Earlier this week we learned that Tesoro—an oil refiner with nasty politics and a rap sheet a mile long — will be facing a criminal investigation for the April explosion at its Anacortes, Washington facility that killed seven workers and earned it the largest L&I fine in state history for “willful disregard of safety regulations.”
Then yesterday, the Tesoro refinery in Martinez, California (about 45 minutes northeast of San Francisco) had another major flare-up. Plumes of toxic black smoke rose over neighboring communities, and officials were forced to issue an emergency “shelter-in-place” warning. As the Oakland Tribunereports:
All five of the refinery’s flares began burning gases and shooting flames after the power failed just after 4 p.m. Wednesday.
…residents were advised to close all windows and doors, and to turn off heaters, air conditioners and fans. Health officials also advised closing fireplace dampers and vents and covering cracks around doors and windows with tape or damp towels.
The cause, apparently, was an electrical substation failure in the vicinity that resulted in a loss of power to the refinery, forcing crews to flare off gases that would otherwise escape in even more poisonous forms, according to reporting at the San Jose Mercury News.
No ill effects have so far been reported, but it’s more than a little concerning that Tesoro’s facilities seem unable to handle a power outage. And it’s especially worrisome because this is hardly the first time the Martinez refinery has had problems. In fact, just last month, a fire erupted there, resulting in at least one hospitalization. And in August, a ruptured pipeline at the facility spilled thousands of gallons of hazardous materials.
That was the same month, in fact, that Tesoro agreed to pay fines for 44 air quality violations in the Bay Area between 2006 and 2008. Which was hardly the first time Tesoro had been fined for breaking the law at the Martinez refinery. Just two years prior, in 2008, the company negotiated a settlement for 77 violations (see page 160), for which it paid $1.5 million. What’s more, air quality violations at the Martinez plant in 2005 earned the company a fine of $1.1 million, one of the largest ever charged to any of the five Bay Area refineries.
If you ask me, yesterday’s scare wasn’t just a mishap. It’s becoming increasingly clear that Tesoro is a rogue operator with insufficient regard for worker safety or environmental protection. No wonder their politics are so toxic.
Oh, wait. I almost forgot what else happened to Tesoro this week: they reported third quarter net earnings of $56 million—a whopping 70 percent increase over the third quarter of 2009. And it would have been more too, if they hadn’t had to lay out $17 million for the deadly Anacortes fire.
***
Update 11/15/10: Bay area television station KTVU reports that the Martinez refinery’s week got even rougher: 84 gallons of sulfuric acid leaked from a tank at the plant. The spill was, apparently, contained on-site with no injuries reported.
Wayne
Not that you really care about the facts, or you would have reported them…The total loss of power to the refinery is something that may happen once in 25 years. No refinery can be cost-effectively designed to handle power failure that is so rare. There are no refineries designed to do such a thing in California, but you chose to call out Tesoro because they don’t. Convenient…Almost all of the major violations that the Golden Eagle refinery made were related to the old coker unit. That coker unit was replaced with a new one that cost over $575 million dollars. It emits far lower pollution than the old coker, and is also far more reliable. It is the unreliability of the old coker that caused the violations. Tesoro could have went with a cheaper solution to address the violations, but went with the solution that also reduced pollution and greenhouse gases in everyday use.You report that Tesoro is facing criminal charges, but that is misleading. Tesoro’s Anacortes refinery is the subject of an investigation by the EPA’s criminal division. The EPA’s criminal division is ALWAYS called on if there is a fatality. It is not indicative of criminal conduct.In the case of the Anacortes explosion and fire, that tragically killed 7 operators, there was a high-temperature hydrogen attack to a heat exchanger. That heat exchanger had been operated within limits which should have kept it safe from HTHA, and so there will be a new look at INDUSTRY standards.
Eric de Place
Wayne, You write: “The total loss of power to the refinery is something that may happen once in 25 years.”That’s the excuse this month. So what’s the excuse for the fire at the same facility last month? And the busted pipeline at the same facility two months before that? And the 44 air quality violations between 2006 and 2008? And 77 violations before those? And on and on?In fact, most of the upgrades Tesoro has made have been forced by regulators. They are hardly acts of corporate beneficence.As for the Anacortes explosion, there’s some truth that there’s lax oversight of the industry. But it’s also true that Tesoro is uniquely abusive of the rules. As the Seattle Times reported (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2013070502_tesoro05m.html):”The agency cited Tesoro for 44 workplace violations, ranging from willful disregard of safety regulations to failing to inspect and maintain decaying 40-year-old equipment.”And:”Tesoro hadn’t properly inspected the exchangers since 1998, and even then didn’t test the most vulnerable areas, Silverstein said. Tesoro had planned to test them in 2008, but never did.”And, in fact, Tesoro was hit with fines for 17 “serious” violations at other parts of the same refinery just the year before.And let’s not even get into the laundry list of other laws that Tesoro has broken, some of which you can read here: http://www.sightline.org/daily_score/archive/2010/10/25/who-again-is-tesoro.That said, my post should have said “criminal investigation” not “criminal charges.” I’m changing it accordingly.
Wayne
Do you really think that a primary and back-up power failure by PG is not a good reason for this incident? Your entire article is predicated on this incident, which was simply unavoidable by ANY refinery in California, but you use it as further “proof” that Tesoro is “rogue.”As I mentioned in my first post, most of the pre-2008 violations were related to the old coker unit, which has been replaced. While Tesoro was forced to create a solution to the reliability issues, it was not being forced to replace the unit. Valero in Benicia faced the same problem and put a stand-by scrubber on it’s old coker. That was a much cheaper solution, but one that does nothing to reduce pollution and GHGs. Now Tesoro did not do this out of charity, but because it made business sense, especially in light of continually tightening regulations.
Eric de Place
Wayne,My article is about the three pieces of news this week for Tesoro: a criminal investigation, the Martinez flare off, and the 3rd quarter earnings report.I suggest that Tesoro is rogue not based on any one incident in isolation, but from what appears to be a pattern of corporate conduct. As for the coker replacement, it sounds to me like Tesoro was just looking out for the bottom line. And it’s evidence that better oversight and tighter regulation are key to getting the company to act responsibly toward it’s worker and surrounding communities.
Wayne
So your article is about an investigation by the criminal branch of the EPA, which is what ALWAYS investigates when there is a fatality, and so not a red flag in itself, the Martinez flare-off which was caused by PG, and the fact that a company is making a profit. I know, I know, profit is a dirty word now…
Curious
Hey Wayne, let me guess: do you happen to work for Tesoro?
Joe Schmoe
I’ve noticed that once in a while Tesoro sends shills to comment boards from GoSkagit.com to now here to try to defend itself.I’d sure love to hear from Wayne (aka Lynn Westfall?) his grandiose story on how seven (7) good Americans were cooked to death in an Anacortes night without appropriate safety gear…
boilermaker
there is no safety gear that can protect you from a fire of that magnitude imagine walking on the sun.
Matteo
I don’t know. Did you report about the man that was kleild and the woman who was injured at the Greater Gabbard Wind facility in England? That was in November, 2009, so I guess that was a long time ago, right?Of course, Chadd B. Mitchell, a 34-year-old Goldendale, Washington man, doesn’t remember much right now about the wind farm accident that kleild him and injured another back in 2007.Oh, and I forgot about the 2006 accident in Holland where the tower burned. And the fire in Germany in 2006 where the fire fighters could do nothing but stand there and watch it burn out while burning blades fell to the ground.But at least no one lost their leg like the UK wind project worker in 2006. Or the 2006 California worker who was found dead hanging inside the wind tower. He probably didn’t fall either, but committed suicide after hearing about the eagle that was kleild after flying into a wind tower in Tasmania earlier that year.Only two people were hospitalized (after one died burning inside of course) in 2005 after a wind tower fire in Minnesota.I so wish I could have witnessed the 2005 incident in Queensland, when a 22 meter blade snapped off and went a-flyin’. That probably beat the best javelin distance I had in high school for sure!And the guy in Germany who was kleild and his coworker injured while working on a wind rotor.But luckily, I haven’t seen any reported wind farm deaths prior to 1975, when a person was reported kleild at one in California.I think solar farms are totally safe from people getting seriously burned of course. Don’t you?But I forgot about the fire at a community college in California last month, where $25,000 in property damage was done by burning solar panels. They might have been improperly stored, and shorted out. Luckily no one was seriously burned in this fire.I’m just glad I’m not a rare desert tortoise near the 4000 acre(!) Ivanpah solar plant in California, who are expected to be seriously impacted by the plant and its destruction of rare desert plants.But I only know of the Daggett California accident where 900,000 gallons of only slightly caustic mineral oil-based heat collection fluid exploded and burned. Officials fought the fire for hours, and evacuated only about a half mile square radius. But I guess that’s safe.Point here is: there are risks in everything in life. Do your research. Many folks who have home wind systems, (myself included) have to be concerned with dangerous speeds from blades and safety while working on their systems. You are sadly fooling yourself my friend, if you think there are not serious risks involved in energy production and transportation, no matter what the source. How interesting you leave out all the serious injuries (and many, many more I did not even mention) that have happened while people have been involved with wind power.