For about two years now I've been trying to raise a stink about the odor in Tulsa. I wish I had printed out my first thread on this subject because what was most remarkable were the local cheerleaders who were insisting they never smelled a thing.
Then there was the break through thread where suddenly everyone felt a sense of permission to admit that, yes, not only Tulsa, but their very own neighborhood stunk. People from as far away as east of Harvard testified that the odor from the refineries had drifted over from the River area. NellieBly talked about that "napalm" smell.
Recycle Michael argued that it wasn't just the refineries that stunk, that other industrial sites near the river were involved. But having grown up in Tulsa I found the current smell remarkably similar to that same old refinery smell I smelled during my childhood here in the 50s.
I decided to do a little research and discovered that at least three Tulsa neighborhoods had filed lawsuits against one or both of the refineries; but without success. Meanwhile, a walk through my lovely neighborhood around dawn or dusk was more often than not punctuated with refinery stink.
I thought it was odd when a group of local rich folks proposed luxury housing at the river just a stones throw away from one of our smelly old refineries. I thought when is someone in leadership going to face reality and admit that Tulsa stinks. I mean the road to something better begins by acknowledging where you are really at.
You can imagine I was quite amazed this week to a see a story in the World about some authority or another addressing the stink issue. Someone raised the point that running the new river pathway over the sewage drying fields south of 51st was problematic. The same story mentioned the refineries as a source of stink but otherwise did not address the refineries.
Then lo and behold the following day the World ran an editorial about the stink. The editorial was toothless and largely forgettable and did not address benzene emissions and cancer but the fact that the World admitted the stink exists was significant. I mean they even used the word "stink."
The editorial sort of addressed the refineries by saying that the refinery smell could be eliminated and that the Sinclair Refinery was making improvements now that would eliminate their smell.
My first response was, if the refinery smell could be eliminated without moving the refinery away, why for God's sake hasn't anyone made this Tulsa's first priority? I mean it is one thing to get your priorities out of whack, but it's another thing to allow the greater part of your city to stink when there is a solution available.
I'm a strong believer in first things first and getting rid of Tulsa's smelly stink has to be right up there with maintaining roads and public safety. Just imagine, according to the World the refinery smells could be eliminated.
Tulsa, we love you girl, but you have stunk for close to a 100 years.
For the last few weeks, I've been thinking about the 'Big Stink' that people keep talking about with regard to the river. All I can think of is how I, personally, have never encountered a horrid stench near the river.
In fact, I just enjoyed a lovely evening along the Arkansas's banks two nights ago and actually tried to smell something bad. It didn't work.
Perhaps I just don't run the RiverTrails enough, or visit River's Edge enough, but I think all the attention on the smell is a bit over-exaggerated.
It might smell, but it's incorrect to say that it is in a perpetual stink.
I really hate that the refineries located along the west bank so many years ago. Just imagine the type of development and growth the west bank could've seen! It could've slowed the massive explosion of growth that pushed Tulsa further South and East, instead of around its Central Business District (and downtown could've actually been central)... It could've done a lot for the area, and who knows, Tulsa today could've been an actual river town. Then we wouldn't even be in a predicament about the pollution and stench of refineries and river development... It would've occurred naturally.
Oh well, my dream's up. [:)]
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Recycle Michael argued that it wasn't just the refineries that stunk, that other industrial sites near the river were involved. But having grown up in Tulsa I found the current smell remarkably similar to that same old refinery smell I smelled during my childhood here in the 50s.
Are you saying your nose knows something I don't?
I can remember a handful of mornings over the last two decades when the distinct smell of sulphur or methane or what-have-you wafted over my house (just west of Harvard, north of 31st).
So yes, there is a smell coming from the river once in a blue moon.
But it just isn't very often. It's not something that is constant. Nor does it affect quality of life in Midtown. It's just one more thing for naysayers to ***** about.
quote:
Originally posted by DScott28604
In fact, I just enjoyed a lovely evening along the Arkansas's banks two nights ago and actually tried to smell something bad. It didn't work.
Topography, prevailing winds, air density (affected by temperature, pressure, and humidity), and the density of odor-causing chemicals are all going to affect where the smells go.
I suspect the refinery smell wouldn't be as bad at the elevation of the river bank. Whatever's causing the bad smell is being released well above ground level, and it's more likely to affect places up the hill from the river, particularly those to the north, like Owen Park and Irving neighborhoods when the wind is southerly as it usually is, or Maple Ridge when the wind is more southwesterly.
When Maple Ridge residents were dealing with noise from the Sinclair refinery several years ago, the problem was more acute near 21st and Madison than downhill and closer to the river.
When the wind is from the west, you can smell a caustic odor strongly as far east as 21st and Yale, which is near the crest of the ridge between the Arkansas and Verdigris valleys. That seems to happen most often in the winter months. I've always suspected that was either a refinery or the trash-to-energy plant.
I live near 31st and Harvard and I do not recall ever smelling the refinery nor sewage. I go to the river parks (mostly near 31st - downtown) and have not smelled sewage and rarely smell the refineries (some days with a very light breeze from the west you get the tar smell, maybe 5% of the time). I drive up riverside several times a month to go out to Bixby (scenic route for me) and do not recall smelling sewage.
Likewise, I occasional frequent the river parks on the West Side of the river and have had friends live in the noted apartments near OSU on the west side. I can acknowledge that there is a higher propensity for the tar smell over there. IN my experience it is present 20-25% of the time in a bothersome manner. Certainly enough to cause some issue but not unbearable for the residents nor visitors.
I can not argue that it is not a problem, but I can attest to the fact that it has not bothered ME enough to spend $$$ on. There may be areas that are worse that I have no experienced. There are certainly times that it is worse. But I am not prepared to say that I would avoid an area due to smells in Tulsa.
Just my .02 dollars.
I don't think I ever referred to the smell as napalm. Hell, if anything, I grew up in Maple Ridge. The river smell reminds me of my childhood.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Recycle Michael argued that it wasn�t just the refineries that stunk, that other industrial sites near the river were involved. But having grown up in Tulsa I found the current smell remarkably similar to that same old refinery smell I smelled during my childhood here in the 50s.
Are you saying your nose knows something I don't?
While you are at it RM.... At the time we were last discussing this fowl smell.... You said "the EPA had crews taking air quality samples in Tulsa."
What did those fellows come up with...?
Hometown, here's an "article" which pre-dated the "op-ed" by a day.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070822_1_A1_hSmel63665
I see what Lorton is up to now. The World stretched the story further into an op-ed to help sell the river tax.
Reason?
Ostensibly, new river commercial development will help spur an economic (and sales tax) boom which will miraculously cure the $5.5mm deficiency we have in crumbling, inefficient, and outdated infrastructure, including mitigating odor from the WWT system on the west bank.
Forgive me my cynicism, but this river development isn't going to bring in tons of new sales tax revenue. All it will do is shift the collection points of the tax revenue from other parts of the city to the river.
I honestly cannot see our idea of river development making Tulsa a "destination" city. Granted, it might bring some people in for a look-see, but not the additional kind of numbers to generate $5.5bn in new sales tax revenue in any sort of reasonible time frame. Not in what's left of my life-time anyhow.
^
Thanks Conan.........
Now with the help of Mister Sevenoaks...
Authority member Richard Sevenoaks said the problem is that the "sewer plant and the open drying beds are in the wrong location for river development."
"There is the Turkey Mountain trail system running behind the sewage plant, and a planned pedestrian bridge going right across our sewer overflow basin," he said.
"We can mitigate some of the smell, but you still have this sewer plant in the middle of river development," he said.
"So we expect someone to spend $200 million in private funds to look out onto the sewer plant or drying beds or whatever it may be?" he asked. "That's a difficult situation with a costly solution."
I think I have a firm grasp of this River Project thing............
It is all about "sewer beautification.."
Maybe instead of any water feature on the parks banks we could have a GIANT BIDET....
That would give it that French Artsy Flair
like on the River Seine..
[}:)]
The nature of this latest "development" is a lot like an Xmas package. You don't have a clue what's in there.
Surprises from friends and family are welcome.
Surprises from government often suck.
Rico- the bedet- hillarious!
I think the quickest way to get something done about the smell is to have some big development complaining about it, investors complaining about it, taxpayers complaining that they spent money and they cant use their investment because of the smell, and a lot more people down there noticing it and complaining about it.
So it sounds to me like what people are really saying is... We dont want any development down there because then we will HAVE to pay to have the smell fixed?
Because we all know the one sure way to NOT get anything done about it is continue as we have with no development down there.
"Would not the rose by any other name smell as sweet?"
Would the drying ponds for Tulsa's s**t by any other name not smell like s**t when their overflows run into the river?
Gasoline numbs the ability to distinguish between different smells. Three beers or two mixed drinks also affect the senses of smell. If one lived in the ranch acres area and could not smell the Tulsa disposal I believe that the one for Jenks at the bend of the river would ride on south winds. The refineries are supposedly burning off their odors and gases in a flare above the installation. Topless bars should pick up the dollars that the casinos are missing and the drunks could be sobered up by pushing them in the river.
We are just interring into the first phase of what the 2025 tax act was to include. Before we even get that straighten out we are promoting a much larger promotion that I am sure we will find that instead of strings attached they are steel cables on any private funding.
Lets go go and see how far we can drive the next generation into debt by helping those donators get rid of their money.
quote:
Originally posted by shadows
"Would not the rose by any other name smell as sweet?"
Would the drying ponds for Tulsa's s**t by any other name not smell like s**t when their overflows run into the river?
Gasoline numbs the ability to distinguish between different smells. Three beers or two mixed drinks also affect the senses of smell. If one lived in the ranch acres area and could not smell the Tulsa disposal I believe that the one for Jenks at the bend of the river would ride on south winds. The refineries are supposedly burning off their odors and gases in a flare above the installation. Topless bars should pick up the dollars that the casinos are missing and the drunks could be sobered up by pushing them in the river.
We are just interring into the first phase of what the 2025 tax act was to include. Before we even get that straighten out we are promoting a much larger promotion that I am sure we will find that instead of strings attached they are steel cables on any private funding.
Lets go go and see how far we can drive the next generation into debt by helping those donators get rid of their money.
Why don't you use your energies to demand cleaner burning refineries, better waste treatment facilities and more stringent requirements on river discharges. One could make the argument that if we abstain from river development, like you wish, because the refineries and waste treatment plants are fouling the river, then no effort needs to be made to stop such fouling because no one uses the river anyway. That is what "no change" does. It freezes us in time so we can complain for ever about the same things. Groundhog day.
quote:
Originally posted by cannon_fodder
I live near 31st and Harvard and I do not recall ever smelling the refinery nor sewage. I go to the river parks (mostly near 31st - downtown) and have not smelled sewage and rarely smell the refineries (some days with a very light breeze from the west you get the tar smell, maybe 5% of the time). I drive up riverside several times a month to go out to Bixby (scenic route for me) and do not recall smelling sewage.
Likewise, I occasional frequent the river parks on the West Side of the river and have had friends live in the noted apartments near OSU on the west side. I can acknowledge that there is a higher propensity for the tar smell over there. IN my experience it is present 20-25% of the time in a bothersome manner. Certainly enough to cause some issue but not unbearable for the residents nor visitors.
I can not argue that it is not a problem, but I can attest to the fact that it has not bothered ME enough to spend $$$ on. There may be areas that are worse that I have no experienced. There are certainly times that it is worse. But I am not prepared to say that I would avoid an area due to smells in Tulsa.
Just my .02 dollars.
Unfortunately there is a stench when crossing the flood canal just before getting to the 131st and Memorial intersection.
The smell is only a portion of the equation. While I'm sure urban enthusiasts may revel at the sight of a river-fronting refinery, potential developers looking to open the next Cheesecake Factory or Chipolte will probably look elsewhere, e.g. Jenks, Bixby, Oklahoma City, or any other place not accompanied by the one-two punch of sulfur/methane and the industrial artistry of refining oil.
Seriously – do you really think a developer would jeopardize a multi-million dollar investment by placing it in close proximity to such turn-offs if another location presented the same benefit without the drawback? So, again - explain to me why a developer would select the current west bank as a good investment idea?
quote:
Originally posted by TheArtist
I think the quickest way to get something done about the smell is to have some big development complaining about it, investors complaining about it, taxpayers complaining that they spent money and they cant use their investment because of the smell, and a lot more people down there noticing it and complaining about it.
So it sounds to me like what people are really saying is... We dont want any development down there because then we will HAVE to pay to have the smell fixed?
Because we all know the one sure way to NOT get anything done about it is continue as we have with no development down there.
Agreed. I'm not a naysayer for the sake of being one. This is not well thought-out and just because one of our county commissioners set an arbitrary deadline to vote on this doesn't mean we have to jump at the first opportunity. I really don't care to hand over additional tax dollars for a new plan with many gaps and un-answered questions. If the private funds can be made available now, they can be made available in the future if it really is in the hearts of these generous Tulsans to do what is best for Tulsa.
However, this will be the "catch" at the expiration of the new River Tax. "Now we need to clean up the refineries and sewage plants. Open pockets. Rinse. Spit. Repeat."
If they build it, it smells like crap and no one comes to spend money there, businesses fail and we wind up with a bunch of vacant commercial space down by the river until we mitigate this mess.
I like the idea of river development. I just can't believe the speed with which this is being rushed through when there are some obvious pitfalls which await us on this, and yet it's all being glossed over or justified by a windfall of new tax revenue which can only happen if more people come to the area.
Creating 4500 service-wage level jobs from the existing worker pool in Tulsa certainly isn't going to raise the kind of additional sales tax revenue proponets are gloming onto. People are not going to move to Tulsa to take retail and entertainment jobs. Just not going to happen.
I hope OKC is not doing something to hurt Tulsa's air. I have never noticed foul smells when I'm in Tulsa. Maybe it's my nose cold or maybe it's because I'm not paying any attention.
Well, DScott expressed what I believe about Tulsa and the refineries
DScott said: "I really hate that the refineries located along the west bank so many years ago. Just imagine the type of development and growth the west bank could've seen! It could've slowed the massive explosion of growth that pushed Tulsa further South and East, instead of around its Central Business District (and downtown could've actually been central)... It could've done a lot for the area, and who knows, Tulsa today could've been an actual river town. Then we wouldn't even be in a predicament about the pollution and stench of refineries and river development... It would've occurred naturally."
Next best thing to moving the refineries? Eliminating the odor (Tulsa World says it is doable though I have my doubts).
Now when I was living in Lortondale during my teen years, I never smelled the refineries. So some Tulsans may really have never smelled the refineries.
Smell elimination should have happened a long time ago but that doesn't mean I won't support the river plan. I'm not convinced about the economic benefits argument but I like the plan. If all we get out of this is a beefed up river parks, it's worth it.
Here's an aside about developing new revenue: If I was Tulsa and I needed to add revenue and residents I would invest money in developing infrastructure on the north side where there is still plenty of land that could be developed as new neighborhoods.
I live on the north side and my prayer is that our city planners won't do to the north side what they did to the south side – horrendous city planning, strip malls, excessive signage and asphalt from here to eternity.
I first saw the word "naysayer" in a recent Tulsa World editorial. Fascinating word, and I would guess very old. I don't think anyone outside of Tulsa is still using this word. "Critic" would probably be the word more frequently used today.
If it weren't for the refineries on the west bank, Tulsa would have never had the seeds for growth which has gotten it to this point. In fact, many of us might live in other areas of the country now if it weren't for the economic and infrastructure legacy oil has provided our city.
I believe private industry like the refineries can clean up the smells further and do it a lot more efficiently than a public trust. Plenty has been done about their emissions over the years and it sounds like work is continuing.
I honestly don't see how smell can be mitigated from open pits and drying beds though unless they are moved far from the river into a sparsely-populated rural area which just would not be practical.
Waterboy quoted:
Why don't you use your energies to demand cleaner burning refineries, better waste treatment facilities and more stringent requirements on river discharges. One could make the argument that if we abstain from river development, like you wish, because the refineries and waste treatment plants are fouling the river, then no effort needs to be made to stop such fouling because no one uses the river anyway. That is what "no change" does. It freezes us in time so we can complain for ever about the same things. Groundhog day.
**********************************************
I have tried for years to change anything in the city through two types of government and the only thing that changed was the knots on my forehead where I was beating my head against the brick wall of the bureaucrats control.
The changing of the river is liken building three ponds which hold impurities in the sands. The Keystone dam cuts off the water supply in the dry season. The foolish effort to change this open storm sewer, that drains the street into them, selling the 5% of the people that will go to it but expecting the other 95% to pay for it, stretches ones imagination even beyond the fairy tales.
There was a editor of a ghost town magazine in Tulsa that was to open the Zink Rifle range with a gold bullet panned from the gold dust being washed down from the upper reaches of the Arkansas River. The Keystone dam shut off this source of gold but some could have designated it as a gold strike instead of thinking they can change the river into an fairy land that will produce millions of dollars in taxes. Having been familiar with the river I think it will be in reversed order. Billions in construction with the return in thousands.
As most of the water from the streets drain into the river. Where do you think would be the best place to drain them? Drain them in the river going though OC?
Tulsa will stink as long as this forum exists.
The moderators, administrators, editors (hiders?) have disclosed my name, my moniker, and my password to other posters and even those who do not post but keep a watchful eye here.
WARNING...you may be the next victim.
DScott said: "I really hate that the refineries located along the west bank so many years ago. Just imagine the type of development and growth the west bank could've seen! It could've slowed the massive explosion of growth that pushed Tulsa further South and East, instead of around its Central Business District (and downtown could've actually been central)... It could've done a lot for the area, and who knows, Tulsa today could've been an actual river town. Then we wouldn't even be in a predicament about the pollution and stench of refineries and river development... It would've occurred naturally."
Those refineries helped build Tulsa. Without them Tulsa wouldn't have become half the city it is. Our history would be completely different. DScott you need to do a little reading about Tulsas history and learn about what built this city. Tulsa has a wonderful and fascinating history and those refineries are integral to that.
Tulsa was situated near both the great Glenn and Cushing Pools, and within a radius of one hundred miles there were several hundred small pools. Tulsans lived on the east side but built a bridge which enabled the workers on the west side, where the oil fields were, to get to and from Tulsa. But there were plenty of other small towns in the area, some larger than Tulsa. Then Tulsa built a modern hotel, which attracted the wealthier operators and caused them to make Tulsa their headquarters. Then came the establishment of oil well supply houses, machine shops and of course the refineries. The money from those refineries and oil industries was a major part of Tulsas success. Tulsa didnt have the oil, but it supplied the industry, refined the oil, and served as a home base.
Skyscrapers were built, Philtower, Philcade, First national Bank, Mid Continent... Grand homes in mid town like Philbrook and Gilcrease. The airport and the aviation industry are a direct result of the oil industry "the Stud Note". Utica Square the result of the pipe and rig industry. Southern Hills. The grand downtown churches. So many things that we consider treasures wouldnt be here if you could go back in time and "pluck" those refineries out of the history books. They are integral to and woven deeply into our history in many ways.
Harry F. Sinclair begins oil production in Tulsa--the start of Sinclair Oil Co.
A group of oil men gather at the Hotel Tulsa to organize and make sure petroleum products are available to U.S. armed forces and allies. They form the Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association
Mid-Continent Oil & Gas Association forms the Kansas-Oklahoma Division headquartered in Tulsa.
(From the Sinclair history website)...
Sinclair and one of his many partners, Patrick J. White, bought crude oil from wildcatters for ten cents a barrel in every prolific field before pipeline outlets were available. Erecting steel tanks, the partners stored millions of gallons of bargain oil. When conditions stabilized, they sold the filled tanks at a $1.20 per barrel profit. By 1913, Sinclair bossed 62 oil companies, owned eight drilling rigs, and with his brother controlled a Tulsa bank. Producing from every mid-continent field, he settled in Tulsa, Oklahoma,
The year 1916 found Sinclair the mid-continent's largest oil independent. In one of his most famous snap judgments, Sinclair decided to fight the giants on their own ground. In one busy week, he blueprinted a $50 million enterprise to be engaged in every branch of the petroleum industry: crude oil production, pipelining and other transport, refining, and worldwide marketing.
A hundred miles west of Tulsa, a Sinclair wildcat penetrated a rich new oil basin with production at several depths. Sinclair had more than half the productive acreage under lease in this new Garber field. The oil was so rich that it sold for a premium price...Now the founder invited his New York bankers to see the new oil empire. By special train he escorted what the Tulsa newspapers described as "the biggest concentration of capital in the history of Oklahoma." )
(some other snippets from the web)
"Oil brought Waite Phillips to Tulsa in 1918. He worked several years with his brothers Frank and L.E. in Bartlesville, but desired to make an independent fortune. He bought leases west of Okmulgee and struck rich pools. With the addition of refineries, transportation and retail sales he created the Waite Phillips Company and moved his headquarters to Tulsa.
In 1928 Skelly along with Waite Phillips, Harry Rogers, Omar K Benedict and Cyrus S Avery, organized the Tulsa Airport Corporation. They along with 42 other Tulsans signed one of Tulsa's famous Stud Notes to underwrite the construction of a major metropolitan airport for Tulsa.
Gilcrease's personal 160 acre allotment happened to be smack atop one of the richest oil fields ever, the Glen Pool south of Tulsa. When he was 16 he sued for his majority rights, and by the age of 21 was a millionaire. "
"Almost since the time that Tulsa became a city, the Helmerich family has kept Tulsans intrigued with banner headline stories of the family's internationally known drilling company, Helmerich & Payne; the family's philanthropic endeavors and "gifts of millions" through the Helmerich Foundation; and their ownership and dream of making Utica Square one of the city's best-known landmarks. ..... "
Here is the simple version.
The pretty stuff in the background came from the ugly stuff in the foreground. [:P]
(http://img170.imageshack.us/img170/6638/refnrywc4.jpg)
I'm a fan of oil (or at least big money) too. But it would have made a huge difference for Tulsa if the refineries and other industry were located further away (and downwind) from downtown.
They were far away from downtown at the time. They needed to be near the river since they are steam driven operations and needed a source of water and discharge.
I understand that there are many improvements coming to the refineries that will reduce their smells to nearly 10% of what they are now. RecycleM, since you sit on one of their advisory boards do you know anything about this?
I was born in Tulsa and have lived out of state (and country) for the past 40 years or so. I am a Chemical Engineer by training and spent 35 years working for a major oil company here in the USA and abroad.
Let me say first off that refineries smell -- all of them. Doesn't make any difference whether they are in Tulsa, Aruba, Southampton, UK or Singapore ... they smell. It is the nature of the beast. Some smell worse than others but they all smell. Not only that but they will continue to smell. Refiners made big reductions in emissions over the past 15 years -- but those easy gains are done and they will be much smaller going forward.
Tulsa should be glad it just has refineries and not huge chemical plants nearby the refineries -- like south of Baton Rouge on the Mississippi or on along the Houston ship channel or Bayway NJ. The chemical plants REALLY SMELL.
Let me say a final word on river development in Tulsa. No one but no one plans leisure investment within view (or smell) of refineries. Refineries tend to devalue nearby property rather than vice versa. I suspect that this is the reason the river has not been developed near the plants up to now.
And in case it's escaped anyone, Sinclair is slowly and quietly buying up the last of the frontage between the refinery and SW Blvd. and starting to buy parcels of land in Garden City.
The odors are not as noxious as where I grew up. We not only had a couple of pulp wood paper mills, there was also a Chemstrand plant and an Air Products plant. That was some bad smells going on. And we lived over 20 miles from the paper mills but could still smell them when the wind was right. I agree with Claygate39, it is here, it will always be here. If you don't want to smell it, get the refineries to close or move. But that smell is historical to the life of Tulsa, keep that in mind.
If you read Bob Gregory's book Oil in Oklahoma, he explains why the refineries are where they are. Oil was discovered in Sand Springs and Glenpool, but the rail lines ran along the river. They could bring in crude oil on the rails, and then ship out what they refined on the rails.
Well it's interesting that NellieBly and Joiei find something positive in the smell. And I suspect Claygate39 is right and the World is wrong about the possibility of eliminating refineries smells.
The Owen Park lawsuit alleged deaths from exposure to refinery emissions. We are kind of dancing around the more central issue of Benzene (one refinery emission) and cancer in humans. The smell is refinery particulates entering our bodies.
Glaygate 39, do you know anything about refineries and Benzene?
And RecycleMichael never responded to Rico's question about the EPA testing of the refineries that he talked about last year. That thread concluded with some consensus that we deserve to know what the refineries are doing to our health.
I will follow up with some questions and report back.
I am trying to do a lot of other things lately and I have kinda ignored "the river and west Tulsa stinks" responsibilty.
My main focus is land stuff, next air things and finally water issues.
I like to say I am not an air head or a water boy, I am a trash MAN.
quote:
Originally posted by recyclemichael
I will follow up with some questions and report back.
I am trying to do a lot of other things lately and I have kinda ignored "the river and west Tulsa stinks" responsibilty.
My main focus is land stuff, next air things and finally water issues.
I like to say I am not an air head or a water boy, I am a trash MAN.
Been too busy making macaroni art "Save the Drillers" signs???[;)]
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Well it's interesting that NellieBly and Joiei find something positive in the smell. And I suspect Claygate39 is right and the World is wrong about the possibility of eliminating refineries smells.
The Owen Park lawsuit alleged deaths from exposure to refinery emissions. We are kind of dancing around the more central issue of Benzene (one refinery emission) and cancer in humans. The smell is refinery particulates entering our bodies.
Glaygate 39, do you know anything about refineries and Benzene?
And RecycleMichael never responded to Rico's question about the EPA testing of the refineries that he talked about last year. That thread concluded with some consensus that we deserve to know what the refineries are doing to our health.
Hometown, I dissected the benzene issue for another poster awhile back, when I get around to it, I'll try to find the particular thread.
As I remember, we don't have a significantly higher benzene concentration than any other city our size. Diesel being burned in trucks and construction equipment seems to be as much a contributor, if not moreso than benzene from refineries. Essentially it's mobile sources (cars & trucks) which add the majority. I believe refineries only contribute about 2% to total benzene emissions.
I'll see if I can find the post and link it.
Okay, here's the links I promised:
Tulsanow thread:
http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=6293
Quoted sources of interest in the thread:
http://www.scorecard.org/env-releases/def/hap_drivers.html#9902
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?geo=USA&pol=45201&city=1&typ=e&_service=nata&_program=nata1999.scl.comap.scl&_debug=2
http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata1999/mapemis99.html
http://www.epa.gov/cgi-bin/broker?geo=USA&pol=80115&city=1&typ=e&_service=nata&_program=nata1999.scl.comap.scl&_debug=2
In addition to the aromas, there are also real industrial dangers involved with these operations.
Here are a few that have occured over the past few years, there are hundreds of other incidents documented.
What chemicals are in use at the Lift Station near I-44 at the River to treat the sewage?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65wrGV3AEiA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9JY3eT4cdM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TworcINhDhQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOKBL1XHcB0
quote:
Originally posted by dbacks fan
If you read Bob Gregory's book Oil in Oklahoma, he explains why the refineries are where they are. Oil was discovered in Sand Springs and Glenpool, but the rail lines ran along the river. They could bring in crude oil on the rails, and then ship out what they refined on the rails.
Well, yes. But water is why they both located next to the river. The railroads were also steam powered and needed a source of water. The yard arm pick ups and water tower platforms can still be found along the river. Did Bob Gregory note that?
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
And in case it's escaped anyone, Sinclair is slowly and quietly buying up the last of the frontage between the refinery and SW Blvd. and starting to buy parcels of land in Garden City.
Why?
quote:
Originally posted by waterboy
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
And in case it's escaped anyone, Sinclair is slowly and quietly buying up the last of the frontage between the refinery and SW Blvd. and starting to buy parcels of land in Garden City.
Why?
My boss just sold some vacant lots he'd bought at tax auction some years back about two blocks south of the refinery and slightly west of the soccer field. He said part of the reason is a buffer zone, part is for possible future expansion. He said Sinclair wasn't overly specific on their intentions, just that they were willing to pay a very fair price for a vacant lot. I'm still not sure how they got in touch with him. Obviously they used county land records to locate him, but it's never been said who brokered the deal. I figure if he wanted me to know he'd tell me.
Brandt has quite a few lots for sale as well. Looks like someone packaged those to sell, though those must be a little further south than Sinclair wants/needs.
Drive along SW Blvd. just south of Goodwill. The old wrecker company, an old trucking outfit, and some other cinder block buildings are all vacant and being demolished now. All bought by Sinclair.
quote:
Originally posted by AMP
In addition to the aromas, there are also real industrial dangers involved with these operations.
Here are a few that have occured over the past few years, there are hundreds of other incidents documented.
What chemicals are in use at the Lift Station near I-44 at the River to treat the sewage?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65wrGV3AEiA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9JY3eT4cdM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TworcINhDhQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOKBL1XHcB0
Sewage generally isn't treated in lift stations, FAIK. I am aware some municipalities might add something for agglomeration or dispersion to help with handling solids problems in lift stations. It's usually a polymer or a metal like alum. Nothing toxic. They are usually a collection point for sewage which is then pumped along to either a larger lift station or directly to a treatment plant. Worst thing you will have in one is sulfur dioxide or other "swamp" gasses.
I wonder if John "J.R." Harris realized when he had his restaurant/bar on 11th named "The Lift Station" that that was also a component of sanitary sewer systems.
Anyone catch today's page 1 story about the big expansion of the Sinclair Refinery?
The World has gone from saying Sinclair will "eliminate" stink in their recent editorial to Sinclair will "cut" emissions.
Of course, I'm hopeful that they will reduce emissions enough to make a difference but I have to say that this refinery does not have a good track record.
I also think this may exacerbate problems with developing anywhere near the refineries.
Are there any experts out there than can weigh in on the claim that they will be able to expand the refinery and reduce harmful emissions at the same time?
I wont go so far as saying I'm an expert HT, but I did some academic work on the legal process of oil and gas.
Most oil infrastructure (power plants too for that matter, and foundries in most instances) are grandfather into emissions standards. It is simply too costly for Congress to require all industry to come up to code, so older facilities are grandfathered in with the idea that they will have to be replaced sooner or later. Of course, this leads to drawn out lives of those facilities to avoid expensive emissions controls, which is why you see refining capacity and electrical production capacity remaining stagnant and constant band aids being put on aging facilities... but I digress.
Those older facilities can do certain maintenance and some upgrades and still garner their grandfather benefits. However, it is VERY LIKELY that this expansion far exceeds those guidelines. Thus, the facility will probably be forced to conform to all new EPA regulations put in place to date. Not to mention some restrictions apply based on the mere volume of work done there (ie. I believe one cut off is 20K barrels, another at 60K, and then the large refinery category).
Thus, there is likely that Sinclair will be forced to upgrade its emissions standards. Perhaps some steps - like hiding the flares, is going above and beyond in an attempt to garner public support. Lets see what happens, but it looks like the pollution aspect will actually benefit the Tulsa environment.
This is all open for correct, I am not an expert. This is simply what I have seen in my research in the past on oil, gas and power production.
CF is correct about the grandfather clauses. This expansion means that the entire refinery will be brought up to current EPA air standards.
Two things are certain: there will be less overall harmful pollutants released into Tulsa's air as a result of this expansion, and there will be less smell associated with the refinery because of specific scrubbers and filters required on the exhaust stacks. It is also likely, but not certain, that the overall tonnage/year of particles released from the refinery's operations will decrease. This depends on the amount of expansion vs. the amount of decrease. But, any continued release will be much, much more air friendly.
What does this mean? It means a net gain for proponents of river developement. Although refining capacity will increase, pollution levels will decrease, providing an overall more enjoyable river experience (not that it was bad before). RecycleMike can probably speak with more authority on the specific changes we can expect in air quality.
Whats wrong with the flares? I like the flares, they look neat. Thats one of the cool things about the refineries. Reminds me of Bladerunner. [8D]
I like the flares too, but open flares like that are polluting because they do not assure the proper air/gas ratio for clean burning. Think of what happens when you turn a Bunsen Burner on too high... large orange flame and black smoke.
Conan, any prospects on Sinclair buying out the homes in Garden City? You said they were buying out some parcels of land, would that include homes or just the uninhabited areas? Maybe this billion dollar investment could "buffer" that area of West Tulsa from the refinery (which is also reducing its profile and reducing emissions and smell supposedly) This could be a good thing for the West side.
quote:
Originally posted by YoungTulsan
Conan, any prospects on Sinclair buying out the homes in Garden City? You said they were buying out some parcels of land, would that include homes or just the uninhabited areas? Maybe this billion dollar investment could "buffer" that area of West Tulsa from the refinery (which is also reducing its profile and reducing emissions and smell supposedly) This could be a good thing for the West side.
YT,
I can't say for certain. All I know is what I've seen purchased so far, and most of that appears to be north and east of the TSU rail line which runs parallel to the river then turns to the west at the south end of the refinery. If I lost you there, Google Earth is a good friend. [;)]
IOW- looks like they are buying land
inside the rail spur- at least for now. There are homes within that area, some abandoned, some still occupied. I've talked to a couple of other land-owners in the area and they seem to think they are going to cash out to the refinery. One of them is pretty hard to trust much of what comes out of his mouth as Gospel, the other is pretty shrewd and plays his cards close to his chest.
I'll keep my ear to the ground and see what else comes up. Personally, I think well-maintained refinery equipment would look better than a lot of the residential squalor which is in GC now.
That's cool. I think that new refinery thing will be a boom to Tulsa. Tulsa will come out smelling like a Rose with hundreds of NEW jobs, good paying jobs. Jobs for Americans.
Is that South American, Central American or North American?
HT- as far as wondering what Sinclair will do to reduce emissions, the World reported this morning that they will cut emissions by 1,000 tons per day. They will also wind up abating noise via the use of scrubbers. That's a new one on me, I'm going to assume that the scrubbers will have a sound-muffling effect in addition to reducing pollution.
quote:
Originally posted by Conan71
They will also wind up abating noise via the use of scrubbers.
Yeah.....that's the ticket...
quote:
Originally posted by Hometown
Is that South American, Central American or North American?
Any one who is LEGAL and has a LEGAL right to work in the country they are living in. Since this new factory expansion will be in Tulsa it's for any LEGAL USA residents.