December 18, 2008
ExxonMobil Fails to Comply With 2005 Court Ruling
ExxonMobil will fork over some $6.1 million as a penalty for its violation of the terms of a 2005 court order concerning the Clean Air Act agreement, announced the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
At the time, ExxonMobil was told it must perform $6.7 million-worth of environmental projects in communities around the company’s refineries and install pollution controls at six of its U.S. refineries. On top of that, Exxon paid a $7.7 million civil penalty.
But the company failed to comply with the terms at four of its refineries: two in Texas (Beaumont and Baytown), one in Torrance, CA, and one in Baton Rouge, LA.
Most of the penalties are for failure to monitor and control the sulfur content in certain fuel gas streams burned in refinery furnaces in 2006-07. The burning of sulfur-containing gases emits sulfur dioxide, which can cause serious respiratory problems. Testing in 2007 revealed that sulfur content was in excess of EPA limits.
The EPA has been working to reduce air pollution from refineries in the U.S. Some 95 refineries across 28 states (comprising 86 percent of the nation’s refining capacity) have been required to install new controls to significantly reduce emissions.
“The EPA will continue to enforce against companies that fail to comply with the terms of court-approved settlements,” asserted the agency’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
Advertisers
Make sustainability part of your strategy.
Get equipped at the SAP Sustainability Resource Center. >>
EFFECTIVELY MANAGE WATER COMPLIANCE
Understand how increased enforcement may affect your company. Find out more >>
EPA mandatory emissions reporting starts Jan 1st
CSA Standards can help your organization get ready for compliance. Find out how. >>
Join the Discussion
Recent Daily News [ see all ]
- 11/06/2009
- 11/05/2009
- 11/04/2009
- Emissions Intensity Falling Globally
- JohnsonDiversey Ups GHG Reduction Target to 25%
- Sainsbury’s Offers Free London Electric Car Charging
- Carbon Trading Could Trigger a ‘Sub-prime Style’ Economic Crash
- Peabody, Exxon Accused of Undermining Climate Talks
- BMW, Toyota, Ford Tout Eco-cars
- In ‘Apathy Gap,’ Energy Efficiency at Home Ranks Low
- China Pushes for CO2 Storage, Not Emissions Reductions
- Clean Tech VC Funding On Rebound, Up 50% Since 2nd Quarter
- IECC Building Code Recommendations Add Up to 30% in Energy Efficiency Gains
- Disney Buys $7M in Reforestation Offsets, a Corporate Record
- McKesson to Save $300K Via Fuel-Efficient Vehicles
- Sprint to Save $2.1M With Eco-Friendly Packaging
- U.S. Export-Import Bank Adopts Carbon Policy to Support Renewable Energy
- Greening the Automotive Supply Chain
- Yokohama Rubber Cuts GHG Emissions 13.4% in 2008
- Electronics Industry Lawsuit Called ‘Attack on States’ Rights’
- Wal-Mart Adding LEDs to 650 Stores
- One Committee Down for Senate Climate Bill, Five More to Go
- EU Poised to Give Heavy Industry Free Carbon Permits
- ResponsibleTravel.com Scuttles Carbon Offsetting Option
- U.S. Cap-and-Trade Creates Winners and Losers among Largest Emitters
- DOE Awards $155M to Make Industrial Sector More Energy Efficient
- System Upgrades Power Up Energy Savings for Hotels
- Xerox Cuts GHG Emissions by 20% from 2002
- Waste Management Landfill Gas Project Complete
- Intel, Pepsi, Kohl’s Stay Atop Green Power Partnership list
- Wal-Mart Thinks Big With Smaller Stores
- Despite Critics, Gore ‘Proud’ to Invest in Green Firms
- Metal Recyclers Spar Over Ship Recycling Site
Industry Voices [ see all ]
A Roadmap for a Renewable Energy Partnership
Brad Cashaw
Vice President
Quaker Foods and Snacks Supply Chain and Sustainability
Forest Carbon Core to Climate Change Deal
Chris Elliott
Forest Carbon Initiative Lead
World Wildlife Fund
VCS and CarbonFix Tops in Review of Forestry Carbon Standards
Paulo Lopes
Carbon Management Consultant
Carbon Clear






Reader Comments
Isn’t it interesting that Exxon Mobil posted the highest profit ever recorded for a private company in 2007 – $39.5 BILLION. And yet, the company could not manage to invest a teeny tiny bit of that money into complying with EPA requirements. And yet this company has the nerve to flood the TV with warm and fuzzy ads telling us about how much they care about the environment… Too bad the gov’t can’t afford to take out ads to tell the public about the poor environmental performance of these corporate giants…
Renee Avdoulos | December 19th, 2008