A proposal to require ambient air monitoring systems at high-emission industrial facilities in Louisiana was in limbo Tuesday and is highly unlikely to move forward.
Air monitoring equipment is needed Senate Bill 356The plan, sponsored by Sen. Lois Duplessis (D-New Orleans), would have provided early warning to nearby residents to seek safety if toxic pollutants were released. However, members of the Senate Environmental Quality Committee took no action after Duplessis introduced the bill.
Sen. Ed Price (D-Gonzalez), the only Democrat on the eight-member committee, was not present when the bill was considered, but his presence would not have made much of a difference.
Duplessis’ bill would have applied to 117 industrial facilities in Louisiana that are considered the “highest risk” to the public based on the types of pollutants they emit. The measure does not require the system to be used for regulatory enforcement, but only for community safety purposes.
The monitoring system would have been paid for by industrial companies, continuously tested for toxic emissions, and posted hourly data on a public website. Neighbors and first responders would have been automatically alerted if contamination levels reached a certain threshold.
The Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality currently maintains limited air monitoring equipment at about 20 locations around the state, but the agency only monitors six types of pollutants: sulfur dioxide, lead, carbon monoxide, ozone, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter.
Environmental groups file lawsuit over Louisiana’s ban on community air monitoring
Kim Tyrrell, a scientist with the Environmental Conservation Project who testified in support of the bill, told lawmakers that the state’s current monitoring equipment is generally not used to measure some of the more toxic chemicals, such as ethylene oxide and vinyl chloride, released in recent industrial accidents in Louisiana.
The bill had the support of dozens of residents and environmental groups, including the Louisiana Conference of Catholic Bishops. Executive Director Tom Costanza said the bill is a “reasonable approach” to addressing what he calls preventable harm.
Costanza said the bill “puts people first and supports the public interest.”
But committee chairman Sen. Eddie Lambert (R-Gonzales) questioned how air monitors would be used, saying they could lead to false readings because industrial factories are responsible for pollution they don’t cause.
The monitoring system, which is also used in other states, including California, also provides weather data showing wind direction and speed to help better pinpoint sources of emissions.
Patrick Reilly, a lobbyist for the Louisiana Chemical Industry Alliance, said industrial companies are already doing more than what is required by law when it comes to air monitoring. He added that the continuous hourly measurements required by Duplessis’ bill are too frequent and would lead to false alarms.
Riley said the alerts will make people panic unnecessarily at first, but over time they will eventually learn to ignore the alerts.
Mr. Duplessis’ bill remains in committee, but it is unlikely to receive enough votes to be considered again this Congress.
Get your morning headlines.
Subscribe
