Detroit fugitive dust management ordinance represents necessary tactic for environmental health

By Dennis Archambault

Critics of environmental health advocates will often point to the absence of  “sound science”  or “conclusive evidence.”  The problem is, most advocates don’t have time or money that industry has to evaluate claims.  And conclusive evidence is seldom available. Although the evidence for the human impact on climate change has met the scrutiny of several legitimate scientific authorities, still the critics express doubt and procrastinate as long as profit can be made.

The resistance to an ordinance drafted by Detroit City Council Member  Rachel Casteneda-Lopez to implement tougher regulations on the transportation and storage of carbonaceous materials, such as  “pet coke,” has featured similar complaints: lack of scientific basis, existing federal, state, and county regulations on managing fugitive dust, a lack of complaints, and the potential impact on jobs. The ordinance originated with the discovery of mounds of pet coke stored in the open along the Detroit River.

As one researcher pointed out recently, decisions to act in support of public health should not wait until there is 100 percent certainty of the validity of the risk and the source of the problem. In event of public health and safety, decisions are made with the best information and greatest likelihood they will protect life.

Industry complains that increased regulation is unnecessary, will contribute to reduced profits and/or increased product costs, and possible job loss. Regarding the latter, some residents may question whose jobs would be lost, given that relatively few Detroit residents work for these industries.

The environmental quality in Southwest Detroit/Downriver Delta communities is much better than it was decades ago, but remains bad, especially as it pertains to lung disease. Industry research and development is generally oriented to maximum efficiency of production systems and worker safety. However, it should also include environmental impact. Industry can afford it. Advocates can’t. Academic researchers may contribute with grant-funded research, but by the time permit requests and other environmental actions are posed, there isn’t sufficient time for research to be undertaken.

The action by Council Member Casteneda-Lopez and other Detroit City Council members who passed the ordinance on Oct. 29 takes another step toward protecting their constituents and improving environmental quality for the region. It may cost industry a little more to implement, but it’s the cost of doing business in a healthy community.

For an account of the proceedings, read this Detroit Free Press article: http://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/detroit/2017/10/31/detroit-pet-coke-regulations/817246001/

Dennis Archambault is vice president, Public Affairs, Authority Health.