By Sharon Franklin.
Recent data collected by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) during a air monitoring trip included a benzene reading that was three times the Texas hourly guideline, which is the weakest in the nation. In two instances, benzene fumes were so strong that scientists with TCEQ, experienced headaches and had to leave the area.
Why is this important? The health effects of benzene can cause immune problems, nervous system conditions, and even certain cancers. Acute symptoms of relatively short-term exposure to benzene include skin, eye, and respiratory tract irritation. Prolonged exposures to even low concentrations of benzene can result in central nervous system depression and arrhythmias, as well as trigger anemia and even compromise the immune system. It has been long established that benzene exposure can cause many forms of leukemia. Industries such as oil and gas can contribute to local benzene pollution greatly. The International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) has classified benzene as carcinogenic to humans (IARC group 1) since 1979. https://publications.iarc.fr/Book-And-Report-Series/Iarc-Monographs-On-The-Identification-Of-Carcinogenic-Hazards-To-Humans/Benzene-2018?link_id=2&can_id=c9993a1d3ecdb976c2e3dc6e3773d7b2&source=email-toxic-tuesday-addressing-questions-about-chemical-exposures&email_referrer=&email_subject=toxic-tuesday-benzene
Despite warnings by state regulators, for nearly 20 years, dangerously high levels of cancer-causing chemical emissions have existed outside K-Solv, a chemical distribution facility in Channelview, Texas, as reported by Public Health Watch.
The readings in Channelview, Texas also exceeded what is considered safe by the city of Houston, Texas. The increased benzene levels found by TCEQ monitoring team in 2021 and 2022 were especially alarming because they weren’t recorded by the state’s closest stationary monitor, whose annual readings are used to gauge residents’ cancer risk. Public Health Watch discovered the discrepancy when it compared hourly readings collected by the field scientists with hourly readings from the stationary monitor. Rice University Professor, Loren Hopkins, a nationally recognized expert in environmental science used data from the stationary monitor to calculate the total lifetime cancer risk from chemical exposure for residents of south Channelview. She also suggested the Channelview residents data is more than double the state and national average. Professor Hopkins also stated the Channelview’s benzene levels are “unacceptably high”. “I definitely wouldn’t want to be the person exposed to this”. She further said, that should the levels found in Channelview, Texas been recorded in Houston, Texas the residents would have received (1) evacuation order, (8) shelter-in-place orders and (8) alerts. However, Channelview residents received (0) notifications.
For 17 years, Tim Doty, managed the TCEQ mobile monitoring team and reviewed wind directions and sample and said the data shows that the scientists looked for benzene sources throughout south Channelview and “There’s no doubt from looking at the data that the primary source of the elevated benzene concentrations was from around K-Solv,” “It’s right there.” “It’s obvious that they didn’t want people to see these numbers. Two years later is pretty outrageous — more than pretty outrageous”.
Recent developments in Channelview, Texas and K-Solv On November 16, 2024, K-Solv had another major chemical leak, as reported by the Channelview Fire Department. It was discovered that a 250-gallon tank was leaking liquid butyl acetate and “creating a vapor cloud” that was approaching homes, according to the Fire Department’s report. https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/25452015-channelview-fire-department-incident-report/#document/p1
What is the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Response? The TCEQ spokesperson said the agency has reviewed the science supporting benzene guidelines used by other institutions, but none of it has “warranted a reevaluation of TCEQ’s” guidelines. “Just because a scientific study is more recent does not make it the best scientific evidence.”