Air monitoring study finds 'elevated radioactivity' near Suncor oil refinery in Commerce City
By: Kristen Sheng
News Article: https://www.denver7.com/news/environment/air-monitoring-study-finds-elevated-radioactivity-near-suncor-oil-refinery-in-commerce-city
Research Article: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/epdf/10.1080/10962247.2024.2393194?needAccess=true
Background:
Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that results from uranium, thorium, and radium breaking down. It is quantified in becquerels per cubic meter (Bq/m^3) or picocuries per liter (pCi/L). The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that approximately 21,000 people die from lung cancer related to radon in the US, and 20,000 people in the EU. Radon comes naturally from the earth, so people are continually exposed to small amounts. Even still, there are no safe levels of radon exposure [1].
Radioactive decay is a form of ionizing radiation and occurs from unstable atoms. Alpha particles are positively charged, composed of two protons and two neutrons. They result from the heaviest radioactive elements, so they are unable to travel far from the atom. Intake of alpha particles can damage living tissue, and they can release energy into a few cells, causing severe concentrated damage [2].
Oil refineries convert crude oil into petroleum products, such as gasoline and fuels [3]. Suncor Oil Refinery is the largest oil refinery in Colorado, holding a total refining capacity of 98,000 barrels of fuel per day [4].
Peer-Reviewed Article:
This study, titled “Elevated airborne radioactivity downwind of a Colorado oil refinery,” is the first to provide gas and particle radioactivity measurements via long-term measurements in the immediate vicinity of a refinery. They confirm there is elevated radioactivity downwind from the Suncor refinery. The Suncor refinery has a long history of air emissions violations, including a $9 million settlement with the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment in 2020 for over 100 air emissions violations, and a $10.5 million settlement for continued air pollution violations between 2019-2021, which is the largest penalty issued by the state against a single facility. However, at the time of its publication, U.S. regulatory agencies did not require the oil and gas industry to have radioactivity emission assessments. This is regardless of the fact that the Clean Air Act defines radon as a hazardous air pollutant and is enforceable under the act.
A stationary site was established approximately 0.4 km northeast of the refinery, and continuous observations were made from a fixed 10 m tall meteorological tower. The paper refers to the site as the Commerce City Fixed site (CCF). They measured radioactivity, specifically alpha radiation from radon gas and radon progeny on PM every 10 minutes from August 30, 2022, through August 2, 2023. This resulted in over 88,000 measurements of both gas-phase and particle-phase radioactivity. They found that particle-phase radioactivity contributed to about 40% of total radioactivity. This is meaningful because literature has suggested that particle-associated radioactivity is more dangerous than radon gas when it comes to human health, since the particles can be trapped in the lungs, extending the periods in which one is exposed to radioactivity.
The measurements varied between 0-80 Bq/m3 for gas-phase radioactivity and 0-75 Bq/m3 for particle-phase. They defined background total radioactivity levels to be the median values measured during the average wind speeds above 6m/s, which gave a level of 11.6 Bq/m3. They found that the measured radioactivity had an inverse relationship with wind speed. This is likely due to the fact that increases in wind speed dilute the emissions with less radioactive background air. With wind speeds above 6 m/s, the median total radioactivity was around 10-15 Bq/m3 and never exceeded 40 Bq/m3. On the other hand, when wind speeds were less than 2 m/s, the total radioactivity was on average between 80-100 Bq/m3 with measurements up to 120 ± 34 Bq/m3. It was concluded that winds from the southwestern direction (where the refinery was) resulted in up to three times the radioactivity than from winds in other directions.
They acknowledged that the medians of radioactivity measured were twice as high in the fall to early winter when compared to the rest of the year. They concluded that this is likely due to seasonal changes in the atmosphere since in wintertime, prolonged temperature inversions cause emissions to accumulate, and this is thus not a reflection of changes in emissions from the refinery. They also investigated two other potential sources of radioactivity nearby, but it was ruled unlikely that they were contributors to the data measured by the CCF.
They also measured other species, including hydrogen sulfide, methane, ethane, propane, and benzene. The radioactivity bivariate polar plots showed the most similarities to those of ethane and benzene. This indicates a “co-emission of radioactivity with a petroleum hydrocarbon source, further supporting the refinery being the likely source” [4]. Specifically, the emission could result from the disposal of gas in flares.
In the discussion, they suggest future studies to differentiate which specific isotopes the radioactivity originates from. Additionally, they recommend future studies to have monitoring sites both upwind and downwind from the area of interest, and potentially collecting measurements at varying heights.
They state that studies have shown that multiple pollutants, “even at low concentrations individually, can result in poor health outcomes similar to that of a single pollutant at higher concentration” [4]. This raises concern for the other pollutants that were also directed downwind from the refinery. They conclude by calling for further investigations into radon emissions from Suncor and other refineries, as well as health studies in individuals exposed to elevated radioactivity in the air along with other pollutants, to drive policy to protect communities.
The news article reported largely accurately, but broadly. The article included interviews with authors of the study, increasing the credibility, as well as interviews with members of the community, increasing the rapport of the article. However, it stated that the study was conducted for over a year, but in reality, it was conducted for just under a year. Additionally, when talking about the increase in detected radioactivity, the article failed to mention that the statistic included was only applicable at weaker winds of less than 6 m/s, as stronger winds would result in dilution of emissions. Even still, the article was productive in drawing attention to this issue. Because of this, I would rate the article an 8/10.
[1] Bannister, M. (n.d.). Radon levels: What do they mean? Www.airthings.com. https://www.airthings.com/resources/radon-levels
[2] United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2024, October 1). Radiation Basics. US EPA. https://www.epa.gov/radiation/radiation-basics
[3] U.S. Energy Information Administration. (2023, February 22). Refining crude oil - the refining process - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). Eia.gov. https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/refining-crude-oil-the-refining-process.php
[4] Helmig, D., Nobel, J., Caputi, D., Brown, D., Daly, R. W., Darby, L. S., Doe, P. T., Gonzalez, O., Greenberg, G., Hueber, J., Potter, K., Schade, G. W., Simoncic, S., Stahli, M., & Subra, W. (2024). Elevated airborne radioactivity downwind of a Colorado oil refinery. Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association, 74(12), 920–931. https://doi.org/10.1080/10962247.2024.2393194
[5] Albaladejo, A. (2024, November 12). Air monitoring study finds “elevated radioactivity” near Suncor oil refinery in Commerce City. Denver 7 Colorado News (KMGH). https://www.denver7.com/news/environment/air-monitoring-study-finds-elevated-radioactivity-near-suncor-oil-refinery-in-commerce-city
Great job, Kirsten! This article really brought to my attention how big companies fail to be held accountable for their actions even though the Clean Air Act is under place. I am appalled that something as dangerous as higher radioactivity levels is unleashed onto communities near the Suncor refinery. I was disappointed to find out that Colorado doesn't monitor for radioactivity; however I was happy to see that Suncor had to pay millions of dollars in fines pretty recently. Do you think having to pay all of that money made them change some of their practices?
ReplyDeleteHi Lanna! Thank you for your feedback! I agree that big companies continually fail to be held accountable. I think that Suncor is at least starting to improve some of their practices. Recently, there was a project where Suncor spent $57 million to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Within this is a plan to replace an old flare stack, which is used to burn off excess gases, with a more efficient one. This would prevent the release of unburnt hydrocarbons and greenhouse gases. While the state doesn't monitor specifically for radioactivity, they have required the monitoring of hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen cyanide, and benzene. Additionally, there was a period in 2022-2023 when the refinery shut down because its pollution levels exceeded the permitted amounts. Overall, I think there has been an increase in monitoring their practices, but obviously, this doesn't mean that they abide by all regulations 100% of the time.
DeleteHi Kristen! Great choice and analysis of article and paper. I liked how this news article went as far as to embed a pdf of the scientific paper and included many links to relevant information within their article.
ReplyDeleteI found this article especially interesting since the news source is reporting about a study done so close to the expected audience of this source. It made me think about the local reaction to this study and article since Suncor company would be so close to home to the readers of the article and also given the large amount of income, tax revenue, and jobs that Suncor reports bringing to Colorado on their website and with many of the paper authors working in Colorado.
Hi Helen! Thank you! I agree that it was wonderful how the study was included in the news article that readers could easily navigate to. I also agree that the reporting was effective since they knew their audience. By including this local study, readers can see immediate impacts on communities near them, and it can potentially drive people to take action and support initiatives against harmful pollutants.
DeleteGreat analysis! It was really interesting to learn about some of the shortcomings within pollutant monitoring and prevention. I was surprised to hear that there hadn't been an air monitoring study done for radioactivity like this one, and that so many dangerous contaminants aren't tracked. I agree with your overall score, as the article did a generally good job describing the issue, but I'm very curious about the study and want to know more. Did they find any other radioactive sources beyond Radon? Is this a widespread issue, and does this occur at all oil plants to some extent? Why did they look at this particular place in Colorado? Will these types of studies expand to more locations? I also wonder if some sort of longitudinal health study could be done to see possible health effects on the populations of affected communities.
ReplyDeleteHi Teresa, Thank you for your comment! The only radioactivity source they looked at was radon, but they did measure both the gas-phase and particle-phase from radon progeny that attached to particulate matter. This study did reference a previous study that looked at beta radioactivity from conventional and unconventional oil and gas development sites. There, they found that 100 unconventional sites showed an approximate 7% increase in airborne particle-associated beta radioactivity, and 100 conventional sites showed a 1% increase. But this study also looked at these sites from further away, so these numbers could change with proximity. Also, naturally occurring radioactive material can be brought to the surface with drilling, and these products are transported to refineries. This study specifically looked at Colorado since it was paid for by a local community organization near the refinery, so this was a local initiative. I would hope that these types of studies can expand to other locations, and I hope other community members can see that they hold the power to make an impact. I agree that health studies should be performed on people near these sites since there are studies stating the negative effects of radioactivity exposure.
Delete