Fuel fracas
Residents hope lawsuit will derail company’s plan to burn tires


by Pamela White

11/14/2002

LYONS–Residents of Lyons and nearby Longmont will now have to wait for the outcome of a lawsuit to learn whether a nearby cement plant will be allowed to burn tires for fuel.

The lawsuit, filed last month against Boulder County by the Sierra Club, alleges the Director of the Boulder County Land Use Department has violated state law, as well as Boulder County zoning codes, in allowing Cemex to burn old tires as a fuel source. The lawsuit claims Boulder County incorrectly determinted a special use permit issued to Cemex in 1990 was still valid. County zoning code states that special permits lapse if not used for five continuous years. The plant has not burned tires since 1993.

Residents had hoped to find a solution outside the courts. They met last week at a hearing of the Boulder County Board of Adjustments to share their concerns about the permit and about tire burning near their homes. The board voted 4 to 1 to back the land use department’s decision.

The board vote is the latest event in a conflict between Cemex, formerly Southdown, and residents of Lyons and Longmont.

"We’re still stuck on the trust issue," says Richard Cargill, a member of the citizen group St. Vrain Watchdogs.

The Watchdogs was founded four years ago in response to fugitive cement kiln dust, a hazardous material, that was blowing through the air near the plant. Residents say they used to keep their windows closed year round because the dust would blow into their houses. Since the Watchdogs mobilized, fugitive dust has been reduced by 80 percent. But residents say there are still so many problems with cement kiln dust that the plant shouldn’t be trusted to manage something as potentially harmful to the environment as burning tires.

Numerous reports of fugitive dust have been made this fall, and a surprise inspection performed by county health officials in October turned up several sources of fugitive dust, including the plant’s clinker pit, where emissions were in excess of 20 percent. One of those sources–piles of dust beneath a conveyor belt–was identified as a problem in other inspections.

"If they can’t get a simple think like their fugitive dust in order, what makes them think they’ll be able to burn tires without malfunctions?" Cargill says.

Lou Dobbs, of the Environmental Justice Project, lives near the plant and watches cement kiln dust blowing in the air often enough to be concerned about tires.

"We do not believe that Cemex can police itself with their emissions," Dobbs says. "(Cemex) continually presents itself to the public as a friend of the community, and that has not been true."

While cement kiln dust is hazardous to breathe, burning tires has the potential to release a number of deadly pollutants, including dioxins, into the air.

Cemex consumes 100,000 tons of coal each year at its Lyons plant. That coal comes from mines located in Paonia, Colo. Cemex officials hope to replace some of that coal by burning 1 million tires each year. Because the company will be paid $15 per ton for the tires, it could realize a savings of $500,000 in fuel costs, as well as about $225,000 in earnings from the tires. It will cost Cemex about $1.5 million to equip the Lyons plant to burn tires.

"It’s better than free fuel," says John Lohr, Cemex plant manager and spokesman.

Lohr said the test burn is intended in part to determine whether burning tires is as cost-effective in reality as it is on paper.

Cemex officials and some environmentalists say burning tires has the potential to prevent environmental damage by cutting back on coal mining. Also, disposal of old tires presents its own environmental dilemma. But Watchdogs members aren’t buying. They cite studies that show significant increases in toxic emissions from plants that burn tires.

In fact, studies on tire burning show mixed results. Some plants emit fewer toxins while burning tires. Others show no significant differences. Others reveal significant toxic emissions. Cargill believes the confusing results are reason enough to delay any test burn until more information is available.

"My concern is there is no science that shows tire burning is safe," Dobbs says. "For every test that said emissions didn’t increase too much, there’s another that said they increased a lot."

There are regulations in place concerning emissions that require multiple inspections by county, state and federal agencies. Further, Cemex has monitors that constantly track the level of pollutants leaving it’s stack. But Dobbs says the inspections and monitors are no guarantee that harmful levels of pollutants won’t make it into the air Boulder County residents breathe.

"What they’ll keep telling you is that they have monitors, but what people don’t understand is that they have ‘upsets.’"

An upset is an unintended event that results in higher levels of toxic emissions. By law, Cemex is required to report "upsets" if toxins reach certain levels.

"I don’t care if they know about them, they’re in the air," Dobbs says. "Knowing about them doesn’t make them less toxic."

Lohrn says he expects the test burn will show no significant increase in pollutants coming from Cemex’s stack.

"But if it’s proven there’s a significant negative impact on the community, we won’t go through with it," Lohr said.

Dobbs says statements like that don’t allay her fears.

"Cemex is a multi-billion-dollar corporation. It’s the third largest cement company in the world," she says. "The only thing we stand to gain is our health. They stand to gain several million in reduced fuel costs."

Respond: letters@boulderweekly.com