Don’t wait – your gift will be doubled for a limited time.  Give Now

Securing US chemical plants

Sam Eaton Jun 15, 2006
HTML EMBED:
COPY

Securing US chemical plants

Sam Eaton Jun 15, 2006
HTML EMBED:
COPY

TEXT OF STORY

TESS VIGELAND: The devil’s in the details when it comes to drafting legislation on security at the nation’s chemical plants. The Senate committee leading that task deleted the most contentious details of a proposal yesterday, and that leaves some questioning, what exactly is left over? From the Marketplace Sustainability Desk Sam Eaton reports.

SAM EATON: One of the casualties of yesterday’s negotiations would have required chemical plants to use less hazardous materials if the option was both available and economical.

Rick Hind with Greenpeace says the reasoning behind the amendment was simple.

RICK HIND: If we switch to safer chemicals nothing catastrophic can happen to the community.

The government estimates that tens of thousands of people could be killed if a terrorist attacked a chemical plant in a populated area. Hind says unless Congress addresses the deadly nature of the chemicals used at those plants, that risk isn’t going to go away.

The American Chemistry Council says these efforts to mandate safer technologies are part of an environmental agenda, not the debate over security.

The council’s members have spent nearly $3 billion on security improvements since 9/11. And while it supports a federal security standard, the Council says decisions about chemistry should be left to the chemists.

I’m Sam Eaton for Marketplace.

There’s a lot happening in the world.  Through it all, Marketplace is here for you. 

You rely on Marketplace to break down the world’s events and tell you how it affects you in a fact-based, approachable way. We rely on your financial support to keep making that possible. 

Your donation today powers the independent journalism that you rely on. For just $5/month, you can help sustain Marketplace so we can keep reporting on the things that matter to you.