UC TSR&TP Public Advisory Committee
Spring 2000 Meeting
UC Office of the President Building, Oakland
Thursday,
March 16, 2000
MINUTES
Present:
Jim Stratton, Chair, Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
Marc Aarens, UCOP
Syed Ali, CA Water Resources Control Board
Steve Book, Dept. of Health Services
Richard Clark, TOSCO
Arthur Fong, IBM Environmental Programs
Kean Goh, Dept. of Pesticide Regulation
Jim Hunt, Associate Director, TSR&TP
Jeff Hunts (for William Orr), CA Integrated Waste
Management Board
Bruce Jennings, CA Assembly Env. Safety & Toxic
Materials Committee
Charles Lapin, ARCO
Bruce LaBelle (for Jim Allen), Dept. of Toxic Substances
Control
Jerry Last, Director, TSR&TP
Niall Mateer, UCOP Academic Affairs
Lisa Stevenson, Program Manager, TSR&TP
Leslie Stewart, League of Women Voters
Mika Pringle Tolson, Public Relations & Grants
Coordinator, TSR&TP
William Vance, CA Environmental Protection Agency
Kip
Wiley, CA Senate Office of Research
Not Present:
Mark DeSaulnier, Supervisor, Contra Costa County
Mike Paparian, Sierra Club
Bob Spies, Applied Marine Services
Winona Victery, US Environmental Protection Agency
Arthur
Winer, Associate Director, TSR&TP
Jim Stratton brought the meeting to order at 10:05am and asked everyone to introduce themselves. Minutes from the fall 1999 meeting were reviewed for final approval. Charles Lapin moved to approve the minutes. All were in favor.
Bill Vance provided an update on ethanol vs. reformulated gasoline. He began with a review of the background of MTBE. In March 1999, Governor Davis signed legislation to phase-out MTBE by December of 2002. This legislation required the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop a Phase III Reformulated Gasoline (RFG3) by the end of 1999 and study the health effects of oxygenates in gas. The CARB did pass RFG3 regulations at the end of 1999, and these will allow up to 10% ethanol in gas. This also complies with the federal guidelines that now require 2% oxygenate. The Environmental Policy Council heard the reports on ethanol in January of 2000. The results showed that air emissions decreased in formaldehyde, but increased in acetylaldehyde (a precursor of PAN, peroxyacetyl nitrate) with ethanol instead of MTBE. The Lawrence Livermore National Lab also did a report on ethanol for the State Water Resources Board. Those results show that ethanol allows gas plumes to move farther in water. Ethanol is not a significant carcinogen, but it increases certain emissions. There appears to be no net change in the risk of carcinogenesis when switching from MTBE to ethanol. Because ethanol has to be trucked in, this could impact traffic in urban areas and air quality due to increased diesel emissions. In the end, the Environmental Policy Council approved the reports and the use of ethanol. How much ethanol will be used depends on a possible waiver of the federal 2% oxygenate requirement, which is the requirement for non-attainment areas (densely populated areas), that make up 70% of gasoline use in California. CARB doesn’t have a waiver for the 2% requirement yet, so the state is still working on RFG3. Right now the state has to plan on using ethanol, and oil refiners need to plan for the increase from 50 million to 550 million gallons/year of ethanol, of which almost all will be imported from the midwestern states. California can produce ethanol, but production won’t be up to demand until at least 2004. The challenge to the oil industry is to figure out how to include ethanol in gas. All refiners make a common grade of gasoline; other ingredients are added at distribution centers. Ethanol is extremely hygroscopic, so it cannot be sent through a pipeline because it would attract a lot of water along the way. Ethanol also increases the vapor pressure of gasoline. Another critical issue mentioned was that ethanol-containing gasoline cannot be sent through the same pipelines as conventional gasoline. Accordingly, to be used, a region would have to dedicate all of the pipeline to ethanol-containing fuel.
Last asked about specifics of the LLNL report on ethanol and the environmental fate of one billion gallons of ethanol versus the smaller scale. Vance responded that we may get a 25% increase in plume length with ethanol, but if a truck spills at a terminal where many other spills have occurred, or if a truck dumps into a stream, that would cause a problem. Vance said Tosco will be able to replace MTBE with ethanol in its gas very soon. Tosco will become the first oil company to solve the problem of moving ethanol gas around the state. Stratton inquired about the current sources of ethanol. Vance said it is mainly produced from corn in the midwestern states, but also from sugar from Brazil, and some from the Caribbean. Stratton asked what the oil industry’s perspective is on ethanol. Charles Lapin offered that there has been a nagging concern from the beginning that the industry was not doing enough life-cycle analysis. Vance echoed his concerns about the lack of original studies. Last pointed to the lessons from MTBE. Models may be good, but they don't always predict what will happen on a large scale.
Jim Hunt reported on his recent activities with low-level radioactive waste. Hunt was appointed by Governor Davis to participate in the committee on low-level radioactive waste. The committee has so far met about 5 times. Hunt noted the disparity in perspectives on the committee - some think that radioactive waste in California is a crisis and others believe it can be managed. Electrical utilities, nuclear power plants and decommissioning are driving the public debate. Hunt said that projections from the 1980s have turned out to be erroneous — we did not produce as much toxic waste as anticipated. The volume of radioactive waste produced has been reduced considerably, but no one seems to acknowledge that.
Stratton proceeded to anticipatory research by asking the committee what problems are forthcoming and how UC research can help. Stationary sources of air pollution, radon, arsenic, and genetically modified organisms and foods were mentioned as areas of concern. Naturally occurring serpentine asbestos emerged as a major concern. Vance said that as our population grows, people are moving to the foothills where there is a lot of serpentine - the California state rock. Crushed serpentine on the roads exposes people to serpentine asbestos. There are conflicting reports about the health effects of exposure to this kind of asbestos. Vance is interested in finding out more about the speciation of different fibers in asbestos. He said this issue has a far-reaching impact because about 40 counties in the state have this problem.
Stratton asked the committee about the teaching aspect of the TSR&TP and the quality of UC graduates moving into the work force. Arthur Fong noted that science skills are good, but writing skills need improvement. He has seen many PhDs that cannot write good reports. Ideas such as introducing scientists to the public policy process and encouraging high school students to get involved with debate teams and more writing courses were suggested. Stratton asked about UC courses for the workplace. He wondered if internet-based UC courses were a viable option. Aarens said that internet courses are just getting off the ground, but UC is preparing for Tidal Wave II with virtual courses. For the general public, there is UCTV, a new station on satellite also accessible from the web. Niall Mateer commented that some industry concerns have been expressed that UC graduate programs do not prepare students for the teamwork necessary in industry or state agencies.
Jerry Last gave the report from the Director’s Office. The TSR&TP's new lead campus program in Toxic Mechanisms at UC Los Angeles (with UC Riverside & Los Alamos National Lab) will begin funding students this summer. This component will look at the applications of genomics and proteomics to toxicological issues. The director and the associate directors will attend the Annual Symposium in April and introduce themselves and their program at the spring Executive Committee meeting. Last extended an invitation to all committee members to attend the symposium. The TSR&TP will be co-sponsoring an invitation-only workshop on Watersheds & Wastesheds at UC Santa Barbara in June. The workshop will mix social and physical sciences and is being organized by Mike McGinnis from the UCSB Ocean and Coastal Policy Center. Last announced that the TSR&TP is scheduled for a formal review by the UC Office of the President on April 10th. He will provide a followup report to the Advisory Committee at the next meeting. Last referred to the web summary report in the meeting packet that illustrated usage patterns of the program's website. The site became quite popular again immediately after the 60 Minutes report on MTBE. Last invited the committee to submit other documents or reports that would be useful to host on the TSR&TP website.
Marc Aarens & Niall Mateer gave a brief report from the UC Office of the President. Aarens announced that the UC budget was very good this year. The priorities have been set by UC and the governor, but approximately $800 million has been added to the budget for new programs. Stratton inquired about the prospects of TSR&TP getting a budget increase. Aarens said the budget for the TSR&TP will remain the same. Last commented that UC is more interested in new and creative initiatives than augmenting old programs. Mateer agreed with Last’s assessment. Mateer provided examples of the new UC programs. The governor made a commitment to establish three Institutes for Science and Innovation with a budget of $25 million per center per year for 4 years (with matching funds from industry) at or near UC campuses. These will be research centers as opposed to the existing university-industry partnerships that serve as granting programs. UC is seeking to globalize its influence with a new UC center in London, with others planned for Mexico City and Hong Kong. The University of Durham in northern Britain is interested in a partnership with UC on environmental health. The governor has appointed trade directors to work with UC and other companies on environmental health, medical, and agriculture concerns.
After the lunch break, the meeting reconvened and Jim Hunt introduced David Sedlak, an Assistant Professor from UC Berkeley and former TSR&TP trainee, who came to talk about his current research on pharmaceuticals in the environment. The title of his presentation was "Endocrine disruptors, pharmaceuticals, and other emerging contaminants you haven’t thought about (yet)".
Sedlak began his talk with a projection that California's population will double in the next 40 years. He said water is a prime consideration in population growth and we will need to look for alternative sources to meet the demand. Water reuse is a possible solution for the drinking water supply and habitat restoration, but there are human health issues and ecological concerns. A National Academy of Sciences report on the issue concluded that water reuse should be the last resort because of contaminants that are not well understood. He said we should be concerned about the feminization of fish species due to endocrine disruptors such as estrogens that are present in pharmaceuticals. Hormones in natural and synthetic forms are the likely perpetrators. Sedlak’s group measured natural and synthetic estradiol levels in variously treated wastewater. Reverse osmosis seems to be the best method to remove them, but the contaminants remain at detectable levels. These hormones are still present after passing through wetlands. Other pharmaceuticals detected in wastewater effluent include ibuprofen, ifosamide (cancer chemotherapy), clofibrate (lipid regulator), and its metabolites, and pharmaceutically active compounds such as antibiotics, antidiabetics, and cholestrol drugs. Some non-pharmaceuticals are also generating concern, for example, NDMA (N-Nitrosodimethylamine), which is used in rocket fuel and is a chlorination byproduct. The environmental fate and human health effects of these compounds remain to be resolved. Sedlak said that water reuse will become increasingly important, but he cautioned that we should evaluate these concerns first. He concluded with acknowledgements to TSR&TP & the Water Resources Center for supporting his research, which has now blossomed into approximately $1 million in extramural funding.
The final agenda item was new business. The fall meeting will be held in Sacramento. Suggestions for the next presentation topic were solicited. Stratton said he sensed the committee was interested in naturally occurring asbestos and the practical implications of turning science into policy. Vance specified that he would like to hear about the differences between mineral form and length of asbestos particles. Other suggestions included another report on low-level radioactive waste, genetically modified organisms, pesticides in fog, and new research on cumulative exposures.
The meeting adjourned at 1:45pm.
| Join
the TSR&TP Mailing List |
Comments |
Please send corrections to the TSR&TP Webmaster