Copyright 1999 Federal Document Clearing House, Inc.
Federal Document Clearing House Congressional Testimony
May 18, 1999
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY
LENGTH: 969 words
HEADLINE:
TESTIMONY May 18, 1999 JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN SENATE ENVIRONMENT
AND PUBLIC WORKS EPA'S PROPOSED SULPHUR STANDARD
BODY:
STATEMENT OF SENATOR JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CLEAN AIR, WETLANDS, PRIVATE PROPERTY, AND NUCLEAR SAFETY
HEARING ON EPA'S PROPOSED GASOLINE SULFUR STANDARD MAY 18, 1999
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing to review the EPA's recently
proposed national gasoline sulfur standard. The State of
Connecticut strongly supports the proposed Tier 2 Emission Standards for
Vehicles and Gasoline Sulfur Standards for Refineries. On a
national level, emissions from mobile sources continue to be major contributors
to air quality problems. Currently, mobile sources account for roughly half the
nitrogen oxide pollution (NOx), more than 40% of hydrocarbon emissions, 80% of
carbon monoxide emissions, and a quarter of particulates. In order to
effectively address air pollution from the transportation sector, we need to
reduce pollutants in the fuels, and improve vehicle emission control
technologies. I am pleased that the Administration has offered these proposed
standards as a package, including flexibility provisions and phase-in
requirements, to achieve substantial, cost-effective air pollutant reductions.
The health and air quality benefits that would result from the proposed
standards are not only significant, they are surprisingly impressive. A recent
study by the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators and the
Association of Local Air Pollution Control Officials (STAPPA- ALAPCO) found that
and factoring in transport of air pollution, reducing gasoline
sulfur levels to 40 parts per million (ppm) -- slightly above the
current proposal -- would yield an air quality dividend equivalent to removing
nearly 54 million vehicles from America's roads. Nationally, that's an air
quality benefit of removing one in four cars from our highways. Described
locally, for citizens of the New Haven region in Connecticut, the new
sulfur standard would translate into air quality benefits
equivalent to removing approximately 264,000 cars from their streets. Reducing
sulfur in gasoline decreases emissions of
hydrocarbons and NOx which will in turn lead to a decrease of ground level
ozone. Together, these pollutants worsen respiratory illnesses such as asthma,
emphysema, and bronchitis. In addition, cleaning the sulfur out
of gasoline will lead to lower emissions of particulate matter
and carbon monoxide, improve visibility, help address the acid rain problem, and
reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Although sulfur occurs
naturally in petroleum, it is a detriment to engine performance. In fact, I
don't think that anyone would argue that sulfur is good for
gasoline. On the contrary, sulfur is a
contaminant that poisons the catalytic converters that are the heart of modern
automobile pollution control systems. Sulfur is particularly
harmful to the operation of low- and ultra low- emissions vehicles. For example,
the NOx emissions from low- and ultra low-emissions vehicles that burn
high-sulfur fuel range from 61% to 251% higher than similar
vehicles running on low- sulfur fuels. To capitalize on the
great pollution prevention promise of low and ultra-low emissions vehicles, we
must ensure they have the clean gasoline they need to operate
effectively. The presence of sulfur in
gasoline increases emissions of NOx and other pollutants by
degrading catalytic converter performance. Unfortunately, much of the harm
caused to catalytic converters by high-sulfur gasoline is
irreversible. Once the damage is done, even returning to low-sulfur
gasoline will not completely repair the pollution prevention system.
Recent studies have shown using high-sulfur gasoline even
briefly causes permanent reductions in catalyst performance as high as a
permanent 15% catalyst efficiency loss for NOx and about 20% catalyst efficiency
loss for carbon monoxide. The irreversibility of catalyst poisoning is one of
the most compelling reasons why the EPA's nationwide gasoline
sulfur standard approach is the right strategy. We can't allow bad gas
to ruin good engines. In the 1970s, we fought to remove lead from
gasoline to make possible the introduction of catalytic
converters. We didn't remove lead from gasoline only in areas
with extremely high incidence of lead poisoning; we removed lead from all
gasoline because it was the right thing to do for the health of
all Americans across the country. Until recently, we did not appreciate that
sulfur is a catalyst poison, too. Aside from California where
they've had clean gasoline since 1996, all vehicles on American
roads that benefit from catalytic converters -- the vast majority of vehicles --
produce substantially more pollution than they would if they were burning
low-sulfur gasoline. All Americans will benefit from the
cleaner air that will result from cleaning our gasoline. A
study by the State and Territorial Air Pollution Program Administrators recently
found that the EPA's gasoline sulfur standard offers marginal
attainment areas more than 14 times the air quality benefits of the petroleum
association's regional program. The national sulfur standard
will likely keep these marginal attainment areas from exceeding new ground level
ozone or particulate matter standards. The EPA's proposed standard is
cost-effective -- estimated to cost only one to two cents per gallon -- and it
is achievable, as demonstrated by the experience of California. We must achieve
this standard nationwide. Providing clean gasoline nationwide
is one very important step that will help reduce pollution immediately and pave
the road for the low and ultra-low emissions vehicles of the future. I applaud
EPA's effort to clean our gasoline and, in turn, clean our air
and improve our quality of life. The new gasoline sulfur
standard will make it easier for all of America to achieve and enjoy clean air.
LOAD-DATE: May 19, 1999