WINNING THE ENVIRONMENTAL LEAD

April 23, 1990
Despite Earth Day doomsaying, the planet has more going for it now than it had when concerned humans first gathered 20 years ago to demand a tidier habitat. In the U.S., air and water are cleaner than they were in 1970. People live longer. And the planet certainly has more concerned humans willing to take action on its behalf.

Despite Earth Day doomsaying, the planet has more going for it now than it had when concerned humans first gathered 20 years ago to demand a tidier habitat. In the U.S., air and water are cleaner than they were in 1970. People live longer. And the planet certainly has more concerned humans willing to take action on its behalf.

Yet most Americans think environmental quality has declined. They learn that scores of U.S. cities can't quite meet strict standards for specific air pollutants and ignore huge reductions in pollution overall. They recoil from oil spills and forget the numerous waterways restored to vitality in the past 20 years. Assuming that ecological losses outweigh gains, they conclude that companies-especially oil companies-simply don't care. Their conclusion is the biggest U.S. environmental problem on Earth Day II, partly because it's half-correct.

TAKING THE INITIATIVE

Air and water quality improvements prove that companies even oil companies-care more about the environment now than they did on Earth Day I. But they don't care enough. If companies cared enough there would be fewer new mistakes and more solutions to old problems.

But oil companies care enough now to take the initiative. Twenty years ago, they resisted any and all environmental regulation. Ten years ago, they reacted to regulations, some of which they helped to write. Now they're acting before regulations force them to, a breakthrough vital to further progress.

Examples abound in the area of oil spill prevention and response, where lapses became apparent in the Exxon Valdez disaster of March 1989. Since then, major shippers have rerouted tankers to avoid sensitive areas. The Petroleum Industry Response Organization has formed to plan a nationwide spill response system. And in one of the boldest oil spill moves so far, Conoco Inc. this month began requiring that all its new tankers have double hulls.

Companies also have begun to swing first in the air pollution fight. Led by ARCO, they have introduced gasolines formulated to reduce emissions. They have launched a joint effort with automakers to find fuel-vehicle combinations that reduce pollution. Similarly, refiners and chemical makers are voluntarily reducing toxic emissions. Some have started programs to reduce waste of all types.

To better manage these efforts, many companies have restructured to elevate environmental responsibilities. Some have environmentalist directors. More and more have vice presidents responsible for the environmental safety of company operations and products.

Oil companies aren't taking these actions because Exxon Valdez and consequent political pressures suddenly made them care. In the preceding 20 years they cared enough to spend an estimated $55 billion on the environment. They cared enough to play an important role in the environmental cleanup that has occurred so far.

HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH?

But it wasn't enough. Some cities do still have too much air pollution. Exxon Valdez did spill 258,182 bbl of crude in Prince William Sound. Complex environmental problems remain, and heavy-handed regulation won't solve them. Companies must have the lead. And they can win the lead only by demonstrating that they care.

So how much care is enough? That's easy. Companies can be certain they care enough about the environment when they are certain they have made enough money. Environmental care and profit must function as eternal partners in the business of human progress. If concerned humans can agree on that within the next 20 years, the planet won't need Earth Day III.

Copyright 1990 Oil & Gas Journal. All Rights Reserved.