February 13, 2009
Amid the community discussion and worry about cleaning the Asarco site, how polluted it is , how much it will cost and who will pay for it, some are wondering what will happen to that famous famous – or infamous – stack.
A beacon to El Paso, it looms 828 feet tall.
To some, it is an ugly landmark that needs to go away. Others are saying it should stand as a historical monument, an obelisk from El Paso’s beginnings, or be turned into a work of art.
“I’d be fine with leaving it,” said Bill Addington of the El Paso regional chapter of the Sierra Club, who added it would be a suitable as a retirement home for Texas Commission for Environmental Quality and EPA officials.
But if the decision is made to bring it down, he said, it will be a dicey and dangerous project.
“The best way would be to take it apart brick by brick from the top down,” he said. “The cheapest way is just to blow it up, but if it came down in an implosion, it would spread hazardous waste all over.
“There’s 110 years of residue inside there.”
“There’s been a lot of discussion about that already,” city Rep. Susie Byrd said, referring to a chain of e-mails started by El Paso photographer Richard Barron. “He’s been calling it a public art sculpture.
“But the issue for the city is we don’t own the land. The trustee will own the land.”
City Rep. Beto O’Rourke picked up that thread and said, “The critics of the city’s opposition to Asarco reopening oftentimes accused the city of just being interested in acquiring the land, which is ridiculous.
“There’s obviously a lot of interest in the stack because it’s one of the major symbols, for good or for bad, in El Paso, so I think people in general feel they have a vested interested in the outcome of that tower.
“I don’t really have an opinion. My primary concern is the health of El Paso. If the tower is too toxic to clean up and too toxic to leave standing, then it needs to come down.”
Thomas L. Aldrich, Asarco’s vice president of environmental affairs, issued this statement in response to a question about the fate of the stack:
“ASARCO is working with the state of Texas to fund a custodial trust for the demolition of the plant and remediation of the site. Any custodial trust must be approved by the bankruptcy court that is overseeing ASARCO’s reorganization effort.
“We will not comment further on any specific details that are part of the bankruptcy process.”
After battling most of this decade for the right to stoke up the furnaces and start refining copper again, Asarco last week threw in the towel.
The company cited the plunge in copper prices and the sour world economy in announcing it was shutting down its effort to reopen.
Eleven months ago, Asarco got what it wanted from TCEQ: the renewal of its permit to discharge emissions into the air.
But the city of El Paso has been contesting that decision and when Asarco made its announcement, a game-ending letter was on the way to TCEQ from the Environmental Protection Agency. EPA’s letter advised TCEQ that, in accordance with existing rules, a plant closure lasting more than two years should have been regarded as a permanent shut down.
Asarco ceased operations 10 years ago and to restart, EPA told TCEQ, would call not for the renewal of an existing air permit but a new licensing process that would take into consideration thee tighter pollution restrictions put in place since Asarco turned off its furnaces.