SNIFF THE SULFUR OR SNUFF THE FIRES

Through the 1970 Clean Air Act, politicians endeared themselves to starry eyed crusaders who thought that puritanically clean air could simply be legislated without paying a price.

It now turns out that the price is not merely high, but impossible to pay in the near future. Pressure to amend the act is building not only in industry, but also in Congress, and even in the Environmental Protection Agency.

First came the news that the standards for nitrogen oxides were based on inaccurate measurements, and EPA wants the law amended accordingly. Then it was found that the secondary sulfur dioxide standards are needlessly strict without guaranteeing the protection of crops and other vegetation, because the damage is done by short term high concentrations, not by the annual emission on which the standard is based.

Now it turns out that there is no known technology to remove sulfur from readily available fuels, either before or after combustion, to the absurdly strict extent of the law.

The Senate Public Works Committee has therefore asked the National Academy of Sciences to examine the validity of of the standards, and a House commerce committee has begun hearings on the 1970 Clean Air Act in preparation of its probable amendment next year.

For fuel oil, the law prescribes a 0.3% sulfur ceiling in some eases, but this can be achieved only for some rare, very special crude oils or by using distilled material that has been desulfurized by complicated processes. Government regulations now discourage the use of such fuels in large plants because of their acute shortage. Removing the sulfur from the stack gases is a problem on which US power companies alone have spent some $300 million by investigating 13 separate processes, but so far without finding a satisfactory solution.

It therefore came as a shock to industrial experts when John R. Quarles, acting EPA administrator (before R.E. Train was sworn in), declared in a congressional hearing in September that technology to remove sulfur from stack gases is available and operating successfully in Japan with equipment perfected in the US.

Quarles' testimony is flatly contradicted by a report of an Edison Electric Institute study group which visited Japan earlier this year and studied sulfur removal processes there. The report concludes that none of the 14 sulfur removal processes studied could meet present US requirements.

What they did find in Japan, however, was the use of tall stacks to provide dilution and dispersion of gaseous pollutants. This is a recognized control technique in Japan and other countries, but few regulatory bodies in the US recognize its merits for the achievement of ambient air quality; most are obsessed with the quantities emitted, no matter at what height.

Amendment of the Clean Air Act now seems highly probable, most likely next year. Opposition to such a move, led by Sen. Muskie and others, is still strong, but perceptibly weakening.