The manufacturer says the octane-booster known as MMT. (methylcyclopentadienyl manganese tricarbonyl), is completely safe. Gasoline producers turned to it 19 years ago to replace lead, after scientists linked leaded gasoline to serious birth defects.
Health Canada agrees with the maker, Virginia-based Ethyl Corporation. But the U.S. government and health and environmental activists on both sides of the border warn that unless MMT is removed, Canadians could face a repeat of the leaded gasoline experience.
Caught in the middle is Environment Minister Sergio Marchi, who is expected to make a decision this week on whether to ban MMT.
The need for more study is the only common ground. What little evidence does exist hints at a risk from breathing the exhaust of cars running on gas containing MMT, says Donna Mergler, a neurophysiologist with the University of Québec at Montreal and one of the few researchers studying the question.
Tests on laboratory animals suggest manganese in MMT could speed up the aging process, Mergler says. Young children, meanwhile, ``may be particularly at risk from manganese," which could cause deterioration of developing brain tissues.
``We should not be taking that kind of chance with the children of Canada,'' says Barbara McElgunn of the Learning Disabilities Association of Canada.
Mergler's research is funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. In fact, MMT has never been used in the U.S. And, though a court ruled last November that the EPA didn't have the authority to outlaw the chemical, the agency is still fighting its introduction.
The Canadian government, following the EPA's lead, moved last year to get rid of the additive. It is now added to all gasoline sold in Canada, with the exception of Chevron products sold in B.C. A 1994 Health Canada review of the evidence found no proof of a health threat, but Marchi's predecessor at Environment, Sheila Copps, said the uncertainties were too great and the stakes too high. A bill outlawing MMT was on the books, but it died when the last session of Parliament ended in January. Since then, Marchi, has delayed making a decision on whether to re-introduce the bill. To avoid repeating the whole legislative process, which could mean the bill isn't passed before the end of the government's term, he must re-introduce it before April 22.
The Sierra Club of Canada and Pollution Probe, with the support of the Learning Disabilities Association and the Washington, D.C.-based Environmental Defence Fund, used a press conference last Thursday to call on Marchi to do just that.
The only new studies to surface recently support a ban, said Ken Ogilvie of Pollution Probe. He warned that if the U.S. reinstates the ban, Canada will be in an awkward position.
`Who's going to be accountable today if we pull back?'' he asked.
Environmentalists recall the story of leaded gasoline, introduced in 1922 with similar claims of safety by Ethyl Corp., which also happens to be the lone manufacturer of MMT. Though some scientists at the time warned of possible risks, it took governments 50 years to recognize that leaded gasoline causes low IQs in children.
``By the time one can see measurable effects in the population, it is much, much too late,'' says Elizabeth May, executive director of the Sierra Club.
There are other parallels. Before each additive was introduced, scientists knew both are toxic at high doses. The dangers of low doses were and, in MMT's case, still are, unknown.
"Déja vu" is a phrase the activists find hard to avoid.
This time round, however, the automobile industry is on their side. Automakers claim MMT is gumming up exhaust systems and interfering with emission control equipment, which is increasingly sensitive thanks to ever-more strict pollution laws.
Fighting a ban are gasoline suppliers. Brendan Hawley of the Canadian Petroleum Products Institute says it would cost the industry $115 million for new equipment and an extra $50 million a year. If Canadians want their cars to run cleanly and get good mileage, he says, something will have to replace MMT, and that something will be more expensive.
Backing the petroleum industry are the provincial governments of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Quebec, New Brunswick and Nova Scotia, home of the country's largest oil refineries. Supporting the ban is British Columbia, which was considering its own ban until the federal government made its move last year.
Whatever Marchi decides, the economic consequences for drivers will be slight. Even the petroleum industry says a ban will raise gas prices by just a fraction of cent per litre, and the automakers are warning of little more than inconvenience for their customers, who might have to get their cars checked more often.
But the broader environmental effects are both harder to predict and potentially more serious. Ethyl Corp. insists it can find no evidence MMT fouls emission control systems or causes a health risk. In fact, company research shows it may actually prevent pollution.
David Wilson, president of Ethyl Canada, says the additive reduces nitrous oxide emissions -- a principal component of smog -- by up to 20 per cent.
Environmentalists, he adds, are ignoring government studies that conclude it's safe. ``There's no reason to ban it here,'' says Wilson.
The only Canadian analysis of the subject, the 1994 Health Canada review, found no risk from fumes containing manganese. ``The level of exposure in the environment is quite low and lower than the level at which we see toxicity,'' says Barry Jessiman, head of the air and waste division at Health Canada.
But Jessiman says there are still many questions, none of which is likely to be answered soon. A full-fledged Canadian study is coming, but it will take 18 months to design and five years to carry out, he says.
The automobile industry wants a ban long before that, in order to prepare its 1997 models. Environmentalists want the same, pointing out that waiting for more evidence could prove costly, just as it did in the case of leaded gasoline.
Return to the previous page