Maine
There’s Something in the Air in South Portland, Maine – Inside Climate News
SOUTH PORTLAND—It’s one of Maine’s most desirable locations—home to a vibrant and diverse community, nearby beaches, and close proximity to Portland’s downtown. But for years, residents in South Portland have wondered: With 120 massive petroleum storage tanks dotting the shore and knitted into some neighborhoods here, is the air safe to breathe?
Now the first answers are in, thanks to a year of emissions monitoring along the fencelines of the city’s tank farms. At two of those locations, in particular, the results showed levels of benzene—a known carcinogen—well above the state’s limit.
“We’re about 300 feet from those tanks,” said Ted Reiner, whose home is surrounded by three of the city’s tank farms. It’s where he and his wife raised their two daughters, now 38 and 28. Around Christmas, Reiner had surgery for bladder cancer. Now he’s undergoing immunotherapy, and he can’t help but wonder whether his environment is contributing to his health woes.
“You just don’t know what the cumulative effect is,” he said. “I think about it a lot.”
Reiner lives closest to the Citgo South Portland Terminal, in a part of South Portland known as Turner Island. The tanks there primarily hold gasoline, while others in the city contain an array of petroleum products, including heating oil and asphalt. He and his family are among the more than 12,600 people who live within a mile of the tank farm, according to EPA data.
According to data collected by Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection, the CITGO terminal is one of two tank farms in the city where emissions exceed the state limit. Average benzene levels were measured at 2.18 micrograms per cubic meter, well above Maine’s allowed limit of 1.28 micrograms.
The highest levels in the city—3.05 micrograms—were measured at South Portland Terminal LLC owned by Buckeye Partners, which, unlike Citgo’s tanks, does not have people living nearby. A tank farm owned by Sunoco, meanwhile, had measurements just below the state guideline.
Long-term inhalation of benzene can damage bone marrow and blood-forming cells, suppress the immune system, and increase the risk of leukemia. According to the World Health Organization, there is “no safe level of exposure.”
Each reported number from the state is the average of a two-week continuous sample. Citgo’s final number for the year is the average of all those two-week samples. When examining a year’s worth of data, higher emissions levels get masked. But levels spike: For one two-week period in particular, the average benzene level recorded near the Citgo facility was 11.8 micrograms per cubic meter, nearly 10 times the state limit.

Those shorter-lived “burst emissions” can be dangerous in their own right.
One to 14 days of exposure to higher levels of benzene can cause headaches and breathing issues for sensitive individuals, such as children, older adults, or people with preexisting health conditions. The risk level for short-term exposure for benzene is 30 micrograms per cubic meter. What’s not clear in the state’s data is whether benzene levels get high enough to trigger those responses.
Rich Johnson, a spokesman for Citgo, said the company takes the concerns of South Portland residents seriously and is continuing to work with state regulators. “We believe it is important that any study of air monitoring results support accurate, representative conclusions about community-level air quality,” Johnson said.
Buckeye Partners did not respond to multiple emails requesting comment.
Petroleum companies and oil terminal owners use various technologies to eliminate emissions, but they still happen. Most often, chemicals escape from tank vents, equipment leaks and loading rack operations.
Anna O’Sullivan, a 42-year-old artist and therapist, thinks about all of this. She worries when her 7-year-old son, Henry, plays in the yard. “Is he just, like, absorbing what’s in the air?” she wonders.
This story is funded by readers like you.
Our nonprofit newsroom provides award-winning climate coverage free of charge and advertising. We rely on donations from readers like you to keep going. Please donate now to support our work.
Donate Now
She’s hesitant to eat anything grown in the soil there. She’s concerned that staying put means poisoning them both.
But she’s also stuck. O’Sullivan bought her three-bedroom cape, built in 1904, with a big backyard for $190,000 in 2017—a charming and impossible find in the market today.
“I can see the tanks from my house,” she said. The feeling is: “I need to move. I can’t raise my kids in an area where it’s just, like, poisonous air.”
But also: “I like my house. … It’s hard to move, it’s hard to buy a house.”
The science supports these emotions.
The readings are high enough “to merit serious attention,” said Drew Michanowicz, a senior scientist at Physicians, Scientists, and Engineers for Healthy Energy, an independent scientific research institute that brings science to energy policy.
Across South Portland, most people don’t live immediately next to the tanks, which lessens their exposure because emissions are quickly dispersed. But especially around the Citgo facility, some live quite close.


Until last fall, when she had to move following a house fire, Jacky Gerry was living near the Citgo tanks. “Did I ever think we were safe? Probably not,” she said. “But did a lot of people have a choice as to where you live? No.”
People in South Portland first became concerned about the tanks in 2019, after the EPA announced consent decrees, a resolution of a dispute without an admission of guilt, with two companies with tanks here—Global Partners LLC and Sprague Energy. In both cases, heated petroleum storage tanks containing asphalt and a thick fuel oil were emitting what are known as volatile organic compounds—chemicals that include benzene—in violation of their state permits. That issue was specific to tanks containing asphalt and number 6 fuel oil, which were previously thought to have no emissions, and is not the situation with the Citgo tanks.
As a result of the consent decrees, the operators installed systems to capture emissions that appear to have worked. In the most recent testing, emissions levels around both tank farms were below Maine’s threshold.
The consent decrees also helped put the tanks on the radar of lawmakers. In 2021, a newly passed law mandated that all petroleum tank farms in the state begin fenceline monitoring for chemicals including benzene. That monitoring began in August 2024, and the first results were released late last year.
Residents here have long taken the fight against industrial emissions into their own hands, including in a high-profile—and successful—fight to keep oil from Canadian tar sands from being piped into the city in 2018.
It was in that spirit that South Portland resident Tom Mikulka, a retired chemist with a Ph.D. in biochemistry from Cornell, opted to analyze the state results so residents would be able to start understanding the implications.
“I wouldn’t want to go to sleep knowing there’s high benzene levels that close to my home,” said Mikulka, referring to the houses that stand just feet from a fenceline monitor mounted along the Citgo property. “While there is diffusion, I can’t imagine the data is much different just a few feet away.”
The state findings validate the concerns he’s had all along. Mikulka first began testing emissions in the neighborhood back in 2020, when he used COVID relief checks to purchase air monitoring equipment. He hung one of the monitors on Reiner’s property, near the swing his grandkids like to play on.
Now, six years later, with official data in hand, Mikulka hopes the findings will be harder for regulators to dismiss.
That’s Jacky Gerry’s hope, too.
“Now that we have these answers, who’s stepping up to the plate to say, ‘Let’s try to fix that?’” she said. “Is it a city problem? An oil company problem? Where does it fall?”
About This Story
Perhaps you noticed: This story, like all the news we publish, is free to read. That’s because Inside Climate News is a 501c3 nonprofit organization. We do not charge a subscription fee, lock our news behind a paywall, or clutter our website with ads. We make our news on climate and the environment freely available to you and anyone who wants it.
That’s not all. We also share our news for free with scores of other media organizations around the country. Many of them can’t afford to do environmental journalism of their own. We’ve built bureaus from coast to coast to report local stories, collaborate with local newsrooms and co-publish articles so that this vital work is shared as widely as possible.
Two of us launched ICN in 2007. Six years later we earned a Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting, and now we run the oldest and largest dedicated climate newsroom in the nation. We tell the story in all its complexity. We hold polluters accountable. We expose environmental injustice. We debunk misinformation. We scrutinize solutions and inspire action.
Donations from readers like you fund every aspect of what we do. If you don’t already, will you support our ongoing work, our reporting on the biggest crisis facing our planet, and help us reach even more readers in more places?
Please take a moment to make a tax-deductible donation. Every one of them makes a difference.
Thank you,
Maine
Who is raising the most money in the Maine governor’s race?
(Joe Phelan/Staff Photographer)
Candidates vying to become Maine’s next governor have until midnight Tuesday to file campaign finance reports for the first quarter of the year.
The reports will show who is best positioned to control the message in the final month-plus until the primaries. But fundraising success doesn’t always guarantee a win at the ballot box.
The reports come as a growing number of leading candidates are taking to the airwaves a head of the June 9 primaries. Five Democrats and seven Republicans are vying to replace Gov. Janet Mills, who is term limited.
As of Tuesday, Republican Jonathan Bush topped all candidates in broadcast, cable and digital advertising, having booked nearly $1.5 million in ads through the primary, the political spending tracker AdImpact said.
But Republican Garrett Mason is benefitting from about $3 million in spending by Restoration of America PAC, which is running ads targeting Gov. Janet Mills and tying Mason to President Donald Trump.
Other Republican candidates running ads are Bobby Charles ($63,000), Owen McCarthy ($43,660) and Ben Midgely ($55,000.)
Hannah Pingree tops the Democratic slate with about $564,000 in ad spending, followed by Nirav Shah ($493,000), Shenna Bellows ($462,700) and Angus King III ($299,000.)
As of Tuesday afternoon, fundraising totals were only trickling in. Public access to those reports was hampered because the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics & Election Practices is building a new website, and glitches made some reports unviewable.
This story will be updated when more reports are filed. As of Tuesday afternoon:
- Republican Jonathan Bush reported raising about $845,000 in the first quarter, but 60% of that, $500,000, was a personal loan to his own campaign. His totals were not yet available through the new website, but his quarterly fundraising and spending was provided by ethics staff.
- Republican Robert Wessels was the only other active candidate that had filed. He raised nearly $11,600 for the quarter and has about $13,540 in cash.
This is a developing story.
Maine
Obituary: Anne Theresa Tarling
Anne Theresa Tarling
SANFORD – Anne Theresa Tarling, 74, of Sanford, Maine passed away peacefully at home on April 23, 2026, surrounded by her loving family. While our hearts are broken, we find comfort in knowing she lived a full and beautiful life rooted in love, creativity, and devotion to the people who meant the most to her.
Anne was born on April 3, 1952, in Portland, Maine, to the late Joseph and Blanche Morin. She grew up in Portland and graduated from Deering High School in 1970.
In 1980, Anne married the love of her life, Ernest Tarling. Together they built a life centered on family, laughter, and partnership. Their 45 years of marriage were filled with shared memories and a deep commitment to one another and to their family.
Anne was a talented self-taught artist who found great joy in painting and sharing her creativity with others. She proudly exhibited her work at local art shows and specialty shops, and her paintings found their way into homes near and far. Her art brought beauty and comfort to many and will continue to remind us of her for years to come.
She also enjoyed gardening, sailing the coast of Maine, and hosting family gatherings. She was known for her famous chocolate chip cookies and for never missing a birthday or special occasion.
Being a devoted Nana brought her great joy, and she cherished time spent with her family above all else.
In addition to her parents, Anne was preceded in death by her brother, Stephen Morin; her sister, Julie Pochebit, her brother-in-law, Daniel Desmond; nieces Elizabeth McKee and Alison Pochebit.
She is survived by her brother, Paul (Sue Ellen) Morin, two sisters, Cheryl Desmond and Celine (Stephen) Pochebit; her husband of 45 years, Ernest Tarling; her son, Greg (Karen) Flagg, her four daughters, Jennifer Copper, Rebecca (Frank) Zavadil, Stefenie (Matthew) Burdick, and Kendra (Justin) Dowling; her 11 grandchildren, Cody, Matthew, Jackson, Gracey, Lucas, Quinn, Beau, Shea, Ellie, Will, and Stevie; a large extended family, including many loving nieces and nephews; and her longtime best friend, Sandy Hobbs.
A funeral service will be held Saturday, May 2, at 11 a.m. at St. Martha Church, 30 Portland Road, Kennebunk, Maine, followed by a celebration of life at 12:30 p.m. at For the Love of Food + Drink at Saltwater Farm, 411 Post Road, Wells, Maine.
To share a memory or leave a message of condolence, please visit Anne’s Book of Memories Page at http://www.bibberfuneral.com.
Arrangements are in the care of Bibber Memorial Chapel, 67 Summer Street, Kennebunk, ME 04043.
Maine
Moldy Maine weed is being treating with radiation
Maine marijuana growers are increasingly using radiation and other methods to remove contaminants from their products, a process consumers are likely in the dark about.
Despite a state policy requiring remediated products to be labeled as such, Maine’s Office of Cannabis Policy is not enforcing that rule.
In response to a complaint by a dispensary owner in late February, deputy director of operations Vern Malloch acknowledged, “we are not requiring labeling of remediated or treated product,” according to records obtained through a media request.
“We plan to issue guidance on this in the near future,” Malloch wrote.
Office of Cannabis Policy Director John Hudak also told lawmakers last year that the agency hasn’t enforced remediation labeling requirements since at least November 2024.
“The Office began receiving pushback from cannabis cultivators who did not want to label their cannabis if they ‘treated’ their cannabis with radiation or ozone prior to submitting the cannabis for mandatory testing,” Hudak wrote in testimony last year.
A spokesperson for the agency declined to answer specific questions Monday, but confirmed the agency stopped enforcing the rule after some growers raised concerns over the “misleading impact” that labeling treated cannabis has on consumers.
“Requiring label disclosure of the use of irradiation or ozone treatment implies a consumer risk that is not scientifically supported and is potentially misleading in its implication about potential harm from exposure,” Alexis Soucy, OCP’s director of media relations, wrote in an email.
Over the last couple years, several marijuana products have been subjected to recall because of high levels of mold, yeast and other contaminants. Unsafe levels of mold in cannabis can cause flu-like symptoms, including respiratory issues, sinus infections, headaches and dizziness.
But rather than tossing their product, growers can turn to a process called irradiation, often involving gamma rays or X-rays, to remove contaminants.
Supporters say it’s a safe way to reduce waste and prolong shelf lives. Mold and yeast grow naturally just about everywhere and many species are benign. Standard cannabis mold testing does not differentiate between harmful and harmless microbes.
Opponents, however, argue there isn’t enough research about remediating cannabis to say whether it’s safe or not. There is not much data on whether the various types of remediation are effective at killing microbes or are safe for consumers, most of whom don’t know about the practice.
“It’s a complex topic without many answers,” said Yasha Kahn, who co-founded MCR Labs, one of four licensed cannabis testing facilities in Maine. “Hopefully, the rescheduling can lead to more research.”
The federal government moved last week to reclassify cannabis from a Schedule I to Schedule III drug. Decades-long restrictions on cannabis research will be lifted, which acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said will allow for studies into “marijuana’s safety and efficacy.”
Kahn, who operates several testing labs throughout New England, said irradiating cannabis has become increasingly prevalent in legal markets across the country and the world. It’s still debated whether irradiation works as well as it’s supposed to, he said.
‘THIS IS A FAIRLY NEW PROCESS’
There are numerous kinds of cannabis remediation, each with its own pros and cons. Growers most commonly use X-rays, gamma radiation or ozone gas to remove mold and microbes.
Radiation does not kill all the mold, yeast and other microbes present in cannabis outright, Kahn said. Certain species of mold, like harmful mycotoxins, can often survive remediation. Others can remain dormant for months following the procedure.
“Irradiation gets rid of mold’s ability to procreate, and not necessarily permanently,” he said. “You can take that same product and test it again, months from then, and there’s going to be mold growth.”
Some in the industry, like organic marijuana farmer Lizzy Hayes in Mercer, fear that having the option to remediate cannabis removes the incentive to grow clean cannabis. If you can simply use radiation to eliminate mold from harvested crops, she said, why would you put effort into growing mold-free products?
Part of the blame, according to Hayes, lies at the feet of Maine’s recreational cannabis testing regime. Unlike the state’s medical marijuana market, batches of recreational cannabis products must be tested for contaminants like mold, yeast and heavy metals before they can be put on a dispensary shelf.
But since the mold test only detects the presence of mold, not whether it’s harmful, Hayes said many growers save themselves the trouble and irradiate their cannabis by default rather than risking a failed test.
“When you have a regulatory system that incentivizes irradiation, it’s also making it so that customers don’t have access to as high quality of a product,” she said.
Some in the industry disagree. A bill was proposed last year to codify requirements around labeling treated cannabis and inspecting remediation equipment. It was ultimately defeated after many Maine cannabis growers testified in opposition to the bill.
“Radiation and ozone treatment methods are well-established, scientifically validated technologies commonly used in industries far beyond cannabis,” wrote Jacob Racioppi, owner of Goose River Cannabis in Unity. “In fact, they are standard in the food industry.”
Joel Pepin, co-founder of JAR Cannabis Company, owns and operates one of about a dozen X-ray machines in Maine’s cannabis industry. He estimated that about half of Maine’s recreational cannabis has been treated by similar methods. It would be overkill, he said, to require all of that product to be labeled over scientifically unfounded concerns.
“If we apply this same logic to other industries in Maine, then why doesn’t this bill also require dental patients to wear a shirt that says, ‘treated by X-ray’ after leaving the dental office?” Pepin testified.
Neither Racioppi nor Pepin responded to requests for an interview.
Lorri Maling, laboratory director at cannabis testing facility Nelson Analytical, seconded Pepin that remediating cannabis is “more in use now than it was a few years ago.”
While some opponents of irradiation claim the process reduces THC content and eliminates terpenes — the chemicals that give different cannabis strains unique scents and effects — Maling said there’s no data to back that up. Nor is there much data to back up many other conclusions about the effects of irradiating cannabis.
Most of the studies on the effects of irradiation have been on fruits and vegetables, she said, which have not shown any negative effects — though there’s no guarantee that any remediation method will kill all bacteria.
“This is a fairly new process for cannabis,” Maling wrote in an email. “I really cannot say that it is safe or unsafe for cannabis as there really is not enough data on this.”
-
California3 minutes agoA Santa Barbara Restaurant Vet Introduces Spanish-California Cooking to West Adams
-
Colorado9 minutes agoColorado real estate broker expands to Breckenridge
-
Connecticut15 minutes agoMan convicted almost 4 years after body found in the Connecticut River
-
Delaware21 minutes agoMezzanine Gallery presents Kira Krell’s “Stone Formations”
-
Florida27 minutes agoFBI asking for help locating missing truck driver after suspected car hauler hijacking in Florida
-
Georgia33 minutes ago
Georgia officials warn wildfires are still a threat as firefighters report progress
-
Hawaii39 minutes agoMysterious green lights in Hawaii sky leave astronomers searching for answers
-
Idaho44 minutes agoRANKED: The 18 Best Private Schools in Idaho
