Because Maine took the extraordinary step of testing nearly 1,000 public and private wells last year, it has the luxury of considering the problem of the gasoline additive MTBE in drinking water long before it becomes a crisis. The time could be profitably spent in three ways: lobbying the federal government to change its rules requiring MTBE or similar additives; searching for suppliers of an alternative that meets federal clean-air levels; and waiting to see what the Big Foot of auto issues, California, decides to do.

MTBE, which has been in gasoline in low levels for 20 years, is used in greater proportion now to reduce air-pollution levels, and, by most accounts, it has worked remarkably well. Regions in 15 states have found its use a simple way to meet air-quality rules from the Environmental Protection Agency.

Unlike other components in gasoline, however, which tend to cling to soil particles when spilled, MTBE runs to water, showing up faster and staying longer in lakes and groundwater. The danger of MTBE isn’t fully known and only a small percentage of the wells tested were found contaminated. But even relatively small spills from gas stations, auto or boating accidents or poor disposal could harm a drinking-water supply. These opposing effects on air and water seem to force Maine into choosing its poison, but a closer look suggests otherwise.

The most comprehensive work to date on MTBE and fuel alternatives has been done by researchers at the University of California-Davis. They examined a dozen topics, including the effect on air and water quality, direct health impacts and treatment technologies to remove MTBE from water. They also did a cost-benefit analysis of several fuels meeting the EPA’s Clean Air Act mandate. They concluded that one alternative that looks very much like one the Maine Department of Environmental Protection has proposed “achieves air quality at the least cost.” Water-treatment costs, by the way, made the fuel with MTBE the most expensive of those examined.

The problem with California or Maine simply using the cost-effective and environmentally friendly fuel is that the EPA won’t allow it. Or at least EPA officials will have to think about allowing it. That is frustrating for a state that wants to find a fuel that both is safe and meets clean-air requirements, but it may also be a blessing because it forces Maine to wait while the fuel industry sorts itself out on this question and far larger states decide what to do about MTBE.

Waiting is also a good idea because Maine can’t afford to go through another round of foulups and unhappiness over regulations concerning its primary source of transportation. After the CarTest failure, the debates over inspection and maintenance programs and the surprising groundwater problems with MTBE, the best tool the state has now might be patience.