Environmental Justice by 15sKCNk

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 24

									Environmental Justice


Are there adequate safeguards in place
to protect disadvantaged communities
from industrial by-products?
Environmental Racism in the U.S.
Background
Studies and Reports
   1897-1992 James Hamilton
   1997 Los Angeles, Hazardous waste
    facilities
   2007 University of Colorado,
    Boulder
   1993 Seema Aurora and Timothy
    Carson
   1987, 2007 United Church of Christ
    Commission for Racial Justice
2007 Report Findings
   National Disparities for location of commercial
    hazardous waster facilities
       Host neighborhoods = 56% people of color
       Non-host neighborhoods = 30% people of color.
   Neighborhoods with Clustered Facilities -
    Neighborhoods with hazardous waste facilities
    clustered close together have populations with
    69% people of color, while neighborhoods without
    clustered facilities have populations with 51%
    people of color.
   State Disparities - Out of 44 states that have
    hazardous waste facilities, 40 of these states have
    disproportionately high percentages of people of
    color living within 3 kilometers of the facilities.
Prominent Examples of Environmental
Hazards

   Lead
   Waste Sites
   Air Pollution
   Pesticides
   Wastewater (City Sewers)
   Wastewater - (Agricultural Runoff)
Warren County




 1982 - Warren County PCB Landfill

 Commission for Racial Justice


http://www.ejrc.cau.edu/WarrenPhotoEssay.html
    Close to Home




   http://rogersroad.wordpress.com/
History of Legislation
   The Civil Rights Act of 1964 provides the
    theoretical legal basis
       fair treatment and meaningful involvement of
        all people regardless of race, color, national
        origin, or income
   A 1994 Presidential Executive Order
    directed every Federal agency to make
    environmental justice part of its mission
    by identifying and addressing the effects
    of all programs, policies, and activities on
    "minority populations and low-income
    populations."
Just because exposure occurs does
not mean that there are not
safeguards to protect the community
Clean Air Act
   address the public health and welfare
    risks posed by certain widespread air
    pollutants
   Programs under the act work to:
       reduce concentrations of air pollutants that
        cause smog, haze, and acid rain
       reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants that
        are known/thought to cause cancer serious
        health effects
       phase out production and use of chemicals that
        destroy the ozone layer
   Section 112: emissions of hazardous air
    pollutants
       “maximum achievable control technology”
Like a Bridge Over Troubled Water

   Safe Drinking Water
       Standards for disposal of waste
        underground to avoid contamination of
        drinking water (Injection Systems)
   Clean Water Act
       specify the maximum allowable levels
        of pollutants that may be discharged
       Similar to the CAA, do not require use
        of a specific technology
           Knowledge is Power
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
This law is designed to help local communities protect public health,
          safety, and the environment from chemical hazards.

   ensure that state and local communities are prepared to
    respond to potential chemical accidents
       Emergency training and system reviews
   MSDS reporting requirements specifically provide
    information to the local community about mixtures and
    chemicals present at a facility and their associated hazards
       “A local emergency planning committee, upon request by any
        person, shall make available a material safety data sheet to the
        person’
   inventory of routine toxic chemical emissions from certain
    facilities
Chemical Incident Prevention
   the facility must rigorous, step-by-step hazard
    analysis of processes, equipment, and procedures
    to identify each point at which an accidental
    release could occur
   audits must be completed every three years and
    reported to the EPA
   Human and mechanical errors are the most likely
    to cause faults – require maintenance and
    employee continued education
   Compliance check sheets are distributed to the
    community to ensure the industry is following the
    rules if they feel that the checks done by EPA and
    OSHA are not frequent enough
Economics is a driving force behind
decision making
…Zoning Out…
   first instated in New York City during the
    industrial times
   residential, commercial, industrial, and
    agricultural
   a system of land use regulation that
    governs the size, shape and types of
    activities that are allowed for lots and
    structures
   Industry regulations often include: proper
    waste disposal, “dead area” around the
    factory, and barriers to mark the land
     Industry’s Innovations
Responsible Care
 “voluntary initiative of the global chemical
  industry to safely handle our products from
  inception in the research laboratory, through
  manufacture and distribution, to ultimate
  reuse, recycle and disposal, and to involve the
  public in our decision-making processes”
 to improve environmental and safety
  performance of CMA members and thereby to
  improve public perception
 changing collective behavior
 provide a forum for the transfer of valuable
  information
      Sensationalism and Responsibility

         Bhopal
         Self-fulfilling prophecy
         Reverse discrimination

         Not In Anybody’s Backyard (reprise)
         Accountability

Underlying issue is that toxic wastes are produced.
There need not be a victim or a party in the wrong.
Environmental Racism
         v.
Environmental Justice
Environmental Justice
   Environmental justice - beyond the procedural and
    distributional equity to a more general anti-toxins
    effort concerned with the clean-up of abandoned waste
    sites, and now with the actual production and use of
    hazardous chemicals.
   Anti-toxins effort
       Love Canal (Niagara Falls, New York)
       Stringfellow (Riverside, California)
       Times Beach (Missouri)
   National Environmental Policy Act (1970),
   Federal Clean Air and Water acts (1970 and 1972),
   Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (1976),
   Community Right-to- Know Act (SARA Title III)
   Toxic Release Inventory (TRI)
   Should the quest for environmental
    justice merely stop with an equitable
    distribution of negative externalities?
   All have an equal opportunity to be
    polluted--or the flip side--protected from
    pollution, however ineffectively.
   Environmental justice demands more
    than mere exposure equity - must
    incorporate democratic participation in
    the production decision itself.
   Move beyond cosmetic change in the distribution
    of environmental problems across communities
    and dares not challenge control of the decision to
    pollute, and thus produce, in the first instance.

   Powerful vested production interests define the
    political agenda in an "either/ or" manner, where
    we are given a choice of race or class
    discrimination, jobs or environment, health or
    economic development.
Environmental Justice Groups

   Citizens Clearinghouse for
    Hazardous Waste (CCHW)

   Greenpeace

   the Southwest Network for
    Environmental and Economic Justice
Discussion

   What would be an ideal world with
    “justice for all”?
   Who is willing to make sacrifices to
    take action? What sacrifices need to
    be made?
   Who is ultimately responsible?
    Government? Industry?
    Shareholders?
       What are their responsibilities?

								
To top