Every blog I have written during my time at the CHEJ has focused on or mentioned the West Lake Landfill. No wonder, considering how the majority of my work here has dealt with promoting awareness about the landfill. But the reason why I continue to write about it is because the inaction and inattentiveness shown by some public officials towards this issue angers me.
There is no excuse for delaying the clean-up of a toxic waste site that poses a threat to public health and potentially threatens the community’s water source. When a Tea Party Republican like Representative Blaine Luetkemeyer and Progressive Democrat like Lacy Clay can agree on the EPA’s mismanagement of West Lake, you know there’s a problem. No room for argument exists as to whether Superfund sites (those recognized by our government as hazardous and toxic) should be top priorities for our public officials. And yet Superfund sites languish across the country.
In addition to the West Lake Landfill, sites in San Jacinto, Texas and Birmingham, Alabama have gone unresolved. The San Jacinto Waste Pit received wastes from a nearby paper mill, depositing harmful dioxins “which are extremely toxic and can cause increased risk of cancer and other threats to human health such as liver damage and birth defects.” The waste pit is also directly near the San Jacinto River and puts the local environment and community drinking water at grave risk. And yet the EPA comes back with temporary cap plans rather than a plan towards a permanent solution. Similarly, the Birmingham community is dealing with the aftermath of the ABC Coke Plant’s pollution at the 35th Avenue Superfund Site. Containing contaminated soil and groundwater, the Birmingham Superfund site also remains an issue and shows the EPA’s preference for lip service over action on toxic waste sites.
Superfund issues have one clear answer: they must be a priority and any threat to families and the public must be immediately addressed. Every day that a site goes unaddressed is another day that a community is put at risk. It’s just common sense that communities should have access to safe, clean drinking water and not live near hazardous waste sites that have gone largely unaddressed by the government. Protecting communities from environmental disasters should be an issue we can all get behind.
Last week, we asked you on Twitter, Facebook, and through an e-mail to add your voice to an important discussion: what do you want to see from the next EPA administration? The results are in!
Focus on environmental justice:58 votes
More direct efforts to make impactful resolutions: 32 votes
Responsive leadership: 27 votes
Transparent decision making: 26 votes
103 people participated in the survey. As you can see, some people put more than one answer– we should expect a lot from the EPA! The most popular choice was a focus on environmental justice, with about 40% of the vote. It’s clear that the participants in this poll aren’t happy with the approach the EPA is taking towards environmental justice. The next EPA administration must adopt an mode of operation that protects everyone, especially those who need it most. We’ve seen environmental injustice exemplified in Flint, where the EPA stayed silent, failing the people there who need clean water. It’s time for a new EPA to speak up. As this infographic from The Nation shows, “environmental racism is nothing new.”
More direct efforts to make impactful resolutions, responsive leadership, and transparent decisionmaking all came in at about 20%. All of these qualities are the next EPA administrator must have, and that current administrator Gina McCarthy has often failed to exhibit. With elections looming, it’s time for politicians– and for all of us– to know what we need from the new EPA for it to be effective in protecting our environment and the people in it. Let’s hold our candidates responsible for their power of appointing the new EPA administrator.
We are deep in the middle of an ugly and divisive election season with two presidential candidates regularly described by polls as the most unpopular in decades. This year’s partisan advertisements and speeches are enough to turn off anyone from politics. One could be forgiven for wondering if politicians can actually work together on an urgent issue that demands attention.
That’s why the cooperative tone currently shown by Missouri’s senators and congressional representatives on the outrage of the West Lake Landfill is such a breath of fresh air. The West Lake Landfill, a landfill containing radioactive waste right next to a landfill on fire, is owned by Republic Services and is a Superfund site managed by the EPA. The health and safety concerns of the community have taken a back seat to political self-interest due to agency concerns and Republic’s political influence over elected officials.
But rather than shamefully protect Republic Services or defend the EPA’s baffling inactivity, Missouri’s congressional delegation has taken a strong stance standing up for local Bridgeton community. After the tireless work of Dawn Chapman and Karen Nickel, two co-founders of the group Just Moms STL, Missouri’s elected officials both hear their concerns and have acted to fix the problem. Nearly one year ago, Senators Blunt and McCaskill and Representatives Clay and Wagner introduced H.R. 4100 to transfer authority over the cleanup from the EPA to the Army Corps of Engineers, an agency trusted by the Bridgeton community because they successfully remediated similar sites in the area. Blunt and McCaskill were able to unanimously pass the bill through the Senate, an action that is practically unheard of in a gridlocked Washington. Clay and Wagner testified at a Superfund hearing one week ago, forcefully denouncing the EPA’s inactivity and giving voice to a Bridgeton community concerned by West Lake’s current impact and its potentially catastrophic effects.
While these actions aren’t enough by themselves, they are without a doubt an achievement for concerned local activists like Chapman and Nickel. The bipartisan action on the landfill absolutely speaks to its pressing nature and proves that focusing on relocation of the families affected is an issue Democrats and Republicans can get behind. In a political era where bipartisan socializing let alone action is rare, the fact that the Missouri delegation is attempting to fix the long overdue problem at West Lake is admirable. Just Moms STL is planning on fostering this bipartisan spirit by hosting an event in Maryland Heights on August 18th called the “West Lake Candidate Forum” where Democrats and Republicans will personally tell voters their plan to address the West Lake Landfill. We can only hope that more elected officials recognize that the people of Bridgeton need this issue to be immediately addressed and resolved.
[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”]Photo: Leaded water in one of the many lead positive Chicago Public School’s bottled from the school’s water fountain.
With news about flint’s water crisis still fresh in our minds, we continue to hear concerns from other communities about their water supplies. Recently, more than 72 Chicago public schools were found to have high levels of lead, well above EPA standards, in their water fountains and/or sinks. Nearly an additional 75 Chicago schools tested positive for lead in the water, but the levels were deemed “safe,” by EPA standard. This means these schools did test positive for lead, but the lead was less than 15 parts per billion, so students were allowed to continue school and be exposed to lead in the water. Out of all 500+ schools only 50 were lead free.
As we know lead has no safe level of exposure for children or adults alike. Lead is dangerous and can be fatal for the human body. Lead poisoning can damage one’s brain and nervous system, leading to issues with body function and control as well as mental illness. Issues with the stomach and the kidneys are common. Lead can also cause high blood pressure. However, little is being done to combat the leaded pipes and the illnesses linked to children who have been repeatedly exposed to leaded water. Several children have explained that they have been drinking from these highly contaminated sources multiple times each day during the school week leaving them especially vulnerable to lead leaching.
Since the Flint water crisis has come to the forefront, communities have started to take notice. With more and more cities doing more routine water testing, it is likely that more townships and school districts will find themselves in the same position wondering what to do to save their water and most importantly protect their children. As parents and educators fight for the health of the students blame alone will not be enough to combat the lead crisis. The EPA is approaching these issues slowly and ineffectively. The response to the communities is unjust and has left the people helpless. Especially parents of children from the 75+ affected Chicago public schools who are forced to continue sending their children to these schools each day where they are constantly exposed.
The EPA National Drinking Water Advisory Committee Working Group has recommended removal of all lead service lines as a public health priority, however this is a monumental project. One that will not be accomplished promptly or with enough time to truly make a difference. There is also the enormous cost burden which these communities cannot afford. Areas like Chicago and Flint still need help and they need it now. By shining light on all the affected communities across our country we can help grow support and action pushing the government to act fast and change its practices on removing lead from our waterways.
To keep a watchful eye on these topics and their progress head to CHEJ’S Facebook page, website, or to learn more click here.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]
[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”]Eva M. Telesco of Lancaster Against Pipelines with her husband Jon and son Pike. The group is fundraising for lawsuits they have filed to stop Atlantic Sunrise Project and raising awareness about the project throughout the affected communities. Interview by Erin Allegro Eva M. Telesco is a volunteer leader of Lancaster Against Pipelines working against Atlantic Sunrise Project, a proposed fracked-gas pipeline that would be double the size of most such pipelines — 42 inches in diameter and 1200 to 1500 PSI — leading to possible environmental disaster. Telesco shared a few stories about her group’s work on the frontlines and how CHEJ has been of help to them with intern Erin Allegro recently. Q: When did you first notice that the community was at risk due to the Atlantic Sunrise Project? A: My husband and I didn’t learn about the Atlantic Sunrise Project until the fall of 2014. Other people in our community had known since that spring how dangerous it could be and how close it would be to our homes. When we first heard about it we said to each other “Oh, a pipeline? Aren’t they everywhere? Big deal.” Luckily, other people were more aware of the reality and the risks, and LAP was formed early in 2014 when the project was announced and the first scoping meetings happened. Q: What did the county do to notify people of the problems with the pipeline that will carry fracking gas through five counties?What solutions or precautions were advised? A: A lot of this happened before I had been involved, but in the township where I live, residents organized several town meetings. I learned about the pipeline at a community meeting at the fire hall. There were also a few township wide mailers, all funded by private citizens. Conestoga residents just sent one out to advertise the walk and keep people up to date with the recent route changes and other news. Most of Lancaster Against Pipeline communication has been through the website, as well as Facebook and emails because we don’t have the money to do huge mailings. Our E-newsletter went out to give residents necessary information. The township didn’t give us any solutions. The supervisors in our towns and all the neighboring towns generally, have been very unsupportive of our side. Even the fire hall meetings and mailings were initiated by private citizens. The township supervisors did not step up at all, and their stance was that they wanted to remain neutral, but in actuality it’s much more like they are siding with industry rather than residents and neighbors. Q: What were some events experienced by community members? A: In the spring of 2015, two of the affected townships [/fusion_builder_column][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”][Martic and Conestoga], tried to adopt home rule, a form of government that gives townships and individual voters more flexibility and more voice in the governing process, and would have hopefully allowed voters to pass a Rights Based Ordinance against the pipeline.Especially in the township where I live, the vote ended up being close, but we ended up losing in both townships. That took a lot of time and energy and a lot of community meetings as well as door to door canvassing and working with voters. After this failed we moved to more of a countywide focus. We started the Protect PA quilt project shortly after. We worked on getting groups and individuals to make quilt squares. We attended local fairs and car shows with a table with information about the pipeline, as well as supplies to make the quilt squares. Now the quilt is so large we have ten five-by-five panels. In March 2016, when we completed our tenth panel and the quilt reached 50 feet, the same distance as the permanent right-of-way for the proposed pipeline, we held a press conference at a local farm that would be bisected by the pipeline. Last summer a lot of our work was based around this quilt project. This spring, we were able to do outreach with affected landowners; more than 40 landowners in Lancaster County have not signed contracts with Williams, the pipeline company. We visit with information and little messages of encouragement. Last month, we gave out a small plant as a gift and this month we are giving out information about eminent domain and what it will look like for the affected landowners. We are just trying to support the landowners and help them stand up to the Williams Company. There are some owners that are a part of our group and some who are resisting, but are not actively engaged with us. They want to be more private about it.
Two weeks ago, Conestoga residents organized a walk against the Pipeline. About 200 people came out to walk approximately 3.1 miles, starting at a landowners farm, continuing down Main Street and ending at the park. We were really excited about the turnout and there was great energy. We brought in some new people and had new volunteers as well as many more people joining! Last week, at the Lancaster FERC meeting we had a huge turnout. The newspapers estimated about 300 people came out, mostly in opposition to the pipeline. The meeting was very dramatic and contentious with a lot of people speaking out and adding great comments. The meeting ended with our supporters singing the FERC representatives off the stage. Q: How has this issue affected you or your family specifically? A: It has really opened my eyes to all kinds of other environmental issues that I was only a little bit aware of but kind of ignoring until it hit so close to home. It has turned our lives upside down; we are involved in some kind of pipeline activity 3-4 nights a week and we are spending probably 10-15 hours a week on pipeline related work. Our four-year-old son is coming to meetings and rallies with us and it’s absolutely crazy trying to balance activism and our normal lives. Q: What media coverage and help of outside organizations were you able to secure? How has it changed the response? A: The Sierra Club has been really supportive. They sent a mass email form letter to all regional Sierra Club members; individuals could submit the letter as is, or modify, during the comment period of the DEIS. The local media has been fairly involved with relatively good coverage. In their effort to remain unbiased the media has represented us well, but has also put in even-handed words on behalf of Williams as well.
We have also worked with many other groups, like the Clean Air Council and the Delaware River keepers. Locally, the Lancaster Conservancy and the Lancaster Farmland Trust have been very supportive. They made strong statements at the FERC meeting in Lancaster. Our allies have helped us to get good coverage in the media as well. Q: What do you want other citizens to know as they move forward in their communities with similar issues with their local environment? A:It’s very hard work, but it’s worth doing. People have to believe that we can stop pipelines! I think the current climate is starting to change. More folks are against these projects and we just have to keep fighting until leaders and politicians catch up. Anyone that wants to get connected please reach out! We are happy to offer advice, help others and attend events to help in any way we can. Learn more about grassroots heroes on the front lines who work with CHEJ by staying up to date on our blogs and signing up for our e-mails here. [/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]
[fusion_builder_container hundred_percent=”yes” overflow=”visible”][fusion_builder_row][fusion_builder_column type=”1_1″ background_position=”left top” background_color=”” border_size=”” border_color=”” border_style=”solid” spacing=”yes” background_image=”” background_repeat=”no-repeat” padding=”” margin_top=”0px” margin_bottom=”0px” class=”” id=”” animation_type=”” animation_speed=”0.3″ animation_direction=”left” hide_on_mobile=”no” center_content=”no” min_height=”none”]Credit for this photo is attributed to Earthjustice
This blog post was written by a former fellow, Katie O’Brien
Last year, I wrote a blog about the environmental racism taking place in Brandywine, MD after the state approved not one, but two gas-fired power plants in the small town. The town of Brandywine is 21 square miles and home to over 6,700 people, 72% of whom are African American. There is already one operating power plant in the town, and the construction of the two proposed plants will result in FIVE total fossil-fuel powered plants within 13 miles of Brandywine. The town sits within Prince George’s County, which is already in violation of the Environmental Protection Agency’s national air quality standards for ozone particulate. The company building one of the power plants, Mattawoman, has already stated that the site, combined with existing pollution, will cause “excessive levels of nitrogen oxide, which is linked to heart disease, asthma, and stroke”. The state of Maryland is home to 13 power plants, all of which are located in disproportionately black communities.
The Brandywine community and effected surrounding towns just recently gained some ground in their fight this June (2016) when a Federal investigation was launched by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Transportation to investigate a possible Civil Rights Violation. The complaint was filed by Earthjustice on behalf of community residents, the Patuxent Riverkeeper, and the Brandywine TB Coalition. The power plants have an adverse impact on the majority African American surrounding community. The complaint states that the Maryland Public Service Commission, the Maryland Department of the Environment, and the Maryland Department of Natural Resources “failed to assess whether the project would cause disparate impacts or explore alternatives to avoid such impacts”. If the investigation finds that disparate impact is taking place, Maryland agencies can be found in violation of the Civil Rights Act and risk the suspension of millions of dollars in grants to the State. Earthjustice Attorney Neil Gormley, who is leading the case says, “We all know it’s unfair to concentrate industrial pollution sources in particular communities, this decision to launch a federal investigation confirms that it’s also a civil rights issue.” The communities surrounding the proposed power plants have the right to clean air and water, despite what the state thinks.
To learn more visit Earthjustice’s website here or here:
To follow the community’s fight click here.[/fusion_builder_column][/fusion_builder_row][/fusion_builder_container]
It doesn’t take too long to scroll through the CHEJ blog roll to find multiple examples of the negative health impacts of hydraulic fracturing, otherwise known as fracking. But, even if fracking could be done in a manner that did not pollute and negatively impact the lives of some of America’s most vulnerable citizens, there is another very important reason why fracking may not be the energy solution that many of our leaders believe it is.
First, let’s take a step back and quickly discuss a major reason why fracking has been a focal point in our energy strategy over the last decade, climate change. Because hydraulic fracturing allows energy producers to access natural gas sources, mostly made up of methane, natural gas has the capacity to mitigate climate change. This is due to the fact that, when burned as a fuel, natural gas produces about half as much carbon dioxide (CO2) as coal. This has led many, including Obama, to adopt the strategy of using natural gas as a “bridge fuel” to replace the most carbon-intense sources, such as coal, while renewable technology, such as wind and solar become cheap enough to use on a grand scale.
Even if we ignore the poor record of pollution and injustice associated with fracking, there is another huge hurdle in this “bridge fuel” plan. There is a significant portion of fracked natural gas that is not being burned as fuel and is being released directly into the atmosphere as methane, a greenhouse gas that is over 25 times more potent than carbon dioxide. This methane is often leaked into the atmosphere during the extraction process. Even with a minimal leakage rate, there is the potential that methane emissions are offsetting the climate benefits of natural gas and using the fuel could actually be worse for the climate than coal. This is particularly troubling, as it would mean a total failure of America’s climate change mitigation strategy over the last eight years.
Currently, the EPA reports very small leakage rates that are based on industry data. With this data, fracking might still pass this very important test. The only problem is that multiple studies have been produced just in the last five years that report much higher leakage rates and spell disaster for our climate as a result. A recent study by Harvard researchers reports leakage rates much higher than EPA numbers, and a 30 percent increase in methane emissions from 2002-2014.
Considering this troubling data about methane emission, not to mention the public health impacts of fracking, maybe it is time to give up this bridge fuel plan and start utilizing renewables on a grand scale now. At the very least, let’s stop using the argument that fracking is good for climate change and have a more honest dialogue about our energy future. Find out more about fracking’s methane problem.
JUST SAY NO!
Susquehanna County citizens are in the fight for their lives. They just recently learned that a new hazardous waste incinerator may be built in their community.
Hundreds of citizens are turning out for community meetings to discuss a hazardous waste incinerator that is being proposed in New Milford. Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania is a county known for its grassroots citizens fighting polluting industry and for protecting their community.
Citizens have learned that the newly formed Tyler Corners Group, (an investment group) plans to build a hazardous waste incinerator. Will this be a front group where the owner/s will hide their questionable dealings behind a smoke screen? Or, will this group be up front and transparent with the community? So far there is no proof that they will be upfront and transparent about on anything to do with the incinerator.
Just as expect, citizens are being told this will be in an industrial park and that it will be a boost to the area economy. They are also being told there will be no emissions from the burner. Well great, another magic burner! And this burner will be state of the art, that means the last technology didn’t work. One would have to wonder what other types of industry would want to be in the same park where there is a hazardous waste incinerator.
Citizens are attending township and county meetings, they have petitions being passed around getting signatures in opposition to the incinerator, they are asking local elected officials to develop and pass air ordinance’s that would protect the health of the community. While the incinerator industry may have thought that they could ride into town and bring their hazardous waste with them and it would be business as usual, they did not think they would run into the opposition they are facing from the local citizens. The POWER IS IN THE PEOPLE!
This facility is what would be called a LULU (Locally Undesirable Land Use) facility. This is described in greater detail in CHEJ’s “How to Deal With a Proposed Facility”. You can get this publication on the CHEJ webpage at www.chej.org. Click on the tab “Take Action”, then click on organizing and leadership. The publication will be the first on the list.
Please go to the groups Facebook page for more information. https://www.facebook.com/StopWasteIncinerator
I don’t know if you noticed, but over the past week and a half, we at CHEJ have been repeatedly asking you, and by extension, your friends, your family, your colleagues, and everyone else you know to call in to the White House and ask for the EPA to ‘Get Out of The Way!’ I’m sure if you’ve called, whether it was once, or every day like myself, you discovered that it was the easiest and most polite call exchange with a government agency that you’ve ever had in your entire life. From my perspective at least, the phone call went something like this: “Hi, this is the White House Comment Line. All our lines are busy right now, but if you’d like to stay on the line, someone will accept your call and record a quick comment….” …Music plays while I’m put on hold for less than ten seconds… Which is kind of boring and bureaucratic-sounding, right? Until a sweet old lady answers your call and sincerely listens to whatever it is you’re trying to say! “Hello?” “Hi! My name is Zoe Hall and I am a citizen of St. Louis calling on behalf of the citizens of Bridgeton, Missouri. I think the EPA needs to get out of the way and push for the FUSRAP to pass so the Army Corps of Engineers can clean up the West Lake Landfill. I would also like the president to see what he can do about relocation for the citizens within a mile of the landfill. This is a really pressing issue and I hope you see to it the president finds out how concerned I am.”
Eventually, by the last Tuesday of our push for calls, the conversation ended like this: “Sure sweetie, are you referring to HR-4100?” Which is the House of Representatives bill 4100 pushing for FURSAP. The instant recognition of the exact issue we are pushing for indicates that the White House Comment Line has gotten such an influx of calls concerning West Lake that they have to have a code for it to easily identify and tally up all of our voices united in our outrage. This is a huge deal –– this list of codes and top concerns of the nation gets forwarded to the White House Staff in order to keep our president updated on the issues we as his constituents are focused on. That means our president has in his possession a lengthy list of people’s names and outcries for change. What he does next is out of our hands, but at least, now aware of our concern, he is accountable for whatever that may be! In itself, I consider this a victory. Whether or not you participated in the call in, everyone can learn from the power this provided to the citizens at West Lake and anyone who wants to organize a simple, empowering action that is not only easy to do (it takes five minutes!) but is also one that gets results. Remain persistent and focused, keep your goals clear, and use the power given to we the people to raise your voice as loud as possible, so that one of the most powerful people in the world might hear.
As President Obama’s final year in office comes to a close, the time has come to reflect upon his legacy and his impact on our country. Perhaps more than other areas, Obama’s environmental record is a mixed bag of laudable achievements and startling mismanagement. Though his actions on climate change will rightfully be praised in the future, some of the more glaring cases of the EPA’s inattentive management in the last several years will be blemishes on his record. From Flint to the West Lake Landfill in St. Louis, the EPA has proven itself to be maddeningly unresponsive. Despite knowing about the problem with Flint’s water nearly a year before intense press coverage, the EPA did nothing to alert the public or force the issue. Instead, the EPA sought to shift the blame entirely to state officials. In regards to Flint, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy simply understated, “clearly the outcome was not what anyone would have wanted.”Additionally, an EPA internal report released a week ago about the West Lake Landfill said that officials knew that removing the toxic waste from the landfill was both possible and relatively inexpensive — and still they chose to do nothing.
All of which leads one to wonder who exactly the EPA works for: the communities who need people in power to responsibly listen and respond to them or glib politicians and waste service companies out for their own interests? Administrator McCarthy needs to prioritize families over giving corporations a break. And each of her deputies must think first of public health and the environment rather than their own personal job prospects.
Though the EPA is an independent agency, Obama is more than able to influence its agenda and responsiveness. In the last year of his presidency, Obama is no longer chained to his own election chances and has more room to simply do the right thing regardless of the political consequences. So I pose the following to President Obama: what do you want your environmental legacy to be? Allowing corporations to shamefully put the health of families at risk and letting politicians ignore pressing problems in service of their personal ambition? Or standing up for everyday Americans against such powerful corporations and non-responsive public servants? The fate of many communities depends on his choice.
