Examples Of Environmental Racism

There exists a pattern of historically disenfranchised groups in the United States, such as minorities and low-income communities, being exposed to a disproportionate level of environmental hazards such as toxic waste, pollution and urban decay. This relationship between social and environmental aspects has been termed environmental racism, and beginning in the mid to late 20th century the Environmental Justice Movement grew to combat the politically normalized existence of environmental racism (Cole). The Environmental Justice Movement began as a grassroots environmental movement that faced many obstacles stemming from deeply rooted social constructs regarding race, and social class. The social standing of the communities that caused corporations

to target them for placing toxic waste dumps, garbage burning facilities, medical waste treatment centers, and sewage treatment plants among other sources of pollution, was also what hindered the community members from having their voices heard in any effective way. Through the power of grassroots organizing and protesting, environmental justice activism was, and is, successful in improving the lives of historically disenfranchised communities and individuals. In addition, environmental justice activism works towards creating influential networks with environmental and social justice organizations, to contribute to systematic justice for the historically disenfranchised.
“From the Ground Up”, by Luke W.

Cole and Sheila R. Foster, discusses what happened in Buttonwillow, California in the early 1990s as an example of environmental racism. A community built on agriculture and oil production, with nearly 50% of the population being Latino, Buttonwillow hosted one of the three toxic waste dumps in California. The community members noticed that the toxic waste dump nearby was affecting their health and they began assembling to address the issue of the Lokern facility that had 200+ trucks of toxic waste coming in every day. With 50% of the community being Latino, there was a language barrier in meetings with county officials and the Local Assessment Committee (LAC), which was, “…a group appointed by the Kern County Board of Supervisors under a California State Law known as the Tanner Act” (Cole 82). At one LAC meeting they refused to translate what was being said to Spanish, and the entire audience left to show solidarity with the 70% of the audience that primarily spoke Spanish. With the technical language used in politics and corporate business, and the fact that business documents are almost exclusively English in the United States, the Buttonwillow community struggled in getting their voice heard. Through persistent efforts the communities continued to protest and Buttonwillow citizens demanded the language barrier be

broken.
The outcome of the Buttonwillow toxic dump conflict was that the fabric of the community, and the citizens themselves were significantly transformed, and to some degree that in itself is a victory, “…people have come together to realize, and exercise their collective power. New friendships have been made, new coalitions built, new skills learned. The resident’s experiences have had and will have a lasting impact on Buttonwillow.”(Cole 102). In another aspect, however, the conflict is regarded as a failure, as plans for the Lokern dump’s expansion are moving forward, and the citizens of Buttonwillow have nothing tangible to show from their seven year struggle. Additionally, an energy company is trying to build a massive $4 billion dirty coal-powered chemical facility near Buttonwillow that would increase the amount of air pollution in the community (Greenaction). While the environmental racism at Buttonwillow is far from gone, the dedication and unity with which Buttonwillow citizens approached and continue to approach the issue speaks volumes about how a small community can transform into a powerful grassroots force despite what language barriers may exist. The battle is far from over and the community excels at demonstrating that despite the lows odds of success, causes of such importance are worth continuing to fight for.
Chester, Pennsylvania is described by “From the Ground Up”, by Luke W.

Cole and Sheila R. Foster, as, “…emblematic of the social, political, and economic forces that shape the disproportionate distribution of environmental hazards in poor communities of color” (Cole 34). Delaware County is only 6.2% African American yet Chester is comprised of 39,000 people, 65% of which are African American. The median family income is 45% lower in Chester than in all of Delaware County and the poverty rate is more than three times the poverty rate of all of Delaware County. Chester also happens to have the largest garbage-burning incinerator in the state (and the 7th largest in the nation) located directly across the street from residential houses, the biggest infectious and chemotherapeutic medical waste autoclave in the nation next to the garbage burning incinerator (Thermal Pure Systems), and the DELCORA sewage treatment facility that treats 90% of Delaware County’s sewage as 20% of their capacity and the other 80% of treated sewage comes from industries in Chester itself (Environmental). To little surprise Chester also has the highest child mortality rate in the

state.
In 1992 a citizens group, Chester Residents Concerned for Quality Living (CRCQL), was created out of concern and anger to see what could be done about the subhuman living conditions they were being exposed to. The CRCQL discovered in 1994 that there was an individual company linked to a string of facilities that were bringing waste to Chester (Environmental). Being fed up with the Department of Environmental Protection’s seeming complicity with industry practices in Chester, the CRCQL sued the state for environmental racism in 1996 under the Civil Rights Act. The short term effect of the CRCQL v. Seif case was that, “…the EPA concluded that the health risks caused by environmental hazards in Chester are ‘unacceptably high’…”, and during the trial the DEP denied a permit to a company to create a contaminated soil bioremediation plant in Chester, which stands as the first time the DEP denied a pollution permit to a corporation that selected Chester (Public). As small as this victory this was, it set the scene for further work and today Chester, Pennsylvania is cleaner than it has been in decades. Perhaps one of the most influential results of the Chester conflict is that the appeals courts backed the community’s assertions that intentional discrimination did not have to be proved, only, “discriminatory effect on the part of the agency needs to be shown” in order for action to be taken against the corporations at fault (Environmental).
A recent effect of the CRCQL’s hard work has been that the DELCORA sewage treatment plant agreed to fund a $200,000 program to reduce lead exposure in the community while also undertaking major improvements to its facilities (Public). Additional facilities have also caved to the pressure being placed on them by the community, and the city itself adopted a “…zoning ordinance, drafted by the Law Center, that prohibited the construction of any new waste treatment facilities unless they could be proven not to create new environmental pollution.”(Public). Due to the persistence of the CRCQL, significant improvements were made to the community of Chester and, while there is substantial work left to be done, the grassroots organization now has connections with other organizations to advise and defend it through the process. In many ways Chester also stands as an example of success to other communities being subjected to environmental racism because the CRCQL was able to bring their case to federal court and get results. Current grassroots organizations might look at Chester, Pennsylvania as an example of how dedication and legal action are important tools in the process of winning justice for disenfranchised communities.
Communities composed primarily of historically disenfranchised groups, such as minorities and lower class citizens, are often exposed to an unequal and increased share of environmental toxins and pollutants. The Environmental Justice Movement developed to combat these instances of environmental racism with the intent of both improving the quality of life in every community affected, and preventing environmental racism from continuing to present itself. While community activism typically began as a reaction to accumulating health issues and decreased quality of life due to polluting facilities, the activism generally morphs to become a struggle of, “the legitimacy of decision-making processes, the exclusion from and the marginalization of disaffected residents during those processes, and the structural forces that constrain individuals in these communities from fully participating in decisions that fundamentally affect their lives.” (Cole 103). In addition to the change in perspectives, grassroots environmental justice groups often shift their focus from short-term community fights to building connections with other environmental and social justice organizations with the common goal to fight the roots of environmental racism and injustice in the long-term. As has been seen over the past few decades, “community fights over particular facilities will come and go, but redlining, racism, unemployment, and crime remain in low-income communities long after” (Cole 132), and it’s because environmental racism isn’t a short term problem that the Environmental Justice Movement will not be a short lived movement.