The Resource Curse of the José López Portillo Plant, Coahuila

by Tyra Norbye, SFSU, 2021

In the Cuenca de Sabinas region there lies a group of coal plants that benefit from their proximity to Mexico’s huge coal reserves. The José López Portillo plant is a coal-based thermoelectric plant which provides energy to many people in Mexico [1]. The energy injustice occurring at this site is that of a resource curse, in which the residents of the neighboring cities do not benefit from the wealth created for/by the state of Mexico and yet they face all of the consequences [2]. 

MICARE Unit which extracts the coal that is then headed for the Jose Lopez Portillo Plant.

The José López Portillo plant was commissioned in 1982 by the Federal Commission of Electricity (Comisión Federal de Electricidad or CFE) to be located in the Coahuila region of Mexico [3]. Approximately 90% of Mexico’s carbon comes from the Sabinas Basin [4]. Despite residents being right by the resource-rich land, they have no control over how it is extracted, how much is extracted, and how the energy is created. So, while they live by the largest energy resource Mexico uses in their creation of energy, they face environmental harms and make hardly any money from that fact.

The José López Portillo plant is causing environmental and human health problems in the surrounding areas of this site. Since the opening of this plant in 1982 there has been a general decline in health among the people in that area. The José López Portillo Plant is the main emitter of nitrogen oxides in Mexico [5]. In Piedras Negras residents have seen a harmful increase in PM10 and PM2.5, yet on the Coahuila Ministry of Environment Facebook page they have stated that there is ‘insufficient data’ since last August [6]. People have had an increasing number of health issues because of air pollution such as malignant lung tumors, heart disease, and diabetes mellitus [7]. There has also been a significant correlation between children aged 1-4 years old having acute respiratory issues as a cause of PM 2.5 [8]. The groups that are facing these issues are generally lower-income families that depend on the coal-fired power plant for their income [9]. The benefits of this site are not primarily felt by the residents. Another recently discovered issue is that the government claims that it [the plant] is necessary because 25,000 families depend on the coal industry for an income; though there are conflicting reports as to how many people in the area are actually employed by the power plant [10]. So, if residents are not even benefiting from a consistent income then there is truly no benefit at all to the people of Coahuila [11]. The CFE froze contracts with small town producers and suppliers of the minerals needed to run the thermoelectric plant [12]. It was easier to erect the coal-fired power plant in an area near the coal mines and lower-income Mexican people. 

The decisions of this carbon-fired power plant are made by the Federal Commission of Electricity. While the CFE is state owned, there are still people within the company that help set its trajectory. The current CEO of the Comisión Federal de Electricidad is Jaime Hernandez [13]. He is based in Mexico City, which is a 13 hour drive from Piedras Negras [14]. It is safe to say that he does not feel the negative effects of the coal-fired power plant. Armando Guadiana Tijerina is a born and raised Coahuilense who became the governor of Coahuila in 2017 [15]. He was the president of the CFE and a mining businessman who owns MINSA (Materiales Industrializados) [16]. This shows a connection between the coal business industry and politics. In 2018, the CFE suspended contracts that would have given them 3 million tons of coal from small producers in the area [17]. They know that as decision-makers they have a lot of power over the people in that area, and it should be their responsibility to make decisions with everyone’s best interests at heart.

References

[1] Badillo, D. (2020). Centrales eléctricas de Coahuila y el lado oscuro de la fiesta del carbón. Retrieved from https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Centrales-electricas-de-Coahuila-y-el-lado-oscuro-de-la-fiesta-del-carbon-20200620-0004.html

[2] Thoyre, A. (2021). How do energy injustices arise? Resource curse caused by lack of local control.

[3] Global Energy Conservatory. (2010). José López Portillo. Retrieved from http://globalenergyobservatory.org/geoid/3754

[4] Digital, M., Sanchez, C. (2019). Carboneros de Coahuila viven su peor crisis en 20 años. Retrieved from https://www.milenio.com/estados/carboneros-coahuila-viven-crisis-20-anos

[5] Badillo, D. (2020). Centrales eléctricas de Coahuila y el lado oscuro de la fiesta del carbón. Retrieved from https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Centrales-electricas-de-Coahuila-y-el-lado-oscuro-de-la-fiesta-del-carbon-20200620-0004.html

[6] Aramayo, N. (2020). ‘Extremadamente mala’ calidad del aire, reportan en Piedras Negras. Retrieved from https://vanguardia.com.mx/articulo/extremadamente-mala-calidad-del-aire-reportan-en-piedras-negras

[7] Valdez, R., Nieto, E., Gutierrez, e., C., Alaman, R., Garcia, O., Bolívar, A., Programa de Gestión Para Mejorar La Calidad Del Aire Del Estado de Coahuila De Zaragoza 2017-2026. Semarnat, Vol. 1, 55-67.

[8] Valdez, R., Nieto, E., Gutierrez, e., C., Alaman, R., Garcia, O., Bolívar, A., Programa de Gestión Para Mejorar La Calidad Del Aire Del Estado de Coahuila De Zaragoza 2017-2026. Semarnat, Vol. 1, 55-67.

[9] Digital, M., Sanchez, C. (2019). Carboneros de Coahuila viven su peor crisis en 20 años. Retrieved from https://www.milenio.com/estados/carboneros-coahuila-viven-crisis-20-anos

[10] Rosales, J. (2020). Mining agonizes in Coahuila, Economy Collapses. Retrieved from https://www.milenio.com/estados/ahmsa-agoniza-mineria-coahuila-colapsa-economia. 

[11] Ramos, L. (2020). They march in Coahuila to Demand Coal Purchase Contracts from the CFE. Retrieved from https://www.jornada.com.mx/2020/03/11/estados/026n1est 

[12] Rosales, J. (2020). Mining agonizes in Coahuila, Economy Collapses. Retrieved from https://www.milenio.com/estados/ahmsa-agoniza-mineria-coahuila-colapsa-economia 

[13] Oxford Business Group. (2017). Jaime Hernandez Martinez, Director-General, Federal Electricity Commission: Interview. Retrieved from https://oxfordbusinessgroup.com/interview/jaime-hern%C3%A1ndez-mart%C3%ADnez-director-general-federal-electricity-commission/mexico-2017.

[14] Comisión Federal de Electricidad. Oficinas Nacionales. Retrieved from https://www.cfe.mx/Pages/default.aspx 

[15] Wikipedia. (2021). Armando Guadiana Tijerina. Retrieved from https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armando_Guadiana_Tijerina 

[16] Wikipedia. (2021). Armando Guadiana Tijerina. Retrieved from https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Armando_Guadiana_Tijerina 

[17] Badillo, D. (2020). Centrales eléctricas de Coahuila y el lado oscuro de la fiesta del carbón. Retrieved from https://www.eleconomista.com.mx/politica/Centrales-electricas-de-Coahuila-y-el-lado-oscuro-de-la-fiesta-del-carbon-20200620-0004.html

Hanford Nuclear Power Plant in Benton County, Washington

Written at San Francisco State University in 2021

The Hanford site, located along the Columbia River in Washington, is an ex-nuclear production site, first established in 1943 in response to World War 2 [1]. Besides once producing nuclear weapons, the Hanford site currently hosts a commercial nuclear power plant [2]. The Hanford site was first built as part of the Manhattan Project, which was in response to World War 2 and the pursuit of creating both uranium and plutonium based atomic bombs [3].

Three Mile Island Nuclear Power Site

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS FROM THE HANFORD SITE

Since the Hanford site is home to nuclear waste the most common environmental impacts it has on the surrounding area is through the planned or unplanned release of gaseous and liquid effluents and disposal of solid waste [4]. The primary pathways for these radioactive materials to enter the environment are from air, surface, ground water, and biotic transport mechanisms [5]. Since we currently don’t have a way of properly disposing of nuclear waste the widely accepted method is to store it underground. There are underground tanks located at the site that stores most of the radioactive waste discharge from the processing plants [6]. The Hanford site currently holds the largest accumulation of nuclear waste in the Western Hemisphere [7]. Environmental monitoring programs have been implemented in order to conduct research on the potential health hazards to individuals and populations that may be exposed to radioactive materials [8]. The superfund site now hosts a commercial power plant but it’s environmental impacts have left  lasting effects on the surrounding area. Six million dollars a day, or 2 billion annually has been contributed to clean up efforts of the site [9]. These funds are allocated in cleaning up the chemical waste that remains in the soil and groundwater at the site. 

DISPLACEMENT CAUSED FROM HANFORD SITE

In order to begin construction on the Hanford site, Native Americans were removed from their land. Not only does this displace indigenous people, but also makes the land uninhabitable for most living creatures and has implications for future generations to come. Nuclear waste has a lasting effect on the environment, especially when stored incorrectly. There were about 2,300 people living in the town of Hanford at the time construction began [10]. They were given anywhere from 28 to 90 days to vacate the area by the government [11]. The people living in Hanford at the time were generally farmers or worked with agriculture [12]. The families and farmers received compensation from the government for their land whereas the Native Americans received no form of compensation [13]. Native Americans were the first people to inhibit the Columbia Basin, which is where the Hanford Site is located. During winter, Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla, Yakama, and the Nez Perce lived in the Columbia Basin, while the Wanapum Tribe lived there year round[14]. A place once filled with orchards and farmland has turned to a superfund site that is inhospitable to mostly everything besides tall grasses. A sacrifice zone is defined as “a place that is written off for environmental destruction in the name of a higher purpose, such as the national interest”, which is exactly what happened at the Hanford site [15].

REFERENCES

[1] United States Department of Energy. (2021). Hanford History. https://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/HanfordHistory

[2] United States Department of Energy. (2021).

[3] Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2017). Hanford, WA. https://www.atomicheritage.org/tour-site/life-hanford

[4] Gray, R.H., Jaquish, R.E., Mitchell, P.J. et al. Environmental monitoring at Hanford, Washington, USA: A brief site history and summary of recent results. Environmental Management 13, 563–572 (1989). https://doi-org.jpllnet.sfsu.edu/10.1007/BF01874962

[5] (Gray, R.H., Jaquish, R.E., Mitchell, P.J. et al.)

[6] Gephart, R.E. 2010. A short history of waste management at the Hanford Site,Physics and Chemistry of the Earth, Parts A/B/C Volume 35, Issues 6–8, Pages 298-306

[7] (Gephart)

[8] (Gray, R.H., Jaquish, R.E., Mitchell, P.J. et al.)

[9] (Gephart)

[10] Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2017). Civilian Displacement: Hanford, WA. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/civilian-displacement-hanford-wa

[11] Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2017). Civilian Displacement: Hanford, WA. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/civilian-displacement-hanford-wa

[12] Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2017). Civilian Displacement: Hanford, WA. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/civilian-displacement-hanford-wa

[13] Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2017). Civilian Displacement: Hanford, WA. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/civilian-displacement-hanford-wa

[14] Atomic Heritage Foundation. (2017). Civilian Displacement: Hanford, WA. https://www.atomicheritage.org/history/civilian-displacement-hanford-wa

[15] Scott, R.R. (2010). Removing Mountains: Extracting Nature and Identity in the Appalachian Coalfields.

Wuxi Huaguang (Tigyit) Coal-fired Power Plant in Shan State, Myanmar

By Nichole Dodson, SFSU, 2021

In 2001, Chinese-owned company, Wuxi Huaguang, received permits to build a coal-fired power plant in Tigyit, an agricultural village located in Shan State, Myanmar [1]. This village is home to several ethnic groups such as the Shan and Pa-Oh [2]. Myanmar’s military regime ordered the Shan State local military to force Tigyit villagers off their land for construction [3]. Since then, the Wuxi Huaguang power plant has perpetuated environmental harm and injustice onto the villagers of Tigyit.

A view of the Wuxi Huaguang coal-fired power plant

Tigyit villagers’ water supply and air are being tainted by pollution from the coal-fired power plant [4]. A majority of the villagers have complained of several health conditions that are linked from pollution [5]. It was reported that half of the village population has experienced skin rashes as a result of fly ash exposure [6]. Moreover, villagers have developed serious respiratory illness and terminal cancers from consuming polluted water.

The root of environmental justice in Shan State traces back to the region’s resource wealth as well as lack of local control maintained by military power and exploitation colonialism. The Shan, Pa-Oh, and other villagers near the Tigyit power plant have been sacrificed for resources and forced to endure the impacts of the country’s resource curse. Today, the power plant continues to destroy their land, health, and livelihoods.

Myanmar’s Resource Curse

“Resource curse” is a phenomenon often applied to countries or specific regions that are rich in natural resources, but also face high rates of poverty [7]. The “curse” arises when these places lack local control over natural resources [8]. The villagers of Tigyit are victim to the resource curse as Shan State is abundant in coal [9]. The mass of coal reserves near Tigyit influenced Wuxi Huaguang to occupy the area, in order to build the coal-fired power plant [10].

The Tigyit coal-fired power plant has influenced the rise in poverty in Shan State. The Myanmar Information Management Unit released a statement that revealed that almost 40 percent of the Shan State population lives below the poverty line [11]. Studies conducted show that the rise in poverty in Shan State correlates to land dispossession, loss of livelihood, and deterioration of health–which are all cases caused by the Tigyit power plant [12]. Many of the villagers, who were farmers, lost their agricultural land–their only source of income [13]. Moreover, air and water pollution from the coal mine and power plant left villagers with critical health issues, preventing them from returning to work [14].

Becoming A Sacrifice Zone

Tigyit villagers face major environmental disadvantages but despite this, the Myanmar government continues to be adamant about maintaining the coal operation as it not only generates power to citizens but also generates revenue as a portion of the electricity is exported to other industrial sectors [15]. Because of this, Tigyit is subjected to becoming a sacrifice zone.

The theory of sacrifice zones describes how communities are sacrificed for energy production, and then suppressed by the idea of “the greater good” [16]. This theory can be applied to Tigyit villagers, who have lost their farmland to the Wuxi Huaguang coal-fired power plant. Wuxi Huaguang was granted permits by the Ministry of Electricity and Energy to build a power plant in Shan State, Myanmar [17]. In 2015, it was reported that over 500 acres were taken from the villagers and used to expand the power plant [18].

Myanmar politicians are responsible for the injustice in Tigyit as they push a narrative that justifies sacrificing the village for “the greater good.” The villagers, alongside the Pa-Oh Youth Organization, have expressed their concerns to the Shan State government, but have been silenced by politicians [19]. U Ko Ko, a House of Nationalities representative, complained that the people of Myanmar “can’t be choosy about where the electricity comes from especially when it can benefit the country and people. It is not the time to say no to coal when only 35 percent of our country’s population have access to electricity” [20].

Deputy Minister of Electricity and Energy Khin Maung Win has also denounced the villagers of Tigyit as he declared his support for the power plant at a parliamentary meeting. He stated that “while the power generation is not very efficient for the region, we do benefit from this plant as it is capable of distributing…electricity to the people.”[21]. Myanmar politicians are a major barrier to protesting the power plant. They emphasize the benefits of the plant so that the public will overlook the oppression of the Tigyit villagers and instead, focus on the “greater good.”

References

[1] PYO and KAN (2011) “Poison Clouds: Lessons from Burma’s largest coal project at Tigyit”. Pa-Oh Youth Organization (PYO) and Kyoju Action Network (KAN) https://burmacampaign.org.uk/images/uploads/PoisonClouds.pdf

[2] PYO and KAN (2011)

[3] PYO and KAN (2011)

[4] Htun, Thiha (2018) “Myanmar Government Rejects Motion to Shutter Polluting Chinese-Owned Coal Plant”. https://www.rfa.org/english/news/myanmar/plant-05192020150555.html

[5] Htun, Thiha (2018)

[6] PYO and KAN (2011)

[7] Patrick (2012) “Why Natural Resources Are a Curse on Developing Countries and How to Fix It.” https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/04/why-natural-resources-are-a-curse-on-developing-countries-and-how-to-fix-it/256508/

[8] Patrick (2012)

[9] PYO and KAN (2011)

[10] PYO and KAN (2011)

[11] Myanmar Information Management Unit (2021) “Kachin and Northern Shan Emergency Situation.” https://themimu.info/emergencies/kachin

[12] Mohanty, S.K., Rasul, G., Mahapatra, B. et al. (2018) Multidimensional Poverty in Mountainous Regions: Shan and Chin in Myanmar. Soc Indic Res 138, 23–44 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-017-1662-9

[13] Mohanty, S.K., Rasul, G., Mahapatra, B. et al. (2018)

[14] Mohanty, S.K., Rasul, G., Mahapatra, B. et al. (2018)

[15] PYO and KAN (2011)

[16] Scott, R. (2010). Removing Mountains: Extracting Nature and Identity in the Appalachian Coalfields. University of Minnesota Press. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.ctttsd37

[17] PYO and KAN (2011)

[18] Kritsanavarin, Suthep (2015) “Myanmar Villagers Say Coal Projects Leave Them Landless and in Poor Health”. https://resourcegovernance.org/blog/myanmar-villagers-say-coal-projects-leave-them-landless-and-poor-health

[19] Thant, Htoo (2019) “Myanmar continues coal-plant plans”. https://www.mmtimes.com/news/myanmar-continues-coal-plant-plans.html

[20] Thant, Htoo (2019)

[21] Htun, Thiha (2018) “Myanmar MP Denounces Govt’s Extension of Controversial Coal Power Plant Operation”. https://www.irrawaddy.com/news/myanmar-mp-denounces-govts-extension-controversial-coal-power-plant-operation.html

Pollution of the Obangue River

By Abby Manzano, SFSU 2021

In southwest Mandji, in the Department of Ndolou in Gabon, Addax Petroleum Company has been polluting the Obangue River for over 20 years [1]. The river supplies drinking water and supports a thriving ecosystem to nearly 100,000 people [2]. As Gabon relies heavily on the extraction and exportation of crude oil for its national economy, the Gabonese government has allowed Addax to dump its hazardous waste into nearby lakes that seep pollutants into the Obangue River [3].

Departments of Gabon

In addition to supporting the immediate ecosystem that sustains several plant and animal species which are on their way to extinction due to the toxic waste [4]. The Obangue is vital to the region’s people. It provides the local population with water for drinking and agriculture [5]. The people living in the surrounding territory, the Ngounié, live in extreme poverty and outside of the main port city region, where many jobs and access to electricity is. Because of this, the Ngounié are regularly ignored by their government.

The trade deal that the Gabonese government has with foreign companies such as Addax, does not put the profits in the hands of the local communities; rather it funds the central government which does not allocate funds to the people or needed infrastructure for the rural communities [6]. Funding continues to be provided to larger cities that are not affected by companies such as Addax Petroleum. These energy injustices that have occurred can be attributed to both the theory of  energy colonialism and the “resource curse”. 

Energy Colonialism

Gabon was colonized by the French in 1885 and became independent in 1960 [7]. While Gabon has been independent for over 60 years, French energy colonization of Gabon has had serious residual effects on the people living there today. Its influence is felt not only among the people but also how the government is run – a republic with a president who has no limits on the number of terms he or she may serve [8]. For all its good intentions the government has been corrupted by the system of capitalization and colinization which are owned and operated by French companies.  Therefore, Gabon is reliant on foreign investment and industry due to this colonization. Post colonization, France still has many economic ties to the country and has been continuing to strip the natural resources from the Gabonese people for their own gains [9].

Resource Curse

Energy colonialism further influenced what is known as the “resource curse” that has plagued the country for decades, even after gaining independence.  The “resource curse” , simply put is when country such as Gabon, has natural resources such as oil or minerals, but experiences inequality and poverty. This gives way for foreign countries to come in under the guise of helping financially when in reality they take the resources and don’t help those living there.

France has many companies that export natural resources not only oil, but uranium as well, out of Gabon [10]. As the government in Gabon has relied on foreign investment to keep its economy going and for its own funding, they have allowed these injustices to continue. One example of how the government has put its economy above its people is that, the Chinese president Hu Jintao gave a cash grant of multi millions of dollars to the president Of Gabon Omar Bongo back in 2004, right after an agreement was signed between Addax and Total gabon, a French owned drilling company [11]. The ties between foreign companies and the Gabonese government have made exploiting the people living in Mandji shockingly easy. 

Fighting back: Why is it so hard to stop the pollution?

The people of the Mandji have been protesting the lack of government transparency and accountability as well as protesting the pollution of their vital water sources for many years with little support from their government or outside help. In 2010, The director of the environment in Gabon, Louis Leandre Ebobola, took a first step in stopping this continued dumping of chemical waste [12]. He ordered Addax to fix the pollution of the river and to ensure the surrounding populations are safe from contaminated waters [13]. Due to the colonization by France and the corrupt government today, this energy injustice continues to occur and harm the Mandji Isle. 

Although there have been lawsuits regarding Addax, very few have been about the pollution they have caused; and more regarding what the oil is worth. Unfortunately Gabons main industry is oil as it accounts for roughly 45 percent of the total GDP [14]. This makes it difficult for the people to fight back as without the foreign investment of these oil companies, Gabons economy would take a huge hit.

[1] European Parliamentary Research Service Blog. (2014). The “Addax affair”: Gabon challenges China in oil dispute. Retrieved from https://epthinktank.eu/2013/08/05/the-addax-affair-gabon-challenges-china-in-oil-dispute/

[2]Environmental Justice Atlas. (2019). Pollution of the Obangué River (also Dubanga River), Gabon. Retrieved from

https://ejatlas.org/conflict/pollution-of-the-obangue-river-also-dubanga-river

[3] Mbog Batassi, P. E. (2010). Pollution au gabon : Une société pétrolière chinoise épinglée. Retrieved from

https://www.afrik.com/pollution-au-gabon-une-societe-petroliere-chinoise-epinglee

[4] Mbog Batassi (2010)

[5] Mbog Batassi (2010)

[7] Pratt, J., melosi, M., & Brosnan, K. (Eds.). (2014). Energy Capitals: Local Impact, Global Influence. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Retrieved from

Global Edge. (n. d.) Gabon: Government. Retrieved from https://globaledge.msu.edu/countries/gabon/governmen

[9] Pratt et al (2014)

[10] Pratt et al (2014)

[11] Pratt et al (2014)

[12] Mbog Batassi (2010)

[13] Mbog Batassi (2010)

[14] Global Edge. (n. d.) Gabon: Government. Retrieved from https://globaledge.msu.edu/countries/gabon/governmen

The Impacts of BLCP Power Plant on Map Ta Phut Community

Written at SFSU, 2021

The BLCP Power Plant in Map Ta Phut, Thailand is the first large-scale bituminous coal-fired power plant in Thailand and is one of many power plants and factories in the Map Ta Phut Industrial Estate [1]. This industrial development has negatively impacted the physical and sociological health of the surrounding communities due to poor infrastructure. This energy site demonstrates environmental classism and the inequality faced by low-income communities across Thailand.

Map Ta Phut Industrial Estate in Rayong Province, Thailand.

Industrialization 

Lack of access to public services and information has affected the livelihoods of low-income and physically vulnerable residents. Industrialization has limited access to water supply, healthcare and even education especially for those who are already at a disadvantage [2]. Environmental impacts are disproportionately harming those who cannot afford the cost of health screenings, transportation, and utilities as a result [3]. Though locals have voiced their concerns, authorities and company leaders have often been unresponsive or slow [4]. Residents worry that the negative impacts brought on by power production operations are affecting their daily lives, and that companies are not prepared to take responsibility for their actions [5].

The History and Background

The BLCP Power Plant is operated by the Japanese company Mitsubishi Corporation, and the most influential decision makers of the project are wealthy businessmen from Japan [6]. Consequently, there is a disconnection between the residents of Map Ta Phut who are affected by these issues, and those who make decisions about them regardless of their experience.  

The village of Map Ta Phut was industrialized as a part of Thailand’s Eastern Seaboard Development Plan (ESDP) in a “growth decentralization” effort. The Gulf of Thailand’s natural resources have catapulted Thailand’s energy industry and transformed their economy [7]. However, Map Ta Phut is considered an energy sacrifice zone, residents must involuntarily take on the harmful impacts of energy production for the “greater good” of supporting Thailand’s developing economy [8]. Though the country’s industrialization was intended for economic expansion, this effort only benefits the government organizations and the leading company members as the government has failed to address environmental pollution control [9]. 

Contamination and Health Impacts

Exposure to pollutants caused by waste disposal from the factories has threatened public health. Clean water supply is a major environmental justice issue caused by pollution, and many villages are exposed to contaminants when they do not have access to a clean and safe water source. The public has expressed disapproval of the government’s lack of aid provided to those who suffer as a result [10]. Contaminants have been found in their water, yet companies continue to limit the information that is released on watery safety and pollutant information available to the public [11]. 

Contaminants include [12][13] :

• Arsenic
• Mercury
• Cadium 
• Zinc
• Chromium
• Lead

Exposure to such pollutants has been linked to human health issues [14]. Without access to data, residents’ are not made aware of what substances they may be coming in contact with. The injustice occurs not only when they suffer from the impacts, but also when they are being denied access to information . Companies like BLCP Power continue to limit the information on water safety and pollutant information that is available to the public despite being responsible for the pollution themselves. The presence of the power plant is impacting the health and livelihoods of residents, and without transparency about petrochemical factories’ operations, the government is not able to adequately support the concerns of the community [15]. 

Social Impacts

The negative health effects brought on by BLCP Power Plant’s operations and environmental hazards have contributed to psychological and social tensions for Map Ta Phut residents. The village is burdened with fear about explosions, accidents, their health, and the wellbeing of their community. Without transparency and access to resources, residents fear for their local economy and culture [16]. The public has lost their trust for the government, as their needs have not been managed or taken seriously.

The exploitation of natural resources at BLCP and the greater Map Ta Phut are only harming village communities. The government has prioritized industrial operations as more important than the needs of civilians. These projects are marketed to the public as a positive way to create jobs and improve the economy, but the environmental damage and the wellbeing of residents are not being acknowledged. 

References 

[1] Asada, E., Honda, K., Kouhara, I., Watanabe, T., & Kawashima, H. (2007, Dec). Design and Construction Overview of the Biggest Coal Fired Power Plant in Thailand (BLCP Power Plant). Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Retrieved from http://www.mhi.co.jp/technology/review/pdf/e444/e444009.pdf

[2] Viwatpanich, K. (2012). “Suffering from Industrial Estate Development A Case Study in Map Ta Phut, Thailand.”Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319622168_Suffering_from_Industrial_Estate_Development_A_Case_Study_in_Map_Ta_Phut_Thailand

[3] Viwatpanich, K. (2012). “Suffering from Industrial Estate Development A Case Study in Map Ta Phut, Thailand.”Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319622168_Suffering_from_Industrial_Estate_Development_A_Case_Study_in_Map_Ta_Phut_Thailand

[4] Viwatpanich, K. (2012). “Suffering from Industrial Estate Development A Case Study in Map Ta Phut, Thailand.”Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319622168_Suffering_from_Industrial_Estate_Development_A_Case_Study_in_Map_Ta_Phut_Thailand

[5] Chompunth, C. (2019). “Environmental Governance in Power Plant Project: A Case Study from Thailand.” Retrieved from https://www.dpublication.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/63-7073.pdf”>https://www.dpublication.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/63-7073.pdf

[6] Asada, E., Honda, K., Kouhara, I., Watanabe, T., & Kawashima, H. (2007, Dec). Design and Construction Overview of the Biggest Coal Fired Power Plant in Thailand (BLCP Power Plant). Mitsubishi Heavy Industries. Retrieved from http://www.mhi.co.jp/technology/review/pdf/e444/e444009.pdf

 [7] Aung, Z. (2016). “Transnational Investments and Responsibility for Social Justice and Environmental Justice.”Dawei Development Association. Retrieved from https://earthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/Transnational-Investments-and-Responsibility-for-Social-and-Environmental-Justice.pdf

[8] Fuller, T. (2009). In Industrial Thailand, Health and Business Concerns Collide. The New York Times. Retrieved April 1, 2021 from https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/19/world/asia/19thai.html

[9] Aung, Z. (2016). “Transnational Investments and Responsibility for Social Justice and Environmental Justice.”Dawei Development Association. Retrieved from https://earthrights.org/wp-content/uploads/Transnational-Investments-and-Responsibility-for-Social-and-Environmental-Justice.pdf

[10] Viwatpanich, K. (2012). “Suffering from Industrial Estate Development A Case Study in Map Ta Phut, Thailand.” Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319622168_Suffering_from_Industrial_Estate_Development_A_Case_Study_in_Map_Ta_Phut_Thailand

[11] Excell, C. (2017). In Thailand, Unmet Transparency Laws Impede Poor Communities’ Struggle for Environmental Justice. Retrieved from https://www.wri.org/insights/thailand-unmet-transparency-laws-impede-poor-communities-struggle-environmental-justice

[12] Corben, R. (2017). Thai Local Communities Want Their Say in Fighting Pollution. Voice of America. Retrieved May 1,2021 from https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/thai-local-communities-want-their-say-fighting-pollution

[13] Rangkadilok, N., Siripriwon, P., Nookabkaew, S., Suriyo, T., & Satayavivad, J. (2014). Arsenic, Cadmium, and Manganese Levels in Shellfish from Map Ta Phut, an Industrial Area in Thailand, and the Potential Toxic Effects on Human Cells. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-014-0054-2

[14] Rangkadilok, N., Siripriwon, P., Nookabkaew, S., Suriyo, T., & Satayavivad, J. (2014). Arsenic, Cadmium, and Manganese Levels in Shellfish from Map Ta Phut, an Industrial Area in Thailand, and the Potential Toxic Effects on Human Cells. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology. Retrieved from https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00244-014-0054-2

[15] Excell, C. (2017). In Thailand, Unmet Transparency Laws Impede Poor Communities’ Struggle for Environmental Justice. Retrieved from https://www.wri.org/insights/thailand-unmet-transparency-laws-impede-poor-communities-struggle-environmental-justice

[16] Viwatpanich, K. (2012). “Suffering from Industrial Estate Development A Case Study in Map Ta Phut, Thailand.”Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/319622168_Suffering_from_Industrial_Estate_Development_A_Case_Study_in_Map_Ta_Phut_Thailand

Coastal Gaslink Pipeline- British Columbia, Canada

By Sarah Mosher, SFSU, 2021

 The newly proposed Coastal Gaslink Pipeline is currently being built in British Columbia, Canada. This pipeline will be carrying liquified natural gas from Dawson Creek to the port of Kitimat where it will then be exported to global markets [1]. There are environmental and social concerns about this pipeline given the fact that it will be running through hundreds of miles of Indigenous Wet’suwet’en unceded territory, putting them and the environment at risk [2]. It is clear that this is a case of ‘energy colonialism’.

Activists blocking railway in protest of Coastal Gaslink Pipeline, sign reading “No pipelines on Indigenous land”

Years of oppression and colonization at the hands of the Canadian government have allowed for foreign companies to take advantage of this biodiverse region and appropriate First Nations land for fossil fuel exploration [3]. 

What is the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline?

The Coastal Gaslink Pipeline is a liquefied natural gas (LNG) pipeline that is planned to be located in the province of British Columbia, Canada, stretching from Dawson Creek to Kitimat [4]. It has been proposed by TC Energy (an energy company based out of Calgary), along with their shareholders, financiers, and beneficiaries including the LNG facility in Kitimat owned by Royal Dutch Shell [5]. It was approved by the Canadian Supreme Court in 2019, with construction beginning shortly after [6]. The Canadian government is expecting economic returns from this project as well [7]. This pipeline is set to run through hundreds of miles of Wet’suwet’en First Nation’s traditional land and poses environmental and social threats to their already marginalized community, much of whom are living in poverty [8]. 

Protester’s sign reading “NO CONSENT” in reference to the proposed Coastal Gaslink Pipeline

The Reality of Liquified Natural Gas

Though many people try to point to the fact that natural gas isn’t as bad as oil or coal, it is still extremely problematic. In fact, in the case of the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline, they are going to be transporting a liquified version which has a high potential of leaking methane and other greenhouse gasses into the air, water, and land [9]. All of which is harmful to human and environmental health as it threatens the quality of water and air for local communities. There is also a potential for a large combustion at any site of leakage [10]. This is concerning given that methane (the GHG most commonly associated with natural gas) is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide and isn’t easily monitored [11]. 

Why the Opposition? Environmental and Social Impacts 

This pipeline poses many threats to the Wet’suwet’en peoples located in the area who could be exposed to these harmful emissions that threaten their livelihoods. This in turn also affects everyone around the globe due to the nature of climate change associated with greenhouse gasses and the continued pursuit of fossil fuels. Along with this, in order to construct the pipeline itself land has to be degraded and developed on. This disrupts the fragile ecosystems of this precious area and presents many threats to the biodiverse wildlife living there, all of which the Wet’suwet’en people rely on and hold in high respect [12]. They understand that industries like this one do much more harm than good for the land and the people [13]. 

Wet’suwet’en fishing site on Bulkley River

Traditional Wet’suwet’en Salmon fishing technique

Though TC Energy has claimed they got consent from the Wet’suwet’en peoples and that jobs will be provided to them, it is evident that this approval was not granted by the Hereditary Chiefs and many other members of this nation do not approve [14]. This is because they are aware of the consequences industries like this have on the planet, along with the fact that they are using stolen land to continue this pollutive business [15]. It is also clear that many of the long-term jobs associated with this pipeline would be outsourced to “specialized workers” [16].  Many protests have sparked around all of Canada in calls for solidarity with the Wet’suwet’en peoples against the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline, as well as at specific sites along the pipeline route itself, in particular at the Unist’ot’en Camp. These protests have been met with violent presence from the RMCP [17]. 

Protesters standing in solidarity against the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline at Unist’ot’en camp

Banner at Unist’ot’en camp reading “Yintah’ Wëwat’zenlï- Taking care of the land”

The Role of Energy Colonialism 

The traditional land where the Indigenous Wet’suwet’en peoples have resided for thousands of years was forcibly stolen from them during colonization [18]. It is in fact unceded territory and the Canadian government has had no legal agreement or treaty to allow for the appropriation of any part of Wet’suwet’en land, including the area in which they are running this pipeline through [19]. 

Unfortunately, throughout the 160 years that ‘Canada’ has been considered a country, it is evident that the Canadian government has denied many First Nations, including the Wet’suwet’en peoples, rights to sovereignty over their own land and livelihoods [20]. And many of the rights that they do have are often violated given that they have become a marginalized community due to these many years of colonization. It is sadly not uncommon that the allotments of land in which First Nations still reside on to this day, are often the places that are exploited for their resources and appropriated for coal, oil, and gas industries. 

Because Wet’suwet’en land is unceded, Hereditary Chiefs are really the ones who have authority over what can be done with the land as it is still technically First Nations land, though it is clear that the Canadian government has ignored this [21]. The U.N. Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination has actually expressed concern that the Coastal Gaslink Pipeline did not fully receive the free, prior, and informed consent of Indigenous peoples that is necessary for such a project to take place under international law [22]. This injustice taking place would be categorized as ‘energy colonialism’ due to the fact that colonial-powers and foreign companies have taken Wet’suwet’en land and are deciding to use it for their own monetary benefit while the Wet’suwet’en peoples bear all of the costs associated with this project. It is clear that the oppressive nature of the Canadian government has allowed for this injustice to take place. The demands of the Wet’suwet’en peoples must be accounted for as this pipeline has no place being built, especially on First Nations land. 

Traditional First Nations drumming at Wet’suwet’en solidarity event in Toronto

[REFRENCES]

[9] [10] [11] Morton, A. (2019, July 2). Booming LNG Industry Could Be As Bad For Climate As Coal, Experts Warn. The Gaurdian. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/03/booming-lng-industry-could-be-as-bad-for-climate-as-coal-experts-warn

[2] [7] [12] Giacomodonato, H. (2020, June 8). Environmental Impact of Coastal Gaslink Pipeline. Shake Up the Estab. https://www.shakeuptheestab.org/post/pipeline-impact-lng

[22] Cox, S. (2021, January 15). UN Committee Rebukes Canada for Failing to Get Indigenous Peoples’ Consent for Industrial Projects. The Narwhal. https://thenarwhal.ca/un-rebukes-canada-industrial-projects/ 

[4] [15] Cecco, L. (2019, January 11). Pipeline Battle Puts Focus on Canada’s Disputed Right to Use Indigenous Land. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/jan/11/canada-pipeline-indigenous-trudeau-treaty 

[3] [18] [19] [20] Cultural Survival, (2020, February 28). Unceded Land: The Case for Wet’suwet’en Sovereignty. Cultural Survival. https://www.culturalsurvival.org/news/unceded-land-case-wetsuweten-sovereignty 

[16] Office of the Wet’suwet’en. (2013). Socio-Economic Impacts Overview. Office of the Wet’suwet’en. http://www.wetsuweten.com/files/LNG_PRESENTATION_(2).pdf 

[5] Resource World. (2020). TC Energy sells 65% stake in Coastal GasLink Pipeline. Resource World. https://resourceworld.com/tce-energy-sells-65-stake-in-coastal-gaslink-pipeline/ 

[1] [4] [6] [7] Coastal Gaslink. (2021). About Coastal Gaslink. Retrieved from https://www.coastalgaslink.com/about/] 

[21] Brown, A, & Bracken, A. (2020, February 23). Inside the Wet’suwet’en Protest Camp That Refused to Cede Land for a Pipeline. The Intercept. https://theintercept.com/2020/02/23/wetsuweten-protest-coastal-gaslink-pipeline/ 

[8] [13] [14] Nickel, R. (2020, February 12). Explainer: Why are indigenous groups protesting a Canada gas pipeline? Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tc-energy-pipeline-explainer/explainer-why-are-indigenous-groups-protesting-a-canada-gas-pipeline-idUSKBN2062U2 

[17] Dhillon, J. & Parrish, W. (2019, December 20). Exclusive: Canada police prepared to shoot Indigenous activists, documents show. The Guardian.  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/dec/20/canada-indigenous-land-defenders-police-documents

[23] Smart, A. (2020, January 3). First Nation opposing Coastal GasLink pipeline exploring its options after B.C. court approval. Financial Post.  https://financialpost.com/commodities/energy/first-nation-looks-ahead-after-court-sides-with-natural-gas-company

Inglewood Oil Field in Los Angeles, CA

Alyssa Hum, SFSU, 2021

The Inglewood Oil Field, owned by Sentinel Peak Resources, is a site of resource extraction located in the Baldwin Hills of Culver City; the land used for this field is unincorporated, occupying about 1,000 acres, in the LA County [1]. Established in 1924, it remains a profitable figure in the fossil fuel industry [2]. An average of 2.5-3.1 million barrels of oil are extracted annually, awarding it both state-wide prominence and recognition as the largest urban oil field nationally [3].

Map of active oil wells and water flood/injection wells in the Inglewood Oil Field (Wikipedia, 2016)

History

The Inglewood Oil Field is a decades old and large site where a significant portion of California’s oil supply is extracted and sold, making it a quintessential location for Big Oil to aggregate profits while fostering a culture of reliance on resource extraction. The main process of gathering the oil, drilling, has resulted in 1,600 wells and the site operators, recently purchased by Sentinel Peak Resources, expressed no indication to slow or stop their extractions [4].

Sentinel Peak Resources assumed operations of Inglewood Oil Field (IOF) in 2017 and prior to the shift in ownership, there was a series of gas leaks in the year 2005 that caused concern for both the communities surrounding the site and the city [5]. Following these events were two oil spills, contaminating the water and air of Culver City and leaving the community members to suffer the consequences [6].

Economic “Greater Good”

This site demonstrates the repercussions of an energy sacrifice zone; the community is a dehumanized and marginalized group, consisting of a majority non-White population, for the sake of profit and the continuation of the destructive fossil fuel industry [7]. And it is not the community that reaps the substantial benefits of the Inglewood Oil field, but the owners of Sentinel Peak Resources who hoard the economic gains without facing the dangers of the site [8].

The Inglewood site does contain instances of Environmental Racism however, the way that this site is portrayed reveals that those who operate and profit from it present the economic benefits of the site, while undermining the community endangerments because the monetary value ‘outweighs’ the externalized costs. 

Picture of an oil field and how much space it requires (Wikimedia, 2008)

Key Demographics:

• 41.1% African American [9]
• 23% Hispanic [10]
• 22% White (Hispanic) [11]
• 4.04% White [12]

The dehumanized group is the predominantly Black community that suffers from various health ailments and a toxic reliance on a fossil fuel site for employment [13]. Their well being is neglected because in energy sacrifice zones, there is a pattern of sacrificing a certain necessity, in this case environmental and physical health, for the greater good.

Said greater good is clearly emphasized by Sentinel Peak Resources. They credit it for being established in 1924 and for the consistency of its production; it continues to be the largest oil field in all of California and plays an “irreplaceable role in meeting the residents energy needs” [14].

Sentinel Peak Resources focus on highlighting the economic benefits of this site, though this comes with ease for the corporation as it is located in Denver, Colorado and those that gain the most from this site do not face any of the consequences [15]. The company removed from the region of dispute yet still retains the confidence to speak on what is best its residents. 

Environmental Health Impacts

Sentinel Peak Resources purposefully ignores the fact that the IOF releases toxic chemicals and Greenhouse gasses into the atmosphere, possessing a track record of numerous oil spills which impose health detriments onto the predominantly Black community [16].

These health impacts include:

• Lung and heart disease [17]
• Leukemia [18]
• Lymphoma [19]
• Lung Cancer [20]
• Nervous System Damage [21]
• Birth Defects [22]
• Premature Death [23]

Toxic Chemicals

Benzene, in particular, poses a major threat because of how toxic it is to the human body [24].  The community must make this sacrifice on behalf of the company. This hazardous carcinogen is prevalent in the oil spills of the IOF, however many other emissions result from spills and operations of the site:

• Methane [25]
• Toluene [26]
• Ethylbenzene [27]
• Fine Particulate Matter [28]
• Nitrous Oxide [29]

While the community must compromise their health and environment, the company continues to profit; the suffering ensued by the IOF, the exploitation of the land and people, and the threats hanging in the future are all necessary components for this ‘greater good’ of bolstering the economy and fossil fuels. 

Employment opportunities and access to energy should not overshadow the voices of the people; they are demanding this oil field to be shut down and replaced with something that will rebuild the community’s sense of place, such as a public park that directly benefits the daily lives of Culver City’s residents [30].

REFERENCES:

[1]City of Culver City. (2017). Inglewood Oil Field: Background. https://www.culvercity.org/City-Hall/Departments/City-Manager/City-Hall/Get-Involved/Inglewood-Oil-Field/Background.

[2] City of Culver City.

[3] City of Culver City.

[4] Inglewood Oil Field. (2019, October). Economic Benefits. Inglewood OIl Field. Retrieved April 2, 2021, from https://inglewoodoilfield.com/benefits/economic-benefits/

[5] LA County – Inglewood Oil Field Campaign. CleanBreak. (2019).
https://cleanbreak.info/la-county-drilling-baldwin-hills-inglewood-oil-field/.

[6] LA County – Inglewood Oil Field Campaign.

[7] Rangan, C., & Tayour, C. (2012, April). Results of the 2011 Inglewood Oil Field Communities’
Survey. Los Angeles; Los Angeles County Department of Public Health.

[8] Angeles Chapter. (2019, July 31). Inglewood Oil Field is Killing Us. Sierra Club. Retrieved April 2, 2021, from https://angeles.sierraclub.org/conservation_news/blog/2019/07/inglewood_oil_field_is_killing_us

[9] Inglewood, CA. Data USA. (2018). https://datausa.io/profile/geo/inglewood-ca.

[10] Inglewood, CA.

[11] Inglewood, CA.

[12] Inglewood, CA.

[13] Inglewood Oil Field. (2019, October). Economic Benefits. Inglewood OIl Field. Retrieved April 2, 2021, from https://inglewoodoilfield.com/benefits/economic-benefits/

[14] Inglewood Oil Field

[15] Peak Resources, S. (2021). About Sentinel Peak. Sentinel Peak Resource. https://sentinelpeakresources.com/about/

[16] LA County – Inglewood Oil Field Campaign.

[17] Angeles Chapter.

[18] Angeles Chapter.

[19] Angeles Chapter.

[20] Angeles Chapter.

[21] Angeles Chapter.

[22] Angeles Chapter.

[23] Angeles Chapter.

[24] Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (2018, April 4). Facts About Benzene. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://emergency.cdc.gov/agent/benzene/basics/facts.asp#:~:text=Benzene%20is%20a%20chemical%20that,float%20on%20top%20of%20water.

[25] Angeles Chapter.

[26] Angeles Chapter.

[27] Angeles Chapter.

[28] Angeles Chapter.

[29] Angeles Chapter.

[30] LA County – Inglewood Oil Field Campaign.

Sasol Chemical & Natural Gas Plant Threatens Black Resilience in Mossville, Louisiana

By Zoria Temple, SFSU,2021

The Sasol Lake Charles Chemical Complex and R&D is located in Mossville, Louisiana, at 2201 Old Spanish Trail, Westlake, LA 70669 [1]. The neighborhood of Mossville was founded by freed slaves in 1790; it was established as one of the first communities of free Blacks in the south [2]. Sasol bought out refineries within the Mossville community, to expand its industrialized processes beginning in the 1990s [3]. Sasol uses natural gas and chemicals to create products like paraffin and diesel fuel [4].

Petrochemical plants light up the night sky in Mossville, Louisiana

History

Singer Solange Knowles sang “Black skin, black braids, black days, these are black-owned things… black faith still can’t be washed away” conveying the resilience of Black people against genocide and a climate of systematic racism, and environmental inequity. The externalities such as high rates of cancer and chronic illnesses like diabetes and high blood pressure are unequally placed on Black Americans in the Mossville Louisiana neighborhood [5]. The Sasol company managed to persuade many families to sell their homes so that the company could build more warehouses on this land [6]. Many families agreed to buyouts offered by Sasol, the purchase amount was 40,000 dollars [7]. The Sasol company is responsible for producing not only elevated carbon emissions, the displacement of Black families, the effects from living near chemical plants, but also practicing environmental racism and designating this community as a sacrifice zone. Are you familiar with the phrase “cancer alley”?

Home buyouts offered to residents in Mossville, Louisiana by Sasol

Impacts on Health

Residents within the Mossville, Louisiana community suffer from health impacts and other hardships like severed historical ties freedmen’s land by living near Sasol’s chemical and natural gas plant [8]. These impacts include [9].

• High rates of developing cancer (i.e., ovarian, prostate, throat cancer)
• Damages to the reproductive system
• Chronic illnesses (i.e., diabetes)
• Skin rashes
• Neuropathy in the feet
• Death of family members who contracted cancer or illnesses
• Loss of community
• Depreciated homes

Chemical plants emits toxic and harmful particulate matter and carcinogens into the air

Considered a Site of Energy Injustice

Environmental racism is often present in communities of color and low-income communities. Many Black or African Americans have been forced to move out of their homes and forget about significant history. Black residents are faced with moving or maintaining place attachment to their environment. Sasol has weakened the legacy of Black resilience in the Mossville, Louisiana community, eliminating one resident after the next [10]. This community was built for and by former slaves, yet White company stakeholders are receiving the benefits from the energy site [11]. In Mossville, Black Americans do not have access to clean water, privately owned gardens, or clean breathable air, while White men are being paid to emit even more greenhouse gasses and other harmful pollutants due to the lifted restrictions of emissions by fossil fuel companies and businesses [12]. The people who make these impactful decisions are the CEOs, typically affluent White men. These individuals also decided to cut 1,500 jobs across the entire company [13]. This would mean that Black workers at Sasol will have a difficult time supporting themselves and their families since there are limited job opportunities in Mossville [14]. After Sasol struggled with debt, they sold a part of their company to Lyondellbasell Industries which caused Sasol to become a 50 percent shareholder company. None of the residents of Mossville received any monetary benefits [15]. Residents of Mossville are subjected to inadequate and harmful infrastructures built in their communities [16]. One resident, Stacey Ryan, claims that Sasol currently owns a municipal sewer system that runs in front of his home [17].

“The company destroyed his sewer line when they cut down half the trees on his land after incorrectly marking the property line”

Tom Valtin, Sierra Club

A woman tending a garden in Mossville Louisiana next door to a Sasol chemical plant

The residents of Mossville, Louisiana are also subjected to living in a sacrifice zone.  Researchers from Tulane University and Harvard University conducted a study that revealed a higher likelihood of African Americans living in counties with elevated levels of particulate matter (PM) 2.5 than any other racial group [18]. Black and African Americans develop high rates of cancer, reproductive disorders, diabetes, loss of normality, and losing several family members at the ages of 50 and 60, or even as young as 37 [19]. Sasol is permitted to emit up “to 10.6 million tons of greenhouse gases and 3,275 tons of volatile organic, compounds” a carcinogen like benzene, into the atmosphere yearly [20]. President and CEO of Sasol, Fleetwood Grobler, claims that the company is headed towards a more established chemical business and calls this a “milestone” while inducing mortality for Black individuals deprived of celebrating milestones like birthdays, graduations, weddings, and promotions [21]. Grobler expresses there will “be future opportunities to debottleneck and increase the capacity of the Lake Charles cracker and PE plants by 5-10% with very-low capital expenditure” which means more pollution for residents of Mossville, Louisiana [22]. Because Sasol has made Mossville, Louisiana into a sacrifice zone, there is widespread vulnerability to harmful emissions and communities where marginalized people suffer due to the “greater good” of national interest such as profit from the fossil fuel industry.

“Sasol has bought out all my neighbors; I’m the last one left,”

Stacey Ryan, Mossville, Louisiana resident

REFERENCES

• [1] Sasol North America. (2013). Lake Charles Chemical Complex: Sasol North America. Lake Charles Chemical Complex | Sasol North America. http://www.sasolnorthamerica.com/louisiana.

[2] Valtin, T. (2015, July 22). Louisiana Man Takes a Stand Against a Petrochemical Giant. Sierra Club. https://www.sierraclub.org/planet/2015/07/louisiana-man-takes-stand-against-petrochemical-giant. 

[3] Valtin, T. (2015)

[4] Buford, Talia. (2014, December 10). Plant Expansions Fueled by Shale Boom to Boost Greenhouse Gas, Toxic Emissions.

[5] Valtin, T. (2015)

[6] Valtin, T. (2015)

[7] Vatlin, T. (2015)

[8] Rogers, H. (2015, November 4). How Pollution Killed a Louisiana Town. The Intercept. https://theintercept.com/2015/11/04/erasing-mossville-how-pollution-killed-a-louisiana-town/.

[9] Rogers, H. (2015, November 4).

[10] Vatlin, T. (2015).

[11] Vatlin, T. (2015).

[12] Theunlssen, G. (2020, October 2). A Billion Here and a Billion There: How Sasol Came to Sell 50% of its Lake Charles Megaproject. Business Insider South Africa. https://www.businessinsider.co.za/what-you-need-to-know-about-sasols-huge-lake-charles-project-2020-10.

[13] Theunlssen, G. (2020, October 2)

[14] Theunlssen, G. (2020, October 2)

[15] Theunlssen, G. (2020, October 2)

[16] Vatlin, T. (2015).

[17] Theunlssen, G. (2020, October 2)

[18] Fussell, S. (2020, May 26). Covid-19 Flares Up in America’s Polluted ‘Sacrifice Zones’. Wired. https://www.wired.com/story/covid-19-flares-americas-polluted-sacrifice-zones/.

[19] Roka, L. (2020, May 18). Utah Film Center Sets Livestream Screening of Mossville Environmental Justice Documentary; Oscars Academy Grant, New Cinema on Demand Titles Available. The Utah Review. https://www.theutahreview.com/utah-film-center-sets-livestream-screening-of-mossville-environmental-justice-documentary-oscars-academy-grant-new-cinema-on-demand-titles-available/. 

[20] Buford, Talia. (2014, December 10)

[21] Brelsford, R. (2020, November 16). Sasol Fully Commissions Louisiana Petrochemical Complex. Oil & Gas Journal. https://www.ogj.com/refining-processing/petrochemicals/article/14187441/sasol-fully-commissions-louisiana-petrochemical-complex.

[22] Beacham, W. (2020, December 2). Specialty Chemicals Will Help Achieve Sasol 2.0 Strategy – CEO. ICIS Explore. https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/news/2020/12/02/10582187/specialty-chemicals-will-help-achieve-sasol-2-0-strategy-ceo.

Marathon Oil Refinery (Detroit, Michigan)

Written at SFSU in 2021

Marathon Oil refinery is located in Boynton, a community in southwest Detroit, Michigan.  It has grown to become a 250-acre facility that refines 140,000 barrels of oil per day (BPD) and is the only oil refinery in Michigan.

Marathon Oil Refinery in Boynton – a Neighborhood of Southwest Detroit, Michigan https://snappygoat.com/free-public-domain-images-marathon_petroleum_company_detroit/DD6BSLRIXDBQgkkf8dpXZ_dMl9SX3HMaEU28zB-7pOmu.html#,0,0.f8f434f89500602a6cd4adbd8575f40448ecdd39

The process of refining oil generates hundreds of tons of air pollutants daily, and considerably affects people in nearby communities as they breathe polluted air regularly.  The marginalized group of society that bears the majority of costs and reaps very little, if any, benefits of refining, are African Americans.  Although there are a handful of ongoing environmental justice issues in this instance, the main injustices I will be focusing on are environmental racism, lack of local control and the embodiment of a sacrifice zone in the area surrounding Marathon’s refinery.

Marginalized Group

Many African Americans first began moving from the south to Boynton and other areas of Detroit in the 1950’s and 1960’s.  Most people moving to the area from the south were in search of a new life after slavery ended and dirty jobs were offered in Detroit to people of color – which allowed many people access to buy a home for the first time [1][2].  During this same period ‘white flight’ began to occur and in the midst, Marathon began adding onto its facilities, decade after decade, because they were granted permits to do so [3].

Marathon has been in the area since before the first African Americans settled in the area, but over time the corporation has taken advantage of the lack of local control.  Many weak state and federal laws that have allowed Marathon amongst other polluters to emit quantities of contaminants into the air for many years after African Americans began to comprise much of the population.  For example, one way refineries have been able to avoid federal regulations is through grandfathering. “Grandfathered plants, those built before environmental laws came into force, can operate without meeting current federal emissions standards. Accidental releases, upsets, and flaring… occur quite frequently at oil refineries; these allow significant emissions to go unregulated during nonpermitted events [4].”  Michigan is also one of fourteen states that doesn’t regulate how far industry must be from homes and schools [5].

Costs

Byproducts of refining include but are not limited to: nitrous oxide, sulfur dioxide, and carbon monoxide [6].  Marathon emits (at least) 29 various types of toxins, which are sprawled throughout the 48217 zip code, which put inhabitants at higher risk of cancer, respiratory disease, asthma, and liver failure [7].  “The University of Michigan Public Health estimates that air pollution kills more than 650 Detroiters a year – more than twice the number of residents killed by gun violence annually.  Thousands more are hospitalized, and children miss a disproportionate number of days at school because of illness and asthma.  The refinery also emits at least eight chemicals known to cause cancer, including benzene, dioxin, and lead compounds, according to the EPA. [8]”

Demographics show people in the three-mile radius mostly affected by air pollution stemming from Marathon’s plant are, “predominantly black [82.7%] and low-income [38.1%]” [9]. Polluters in Michigan, are not required by any state laws or regulations to build away from schools and residential areas [10]. Pollution has worsened as permits have been granted to Marathon to continue adding to its facilities to increase production decade after decade; despite the well known facts about the effects their air pollution has on residents in nearby areas [11].  It is also worth noting Marathon has violated the Michigan state emissions limits 15 times since 2013 [12].

Benefits

The CEO of Marathon, management, shareholders, whites, and the upper class reap the benefits of the company’s profits without suffering the side effects of air pollution.  White neighborhoods of Oakwood Heights, the northern region of the 48217, were offered above market value for their houses by Marathon during one of their most recent expansions while those in Boynton weren’t extended the same proposal [13].  This is one clear-cut instance where wealthy people and whites benefit, while the working class and people of color in the area suffer.

Importance

In this part of town, it is nearly impossible for many people to move away from Marathon,  given most people’s economic situation and the fact that no one wants to purchase their homes due to the pollution [14]. Continual issuance of permits to polluters, whilst effects are felt throughout the community of Boynton and nearby towns, constitute nothing short of an environmental sacrifice zone that is permitted to continue producing because of a lack of local control in Michigan, specifically in which a marginalized group in Boynton feel the effects of underlying and ongoing environmental racism.

References:

[1] Boynton–Oakwood heights (Detroit). (2021, January 01). Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boynton%E2%80%93Oakwood_Heights_(Detroit)

[3] Neavling, S. (2021, April 01). Struggling to breathe In 48217, MICHIGAN’S most Toxic zip code. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/struggling-to-breathe-in-48217-michigans-most-toxic-zip-code/Content?oid=23542211

[5] Neavling, 2021

[6] Neavling, 2021

[7] Neavling, 2021

[8] Neavling, 2021

[9] Neavling, 2021

[11] Neavling, 2021

[12] Neavling, 2021

[13] Neavling, 2021

[14] Neavling, 2021

[10] Oosting, J. (2010, June 21). Must-read report: DETROIT’S 48217 zip code is MICHIGAN’S most polluted. Retrieved April 10, 2021, from https://www.mlive.com/news/detroit/2010/06/must-read_report_detroits_4821.html

[4] O’Rourke, D., & Connolly, S. (2003). Just oil? The distribution of environmental and social impacts of oil production and consumption. Annual Review of Environment and Resources, 28(1), 587-617. doi:10.1146/annurev.energy.28.050302.105617

[2] Tran, D. (2020, January 12). Marathon oil refinery in Detroit, Michigan, USA: EJATLAS. Retrieved April 13, 2021, from https://ejatlas.org/conflict/marathon-oil-refinery-in-detroit-michigan

Gas Pipeline Running Through Indigenous Territory in Loma de Bacum, Mexico

By Julisa Lopez, SFSU, 2021

While only making about 20% of the Mexican population, Indigenous communities are one of the most marginalized groups in the entire country [1]. Loma de Bacum, Mexico, houses one of these Indigenous communities, the Yaqui. The Loma de Bacum community has been pitted against other Yaqui communities due to the imminent construction of a gas pipeline that would go through their territory[3]. The Yaqui nation is made up of 8 communities located throughout northwestern Mexico [1]. One of these being the Loma de Bacum community, who has been made a victim of an energy injustice.

Pictured above is a gas pipeline in the U.S. The Loma de Bacum territory would face the same environmental destruction.

The project put out by Gasoducto de Aguaprieta, which is a branch of the Mexico City-based company IEnova, intended to construct a section of the Sonora gas pipeline through the Loma de Bacum territory[3]. This intended section, known as the Guaymas-El Oro gas pipeline, would run eleven miles through Loma de Bacum, in order to complete the 205 miles of the Sonora gas pipeline [1].

Seven of the eight Yaqui communities approved the project in the hopes that its construction would lead to development and growth [1]. However, the community of Loma de Bacum saw this project as a direct threat to the environment that they depend on for their livelihoods [1]. The community’s authorities have also claimed that the only reason the majority of the Yaqui communities have approved this project is because they have been bribed by Gasoducto de Aguaprieta, as well as threatened to comply by Sonoran authorities [1]. 

            The adverse environmental effects this gas pipeline could have on the territory that the Yaqui communities depend on, is immense. Aside from the fact that it would be transporting natural gas, which is a fossil fuel that contributes to climate change, the mere construction of such a project would affect the state of land and wildlife where it is developed[2]. Land disturbance due to gas drilling, construction of roads to transport materials, installation of pipes, etc. can all cause soil erosion as well as habitat fragmentation [2]. Erosion of minerals, dirt, and other pollutants could runoff into nearby streams, causing water contamination [2]. These conditions not only harming the state of the environment, but wildlife and communities living nearby that depend on these natural resources.

            With these adverse effects in mind, the community of Loma de Bacum have countlessly voiced their opposing thoughts about the Sonora gas pipeline[1]. However, these remarks go unheard of because of the urgency to upgrade and modernize Mexico’s energy landscape [3]. This clearly makes the small community of Loma de Bacum an energy sacrifice zone. The impacts they will endure with the construction of such a project are justified if it means Mexico will be able to grant more energy access to its population[3]. Mexico’s natural gas trade association has been frustrated with the disruption caused by the Yaqui and noted that they are hindering “the creation of new jobs and the generation of electricity that is cleaner and more competitive” [3]. Accessibility to this new energy is questionable, as most of the time it is not accessible to poor, marginalized groups, but only to those who can afford it [3]. For the Yaqui community of Loma de Bacum it is a big price to pay with no clear guarantee of progress. It is also important to note that marginalized groups, like the Yaqui, are forced to comply to the construction of such projects. In this case, the mechanisms used to acquire agreements for construction are bribes and threats of violence[1].

            In many cases, indigenous lands are considered the designated sacrifice zones, as these tend to be home to people that do not have the political and economic power to fight big industry or governmental associations[3].  Wealthy landowners, on the other hand, may request higher payments from developers to run these projects through their lands, granting them the ability to voice their concerns with an audience who is going to listen [3]. However, the Loma de Bacum community has put its foot down and refuses the construction of the Guaymas-El Oro gas pipeline. This not only pitting them against the company constructing this project, but also the government and the seven other Yaqui communities affiliated with them. On October 16, 2016 this resulted in a physical altercation between the Loma de Bacum community and members of the other seven Yaqui communities who had approved the construction of the gas pipeline [1]. Gunfire and burning of vehicles ensued, leading to two deaths and ten people being injured [1]. This confrontation completely changing the solidarity between all of the Yaqui communities of the northwestern Mexican territory.

        

References

[1] Soberanes, Rodrigo. (2018). Mexico: Pipeline Divides Yaqui Communities and Triggers Wave of Violence. Mongabay Environmental News. Retrieved from news.mongabay.com/2018/08/mexico-pipeline-divides-yaqui-communities-and-triggers-wave-of-violence/.

[2] UOCS. (2014). Environmental Impacts of Natural Gas. Union of Concerned Scientists. Retrieved from ucsusa.org/resources/environmental-impacts-natural-gas.

[3] Nikolewksi, Rob. (2018). Problems in the Pipeline for Sempra’s Subsidiary in Mexico. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-sempra-mexico-20180208-story.html.