AUSTIN, Texas -- When high pollution levels occur in a neighborhood, residents are likely to be Black or Latino families, and a new survey finds many white Americans are unaware of the disparity.

Elise Nelson Leary, manager of campaigns and partnerships for the Environmental Defense Fund said the national poll conducted for the group found fewer than four in 10 white adults know minority neighborhoods often aren't like their own.

She noted pollution and contaminants are far more likely to be detected in Black, Latino and low-income neighborhoods.

"Low-income communities and communities of color have endured disproportionate harm from climate change," Nelson Leary contended.

She added 60% of U.S. respondents to the poll who identified as Black said they were very concerned about air-pollution exposure in their community versus 32% of white adult respondents.

Juan Parras, executive director for Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services said unless you live in a neighborhood with high levels of pollution, you're unlikely to know the difference.

He added people often lack understanding even if they recognize the privileges afforded by culture and circumstances.

"And then some that do, they don't blame it on the environment," Parras observed. "They blame it on the people themselves, thinking, 'Well, why don't they move out?' 'Why don't they move out to a better community?' It's all a matter, I think, of education and understanding."

Nelson Leary said the poll found 51% of Black respondents and 48% of Latino respondents believe environmental injustice is a major problem in the U.S., while only 33% of white adult respondents agree.

"We wanted to use this poll to get a pulse of how people were seeing these issues," Nelson Leary explained. "And so this poll really again was to collect that data and to really understand how we can better talk about environmental justice."

The survey also shows concern about climate change and its impact on the economy is more prevalent among Black and Latino respondents than white respondents.

Proposed legislation would end subsidies for wood-burning power plants in Massachusetts by removing biomass as an eligible fuel source for the Commonwealth's two primary clean-energy programs.

Currently, fuel from biomass plants is included in the Renewable Portfolio Standard and the Alternative Portfolio Standard, but environmental groups noted burning wood is more polluting than burning coal, and leads to major health impacts in surrounding communities.

Caitlin Peale Sloan, Massachusetts vice president for the Conservation Law Foundation, said subsidies for biomass need to end, especially as the need to reduce emissions grows because of threats from climate change.

"It's very important that now we clarify what we're calling renewable," Peale Sloane urged. "So that we can increase our subsidies of renewables without increasing combustion and additional climate impacts from carbon emissions."

Last year, the operating permit for a proposed Palmer biomass plant in Springfield was revoked because of its proximity to an environmental-justice community. Springfield has high rates of asthma and other respiratory illnesses. A letter from more than 100 groups urged the Legislature to pass the bill, so biomass cannot be subsidized in any area of the state.

Sen. Eric Lesser, D-Springfield, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said the proposed plant was aiming to build in the middle of a densely populated neighborhood where many residents are immigrants, people of color or low-income.

He argued ending subsidies for biomass will help push back against the history of racism in where these plants have been put.

"The greater Springfield area has one of the worst asthma rates in the entire country," Lesser pointed out. "Part of the reason for it is this industrial legacy, and a legacy of pollution tied in certain respects to these power plants."

He emphasized moving forward, it will be important to ensure front-line communities hit hardest by the effects of climate change and pollution get the most focused protection from climate-mitigation efforts.

Naia Tenerowicz, a Springfield resident and environmental advocate, said while Massachusetts is a leader in the transition to net-zero emissions in many ways, subsidies for biomass set the Commonwealth back.

"The idea that biomass could be subsidized as clean energy, when it's polluting your community when it's making it harder for you and your loved ones to breathe," Tenerowicz remarked. "It's not something that I want to happen to anyone in any community."

A record number of manatees have died this year, more than a thousand, and conservation groups warn hundreds more will die from starvation and illness, the result of Florida's toxic sewage and polluted waters.

At a memorial service today in Port St. John, participants are encouraged to wear black as they kayak or paddleboard near a Florida Power and Light plant, where an experimental feeding site will be set up to help feed the slow-moving manatees that used to graze on seagrass.

Katrina Shadix, executive director of the group Bear Warriors United, said after a massive loss of habitat, she wished officials had moved faster to approve a federal supplemental feeding program.

"The starvation deaths never stopped for the manatees," Shadix observed. "They decreased, and that's because two-thirds of the population migrated out. But for the one-third that call the Northern Indian River Lagoon home all year round, they have had no food. So, they've continued to starve, they've continued to be pulled lifeless from the river."

Federal and state officials have launched a temporary field response station in Brevard County, adding small amounts of lettuce to the water. Still, the few animals spotted this week were not seen eating the leafy greens, according to a Florida Wildlife Commission spokesperson.

The memorial service starts at noon at the Port St. John Boat Ramp.

Shadix commended the work of Florida's Fish and Wildlife officials. She pointed out they are often put in the position of having to clean up after what she calls the "failed policies" of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP).

"The algal blooms killed off the seagrass, which caused the manatees to starve," Shadix explained. "If we want to get back down to it, it's all about development and the DEP's lack of regulation of the sewage that goes into the Indian River Lagoon."

Shadix filed a 60-day letter of intent to sue the DEP over the pollution. She believes state officials began the feeding program because of the legal pressure her group is exerting, citing a possible violation of the Endangered Species Act.

Other groups, including EarthJustice and Save the Manatee Club, have announced their intent to sue the federal Environmental Protection Agency for failing to protect the threatened species.

WHITING, Ind. -- International oil-and-gas producer BP will pay more than $500,000 to the federal government as part of a legal settlement over air pollution from the company's Indiana plant in Whiting.

The Whiting facility is BP's largest oil refinery worldwide, and overall, the sixth-largest in America.

Sanghyun Lee, an attorney for the Environmental Integrity Project, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said the plant will be required to follow new monitoring and reporting standards.

"The refinery is going to be required to install a number of new continuous analyzers that'll be tracking certain operating parameters related to soot production," Lee explained. "And they'll need to monitor those on an hourly basis going forward."

The company will provide the information to state and federal environmental agencies, and to the environmental advocacy groups behind the lawsuit. In a statement, a BP spokesperson said the company was pleased to resolve the dispute, and is "committed to safe, reliable and compliant operations at the Whiting Refinery."

The settlement was negotiated by the Justice Department, on behalf of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. The lawsuit alleged in addition to violating legal limits on soot pollution, BP also failed to quickly report and correct pollution from petroleum processing units and did not continuously operate air pollution control equipment.

Lee pointed out the new reporting requirements will provide more transparency about the refinery's emissions.

"You shouldn't just look at it strictly in terms of a monetary penalty," Lee emphasized. "The goal in the citizen groups bringing this action really was to just ensure that, going forward, this facility is going to be meeting its soot limits."

The plant was constructed in 1889 by Standard Oil, and is located about 20 miles southeast of Chicago, along the Lake Michigan Shoreline. According to BP, the facility is able to process about 440,000 barrels of crude oil per day.