Racial disparities exist in Minnesota when it comes to asthma cases. Environmental-justice advocates said it is one example of pollution disproportionately affecting communities of color, and they hope a bill in the Legislature would add protections.

The plan calls on the Pollution Control Agency to consider whether an industrial site or other entity seeking a permit would add to the cumulative impact in a racially diverse area that already has environmental stressors.

Carolina Ortiz, associate executive director of the Latino advocacy group COPAL MN, said the timing is especially important as Minnesota sees more climate migration from other countries.

"They're running away from some of the pollution, some of the additional barriers they face over there," Ortiz observed. "But then they're coming here to face the same thing, just in a different location."

Criteria for the environmental justice areas would include certain percentages of people who are nonwhite, who speak limited English, as well as income levels and tribal lands. The measure has been heard by various committees and is expected to be included in a larger omnibus bill. The League of Minnesota Cities recognizes the need but worries about how municipal water facilities would need periodic reviews of permits.

Tim Schaefer, legal advocate for COPAL MN, said it should not be viewed as an obstacle toward economic growth, because it can help create stronger and healthier communities.

"If economic growth comes at the expense of human health, if it comes at the expense of people's families and people's safety and security and their well-being, it's not worth it," Schaefer argued.

Roxxanne O'Brien, founder of Community Members for Environmental Justice in North Minneapolis, said neighborhoods in her area often lack the power to limit the development of industry and traffic and the pollution that comes along with it.

"We're not the ones heavily adding the carbon footprint out here, but we are the ones who get exploited the most," O'Brien contended.

Xcel Energy says its latest proposal before the Public Utilities Commission will help Colorado reach it's clean energy goals - by adding more wind and solar power, more energy storage, and a new biomass facility.

But critics are crying foul over plans to construct three new gas-fired power plants, one near Alamosa and two near Longmont.

Ean Tafoya, director with GreenLatinos Colorado, said he is urging the commission to reject the plan to protect disproportionately impacted communities.

"These are the people who are defined under the state's Environmental Justice Act," said Tafoya. "Linguisitally isolated, low-income, the people who are living around these plants that are definitely disproportionately impacted, those are predominantly Latinos."

Xcel claims the new gas plants are needed to ensure grid reliability, and says its proposal will remove 740 megawatts of gas power in part by retiring contracts and some of its 14 existing gas plants.

Alternative plans that add more renewables could save customers $29 million compared to Xcel's proposal in the first year alone, according to a new study.

The PUC is expected to make a decision by year's end.

Leading global scientists have long warned that burning fossil fuels must end to avoid catastrophic impacts of climate change.

Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is over 85 times more potent at trapping heat in the atmosphere than coal-fired climate pollution.

Tafoya said he opposes Xcel's plan to use ratepayer money to build new fossil fuel infrastructure.

"To invest hundreds of millions of dollars to build new plants," said Tafoya, "to me is a boondoggle that is about us investing in their technology, while they profit and send money to Wall Street."

Tafoya said he also worries that ratepayers will be on the hook for the cost of new gas plants long after they become stranded assets. He added that natural gas is not a safe source of energy.

"We know that when people use it in their households, that it causes the indoor ambient air to be as bad as it could be if you were standing next to a roadway," said Tafoya. "So these fuels when they burn and when you withdraw them from the ground, they all leave toxic legacy."




get more stories like this via email

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved a plan extending a natural-gas pipeline in Virginia. The Virginia Reliability Plan and Transcot's CEC project calls for compressor stations and a natural-gas pipeline extension in communities already harmed by these impacts such as Petersburg.

The city ranked as the least healthy according to the University of Wisconsin's County Health Rankings and Roadmaps.

Tim Cywinski, communications director with the Sierra Club's Virginia Chapter, said projects like this undermine the state's climate progress.

"Whether it's a natural-gas pipeline that's doubling the size and diameter or a proposal to build a 'peaker plant' in Chesterfield, Virginia," he said. "All of these go against Virginia's goals, specifically since we're the last stronghold in the South that has any kind of climate commitment."

He said the state can't reach its climate goals and uphold environmental justice if projects like the VRP continue to be approved.

The project's Environmental Impact Statement is explicit on the determinants this project poses, but, Cywinski said Petersburg is a "sacrifice zone." This is an area where fossil-fuel companies already have an approved project and go there for a new project since the area's already facing environmental impacts.

Feedback to the project has been particularly negative. Numerous community and environmental groups voiced their opposition, and Cywinski said policymakers need to understand the importance in plans like this not being implemented.

"It's not unreasonable for us to expect our decision makers to implement a policy where protecting people from pollution is the floor -- not some negotiation up to the ceiling, the floor," he continued. "And, I think people, as the climate issue becomes more apparent, as people see more of the impacts of pollution, that this type of opposition is becoming more and more regular."

While some could get the misconception Virginia is pulling away from its climate goals, Cywinski said the opposite is true. He feels Gov. Glenn Youngkin and some legislators are working to blunt the state's climate goals.

In a new report, a coalition of New York environmental groups said dredging the Hudson River of toxic chemicals has failed.

The report by Friends of a Clean Hudson River showed PCB chemical levels are higher than anticipated. The Environmental Protection Agency dredged the river between 2009 and 2015 for 30 years worth of chemicals General Electric dumped into it.

Ned Sullivan, president of Scenic Hudson, said while dredging is typically an effective way to clean pollutants out of a river, the EPA's effort was ineffective.

"The problem is that EPA struck a deal with GE that was too much in favor of the polluter," Sullivan contended. "They didn't require GE to clean up enough contamination."

Other federal agencies noted this. A 2015 report found GE did not do enough dredging, and the EPA did not force the company to do more.

Sullivan argued the first step to true remediation is having the EPA admit the finding was correct, and prepare for more extensive dredging.

Some 200 miles of the Hudson River are considered a Superfund site due to the high amount of contamination, and 40 miles of the Upper Hudson are GE's responsibility. Friends of a Clean Hudson River's assessment contended current sediment recovery rates are unlikely to allow fish to recover naturally.

Sullivan noted the effects it would have.

"PCBs are a forever chemical, they don't naturally break down in the environment," Sullivan stressed. "And as you move up the food chain to other wildlife that consumes fish, as well as humans, the PCBs become more and more concentrated at every level in the food chain."

The EPA has warned against eating fish caught in the river between Troy and Hudson Falls, but people still do.

Sullivan emphasized PCBs are here to stay unless more is done. He said other parts of the river also need to be monitored, since they are just as toxic as the dredged area.

"We've called on EPA to require a formal investigation of the Lower Hudson, 160 miles below the Troy Dam, where no remediation has been done," Sullivan pointed out. "We know there is additional contamination because the fish in that Lower Hudson remain unsafe to eat."

GE implemented two of three sediment collection programs this year. A third program, which includes deeper sediment sample collection, starts in 2024.


get more stories like this via email