Analyze

In Saxony-Anhalt, located in eastern Germany, the building and waste industry companies reap substantial profits thanks to the legislative and organizational framework governing the establishment and operation of waste disposal and recycling sites, such as landfills. To curtail state expenditures, German state agencies have reduced their staff with the expertise needed to evaluate proposed projects. Instead, they heavily rely on external evaluations conducted by experts closely connected to companies with a vested interest in securing ongoing contracts. While state agencies mandate oversight and safety measures, these responsibilities are delegated to the companies themselves. Only when concrete evidence, in the form of photos and videos, demonstrates that these companies are not fulfilling their obligations, do state agency employees step in to personally inspect the sites. Lastly, the approval of construction bids for waste disposal sites is typically granted unless there is substantial evidence of immediate harm to the environment or public health. In cases where the safety of the ground cannot be definitively ascertained, construction proceeds. Incomplete knowledge regarding geological factors or potential chemical reactions does not hold legal weight as an argument against waste disposal operations.

Baum, Philipp. 2023. "The Legal Framework of Constructing and Operating Waste Disposal Site in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany." In 4S Paraconference X EiJ: Building a Global Record, curated by Misria Shaik Ali, Kim Fortun, Phillip Baum and Prerna Srigyan. Annual Meeting of the Society of Social Studies of Science. Honolulu, Hawai'i, Nov 8-11.

The political process is also always a learning process, a process of attunement. And becoming attuned to relations of power also means becoming compromised, to a certain degree, despite whether this attunement takes the form of compliance or resistance. For instance, the oil and gas industry has had a large influence on the structure and character of renewable energy advocacy in Austin, Texas, even as it was being developed as a strategy of resistance to petroculture. In particular, there was the purposeful move to imitate the mineral rights contracts that the oil and gas industry had developed in order to drill on private land, creating similarly structured leasing agreements for what would come to be known as “wind farms” in many of the same locations as former drilling sites. The idea here was to create a wealthy landowning class that could help lobby for renewable energy, much like previous land owners had for the oil and gas industry. Secondly, the Texas Renewable Energy Industry Association (TREIA) collectively decided to invite the utility industry to join their ranks in order to pursue renewable energy at the utility scale through the use of Renewable Portfolio Standards. And while Austin’s early energy advocates still speak of this as a winning strategy (and indeed it was), it also reproduced the utility as a center of power and promoted a top-down style of environmental advocacy that had long shut Austin's minoritized and marginalized communities out of its environmental benefits. Building support in this way, by appealing to those who are not only likely to share your perspective and its blindspots, but that have also already shaped the political landscape in their interest, this creates the perfect conditions for injustices to transpire, persist, and even intensify. Thus, part of the struggle for just transition entails keeping the question of what counts as environmental justice or injustice held open at the same time that the former is being pursued and/or the latter resisted. 

Adam, James. 2023. "Petro-ghosts." In 4S Paraconference X EiJ: Building a Global Record, curated by Misria Shaik Ali, Kim Fortun, Phillip Baum and Prerna Srigyan. Annual Meeting of the Society of Social Studies of Science. Honolulu, Hawai'i, Nov 8-11.

Most recent news (As of September 2022) focuses on the EPAs naming of 23 EtO sterilization plants as high risk. This announcement enables local leadership, environmental organizations and legal partners to assess human health risks while focusing on reducing EtO emissions, as outlined by the EPA. Most recent news (As of September 2022) focuses on the EPAs naming of 23 EtO sterilization plants as high risk. This announcement has enabled local leadership, environmental organizations and legal partners to assess human health risks while focusing on reducing EtO emissions, as outlined by the EPA. This release by the EPA has prompted activism in the communities affected by EtO sterilization facilities. As noted by EarthJustice on the news, “Raul Garcia, legislative director for Healthy Communities at Earthjustice: ‘This is an important and welcome step to increasing transparency on the toxic air pollution and health threats that sterilizer facilities pose to the health of millions of Americans. Now that EPA has new information on precisely where the worst health threats are, the agency must use its full authority to ensure public health so no one gets cancer from this pollution and require fenceline monitoring at these facilities. Now, EPA must issue a strong new rule that phases out the use of ethylene oxide at commercial sterilizers. No one should get cancer from facilities that are used to sterilize equipment in the treatment of cancer.’ “. In addition, one major article edited and published by ProPublica sparked both outrage but in addition, change. The article The Most Detailed Map of Cancer-Causing Industrial Air Pollution in the U.S. details 

Activism has prompted more indepth research, increased acquisition and availability of EtO industry data, and increased focus on EtO as a carcinogen and toxin. This hazard was recognized fully by the EPA between 2016-2018 which led to increased assessment and acknowledgement of EtO as a toxin.

The main concern with EtO exposure includes inhalation. Laws that regulate air emissions have invariably affected and regulated this hazard. But specifically, below is a rough outline of  laws that directly impacted the air emissions of facilities processing EtO: 

• Clean Air Act Section 112, Hazardous Air Pollutants. The CAA regulates Ethylene Oxide under section 112 of the CAA. The CAA labels EtO as a hazardous air pollutant. Under the CAA, EtO emissions can be regulated in conjunction with promoting the best emission controls.

• Regulations on Sterilization Facilities (From Federal Register : National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants: Ethylene Oxide Commercial Sterilization and Fumigation Operations) 

Note, fugitive emissions have not been standardized by the EPA, including back vents, emergency ventilation etc.

Mainly stark contrast can be found between the EPA and various state and chemical manufacturing companies in terms of data divergence. The main concern surrounding EtO is the elevated cancer risk that occurs with long exposure both direct and indirect. The ways in which the EPA and other companies and agencies assess risk have been different in terms of unit quantity. The EPA utilized in 2016 the Integrated Risk Information System to model cancer risk. According to the American Chemical Council the, “ACC believes the value is significantly flawed.” Also, the Texas Commision on Environmental Quality has stated, “ ‘the US EPA unit risk factor (URF) for ethylene oxide is not scientifically justified.’ ”. This has led the TCEQ to raise its exposure limit from 1 ppb to 2.4 ppb.

• Results of the Risk Assessment of Ethylene Oxide Emitting Facilities in Texas and Louisiana

Provides a list of 8 high risk EtO facilities both in LA and TX. Provides a breakdown of race in terms of proximity to facility and risk level. *One point to mention, is that data from the 2018 National Emissions Inventory (NEI), which was used, is provided to the EPA by the LDEQ and TCEQ.*

• Ethylene Oxide Risk Map - Air Alliance Houston

Mapped by the Environmental Advocacy group Air Alliance Houston are EtO facilities across America. The top 25 EtO emitting facilities are labeled and census tracts with a cancer risk greater than 100 in 1 million are also highlighted.

The major organization involved in assessment of EtO is the EPA. The EPA and its branch leaders have spearheaded the response guidelines, have outlined cancer risks, and have conducted research in partnership with other national partners such as the NIH, federal departments of health, and state departments of health.

In the period between 1982 to 1984 multiple studies on lab rats concluded that inhalation concentrations of ethylene oxide could be correlated to cancer development. An analysis of the results found that increased exposure showed higher incidences of tumor development in both male and female lab rats. According to the EPA EtO is carcinogenic and, “Scientific evidence in humans indicates that exposure to EtO for many years increases the risk of cancers of the white blood cells, including non-Hodgkin lymphoma, myeloma, and lymphocytic leukemia. Studies also show that long-term exposure to EtO increases the risk of breast cancer in women.” 

Ethylene oxide mainly becomes an environmental and health hazard in any community when it is released as a gas into the surrounding air. Ethylene oxide exposure includes inhalation and ingestion. 

The map above constructed by air alliance Houston (Generated April 6, 2020) shows areas with EtO Cancer risk greater than 100/1 million as stars, top 25 EtO emitting facilities from 2008-2018 as red dots and other EtO facilities as black dots. Ethylene oxide facilities span the country mainly located on the east coast and gulf coast. 

In a close up we can see Huntsman Petrochemical highlighted within the elevated EtO cancer risk.