Analyze

Given the vastness of Formosa Plastics' influence, there are many ways to tell its story to the world. As environmental justice activists and researchers, how do we describe a company and its negative impact when there is so much to say? Limited by time, word count, and the audience's attention span, we must decide what goes unsaid. As a result, we could write countless answers to the same question, "What is Formosa Plastics?"

In this published academic case study, I introduce Formosa Plastics through a local lens--specifically, through the eyes of a grandmother-turned-activist in the small town of Welcome, Louisiana. Her family's history with social justice activism, as well as the area's connection to centuries of slavery, make the environmental racism of Formosa Plastics' Sunshine Project especially salient. Although Formosa Plastics is a global force, telling its story on the microscale is an equally important perspective. After all, in Sharon Lavigne's eyes, her small town is her world. How many of these little worlds have Formosa Plastics destroyed as they wreak havoc across international borders?

The fact that when the government went to collect samples of lead, they didn't go to all the sites. Also the fact that EPA has an action level for lead in the water. 

The author of the article read over the New Jersey's Drinking Water Watch database and read a letter that was sent by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to the Newark Water Department.

The article informs its readers that there is an excess amount of lead in Newark's drinking water as of September 20, 2017. Five addresses had the tap water tested and the lead levels exceeded at least three times the federal standard and Newark's Water Department was informed. The article then explains the process at which Newark's Water Department must go through in response to the excess amount of lead and what residents must do.

The Aim of this organization is to examine the dangers and amount of lead water in Newark. The article states that Newark water department exceeded the federal "level" for lead in it's water.  

I agree that Newark had terrible water but a big issue is the funding to fix the problem... and the artical goes into all the research about the water but neglects to talk about federal and local funding. 

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Lead and Copper Rule regulates the presence of lead in drinking water. Under the rule, if more than 10 percent of samples test above 15 parts per billion, the federal lead “action level” is exceeded. An “action level” exceedance triggers mandatory requirements that a water system must perform. For Newark, these requirements include water quality monitoring, corrosion control treatment, source water monitoring and treatment, public education, and lead service line replacement. Newark must treat its water to guard against corrosion (pipe erosion and damage) to minimize lead “leaching” (when lead is dissolved from pipes or fixtures and transfers into the water) or flaking of small lead particles from pipes or fixtures into tap water.

This article brings Newark’s water contamination problem up, specifically the amount of lead found in recent studies. Newark’s water was found to have three times the amount of acceptable lead in its tap water, but no specific locations were give as to what places are being affected by this contamination. Newarks Water Department will be required to take actions such as testing public school water supplies, changing lead pipe lines, and maintaining more accurate maintainence schedules and records. By holding people accountable, Newark is changing its vulnerability towards water contamination 

I think it is an important step, clearly for presenting complaints, the problem will not be solved; we should all do it if we see something of this kind. In addition to the complaints, there are many steps to follow, such as organizing protests, taking care of daily consumption or becoming aware that a sustainable life is better for everyone.