Our Comments to NJDEP: No Toxic Hydrogen Hubs in Overburdened Communities

Comments on: New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection’s Strategic Climate Action Plan

Submitted by the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

October 19, 2023

Introduction

The New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance (NJEJA) is a statewide organization mobilizing other environmental justice (EJ) organizations and individuals in order to increase the quality of life and upward mobility opportunities for EJ communities (low-income communities and communities Of Color), many of whom experience additional burdens resulting from histories of systemic racism. Our work covers a wide range of areas including plastics and incineration, air pollution reduction and cumulative impacts, ports and transportation, and clean energy policy. The principles and values of environmental justice practices are at the center of all we do, and we believe that the community’s vision of improvement will always be the most effective and important part of strategic development.


As such, we respectfully submit these comments today in an effort to support the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) in their “continuing commitment to furthering the promise of environmental justice through actions that advance climate justice” (Section 2). Our range of work, state-wide reach, and diversity of membership gives us a unique perspective on environmental protection and allows us to bring the concerns of overburdened, environmental justice communities to the forefront of the conversation.


Air Pollution, Co-Pollutants and Emissions Reduction
When identifying and implementing the best practices for addressing air pollution in the state of New Jersey, the DEP must ensure that all efforts to lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions work equally as hard to lower co-pollutants emissions. As the Strategic Climate Action Plan (the Plan)
draft clearly states:


“Climate impacts are likely to have even greater effects in communities already overburdened by pollution. That includes threats from co-pollutants, emitted alongside greenhouse gases, which have localized health effects.”

Section 2

The harmful effects of co-pollutants disproportionately impact already overburdened EJ communities. These aforementioned localized health risks, such as the effects of Particulate Matter (PM) 2.5, include premature death, cardiovascular disease, lung cancer, and pulmonary disease. Additionally, it must be acknowledged that fine PM has no lower threshold for health benefits. Driving down concentrations of fine PM and other co-pollutants in tandem with GHG emissions has immediate relevancy and benefit to EJ communities.


To this end, NJEJA is concerned both about the lack of specific accountability mechanisms and discussion of co-pollutants throughout the report. Within the report, reduction in co-pollutants is seen as a secondary benefit brought on by a reduction in GHG emissions. It must be recognized that a climate change mitigation policy that does not address co-pollutants directly, but instead treats them as secondary benefits is an ineffective policy. This can be seen in Section 4.2.6.1 when the Plan states that “anticipated outcomes could include reduced co-pollutant emissions.” Similarly, Section 7.2.2 states that “reducing greenhouse gas emissions will also have co-benefits of reducing co-pollutants.”


By not addressing co-pollutants in air pollution policy directly, we risk failing to improve air quality even if we are successful in our GHG policies. Climate change mitigation policy must address co-pollutants in order to ensure that we protect overburdened EJ communities. The DEP has the opportunity to drive down concentrations of co-pollutants in tandem with GHG emissions while advancing the States’ clean energy and climate-related priorities; this can only be achieved by treating greenhouse gases and co-pollutants as equally important and as equally devastating to our communities’ health, safety, and stability. To this end, we recommend that any policies which target greenhouse gas emissions include mechanisms to monitor and reduce co-pollutants as well. Such examples could include: factoring in co-pollutants to the Social Cost of Carbon (SCC) calculations (Section 4.2.2); including co-pollutants in the proposed annual Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Inventory Report (Section 4.2.2); developing a co-pollutant inventory for Department facilities as supplemental to the development of its greenhouse gas inventory (Section 4.2.3.1); increasing transparency and specificity to address co-pollutants while examining “avenues to reduce pollution in overburdened communities” (Section 7.1).


Hydrogen Hubs
Throughout the Plan, the DEP highlights their intention to support the development of a regional hydrogen hub (Section 4.2.5 and Section 4.2.6.1). We are deeply concerned that these plans will be advanced without consideration of community input, potential risks, and sufficient conversation with EJ communities who will bear the brunt of negative consequences from these facilities. The only way to produce hydrogen without worsening air pollution or further damaging the climate is to create “green hydrogen” which – as of April 2021 – represents less than 1% of the hydrogen produced. Hydrogen Hubs cannot be treated as the singular solution and any exploration of using hydrogen should be treated with extreme caution. EJ communities must be engaged and given accurate information regarding the impacts of these hubs to their communities. Furthermore, the DEP must sufficiently address the public and environmental risks of the hydrogen hubs program to New Jersey communities with robust discussion, full transparency, and meaningful engagement.

Lastly, the DEP should be clear in its understanding and interpretation of clean energy specifically as it relates to the development of renewable energy powered and/or hydrogen-powered fuel cells. The DEP must define “clean firm” and be precise about both the benefits and risks of these technologies. Clean technology cannot become a greenwashed term, and must represent truly clean technologies. Language regarding clean energy and clean technologies must ensure that environmental communities see real, tangible protection and that just transition practices are employed in every proposal and plan.


Sustainable Waste Management
The issue of sustainable waste management is a unique challenge in that it requires both highly specific community engagement and localized plans as well as a broad state-wide plan to handle the state’s waste. NJEJA firmly supports a prioritization of EPR as an effective tool to drastically reduce the amount of plastic waste, particularly plastic packaging waste, from entering the waste stream. When we reduce plastic production we send less waste to incinerators, which alleviates air pollution and other toxic-exposure health concerns in overburdened communities. We urge the DEP to continue developing EPR policies and infrastructure, in order to address waste issues in a manner that reduces the pressure on the individual, and instead handles these waste challenges at an infrastructural level targeting plastic reduction policies at the source of their production. Additionally, the DEP must be clear about their definitions of recycling and their development of facilities to handle sustainable waste management. First, the definition of recycling should prohibit chemical recycling, plastic to fuel, advanced recycling, pyrolysis, solvolysis, gasification, or any synonymous technology from being included as viable recycling techniques. These technologies have not been proven to be credible or safe techniques and expose communities, particularly already overburdened communities, to air pollutants and risk of fires, gas and chemical leaks, and costly clean-ups. Secondly, we recommend that the DEP define and explain their intention for similar terms including food waste recycling facilities and organic waste recycling.


Finally, the DEP must ensure that all evaluation of emerging technologies, educational programming, engagement opportunities, and strategic planning includes communities who will be primarily affected by these facilities. These communities must be prioritized in the stakeholder engagement process in order to address their concerns, ensure safety and stability in the development process, and sufficiently address environmental risks.


Climate Equity: Stakeholder Engagement and Community Input
Finally, climate equity work must include and center EJ communities. As the Plan acknowledges:

“Low-income communities and communities of color in New Jersey – and across the United States – are burdened with disproportionately high pollution, increased flood risk, and more intense heat waves as compared to wealthy, White communities due to decades of redlining and community disinvestment.”

Section 7

These communities have consistently been forced to navigate climate change dangers, environmental degradation, adverse health risks due to worsening air pollution, and other community risks. In order to ensure that past wrongs are not replicated in current plans, EJ communities must be included and recognized as leaders in the strategic planning process. The DEP must underscore the importance of community engagement in every action, plan, and regulatory development. We are supportive of the opportunities for stakeholder engagement listed within the Plan, and we encourage the DEP to ensure that these engagements are inclusive of all stakeholders including community-based and local non-profit organizations. Prioritizing direct engagement with communities not only builds trust between governmental bodies and the local communities, but often leads to increased support for projects by recognizing the value and knowledge of communities in leading the planning and development processes. This support serves to expedite the planning process, ensure that communities are enthusiastic about plans to build climate resilience across New Jersey, and create a cohesive, cross-sector coalition dedicated to helping the State reach its climate goals. All areas of the Plan would benefit from increasing community engagement, but areas that address the layout and specific conditions of a community can see increased benefit from direct community conversation. Such areas include the DEP’s work on sustainable waste management (Section 9.2.1), resilience funding (Section 5.2.2.1 and Section 5.2.2.2), and the Community Solar Energy Program (Section 4.2.5.1). Furthermore, the DEP should increase transparency and specificity regarding tools, tactics, and strategies to support overburdened communities; there must be prioritized, direct, and protective actions to reduce risk and strengthen the overall health and wellbeing of the community.


Conclusion
When the communities across the state that are most consistently facing climate risk are protected, we will see a trickle-up effect where every individual is protected. NJEJA reaffirms every community’s inherent right to a healthy, safe community. These comments have been submitted to address our concerns regarding air pollution, hydrogen technologies, truly clean energy, sustainable waste management, and robust stakeholder engagement. We offer our support in building a cleaner, more resilient New Jersey and are supportive of ongoing conversation with the NJDEP concerning our thoughts in these comments.

Prepared by:
Brooke Helmick, M.A.
Law and Policy Manager, New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance

NJEJA-Strategic-Climate-Action-Plan-CommentsDownload

Press Release: EPA’s Proposed New Carbon Pollution Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants Will Fail to Protect EJ Communities

Press Release: EPA’s Proposed New Carbon Pollution Standards for Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants Will Fail to Protect EJ Communities

WASHINGTON (August 8, 2023) –The Tishman Environment and Design Center at The New School, the Center for the Urban Environment of the John S. Watson Institute for Urban Policy and Research at Kean University, the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance (NJEJA), and the Center for Earth, Energy and Democracy, along with 18 environmental justice and 9 allied organizations are submitting public comments today on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s proposed carbon pollution standards for coal and new natural gas fired power plants. 

Environmental justice (EJ) communities are on the frontlines of the adverse impacts of climate change and are disproportionately exposed to a wide range of polluting industries, including fossil fuel infrastructure like coal plants, natural gas plants, and pipelines. The use of carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) mechanisms and hydrogen co-firing in the power sector will further harm EJ communities that are already overburdened. The only real solution to climate change is the rapid and complete transition of the power sector away from all types of fossil fuels to energy efficiency and  renewable energy in the form of wind and solar power. We call attention to critical EJ concerns related to the proposed rule that would hinder a reliable, just, and truly clean power section transition. 

The EPA will finalize the standards in the coming months.

The following is a comment from Dr. Ana Baptista, The Tishman Environment and Design Center at The New School

“Addressing climate change and decades of toxic exposure experienced by environmental justice communities means moving away from a dependence on fossil fuels and investing instead in renewable energy sources and infrastructure in communities. Supporting carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and hydrogen co-firing in the power sector through massive amounts of public funding and policies like EPA’s proposed rule will perpetuate the fossil fuel industry, to the continued detriment of EJ communities. These same overburdened communities have time and again been sacrifice zones to unjust policies and infrastructure that place them on the frontlines of fossil fuel polluting structures. Environmental justice should be a priority for the EPA’s power sector rule rather than an afterthought . We urge the EPA to take seriously the environmental justice implications of this rule and consider cumulative impacts in decision-making processes related to the rule.”

 

The following is a comment from Dr. Nicky Sheats, John S. Watson Institute for Urban Policy and Research at Kean University

“Too many low-income communities and Communities of Color around the country are exposed to the harms of all types of polluting infrastructure and have disproportionately borne these cumulative burdens for too long. It’s time to right these wrongs. EPA’s proposed rule all but recognizes that CCS and hydrogen co-firing will add to toxic air pollution in communities living near power plants, and this is unacceptable when such communities already live with an unfair share of cumulative impacts from pollution. The EPA’s proposed carbon pollution standards must adopt a more affirmative approach toward environmental justice to address cumulative impacts. ” 

The following is a comment from Melissa Miles, New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance

“A rapid, clean energy transition is indispensable to ensure that current and future generations have healthy and safe communities to live, work, play, learn, and worship in. We need policies that mandate emissions reductions in EJ communities and ensure the closure of fossil fuel powered plants first and foremost in EJ communities. The EPA’s proposed carbon pollution standards are an opportunity for the EPA to create equitable policies that truly center communities on the frontlines and bring us to a clean energy transition and just future for all.” 

 

The following is a comment from Bill Gallegos, Center for Earth Energy & Democracy

“We know that overwhelmingly the burden of pollution from fossil fuel powered power plants is borne by low income communities, communities of color and indigenous communities. We also know that the impacts of rising intensive heat cycles, extreme temperatures and the resulting power outages are experienced most acutely by environmental justice communities.  We are at a critical juncture in our nation’s history. We must meet the challenge of climate change like never before – in ways that center environmental justice communities. We urge the EPA to uphold its commitment to environmental justice and create policies that reduce carbon pollution from the power sector in ways that create benefits for environmental justice communities.”

 

View Full Comments

Press Release: New Jersey Releases Rules for Landmark Environmental Justice Law

For Immediate Release: Monday, June 6, 2022


For more information regarding this statement, please contact: 

JV Valladolid, jvalladolid@ironboundcc.org   cell:  862-588-4715

 

Statement from Ironbound Community Corporation, 

New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, Clean Water Action,

 and South Ward Environmental Alliance


New Jersey Releases Landmark Environmental Justice Rules


     Environmental Justice (EJ) communities throughout New Jersey are on the brink of change as the landmark Environmental Justice Bill S232 comes closer to being realized.  Today’s release of long awaited rules that accompany this landmark EJ Law is a critically  important milestone. 


The law and now proposed rules tackle the decades-long pattern of dumping polluting facilities in communities Of Color and low-income communities. Under these new rules, polluting facilities will be required to undergo a robust environmental justice review before being permitted in overburdened, i.e., environmental justice communities. These precedent-setting rules will arm New Jersey regulators with the right to deny further harmful pollution in these neighborhoods. Environmental justice communities will finally have a chance to have what many people take for granted – clean air and a safer environment in which to thrive. 


The just released rules would not have been possible without the tireless efforts of New Jersey environmental justice advocates and organizations, as well as State Senator Singleton, State Senator Ruiz, Assemblyman McKeon, Governor Murphy, NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJEP) Commissioner LaTourette and staff that led to the passage of the law (S232) in the first place.


This rule reflects two years of continued hard work, expertise and community knowledge of EJ advocates who worked alongside the NJDEP staff to develop a strong set of rules that reflect the ambition, significance and promise of the landmark EJ law. We are eager to see these rules adopted as written as soon as possible and finally put to use in the communities that have been sacrificed for far too long. 


New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, Ironbound Community Corp. Environmental Justice, South Ward Environmental Alliance, and Clean Water Action will be making sure that communities understand and are engaged with the public hearings regarding the proposed regulations. Too often when a historic bill such as S232 is passed, people stop paying attention after the bill is signed. It is imperative that our communities stay engaged. Until the final rule adoption occurs later this year, we  urge the NJDEP to act in the spirit of the law and as we continue to fight our current battles for environmental justice in New Jersey, including: a fourth fracked gas power plant proposed by Passaic Valley Sewerage Commission, threat of a sludge facility proposed, and waste facility expansions in Camden. 


The draft rules require the NJDEP to evaluate the environmental and public health impacts of various polluting facilities on overburdened communities when reviewing specific types of permit applications. It lays out a process for assessing the burden that new facilities may pose to communities that are already overburdened and directs the state to deny those permits that contribute to the existing stressors in those census blocks. It requires additional reviews of existing facilities in overburdened communities that undergo a renewal or expansion process and can apply more stringent conditions to those existing facilities. It also offers a robust set of public participation processes for local input. 



“This is an important first step to ensuring that communities Of Color and communities with low-income in New Jersey have a chance to attain the clean environment  that other communities in the state enjoy.”

– Nicky Sheats, Ph.D., Esq, NJEJA Trustee


“The South Ward community of Newark just wants to breathe clean air and enjoy their quality of life free from additional toxic facilities impacting the health of the neighborhood.”

– Kim Gaddy, Environmental Justice Director, Clean Water Action


“We are excited about reaching this pivotal moment in the trajectory of the EJ law. Environmental Justice communities will be paying specific attention to what warrants a compelling public interest, what does it mean to avoid harming the community and provisions around community engagement.  We need to ensure that no industry green washes their way through EJ law.”

– Maria Lopez-Nunez, Ironbound Community Corp.


“These rules represent the hard work and diligence of EJ activists that have worked tirelessly alongside NJDEP to produce the strongest environmental justice law in the nation. Finally, there is a light at the end of this journey towards environmental justice for all.” 

– Ana Baptista, Ph.D., The New School University, NJEJA & ICC Trustee


“One of the most critical details of the Environmental Justice Law is the robust public process required of permitting facilities. For far too long some of the worst actors have lied or bought their way into the good graces of a few key people and claimed that their ‘back room’ deals were community engagement. Even now some communities expect polluting industries to operate in obscurity and without their input. That all ends with the implementation of the EJ Law.”

– Melissa Miles, Executive Director, New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance (NJEJA)


-end –


Download Press Release

Press Release: Coalition for Healthy Ports call for action on scrapyard fire at Eastern Metal Recycling Terminal at Port Newark

Coalition for Healthy Ports

Ironbound Community Corporation      

New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance    

Clean Water Action    

South Ward Environmental Alliance

Immediate Release: Tuesday January 25, 2022

Contact:  Kim Gaddy, Clean Water Action and South Ward resident  973-914-2449

                 Maria Lopez-Nunez, Ironbound Community Corporation    201-978-6660    

                 Melissa Miles, New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance  347-553-3338

TODAY, Newark – The Coalition for Healthy Ports (CHP)* issued a call for action regarding the scrap yard fire at Eastern Metal Recycling Terminal at Port Newark, the second large fire at this site since September 2021.

 Current policies, regulations and emergency response procedures leave communities and workers vulnerable to unknown chemical exposures and other harms of this facility and others like it during routine operations, only made worse during crisis management.

Community notification procedures and air monitoring systems are inadequate, leaving residents clueless as to what to do to protect themselves and their families. The only information residents are getting is from news reports. Agencies will have limited information to assess the situation, pollution impacts, and/or consider remedies to put in place in the future. 

It is also alarmingly unclear who has jurisdiction for permits, operations, emergency response and enforcement at Port Newark – Port Authority of NY&NJ (PANYNJ), NJ Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Office of Emergency Management (OEM), Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) for port, on-site and emergency responders just to name a few. The PANYNJ fire team deemed themselves ill equipped so the City of Newark Fire Department was called in to respond. Additionally, NJDEP’s oversight is currently limited, but we anticipate that the long awaited environment justice rules will include scrap yards – facilities that have long eluded regulatory controls and tools for community accountability.

The Coalition for Healthy Ports calls on the Governor and other responsible agencies to: 

  • take immediate action to protect residents and workers, properly and regularly inform them of developments related to the fire 
  • install emergency and permanent air/water monitors to assess pollution and health impacts
  • evaluate reasons for current fire and take immediate steps to prevent future fires
  • exercise enforcement powers where they may currently exist 
  • formally propose and adopt cumulative impact regulations as soon as possible, including scrap yards and other previously un/underregulated facilities of concern
  • resolve chronic jurisdictional issues and enforcement powers at the port 
  • hold a community meeting to both inform and receive public input on their concerns and demands for action

Below are quotes from impacted community leaders and Coalition for Healthy Ports members:

“ We often have to worry not just about fires but what is burning in those fires. No one should go to bed with nausea or headaches from the smells outside but our residents know the feeling all too well. This fire joins a long list of situations that remind us how close we are to potential catastrophe in our communities because of the concentration of toxic reactive chemicals. We need more than lip service, we need real protection. It is exhausting to keep asking for protection from our state but there are decades of historic injustice that must be addressed.” – Maria Lopez-Nuñez, Deputy Director, Organizing and Advocacy, Ironbound Community Corporation

“Longshoreman and Newark residents deserve to be protected from fires at Port Newark.  Our health must be a priority of Gov. Murphy and the PANYNJ. As a South Ward resident living in a Port community, we demand mandatory air monitoring and environmental enforcement at the Port today.” – Kim Gaddy, Executive Director, South Ward Environmental Alliance and New Jersey Environmental Justice Director, Clean Water Action

“Leadership at the Port of Newark has consistently denied their responsibility for air pollution beyond their fence line. This is a clear incidence of serious impacts as far away as New York City. We need fence line air monitoring and community accountability from the Port and its tenants.” – Melissa Miles, Executive Director,  New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance

“This fire is a reminder of the threats that port related waste facilities pose to community and worker health. In times of emergency, we must have clear lines of communication and a coordinated response to protect people. We call on state and local agencies together with the PANYNJ to ensure effective monitoring and enforcement to prevent future fires.” – Ana Baptista, P.h.D. Co-Director, Tishman Environment & Design Center, The New School University and Coalition for Healthy Ports Member

“The frequency of chemical fires occurring in New Jersey is on the rise – sounding the alarm for immediate action. The state must step up enforcement of existing laws and adopt long awaited cumulative impact protections including strict oversight of polluting facilities and scrap yards in already grossly overburdened communities and port region. Anything less than this is an environmental and public health injustice to residents and workers.” – Amy  Goldsmith, NJ State Director, Clean Water Action and Steering Committee Member, Coalition for Healthy Ports

“The New Jersey Governor’s Office, New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and all relevant governmental agencies need to work together to address this alarming fire and to prevent this type of incident from happening again in the future.” – Nicky Sheats, Esq., Ph.D., Director, Center for the Urban Environment, John S. Watson Institute for Urban Policy and Research at Kean University, and New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance Member

###

* Coalition for Healthy Ports (CHP) is a bi-state alliance founded in 2007 by environmental and environmental justice activists, truck drivers, faith leaders, labor unions, and community advocates fighting for zero emissions, clean air, good jobs, healthy communities, environmental and economic justice at the Ports of New York and New Jersey and throughout the logistics industry. Particular emphasis is given to port-adjacent communities that are disproportionately overburdened by port pollution and operations. www.coalitionforhealthyports.org

Download Press Release

Press Release: Governor Murphy Signs Historic Environmental Justice Legislation

Nation’s Strongest Measure to Protect Overburdened Communities from Pollutants

Fulfilling a commitment to enact sweeping protections for environmental justice communities, Governor Phil Murphy today, alongside U.S. Senator Cory Booker, Mayor Ras Baraka, Senator Troy Singleton, Assemblyman John McKeon, and environmental advocates, signed legislation (S232), which requires the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection to evaluate the environmental and public health impacts of certain facilities on overburdened communities when reviewing certain permit applications. New Jersey is the first state in the nation to require mandatory permit denials if an environmental justice analysis determines a new facility will have a disproportionately negative impact on overburdened communities.

The bill defines an overburdened community as any community where 35 percent of the households qualify as low-income according to the U.S. Census, 40 percent of households are minority, or 40 percent of households have limited English proficiency. There are approximately 310 municipalities with populations totaling approximately 4,489,000 that have overburdened communities within their municipalities…

Read the Press Release

NJEJA Statewide Cumulative Impacts Policy

Cumulative Impacts and the Permitting Process

Introduction
This memorandum presents ideas regarding cumulative impacts and the permitting process that have been debated and discussed for several years by members of the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, Environmental Justice Advisory Council to the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), Ironbound Community Corporation, Environmental Research Foundation, New Jersey Environmental Federation and Center for the Urban Environment. Although these ideas represent a considerable amount of thought they are not intended to be a final solution but a contribution to a discussion that will involve many participants. 

The concept of cumulative impacts (CI) should be incorporated into the permitting process in such a way that at least two goals are achieved: 1) Applications for new pollution permits can be denied in environmental justice (EJ) communities, and communities already overburdened with pollution, if granting the permit would increase the amount of pollution in the community; 2) The amount of pollution in a community
would be decreased by a facility’s operations or actions when the facility applied for a permit renewal. To achieve these goals NJDEP will have to identify EJ and overburdened communities and then apply the concept of CI in several specific ways…

Read More

EJ Bill

Chapter 92

AN ACT concerning the disproportionate environmental and public health impacts of pollution on overburdened communities, and supplementing Title 13 of the Revised Statutes.

BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State of New Jersey:

C.13:1D-157 Findings, declarations relative to impact of pollution on overburdened communities.

1. The Legislature finds and declares that all New Jersey residents, regardless of income, race, ethnicity, color, or national origin, have a right to live, work, and recreate in a clean and healthy environment; that, historically, New Jersey’s low-income communities and communities of color have been subject to a disproportionately high number of environmental and public health stressors, including pollution from numerous industrial, commercial, and governmental facilities located in those communities; that, as a result, residents in the State’s overburdened communities have suffered from increased adverse health effects including, but not limited to, asthma, cancer, elevated blood lead levels, cardiovascular disease, and developmental disorders; that children are especially vulnerable to the adverse health effects caused by exposure to pollution, and that such health effects may severely limit a child’s potential for future success; that the adverse effects caused by pollution impede the growth, stability, and long-term well-being of individuals and families living in overburdened communities; that the legacy of siting sources of pollution in overburdened communities continues to pose a threat to the health, well-being, and economic success of the State’s most vulnerable residents; and that it is past time for the State to correct this historical injustice…

Read the Bill

Study Reveals Importance of Driving Down Dirty Diesel Emissions in EJ Communities in Newark Area

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Monday, November 16, 2020 

CONTACTS: 

Dr. Nicky Sheats, New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, 609-558-4987

Dr. Ana Baptista, Ironbound Community Corporation, 973-342-6056 

Melissa Miles, New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, 347-553-3338 

 

STUDY REVEALS IMPORTANCE OF DRIVING DOWN DIRTY DIESEL EMISSIONS IN EJ COMMUNITIES IN NEWARK AREA 

Transportation is one of the largest contributors to local air pollution and the state’s greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (1). Reducing emissions from this sector will be critical to improve air quality, especially within environmental justice (EJ) communities, i.e. communities Of Color and low-income communities, which frequently experience disproportionately high pollution burdens including elevated levels of air pollutants known to detrimentally impact human health. To better understand the equity implications of air pollution emissions the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance (NJEJA) commissioned a study, “Newark Community Impacts of Mobile Source Emissions”, of air pollution emissions from the transportation sector in the Newark area (2). The study examined air pollution emissions such as fine particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides (NOx) black carbon (BC) and carbon dioxide (CO2). The study looked at the related emissions exposure from various mobile sources and non road sources including: cars, medium and heavy duty diesel trucks, buses, locomotives, ships, and port related sources such as cargo handling equipment as well as idling from trucks and buses. The study examined emissions impacts on particularly sensitive populations in close proximity to transportation infrastructure such as schools, senior centers, daycares and dialysis centers. Finally, the study explored the potential impacts that electrification would have in the study area. The report confirms some of the concerns that EJ communities express about disproportionate exposure to harmful transportation sector emissions. The findings show that: 

  1. Emissions of the most health harming air pollutants such as PM2.5, BC, and NOx from non-roadway sources, particularly locomotives and port operations, have the highest air quality impact in the total study area, followed by medium- and heavy-duty vehicles. These sources far outweigh the emissions exposure from passenger vehicles and together contribute around 95 percent of the total emissions exposure modeled within the study area. 
  2. While the contribution of different sources varies within the study area, the highest burden can be found in locations close to high density truck and bus routes and locations close to port facilities and rail yards. 
  3. The analysis shows that while electrification of trucks and buses could be one path to reduce emissions of health harming air pollutants, electrification of these vehicles must be accompanied by a focus on emissions reductions from electric generating units co-located within the same community in order to ensure a reduction in overall local air pollution burden. Displacement of air pollution emissions to power plants due to electrification can be a significant factor in impact of local emissions under different electrification scenarios. 

Based on the findings of this study, when evaluating roadway transportation emissions sources, medium-and heavy-duty vehicles have an outsized impact on the harmful local pollutants that impact human health and contribute significantly to transportation sector GHG emissions. This analysis further found that reducing emissions from the medium- and heavy-duty vehicle sector would have meaningful and immediate impacts on air-quality within disproportionately burdened communities. The implications of the report findings are relevant for several ongoing discussions concerning air pollution, climate mitigation and EJ. In New Jersey and regionally (i.e. Transportation and Climate Initiative) much of the focus of transportation sector climate mitigation efforts have been on car electrification. This study highlights the importance of prioritizing dirtier segments of this sector such as the diesel trucks and buses as well as port related emissions that have the greatest detrimental health impact on EJ communities. 

The investigation’s findings also indicate that developing climate mitigation policy that targets air pollution reduction and electrification can be complicated from an EJ perspective, at least partly due to the displacement of emissions to the power sector. Since so many of New Jersey’s existing power plants are located in EJ communities, already overburdened with multiple sources of pollution – shifting emissions from the tailpipe to the power sector could have localized impacts. Development of climate mitigation policies for this sector that takes into account EJ and equity considerations must be performed with careful consideration of the potential impacts that include but are not limited to geographic location, displaced emissions and community vulnerabilities. 

The study also highlights what NJEJA believes to be some of the key shortcomings of the proposed regional TCI approach with respect to EJ. TCI prioritizes light duty passenger vehicles in both its investment and electrification scenarios. This study shows how critical the dirtier segments of the transportation sector are to reducing the health harming impacts of the transportation sector. Without targeted, ambitious and significant attention to the diesel sector, EJ communities that suffer the greatest impact from transportation related pollution will not benefit sufficiently from TCI related policies. Furthermore, the strong emphasis on the electrification of the light duty vehicles may in fact pose a potential harm to those communities that host power plants where emissions of certain co-pollutants may increase. EJ and racial justice demand that we prioritize climate mitigation policies that affirmatively address those most severely affected by pollution. 

When we know better, we must endeavor to do better. This study clearly points the way forward to a more equitable and just approach to transportation sector mitigation policies focused on the communities that are most impacted. This would necessitate moving away from a program like TCI, which does not ensure emissions reductions in EJ communities as its core policy and moving towards targeted emissions reductions policies like Clean Truck Rules. 

“The only two children in my family who have asthma both lived along a truck route in the port-adjacent Ironbound neighborhood in Newark”, said Melissa Miles, Executive Director of the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance, a steering committee member of the Coalition for Healthy Ports. “Every year we counted trucks on our corner as part of a community initiative, only to find out through this report that we were also being exposed to heavy emissions from off-road sources like freight trains. New Jersey needs to address the most serious contributors to transportation emissions like trucks and trains, not just passenger vehicles which are the low hanging fruit.”

Quotations about the report and its implications from members of the Coalition for Healthy Ports 

“This report illustrates what EJ communities have long known, that living with dirty diesel in your backyard is dangerous to your health. Any climate mitigation policy focused on the transportation sector must prioritize the elimination of this local pollution as a core strategy.” Ana Baptista, PhD, NJEJA

 

(1) https://www.nj.gov/dep/aqes/oce-ghgei.html 

(2) The study was conducted by MJ Bradley and Associates with funding from the Natural Resources Defense Council. The report was also released and reviewed in consultation with members of the Coalition for Healthy Ports members, specifically, Ironbound Community Corporation, GreenFaith, NJ Clean Water Action and New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance.

Read Full Report