MbShea@PWP@English@UMCP

ABSTRACT: Hazardous waste is an inevitable byproduct of our nation, but it’s often assumed that it is managed and safely taken care of. We take for granted that the land we live on and the water we drink is safe for us, but this may not be the case for low-income or minority communities. Originally envisioned as an idyllic community, Love Canal was used as a dumpsite for chemical and municipal waste by the Hooker Chemical Company. The Niagara Falls government knowingly built a low-income housing development on top of it, and hundreds of residents suffered irreversible health effects. Afterward, CERCLA was created to remediate sites contaminated by hazardous waste, Now, the name “Love Canal” brings to mind one of the most significant and easily avoidable environmental tragedies in our nation’s history. Despite the national uproar caused by Love Canal, similar situations still occur in the USA. An ongoing example is the Flint Water Crisis. In 2014, government officials in Flint avoided paying for corrosion inhibitors on water pipes to prevent lead and other substances from seeping into the water, despite being aware that they were necessary. There are similarities between the willful neglect and unconcern for the safety of Flint residents by its officials and the Niagara Falls government’s decision to build a community on a known hazardous waste disposal site. The government has been spurred into action only after an incident such as Love Canal occurs, but there are no widespread measures in place to protect people of lower socio-economic status.


READER'S PROFILE: Someone who believes that current laws are probably good enough to prevent or at least quickly remediate these problems.


READER'S RESPONSE: CERCLA was passed in response to the Love Canal disaster, so the government did take responsibility for remediating the problem. The article does say that the state already knew that dangerous waste had been dumped where they were building the community, though. Not all situations are due hazardous waste, like Flint, so I guess CERCLA, and other waste management laws can only do so much. There were apparently already laws in place to make the water safe in Flint, so there must be some underlying problem that mostly affects minorities and people with lower-incomes. Maybe some statistics on how often environmental health problems occur in different demographic areas would help make the connection stronger.

M, to address this reader, you might point out the two sets of laws on water: Clean Water Act (directed at surface waters, some of which provide potable water) and the Safe Drinking Water Act (on potable sources used for utilities but also for wells).

The other problem about Flint concerns complex treatment chemistry. See Marc Edwards at VA Tech for some of this important work.

Love Canal concerns toxicology. Flint is more complicated about water treatment chemistry choices.
http://flintwaterstudy.org/about-page/about-us/

---
This document could grow too large! Start writing and touch base with me about how to scale down, if need be.