Testimonies from various professionals and members of the communities who have suffered pollution are given below. These perspectives help to better illuminate the lack of care given to these communities and the idea of hopelessness in pollution.
Investors saw dollar signs when they looked at land in downtown Indy around the [White] River; people who lived there saw filth...
An Indianapolis Principal's Perspective
This interviewee requested to remain anonymous. This principal worked for over 40 years in communities more heavily affected by pollution.
The 3 Mile Island crisis (1979) brought the environment to America’s consciousness. There were those concerned about the waste from nuclear reactors (there were even protests in Indiana over the building of a nuclear power plant on the Ohio River. People began worrying about waste runoff into all our waterways from other polluters such as manufacturers. At this time, environmentalists started talking about air pollution. Unfortunately business had the ear of the politicians and they thought it was “nice” that school children would cleanup littered parks, neighborhoods, and the banks of waterways, but when it came to hard decisions like coal-fired power plants (Indians is one of the largest producers of coal) or manufacturers dumping chemical waste into streams and rivers, or farmers (heaven forbid touching the farmers who feed us!) chemical runoff into waterways, the legislature remained silent for several years. Until the bigwigs noticed the value of clean waterways for tourism.
The largest undertaking was White River in Indianapolis. Investors saw dollar signs when they looked at land in downtown Indy around the River; people who lived there saw filth - floating dead fish, trash (even old appliances and cars) in the River, and gross smells. But the pollution started upstream. So, they had to approach the legislature to stop pollution. -That was different and, now, you had two fractions: moneyed developers and the “polluters” such as coal, manufacturers, and farmers. ...hopefully you can see the compromises that begin to be made: coal companies would ”beautify” the land after they stripped it (no mention of the slag pits they left behind) manufacturers would “work on” lowering their pollutants” and farmers would be “educated” in better farming techniques. It was SEVERAL years later that some killer chemicals were banned.
In the meantime school children began studying pollution and cheerily got outside during the unit to pick up litter and if lucky enough to be close to a stream, clean it up and innovative science teachers had experiments to show what was in the water.
The largest undertaking was White River in Indianapolis. Investors saw dollar signs when they looked at land in downtown Indy around the River; people who lived there saw filth - floating dead fish, trash (even old appliances and cars) in the River, and gross smells. But the pollution started upstream. So, they had to approach the legislature to stop pollution. -That was different and, now, you had two fractions: moneyed developers and the “polluters” such as coal, manufacturers, and farmers. ...hopefully you can see the compromises that begin to be made: coal companies would ”beautify” the land after they stripped it (no mention of the slag pits they left behind) manufacturers would “work on” lowering their pollutants” and farmers would be “educated” in better farming techniques. It was SEVERAL years later that some killer chemicals were banned.
In the meantime school children began studying pollution and cheerily got outside during the unit to pick up litter and if lucky enough to be close to a stream, clean it up and innovative science teachers had experiments to show what was in the water.
At that time, I was at Harshman Jr High which sits next to Pogue’s Run, at one time a beautiful meandering stream that runs through the heart of downtown. This was early 80’s and a consortium of businessmen (yes, they were all men) became interested in developing the banks of White River and attending waterways in Indy, including Pogue’s Run and Fall Creek. You can see what their money did for White River: the Zoo, White River State Park. The NCAA Hall, Eiterjorge Museum, and the lawn at White River to name a few.
Fall Creek got a cleaning out and a canal was added, along with hiking trails.
And Pogue’s Run? Not so much. You see it meanders from North to south through poverty stricken neighborhoods And it still floods, dumping squalor, during spring rains. And it still smells. And children still play in it. And once each year on Earth Day, the children in poor public schools go out with trash bags and celebrate being out of the building for a few hours.
Fall Creek got a cleaning out and a canal was added, along with hiking trails.
And Pogue’s Run? Not so much. You see it meanders from North to south through poverty stricken neighborhoods And it still floods, dumping squalor, during spring rains. And it still smells. And children still play in it. And once each year on Earth Day, the children in poor public schools go out with trash bags and celebrate being out of the building for a few hours.
An Environmental Professional's Perspective
This interviewee requested to remain anonymous. This interviewee is a grad student studying environmental policy.
How effective are the current policies surrounding pollution? Are there certain policy agendas being pushed more than others and why?
For things like the Clean Air Act or Clean Water Act, those are obviously federally mandated laws. And NEPA forces governmental agencies to write environmental impact statements prior to any major federal action. But under, I think it’s the Clean Water Act, we have NPDES permits that are state permits that actually allow pollution to take place. So you’re allowed to have a certain say number of parts per million of a particle that go into the water supply. That’s state regulated. Clean Air Act on the other hand has federal standards. So for particulate matter, knox, sulfur dioxide, there are a couple others, those are all federally regulated. So, when we get into the polluting permit situation, regardless if it’s on the state or federal level there’s incentive more on a state level than anything, to allow a company -- because you want to create jobs in your state, right? -- there’s an incentive by let’s say the government in Indiana, to let’s say try to convince the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to give out permits for pollution to a given company. So let’s say that Amazon wanted to come and build a factory in the Midwest. They’re trying to decide between Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. So the government in our state is going to want the business here because it’s going to create jobs and so he’s going to suggest to the folks over at IDEM, “Hey, why don’t you tell this company you can pollute this much, it will save you this much money to be allowed to pollute this much.” So, there’s that incentive from the government, so that’s I think sorta where we are falling down on the job, I guess, in a way. It’s the job of environmental managers to say, “Excuse me Mr. Governor (or Mrs. Governor), are you asking me to break the law?”. And oftentimes that’s where we have whistleblowers come out and say, “IDEM is giving out permits to this company to pollute.” And this tied in with that as far as the racial and SES problems go, let’s say we now have this company that’s going to come build this plant in Indiana. Let’s say the come to Bloomington and they say, “We’re gonna build a factory in Bloomington.” There are enough wealthy people in Bloomington, they’re gonna go to the governor and say, “No, not in my backyard.” That’s the most common phrase. And they just have a lot of sway because those are the people making a lot of financial donations. So what happens then is these plants inevitably end up in low-income and minority areas. So those people are going to be at more risk to pollution than people in more wealthy communities.”
Who has the power to make real change to policies that could benefit these specific communities?
I’ll say ethics in politics would be great. And then we have to have ethics on the part of environmental managers as well, because you have to have people that are going to push back against these policies that allow pollution to take place in these impoverished areas. It’s the job of the environmental manager to prevent environmental justice issues.
Are environmental policies the most effective way to bring change? Should the relevant authorities look into other things such as furthered education or economic stimulus?
I think policy change is a big deal. I mean if you google the environment right now and click on the news, the first thing that comes up is “Plastic Pollution is an Environmental Justice Issue.” Actually, there’s another article I found earlier, it’s out in Colorado. So Colorado is just issuing air pollution permits basically. They’re kinda just all willy-nilly right now and there was a whistleblower complaint by three employees alleging it was short-circuited and required analysis to enable pollution at the expense of the public’s health. So, policy is in place, but it is the environmental manager falling down on the job and not doing things like final impact statements or not following the advice of an environmental statement.
For things like the Clean Air Act or Clean Water Act, those are obviously federally mandated laws. And NEPA forces governmental agencies to write environmental impact statements prior to any major federal action. But under, I think it’s the Clean Water Act, we have NPDES permits that are state permits that actually allow pollution to take place. So you’re allowed to have a certain say number of parts per million of a particle that go into the water supply. That’s state regulated. Clean Air Act on the other hand has federal standards. So for particulate matter, knox, sulfur dioxide, there are a couple others, those are all federally regulated. So, when we get into the polluting permit situation, regardless if it’s on the state or federal level there’s incentive more on a state level than anything, to allow a company -- because you want to create jobs in your state, right? -- there’s an incentive by let’s say the government in Indiana, to let’s say try to convince the Indiana Department of Environmental Management to give out permits for pollution to a given company. So let’s say that Amazon wanted to come and build a factory in the Midwest. They’re trying to decide between Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. So the government in our state is going to want the business here because it’s going to create jobs and so he’s going to suggest to the folks over at IDEM, “Hey, why don’t you tell this company you can pollute this much, it will save you this much money to be allowed to pollute this much.” So, there’s that incentive from the government, so that’s I think sorta where we are falling down on the job, I guess, in a way. It’s the job of environmental managers to say, “Excuse me Mr. Governor (or Mrs. Governor), are you asking me to break the law?”. And oftentimes that’s where we have whistleblowers come out and say, “IDEM is giving out permits to this company to pollute.” And this tied in with that as far as the racial and SES problems go, let’s say we now have this company that’s going to come build this plant in Indiana. Let’s say the come to Bloomington and they say, “We’re gonna build a factory in Bloomington.” There are enough wealthy people in Bloomington, they’re gonna go to the governor and say, “No, not in my backyard.” That’s the most common phrase. And they just have a lot of sway because those are the people making a lot of financial donations. So what happens then is these plants inevitably end up in low-income and minority areas. So those people are going to be at more risk to pollution than people in more wealthy communities.”
Who has the power to make real change to policies that could benefit these specific communities?
I’ll say ethics in politics would be great. And then we have to have ethics on the part of environmental managers as well, because you have to have people that are going to push back against these policies that allow pollution to take place in these impoverished areas. It’s the job of the environmental manager to prevent environmental justice issues.
Are environmental policies the most effective way to bring change? Should the relevant authorities look into other things such as furthered education or economic stimulus?
I think policy change is a big deal. I mean if you google the environment right now and click on the news, the first thing that comes up is “Plastic Pollution is an Environmental Justice Issue.” Actually, there’s another article I found earlier, it’s out in Colorado. So Colorado is just issuing air pollution permits basically. They’re kinda just all willy-nilly right now and there was a whistleblower complaint by three employees alleging it was short-circuited and required analysis to enable pollution at the expense of the public’s health. So, policy is in place, but it is the environmental manager falling down on the job and not doing things like final impact statements or not following the advice of an environmental statement.
In the Flint Water Crisis, do you feel race or class was a determining factor in the aid the community received and how so? If not, what were factors?
I do think that race and SES played a part. They were a mostly-black community, and I think if they were wealthy, if it was Bloomington, something would have been done. Do you know of any contributing factors or instances in history that has led pollution to be where it is today? So with pesticides we had Rachel Carson wrote her book, Silent Spring, which lead to the creation of FIFRA, so prior to her book, we were using this chemical called DDT which was used as an insecticide, and if you ever watch videos of DDT use, they literally, city and state employees, would drive around trucks and hose kids with clouds of DDT. It was just what you used everywhere. So, whenever they’re killing off all these insects and poisoning these insects, they’re killing off all the wild life, and so Silent Spring refers to the silence of wildlife. |
A Student from the Indianapolis Area at IU
This interviewee requested to remain anonymous and requested the interview not be recorded, so the summary is given below.
This interview was with a student at IU who had personally experienced the effects of pollution in Indiana, but requested to remain anonymous. Therefore, we were unable to record this in-person interview, but have summarized it below with quotes.
The interview opened with me asking the interviewee about their background. The interviewee spoke about being raised in the suburbs of Indianapolis and living close to the white river as it flows through the city. I asked them about their experience living next to the river, they said “My parents treated it like it was the plague. One of the key rules when I was a kid was to stay away from the water”. The interviewee spoke about not truly understanding why the water was so bad when they were a kid and did not fully understand the pollution until they were older. The interviewee mentioned one time when they were younger a friend fell into the river and developed skin irritation as a mild symptom. The interviewee spoke how this experience with pollution extended to their academic life where they would often pick up trash after school or participate in community-sponsored clean-ups. When asked if some of their friends at IU from other areas were nearly as focused on these issues, they said “No, some never did any events similar to what I did in school”. The interviewee said they did not know entirely why they experienced so much pollution. They had once asked their parents about the situation and they simply responded that “no one cares that much to help clean things up”. Upon hearing more about our research topic, our interviewee was unsure of whether or not they agreed with our counter narrative and said there had been no discussion of the environmental justice issue within their life even after facing pollution themselves. |
My parents treated [the White River] like it was the Plague. |