Side Quest: Diane Wilson

Diane Wilson came to speak about her fight against chemical plants in her hometown. Diane was a shrimper off the Texas Coast, her hometown had a population of only about 15000. A company moved in to town and and built a chemical plant. A local newspaper had a article that came out stating what chemicals were coming from the plant. Diane was bothered about this, because it was actually destroying her business. She contacted City Hall to ask about the plant. The people in City Hall said she was stupid and accused her of being evangelist. Diane started a petition wanting to remove the plant from her hometown. Diane even organized protests, but City Hall never responded or took any action against the plant. Her family, city, state, and everybody was against her. They said a woman didn't have a right to speak out. Diane went on a hunger strike since nobody would listen to her. She took heat for her hunger strike as well. Diane has been arrested numerous of times behind her fight. Diane has kept speaking out against her fight against the chemical plant. The town had once had 100 boats now they are down to 3. From our readings we have learned that most of these plants invade small, poor, and minority towns. These towns don't have enough people to stand up and fight for their city to be saved from these kind of pollutions. Many jobs, people, and areas are effected by these plants. According to Higgins' Race,Pollution, and Mastery Nature. Also being female doesnt help the cause. We live in a society were women are looked at as less than of a male. That a woman is supposed to be seen and not heard. Diane went against all those stereotypes had a voice that needed to be heard in order to keep people safe. I feel that if Diane was a man then she would have gotten attention from City Hall or even had more followers on her path to shut down the chemical plants. Diane has not given up her fight and she will continue to speak out on all things that are in just "Civil disobedience causes change to happen"-Diane Wilson

Electronic Waste Dumps

Millions of electronics are thrown away each year. They go to a waste dump in China. The goods that are thrown away causes pollution, because they contain toxic chemicals such as mercury and lead. Many western countries export the electronic goods to other countries such as China to save money and avoid pollution restriction in their own country. Its dangerous to work in the electronic waste dumps, because the workers are dismantling the no longer needed goods without protection for their hands and face. Making them more available to contract diseases. Many workers are contracting skin disease and lead poisoning. When burning the metal the smoke flows over the villages and causing women, children, and elderly people to come in close contact with the toxins and they too have became sick. Their metal is also found in the river, where the village people to go to get water. The river contains metal poison. To get fresh water the the people Quanzo have to travel 53 kilometers. Workers who make computer chips are easily assessable to brain cancer, blood cancer, kidney cancer, and miscarriages. Why do people work there, you might ask? Well simply, because they need the money. The pay is not very high either; for a full time position the pay is equivalent to two U.S. dollars. Most of the workers are ex farmers. Most of these dumps are in rural areas and workers are of the minority. According to one study done by the EPA reported that “although socioeconomic status appeared to play an important role in the location of commercial hazardous waste facilities, race still proved to be more significant” (UCC 1987, p. xiii)(Figueroa pg 3). The theme behind this is that companies produce electronics to last consumers about a year and half and then something bigger, smaller, or better comes out and consumers always want the new thing. We call these new items "Designed for the Dump". Which means we make things that are to be thrown away quickly. Today's electronics are hard to upgrade, easy to break, and impractical to repair. We dispose of twenty-five million e-waste a year. Companies are to blame for this, they make a product using high level toxins that will only last you for a certain time and the consumers throw they products away when the need for them is gone. Causing people in other countries to suffer from toxic poisoning. Companies gain the most for shipping electronics overseas due to externalizing cost.Instead of companies paying for better facilities the workers pay with their health.Instead of paying designers to use fewer toxins villagers pay by losing their clean drinking water. The companies make their profit while everyone else pays.If we demand "product take back" then big companies would know exactly how it feels to have toxic materials laying around. They would probably call their manufacturers and say "Quit designing for the dump." Product take back is when the companies take back their product; either making longer lasting products or when something is broke they can send the piece that needs fixing instead of taking the whole product back. Many take back laws are emerging around the country. We as consumers can make these "take back laws" strengthen and stronger by protesting against the companies to stop sending the e-waste to countries that are harmful and or make the products using fewer chemicals. The distributive dimension is evident in least-resistance strategies, whereby government officials determine the location of toxic facilities, compensation, and remediation procedures according to the racial, ethnic, religious, and socioeconomic character of communities. (Figoeroa 3)

Local Community Protests Toxic Coal Power Plant

The piece about which I am writing was written by eNews Park Forest, which reports on news that concerns the environment, and is run by journalists with a passion for nature. Most of the site's readers share this passion, and the piece is trying to communicate that there are grassroots organization in Chicago that share that passion.

Local Chicagoans stood on the grounds of the toxic coal-burning Crawford power plant yesterday to protest the plant and try to get it shut down. The Crawford plant, along with the Fisk plant, account for around 45,000 tons of pollutants floating in the air around Chicago. These citizens have taken to protesting as a means of effecting change in their local communities, and trying to communicate to the people involved in the upcoming Clean Power Ordinance hearing, which could force the plant to shut down and change its methods.

If they are successful, the protestor’s will not lead to spreading the environmental burdens the plant brings, but actually lessening the burden, which everyone benefits from, though the protestors are likely less affected than most by these burdens. “The most defensible accounts of fairness and climate change suggest that the rich countries should bear the brunt, and perhaps even the entirety, of the costs. What, then, has the world done?” (Gardiner Ethics 590) The Crawford plant’s protestors seem to have an answer to the question of whose responsibility it is to bear the costs (spending the time and money) of fixing environmentally unfriendly practices: themselves.

 This kind of action shows that some of the people of Chicago’s south side truly care about the quality of their local environment and want to see things change for the better. I think this kind of protesting is a great way to raise awareness and show people that there are groups that want the plant shut down or reformed, but one must follow up these actions by appearing at the hearing and making your voice heard by the people who actually write the laws that make the changes you want.