2. What two (or more) quotes capture the message of the article?
"Los Angeles, Miami and Houston are among the many cities investing millions in huge dredging projects to make their channels deep enough for the “post-Panamax” ships that will soon sail into their harbors. But with more (and much larger) vessels come greater diesel emissions, and Ship Channel residents worry their hard-hit communities will only suffer more with increased air pollution. Diesel exhaust has been linked to respiratory and heart disease, and is a known carcinogen."
"First, the coalition says the port authority needs to be a leader in reducing emissions, partly by giving preference during bidding to contractors with clean practices. It also recommends setting up emissions reduction goals and installing fence-line monitors to help enforce federal air-quality standards. Houston should follow the Los Angeles-Long Beach Ports’ example, the coalition suggests, by phasing out old diesel trucks and introducing electricity to ports so ships can conserve diesel fuel while docked."
3. What is the main point of the article, and how is it supported?
The main point of the article is to establish the health risks unfairly put on communities surrounding the port. The Healthy Port Communities Coalition determined that while 3.69% of all Texan adults have been diagnosed with cancer, that rate increases to 5.61% in the Ship Channel.
With this health risk in mind, the Port Authority should take actions (like the ones mentioned above) to reduce emissions. Furthermore, more emphasis needs to be given to the issue in policy making.
A success story in the Los Angeles ports is used as support.
In 2007, these two ports together adopted an aggressive plan to reduce pollution called the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan.
As result of the plan vessel emissions were reduced, old diesel trucks were replaced with newer and cleaner trucks, and initiative investments for clean technologies were made, such as the development of electric docs for ships to plug into.
The ports exceeded their emission reduction goals for some pollutants.
"By 2012, the two ports had cut their diesel particulate matter emissions by 77 percent (eliminating 645 tons) from 2005 levels, sulfur oxides by 88 percent (4,675 tons), and nitrogen oxides by 56 percent (9,154 tons). When seven terminal operators violated San Pedro Bay’s new diesel emissions standards, they each paid $1 million in cleanup costs as part of a settlement reached in 2011."
4. What actors (individuals or organizations) are referred to? (Provide names and short descriptions.)
Healthy Port Communities Coalition- an open group that has included the organizations Air Alliance Houston, Pleasantville Environmental Coalition, Public Citizen, Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services, and Texas Organizing Project. They aim to organize port communities to engage in decision making on port expansion, create documents enforcing the need for pollution reduction, and advocate for policy change (Source- Air Alliance Houston website). The article references the Healthy Port Communities Coalition's survey that concluded that residents of 5 communities surrounding the Ship Channel (Houston’s East End, Fifth Ward, Denver Harbor, Manchester and Pasadena neighborhoods) have higher rates of cancer and respiratory illness than the rest of Texas.
World Health Organization (WHO)- The author notes that one month ago (October 2013) at the time of the article, the WHO officially added air pollution to the list of known carcinogens. Source
Elena Craft- a scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, who has been referenced in other articles previously annotated pertaining to Houston air pollution, such as Roadway Pollution Putting 80,000 Area Schoolkids at Risk and State to Measure Air Pollution Along Freeways. She speaks regarding the results of the coalition's survey, saying that although it is difficult to pinpoint the exact sources contributing to this health risk, especially with self reported data, the statistics bring to light the importance of the issue.
5. What kind of causation or responsibility is argued or implied in the article?
Elena Craft says she hopes the survey results empower the area residents to demand change. She notes that while there are many sources of pollution in the port area, she suggests that residents pressure to the Port Authority to begin to address emissions.This puts responsibility on the residents, but no suggestions or guidance are offered on how they should individually begin to "pressure" the Port Authority.
While this article primarily focuses on the ports, the author chooses to recognize other causes as well, such as refineries and chemical plants. This is not to reduce the responsibilities of the port, but to imply all industries are causes of air pollution and all share responsibility.
The author says that it is difficult to imagine Texas or the Port of Houston adopting any plans as aggressive as the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan, and if they did enforcing it by fining companies for environmental violations, but that policy makers should consider the positive results it brought.
6. How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
Central focus on the article is the health disparities in port communities, and the author mentions that these communities are predominantly Hispanic and Black.
Despite the increase in health risk in the areas, more than half of the coalition survey respondents did not have health insurance.
7. What three points, details or references from the article did you follow up on to advance your understanding of the issued and actors described in the article?
Elena Craft has been a reoccuring figure in my research, so I followed up with her career. Her areas of expertise are climate change, air quality, ports, and transportation. I found that she acts as an important voice for Texas within the federal government, testifying before the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space and Technology on the importance of protective health measures. I plan on annotating her testimony for this week's research.
I followed up with the World Health Organization's classification of air pollution as a known carcinogen.This October 2013 would be a good event for the health timeline for the research project. Specifically, the organization studied air pollution from traffic and industrial fumes. Pollution from these sources were concluded a definite cause of lung cancer, and also linked to bladder cancer. This health affect has not been addressed in our research, and would be a good research point for those focused on health. Source
The report claimed that the San Pedro Bay Ports Clean Air Action Plan was a result of community pressure, but the source given only said that it was voluntarily adopted through a vote by the boards of the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. I found a source, a book titled "The Competitiveness of Global Port Cities," that went into more detail of the community intervention. Social pressure had increased due to a public concern after area study correlated the risk of cancer and respiratory diseases with proximity to freight-movement corridors, much like Air Alliance Houston and the Coalition's studies. Cargo volumes had increased through 2004, but public opposition, including a series of lawsuits, made expansion nearly impossible. Public officials aligned with the public on the issue, which would be a difficult feat in Houston. Furthermore, the source notes that their location gave these ports more room to impose fees on industry and generate revenue to implement environmental policies. Full source is not available online, I was able to view this chapter through google books.
2. What two (or more) quotes capture the message of the article?
3. What is the main point of the article, and how is it supported?
4. What actors (individuals or organizations) are referred to? (Provide names and short descriptions.)
5. What kind of causation or responsibility is argued or implied in the article?
6. How (if at all) are health disparities or other equity issues addressed in the article or report?
7. What three points, details or references from the article did you follow up on to advance your understanding of the issued and actors described in the article?