http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/brooklyn/north-brooklyn-south-bronx-residents-pushing-waste-stations-lift-trash-burden-article-1.1056914?localLinksEnabled=false
This picture shows just one of thirteen waste management facilities in the South Bronx. You won't find a picture like this in Manhattan - because it doesn't have any waste facilities. Despite the fact that 40% of the state's waste is generated in Manhattan, poor areas like North Brooklyn and South Bronx are burdened with over 60% of Manhattan's garbage.
One of the most powerful sections of the article said the following: “It is absolutely reprehensible that the most privileged community in New York City refused to accept its fair share [of garbage],” said executive director of UPROSE. “Our people in Williamsburg can’t breathe. Our people in the South Bronx can’t breathe.” This passage shows a direct correlation between economic status and trash burden. While wealthy communities generate the most trash, they do not take responsibility to clean up their mess. Instead, the trash is literally shipped to the less wealthy districts that are subsequently subject to increased pollution and contamination. This situation parallels the events in Hyde Park, where industries unfairly took advantage of the community's poverty, leaving locals unprotected from pollution and its accompanying health ailments.
Residents in Williamsburg, Greenpoint, and South Bronx are fighting to have Manhattan handle its own garbage. Tired of bearing the highest trash burden, these citizens are looking to improve their neighborhoods and prevent the state from "moving backward in the political sense." Do you think the residents in these neighborhoods will be successful in obtaining their demands? What groups should get involved to help them achieve their goals? The EPA? The state or national government? And what are your thoughts on why the trash is shipped out of Manhattan to South Bronx (etc)? Is this unjust?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile this article is most certainly disheartening and the circumstances appalling, I can't say that I am too surprised. In fact, I would expect that the problem of disproportionate trash burden is prevalent in New York City as well as Hyde Park. Manhattan is definitely one of the wealthiest cities in the United States and it desires to maintain its status as such. However, this requires the relocation of unsightly waste to poorer neighborhoods. The residents of Manhattan have both the money and clout to persuade city and government officials to locate waste facilities in areas outside the city in order to preserve its elite atmosphere.
ReplyDeleteOn the other side of the situation are the people who must live among the garbage. Residents of the South Bronx or similar areas should look to high profile organizations like the New York City Environmental Justice Alliance to bring attention to their plight and render change for their communities. While the EPA may also seem like a viable option for help as well, the residents run the risk of being misled or met with the obstacle of "lack of evidence" claims similar to those given to the residents of Hyde Park.
In my opinion, Manhattan should have to bear some of the trash burden which they have helped create. If the residents of the city don't want to house the waste, perhaps they should focus on implementing programs which cut down on the amount of garbage generated within the city. Recycling and reducing the use of disposable products can go a long way in the quest to rectify New York's trash problem. In this way, the city can maintain it's clean atmosphere while also lightening the currently unfair load on the surrounding dump sites in poorer areas of the state.
This situation definitely follows the patterns we've talked about with regards to Hyde Park, where poorer areas bear much of the burden for trash and other waste. However this situation is somewhat different in that it is trash, something all people contribute to, rather than pollution from certain companies, that is being disproportionately distributed. I think this presents the opportunity to engage the Manhattan community, since this is a problem that they contribute to directly. Manhattan residents should know that they bear the burden of the trash they produce, and the law and placement of waste facilities should reflect this. I agree that measures to reduce trash should also be encouraged to present a more positive way to solve the problem.
ReplyDeleteThese types of practices are not only harmful in the obvious ways, as previously discussed, but are also responsible for destroying and sealing their fate as low-income neighborhoods. Like the Hyde Park residents who saw their property value drop to almost nothing, these neighborhoods now have a slim chance at revitalization with the burden of 13 waste management sites in their backyard. In addition to the right of all New York residents to live in a contaminant-free environment, they must also have to right to improve their neighborhoods in regards to urban opportunities and infrastructure. What an uphill battle they must face if their government officials do not even see them worthy of improvement.
ReplyDeleteThis issue certainly does bring up similar ones raised with the Hyde Park situation. We again see a poor community suffering from environmental injustice while a neighboring upper class one bares no responsibility for its environmental impact. It will be difficult for the residents of the affected communities to single-handedly bring about major legal regulation to improve the situation. Perhaps smaller projects would be a more effective approach. In another class, I learned about a similar situation in the Bronx where a local river was so contaminated and surrounded by waste that it was essentially forgotten by the residents. A grassroots program called Greening the Ghetto was implemented to educate the local community and encourage them to personally live a more "green" lifestyle. If locals themselves start changing their own lifestyles and encouraging change, it may impact their abilities to pressure local officials to lobby for change at a larger, state level.
ReplyDelete