This article tells the story of Juliette, Georgia--which is, in many ways, reminiscent of Hyde Park. Many residents bought or built their homes to have
their own shot at the American Dream. However, there have been high instances
of skin diseases, cancer, kidney failure and other unusual problems. Some residents
have been diagnosed specifically with environmentally caused cancer, and others
with uranium poisoning.
There is a coal power plant just down
the road, run by Georgia Power which has slowly been buying up the homes of ill
residents, tearing down the homes, sealing up the wells and planting pine trees
in the now-abandoned lots. The uranium has not been conclusively traced to any
source, though the EPA indicated they thought it was from a layer of granite 70
miles away. This was not the response the Juliette residents were looking for. Georgia
Power has been emphasizing their compliance with state and federal regulations
and denies any connection to the contamination.
Still, the residents are convinced there are toxins leaking into their
water supply from the power plant’s coal ash pond. With the risk of
contamination so high, the home resale values are very low. Residents are
hoping that Georgia Power will buy all the homes in the community, allowing
them to move elsewhere and hopefully lower their risk of sickness.
Juliette is a primarily white community,
so based on other stories we have read I am surprised they have not mobilized
to secure a buyout. There was no indication of any sort of community organizing
committee or lobbying group working for remediation. Instead, each individual
homeowner seemed to be on their own. Perhaps the community ties are not as
strong in Juliette as they are in Hyde Park. This story appeared on CNN on
April 1st, but it doesn’t seem to have hit other mainstream media
sources yet. How do you think this situation will unfold? Will the race of the
residents be a factor?
Unfortunately, I do not see the residents of Juliette securing a buyout. Since the EPA indicated the uranium was coming from a layer of granite, I doubt that the community will be able to obtain conclusive data that proves Georgia Power is responsible for the high contamination. I expect the EPA would be one of the first groups to condemn a power plant's contamination, yet this is not the case here in Juliette.
ReplyDeleteHas anyone tested the contamination in the water itself? The health conditions you mentioned were serious, but is there a link between the time when people started getting sick and when Georgia Power reached full capacity? In Hyde Park there was a stark change between the land and community before and after industrial contamination occurred. Once gardens grew and people enjoyed a strong sense of community, but later the land yielded no harvest and people fell ill to unknown illnesses.
If the community fails to mobilize itself and the EPA points to another source of uranium, there is little hope for the residents in obtaining remediation. Since the power plant is below government thresholds (allegedly), then there won't be any intervention from outside groups unless pressure is applied through the media. If the media gets involved and attracts attention to this case, we may see a different outcome - one that the Juliette residents may favor.
In terms of race, I do not think it will be a major factor here since the community is primarily white. The main factor will probably be economic status. Residents in Juliette are likely very poor since the power plant is able to purchase their homes, and community members have failed to hire outside lawyers or committees to assess their situation.
It is difficult to see a clear route to success for the citizens of Juliette even if they do start organizing around these health issues. One of the problems in a lot of these cases is that the laws just aren't strict enough on the environmental effects of these industries to adequately protect communities like this. Without actual legal recourse, there's only so much that even organized communities can accomplish with inconclusive evidence and contradictory reports on pollutant sources.
ReplyDeleteOne way to work against the situation as it is now for communities like this is to work more on influencing state policy to create stricter regulations and better protections. However, this is a lot more likely to happen in more progressive states, which are not usually the states that have problems like this to begin with from what we've seen. Still, there may be potential for activists to create a stronger network of communities facing environmental justice issues. Organizing one community is good, but taking that to the next level and organizing communities across the state may be the only way to ensure a consistent shift towards holding industries accountable for the pollution.