Recently, a large black cloud hovered over the small town of East Palestine, Ohio — chemicals released from a massive train wreck were burning en masse. At face value, a “mushroom cloud” of chemicals cannot be good. This accident garnered national intervention; it demonstrated how a toxic plume is a sign that a community has been subjected to chemical violence. The derailment has since become one of the United States’ highest-profile chemical disasters in recent years [1]. While the East Palestine, Ohio incident should be addressed in its severity, it should not overshadow the communities who have, time and time again, silently suffered from chemical violence as a result of industrial pollution. Rather, widespread public attention offers a chance for state and national leaders to have high-level conversations about such communities and take action. 

Industrial pollution is not a new phenomenon in the United States. Communities near power plants, factories, or any other industrial area are disproportionately exposed to air-born toxins, and resultantly have high rates of cancer. Yet, these toxins are just that — airborne. Without bringing in the necessary equipment and personnel, the toxins are hard to determine as harmful. And, without a telltale sign of the toxic plume, citizens have little basis to prove on their own that they are victims of chemical violence. 

Air quality has improved over the past few decades in the United States through the persistent struggle of community advocates to garner votes and translate community voices into action [2]. Nevertheless, recent years have seen an uptick in petrochemical factory locations, especially in Louisiana, one of the most affected states. The “Cancer Alley” – a nickname for the stretch of the Mississippi River between New Orleans and Baton Rouge – has a high concentration of such factories and cancer diagnoses. With little intervention from state governments on everyday toxicity, it is evident that industrial companies continue to have leverage over the health and well-being of ordinary citizens. 

When citizens’ biological illnesses go unrecognized, a new battle ensues — what can one do to obtain state assistance for an ailment that is out of their control? Chloe Ahmann, an Assistant Professor at Cornell University, describes the concept and practice of toxic disavowal as a way for such citizens to gain support. Toxic disavowal is the state where citizens who have been subject to chemical or biological harm choose not to be a toxic subject to the state, in order to receive state assistance. How and why would a person willingly become a toxic subject? When a community of people are affected by a chemical disaster, there are often not enough resources in that community to bring it back to health on its own. Think of events such as Hiroshima and Chernobyl, to industrial neighborhoods constantly harmed by pollution — the consequences as deadly as they are invisible. The people affected then have an opportunity to appeal as toxic subjects to their government in hopes of obtaining the benefits and care they need [3]. Ideally, the state recognizes the toxicity and takes action to prevent its harm. However, less visible chemical attacks are more likely to be swept aside, or even ignored. 

According to Ahmann, the citizens of Wagner’s Point, an industrial and former residential area in Baltimore, Maryland, had grimly suffered years of biological symptoms without government intervention. Images of their everyday suffering are poignant and shocking: snow would turn rainbow like “asphalt tinged with gasoline,” and year by year, chemical plants advanced until the communities seemed engulfed in toxicity [3]. The citizens, having no way to prove that the industrial chemicals were the cause of their suffering, decided to engage in toxic disavowal when a series of petrochemical explosions happened nearby. In other words, they chose not to become toxic subjects and instead pushed their government to take down the residential area because frequent factory explosions put them at risk of chemical violence [3].

The idea worked to an extent. Residential living did end up being cleared at Wagner’s Point, and citizens moved out [3]. Yet, if there had not been physical proof — dangerous explosions — of life being untenable at Wagner’s Point, then perhaps even this attempt would have left governments unconvinced. For chemical violence awareness to truly change the lives of those affected, stakeholders must recognize the slow and invisible impact of toxicity on a daily basis. 

The East Palestine train derailment reveals the resources that governments have at their disposal to test for chemical risk. Within four days of the accident, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency discovered multiple hazardous chemicals released into the environment, including vinyl chloride, a colorless gas that can cause dizziness and headaches in the short-term, and liver cancer in the long term [1]. Bringing these same detection tools to smaller communities at risk can give the citizens there the transparency they need, or at least baseline recognition of their dangerous daily living conditions. Just recently, EPA chief  Michael Regan traveled to Louisiana to announce a proposal to sharply reduce toxic emissions in the state and around the country [4]. Taking in the train derailment as not just a tragedy, but an area of growth is a step in the right direction for public health and environmental regulators. 

It goes without saying that healthy air is a basic need of human life. Governments, agencies, and companies alike have an opportunity to reverse their complacency and truly prove that they can make lives of everyday people safer. Above all, we should not wait for the black plume. 



References

  1. Fortin, J. (2023). Ohio train derailment: Separating fact from fiction. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/28/us/ohio-train-derailment-east-palestine.html.

  2. Baurick, T., Younes L., & Meiners, J. (2019). “Welcome to ‘Cancer Alley,’ where toxic air is about to get worse.” ProPublica. October 30, 2019. https://www.propublica.org/article/welcome-to-cancer-alley-where-toxic-air-is-about-to-get-worse.

  3. Ahman, C. “Toxic disavowal.” (2020). Somatosphere. http://somatosphere.net/2020/toxic-disavowal.html/.

  4. McFadden, C., Reimchen, K., & Schapiro, R. “EPA Chief Goes to ‘Cancer Alley’ to Announce Proposal to Cut Toxic Air Emissions.” (2023). NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/news/nightly-films/epa-chief-regan-cancer-alley-louisiana-proposal-toxic-air-emissiions-rcna78381.

Comment