Search

Extreme weather events are becoming more severe due to climate change, increasing the risk of contaminant releases from hazardous sites disproportionately located in low-income communities of color. We evaluated contaminant releases during Hurricanes Rita, Ike, and Harvey in Texas and used regression models to estimate associations between neighborhood racial/ethnic composition and residential proximity to hurricane-related contaminant releases. Two-to-three times as many excess releases were reported during hurricanes compared to business-as-usual periods. Petrochemical manufacturing and refineries were responsible for most air emissions events. Multivariable models revealed sociodemographic disparities in likelihood of releases; compared to neighborhoods near regulated facilities without a release, a one-percent increase in Hispanic residents was associated with a 5 and 10% increase in the likelihood of an air emissions event downwind and within 2 km during Hurricanes Rita and Ike (odds ratio and 95% credible interval= 1.05 [1.00, 1.13], combined model) and Harvey (1.10 [1.00, 1.23]), respectively. Higher percentages of renters (1.07 [1.03, 1.11], combined Rita and Ike model) and rates of poverty (1.06 [1.01, 1.12], Harvey model) were associated with a higher likelihood of a release to land or water, while the percentage of Black residents (0.94 [0.89, 1.00], Harvey model) was associated with a slightly lower likelihood. Population density was consistently associated with a decreased likelihood of a contaminant release to air, land, or water. Our findings highlight social inequalities in the risks posed by natural-technological disasters that disproportionately impact Hispanic, renter, low-income, and rural populations.

Contaminated drinking water from widespread environmental pollutants such as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) poses a rising threat to public health. PFAS monitoring in groundwater is limited and fails to consider pesticides found to contain PFAS as a potential contamination source. Given previous findings on the disproportionate exposure of communities of Color to both pesticides and PFAS, we investigated disparities in PFAS-contaminated pesticide applications in California based on community-level sociodemographic characteristics. We utilized statewide pesticide application data from the California Department of Pesticide Regulation and recently reported concentrations of PFAS chemicals detected in eight pesticide products to calculate the areal density of PFAS applied within 1 km of individual community water systems' (CWSs) supply wells. Spatial regression analyses suggest that statewide, CWSs that serve a greater proportion of Latinx and non-Latinx People of Color residents experience a greater areal density of PFAS applied and greater likelihood of PFAS application near their public supply wells. These results highlight agroecosystems as potentially important sources of PFAS in drinking water and identify areas that may be at risk of PFAS contamination and warrant additional PFAS monitoring and remediation.

This practice brief presents lessons learned through the Water Equity Science Shop (WESS), a community-academic-government partnership seeking to address drinking water challenges in California through community-engaged research and knowledge dissemination. Formed in 2017, WESS is comprised of Community Water Center, a community-based organization (CBO) working towards realizing California’s Human Right to Water; researchers at the University of California (Berkeley and Los Angeles); and scientists at the California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment. We describe the development of an online “Drinking Water Tool,” which presents data and maps on drinking water access, threats, and local decision-making processes. We discuss how features of the WESS collaboration have extended the “4 Rs”—the rigor, relevance, reach, and reflexivity—of our science and resulted in new approaches for assessing drinking water (in)justice that have both influenced and been influenced by complementary efforts by state agencies. Through our reflections, we elucidate how collaborations between communities, CBOs, academic institutions, and state agencies can generate actionable evidence and accessible data to support the incorporation of environmental justice goals into drinking water supply and management.

Following the Great Depression and related home foreclosures, the federal government established new agencies to facilitate access to affordable home mortgages, including the Home Owners' Loan Corporation (HOLC) and Federal Housing Administration (FHA). HOLC and FHA directed widespread neighborhood appraisals to determine investment risk, referred to as "redlining," which took into account residents' race. Redlining thereby contributed to segregation, disinvestment, and racial inequities in opportunities for homeownership and wealth accumulation. Recent research examines associations between historical redlining and subsequent environmental determinants of health and health-related outcomes. In this scoping review, we assess the extent of the current body of evidence, the range of outcomes studied, and key study characteristics, examining the direction and strength of the relationship between redlining, neighborhood environments, and health as well as different methodological approaches. Overall, studies nearly universally report evidence of an association between redlining and health-relevant outcomes, although heterogeneity in study design precludes direct comparison of results. We critically consider evidence regarding HOLC's causality and offer a conceptual framework for the relationship between redlining and present-day health. Finally, we point to key directions for future research to improve and broaden understanding of redlining's enduring impact and translate findings into public health and planning practice.

Purpose of reviewClimate change is causing warming over most parts of the USA and more extreme weather events. The health impacts of these changes are not experienced equally. We synthesize the recent evidence that climatic changes linked to global warming are having a disparate impact on the health of people of color, including children.Recent findingsMultiple studies of heat, extreme cold, hurricanes, flooding, and wildfires find evidence that people of color, including Black, Latinx, Native American, Pacific Islander, and Asian communities are at higher risk of climate-related health impacts than Whites, although this is not always the case. Studies of adults have found evidence of racial disparities related to climatic changes with respect to mortality, respiratory and cardiovascular disease, mental health, and heat-related illness. Children are particularly vulnerable to the health impacts of climate change, and infants and children of color have experienced adverse perinatal outcomes, occupational heat stress, and increases in emergency department visits associated with extreme weather. The evidence strongly suggests climate change is an environmental injustice that is likely to exacerbate existing racial disparities across a broad range of health outcomes.

BackgroundClimate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of heatwaves. Prior studies associate high temperature with preterm birth.ObjectivesWe tested the hypotheses that acute exposure to extreme heat was associated with higher risk of live spontaneous preterm birth (≥20 and historical [1971-2000] summertime 99th percentile) up to a week prior for each day of pregnancy. Survival analysis controlled for individual-level risk factors, secular and seasonal trends. We considered race/ethnicity, heat-trapping neighbourhood landcover and Index of Concentration at the Extremes as effect modifiers.ResultsThe frequency of preterm birth was 10.3%. A quarter (26.8%) of people were exposed to ATmax ≥40°C, and 22.8% were exposed to Tmax and Tmin >99th percentile while at risk. The preterm birth rate among the exposed was 8.9%. In multivariable models, the risk of preterm birth was 15% higher following extremely hot days (hazard ratio [HR] 1.15 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01, 1.30) for ATmax ≥40°C vs. 99th percentile). Censoring at earlier gestational ages suggested stronger associations earlier in pregnancy. The risk difference associated with extreme heat was higher in neighbourhoods of concentrated racialised economic disadvantage.ConclusionsAmbient heat was associated with spontaneous preterm birth, with stronger associations earlier in pregnancy and in racially and economically disadvantaged neighbourhoods, suggesting climate change may worsen existing social inequities in preterm birth rates.

The Drinking Water Tool (DWT) is a community-driven online tool that provides diverse users with information about drinking water sources and threats to drinking water quality and access due to drought. Development of the DWT was guided by the Community Water Center (CWC) as part of the Water Equity Science Shop (WESS), a research partnership integrating elements of community-based participatory research and the European Science Shop model. The WESS engages in scientific projects that inform policy change, advance water justice, and reduce cumulative exposure and disproportionate health burdens among impacted communities in California. WESS researchers conducted qualitative analysis of 15 stakeholder interviews regarding the DWT, including iterative feedback and the stakeholder consultation process as well as stakeholder perceptions of the tool's impact on California water policy, organizing, and research. Results indicate that the DWT and the stakeholder engagement process which developed it were effective in influencing policy priorities and in promoting interagency coordination at multiple levels to address water equity challenges and their disproportionate burdens, particularly among rural and low socioeconomic status areas and communities of color.

Methane superemitters emit non-methane copollutants that are harmful to human health. Yet, no prior studies have assessed disparities in exposure to methane superemitters with respect to race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and civic engagement. To do so, we obtained the location, category (e.g., landfill, refinery), and emission rate of California methane superemitters from Next Generation Airborne Visible/Infrared Imaging Spectrometer (AVIRIS-NG) flights conducted between 2016 and 2018. We identified block groups within 2 km of superemitters (exposed) and 5-10 km away (unexposed) using dasymetric mapping and assigned level of exposure among block groups within 2 km (measured via number of superemitter categories and total methane emissions). Analyses included 483 superemitters. The majority were dairy/manure (n = 213) and oil/gas production sites (n = 127). Results from fully adjusted logistic mixed models indicate environmental injustice in methane superemitter locations. For example, for every 10% increase in non-Hispanic Black residents, the odds of exposure increased by 10% (95% confidence interval (CI): 1.04, 1.17). We observed similar disparities for Hispanics and Native Americans but not with indicators of socioeconomic status. Among block groups located within 2 km, increasing proportions of non-White populations and lower voter turnout were associated with higher superemitter emission intensity. Previously unrecognized racial/ethnic disparities in exposure to California methane superemitters should be considered in policies to tackle methane emissions.

Background: Policies to mitigate climate change by reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can yield public health benefits by also reducing emissions of hazardous co-pollutants, such as air toxics and particulate matter. Socioeconomically disadvantaged communities are typically disproportionately exposed to air pollutants, and therefore climate policy could also potentially reduce these environmental inequities. We sought to explore potential social disparities in GHG and co-pollutant emissions under an existing carbon trading program-the dominant approach to GHG regulation in the US and globally.Methods and Findings: We examined the relationship between multiple measures of neighborhood disadvantage and the location of GHG and co-pollutant emissions from facilities regulated under California's cap-and-trade program-the world's fourth largest operational carbon trading program. We examined temporal patterns in annual average emissions of GHGs, particulate matter (PM2.5), nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, and air toxics before (January 1, 2011-December 31, 2012) and after (January 1, 2013-December 31, 2015) the initiation of carbon trading. We found that facilities regulated under California's cap-and-trade program are disproportionately located in economically disadvantaged neighborhoods with higher proportions of residents of color, and that the quantities of co-pollutant emissions from these facilities were correlated with GHG emissions through time. Moreover, the majority (52%) of regulated facilities reported higher annual average local (in-state) GHG emissions since the initiation of trading. Neighborhoods that experienced increases in annual average GHG and co-pollutant emissions from regulated facilities nearby after trading began had higher proportions of people of color and poor, less educated, and linguistically isolated residents, compared to neighborhoods that experienced decreases in GHGs. These study results reflect preliminary emissions and social equity patterns of the first 3 years of California's cap-and-trade program for which data are available. Due to data limitations, this analysis did not assess the emissions and equity implications of GHG reductions from transportation-related emission sources. Future emission patterns may shift, due to changes in industrial production decisions and policy initiatives that further incentivize local GHG and co-pollutant reductions in disadvantaged communities.Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine social disparities in GHG and co-pollutant emissions under an existing carbon trading program. Our results indicate that, thus far, California's cap-and-trade program has not yielded improvements in environmental equity with respect to health-damaging co-pollutant emissions. This could change, however, as the cap on GHG emissions is gradually lowered in the future. The incorporation of additional policy and regulatory elements that incentivize more local emission reductions in disadvantaged communities could enhance the local air quality and environmental equity benefits of California's climate change mitigation efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives. We used an environmental justice screening tool (CalEnviroScreen 1.1) to compare the distribution of environmental hazards and vulnerable populations across California communities. Methods. CalEnviroScreen 1.1 combines 17 indicators created from 2004 to 2013 publicly available data into a relative cumulative impact score. We compared cumulative impact scores across California zip codes on the basis of their location, urban or rural character, and racial/ethnic makeup. We used a concentration index to evaluate which indicators were most unequally distributed with respect to race/ ethnicity and poverty. Results. The unadjusted odds of living in one of the 10%most affected zip codes were 6.2, 5.8, 1.9, 1.8, and 1.6 times greater for Hispanics, African Americans, Native Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and other or multiracial individuals, respectively, than for non-Hispanic Whites. Environmental hazards were more regressively distributed with respect to race/ethnicity than poverty, with pesticide use and toxic chemical releases being the most unequal. Conclusions. Environmental health hazards disproportionately burden communities of color in California. Efforts to reduce disparities in pollution burden can use simple screening tools to prioritize areas for action. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing body of literature suggests that more unequal societies have more polluted and degraded environments, perhaps helping explain why more unequal societies are often less healthy. We summarize the mechanisms by which inequality can lead to environmental degradation and their relevance for public health. We review the evidence of a relationship between environmental quality and social inequality along the axes of income, wealth, political power, and race and ethnicity. Our review suggests that the evidence is strongest for air- and water-quality measures that have more immediate health implications; evidence is less strong for more dispersed pollutants that have longer-term health impacts. More attention should be paid in research and in practice to links among inequality, the environment, and health, including more within-country studies that may elucidate causal pathways and points of intervention. We synthesize common metrics of inequality and methodological considerations in an effort to bring cohesion to such efforts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]