This is consistent with what indigenous leaders have told the agencies that permit and regulate transmission pipelines, including the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The researchers closely analyzed the plight of indigenous communities in rural areas and found that pipeline planning and permitting often excludes indigenous perspectives, weakens sovereignty, or otherwise undermines indigenous self-determination. While there’s a theory that it’s best to locate these pipelines in rural areas to place fewer people at risk, the researchers find that pipeline construction can “facilitate drastic alteration of communities, transforming rural landscapes into sprawling, industrial settings within a few years.” In particular, the authors conclude that the social vulnerability of rural areas should be taken into consideration when planning pipeline routes, since rural communities often lack the capacity that urban areas have to respond to the dangers of pipelines. The study’s main finding aligns with scientific understanding that the most vulnerable members of society are shouldering a disproportionate burden of the health and health-related economic harms from climate change hazards. This analysis reveals that the density of gas gathering and transmission pipelines is “significantly greater” for the most socially-vulnerable counties, revealing an inequitable and underappreciated burden that threatens to widen existing health disparities. As polluters seek to significantly expand existing oil and gas infrastructure, it’s crucial to better understand the ways in which these dirty energy sources are inflicting harm on local communities and deepening environmental injustices. Why is this index important? It’s a broad indicator of a community’s capacity to prepare for, cope with, and recover from multiple threats linked to oil and gas infrastructure such as air pollution, explosions, property damage, water contamination, and leaks and spills. census tract-level data, including: poverty levels, unemployment rates, income, educational attainment, age, race, English-language fluency, housing status, and access to transportation. That summary index captures 15 criteria from U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry. To estimate local social vulnerability, they used a Social Vulnerability Index, developed by the U.S. The researchers analyzed data in 2,261 U.S. (1/5)- AGU (American Geophysical Union) May 27, 2021 with more socially vulnerable populations have a higher density of #naturalgas #pipelines overall, according to a new study in #AGUpubs’ GeoHealth. But it is also important to understand the public health damage and social ills caused by “midstream” oil and gas infrastructure – that is, networks of heavy equipment for transporting gas including transmission pipelines, pumps, compressors, and storage facilities that link gas production areas to processing, combustion, and distribution sites.Ĭounties in the U.S. It is well documented that oil and gas supply chains cause significant environmental degradation at extraction sites and endanger the health and safety of workers and surrounding communities. This research in the peer-reviewed journal GeoHealth sheds light on the intersection of population vulnerability and oil and gas infrastructure – systems built to manage the distribution of polluting energy sources that are also contributing to the worsening global climate crisis. Gathering lines have much weaker regulations, and in some locations are not regulated at all. Transmission lines are typically larger pipelines that transport the oil or gas from that centralized location to power plants or distribution companies, known as “midstream,” and frequently traveling long distances. Gathering lines transport oil or gas from a network of wellpads to a centralized collection location or processing facility. A new analysis of the siting of fracked gas pipelines across the United States finds that transmission and gathering lines are more densely concentrated in communities with the most socially vulnerable populations.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |