5 Dirty Projects Worsening Environmental Injustice in New Jersey
The residents of Newark, New Jersey’s Ironbound neighborhood are no strangers to pollution. The state has designated the Ironbound an “environmentally overburdened community” thanks to nearby highways, an international airport, heavy industry, and three power plants. The pollution has led to higher rates of asthma and heart and lung disease in the neighborhood.
Yet, the Ironbound currently faces a power plant proposal at a nearby sewage treatment plant. The plant promises more pollution at home — and more emissions that will contribute to our global climate emergency.
If you were to believe the hype, you’d think New Jersey has some of the strongest climate measures in the country, with Governor Phil Murphy leading the charge. However, his administration continues to permit new long-term sources of greenhouse gas emissions. Six fossil fuel expansions approved during the governor’s first term could increase the state’s total climate pollution by up to 19%. What’s worse, New Jersey is currently considering an outrageous seven new fossil fuel projects, including the proposed power plant in the Ironbound. And those projects could increase New Jersey’s climate pollution by up to a whopping 38%. At the same time, five out of those seven projects are sited in areas already suffering from deadly levels of pollution. They fly in the face of the state’s newly adopted Environmental Justice law, which is supposed to protect communities like these.
This is unacceptable. That’s why we’ve been working with frontline communities across New Jersey to resist toxic power plants, dangerous pipelines, polluting highway expansions, and more.
This week, we’ll be rallying against five major proposals, demanding action from Governor Murphy. Here’s what you need to know:
1. No LNG in South Jersey
We’re starting the week with a rally in Gloucester City against a plan to bring explosive liquefied natural gas (LNG) to South Jersey. The proposed project would move LNG from Pennsylvania to an export terminal in Gibbstown, NJ, by rail and/or truck.
LNG not only creates climate-wrecking emissions; it poses huge public health and safety risks for everyone in its path. In New Jersey’s case, that path moves through some of the most densely populated areas on the East Coast.If completed, the project would put almost 2 million people in a “danger zone” in the case of a catastrophic incident.
Even without disaster, trains and trucks on the route would spew toxic diesel emissions in already burdened communities. Moreover, the project would have an estimated climate impact equal to 2 million cars on the road per year.Already, 18 municipal governments have passed resolutions to oppose the plan. And while the U.S. Department of Transportation struck a huge blow to the project and denied a permit renewal in April, the project isn’t dead yet.
To stop it, we’re petitioning the federal government to require a full environmental impact statement — something the company is trying to avoid. We’re also organizing communities along the proposed rail and truck routes to call on Governor Murphy to use his authority to kill the project.
2. No Woodbridge Gas Plant
Next stop: Woodbridge. There, residents face a planned second gas plant in the Keasbey community. Keasbey, home predominantly to people of color, already suffers pollution from the area’s heavy industry and existing fossil fuel infrastructure. Additionally, the state’s two largest highways run right through Woodbridge.
The company helming the project, Competitive Power Ventures, has already been cited more than a dozen times for air quality violations. To make matters worse, if approved, the plant would be one of the state’s largest climate polluters. It would also emit hundreds of tons of toxic air pollutants, including carbon monoxide and lead.
Although 14 nearby municipalities passed resolutions calling on..
