Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Black Alabamans Urged Officials to Stop a Plant Polluting Their Neighborhood

News Feed
Saturday, April 6, 2024

This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Walter Moorer likes to say he lives at 411 “Death Row Street.” At least that is what he compares his living conditions to as he is bombarded with the stench, pollution, noise, and dust that emanates from an asphalt plant owned by Hosea Weaver and Sons Inc. “I changed it to Death Row because I’d be in the house and that odor comes from Hosea Weaver,” Moorer said at a hearing last month before the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM). “It’s like I’m in a gas chamber. So I been on death row 20 something years.” Moorer’s testimony came during part of the hearing set aside for public comment on Hosea Weaver’s application for a new or revised Synthetic Minor Operating Air Permit. The input from Moorer and others who live next door to the company could be summed up in three words: deny the permit.  It had been a long road of opposition for Moorer and his neighbors, who can still remember life before the asphalt plant, and the Planning Commission meeting 25 years ago when their concerns were first ignored. Would their testimony, and written comments, to the state’s environmental regulators produce a different result this time?  “When I tried to tell ADEM about all the cancer and sickness I have seen over the last 20 years, I am told to go to the health department.” Moorer actually lives on Chin Street in the historic Black community of Africatown, which was founded by former slaves brought to America on the Clotilda, the last known slave ship to arrive in the country. Intertwined in Africatown’s history is the constant billow of industrial pollution that has plagued residents there for years.  Moorer, 66, grew up on Chin Street and reminisces about how life used to be before Hosea Weaver constructed the asphalt plant just yards away from his home 20 years ago. Moorer said he once was able to go outside and hear children playing, smell food barbecuing and feel a vibrant community.    Now the sound of young children playing and smell of food grilling has been replaced with machinery and the noxious fumes of asphalt cooking.  Michael Weaver, Hosea Weaver’s president, did not respond to a request for comment.   Moorer and other residents have complained for years about Hosea Weaver to local officials, yet the company has continued operating. The experience has taken a toll on Moorer, who said the company has destroyed his life. The only relief from the facility’s pollutants, he said, are when it rains or if the company gives workers a day off.  “My life, my nerves,” Moorer said, “all this is about is Hosea Weaver. I think about them all the time because they done destroyed my life.” Now, Moorer just hopes the new permit will be denied by ADEM and some peace can be restored to his life. But if the permit is denied it is unclear whether the facility will have to cease operating, or could re-apply.  Moorer outside his home on Chin Street in Mobile, Alabama. Patrick Darrington/Inside Climate News In November 2021, after residents filed complaints with ADEM about the facility, regulators conducted a particulate matter air quality test in June 2022. It found that Hosea Weaver was emitting the maximum amount of particulate matter allowable under their air permit, and ADEM issued a warning. The company responded to ADEM two months later promising to conduct quarterly tests to detect any leaks. Subsequently, ADEM conducted a test in December 2022 that revealed the facility had not fixed the issue and was emitting particulate matter above the allowable limit.  The limit for particulate matter emission is 0.04 grains per dry standard cubic foot. The asphalt company was found to be emitting an average of 0.067 gr/dscf.  Particulate matter is a pollutant created from a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency. Exposure to particulate matter can cause a multitude of health complications, according to studies, including lung cancer, aggravated asthma, increased respiratory issues and more. The facility also exposes residents to several “criteria” pollutants alongside particulate matter, as defined by the EPA, including sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, ozone pollution, lead, and nitrogen monoxide.  Hosea Weaver discovered that the reason for the excessive emissions was a failed mechanism designed to capture pollution. The facility was issued a consent order by ADEM for violating the emissions limit and fined $24,000. The new revisions to the permit would place further limitations on the facility’s hours of operations and on the types of fuel oil it is allowed to burn. ADEM contends these revisions will ensure that Hosea Weaver remains in compliance with the new permit. But an environmental organization, the Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition (MEJAC), argues that the new permit requirements demonstrate that the facility has been operating without the correct permit the entire time.  Moorer and other nearby residents are not satisfied with these revisions and want Hosea Weaver out of their neighborhood. Public comment from several other environmental organizations cite multiple reasons why the proposed permit is not sufficient and should be denied.  While the majority of public comments submitted to ADEM asked the agency to deny the permit, some people still support the company—but none who live on Chin Street.  As part of the public input process, ADEM held the hearing and also allowed written comments to be submitted. Yuvonne Brazier offered written comments and spoke during the hearing.  The Hosea Weaver asphalt plant is yards away from Chin Street. Patrick Darrington/Inside Climate News “When I tried to tell ADEM about all the cancer and sickness I have seen over the last 20 years, I am told to go to the health department,” Brazier wrote. “The health department has told me that they have nothing to do with the environment. Thank God there are no more fish in 3 Mile Creek where the whole street used to fish and share with the neighbors. My mother, who never smoked, died of lung cancer. I tried to get her to leave, but she loved our home and her garden in the backyard. She bragged about her fresh vegetables. When her cancer got so bad, she had to leave and come stay with me. Then my niece tried to live there, until her son almost died of asthma. He could not breathe.” An environmental justice report by the EPA called an EJScreen was conducted on Africatown, mapping different socioeconomic and environmental indicators. The test confirmed that Africatown was an environmental justice community because residents face the highest air toxics cancer risk in Alabama (99th percentile) and in the United States (95-100th percentile).  Also, a countrywide 2019 EPA study found that Alabama emitted the fifth-most toxic substances into the air and Mobile County ranked first in the state in overall releases.  Ever since the plant “went into operation, it has had a devastating impact on the local community, the residents, their health, and local businesses.” All told, over 65 pages of written comment were submitted by a collection of environmental organizations, including MEJAC, Mobile Alabama NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice Committee, Greater-Birmingham Alliance to Stop Air Pollution (GASP), the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), and Clean Healthy Educated Safe and Sustainable Africatown (CHESS).  Throughout the document, the organizations presented numerous reasons why ADEM should deny the permit, chief among them that Hosea Weaver needs to be designated as a so-called “major source” emitter under Title V of the Clean Air Act. They argue that, based on Hosea Weaver’s emissions history, the asphalt plant clearly releases excess tons of pollution that go above the threshold of a major source emitter.  The environmental organizations also argue that ADEM is not fulfilling its role to protect the civil rights of a disproportionately harmed minority community, as described under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  “ADEM—as a recipient of federal funds for enforcement of the air permitting and other programs delegated to it by the EPA—must ensure it fulfills its legal duty to protect civil rights as required by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” the document says. “Such consideration is required under Title VI because emissions from the Source result in an emissions impact to a community that already bears disproportionate socioeconomic harms.” For Beverly Cooper, who spoke against the new permit, the ADEM hearing brought back memories of another public meeting in 1999: She was, at the time, a member of the Mobile Planning Commission, and Hosea Weaver had come before the panel, belatedly seeking a construction permit for a project it had almost completed.  “I voted against this because it was clear that it would have a negative impact on the local community, and it has,” Cooper said. “Since it went into operation, it has had a devastating impact on the local community, the residents, their health, and local businesses.” Cooper also said that the facility was essentially fully constructed by the time Hosea Weaver even came before the planning commission to request its approval. According to a Mobile Press Register article from 1999, Hosea Weaver constructed nearly 75 percent of the facility next to Chin Street prior to obtaining the necessary construction permit from the city of Mobile. The city administered multiple stop-work orders for Hosea Weaver to halt construction on the facility after finding out but the company continued building anyway. The firm’s former president, Paul Weaver, said at the time that he did not know it needed a permit to build.  Despite the plant being constructed without city permits, the Mobile Planning Commission voted 4-2 to give Hosea Weaver preliminary approval. One of the members, James Laier, recused himself because he worked with Hosea Weaver on the project.  According to the Press Register, 40 Africatown and Chin Street residents protested the facility being built during the meeting. As part of the construction approval, the commission required Hosea Weaver to build an 8-foot privacy fence and two strips of 16-foot-tall trees to serve as a buffer for nearby residents. These requirements were never fulfilled. Inside Climate News spoke to several residents who detailed how Hosea Weaver has negatively impacted their community, although they did not submit public comments. Arthur Ruggs’ backyard has turned swampy due to an embankment created by the asphalt plant. Patrick Darrington/Inside Climate News Arthur Ruggs, who did not submit written testimony with ADEM objecting to Hosea Weaver’s new permit, said in an interview that his backyard was swampy due to an embankment created by the asphalt plant. Ruggs said he could not even mow his lawn, explaining how his lawnmower recently got stuck in the muddy earth. Ruggs is glad his children were grown by the time Hosea Weaver moved in and avoided the company’s pollution and environmental impact.“The only thing about it now is ain’t no small kids around here,” he said.  Jemal Walker said that the noise produced by the plant often kept him from getting any sleep at night. Walker was once incarcerated and said he had “more peace” in prison than he does now.  “I’d rather be in prison than to be sitting here listening to this noise,” Walker said. “I got more peace in prison than I do right here.” There are some within the Africatown community and outside who support Hosea Weaver. Cleon Jones, a member of the Africatown Community Development Corporation, argued during the public hearing that Hosea Weaver and “business” were needed to help revitalize Africatown, even though residents say the company does not employ anyone from the community. Charles Williams, also with ACDC, said he empathized with Chin Street residents but believed they needed to discuss solutions because “industry is going nowhere.”  “My heart goes out to the people that live next to the plant,” Williams said. “I live over here. So I don’t have to hear the noises. I don’t have to see the pollution. I don’t have to walk in your shoes, but I can empathize with you. But also there are people who work at that plant who have got to feed their families. And we’ve got to try to find a solution.” “Some guys came down from Washington, they said they’ve never seen a plant that close to a community.” ACDC is connected to a nonprofit organization that works to protect the interest of businesses in the port of Mobile from environmental activists, called Keep Mobile Growing (KMG). Its website says it is a “non-profit alliance of Mobile Businesses and industries supporting the Alabama Port Authority, related port commerce and the region’s energy markets.”   The organization was founded in 2014 explicitly to provide a voice against environmental activists, according to its website. “Radical, national environmental organizations remain active locally and are emboldened by increasing attention to the Mobile area,” a page on the website says. “Their agendas often conflict with the traditional, safe operations of KMG members. KMG exists to provide a voice of advocacy against any threats posed by these groups.” The Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition was founded just a year prior, in 2013, advocating on behalf of citizens who live near the port and all its businesses.  Keep Mobile Growing’s membership list on their website features Hosea Weaver. The organization touts how, through its collaboration with the Africatown Community Development Corporation, it established the Africatown Business and Community Panel (ABCP) in 2016. In IRS filings, this relationship is referenced consistently. Keep Mobile Growing gave $1,000 to Jones’ organization, the Cleon Jones Last Out Community Foundation, according to 2021 filings.  During her public comments at the recent ADEM meeting, Brazier, in describing all the cancer in her family, mentioned that a city council member told her they were powerless to help because businesses in the port generated substantial revenue.   “Some guys came down from Washington, they said they’ve never seen a plant that close to a community,” Brazier said. “And I just don’t understand that. We’ve been to city council after city council meeting. We were there a couple years ago. And the city council member said we get $30 billion from the state dock and all that’s connected, so there’s nothing we can do about it.” Shirley Ford, another Chin Street resident, has no faith in ADEM and remembers what life was like prior to Hosea Weaver moving in.  “I was born here and raised here,” Ford said. “I remember when the air was better. I remember when it smelled better. Nine times out of ten ADEM’s gonna give the permit to Weaver anyway, cause the plant isn’t in their neighborhood.”  On March 18, ADEM announced its decision regarding the air permit, and it was just as Ford had assumed: ADEM granted the permit despite the overwhelming pleas from Chin Street residents asking for a denial.  In a response to the public comments received, ADEM separated the submissions into two sections. One section was for comments concerning the proposed permit, the agency said in its response, while the other section was for comments not relevant to the proposed permit action. It categorized all of the comments asking for the permit to be denied—those made primarily by Chin Street residents—as irrelevant to the permitting action.  The comments deemed relevant to the proposed permit action were predominantly those submitted by MEJAC and other environmental organizations. ADEM responded to these comments by explaining how Hosea Weaver complied with applicable regulations or how the comments did not necessitate any changes to the proposed permit. “I want them to know about the smell, how terrible it is. The noise. The dust. And how they just ignore us.” “The applicant [Hosea Weaver] has submitted to the Department a request for additional restrictions and recordkeeping requirements for the existing Synthetic Minor Operating Permit,” ADEM said in response to comments to deny the permit. “The application indicates, to the satisfaction of the Department, that the proposed changes to the permit can comply with the technical and administrative requirements applicable to the proposed operation of the facility. Once an applicant satisfies all legal requirements for obtaining a permit, the Department cannot arbitrarily deny the issuance of the requested permit. In addition, the Department has no jurisdiction over the zoning and siting of permitted facilities. Such issues should be presented to the appropriate local zoning agency/department.” The comments that were relevant to the proposed permit action were predominantly the arguments submitted by the Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition and other environmental organizations. ADEM responded to these comments by explaining how Hosea Weaver complied with applicable regulations, and how the comments did not necessitate any changes to the proposed permit. Walter Moorer, like his neighbor on Chin Street, Shirley Ford, was not surprised by the decision. “I knew it was gonna happen because nobody cares about our lives,” he said.  Moorer said he did not want to bring up race as a factor, but he believed that ADEM was so willing to disregard the community’s concerns because they are Black and the owners of the asphalt plant are white.  Surrounded by industry in the “chemical corridor,” Ford said she wants people to know the uncomfortable conditions she and other residents live under. “It feels like we don’t exist,” she said.  “I want them to know about the smell, how terrible it is,” Ford said. “The noise. The dust. And how they just ignore us like we don’t exist. And don’t care. They didn’t even put the eight-foot fence up. They didn’t even put nothing to try to buffer the noise nor the dust or anything. It’s like we don’t count. We don’t exist.”

This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Walter Moorer likes to say he lives at 411 “Death Row Street.” At least that is what he compares his living conditions to as he is bombarded with the stench, pollution, noise, and dust that emanates from an asphalt plant […]

This story was originally published by Inside Climate News and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration.

Walter Moorer likes to say he lives at 411 “Death Row Street.” At least that is what he compares his living conditions to as he is bombarded with the stench, pollution, noise, and dust that emanates from an asphalt plant owned by Hosea Weaver and Sons Inc.

“I changed it to Death Row because I’d be in the house and that odor comes from Hosea Weaver,” Moorer said at a hearing last month before the Alabama Department of Environmental Management (ADEM). “It’s like I’m in a gas chamber. So I been on death row 20 something years.”

Moorer’s testimony came during part of the hearing set aside for public comment on Hosea Weaver’s application for a new or revised Synthetic Minor Operating Air Permit. The input from Moorer and others who live next door to the company could be summed up in three words: deny the permit. 

It had been a long road of opposition for Moorer and his neighbors, who can still remember life before the asphalt plant, and the Planning Commission meeting 25 years ago when their concerns were first ignored. Would their testimony, and written comments, to the state’s environmental regulators produce a different result this time? 

Moorer actually lives on Chin Street in the historic Black community of Africatown, which was founded by former slaves brought to America on the Clotilda, the last known slave ship to arrive in the country. Intertwined in Africatown’s history is the constant billow of industrial pollution that has plagued residents there for years. 

Moorer, 66, grew up on Chin Street and reminisces about how life used to be before Hosea Weaver constructed the asphalt plant just yards away from his home 20 years ago. Moorer said he once was able to go outside and hear children playing, smell food barbecuing and feel a vibrant community.   

Now the sound of young children playing and smell of food grilling has been replaced with machinery and the noxious fumes of asphalt cooking. 

Michael Weaver, Hosea Weaver’s president, did not respond to a request for comment.  

Moorer and other residents have complained for years about Hosea Weaver to local officials, yet the company has continued operating. The experience has taken a toll on Moorer, who said the company has destroyed his life. The only relief from the facility’s pollutants, he said, are when it rains or if the company gives workers a day off. 

“My life, my nerves,” Moorer said, “all this is about is Hosea Weaver. I think about them all the time because they done destroyed my life.”

Now, Moorer just hopes the new permit will be denied by ADEM and some peace can be restored to his life. But if the permit is denied it is unclear whether the facility will have to cease operating, or could re-apply. 

Moorer outside his home on Chin Street in Mobile, Alabama.

Patrick Darrington/Inside Climate News

In November 2021, after residents filed complaints with ADEM about the facility, regulators conducted a particulate matter air quality test in June 2022. It found that Hosea Weaver was emitting the maximum amount of particulate matter allowable under their air permit, and ADEM issued a warning. The company responded to ADEM two months later promising to conduct quarterly tests to detect any leaks. Subsequently, ADEM conducted a test in December 2022 that revealed the facility had not fixed the issue and was emitting particulate matter above the allowable limit. 

The limit for particulate matter emission is 0.04 grains per dry standard cubic foot. The asphalt company was found to be emitting an average of 0.067 gr/dscf. 

Particulate matter is a pollutant created from a mixture of solid particles and liquid droplets found in the air, according to the US Environmental Protection Agency. Exposure to particulate matter can cause a multitude of health complications, according to studies, including lung cancer, aggravated asthma, increased respiratory issues and more. The facility also exposes residents to several “criteria” pollutants alongside particulate matter, as defined by the EPA, including sulfur dioxide, volatile organic compounds, ozone pollution, lead, and nitrogen monoxide. 

Hosea Weaver discovered that the reason for the excessive emissions was a failed mechanism designed to capture pollution. The facility was issued a consent order by ADEM for violating the emissions limit and fined $24,000.

The new revisions to the permit would place further limitations on the facility’s hours of operations and on the types of fuel oil it is allowed to burn. ADEM contends these revisions will ensure that Hosea Weaver remains in compliance with the new permit. But an environmental organization, the Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition (MEJAC), argues that the new permit requirements demonstrate that the facility has been operating without the correct permit the entire time. 

Moorer and other nearby residents are not satisfied with these revisions and want Hosea Weaver out of their neighborhood. Public comment from several other environmental organizations cite multiple reasons why the proposed permit is not sufficient and should be denied. 

While the majority of public comments submitted to ADEM asked the agency to deny the permit, some people still support the company—but none who live on Chin Street. 

As part of the public input process, ADEM held the hearing and also allowed written comments to be submitted. Yuvonne Brazier offered written comments and spoke during the hearing. 

The Hosea Weaver asphalt plant is yards away from Chin Street.

Patrick Darrington/Inside Climate News

“When I tried to tell ADEM about all the cancer and sickness I have seen over the last 20 years, I am told to go to the health department,” Brazier wrote. “The health department has told me that they have nothing to do with the environment. Thank God there are no more fish in 3 Mile Creek where the whole street used to fish and share with the neighbors. My mother, who never smoked, died of lung cancer. I tried to get her to leave, but she loved our home and her garden in the backyard. She bragged about her fresh vegetables. When her cancer got so bad, she had to leave and come stay with me. Then my niece tried to live there, until her son almost died of asthma. He could not breathe.”

An environmental justice report by the EPA called an EJScreen was conducted on Africatown, mapping different socioeconomic and environmental indicators. The test confirmed that Africatown was an environmental justice community because residents face the highest air toxics cancer risk in Alabama (99th percentile) and in the United States (95-100th percentile). 

Also, a countrywide 2019 EPA study found that Alabama emitted the fifth-most toxic substances into the air and Mobile County ranked first in the state in overall releases. 

All told, over 65 pages of written comment were submitted by a collection of environmental organizations, including MEJAC, Mobile Alabama NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice Committee, Greater-Birmingham Alliance to Stop Air Pollution (GASP), the Southern Environmental Law Center (SELC), and Clean Healthy Educated Safe and Sustainable Africatown (CHESS). 

Throughout the document, the organizations presented numerous reasons why ADEM should deny the permit, chief among them that Hosea Weaver needs to be designated as a so-called “major source” emitter under Title V of the Clean Air Act. They argue that, based on Hosea Weaver’s emissions history, the asphalt plant clearly releases excess tons of pollution that go above the threshold of a major source emitter. 

The environmental organizations also argue that ADEM is not fulfilling its role to protect the civil rights of a disproportionately harmed minority community, as described under the Civil Rights Act of 1964. 

“ADEM—as a recipient of federal funds for enforcement of the air permitting and other programs delegated to it by the EPA—must ensure it fulfills its legal duty to protect civil rights as required by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964,” the document says. “Such consideration is required under Title VI because emissions from the Source result in an emissions impact to a community that already bears disproportionate socioeconomic harms.”

For Beverly Cooper, who spoke against the new permit, the ADEM hearing brought back memories of another public meeting in 1999: She was, at the time, a member of the Mobile Planning Commission, and Hosea Weaver had come before the panel, belatedly seeking a construction permit for a project it had almost completed. 

“I voted against this because it was clear that it would have a negative impact on the local community, and it has,” Cooper said. “Since it went into operation, it has had a devastating impact on the local community, the residents, their health, and local businesses.”

Cooper also said that the facility was essentially fully constructed by the time Hosea Weaver even came before the planning commission to request its approval.

According to a Mobile Press Register article from 1999, Hosea Weaver constructed nearly 75 percent of the facility next to Chin Street prior to obtaining the necessary construction permit from the city of Mobile. The city administered multiple stop-work orders for Hosea Weaver to halt construction on the facility after finding out but the company continued building anyway. The firm’s former president, Paul Weaver, said at the time that he did not know it needed a permit to build. 

Despite the plant being constructed without city permits, the Mobile Planning Commission voted 4-2 to give Hosea Weaver preliminary approval. One of the members, James Laier, recused himself because he worked with Hosea Weaver on the project. 

According to the Press Register, 40 Africatown and Chin Street residents protested the facility being built during the meeting. As part of the construction approval, the commission required Hosea Weaver to build an 8-foot privacy fence and two strips of 16-foot-tall trees to serve as a buffer for nearby residents. These requirements were never fulfilled.

Inside Climate News spoke to several residents who detailed how Hosea Weaver has negatively impacted their community, although they did not submit public comments.

Arthur Ruggs’ backyard has turned swampy due to an embankment created by the asphalt plant.

Patrick Darrington/Inside Climate News

Arthur Ruggs, who did not submit written testimony with ADEM objecting to Hosea Weaver’s new permit, said in an interview that his backyard was swampy due to an embankment created by the asphalt plant. Ruggs said he could not even mow his lawn, explaining how his lawnmower recently got stuck in the muddy earth.

Ruggs is glad his children were grown by the time Hosea Weaver moved in and avoided the company’s pollution and environmental impact.“The only thing about it now is ain’t no small kids around here,” he said. 

Jemal Walker said that the noise produced by the plant often kept him from getting any sleep at night. Walker was once incarcerated and said he had “more peace” in prison than he does now. 

“I’d rather be in prison than to be sitting here listening to this noise,” Walker said. “I got more peace in prison than I do right here.”

There are some within the Africatown community and outside who support Hosea Weaver. Cleon Jones, a member of the Africatown Community Development Corporation, argued during the public hearing that Hosea Weaver and “business” were needed to help revitalize Africatown, even though residents say the company does not employ anyone from the community. Charles Williams, also with ACDC, said he empathized with Chin Street residents but believed they needed to discuss solutions because “industry is going nowhere.” 

“My heart goes out to the people that live next to the plant,” Williams said. “I live over here. So I don’t have to hear the noises. I don’t have to see the pollution. I don’t have to walk in your shoes, but I can empathize with you. But also there are people who work at that plant who have got to feed their families. And we’ve got to try to find a solution.”

ACDC is connected to a nonprofit organization that works to protect the interest of businesses in the port of Mobile from environmental activists, called Keep Mobile Growing (KMG). Its website says it is a “non-profit alliance of Mobile Businesses and industries supporting the Alabama Port Authority, related port commerce and the region’s energy markets.”  

The organization was founded in 2014 explicitly to provide a voice against environmental activists, according to its website. “Radical, national environmental organizations remain active locally and are emboldened by increasing attention to the Mobile area,” a page on the website says. “Their agendas often conflict with the traditional, safe operations of KMG members. KMG exists to provide a voice of advocacy against any threats posed by these groups.”

The Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition was founded just a year prior, in 2013, advocating on behalf of citizens who live near the port and all its businesses. 

Keep Mobile Growing’s membership list on their website features Hosea Weaver. The organization touts how, through its collaboration with the Africatown Community Development Corporation, it established the Africatown Business and Community Panel (ABCP) in 2016. In IRS filings, this relationship is referenced consistently. Keep Mobile Growing gave $1,000 to Jones’ organization, the Cleon Jones Last Out Community Foundation, according to 2021 filings. 

During her public comments at the recent ADEM meeting, Brazier, in describing all the cancer in her family, mentioned that a city council member told her they were powerless to help because businesses in the port generated substantial revenue.  

“Some guys came down from Washington, they said they’ve never seen a plant that close to a community,” Brazier said. “And I just don’t understand that. We’ve been to city council after city council meeting. We were there a couple years ago. And the city council member said we get $30 billion from the state dock and all that’s connected, so there’s nothing we can do about it.”

Shirley Ford, another Chin Street resident, has no faith in ADEM and remembers what life was like prior to Hosea Weaver moving in. 

“I was born here and raised here,” Ford said. “I remember when the air was better. I remember when it smelled better. Nine times out of ten ADEM’s gonna give the permit to Weaver anyway, cause the plant isn’t in their neighborhood.” 

On March 18, ADEM announced its decision regarding the air permit, and it was just as Ford had assumed: ADEM granted the permit despite the overwhelming pleas from Chin Street residents asking for a denial. 

In a response to the public comments received, ADEM separated the submissions into two sections. One section was for comments concerning the proposed permit, the agency said in its response, while the other section was for comments not relevant to the proposed permit action. It categorized all of the comments asking for the permit to be denied—those made primarily by Chin Street residents—as irrelevant to the permitting action. 

The comments deemed relevant to the proposed permit action were predominantly those submitted by MEJAC and other environmental organizations. ADEM responded to these comments by explaining how Hosea Weaver complied with applicable regulations or how the comments did not necessitate any changes to the proposed permit.

“The applicant [Hosea Weaver] has submitted to the Department a request for additional restrictions and recordkeeping requirements for the existing Synthetic Minor Operating Permit,” ADEM said in response to comments to deny the permit. “The application indicates, to the satisfaction of the Department, that the proposed changes to the permit can comply with the technical and administrative requirements applicable to the proposed operation of the facility. Once an applicant satisfies all legal requirements for obtaining a permit, the Department cannot arbitrarily deny the issuance of the requested permit. In addition, the Department has no jurisdiction over the zoning and siting of permitted facilities. Such issues should be presented to the appropriate local zoning agency/department.”

The comments that were relevant to the proposed permit action were predominantly the arguments submitted by the Mobile Environmental Justice Action Coalition and other environmental organizations. ADEM responded to these comments by explaining how Hosea Weaver complied with applicable regulations, and how the comments did not necessitate any changes to the proposed permit.

Walter Moorer, like his neighbor on Chin Street, Shirley Ford, was not surprised by the decision. “I knew it was gonna happen because nobody cares about our lives,” he said. 

Moorer said he did not want to bring up race as a factor, but he believed that ADEM was so willing to disregard the community’s concerns because they are Black and the owners of the asphalt plant are white. 

Surrounded by industry in the “chemical corridor,” Ford said she wants people to know the uncomfortable conditions she and other residents live under. “It feels like we don’t exist,” she said. 

“I want them to know about the smell, how terrible it is,” Ford said. “The noise. The dust. And how they just ignore us like we don’t exist. And don’t care. They didn’t even put the eight-foot fence up. They didn’t even put nothing to try to buffer the noise nor the dust or anything. It’s like we don’t count. We don’t exist.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Fire Disrupts UN Climate Talks Just as Negotiators Reach Critical Final Days

Fire has disrupted United Nations climate talks, forcing evacuations of several buildings with just two scheduled days left and negotiators yet to announce any major agreements

BELEM, Brazil (AP) — Fire disrupted United Nations climate talks in Brazil on Thursday, forcing evacuations of several buildings with just two scheduled days left and negotiators yet to announce any major agreements. Officials said no one was hurt.The fire was reported in an area of pavilions where sideline events are held during the annual talks, known this year as COP30. Organizers soon announced that the fire was under control, but fire officials ordered the entire site evacuated for safety checks and it wasn't clear when conference business would resume.Viliami Vainga Tone, with the Tonga delegation, had just come out of a high-level ministerial meeting when dozens of people came thundering past him shouting about the fire. He was among people pushed out of the venue by Brazilian and United Nations security forces.Tone called time the most precious resource at COP and said he was disappointed it's even shorter due to the fire.“We have to keep up our optimism. There is always tomorrow, if not the remainder of today. But at least we have a full day tomorrow,” Tone told The Associated Press.A few hours before the fire, U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres urged countries to compromise and “show willingness and flexibility to deliver results,” even if they fall short of the strongest measures some nations want.“We are down to the wire and the world is watching Belem,” Guterres said, asking negotiators to engage in good faith in the last two scheduled days of talks, which already missed a self-imposed deadline Wednesday for progress on a few key issues. The conference, with this year's edition known as COP30, frequently runs longer than its scheduled two weeks.“Communities on the front lines are watching, too — counting flooded homes, failed harvests, lost livelihoods — and asking, ‘how much more must we suffer?’” Guterres said. "They’ve heard enough excuses and demand results.” On contentious issues involving more detailed plans to phase out fossil fuels and financial aid to poorer countries, Guterres said he was “perfectly convinced” that compromise was possible and dismissed the idea that not adopting the strongest measures would be a failure.Guterres was more forceful in what he wanted rich countries to do for poor countries, especially those in need of tens of billions of dollars to adapt to the floods, droughts, storms and heat waves triggered by worsening climate change. He continued calls to triple adaptation finance from $40 billion a year to $120 billion a year.“No delegation will leave Belem with everything it wants, but every delegation has a duty to reach a balanced deal,” Guterres said.“Every country, especially the big emitters, must do more,” Guterres said.Delivering overall financial aid — with an agreed goal of $300 billion a year — is one of four interconnected issues that were initially excluded from the official agenda. The other three are: whether countries should be told to toughen their new climate plans; dealing with trade barriers over climate and improving reporting on transparency and climate progress.More than 80 countries have pushed for a detailed “road map” on how to transition away from fossil fuels, like coal, oil and natural gas, which are the chief cause of warming. That was a general but vague agreement two years ago at the COP in Dubai. Guterres kept referring to it as already being agreed to in Dubai, but did not commit to a detailed plan, which Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva pushed for earlier in a speech.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.This story was produced as part of the 2025 Climate Change Media Partnership, a journalism fellowship organized by Internews’ Earth Journalism Network and the Stanley Center for Peace and Security.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Engineered microbes could tackle climate change – if we ensure it’s done safely

Engineering microbes to soak up more carbon, boost crop yields and restore former farmland is appealing. But synthetic biology fixes must be done thoughtfully

Yuji Sakai/GettyAs the climate crisis accelerates, there’s a desperate need to rapidly reduce carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, both by slashing emissions and by pulling carbon out of the air. Synthetic biology has emerged as a particularly promising approach. Despite the name, synthetic biology isn’t about creating new life from scratch. Rather, it uses engineering principles to build new biological components for existing microorganisms such as bacteria, microbes and fungi to make them better at specific tasks. By one recent estimate, synthetic biology could cut more carbon than emitted by all passenger cars ever made – up to 30 billion tonnes – through methods such as boosting crop yields, restoring agricultural land, cutting livestock methane emissions, reducing the need for fertiliser, producing biofuels and engineering microbes to store more carbon. According to some synthetic biologists, this could be a game-changer. But will it prove to be? Technological efforts to “solve” the climate problem often verge on the improbably utopian. There’s a risk in seeing synthetic biology as a silver bullet for environmental problems. A more realistic approach suggests synthetic biology isn’t a magic fix, but does have real potential worth exploring further. Engineering microorganisms is a controversial practice. To make the most of these technologies, researchers will have to ensure it’s done safely and ethically, as my research points out. What potential does synthetic biology have? Earth’s oceans, forests, soils and other natural processes soak up over half of all carbon emitted by burning fossil fuels. Synthetic biology could make these natural sinks even more effective. Some researchers are exploring ways to modify natural enzymes to rapidly convert carbon dioxide gas into carbon in rocks. Perhaps the best known example is the use of precision fermentation to cut methane emissions from livestock. Because methane is a much more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, these emissions account for roughly 12% of total warming potential from greenhouse emissions. Bioengineered yeasts could absorb up to 98% of these emissions. After being eaten by cattle or other ruminants these yeasts block production of methane before it can be belched out. Synthetic biology could even drastically reduce how much farmland the world needs by producing food more efficiently. Engineered soil microbes can boost crop yields at least by 10–20%, meaning more food from less land. Precision fermentation can be used to produce clean meat and clean milk with much lower emissions than traditional farming. Engineered microbes have the potential to boost crop yields considerably. Collab Media/Unsplash, CC BY-NC-ND If farms produce more on less land, excess farmland can be returned to nature. Wetlands, forests and native grasslands can store much more carbon than farmland, helping tackle climate change. Synthetic biology can be used to modify microbe and algae species to increase their natural ability to store carbon in wetlands and oceans. This approach is known as natural geoengineering. Engineered crops and soil microbes can also lock away much more carbon in the roots of crops or by increasing soil storage capacity. They can also reduce methane emissions from organic matter and tackle pollutants such as fertiliser runoff and heavy metals. Sounds great – what’s the problem? As researchers have pointed out, using this approach will require a rollout at massive scale. At present, much work has been done at smaller scale. These engineered organisms need to be able to go from Petri dishes to industrial bioreactors and then safely into the environment. To scale, these approaches have to be economically viable, well regulated and socially acceptable. That’s easier said than done. First, engineering organisms comes with the serious risk of unintended consequences. If these customised microbes release their stored carbon all at once during a drought or bushfire, it could worsen climate change. It would be very difficult to control these organisms if a problem emerges after their release, such as if an engineered microbe began outcompeting its rivals or if synthetic genes spread beyond the target species and do unintended damage to other species and ecosystems. It will be essential to tackle these issues head on with robust risk management and forward planning. Second, synthetic biology approaches will likely become products. To make these organisms cheaply and gain market share, biotech companies will have an incentive to focus on immediate profits. This could lead companies to downplay actual risks to protect their profit margins. Regulation will be essential here. Third, some worthwhile approaches may not appeal to companies seeking a return on investment. Instead, governments or public institutions may have to develop them to benefit plants, animals and natural habitats, given human existence rests on healthy ecosystems. Which way forward? These issues shouldn’t stop researchers from testing out these technologies. But these risks must be taken into account, as not all risks are equal. Unchecked climate change would be much worse, as it could lead to societal collapse, large-scale climate migration and mass species extinction. Large scale removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere is now essential. In the face of catastrophic risks, it can be ethically justifiable to take the smaller risk of unintended consequences from these organisms. But it’s far less justifiable if these same risks are accepted to secure financial returns for private investors. As time passes and the climate crisis intensifies, these technologies will look more and more appealing. Synthetic biology won’t be the silver bullet many imagine it to be, and it’s unlikely it will be the gold mine many hope for. But the technology has undeniable promise. Used thoughtfully and ethically, it could help us make a healthier planet for all living species. Daniele Fulvi receives funding from the ARC Centre of Excellence in Synthetic Biology, and his current project investigates the ethical dimensions of synthetic biology for climate mitigation. He also received a small grant from the Advanced Engineering Biology Future Science Platform at CSIRO. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and are not necessarily those of the Australian Government or the Australian Research Council.

Exclusive-Europe Plans Service to Gauge Climate Change Role in Extreme Weather

By Alison Withers and Kate AbnettCOPENHAGEN (Reuters) -The EU is launching a service to measure the role climate change is playing in extreme...

By Alison Withers and Kate AbnettCOPENHAGEN (Reuters) -The EU is launching a service to measure the role climate change is playing in extreme weather events like heatwaves and extreme rain, and experts say this could help governments set climate policy, improve financial risk assessments and provide evidence for use in lawsuits.Scientists with the EU's Copernicus Climate Change Service told Reuters the service can help governments in weighing the physical risks posed by worsening weather and setting policy in response. "It's the demand of understanding when an extreme event happens, how is this related to climate change?" said the new service's technical lead, Freja Vamborg.The European Commission did not immediately respond to a Reuters request for comment.The service will perform attribution science, which involves running computer simulations of how weather systems might have behaved if people had never started pumping greenhouse gases into the air and then comparing those results with what is happening today.Funded for about 2.5 million euros over three years, Copernicus will publish results by the end of next year and offer two assessments a month - each within a week of an extreme weather event.For the first time, "there will be an attribution office operating constantly," said Carlo Buontempo, director of Copernicus Climate Change Service. "Climate policy is unfortunately again a very polarized topic," said Friederike Otto, a climate scientist at Imperial College London who helped to pioneer the scientific approach but is not involved in the new EU service. She welcomed the service's plans to partner with national weather services of EU members along with the UK Met and the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre."From that point of view, it also helps if the governments do it themselves and just see themselves really the evidence from their own weather services," Otto said. Some independent climate scientists and lawyers cheered the EU move. "We want to have the most information available," said senior attorney Erika Lennon at the non-profit Center for International Environmental Law."The more information we have about attribution science, the easier it will be for the most impacted to be able to successfully bring claims to courts."By calculating probabilities of climate change impacting weather patterns, the approach also helps insurance companies and others in the financial sector.In a way, "they're already using it" with in-house teams calculating probabilities for floods or storms, said environmental scientist Johan Rockstroem with the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research."Financial institutions understand risk and risk has to be quantified, and this is one way of quantifying," Rockstroem said.In litigation, attribution science is also being used already in calculating how much a country's or company's emissions may have contributed to climate-fuelled disasters.The International Court of Justice said in July that attribution science is legally viable for linking emissions with climate extremes - but it has yet to fully be tested in court. A German court in May dismissed a Peruvian farmer's lawsuit against German utility RWE for emissions-driven warming causing Andean glaciers to thaw. The case had used attribution science in calculating the damage claim, but the court said the claim amount was too low to take the case forward.So "the court never got to discussing attribution science in detail and going into whether the climate models are good enough, and all of these complex and thorny questions," said Noah Walker-Crawford, a climate litigation researcher at the London School of Economics. (Reporting by Ali Withers in Copenhagen and Kate Abnett in Belem, Brazil; Writing by Katy Daigle; Editing by David Gregorio)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer is running for governor

Billionaire hedge fund founder, climate change warrior and major Democratic donor Tom Steyer is running for governor. Fossil fuel and migrant detention facility investments will likely draw attacks from his fellow Democrats.

Billionaire hedge fund founder Tom Steyer announced Wednesday that he is running for governor of California, arguing that he is not beholden to special interests and can take on corporations that are making life unaffordable in the state.“The richest people in America think that they earned everything themselves. Bulls—, man. That’s so ridiculous,” Steyer said in an online video announcing his campaign. “We have a broken government. It’s been bought by corporations and my question is: Who do you think is going to change that? Sacramento politicians are afraid to change up this system. I’m not. They’re going to hate this. Bring it on.” Protesters hold placards and banners during a rally against Whitehaven Coal in Sydney in 2014. Dozens of protesters and activists gathered downtown to protest against the controversial massive Maules Creek coal mine project in northern New South Wales. (Saeed Khan / AFP/Getty Images) Steyer, 68, founded Farallon Capital Management, one of the nation’s largest hedge funds, and left it in 2012 after 26 years. Since his departure, he has become a global environmental activist and a major donor to Democratic candidates and causes. But the hedge firm’s investments — notably a giant coal mine in Australia that cleared 3,700 acres of koala habitat and a company that runs migrant detention centers on the U.S.-Mexico border for U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement — will make him susceptible to political attack by his gubernatorial rivals. Steyer has expressed regret for his involvement in such projects, saying it was why he left Farallon and started focusing his energy on fighting climate change. Democratic presidential candidate Tom Steyer addresses a crowd during a presidential primary election-night party in Columbia, S.C. (Sean Rayford / Getty Images) Steyer previously flirted with running for governor and the U.S. Senate but decided against it, instead opting to run for president in 2020. He dropped out after spending nearly $342 million on his campaign, which gained little traction before he ended his run after the South Carolina primary.Next year’s gubernatorial race is in flux, after former Vice President Kamala Harris and Sen. Alex Padilla decided not to run and Proposition 50, the successful Democratic effort to redraw congressional districts, consumed all of the political oxygen during an off-year election.Most voters are undecided about who they would like to replace Gov. Gavin Newsom, who cannot run for reelection because of term limits, according to a poll released this month by the UC Berkeley Institute of Governmental Studies and co-sponsored by The Times. Steyer had the support of 1% of voters in the survey. In recent years, Steyer has been a longtime benefactor of progressive causes, most recently spending $12 million to support the redistricting ballot measure. But when he was the focus of one of the ads, rumors spiraled that he was considering a run for governor.In prior California ballot initiatives, Steyer successfully supported efforts to close a corporate tax loophole and to raise tobacco taxes, and fought oil-industry-backed efforts to roll back environmental law.His campaign platform is to build 1 million homes in four years, lower energy costs by ending monopolies, make preschool and community college free and ban corporate contributions to political action committees in California elections.Steyer’s brother Jim, the leader of Common Sense Media, and former Biden administration U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy are aiming to put an initiative on next year’s ballot to protect children from social media, specifically the chatbots that have been accused of prompting young people to kill themselves. Newsom recently vetoed a bill aimed at addressing this artificial intelligence issue.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.