Disaster Recovery Doesn’t End with Soil Cleaning and Water Testing – The Progressive

Report on the Environmental and Social Impacts of the Smitty’s Supply Chemical Explosion in Roseland, Louisiana

Executive Summary

On August 22, a chemical explosion at the Smitty’s Supply plant in Roseland, Louisiana, resulted in significant environmental contamination and social disruption. This incident highlights critical failures in achieving multiple Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those related to health, clean water, sustainable communities, and institutional justice. The aftermath reveals severe impacts on air, water, and soil quality, alongside a profound erosion of public trust in regulatory bodies, raising concerns of environmental injustice.

Environmental Contamination and Public Health Concerns (SDG 3, 6, 14, 15)

The explosion released hazardous materials over a wide area, directly contravening the objectives of ensuring good health, clean water, and the protection of terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems.

Key Environmental Impacts

• Water Contamination (SDG 6, SDG 14): Petroleum products and an oily residue contaminated the Tangipahoa River, traveling nearly 40 miles downstream towards Lake Pontchartrain. Adjacent ponds and potentially the local aquifer, a primary water source for homes and farms, are at risk. Water tests conducted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) confirmed traces of petrochemicals miles from the plant.
• Air and Soil Pollution (SDG 3, SDG 11, SDG 15): A plume of thick black smoke dispersed soot and a chemical odor across an estimated 40-mile radius. Residue found on properties contained hazardous heavy metals. Official and independent testing confirmed the presence of the following substances:
  1. Arsenic
  2. Barium
  3. Lead
  4. Chromium
• Public Health Risks (SDG 3): Residents report immediate and long-term health concerns due to exposure to contaminated air, water, and soil. The presence of known carcinogens and toxic heavy metals poses a significant threat to community well-being, forcing residents to purchase drinking water and limit outdoor activities.

Social Disruption and Institutional Failures (SDG 10, 11, 16)

The incident and the subsequent response have undermined the goals of creating sustainable, inclusive communities and ensuring justice through effective institutions. Concerns of inequality and environmental injustice are prominent among the affected population.

Community and Institutional Response

• Impact on Community Life (SDG 11): The explosion prompted mandatory evacuations within a one-mile radius. Lingering concerns over air quality led to restrictions on outdoor activities for children as far as twenty miles away, disrupting community life and safety.
• Inequality and Environmental Justice (SDG 10): With a population that is 54% Black, residents of Roseland have expressed feelings that the slow and inadequate institutional response is linked to the town’s racial makeup. This perception points to a failure to reduce inequalities and protect vulnerable communities from environmental hazards.
• Erosion of Trust in Institutions (SDG 16): The community has voiced significant distrust in the EPA and state agencies. Residents report a lack of direct engagement and transparency from officials. The decision to hand cleanup oversight to the company responsible for the pollution, Smitty’s Supply, further weakened public confidence in regulatory bodies.

Corporate Accountability and Regulatory Context (SDG 8, 12)

The explosion at Smitty’s Supply is contextualized by a history of corporate negligence and a permissive regulatory environment, which conflicts with the principles of responsible production and decent work.

Systemic Issues

1. History of Non-Compliance (SDG 12): Smitty’s Supply has a documented history of environmental violations, incurring over $160,000 in fines from the EPA in the five years preceding the explosion for releasing pollutants into the river. This pattern indicates a failure in responsible corporate management of chemicals and waste.
2. Economic Activity vs. Environmental Safety (SDG 8): While the plant is a major employer, the incident demonstrates a conflict between economic growth and the well-being of the community and environment. The lack of enforcement of safety and environmental regulations undermines the goal of achieving sustainable economic productivity.
3. Regulatory Weaknesses (SDG 16): The event occurred within a broader context of deregulation in Louisiana, which houses 25% of the nation’s petrochemical production. State and federal policies, including generous tax breaks and exemptions from air pollution rules, have prioritized industrial growth over public and environmental health, failing to build effective and accountable institutions.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The article discusses the potential short-term and long-term health impacts on residents due to exposure to hazardous chemicals like arsenic, lead, and chromium released into the air, water, and soil. Residents express deep concerns about how the pollution will affect their bodies.
• SDG 6: Clean Water and Sanitation: The explosion led to significant water pollution. The article explicitly states that petroleum pollution and petrochemicals have seeped into the Tangipahoa River, adjacent ponds, and other waterways, contaminating water sources for homes and farms and traveling forty miles downstream.
• SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth: The article presents a conflict between economic activity and environmental safety. Smitty’s Supply is described as an “economic engine” employing nearly 500 people, but its operations have led to severe environmental degradation and health risks, highlighting the challenge of decoupling economic growth from environmental harm.
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities: The article raises the issue of environmental justice. It notes that some residents in the majority-Black (54%) town of Roseland feel that their community’s racial makeup contributed to the “slow and inadequate response” from the EPA, suggesting a potential inequality in the application of environmental protection.
• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities: The chemical explosion directly impacted the safety and sustainability of the Roseland community. It prompted mandatory evacuations, created hazardous living conditions with contaminated air and soil, and made outdoor public spaces unsafe for children.
• SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production: The core issue is the failure of a company to manage hazardous chemicals and waste responsibly. The explosion at a plant manufacturing lubricants and antifreeze, coupled with its “long history of environmental violations,” points directly to a failure in achieving environmentally sound management of industrial chemicals and pollutants.
• SDG 15: Life on Land: The pollution has damaged terrestrial and freshwater ecosystems. The article describes soot containing heavy metals covering yards and farmland, and petroleum products contaminating the Tangipahoa River, affecting the soil, local animals, and the river ecosystem.
• SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions: The article highlights a breakdown of trust in public institutions. Residents feel “disregarded” and “in the dark” due to the perceived failure of the EPA and state government to enforce regulations, provide a satisfactory emergency response, and ensure a transparent cleanup process.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 3.9: By 2030, substantially reduce the number of deaths and illnesses from hazardous chemicals and air, water and soil pollution and contamination.
   • The release of a “plume of thick black smoke” and soot containing “arsenic, barium, lead, and chromium” directly relates to this target, as these substances pose a significant risk of illness from air, water, and soil contamination.
2. Target 6.3: By 2030, improve water quality by reducing pollution, eliminating dumping and minimizing release of hazardous chemicals and materials.
   • The article details how “petroleum pollution from the explosion has seeped into the Tangipahoa River” and traveled forty miles, which is a direct failure to meet this target of reducing water pollution from hazardous chemicals.
3. Target 11.6: By 2030, reduce the adverse per capita environmental impact of cities, including by paying special attention to air quality and… waste management.
   • The incident created a significant adverse environmental impact on the Roseland community, with poor air quality forcing children to stay indoors and chemical residue contaminating homes and yards.
4. Target 12.4: By 2020, achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil in order to minimize their adverse impacts on human health and the environment.
   • The explosion and the company’s history of “repeatedly releasing pollutants” represent a clear failure to manage chemicals and wastes in an environmentally sound manner, leading to their release into the air, water, and soil.
5. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.
   • The community’s feeling of being “in the dark” and the perception of a “slow and inadequate response” from the EPA suggest a lack of effectiveness, accountability, and transparency from the institutions responsible for environmental protection and emergency response.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Presence and concentration of hazardous substances: The article explicitly mentions that tests revealed the presence of “arsenic, barium, lead, and chromium” in soot and “traces of petrochemicals” in water. An independent tester measured “twenty-nine different metals.” These findings serve as direct indicators for measuring pollution levels (Targets 3.9, 6.3, 12.4).
• Extent of environmental contamination: The article states that the chemical odor and residue spread for “around forty miles” and that oily materials traveled “forty miles downstream.” This geographic spread is a key indicator of the scale of the environmental damage (Targets 6.3, 15.1).
• Qualitative air quality reports: Descriptions such as a “plume of thick black smoke,” a “chemical odor,” and the fact that “children twenty miles away… were not allowed to play outside due to concerns over the air quality” act as qualitative indicators of reduced air quality (Target 11.6).
• History of regulatory non-compliance: The mention that the EPA levied “over $160,000 in fines against Smitty’s Supply” in the preceding five years is an indicator of the company’s persistent failure to comply with environmental regulations (Target 12.4).
• Public trust and perception of institutions: Residents’ statements about feeling “disregarded,” that officials “don’t care because of who lives here,” and the lack of direct engagement from EPA officials are strong qualitative indicators of a lack of trust and perceived institutional failure (Target 16.6).
• Demographic data related to environmental impact: The article points out that Roseland’s population is “about 54 percent… Black,” which, when combined with residents’ perceptions of neglect, serves as an implied indicator for investigating potential environmental injustice (Target 10.2).

4. Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: progressive.org