Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2024 Jan 31.
Published in final edited form as: Clim Risk Manag. 2023 Jun 15;41:100532. doi: 10.1016/j.crm.2023.100532

Unseen Risk: Mapping Contamination Hazards to Enhance Risk Perception in Galena Park, Texas

Ryun Jung Lee a, Zhihan Tao b, Sara Prybutok b, Suji Jang c, Chimeddulam Dalaijamts c, Weihsueh A Chiu c,d, Galen Newman b
PMCID: PMC10830168  NIHMSID: NIHMS1957307  PMID: 38298905

Abstract

As extreme weather events have become more frequently observed in recent decades, concerns about exposure to potential flood risk have increased, especially in underserved and socially vulnerable communities. Galena Park, Texas, is a socially vulnerable community that also confronts escalated physical vulnerabilities due to existing flood risks from Buffalo Bayou and the Houston Ship Channel as well as proximity to industrial facilities that emit chemical pollution. To better understand the underlying risks that Galena Park is facing, this research assesses and visualizes the existing contamination hazards associated with the chemical facilities within Galena Park. Through this process, we (1) compute the environmental, health, and physical hazards associated with industrial facilities, (2) spatially geocode the points of contamination sources and flood exposure, and (3) increase awareness of existing risk by visualizing and distributing related information using an ArcGIS Dashboard. The results indicate that there are 169 points of location from 127 industrial facilities, and 24 points were inducing potential chemicals. In total, 126 chemicals have potential physical, health, and environmental hazards. On average, each facility has 2.4 chemicals that could cause potential hazards with a range of zero to 57 chemicals. When examining the specific physical, health, and environmental risks associated with the chemicals, on average each facility has 14.6 types of risks associated with it. This includes, on average, 9.8 types of health hazards, 1.53 physical hazards, and 2.3 environmental hazards per facility. When analyzing the spatial relationship between the chemical exposure and the current flood risk using the Dashboard, it is noticeable that most of the industrial facilities are located in the south of Galena Park, near Buffalo Bayou, where a variety of industrial facilities are clustered. Through this study, we spatially mapped the existing risks in Galena Park that are not readily available to the community and risks that are not currently tangible or visible. The utility of ArcGIS Dashboards affords the opportunity to translate massive databases into digestible knowledge that can be shared and utilized within the community. This study also takes another step toward building community resilience by providing knowledge that can be used to prepare for and respond to disasters. Visualizing unseen risks and promoting awareness can enhance risk perception when supported by scientific knowledge. Further investigation is necessary to enhance preparedness behaviors, identify proper evacuation techniques and routes, and build community networks to comprehensively promote resilience to multi-hazard circumstances.

Keywords: ArcGIS Dashboards, Galena Park, Texas, Contamination hazards, Flood risk, Environmental justice

Introduction

As extreme weather events have become more frequently observed in recent decades, concerns about exposure to potential flood risk have increased, especially in underserved and socially vulnerable communities. The long history of environmental injustice in the U.S. has shown that socially vulnerable communities have higher exposure to potential environmental risks, as evidenced by numerous studies on the historic exposure to contamination from chemical spills (Churchill et al., 2001). Simultaneously, it has become more difficult to deal with natural disasters caused by extreme weather events as global temperature increases over time with more frequent rainfalls (Knutson et al., 2019, Knutson and Tuleya, 2004) and sea level rise (USGCRP (U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program), 2017) increasing flooding risk (Kay et al., 2021). From an environmental justice viewpoint, the identification of existing multi-hazard risks in vulnerable communities has become even more critical in the face of climate change (Lee, 2021). Galena Park is an underserved community located north of Buffalo Bayou along the Houston ship channel in Coastal Texas. In the past decades, Galena Park has experienced numerous flood events (Newman, Cai, et al., 2021), including inundation from Hurricanes Harvey and Ike as well as Tropical Storm Allison, as the community is situated along the 100- and 500- year floodplains with a higher risk of flooding and storm surge compared to other inland communities.

The Houston metro area has a unique land use pattern due to its exemption in designating zoning regulations that can separate land uses. Due to this, lower-income cities and communities such as Galena Park have are typically located near industrial facilities which can expose residents to hazardous chemicals (Han et al., 2022, Olaguer, 2020)). The city’s proximity to nearby industrial facilities has eventually led areas in Galena Park to experience both direct and indirect exposure to potential hazard risks caused by chemical exposure; cancer risk has been reported in the form of air pollutants through Benzene (Yacovitch, 2015) and soil contamination with a heavy metal concentration (Han et al., 2022). Even with the numerous studies on the contamination issues within the city, residents have limited access to information and knowledge on their existing risk factors.

After Hurricane Harvey hit the Houston region in the fall of 2017, a large chemical spill was reported in Galena Park (Miller and Craft, 2018; Newman, Cai, et al., 2021; Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, 2017), increasing the already-vulnerable community’s health concerns. Considering that Hurricane Harvey damaged almost 12% of the structures in Harris County (Han et al., 2022), Galena Park was no exception as structural damages occurred where many of the industrial facilities are concentrated. Limited access to resources and awareness of the long-term effects of chemical exposure on human health are negatively impacting the city. It has been difficult for Galena Park residents to comprehend the unseen risks and exactly to what extent each chemical facility is elevating the chemical exposure levels and affecting residents’ health risks.

1.1. Chemical contamination and environmental injustice

Historically, marginalized communities have been exposed to a greater risk from chemical contamination associated with pollution from industrial land uses compared to other communities. Many studies have shown that communities in close proximity to industrial sites tend to have more vulnerable groups of populations, including lower income and ethnic minorities (Chakraborty et al., 2014, Churchill et al., 2001). Such communities also tend to experience social stressors from having lower socioeconomic status, making it even more challenging to deal with potential environmental hazards from nearby industries (Johnston and Cushing, 2020, Landrigan et al., 2010, Pasetto et al., 2019). Attempts to decrease the impacts of this exposure to pollutant loads have continued, but the effort is typically less effective in marginalized communities as they are more vulnerable to such exposure and also typically have limited resources and social power (Johnston and Cushing, 2020), resulting in concerns of environmental injustice (Pasetto et al., 2019).

Environmental injustice related to the disproportionate exposure to hazards is well discussed in the literature on industrial sites that can release synthetical chemical compounds. Many studies have addressed the U.S.’s historic stigma which deepened residential segregation and environmental justice concerns, particularly in African American and lower-income minority communities (Bullard and Johnson, 2000, Iceland et al., 2002). The concept of environmental injustice is directly related to spatially disproportionate lower-income minority communities that typically have higher levels of exposure to environmental hazards than affluent communities (Landrigan et al., 2010). While the environmental risk of hazard exposure is well-known, the disproportionate exposure for marginalized communities is concerning (Gochfeld and Burger, 2011), especially in relation to potential human health risks and issues (Landrigan et al., 2010, Pasetto et al., 2019). The disparities of health conditions in marginalized communities can be exacerbated by environmental injustice (Landrigan et al., 2010), making the already vulnerable populations encounter additional hardships (Bhandari et al., 2022). There is, therefore, a necessity to focus on the health impact on populations that have less social power (Gochfeld and Burger, 2011), and, thus, interventions are needed to reduce injustices in exposure to hazards (Malecha et al., 2020).

Recently, climate change has added to concerns about existing environmental hazards in the socially vulnerable communities, and further accelerated health concerns. Existing hazard risks can be amplified by, for example, unexpected chemical release caused by extreme weather events, which are more frequent than ever (Johnston and Cushing, 2020). In fact, many urbanized areas are suffering from flooding, hurricane, storm surge, draught, and wildfire more than ever, in modern history (Greenough et al., 2001). The primary concern of exposure to toxic chemicals in marginalized communities in relation to climate change is when flood events or damages from hurricanes accelerate contamination processes in water and soil, which then directly and indirectly impact community health (Hendricks et al., 2018). Marginalized communities that are already experiencing other social and economic stressors typically also have health concerns due to their limited access to health facilities and healthy food and inadequate housing condition (Johnston and Cushing, 2020). It is also worthy to note that chemical exposure is especially dangerous for younger ages such as infants and children due to their biological vulnerability. Unfortunately, it is already known that children in marginalized communities have more symptoms of asthma, lead poisoning, and obesity (Landrigan et al., 2010).

1.2. Community risk perception of environmental hazards

Sharing knowledge on existing and potential hazards exposure can improve risk perception and awareness, which should actually be the first step for potential hazard mitigation. Proper knowledge is critical for chemical-related risks that are typically not visually observable as these impacts are rather long-term (Quandt et al., 1998, Villanueva et al., 2014). While other hazard types, such as flooding and hurricanes, are more immediate and their impacts are more visible, chemical exposure is difficult to capture due to its limited physical presence in communities. Thus, related information on preventing pollution sources, protecting residents from exposure, and post-exposure remediation can be valuable for marginalized communities (Johnston and Cushing, 2020). Residents who live close to industrial facilities that emit chemical pollution might know about potential risk, but if specific knowledge is not provided, the level of risk perception would not be equivalent to the actual risk level (Liu et al., 2020). Simultaneously, sharing complicated scientific knowledge with the general public requires a strategic approach (King et al., 2021), as such knowledge is commonly characterized by complex technical terms and jargon which can be confusing to people unfamiliar with certain research fields, namely residents (Gudi et al., 2021). Even when such knowledge is publicly accessible (e.g. from a national database), there can still barriers to access the knowledge locally, making it difficult to take action or utilize it for specific purposes (Johnston and Cushing, 2020).

Galena Park is no exception; better knowledge can enhance risk perception in the city. Galena Park is a lower-profile city in terms of emergency preparation and risk perception associated with industrial facilities. Several facilities in Galena Park have been reported to use hazardous chemicals that have released and caused concerns in the past (Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, 2017, The Right To Know Network, 2019). Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) site data in Galena Park is available, and there has been a recent concerted effort to share this dataset’s information with residents (Palenchar, 2022). Due to the complexity of the information itself, however, residents do not always necessarily have full access to the important aspects of the information contained within it. Residents often prefer to know about the risk from living close to industrial facilities through word-of-mouth, rather than through presentations from academics. While it may be ideal to avoid existing individual risk by relocation of homesteads, the place attachment formed over generations as well as limited budgets can make it difficult for residents to make a final decision to move out of their homes or relocate to a lower risk area. Thus, a more realistic approach can be to identify a way to convert existing information into community knowledge and action. Having community members involved in the investigation and collaboration process is an important step (Stevens et al., 2009) to potentially encourage actions and policy changes to which residents would agree to adhere (Johnston and Cushing, 2020).

Sophisticated methods to increase awareness and engage communities in sharing knowledge are an important step for proactive disaster preparedness. To share knowledge with communities, a dashboard platform has been discussed in diverse fields, for example, to promote public health by monitoring COVID-19 variants with respect to social determinants (Shi et al., 2022). Environmental Systems Research Institute (ESRI), a leading company in developing GIS software such as ArcGIS Pro, launched a dashboard builder system named Operations Dashboard in 2013, which later changed its name to ArcGIS Dashboards (Colgrove, 2020). Since, there have been attempts to use ArcGIS Dashboards as a tool to share public knowledge and visualize complex information. (Newman et al. 2021b) used ArcGIS Dashboards to monitor toxic substances in the events of flooding in Rhode Island. Another recent study at Pennsylvania State University used Dashboards to create a community-driven database that provides information of local collaborators for the water-energy-food nexus (Arenas et al., 2021).

1.3. Research objectives

ArcGIS Dashboards are a web-based interactive platforms that are used to effectively and creatively share spatial data to persons through a GIS format (Esri, 2020). A recent study used ArcGIS Dashboards to identify potential flood risk associated with chemical contamination in Galena Park and found that the sea level rise could deepen the existing flooding risk and there is inequality concerns (Newman, Cai, et al., 2021). However, the details of contamination risk were not provided in this Dashboard, therefore the full potential of the Dashboard was not fully utilized. To better understand the underlying risks that Galena Park is facing, this research assesses and visualizes the existing contamination hazards associated with the industrial facilities within Galena Park. Through this process, we (1) compute the environmental, health, and physical hazards associated with industrial facilities, (2) spatially geocode the points of contamination sources and flood exposure, and (3) increase awareness of existing risk by visualizing and distributing related information using an ArcGIS Dashboard. Through this study, we introduce a method that can be replicable in other communities to spatially geocode community risks that are often undetectable and unnoticeable.

2. Methods

2.1. Study area

Galena Park is a small city located in Harris County, Texas, tangentially east of Houston. Buffalo Bayou, which is connected to the Houston Ship Channel, passes through southern Galena Park. Due to its close proximity to the Houston Ship Channel, industrial facilities are commonly found along the bayou and near the city (Newman, Cai, et al., 2021). Galena Park has a population of 10,461 as of 2020 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022), with a relatively stable population in the past 10 years. With an 86.4% Hispanic population, Galena Park has a high level of social vulnerability with over 30% of population under age 65 without health insurance and a median household income of $47,849, which is far lower than the average median income of Harris County ($63,022) (U.S. Census Bureau, 2022). When examining the level of social vulnerability of the community using the Center for Disease Control (CDC)’s Social Vulnerability index (Fig. 1), which was calculated using 15 social factors (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ Geospatial Research, 2020), a majority of the city’s land has the highest vulnerability, except for the eastern portion of the city (while still fairly high). While Galena Park is not the only vulnerable community located in Harris County, its proximity to industrial facilities and existing floodplains has magnified its hazard risk levels.

Fig. 1.

Fig. 1.

Open in a new tab

Social Vulnerability of Galena Park in Relation to Houston Metro, Texas.

2.2. Collecting, cleaning, and geocoding chemical facility information and their hazard risks

To visually assess the current inventory of industrial facilities in and around Galena Park, we 1) cleaned the facility and chemical data, 2) geocoded industrial facility information with floodplain data and 3) created an interactive mapping platform using an ArcGIS Dashboard. First, it is critical that the collected industrial facilities and associated chemical data are manageable for geocoding. This requires having only one point for each facility with an attribute table that includes latitude and longitude coordinates, facility information, chemicals, and potential associated hazards. An initial list of facilities was identified using the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) Central Registry (https://www15.tceq.texas.gov/crpub/ [downloaded 8-Nov-2021]) using “Galena” as the “city” name. These were curated by keeping only “active” registrations and permits. Data on pollutants at each facility were obtained by searching both the TCEQ registry, as well as the following U.S. EPA databases: Toxic Releases Inventory facilities (https://enviro.epa.gov/triexplorer/tri_release.chemical), Envirofacts (https://enviro.epa.gov), Facility Registry Service (https://www.epa.gov/frs/frs-query), and Enforcement and Compliance History Online (https://echo.epa.gov). After manually removing duplicate entries, a total of 127 facilities were identified, of which 24 had data on regulated pollutants used at or emitted by the facility.

The union of all pollutants across all facilities was then curated for duplicates, resulting in 126 chemical substances. Each chemical’s hazards were identified using Globally Harmonized System (GHS) classifications from the Japanese National Institute of Technology and Evaluation, Chemical Management Center (https://www.nite.go.jp/chem/english/ghs/ghs_download.html [downloaded 3-Dec-2021]). This database was used because among the OECD databases (https://www.echemportal.org/echemportal/ghs-search), it had the most complete coverage of the chemical substances we identified as being associated with Galena Park facilities. We also had to manually clean the chemical names due to the different methods of recording chemicals across datasets.

Many of the facilities examined have multiple locations with dozens of chemicals. Each chemical is also associated with numerous physical, health, and environmental hazards. In order to identify hazard types associated with the chemicals per facility, we identified facilities with multiple locations across the community to geocode them separately. Then, we matched the chemical types with the hazard information since each chemical is associated with different hazards. Using the information collected above, we then identified different types of hazards (environment, health, and physical) based on the categories from the GHS.

2.3. Measuring chemical hazards by facility

To quantify the amount of chemicals or the magnitude of hazardous chemicals, several pieces of information were reviewed. First, each chemical has different types of hazards, and some types of hazards use different severity categories (Category 1 being the most hazardous and subsequent categories being less hazardous). Second, each facility includes information on the amount of chemicals exposed within the city. Unfortunately, there was no best way to use this information, as cross-examining different types and units of chemicals is nearly impossible. Instead, we had to quantify the total number of hazards associated with each specific chemical. Specifically, we identified: 1) the total number of chemicals per facility associated with physical, health, and environmental hazards and, 2) the total count of physical, health, and environmental hazards per facility. It should be noted that this method may not fully represent the exact measures of chemicals with specific units, but it does provide a valid approach to measure the magnitude of hazardous chemicals and hazards associated with individual facilities to guide the general public. This method is also beneficial in that the approach can be used in other cities or communities when multiple chemical risks need to be examined across space. Table 1 illustrates the final outcome of the information geocoded with GIS.

Table 1.

Description of chemicals and hazards by facility used in ArcGIS Dashboard.

Column Description
Facility ID Unique facility ID
Facility information Facility name, primary business, industry type, address
Coordinate Latitude and Longitude for each facility point
Chemical list Names of chemicals associated with each facility
Counts of hazards Physical hazard Total count of physical hazards associated with a facility
Health hazard Total count of health hazards associated with a facility
Environmental hazard Total count of environmental hazards associated with a facility
Total hazard Total count of any hazards associated with a facility
Counts of chemicals Physical hazard Total count of chemical inducing physical hazards
Health hazard Total count of chemical inducing health hazards
Environmental hazard Total count of chemical inducing environmental hazards
Total hazard Total count of chemical inducing any types of hazards
Open in a new tab

2.4. Mapping and Visualizing with GIS

Using the coordinates provided for each facility, we created point data using the XY Table to Point function in ArcGIS Pro. This process was necessary to spatially map the facilities and associated chemical hazards information that we collected. We then changed the symbology to represent the quantity of hazards by facility. Although our intention was to compare different types of hazards, through this process, we realized that there was not much variation between hazard types; the facilities with more physical hazards typically had more environmental and health hazards. Thus, we kept these different hazard types in the attribute table as detailed information, and only used the total counts of hazard associated with the chemicals from each facility, for visualization purposes (See Table 1 for the descriptions of total hazards).

Eventually, we chose to display two maps for the Dashboard: 1) a map displaying different sizes of circles representing the number of hazards and 2) a map that shows the points of each facility with different colors representing the types of chemical causing hazards on a satellite map. While the information seems repetitive, we intentionally created the second map to use it for zoomed-in information when certain facility was selected from the first map. A floodplain map was also added to visually illustrate the relationship between industrial facilities and flood exposure since it has been reported that flooding issues can cause chemical spills and exacerbate contamination issues. Communities with already existing flood risk may also be at risk of chemical spills. Thus, identifying both datasets together is critical for the purposes of this research and Galena Park. We then uploaded these maps to the ESRI Online system to publicly publish the information.

2.5. Interactive mapping with ArcGIS Dashboards

ArcGIS Dashboards were chosen as our platform to publicly share the level of chemical exposure through maps and provide facility information simultaneously. ArcGIS Dashboards are an interactive mapping platform provided by the ESRI online system. The benefit of this platform is to share charts and graphs associated with the maps and provide users to navigate the map on their own without having to learn how to open a shapefile or how to visualize information within a GIS-related program. As noted, such Dashboards have been used to spatially examine existing community risks. For example, an existing study (Newman et al., 2021) used Dashboards to measure storm surge, flood risk, and chemical risk together for the Galena Park community. While the existing study has already attempted to spatially gauge potential chemical spills in Galena Park, the research has limited information about the facilities, and no specific chemical or hazard types were introduced. Our study utilizes a similar platform, but with more in-depth knowledge on chemical types of the facilities to advance the existing attempt to use Dashboards and provide more accurate information of the risk the community is confronting. The chemical facility dashboard we created can be found here: https://tamu.maps.arcgis.com/apps/dashboards/1776af3892f441109352e7892f556b0f.

While the maps exported through ArcGIS Pro show the overall counts of hazard by facility, using Dashboards, we also provide additional information such as total hazards and chemical counts by hazard type. As Fig. 2 shows, we located the right map as a zoomed-in version where more immediate contextual information is provided through satellite image. We took advantage of the interactive functionality by adding a tool to select facilities individually and as a group from the map on the left. When a facility is selected, the detailed information automatically shows up on a zoomed-in map, and the charts are updated for the selected features.

Fig. 2.

Fig. 2.

Open in a new tab

Dashboard interface for industrial facilities within and around Galena Park, Texas.

3. Results

3.1. An overview of the industrial facilities and their associated hazards

In and around Galena Park, we found that there are 169 points of location from 127 facilities. These facilities include retail buildings, manufacturing plants, fuel tank farms, oil distilling and chemical processing plants, bulk liquid storage terminals, and related industrial structures. When potential chemicals associated with each facility were examined, not all the facilities, in fact, had chemical hazards. Among 169 points, only 35 points were inducing potential chemicals. These 24 facilities in total, however, include 126 chemicals that could generate physical, health, and environmental hazards. The specific hazards associated with physical, health, and environmental hazards are listed in Table 2.

Table 2.

Types of hazards and the details.

Hazard types Details
Physical hazard Explosives, Flammable gases (including chemically unstable gases), Aerosols, Oxidizing gases, Gases under pressure, Flammable liquids, Flammable solids, Self-reactive substances and mixtures, Pyrophoric liquids, Pyrophoric solids, Self-heating substances and mixtures, Substances and mixtures which, in contact with water, emit flamm, Oxidizing liquids, Oxidizing solids, Organic peroxides, Corrosive to metals, Desensitized explosives
Health hazards Acute toxicity (Oral), Acute toxicity (Dermal), Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Gases), Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Vapours), Acute toxicity (Inhalation: Dusts and mists), Skin corrosion/irritation, Serious eye damage/eye irritation, Respiratory sensitization, Skin sensitization, Germ cell mutagenicity, Carcinogenicity, Reproductive toxicity, Specific target organ toxicity - Single exposure, Specific target organ toxicity - Repeated exposure, Aspiration hazard
Environmental hazards Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Acute), Hazardous to the aquatic environment (Long-term), Hazardous to the ozone layer
Open in a new tab

Source: Japanese National Institute of Technology and Evaluation, Chemical Management Center (https://www.nite.go.jp/chem/english/ghs/ghs_download.html

The Dashboard shows the potential hazards of the facilities within and near Galena Park. On average, each facility has 2.4 chemicals that could cause potential hazards with a range of zero to 57 chemicals. There are 37 chemicals with physical risk (with an average of 1.3 chemicals per facility), 53 chemicals associated with health risk (on average 2.1 chemicals per facility), and 28 chemicals with environmental risk (on average 1.2 chemicals per facility). While the specific types of risk may differ by chemicals, this assessment clearly shows the extent of the potential risk within Galena Park. When examining the specific physical, health, and environmental risks associated with the chemicals, on average each facility has 14.6 types of risks associated with it. This includes, on average, 9.8 types of health hazards, 1.53 physical hazards, and 2.3 environmental hazards per facility. It is notable that the structural conditions of the facilities could also be an important aspect contributing to potential hazards, which has been excluded from this study due to the limited information publicly available.

This Dashboard is also beneficial to examine more specific areas by selecting the facilities or areas of interest. Fig. 3 shows an example of the view when selecting a zoomed-in commercial area (Clinton Drive, Galena Park, TX) where 8 facilities exist. When these 8 facilities are selected, the Dashboard calculates the average number of chemicals causing physical, health, and environmental hazards. In this case, the averages are 1.7, 3, and 2, respectively, showing a higher level of chemicals compared to the overall average (1.3, 2.1, and 1.3 respectively) in and around Galena Park.

Fig. 3.

Fig. 3.

Open in a new tab

Dashboard usage to select a specific area (around Clinton Drive, Galena Park, Texas).

3.2. The spatial patterns of current flood risk and chemical exposure

When analyzing the spatial relationship between the chemical exposure and the current flood risk using the Dashboard (Fig. 4), it is noticeable that most of the facilities with chemical hazards are located in the south of Galena Park, near Buffalo Bayou, where a variety of industrial facilities are clustered. In total, there are 127 facilities (of the total 169 points) within and around Galena Park. Among the facilities, 24 facilities use chemicals that could increase physical, health, and environmental hazards, and 39 facilities are located within FEMA 100- and 500-year floodplains. 11 facilities within FEMA 100- and 500-year floodplains use chemicals increasing physical, health, and environmental hazards. While it may have been an inevitable decision to locate the facilities close to the Houston ship channel for their locational benefits, the potential accumulated risk in a combination of chemicals and flood hazards is concerning.

Fig. 4.

Fig. 4.

Open in a new tab

The relationship between flood risk and chemical exposure in and around Galena Park, Texas.

4. Discussion

Sharing knowledge is the very first step to promote resilience to potential hazard especially in underserved communities like Galena Park, Texas. While information on potential hazards associated with industrial facilities is publicly available, the raw data were not transformable as community knowledge. This study utilizes ArcGIS Dashboards to create an online platform that can be easily shared with the community. Using Dashboards, we are able to show the spatial association between existing flood risk and industrial facilities that can induce hazardous chemicals. A few takeaways can be addressed as follows.

4.1. Transforming digital database into community knowledge

As digitally available data are now prevalent, the new challenge is to determine how to best utilize all the available data and determine which information in the data can be transformed as useful knowledge. For a highly socially vulnerable city such as Galena Park, it is especially critical to collect and share knowledge that can benefit its communities. This study disentangles complex data from multiple sources and converts these data into useful knowledge to keep the city resilient to potential climate disasters and spillover effects from chemical transferal during flooding. Through this study, we spatially pinpoint the location of the facilities that can induce potential environmental, physical, and health hazards. We also visually represent the level of potential contamination using ArcGIS Dashboards.

Utilizing ArcGIS Dashboards affords the opportunity to translate massive databases into digestible knowledge that can be shared and utilized within the community. We integrated different types of data sources such as chemical hazards (from TCEQ and GHS data) and floodplains (from FEMA) into one map to analyze the spatial relationship of the different types of risk to Galena Park. ArcGIS Dashboards allow the benefit of going beyond typical GIS data mapping and calculate the average chemical risks through charts and graphs from the GIS data (see Fig. 2). It is also notable that the interactive platform can also show tailored information on the specific facilities selected by users and provides more user-specific knowledge. Finally, through the ArcGIS Dashboard, we can visualize the location of the industrial facilities, the types of chemicals and associated hazards, and their relationship with flood risk in the community all in one screen.

4.2. Visualizing the unseen risk in Galena Park, Texas to promote environmental justice

Through this study, we spatially mapped the existing risks in Galena Park that are not readily available to the community and risks that are not currently tangible or visible. While existing industrial facilities within and around Galena Park have brought some health concerns to the city’s residents, the details may not be so straightforward or easy to comprehend. The types of chemicals released from each industrial facility and the types of hazards associated with the chemicals are a long list that are not visually identifiable without a digital platform. Additionally, the physical, environmental, and health effects of the chemicals are rather long term and may not observable immediately. As risk perceptions and knowledge are the key for disaster preparedness (Coughlan de Perez et al., 2022), further concerns could be elevated if the knowledge is not provided to the community in a tangible format. In the case of flood risk, its scope may be more obvious for community members as they have experienced flood events in the past. However, its relationship with chemical risks is rather complex and difficult to visually understand through experience alone. Through this study, we were able to identify the potential accumulated risk in the south side of the community where a large scale of chemical hazards and flood risk are both observed. At the same time, this study is limited to identifying potential chemical hazards near Galena Park. The way these industrial facilities actually treat these chemicals and the actual route of potential exposure need more attention to fully understand how severe the current risk is for the residents. For a socially vulnerable community like Galena Park, sharing knowledge and information is eventually the key to promoting environmental justice.

4.3. Building resilience to physical and social vulnerability in Galena Park, Texas

Galena Park is at a disadvantage in that it is a socially vulnerable community that also confronts escalated physical vulnerabilities due to close proximity to industrial facilities with potential chemical pollution and existing flood risks. Due to the unique condition in the Houston metropolitan area where no zoning exists, Galena Park residents have potential health risks through diverse means of contamination from the industrial facilities. Potential air pollution as well as soil contamination exists and these risks can be greater when coupled with the existing risk of flooding, since much of the city is situated within 500 and 100-year floodplains. At the same time, the conditions in Galena Park are, sadly, not a unique case. Communities that are socially vulnerable tend to be at a greater risk with fewer resources or knowledge to prepare and respond to potential disaster (Morrow, 1999), which falls under the umbrella of environmental injustice. Yet, promoting social and physical resilience to existing and known risks is rather complex.

This study also takes another step toward building community resilience by providing knowledge that can be used to prepare for and respond to disasters. More specifically, this research helps to share circumstances for compounding factors in multi-risk situations when knowledge is usually readily available due to the complexity of such situations and that existing disasters are magnified by multiple additional risks (i.e., flooding). The results, therefore, build resilience through enhanced knowledge relevant to community issues, which is a critical need in today’s society, especially when considering climate change. As building community resilience typically takes four steps – preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery (Blanchard, 2008) – promoting community knowledge should not be the last step in the process, but the first step. Visualizing unseen risks and promoting awareness can enhance risk perception when supported by scientific knowledge. Further investigation is necessary to enhance preparedness behaviors, identify proper evacuation techniques and routes, and build community networks to comprehensively promote resilience to multi-hazard circumstances.

Highlights.

  • Galena Park, Texas, is exposed to industrial facilities where flood risks exist.

  • 126 chemicals were identified that could induce physical, health, and environmental hazards.

  • On average, each facility has 2.4 chemicals that could cause potential hazards.

  • ArcGIS Dashboard affords the opportunity to create sharable community knowledge.

  • Visualizing unseen risks can enhance risk perception and build community resilience.

Acknowledgement

The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Ryun Jung Lee and Galen Newman report financial support was provided by United States Environmental Protection Agency. Weihsueh A. Chiu reports financial support was provided by National Institutes of Health and United States Environmental Protection Agency.

Footnotes

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Data availability

Data will be made available on request.

References

  1. Arenas M, Femeena PV, Brennan RA, 2021. The water–energy–food nexus discovery map: linking geographic information systems, academic collaboration, and large-scale data visualization. Sustainability 13 (9). 10.3390/su13095220. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Bhandari S, Casillas G, Aly N, Zhu R, Newman G, Wright F, Miller A, Adler G, Rusyn I, Chiu W, 2022. Spatial and temporal analysis of impacts of Hurricane Florence on criteria air pollutants. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 19 (3), 1757. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Blanchard BW, 2008. Guide to emergency management and related terms, definitions, concepts, acronyms, organizations, programs, guidance, executive orders & legislation: A tutorial on emergency management, broadly defined, past and present. United States, Federal Emergency Management Agency. [Google Scholar]
  4. Bullard RD, Johnson GS, 2000. Environmentalism and public policy: Environmental justice: Grassroots activism and its impact on public policy decision making. J. Soc. Issues 56 (3), 555–578. [Google Scholar]
  5. U.S. Census Bureau. (2022). QuickFacts. Retrieved Aug 1, 2022 from https://www.census.gov/quickfacts.
  6. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/ Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry/ Geospatial Research, A., and Services Program,. (2020). CDC/ATSDR
  7. Social Vulnerability Index 2020. Database. Retrieved Nov 1, 2022 from https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/placeandhealth/svi/data_documentation_download.html.
  8. Chakraborty J, Collins TW, Grineski SE, Montgomery MC, Hernandez M, 2014. Comparing disproportionate exposure to acute and chronic pollution risks: a case study in Houston, Texas. Risk Analysis 34 (11), 2005–2020. 10.1111/risa.12224. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Churchill JE, Ashley DL, Kaye WE, 2001. Recent chemical exposures and blood volatile organic compound levels in a large population-based sample. Arch. Environ. Health: Int. J. 56 (2), 157–166. 10.1080/00039890109604068. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Colgrove D (2020). Introducing ArcGIS Dashboards: A Solution for Everyone. Esri. Retrieved August 1, 2022 from https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/ops-dashboard/announcements/introducing-arcgis-dashboards/. [Google Scholar]
  11. Coughlan de Perez E, Berse KB, Depante LAC, Easton-Calabria E, Evidente EPR, Ezike T, Heinrich D, Jack C, Lagmay AMFA, Lendelvo S, Marunye J, Maxwell DG, Murshed SB, Orach CG, Pinto M, Poole LB, Rathod K, Shampa, & Van Sant C (2022). Learning from the past in moving to the future: Invest in communication and response to weather early warnings to reduce death and damage. Climate Risk Management, 38. 10.1016/j.crm.2022.100461. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Esri. (2020). ArcGIS Dashboards. Esri. Retrieved March 1, 2022 from https://www.esri.com/en-us/arcgis/products/arcgis-dashboards/overview.
  13. Gochfeld M, & Burger J (2011). Disproportionate exposures in environmental justice and other populations: the importance of outliers. American journal of public health, 101(S1), S53–S63. (American Journal of Public Health). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Greenough G, McGeehin M, Bernard SM, Trtanj J, Riad J, Engelberg D, 2001. The potential impacts of climate variability and change on health impacts of extreme weather events in the United States. Environ. Health Perspect. 109 (suppl 2), 191–198. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Gudi SK, Tiwari KK, Panjwani K, 2021. Plain-language summaries: An essential component to promote knowledge translation. Int. J. Clin. Pract. 75 (6), e14140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Han I, Whitworth KW, Christensen B, Afshar M, Han HA, Rammah A, Oluwadairo T, Symanski E, 2022. Heavy metal pollution of soils and risk assessment in Houston, Texas following Hurricane Harvey. Environ. Pollut. 296, 118717. Environmental Pollution. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Hendricks M, Newman G, Yu S, Horney J, 2018. Leveling the Landscape: Landscape Performance as a Green Infrastructure Evaluation Tool for Service-Learning Products. Landsc. J. 37 (2), 19–39. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Iceland J, Weinberg DH, Steinmetz E, 2002. Racial and ethnic residential segregation in the United States 1980–2000, Vol. 8. Bureau of Census. [Google Scholar]
  19. Johnston J, Cushing L, 2020. Chemical exposures, health, and environmental justice in communities living on the fenceline of industry. Curr. Environ. Health Rep. 7 (1), 48–57. Current environmental health reports. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Kay AL, Rudd AC, Fry M, Nash G, Allen S, 2021. Climate change impacts on peak river flows: Combining national-scale hydrological modelling and probabilistic projections. Clim. Risk Manag. 31 10.1016/j.crm.2020.100263. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. King AC, Odunitan-Wayas FA, Chaudhury M, Rubio MA, Baiocchi M, Kolbe-Alexander T, Montes F, Banchoff A, Sarmiento OL, Balter K, Hinckson E, Chastin S, Lambert EV, Gonzalez SA, Guerra AM, Gelius P, Zha C, Sarabu C, Kakar PA, . . . On Behalf Of The Our Voice Global Citizen Science Research, N. (2021). Community-Based Approaches to Reducing Health Inequities and Fostering Environmental Justice through Global Youth-Engaged Citizen Science. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 18(3). 10.3390/ijerph18030892. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Knutson T, Camargo SJ, Chan JCL, Emanuel K, Ho C-H, Kossin J, Mohapatra M, Satoh M, Sugi M, Walsh K, Wu L (2019). Tropical Cyclones and Climate Change Assessment: Part I. Detection and Attribution. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. 10.1175/bams-d-18-0189.1. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Knutson TR, Tuleya RE, 2004. Impact of CO2-Induced Warming on Simulated Hurricane Intensity and Precipitation: Sensitivity to the Choice of Climate Model and Convective Parameterization. J. Clim. 17 (18), 3477–3495. . [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Landrigan PJ, Rauh VA, and Galvez MP (2010). Environmental justice and the health of children. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine, 77(2), 178–187. (Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Lee RJ, 2021. Vacant land, flood exposure, and urbanization: Examining land cover change in the Dallas-Fort Worth metro area. Landsc. Urban Plan. 209, 104047. [Google Scholar]
  26. Liu T, Zhang H, Li X, Zhang H, 2020. Individual factors influencing risk perceptions of hazardous chemicals in China. Environ. Res. 186, 109523 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109523. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Malecha M, Kirsch K, Karaye I, Newman G, Horney J, 2020. Advancing the Toxics Mobility Inventory: Development of a Toxics Mobility Vulnerability Index and Application in Harris County, TX. Sustain.: J. Record 13 (6), 282–291. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Miller AE, and Craft E (2018). Rapid-Response Local Monitoring of Toxic Air Pollution after Hurricane Harvey Addressing Complex Local and Global Issues in
  29. Environmental Exposure and Health, https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/isesisee.2018.S01.03.18.
  30. Morrow BH, 1999. Identifying and mapping community vulnerability. Disasters 23 (1), 1–18. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. Newman G, Malecha M, Atoba K, 2021. Integrating ToxPi outputs with ArcGIS Dashboards to identify neighborhood threat levels of contaminant transferal during flood events. J. Spat. Sci. 1–13 10.1080/14498596.2021.1891149. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  32. Olaguer EP (2020). Overview of the Benzene and Other Toxics Exposure (BEE-TEX) Field Study. Environmental Health Insights, 9(s4). (Environmental Health Insights). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  33. Palenchar MJ (2022). Risk communication and community right to know: A public relations obligation to inform.
  34. Pasetto R, Mattioli B, & Marsili D (2019). Environmental justice in industrially contaminated sites. A review of scientific evidence in the WHO European Region. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(6), 998. (International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health). [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  35. Quandt SA, Arcury TA, Austin CK, Saavedra RM, 1998. Farmworker and Farmer Perceptions of Farmworker Agricultural Chemical Exposure in North Carolina. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  36. Organ Hum 57 (3), 359–368. 10.17730/humo.57.3.n26161776pgg7371. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  37. Shi Q, Herbert C, Ward DV, Simin K, McCormick BA, Ellison III RT, Zai AH, 2022. COVID-19 Variant Surveillance and Social Determinants in Central Massachusetts: Development Study. JMIR Formative Research 6 (6), e37858. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  38. Stevens MR, Berke PR, Song Y, 2009. Public Participation in Local Government Review of Development Proposals in Hazardous Locations: Does it Matter, and What Do Local Government Planners Have to Do with It? Environ. Manag. 45 (2), 320–335. 10.1007/s00267-009-9397-2. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  39. Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. (2017). Air Emission Event Report Database Incident 266754. https://www2.tceq.texas.gov/oce/eer/index.cfm?fuseaction=main.getDetails&target=266754.
  40. The Right To Know Network. (2019). Risk Managment Plans (RMP). Retrieved 13-Sept from https://rtk.rjifuture.org/rmp/.
  41. USGCRP (U.S. Global Climate Change Research Program). (2017). Climate Change Special Report – Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume 1. [Google Scholar]
  42. Villanueva CM, Kogevinas M, Cordier S, Templeton MR, Vermeulen R, Nuckols JR, Nieuwenhuijsen MJ, Levallois P, 2014. Assessing exposure and health consequences of chemicals in drinking water: current state of knowledge and research needs. Environ Health Perspect 122 (3), 213–221. 10.1289/ehp.1206229. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  43. Yacovitch Tara I., S. C. H., Roscioli Joseph R., Floerchinger Cody, Knighton W. Berk, and Kolb Charles E.. (2015). Air Pollutant Mapping with a Mobile Laboratory during the BEE-TEX Field Study. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Data Availability Statement

Data will be made available on request.

RESOURCES