The investigation of the inferno at a recycling plant: Unsafe buildings and fire hazard caused by cumulative violations of the city’s code
While the cause of the inferno is still unknown, local leaders had been expressing concerns since at least 2019 that the recycling plant was riddled with fire hazards and building code violations, records show.
The fire may be releasing debris with hazardous materials from the incinerated plastic and so the EPA has been checking the air quality all night.
In the meantime, an evacuation order remains in effect for the approximately 2,000 residents who live within a half-mile radius of the plant. People who live close to the evacuated zone are told to shelter in place and avoid smoke exposure.
In 2019, the city’s Unsafe Building Commission found that the “cumulative effect of the code violations present” rendered “the premises unsafe, substandard, or a danger to the health and safety on the public,” according to meeting minutes obtained by CNN.
During a hearing by the commission, the plant’s owner, Seth Smith, admitted that one of the buildings on the property had no fire extinguishing system, the records show.
CNN tried to reach out to Smith but he did not reply. The attorney that previously represented Smith in a related lawsuit declined to comment.
The Fire Marshall’s Office said it would likely be several days before the fire stops burning and investigators can safely enter the plant to assess its cause.
The plant owner was accused of ignoring an order to clean up the property by the mayor, who said that city officials were aware of the fire hazard.
The fire began in a semitrailer loaded with plastics and then spread to surrounding piles of recyclables before eventually reaching the building, which was “completely full from floor to ceiling and from wall to wall,” Brown, fire chief, said. He said firefighters couldn’t reach the buildings because access roads were blocked by plastic.
Snow said that the business owner should be responsible for the damages and risk taken by the first responders.
An Indiana circuit court judge ruled in favor of the city in March 2020. Smith’s properties constituted a fire hazard, pose a hazard to public health, constitute a nuisance, and are dangerous to people or property due to violations of statute and the City Ordinance, as found by the court.
As toxins have not yet been discovered, the primary concern for residents is particulate matter, which can cause respiratory problems if you inhale it.
N95 masks – the kind widely used during the Covid-19 pandemic – could be used as a protective measure against the particles, but people should leave an area if they see or smell smoke or experience symptoms, Stinson said.
Due to the age of the building, asbestos is also a potential concern, the EPA said. The agency advised residents to avoid touching debris until more tests are conducted.
Air quality tests conducted by the EPA found no evidence of toxic chemicals such as styrene or benzene as of mid-Wednesday morning, though tests are continuing as the smoke settles.
Longer-term issues could include an increased risk of cancer if someone is exposed to a high concentration of toxins for a prolonged period of time, he said.
“We know that it is very common that a large range of chemicals are formed whenever plastic materials are burned, including styrene, benzene, and a wide number of polyaromatic hydrocarbons – all of these are strong carcinogens, and it’s important for people to avoid exposures,” said Richard Peltier, associate professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Massachusetts-Amherst.
There could be short-term symptoms like dizziness, nausea, coughing and headaches. “Asthma is regularly triggered by these types of complicated exposures so if you have asthma, it’s really important to be extra careful,” he said.
Why is the Richmond blaze so bad? How toxic is the plastic recycling process in America? An investigation of the case of a Richmond plastics recycling warehouse
Last night, the City of Richmond said the fire was finally “under control.” But there’s still no word yet on when the air and environment will be safe enough for residents in the evacuation zone to return as the rubble continues to smolder.
This scenario is horrifying, but it’s also part of a larger problem. There isn’t anything America knows how to do with its plastic. Very little of it is ever reused because of the chemistry and costs involved. When the waste piles up, like in the case of this warehouse, it can become dangerous.
It’s riskiest, he says, for people with a history of heart and lung conditions. And that’s often more common in areas where people live near industrial facilities, like this plastics recycling warehouse.
Even before the blaze there began, the surrounding neighborhood ranked in the 90th percentile for smog exposure and asthma risk, according to the EPA’s environmental justice screening tool. That means just 10 percent of Indiana residents live in places with greater exposure to smog or a higher risk of developing asthma.
The Richmond blaze is extraordinary because of its size and severity. But fires aren’t uncommon at plastic recycling facilities. Jan Dell started a nonprofit to tackle plastic pollution when she retired as a chemical engineer. She used to be a consultant to the oil, gas, and manufacturing companies, conducting safety audits for different types of facilities.
Why is it just sitting there? When it comes to plastics in particular, recycling is mostly a myth. Research shows that just 9 percent of plastic waste has ever been recycled. The quality of the plastic deteriorates with each reuse, so even materials that are reused are most often “downcycled.”
Plastic bottles can be turned into fibers for carpeting. But the material can only be downcycled so many times before it eventually ends up in the trash. The kind of plastic used to make beverage bottles happens to be one of the easier types to reuse. According to a report last year, only 20% of it can be processed in the US.
Unsurprisingly, the chemical recycling process, from making to eventually burning the fuel, creates more pollution. So, it’s just more greenwashing, says Veena Singla, a senior scientist studying toxic chemicals and health disparities at the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council.