As COVID-19 continues to keep employees working at home, there is a looming change as to how people use office spaces.

We can begin to see a future where people are spending two or three days working from home and only commuting to an office the other half of the week. This ultimately will result in fewer emissions because of the significant reduction in commuting trips.

However, this is not a one-size-fits-all solution for the future of work. Some people may have stressors at home, and some may prefer to be around people and colleagues and not have to consistently get on Zoom. As this New York Times article explains, “Offices will need spaces for specific tasks like focused work, team brainstorming, client presentations and employee training. And they will need to be more focused on individuals, even if these people work for a large company.”

Experts predict that workers will have flexibility in the use of office space and that working will become more dynamic than ever. Some large employers may start to locate additional offices in the suburbs near downtown headquarters. It is likely that the headquarters will continue to be the most important hub, but employees won’t be expected to be there all day every day. As offices begin to decentralize and employees are expected to be at the office less, employees can live closer to satellite offices and be able to walk or bike. This will overall create a better work-life balance for employees.

That’s not the only benefit. According to the EPA, emissions from the transportation sector makes up just over a quarter of the United States’ annual emissions. With shorter commutes, active commuting (like biking, walking or using public transit) becomes a much easier and more convenient option for getting to work.

Increased active commuting means emissions from the transportation sector will begin to decrease. Active commuting also has been shown to improve health outcomes, not only because of reduced air pollution but because of the mental and physical health benefits associated with biking, walking and even taking public transit.

These changes in the way we work will allow cities to change up the way they provide transportation services. With citizens living closer to their office, reaping the health benefits of active commuting, and/or not commuting to the office as often, our communities will become healthier and more sustainable.

From left, Dorceta Taylor, PhD, and Rue Mapp

Robert Bullard, PhD, Dorceta Taylor, PhD, and Rue Mapp are three key people who have powered the environmental justice movement. These three people have spent their careers working to bring others to action to create a more just and cleaner environment for all.

Dr. Bullard is a professor of urban planning and environmental policy at Texas Southern University. He is considered the “father of environmental justice” because of his work that began in the 1970s on the environmental injustices faced by minority communities in Houston. Dr. Bullard was collecting information for a civil rights lawsuit his wife was filing that challenged the placement of a landfill in a Black community. In an interview with The Guardian, Dr. Bullard said, “we found five out of five landfills in Houston were located in Black neighborhoods, and six out of eight incinerators were in Black neighborhoods.” This led Dr. Bullard to start writing and researching environmental justice, and it set him on his path to become a leader in the movement.

Rue Mapp is the CEO and Founder of Outdoor Afro. A 2009 report about National Park Service (NPS) attendance found that white people made up 78% of NPS visitors. Mapp wanted to increase the diversity of people using preserved natural spaces, so she created a network that celebrates and inspires Black connections and leadership in nature. Outdoor Afro leads nature experiences to empower people of color to be the face of conservation.

Dr. Taylor is a professor of environmental justice at the Yale School of Environment. Her work mainly focuses on environmental racism and diversity within environmental groups. Dr. Taylor has written several books on the subject, including “Toxic Communities: Environmental Racism, Industrial Pollution, and Residential Mobility” and “The Environment and the People in American Cities.” Her most prominent work, which is focused on diversity within environmental groups, is called “The State of Diversity in Environmental Organizations: Mainstream NGOs, Foundations & Government Agencies.” This report is the most comprehensive report on diversity in the environmental justice network.

Although these are a few of the people who are considered the faces of the movement, many leaders are doing great environmental justice work, and we are all environmentalists. As Dr. Bullard said during a talk at Furman University, “Do you breathe air? Then you’re an environmentalist.”

Let’s keep innovating to create a more just and cleaner environment!

Last week, we wrote about environmental justice and how communities of color are disproportionately impacted by environmental hazards. This week’s article highlights an example of environmental injustice in North Omaha and how collective action and community organizing led to triumph and community healing.

North Omaha has faced a variety of challenges related to unjust development policies throughout history. In 1954, a coal plant was constructed at John J Perishing Drive and Florence Boulevard by Omaha Public Power District (OPPD). Coal plants pollute the air by releasing potent toxins like carbon dioxide, sulfur dioxide, mercury and small particulate matter, which has led to poor air quality and higher rates of asthma in the predominantly African American community. In 2013, the coal plant was ranked “the 16th worst environmental justice offender in the nation” by the NAACP, according to Grist.

The location of this plant in the North Omaha neighborhood caused unjust environmental and health impacts, including frequent code-red air days and a growing asthma rate. According to Toll from Coal, the North Omaha coal plant has caused an average of 18 deaths, 11 heart attacks and 120 asthma attacks per year. Not only did residents face inequity with regard to the quality of the air they were breathing, but emergency room visits exacerbated wealth inequities by putting undue financial burden on North Omaha families.

North Omaha residents demanded accountability. Community leaders organized meetings and educational forums, and residents showed up in record numbers to an OPPD board meeting to push for the coal plant to be retired. The NAACP’s Omaha branch also spoke out in support of the organizers, voicing concerns about the coal plant and air pollution in the community.

Residents’ demands for justice were heard — in 2014, OPPD retired the three oldest coal-generating units and began retrofitting and updating the last two units with more emissions controls. Graham Jordison, a Beyond Coal organizer in North Omaha, described the effort as “a powerful movement here in Omaha” — one that has created partnerships between organizations like the Sierra Club and the Malcom X Foundation, with the ultimate goal of securing a more equitable clean energy system across the state. The retirement of the coal plant was one step toward this future and served as a moment of healing for the North Omaha community.

February is Black History Month — a time to celebrate achievements and contributions to U.S. history by Black Americans.

It’s also a good reminder to reflect on ongoing inequality in our society. Within the U.S., there are dominant socioeconomic forces that result in lower environmental quality for most communities of color, but especially Black communities, that place them at higher risk of devastation by natural disasters, all of which lead to poor health outcomes.

Communities of color face a variety of environmental impacts as a result of these forces. For example, toxic facilities like landfills and factories are frequently located within communities of color because decision makers know that these communities often do not have the resources and influence to oppose them.

Investments that would help improve environmental quality — such as green spaces and bike lanes — often backfire, leading to gentrification. Residents of color who can no longer afford to live in their home are then displaced to other neighborhoods where toxic facilities already exist. Ultimately, these cyclical events lead to higher pollution levels in the air and water, fewer trees to clean the air, reduced access to healthy food and more challenges in Black communities.

These environmental impacts have serious implications for health outcomes. According to researchers, poor air quality creates a higher risk of getting cancer, asthma, heart disease, cognitive problems and a whole host of other conditions. It also can exacerbate existing conditions. These outcomes are considerably higher for communities of color. According to the Princeton Student Climate Initiative (PSCI), 13.4% of African American children suffer from asthma, compared to only 7.3% of white children.

The PSCI defines environmental justice as “a social justice movement that seeks to dismantle the flawed environmental policies that have long harmed low-income communities and communities of color, and instead pursue policy and development that work to create a sustainable, cooperative, and equitable future for the environment.”

The NAACP and numerous other organizations are working to flip the script and create sustainable investment that brings environmental justice and health to communities of color. The NAACP Environmental and Climate Justice Program works to reduce harmful emissions, advance energy efficiency and clean energy sources (such as wind and solar), strengthen community resilience to natural disasters, and create more livable neighborhoods. See more at the website, including an introductory video and reports and toolkits.