Pollution generating businesses do not target minorities or poor people when locating their facilities. Instead, they choose sites for some of the same reasons that these same sites are attractive to poor minorities. There has been a large controversy over whether or not the practices of these business constitute racism. The location choices are not intentionally discriminatory, although it may seem that way, so therefore it is not racism. A great deal of factors come into play when a business is looking at where to site ion the most commercially reasonable location. The siting of the Camden St. Lawrence Cement Company's plant in a nonwhite neighborhood in 2001 was not environmentally racist because the siting decisions for large plants such as this one are based on the ability to secure the required permits, sufficient transportation networks, and low land costs.

The siting of this plant in 2001 in the Waterfront South …show more content…
Lawrence. The fact that the residents happened to be nonwhite did not play a factor in deciding to place a plant here; however, the ease of obtaining the permits in the already polluted Camden did play a role. As stated in an article by Shiela Foster, the area "has been an attractive location for polluting facilities"(Challenge of Environmental). Waterfront South was already home to many polluting industries including a trash incinerator, a regional sewage plant, two superfund sites, and more than a dozen contaminated properties. Siting a cement plant in an area like this would be ideal since there are other similar industries located nearby. These previous polluting sites required similar pollution permits, thus setting a reasonable expectation that St. Lawrence could secure it required permits. This plant could even be considered beneficial to the area by providing much needed additional jobs for the local residents of the Waterfront South Community, this would likely weigh positively with the permitting