Hidden Abodes: Industrializing Political Ecology

Abstract

In this article, I argue that political ecology has neglected examining the “hidden abodes” of industrial factory production. I suggest a visit to such sites can expand and deepen what counts as both ecology and politics in the field. Ecologically speaking, the industrial secondary sector is not only at the center of the overall “metabolism” between society and nature but also is central in producing many large-scale ecological problems like climate change. Politically, although much of political ecology focuses on marginalization, dispossession, and what I call “following the politics” (i.e., protest and resistance movements), industrial environments often entail uncontested power over massive flows of raw materials, energy, and waste. I suggest that political ecology analysis can use chains of explanation to make these industrial ecologies political. To illustrate the argument, I focus on a large industrial nitrogen fertilizer facility in southern Louisiana. In the empirical sections of this article, I examine its control over the highly politicized chemical compounds of natural gas (CH₄), ammonia (NH₃), and carbon dioxide (CO₂). Although the industrial facility largely benefits from its access to and control over these substances, the politics of them is directed elsewhere along the commodity chain to naturalized areas more familiar to political ecologists (e.g., sites of natural gas extraction or agricultural application). I conclude by suggesting that making this kind of analysis political requires that we disseminate our analysis and critiques to broader publics.

我于本文中主张, 政治生态学忽略了检视产业要素生产中的) “隐藏住所”。我主张, 探访这些场所, 能够扩张并深化同时作为田野中的生态学和政治之物。就生态学而言, 二级产业部门并非仅是位于社会和自然之间的总体 “代谢” 核心, 亦同时是生产诸多如气候变迁等大型尺度生态问题的关键。就政治而言, 尽管政治生态学多半聚焦边缘化、迫迁, 以及我所谓的 “追随政治” (例如抗议与反抗活动), 产业环境却经常带来关乎原始材料、能源和废弃物大量流动的不具争议之权力。我主张, 政治生态学分析能够运用一系列的解释, 让这些产业生态变得具政治性。为了阐述上述主张, 我将聚焦路易斯安那州南方的一个大型工业氮肥设施。我将在本文的经验部分中, 检视对于自燃煤气 (CH₄)、氨 (NH₃)以及二氧化碳 (CO₂) 的高度政治化的化学復合物之控制。尽管产业设施从取得这些物质并对此进行控制中大量获益, 但这些物质的政治, 却沿着商品链被导向政治生态学者较为熟悉的其他受驯化的领域 (例如自燃煤气提取或农业应用)。我于结论中主张, 将此般分析变得政治化, 需要我们将自身的分析及批判扩展至更为广泛的公众。

En el presente artículo, sostengo que la ecología política se ha abstenido de examinar los “domicilios escondidos” de la producción de plantas industriales. Sugiero que una visita a tales sitios puede ampliar y profundizar lo que cuenta tanto con ecología como con política en el campo. Desde el punto de vista ecológico, el sector secundario industrial no solo está en el centro del total “metabolismo” entre sociedad y naturaleza, sino que es también central en producir muchos problemas ecológicos de gran escala, como el cambio climático. Políticamente, aunque mucho de la ecología política está enfocado sobre marginalización, desposeimiento y lo que yo llamo “seguir la política” (esto es, movimiento de protesta y resistencia), los entornos industriales a menudo conllevan poder incontestable sobre flujos masivos de materias primas, energía y desechos. Sugiero que el análisis de ecología política puede usar cadenas de explicación para hacer políticas estas ecologías industriales. Para ilustrar el argumento, me enfoco en una gran instalación industrial de nitrógeno fertilizante del sur de Luisiana. En las secciones empíricas de este artículo, examino su control sobre los muy politizados compuestos químicos de gas natural (CH₄), amoníaco (NH₃) y dióxido de carbono (CO₂). Aunque la instalación industrial en gran medida se beneficia de su acceso y control de estas sustancias, la política sobre las mismas se dirige en otras partes a lo largo de la cadena de mercaderías hacia áreas naturalizadas más familiares para los ecólogos políticos (por ejemplo, sitios de extracción de gas natural o de aplicación agrícola). Concluyo sugiriendo que para hacer este tipo de análisis político se requiere que diseminemos nuestro análisis y críticas a públicos más amplios.

Key Words:

• industrial geography
• nitrogen fertilizer
• political ecology

关键词：:

• 产业地理学, 氮肥, 政治生态学。

Palabras clave:

• geografía industrial
• nitrógeno fertilizante
• ecología política

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank Bruce Braun for his supportive editorial guidance and three anonymous reviewers for helpful critiques that pushed the ideas in the article. All mistakes are my own.

Funding

This research was made possible by funding from the Maxwell School at Syracuse University and the National Science Foundation Grant No. 1437248.

Notes

1. The names of the company, location of facility, and participants involved in this study have been kept confidential in accordance with institutional review board protocol. This article is based on a wider research project examining the history and political ecology of the industrial nitrogen fertilizer industry. This project used a multisited methodology to examine both the specific issues of the factory in southern Louisiana and the general political concerns of the industry as a whole. Fieldwork in southern Louisiana involved two facets. First, I was able to gain entry to the facility itself and hold a meeting with engineers and other managers at the plant. I was given a tour of the facility, as well as a PowerPoint presentation on its history and current operations. I was also able to ask questions for over an hour, but plant officials declined my request to record the conversation. Locally in Louisiana, I also conducted recorded interviews with the mayor, two members of the chamber of commerce, the daughter whose father sold his plantation to nitrogen producers, and five environmental justice and climate activists in the region who run campaigns focused on specific facilities. Finally, I was able to have informal conversations with two local reporters who have covered the region for several years at a local newspaper. All of these interviews provided multiple perspectives on the role of the facility in the local region, as well as how it fit (or not) in the context of larger histories of environmental activism. To ascertain the general political concerns of the industry, four interviews were conducted at a fertilizer industry conference, and two at an industry think tank in Washington, DC. Here is a list of the interviews cited here: Interview 1, environmental justice activist; Interview 2, natural gas market analyst (industry conference); Interview 3, policy spokesperson at industry think tank; Interview 4, public affairs spokesperson at industry think tank; Interview 5, daughter of plantation owner; Interview 6, environmental justice activist; Interview 7, chamber of commerce member; Interview 8, mayor; Interview 9, sustainability spokesperson at industry think tank (industry conference).

2. The introduction of single-train centrifugal compressors in the 1960s revolutionized the ammonia industry and lowered the costs of production substantially (Smil 2001, 122–27).

3. This is a difficult claim to make when it is possible that much “political” attention remains below the surface. I base it on the interviews detailed in Footnote 1, particularly conversations with local reporters with deep knowledge of the role of the plant in the community. My conversations with some of the most well-known and prominent environmental activists who focus on the chemical corridor revealed they had little knowledge of the plant (or its major ecological impacts detailed here). Indeed, when I explained the enormity of these impacts it often surprised these activists. They knew of no historical or current organizing campaigns focused on this particular facility.

4. Thus, I'm not concerned with revealing that the methods of industrial ecological analysis (e.g., life cycle assessments) are inherently political. Rather, I'm using the case of an industrial ecology to critique and broaden what counts as politics and ecology in political ecology.

5. The neglect of the geographies of urban provision is rightly called “methodological cityism” by Angelo and Wachsmuth (2015).

6. Of course, as we could also do a political ecology of the tertiary “knowledge economy” (see Kostakis, Roos, and Bauwens 2015).

7. The turn conceptually to “dispossession” can be traced (at least) to Harvey (2003). Harvey warned that a politics focused only on “accumulation by dispossession” runs the risk of being too “diffuse … inchoate, fragmentary, and contingent” (173–74). He suggested that we need to combine such a politics with struggles focused on the “expanded reproduction of capital” (e.g., labor and socialist struggles). Oddly, much of the political ecology literature ignored his critique and focused almost exclusively on “accumulation by dispossession.”

8. China remains tied to coal-based ammonia production.

9. Reay (2015) offered an entire book on nitrogen and climate change and barely addressed the industrial sector.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Matthew T. Huber

MATTHEW T. HUBER is an Associate Professor in the Department of Geography at Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244. E-mail: [email protected]. His research interests focus on energy and the political economy of capitalism.