New England at Risk: Hazardous Sites and Climate Change

We combined data on climate risks, social vulnerability, and hazardous sites to see which counties are most at risk. Counties in Massachusetts and Connecticut fall into the highest risk categories.

Our high-level analysis focused on risk at the county level, so we do not identify specific hazardous sites at risk. Instead, this map combines multiple factors that together can increase the overall risk for each county in New England. 

The risk rating is relative across the region, so counties are ranked against each other. According to our analysis, the county with the lowest risk is Sagadahoc County, Maine. The most at risk is Suffolk County, Massachusetts (home of Boston).

Our analysis considered sites where hazardous waste was dumped in the past and those that actively produce and discard toxic waste today. In total, we mapped 2,933 sites across the region.

We mapped sites that the EPA regulates under the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act –  more commonly known as Superfund  – and sites regulated under the federal  Resource Conservation and Recovery Act . We also mapped landfills that receive municipal solid waste.

We then looked at the level of climate risk by county, including risks associated with flooding, extreme heat, and threat of wildfire.

Zoom into the map and click on a dot to learn what's there. You can also enter an address in the search box or mouse around the map to explore more.

Read on to learn about these sites and the programs that regulate them, as well as the threats posed to them by climate change.

Superfund sites are among the most contaminated in the country. These sites, regulated under federal law, are ones at which toxic pollution has been identified and either cleaned up or slated for cleanup. 

We included data for all Superfund sites across New England, including those currently in the process of being cleaned up. We also included sites that have already been cleaned up and those proposed for Superfund status. In total, we mapped 905 current, proposed, and cleaned-up sites.

The EPA regulates this clean-up process, which can  cost enormous amounts of money and take years  – even decades – to complete. However, even when sites are considered cleaned up, they remain vulnerable to climate impacts such as increased risk for flooding.   

For example,  over a billion dollars  have been spent on the New Bedford Harbor clean-up since it was designated as a Superfund site in 1983. But some contamination may still linger;  people are warned not to eat fish caught in the harbor , for example. Plus, some toxic material is still being stored on site, in a capped hole under the harbor. Some experts worry that might not be safe in the long run.

The worst Superfund sites are put on the National Priorities List (abbreviated as NPL). This list is meant to help guide the EPA in prioritizing sites for clean-up. Because of their level of contamination and priority status, we weighted these sites more heavily in our analysis.

Swipe across the map to see where sites on the National Priorities List (yellow triangles) are located compared to other Superfund sites.

You can click on a dot or triangle on the map to learn more about that site. The link in the "Facility Information URL" field of the pop-up will take you to the EPA's webpage for that site to learn even more.

In addition to Superfund sites, New England also has many facilities that continue to generate and dispose of hazardous waste. These include everything from oil tank farms to wastewater treatment plants.  

The EPA manages many of these sites through the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). Based on this law, we mapped 1,947 facilities that generate:

• 1,000 kilograms or more per month of hazardous waste, or more than 1 kilogram per month of “acutely” hazardous waste – substances that are particularly toxic. These facilities are known as large-quantity generators (LQGs).
• We also included sites that are permitted for the treatment, storage, or disposal of toxic chemicals. These are referred to as TSDs.  

CLF has  ongoing lawsuits  against large-quantity generators – such as ExxonMobil and Shell Oil – who have failed to prepare their coastal facilities for climate change. 

Click on a yellow RCRA dot on the map to learn what kind of facility is there.

Using data from the First Street Foundation’s  Flood Factor tool , we looked at how flooding from sea level rise and increased precipitation will affect New England counties, out to the year 2050. This data factors in flooding from sea level rise, changes in rain patterns, flooding along rivers, and storm surge flooding. This map reflects counties with the greatest expected threat from flooding across the region. This risk assessment is only in comparison to other New England counties, not to the nation as a whole.

The table below shows the range of First Street Foundation flood risk values for New England.  Learn more about the Flood Factor scores here .

We then used this data to determine how flood risks line up with existing hazardous sites across the region.

It's important to note that this flood data averages flood risk across an entire county. That can smooth out the effects of some high-risk coastal areas or amplify flood risks in less densely populated counties. The image below hones in on the property-level flood risk for the Boston area. Note how many coastal properties are dark red – meaning they are at high risk.

Climate change also causes  rising average temperature s and  wider temperature extremes .  

We looked at the average number of days per year over 90 degrees to determine how extreme heat will affect New England, out to the year 2065.  

Extreme heat can damage infrastructure, such as protective caps that cover contaminated soil. Extreme heat also poses health threats. While  hospitalization and even death  from heat stroke have been well documented, extreme heat can also  increase the toxicity  of certain heavy metals and chemicals. 

Many of New England's hazardous sites sit in counties that are warming rapidly. Within the next few decades, counties like Fairfield and New Haven in Connecticut are expected to see more than 30 additional days over 90 degrees each year. That's a whole month of extreme heat.

Climate change triggers more frequent, intense, and longer wildfires. Wildfires are less common in New England than in places like California and Oregon. However, states like Maine and New Hampshire still experience wildfires, and this risk is  increasing  with climate change. 

The EPA  defines  environmental justice as "the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies."

Communities of color and low-income communities are more likely to live near hazardous sites due to decades of  environmental racism and injustice . It's important to consider this context when evaluating the potential threat from a hazardous site.

These communities are also  more vulnerable to climate change impacts . They are more likely to live in flood-prone areas, for example, and may have fewer resources available to help recover from a disaster.