As part of its push to stop coal trains from moving, Gov.
Andrew Cuomo recently signed into law a bill that would allow the state’s most vulnerable populations to move into new homes on the outskirts of the rail corridor, where the air quality is worse.
But while the bill has the potential to reduce air pollution, it’s not clear how much it would help the communities that are already suffering from the pollution, said Dr. David Stolper, a professor of environmental health at the University of New York at Albany and one of the authors of a study that was published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
The bill allows residents of communities impacted by the coal industry to move back into their homes, but it also allows them to live in their old homes and to move in with their friends and family.
In other words, the bill would allow residents of those communities to move to another community on the same lot, said Stolp, who has researched the impact of coal and the impacts of the industry on communities of color.
The state’s largest metropolitan area, New York City, has more than 6 million residents, according to the most recent data from the U.S. Census Bureau.
While many of those people live in neighborhoods that have already experienced the effects of air pollution and pollution from the coal trains, the population is concentrated in areas where the rail line passes through.
This can lead to some residents moving back to their old communities and the new communities being very different from their old neighborhoods, said Andrew A. DeFazio, director of the National Center for Community Renewal at Northeastern University.
“The new communities are very different,” he said.
Stolpe said that if the legislation is enacted it could mean a lot of people could move back and forth between their homes and their old places in New York, but not to their new communities.
“That could be a huge problem,” he added.
Cuomo has been criticized by some residents and advocates for the bill for its impact on communities that already live in communities impacted.
Critics say that, in some cases, they have been forced to move out of their homes in those communities because of the toxic air.
While the bill’s impact could be minimal, it could make it easier for communities to relocate in the future, said Robert R. Johnson, a senior research fellow at the Center for Regional Science at Northey University in Pennsylvania.
If residents of a coal town want to move, they can do so within their new neighborhoods, but if they are displaced from their new home, they will have to move elsewhere, Johnson said.
He said that could lead to people leaving the communities and potentially creating new tensions in the communities.
Stoltper said that the bill could also impact those communities in the most extreme cases, where people are in danger of being killed or dying from respiratory disease.
“It’s very difficult for me to imagine a scenario where the bill doesn’t have a big impact on a community,” he told Al Jazeera.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) said in a statement that it “has taken steps to make New York safer for people living near existing power lines” and that it has implemented “several changes to improve air quality.”
However, Johnson and other researchers are not convinced that the legislation would actually be a big help for communities like New York’s, which already struggle with pollution, and which have seen an uptick in the number of people experiencing asthma, respiratory disease and other health issues in recent years.
“This is a really interesting bill, but I think it’s a very, very, low bar,” Johnson said, noting that in some ways it could be harmful.
He added that he believes the legislation could be good for the state as a whole, but that it’s likely to exacerbate the already difficult situation in some areas.
“If the bill is enacted, I think the most vulnerable people will be hurt the most,” he explained.
“They will have no choice but to leave their old home.
The most vulnerable communities are in the outer boroughs and in those parts where the population density is higher, you’ll get the most exposure.”
In other parts of New Jersey, residents have complained about the increased health problems caused by the bill.
As of August 2016, there were more than 3,400 people with asthma in the boroughs of Jersey City, Newark, Trenton and Monmouth, according the Center on Disease Control and Prevention.
A recent study by researchers at the Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health found that nearly three quarters of the people who have asthma in those same three boroughs had symptoms after living in their homes for two years, and nearly half of the residents who had asthma lived in their own homes.
The study also found that more than 60 percent of those with asthma had been treated in emergency rooms for symptoms.
In addition, residents of New Brunswick, New Jersey also had more than