Women’s and Girls’ Roles in Environmentalism and Public Health

Author(s): Scott Douglas Jacobsen

Publication (Outlet/Website): The Good Men Project

Publication Date (yyyy/mm/dd): 2025/03/02

Diamond Spratling, MPH, discusses the urgent need to shift climate change communication to a health and economic lens, making it more relatable to communities. She highlights the energy burden crisis in low-income Black and Brown communities, emphasizing systemic issues in housing infrastructure and policy. Spratling underscores the resilience and leadership of Black women in environmental justice, noting their historical role in major movements. She advocates for preventative solutions, policy changes, and community-driven action. Through Girl Plus Environment, she fosters education and empowerment, ensuring marginalized voices shape climate solutions. The conversation concludes with a call to amplify Black women’s leadership.

Scott Douglas Jacobsen: Today, we’re here with Diamond Spratling, MPH. She is an environmental health and climate justice activist, author, and public speaker. She grew up in Detroit and founded Girl Plus Environment. This national nonprofit empowered Black and Brown women to lead environmental justice efforts.

As a speaker, Diamond transforms complex environmental and health information into engaging messages for communities most affected by climate change. She has secured funding and developed award-winning equity tools for cities like Atlanta, earning accolades such as the Yale New Horizons in Conservation Award and recognition as an Aspen Institute Future Leader Climate Fellow. Diamond continues to inspire change and build equitable solutions for a healthier, more sustainable future.

What inspired you to found Girl Plus Environment? Did growing up in Detroit uniquely make this work for you?

Diamond Spratling: Yes. Growing up as a Black girl in Detroit, I loved being outdoors. Running up and down the street with all the other kids on the block was fun, especially in the summertime.

I naturally developed an interest in and curiosity about my environment. One moment that stood out to me was a Save the Polar Bears commercial I saw as a kid. It talked about how the ice sheets were melting, and as someone who loved the outdoors and animals, that was devastating. I thought, “Oh my goodness, I have to save the polar bears!” That sparked my deeper interest in the environment.

I started taking environmental science and AP classes in high school, where my interest grew even stronger. When I got to college, I studied Environmental Policy and Analysis. During one of my early internships, I began learning about the relationship between environmental issues and public health, particularly in Black and Brown communities.

I discovered how many Black and Brown children have asthma at disproportionately high rates due to environmental factors like air pollution. I learned how families were impacted—parents missing work, children missing school, and how these health disparities affected education, economic stability, and overall quality of life. It was eye-opening because I realized that environmental issues aren’t just about nature—they are deeply tied to public health, racial justice, and systemic inequalities.

I was frustrated by this realization. I started making Facebook posts to talk to my family about environmental issues and how they impact our health, but they brushed it off. They didn’t seem to care. That wasn’t very pleasant because I was so passionate about it.

I decided to create a space where we could normalize these conversations. I had to create opportunities for engagement. That’s how Girl Plus Environment was born—from my desire to create a safe, fun, and culturally relevant space for Black and Brown women to engage with environmental justice issues that impact us daily. It took off from there, and now, six years later, here we are.

Jacobsen: What strategies do you use to make technical information on policy and environmental justice more accessible and relatable?

Spratling: Yes, well, first, we do a whole lot of social media engagement and outreach. Social media and communications, in general, are our bread and butter because we know how to communicate with people non-technically. I’ve worked in various spaces—federal government, government in general, and academia. Still, I am also a regular Black woman, just like anyone else. So I think a lot about how my cousins, who have never studied environmental issues or set foot in a university, would want to receive this information. We use social media and trending topics to make the information accessible.

For example, last year, we had a campaign about toxic chemicals. We framed it around the movie Mean Girls, which everyone knows. We created content like “Meet the Toxins” and other relatable messaging. It was fun and engaging. We also create a ton of video content and host events that blend fun with education, incorporating culture into our work.

Jacobsen: How do you empower young Black and Brown women to lead and work on climate initiatives in their communities?

Spratling: Yes, well, we follow a strategy of education, engagement, and empowerment. First, education—because we don’t know what we don’t know. The government isn’t knocking on our doors, telling us, “Hey, we’re polluting your neighbourhood.” Often, we don’t even know about these issues.

So, we use visual media and other tools to educate our community, making them aware of environmental issues and how they impact their health and well-being. We ensure the information is easy to understand and relatable—helping people connect it to their daily lives, like how pollution affects their ability to go to work every day or take their kids to play at a park.

We also focus on engagement. We facilitate different training sessions and offer extensive advocacy training in our manual to help our community understand how to get involved. We teach people how to talk to decision-makers, such as legislators and senators, about the issues they care about. We train them to submit public comments, attend hearings, and engage in policymaking.

Finally, one of the most important pieces is empowerment and mobilization. We create safe spaces for these conversations and learning opportunities. People often feel more comfortable surrounded by others who look like them or share similar experiences. So, we cultivate those safe spaces—whether in our training sessions, events, or online content—so that young Black and Brown women feel comfortable learning about these issues and, more importantly, mobilizing their communities to take action.

Jacobsen: Beauty products are common in North America. In the United States, some products are harmless, while others contain harmful ingredients. Which beauty products are marketed to Black and Brown women that may not necessarily be healthy?

Spratling: Well, the sad reality is that an overwhelming number of beauty products are disproportionately marketed to Black women and Black communities. Many times, in beauty supply stores or even at your average corner store, some products contain ingredients harmful to our health.

For example, many products contain endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs), which interfere with our endocrine system. These chemicals can increase women’s risk of developing fibroids or experiencing maternal health issues. These concerns are significant, yet many don’t always consider the connection between our beauty products and our health.

The reality is that the things we put on and inside our bodies profoundly impact our well-being.

Jacobsen: Why do low-income Atlanta communities spend over 20% of their income on energy bills? I’ll share a personal experience. Last year, I traveled across the United States by Amtrak, and when I arrived in Atlanta, I had my first Waffle House experience. I ordered a meal with grits.

Later, I walked to a downtown area with high-rises, where I stopped at a Starbucks located at the base of one of the buildings. I don’t remember the street names, but I remember that the cost of my fancy coffee was almost as much as my full breakfast at Waffle House.

These areas were within walking distance of each other, yet the economic divide was stark. The difference between neighbourhoods was clear just by crossing a few streets.

So, how do low-income communities in Atlanta end up spending over 20% of their income on energy bills? What are the reasons for this, and how can it be addressed systematically and responsibly?

Spratling: Yes. I appreciate your personal story—it reflects the deep disparities in Atlanta. These inequalities go beyond economics; they even impact health and life expectancy. In Atlanta, life expectancy can vary by up to 12 years, depending on your zip code. That is significant.

As for energy bills, I’ll first mention that many assume individuals are to blame for their high energy costs. But the reality is that many low-income and Black and Brown communities are already conservative with their energy use—simply because they don’t have the money to waste.

Historically, in Black households, our grandparents and great-grandparents taught us to turn off all the lights, conserve energy, reuse plastic bags, and limit waste. This mindset has been passed down through generations, so it’s not that individuals are careless with their energy consumption.

The real issue is structural and systemic factors, particularly housing quality and infrastructure. Many low-income communities live in older, less energy-efficient homes with poor insulation, outdated appliances, and inefficient heating and cooling systems. These factors force families to use more energy to maintain basic comfort, disproportionately driving up their utility bills.

Addressing this issue requires systematic investment in energy-efficient housing, affordable retrofitting programs, and stronger policies to ensure landlords maintain properties at a standard that doesn’t unfairly burden tenants.

Many of our homes are not setting us up for success. Many homes lack proper infrastructure, including insulation, needed to keep houses warm in the winter. The same issue exists in the summer—we don’t have adequate infrastructure, like proper windows or window treatments, to keep out excess heat.

A lot of this comes down to the structural conditions of our homes, but also the fact that many low-income and Black and Brown communities aren’t earning enough money to begin with. The annual household income in these communities is often between $35,000 and $45,000, yet people pay $400 monthly on energy bills. Of course, they are energy-burdened—because they don’t make enough money in the first place.

The concept of energy burden is interesting because, while it does involve energy conservation and efficiency, it is primarily about structural issues in housing and economic disparities.

So, how do we address and solve this energy burden crisis? A lot of it comes down to how we build and maintain homes. We need policies to ensure that landlords are responsible for maintaining properties—ensuring rentals are properly insulated and energy-efficient. We also need to ensure that wages are equitable so people can afford their energy bills without being financially overwhelmed.

A significant portion of this issue is policy-driven. Here in Georgia, a Public Service Commission repeatedly allows Georgia Power to raise energy rates, forcing residents to pay for projects they never approved. For instance, residents are paying for Georgia Power’s nuclear power plants, which are billions of dollars over budget. These weren’t projects the community demanded—they were corporate decisions, and now the financial burden is unfairly placed on consumers.

Jacobsen: This is a common problem. From my perspective as a Canadian, the American case appears more severe in this regard—where financial consequences and costs are offshored to individuals rather than absorbed by corporations or larger entities. The way these issues are framed and discussed also plays a significant role.

We are now seeing wildfires in California (LA fires) that clearly illustrate the impact of anthropogenic climate change, with extreme weather events becoming more frequent and severe.

How do you work with communities to provide effective education about anthropogenic climate change, its associated health risks, and the increasing intensity and frequency of natural disasters?

Spratling: Yes. What happened in California was a horrifying example of a community that was ultimately unprepared, even at the city level. Los Angeles was not adequately prepared, especially after funding was cut from fire departments.

As you mentioned, when it comes to communication and education, we have to focus on the health angle. How do we shift the narrative on climate change so that it is understood through a health lens?

My background is in public health, and I think a lot about the urgency that health-related messaging creates compared to climate change messaging. The reality is that the environmental and climate sectors have never been great at communication. We’ve traditionally relied on scare tactics—warnings about the sky falling, the world ending, and other apocalyptic predictions. But that approach has not worked.

We must be sensitive to how we communicate climate issues to our communities. Instead of highlighting the dangers, we must emphasize health implications and economic consequences—things people care about now.

Right now, people are struggling with immediate concerns—how to pay rent and put food on the table. Climate change is often perceived as a distant problem, even though we know it is happening now. But for many, it simply does not feel as urgent as putting food on the table today.

So, when it comes to education, it is about shifting the narrative—helping people understand climate change in a way that will ignite action rather than just instilling fear. We need to prepare our communities so that when disasters—like what we saw in Los Angeles and other parts of the world—happen, people are ready to take action rather than being caught off guard.

Jacobsen: Amid challenges, there are also new opportunities. For example, while doing some correspondence in Ukraine, I learned a lot. I came back. Then I attended a conference in Toronto about rebuilding Ukraine. 

One of the companies I spoke with was pursuing a large contacts—which, while significant, is perhaps not as large as it might seem in the context of massive rebuilding efforts. But they were focused on durable, fire-resistant building materials.

In that case, you had an entire city, designed for a population of many thousands people, that was flattened—80% to 90% destroyed by bombings. But as they plan to rebuild, they are considering more durable, fire-resistant materials—not just restoring what was lost, but creating something better and more resilient.

Similarly, with climate change and its many negative impacts, how do you shift the narrative toward solutions? How do we move from recognizing the increasing tragedies over time to actively proposing innovative, forward-thinking solutions?

Spratling: As you said, we must approach this from a precautionary standpoint, something the U.S. has historically failed to do. We tend to be reactionary rather than considering long-term impacts and investments.

A significant part of this conversation concerns investing in materials and infrastructure that will support our communities and help protect our environment. It’s critical that people understand this from an economic standpoint—that proactive investment is far more cost-effective than constantly rebuilding from scratch.

Approaching this work through an economic lens allows us to find shared values that resonate with everyone. We all want to live happy, healthy lives and have economic security. Meeting people where they are—by speaking in terms they relate to—works wonders. No one wants to have to rebuild their city.

So, from a mitigation standpoint, we need to focus on preventative measures—how we can lessen the impact of future disasters rather than simply reacting after they happen.

Jacobsen: What makes Black and Brown women in Atlanta and similar cities uniquely positioned to educate themselves and others about climate risks, infrastructure challenges, and the importance of making informed choices about environmental impacts and personal products?

Spratling: First, I would say that Black women are resilient.

Black women have had to endure and lead through countless challenges. Black women are the most educated demographic in the world.

If we look at major social movements—from the Me Too movement to the Civil Rights movement to Black Lives Matter—black women have always been the backbone.

This is no different when it comes to the climate and environmental justice movement. In fact, we must be even more engaged because environmental issues have disproportionate impacts on us and our communities.

Black women should be at the forefront of environmental justice—in conversations, decision-making, solutions, jobs, leadership roles, and every aspect. We understand the stakes because we have lived them.

We have been experiencing environmental burdens our entire lives. That lived experience gives us a unique ability to advocate for ourselves and everyone disproportionately affected by environmental injustice.

When we discuss Black women’s roles and strengths, we focus on our endurance and the fact that we already have what it takes to lead in this movement.

Unfortunately, for too long, we have been ignored and told this is not a space for us—which is completely false. Our grandmothers, great-grandmothers, and ancestors have been engaged in this work for generations. It is our time to amplify their legacy and push it even further.

Jacobsen: Diamond, thank you for taking the time to speak today. It was lovely to meet you.

Spratling: Yes, likewise. Thank you so much! It was great to meet you as well.

Jacobsen: We’ll be in touch shortly.

Spratling: Thank you. Take care.

Last updated May 3, 2025. These terms govern all In Sight Publishing content—past, present, and future—and supersede any prior notices. In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen is licensed under a Creative Commons BY‑NC‑ND 4.0; © In Sight Publishing by Scott Douglas Jacobsen 2012–Present. All trademarks, performances, databases & branding are owned by their rights holders; no use without permission. Unauthorized copying, modification, framing or public communication is prohibited. External links are not endorsed. Cookies & tracking require consent, and data processing complies with PIPEDA & GDPR; no data from children < 13 (COPPA). Content meets WCAG 2.1 AA under the Accessible Canada Act & is preserved in open archival formats with backups. Excerpts & links require full credit & hyperlink; limited quoting under fair-dealing & fair-use. All content is informational; no liability for errors or omissions: Feedback welcome, and verified errors corrected promptly. For permissions or DMCA notices, email: scott.jacobsen2025@gmail.com. Site use is governed by BC laws; content is “as‑is,” liability limited, users indemnify us; moral, performers’ & database sui generis rights reserved.