What Portland’s Smoky Summer Can Do for Air Quality Equity Across the Country
23 November
Insights + Opinion
Smoke covers the skies over downtown Portland, Oregon, on Sept. 9, 2020. Diego Diaz / Icon Sportswire
By Isabella Garcia
September in Portland, Oregon, usually brings a slight chill to the air and an orange tinge to the leaves. This year, it brought smoke so thick it burned your throat and made your eyes strain to see more than 20 feet in front of you.
<p><br/></p>
<p>As historic wildfires burned more than 1 million acres and displaced more than 40,000 people in Oregon, photos of the red haze cloaking the Pacific Northwest were spotlighted on national newscasts and ogled on social media. Portland's air quality was the worst in the world for several days, peaking at <a href="https://aqicn.org/city/usa/oregon/portland/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">an Air Quality Index </a>of 486 on Sept. 13. In comparison, the <a href="https://aqicn.org/city/beijing/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">mean AQI in September in Beijing</a>, known for its smoggy skies, was 77. Just a year before, in September 2019, Portland enjoyed an average AQI more typical for the city: 22.</p><p>The hazardous air of the 2020 fires brought a new awareness of air quality issues in areas that don't normally have to think about them. It prompted fresh conversations about climate change, too: A <a href="https://multco.us/air-quality-public-health-problem/news/wildfire-pollution-obliterates-portland-bad-air-records-and" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Multnomah County news release</a> called the wildfires a "full-on disaster siren that climate change is fully here."</p><p>But when the rain finally came on Sept. 19 and cleared the air, Portlanders rejoiced in the ability to breathe deeply again. The climate conversation and talk of air quality slowly but surely fell out of the news cycle, replaced with the election and the pandemic.</p><p>But what about the communities whose air is filled with dangerous emissions every day without the drama of an apocalyptic glow? What about the people who don't get the reprieve of a breath of fresh air? Poor air quality can be seen in metro areas across the U.S., but the distribution of that burden overwhelmingly falls on communities of color.</p><p>Communities in Texas and Michigan are home to some of the most polluted air in the country, but they are also home to groups that are fiercely fighting for — and making — change.</p>
<h2>Manchester United</h2><p>Houston is known as the energy capital of America, but that title comes with industrial refineries and chemical plants that release toxic emissions into the air. Having grown up in East Houston, near smokestacks and petrochemical plants, Bryan Parras knows this particular toxic air well. He now works for the Sierra Club as a healthy communities organizer and environmental justice advocate. His job is to identify local issues and leverage Sierra Club resources to address them most effectively.</p><p>"In some ways you're like a triage doctor, stopping the bleeding and dressing wounds," Parras explains. "In that process, you learn about the policy decisions that have led to things to begin with. You begin to understand the dynamics that people are dealing with, and you get a deeper grasp of the intersections of housing, environment, immigration status, and all these things."</p><p>Those intersections are clear in an ongoing case against Valero Energy, a midsize oil refinery that <a href="https://www.valero.com/en-us/Pages/Houston.aspx" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">produces 235,000 barrels of oil and petroleum products per day</a> in Houston's Manchester neighborhood. Valero applied for a permit to emit poisonous hydrogen cyanide in its refining process in March 2018. To fight back, Manchester community representatives are seeking party status during the permit hearings with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. According to the CDC, exposure to <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/ershdb/emergencyresponsecard_29750038.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">this chemical asphyxiant</a> interferes with nearly every organ in the body, especially the brain, heart, and lungs, and can be fatal in high concentrations.</p><p>The toxin is better known in other contexts. Hydrogen cyanide has been <a href="https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1992-04-11-mn-180-story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">used for lethal injection</a> and is the primary component of Zyklon B, the gas used for mass murder in Nazi WWII gas chambers. Parras says Valero has long been emitting hydrogen cyanide into the air in the Manchester community, but the amount is unclear because the emission was only discovered, or revealed, after a change in EPA requirements during the Obama administration.</p><p>The permit request is for 512 tons of hydrogen cyanide per year. To put that number in context, community leaders and elected officials in Denver were appalled when the <a href="https://www.denverpost.com/2018/04/19/suncor-energy-cyanide-gas-poor-denver-neighborhoods/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment imposed a new limit</a> that allowed nearly 13 tons of hydrogen cyanide to be emitted in 2018.</p><p>The permit request in Houston caught the attention of Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services (t.e.j.a.s.), an organization aiming to provide Texas communities with environmental and legislative expertise to advocate for environmental justice. The group's co-directors, Juan and Ana Parras, founded the group in 1995. Bryan Parras is their son and a member of the t.e.j.a.s. board of directors.</p><p>"[Valero] were releasing without a permit for over 10 years," Ana says. "These people are just being dumped upon."</p>
<h2>Houstonians Can't Breathe</h2><p>Manchester is one of <a href="https://www.yesmagazine.org/social-justice/2013/04/23/houston-s-most-polluted-neighborhood-draws-line-keystone-tar-sands/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Houston's oldest neighborhoods</a>. It is surrounded on three sides by a chemical plant, synthetic rubber plant, oil refineries, and a car-crushing facility, all of which belly up to the Houston Ship Channel, one of the busiest sea ports in the world. The fourth side is a train yard.</p><p>A <a href="https://airalliancehouston.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/AAH-Executive-Summary.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">2019 study commissioned by Air Alliance Houston</a>, an environmental advocacy organization, found that the city's polluting facilities are routinely clustered in and around communities where most of the residents are people of color, or where more than 30% of households are considered low-income. Manchester qualifies as both. As of 2015, <a href="https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Demographics/docs_pdfs/SN/65_Harrisburg_Manchester.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">82% of Manchester residents are Hispanic</a>, 14% are Black, and 3% are White. Some 41% of residents make $25,000 or less per year.</p><p>The Valero Energy plant is just two blocks from nearby residential homes — or "fence line communities" as Ana and Juan Parras describe them. A <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/double-jeopardy-houston%252523.Wxa161OUv1y" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">2016 study from the Union of Concerned Scientists</a> found that 90.2% of the Manchester population lives within 1 mile of at least one regulated industrial facility. The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2013-11/documents/appendix-a-final.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">EPA estimates that each year, these types of facilities have about 150 catastrophic releases</a>, which can be fires, explosions, or emissions that pose immediate and significant danger to people and the environment.</p><p>The same study also found the Manchester neighborhood's respiratory hazard index to be 2.56. That far exceeds the EPA's acceptable level, which is less than 1.0. In comparison, Portland, Oregon, has an average <a href="https://regionalbarometer.oregonmetro.gov/datasets/respiratory-hazard-index-map" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">respiratory hazard index of 0.57</a>.</p><p>T.e.j.a.s and two other community representatives have received standing in the administrative hearings for the Valero permit moving forward. But Ana Parras anticipates the case lasting well into 2021, and all the while, Valero continues to emit hydrogen cyanide unrestricted.</p>
<h2>Pushing Back Against Discrimination</h2><p>On a faster track is the Title VI language justice case t.e.j.a.s. filed against the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.</p><p>Title VI prohibits discrimination based on race, color, and national origin in programs that receive federal assistance. Many of the notifications for the community hearings for the Valero case were in English only, even though <a href="https://www.houstontx.gov/planning/Demographics/docs_pdfs/SN/65_Harrisburg_Manchester.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">70% of Manchester residents speak Spanish</a> at home. Also, because there weren't adequate translators, Spanish-speaking parents would bring their bilingual children — some as young as 7 years old — to the hearings to translate for them.</p><p>In this case, t.e.j.a.s. is asking that all notifications be translated into languages congruent with the community demographics, not just the first notification as stated under the current rule.</p><p>"In an unprecedented two weeks, we had a hearing," Ana says.</p><p>The case has the potential to change the national EPA rules, in addition to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality rule.</p><p>"The system is hard to change," Juan says, but if t.e.j.a.s. and other organizers stop fighting these systemic environmental ills, he says, the fence line communities will suffer even greater losses. "Community is always first."</p>
<h2>Environmental Justice Hot Spots</h2><p>In Michigan, organizers with the Michigan Environmental Justice Coalition are using scientific research to find and calculate the impact of environmental racism in their state's fence line communities. For years, MEJC members had been showing up to permit hearings for industrial polluters, mobilizing and providing support for the various communities that were at risk. After a while, the coalition realized a flaw in the permitting system.</p><p>"We recognized that these permits were not being considered in relationship to each other," says Jamesa Johnson-Greer, the climate justice director at MEJC. "So, when an air permit is considered for nitrous oxide, for example, that's only considered for that one entity, and that's not considering the fact that these polluting facilities might by near other polluting facilities that are also emitting the same nitrous oxide." Those facilities are often concentrated in and around low-income neighborhoods of color.</p><p>The coalition commissioned a <a href="https://seas.umich.edu/sites/all/files/AssessingtheStateofEnvironmentalJusticeinMichigan_344.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">cumulative impact study</a> by the University of Michigan School for Environment and Sustainability. Researchers assigned an environmental justice score for each census tract in the state based on social, demographic, and environmental data.</p><p>In 2019, the researchers reported hot spots of environmental injustice — communities around the state experiencing compounding impacts from 11 environmental factors, including the respiratory hazard index, diesel exposure, <a href="https://www.epa.gov/urban-air-toxics/about-urban-air-toxics" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">air toxics cancer risks</a>, nearby hazardous waste facilities and regulated industrial facilities, as well as traffic proximity. Unsurprisingly, those hot spots were disproportionately clustered in communities of color that had higher levels of poverty, unemployment, and educational attainment (the percent of the population over 25 without a high school diploma) than the statewide average.</p><p>The report confirmed some of what MEJC already knew, such as the intense air pollution in southwest Detroit, particularly <a href="https://www.metrotimes.com/detroit/struggling-to-breathe-in-48217-michigans-most-toxic-zip-code/Content?oid=23542211" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the 48217 ZIP code</a>, which is surrounded by more than two dozen industrial polluting facilities. The environmental justice scores around Detroit were as high as 87 out of 100. But there were also surprises, according to Johnson-Greer, like the fact that Grand Rapids, Michigan, had the highest EJ score in the state: 93.99. And despite the egregious water issues in Flint, Genesee County, where the city is located, didn't even make the top 10% of census tracts.</p><p>"That actually influenced the way we did our work this year," Johnson-Greer says, "recognizing that we needed to go and talk to people in those areas who have been doing work around environmental justice or social justice and see what the issues were on the ground."</p><p>By developing relationships with environmental advocates in Grand Rapids, MEJC learned that the town has a long history of logging and paper mills, considered <a href="https://www.intechopen.com/books/environmental-management-in-practice/pollution-prevention-in-the-pulp-and-paper-industries" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">one of the most polluting industries in the world</a> because of the high concentration of chemicals in the wastewater. Johnson-Greer says that recognizing the patterns and similarities across the EJ hot spots throughout the state can help highlight the weaknesses — and, thus, the starting points for equitable environmental transitions — in statewide and national environmental policies.</p><p>In particular, she points to the importance of "prioritizing those communities that are most vulnerable and recognizing that those are the communities that we need to start resourcing immediately, because they have probably also been most under-resourced and have also been left behind in past policies."</p>
<h2>A Shift in the Collective Consciousness</h2><p>For Bakeyah Nelson, the executive director of Air Alliance Houston, putting the most affected communities' needs first means using a diversity of tactics. Air Alliance Houston supports community interests by advocating for long-term legislative solutions, like developing industrial zoning laws in Houston, and by responding as-needed to threats against local communities' air quality, such as monitoring permits for new concrete batch plants so they can alert the nearby residents of their options to fight the permit.</p><p>"In advocacy, I would say there is no one size fits all," Nelson says. "It can be proactive; we can work with groups and coalitions to put forth state level legislation to try to prevent concrete batch plants from being placed near neighborhoods. But, on a day-to-day basis, it's more reactive in that we are tracking the permits; we see a permit and then we respond."</p><p>With limited time and resources, striking an effective balance of reactive and proactive responses can be a challenge, says Bryan Parras of the Sierra Club. But Parras is inspired by the community he serves, as well as the overall shift in public conversation he's seen around pollution and climate change over the past few years. While affluent White communities are typically untouched by environmental racism, they are now facing the unavoidable sign of climate change, as was the case with Portland in this year's wildfires. That can prompt powerful empathy and is moving the needle toward action on environmental justice.</p><p>"Despite all of the problems, you see some real change happening in the collective consciousness," Parras says. "There is a growth, a renaissance of activism and participation in civic life that is really beautiful to see."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.yesmagazine.org/environment/2020/11/18/smoke-portland-air-quality-equity/" target="_blank">YES! Magazine</a>.</em><br/></p>From Your Site Articles
- 16 Essential Books About Environmental Justice, Racism and Activism ›
- 7 Devastating Photos of Wildfires in California, Oregon and ... ›
- Several West Coast Cities Have the World's Worst Air - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
An aerial view from a drone shows an auger cart being used to transfer soybeans to a transport truck in a field at the Bardole & Son's Ltd farm on October 14, 2019 in Rippey, Iowa. Joe Raedle / Getty Images
By Scott Faber
The staggering number of food and farm workers who have died from Covid-19 has laid bare the Trump administration's disastrous policies on food and farm issues.
<p>President Trump's failure to provide these workers with protections from the coronavirus was the latest bad decision that made our food and the people who produce it less safe, increased hunger, increased the health care costs caused by poor diets and the pollution caused by farms, and made it harder for all Americans to decide how to feed their families.</p>
<p>Now President-elect Biden has a chance to change course. Here's what should be on the menu.</p><p>First, Biden should make it a <a href="https://frac.org/news/frac-congratulates-presidentelectbiden" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">priority to end hunger</a>. As a result of the pandemic, millions more are <a href="https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/05/06/the-covid-19-crisis-has-already-left-too-many-children-hungry-in-america/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">facing hunger</a>, including one in five children.</p><p>The Trump administration has actually been undermining programs to alleviate hunger. Last year, the Department of Agriculture proposed to kick nearly <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/family/archive/2019/12/trump-snap-food-stamps-cuts/603367/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">700,000</a> people out of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, as well as implementing <a href="https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/targeting-snap-expanded-public-charge-rule-could-worsen-food-insecurity" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">other rules</a> designed to reduce participation in the program, commonly known as food stamps. Just weeks before the election, the administration went to court to <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/10/26/trump-blocks-pandemic-food-aid-432560" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">block pandemic food aid</a> for the poor.</p><p>Biden has <a href="https://joebiden.com/joe-biden-urges-donald-trump-to-address-hunger-crisis/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pledged</a> to increase the standard SNAP benefit by 15 percent, <a href="https://joebiden.com/covid19/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">supports</a> free school meals and wants to <a href="https://joebiden.com/covid19/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">rescind</a> rules that limit participation in anti-hunger programs. But increasing SNAP benefits and participation alone will not end hunger. A Biden administration must also address income and housing challenges.</p><p>Second, Biden should make it a priority to protect food and farm workers from Covid-19. According to the Food and Environmental Reporting Network, at least <a href="https://thefern.org/2020/04/mapping-covid-19-in-meat-and-food-processing-plants/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">72,000</a> of these workers have gotten sick and <a href="https://thefern.org/2020/04/mapping-covid-19-in-meat-and-food-processing-plants/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">327</a> have died.</p><p>Biden has <a href="https://people.com/politics/joe-biden-says-no-workers-life-is-worth-me-getting-a-cheaper-hamburger/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">said</a>, "[N]o worker's life is worth me getting a cheaper hamburger," and <a href="https://joebiden.com/empowerworkers/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pledged</a> to support policies that protect workers from Covid-19, expand their ability to organize, and provide a $15 minimum wage. To make good on his pledge to protect workers threatened by Covid-19, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, or OSHA, must quickly require basic personal protections for workers, boost enforcement and ensure that workers have safe housing and transportation. When food and farm workers get sick from Covid-19, they should receive sick pay so they can stay home. And when they take risks to keep us fed, those risks should be rewarded through premium pay.</p><p>Third, Biden should make it a priority to support healthy diets.</p><p>Poor diet is now the <a href="https://cspinet.org/eating-healthy/why-good-nutrition-important" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">leading cause of Americans' death</a>, and obesity rates <a href="https://sites.tufts.edu/foodnutritionandhealth2019/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">continue to climb</a>, increasing <a href="https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/obesity-prevention-source/obesity-consequences/economic/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">health care costs</a>. The diseases caused by poor diets – such as diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease – have <a href="https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2021264" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">significantly increased</a> the risks posed by Covid-19.</p><p>As a candidate, Biden has not had much to say about diet. But <a href="https://www.rockefellerfoundation.org/report/reset-the-table-meeting-the-moment-to-transform-the-u-s-food-system/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">food leaders</a> have had a lot to say about <a href="https://www.tfah.org/report-details/state-of-obesity-2020/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">steps</a> we can take to support healthy diets. And Vice President-elect Kamala Harris has been an outspoken supporter of <a href="https://www.cnsnews.com/article/national/susan-jones/harris-would-change-dietary-guidelines-food-labels-discourage-red-meat" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">food policy reforms</a> designed to improve our health. For starters, a Biden-Harris administration should immediately restore tough standards for food sold in schools.</p><p>Fourth, Biden should revamp Trump's farmer bailout programs to help farmers in real need and restore rules that ensure a farmer gets a fair price.</p><p>Trump's policies have been a disaster for farmers. His <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/making-sense/what-is-the-toll-of-trade-wars-on-u-s-agriculture" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">trade war</a> closed markets that had taken decades to open. His <a href="https://foodpolicyaction.org/will-congress-repeat-the-mistakes-of-trumps-farmer-bailout/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bailouts</a> have favored the <a href="https://www.ewg.org/agmag/2020/10/get-big-or-get-out-how-trump-s-farm-bailouts-are-fueling-farm-consolidation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">wealthiest farmers</a> at the expense of family farms, and rules designed to ensure that farmers get a <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2020/01/14/trump-usda-meatpacking-proposal-098352" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fair price</a> have been shelved. His inhumane immigration policies have created <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/18/nyregion/ny-farmers-undocumented-workers-trump-immigration.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">labor shortages</a> that have harmed both farmers and food manufacturers.</p><p>The modest tweaks to ethanol programs Biden has proposed won't make a difference to most farmers. His agriculture secretary must rescind and rewrite the rules for the USDA's Covid-19 response programs to help farmers facing economic ruin and reform other farm subsidy programs to level the playing field for family farmers.</p><p>But that's not all. President-elect Biden should also make good on his<a href="https://joebiden.com/rural-plan/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer"> plan</a> to address long-standing and ongoing discrimination against Black farmers. Farm subsidy reform alone will not be enough to address the <a href="https://elizabethwarren.com/plans/equity-farmers-of-color" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">long legacy of racial discrimination</a> in farm programs. We must also transform the culture at the USDA, provide land and credit to Black farmers and lift the veil of secrecy that hides the <a href="https://civileats.com/2020/07/03/op-ed-the-farm-bureau-says-it-wants-to-fight-racism-heres-where-to-start/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">racial makeup</a> of farm subsidies.</p><p>Fifth, Biden should make it a priority to keep our food safe.</p><p>Contaminated food kills more than <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/foodsafety/cdc-and-food-safety.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">3,000 Americans</a> a year, and a recent <a href="https://www.gao.gov/key_issues/food_safety/issue_summary" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">audit</a> shows no progress is being made to reduce foodborne illness. But Trump's Department of Agriculture <a href="https://advocacy.consumerreports.org/research/safe-food-coalition-comments-to-usda-on-its-proposal-to-eliminate-hog-carcass-cleaning-rules/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">eliminated</a> a requirement to clean hog carcasses, <a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/resources/attacks-on-science/usda-increases-line-speeds-endangering-poultry-processing-plant" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">increased</a> line speeds at meat-processing plants and <a href="https://cspinet.org/news/usda-publishes-final-rule-deregulate-meat-inspection-jeopardizing-food-safety-20190917" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">deregulated</a> food safety inspections. His Environmental Protection Agency <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/18/climate/epa-chlorpyrifos-pesticide-ban.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reversed</a> a ban on chlorpyrifos, a pesticide linked to brain damage in children, and <a href="https://biologicaldiversity.org/w/news/press-releases/epa-reapproves-dangerous-drift-prone-dicamba-pesticides-recently-banned-federal-court-causing-widespread-economic-harm-farmers-2020-10-27/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">extended</a> the life of dicamba, another toxic pesticide.</p><p>Biden should immediately restore the ban on chlorpyrifos and reverse other Trump administration decisions that fail to protect consumers and farmworkers from pesticides. But the Biden-Harris administration should go further and fix our broken system for reviewing the safety of <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/flawed-epa-approval-process-IB.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">pesticides</a> and other <a href="https://www.edf.org/health/unsafe-and-untested-chemicals-are-our-food" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">chemicals</a> in food.</p><p>We must also do much more to reduce foodborne illness. We must not only require growers to test irrigation water for pathogens but also combat <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/issue-briefs/2019/05/opportunities-to-improve-food-safety-from-farm-to-fork" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">the growing threat of pathogens</a> in meat and poultry. We must <a href="https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/news-room/press-releases-and-statements/2017/07/17/pew-safer-meat-requires-reducing-risks-where-food-animals-are-raised" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">address these risks where they start</a> – in the massive confined feedlots that have taken over much of farm country.</p><p>Sixth, the new agriculture secretary should immediately declare a climate emergency and use the resources of the Commodity Credit Corporation to reward farmers who reduce emissions and permanently store carbon in the ground.</p><p>Farmers can play a much <a href="https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/437193-how-corn-farmers-and-cows-can-help-avert-the-climate" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bigger role</a> in efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Historic storms have placed farmers on the front lines in the fight against the climate crisis, and legislators have proposed <a href="https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/with-fdrs-new-deal-as-blueprint-booker-introduces-climate-change-bill-focused-on-investing-in-farm-conservation-programs-reforestation-and-wetlands-restoration" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">bold ideas</a> to reward farmers who take meaningful and measurable steps to address it. Expanding and reforming voluntary farm stewardship programs to make the climate crisis a top priority and linking farm subsidies to a <a href="https://www.ewg.org/research/fooling-ourselves" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">basic standard</a> of environmental care will also help keep our drinking water clean and safe.</p><p>The Covid-19 crisis has shined a spotlight on Trump's food and farm policy failures. Workers are getting sick, and our food supply chains are being tested. Trump's policy failures have also made more consumers sick and pushed many farmers to the brink of financial ruin. A Biden-Harris administration can – and should – do better.</p><p><em><a href="https://www.ewg.org/experts/scott-faber.php" target="_blank">Scott Faber</a> is the Senior Vice President of Government Affairs at the Environmental Working Group.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
Like many other plant-based foods and products, CBD oil is one dietary supplement where "organic" labels are very important to consumers. However, there are little to no regulations within the hemp industry when it comes to deeming a product as organic, which makes it increasingly difficult for shoppers to find the best CBD oil products available on the market.
<p>Here you can learn about the importance of organic hemp oil, why it's better for the environment, and which CBD companies actually make trustworthy products with sustainable farming processes. origins which weigh heavily on many consumers who want to buy a product that's produced in the best way possible for not only themselves to ingest, but for the environment as well through sustainable farming methods. </p><h2>What Is CBD Oil?</h2><p>First things first, CBD stands for cannabidiol, and it's a cannabinoid found within cannabis sativa plants. This plant compound is believed to have many potential benefits, and it is primarily derived from hemp plants via a CO2 extraction process. </p><p>Since CBD is extracted from industrial hemp, which contains only trace amounts of THC (the psychoactive component in cannabis plants), this means that CBD won't make you feel high like marijuana, which has much higher levels of THC that causes psychoactive effects. Instead, the effects of CBD are much more subtle and promote a general sense of calm and relaxation in most users.</p><h2>What Makes a CBD Oil Organic?</h2><p>In terms of organic labels, perhaps the most important (and prominent) certification comes from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). This government organization has been labeling foods as "organic" for many years, but what exactly does this certification entail? Essentially, a label indicating that a product is "USDA Organic" or "Certified Organic" means that at least 95% of the ingredients are obtained from organic sources.</p><p>For a crop to be considered organic by the USDA, it must be grown without the use of industrial solvents, irradiation, genetic engineering (GMOs), synthetic pesticides, or chemical fertilizer. Instead, farmers rely on natural substances and <a href="https://www.usda.gov/media/blog/2012/03/22/organic-101-what-usda-organic-label-means" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">mechanical, physical, or biologically based farming</a> techniques to cultivate healthy and organic crops.</p><p>Before the passage of the 2018 Farm Bill, no hemp-derived products could be dubbed as "certified organic" since the hemp plant and its extracts were still categorized as a Schedule I Controlled Substance. However, it's still difficult for CBD companies to obtain a USDA certified organic label for their products due to the legal grey area that still surrounds CBD extracts. </p><p>Because of these challenges, and due to the fact that industrial hemp has only recently become an agricultural crop, very few CBD oils are USDA certified organic. Rather, many CBD products contain hemp extracts from plants that were grown in organic conditions but may not be federally certified.</p><h2>What are the Best Organic CBD Oil Brands?</h2><p><em>Each product featured here has been independently selected. If you make a purchase using the links included, we may earn commission.</em></p>
<h2>Why Organic Hemp Oil Matters</h2><p>Hemp is a unique plant, not only for its rich cannabinoid content, but also for its ability to absorb a wide variety of components in soil. But this trait poses great risks when it comes to the creation of CBD products derived from hemp.</p><p>Because hemp has a high capacity for compound uptake, this means that the plants can retain <a href="https://www.remedyreview.com/industry/lab-test-results/" target="_blank">harmful chemicals like pesticides</a>, heavy metals, and other residual solvents. This is especially true when it comes to synthetic chemicals that are more toxic to humans, and difficult to remove once they have been absorbed by the hemp plant.</p><p>Organic farming practices help reduce the risk of hemp crops absorbing harsh chemicals that may later end up in CBD oil after extraction. When you're taking CBD as a wellness supplement to help alleviate your symptoms or improve your overall well-being, the last thing you want is to ingest compounds that might negatively outweigh the benefits of CBD. This is an important reason to look for third party lab test results when shopping for CBD products since these certificates of analysis can show the full cannabinoid and terpene profile of a hemp extract, as well as test results that search for the presence of any residual solvents.</p><p>In addition to creating a better end product, organic farming practices are also better for the environment. Sustainable and organic farming methods may <a href="https://www.helpguide.org/articles/healthy-eating/organic-foods.htm" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">reduce pollution, conserve water, reduce soil erosion, increase soil fertility, and use less energy</a>. The use of natural pest deterrents as opposed to chemical pesticides is also better for nearby animal populations and ecosystems.</p><h3>Organic vs. Natural</h3><p>While there are only a select few companies offering certified organic ingredients in their products, almost every brand in the CBD market creates "natural" products. The term "all-natural" or "plant-based" does not mean that a product is organic, and since hemp oil is a natural derivative of hemp plants, these products are often referred to as all-natural. However, there are some synthetic CBD oils that should be avoided because they are chemically constructed and may produce unwanted side effects that are not caused by naturally derived CBD extracts.</p><h2>What are the Benefits of Organic CBD Oil?</h2><p>There's a long list of potential CBD oil health benefits, and some of the most common wellness advantages include:</p><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2503660/" target="_blank">Chronic pain relief</a></li><li><a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604171/" target="_blank">Anti-anxiety effects</a></li><li>Better sleep</li><li><a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/inner-source/201901/cbd-oil-mental-health-should-you-take-it-too" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Improvements in mood</a></li><li>Internal balance and regulation</li></ul><p>When dealing with pain, inflammation, sleep issues, and mental health struggles, it can be hard to find sufficient treatment options. The use of certain prescriptions can cause unwanted side effects, yet they are often the only solution for patients with these medical conditions. In search of other therapies, people have started to flock towards CBD oil as an alternative remedy for a variety of conditions. However, it should be noted that CBD products are not approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), and you should seek your doctor's advice before using CBD if you have a serious medical condition.</p><h2>Look at the Labels Before You Buy CBD Oil</h2><p>When you go online to buy CBD oil, you'll quickly realize there is an overwhelming number of brands that are saturating the market. It can be difficult to determine which products are truly as good as they make themselves out to be. Always look for up-to-date third-party lab tests so you know you are getting a great product, and don't hesitate to contact the brand if you have any additional questions. And if you're intent on purchasing 100% organic CBD oil, it's best to look for certified products or brands that are held to strict regulatory standards.</p><p><strong>Melena Gurganus </strong>is the Reviews Editor at EcoWatch. She is passionate health and wellness and her writing aims to help others find products they can trust. Her work has been featured in publications such as Health, Shape, Huffington Post, Cannabis Business Times, and Bustle.<br></p>
Spruce
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjI3OC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyOTM2NzgzOX0.axY0HjeqRctJsR_KmDLctzDpUBLBN-oNIdqaXDb4caQ/img.jpg?width=980" id="774be" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="8379f35b1ca8a86d0e61b7d4bfc8b46e" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="spruce organic cbd oil" /><p>As one of the best brands in the business, Spruce CBD is well-known for its potent CBD oils that feature many additional beneficial phytocannabinoids. This brand works with two family-owned, sustainably focused farms in the USA (one located in Kentucky and one in North Carolina) to create its organic, small product batches. The max potency Spruce CBD oil contains 2400mg of full-spectrum CBD extract, but the brand also offers a lower strength tincture with 750mg of CBD in total.</p>
$89
CBDistillery
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjkzNC9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYyMTU4OTM4Nn0.ypRdeDSBcE87slYrFfVrRwtJ2qGIK6FD5jBB4pndTMo/img.jpg?width=980" id="b473b" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="9930b53c9d58cb49774640a61c3e3e75" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="cbdistillery cbd oil" /><p>All of the products from CBDistillery are <a href="https://ushempauthority.org/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. Hemp Authority Certified</a>, and for good reason. The company only uses non-GMO and pesticide-free industrial hemp that's grown organically on Colorado farms. Its hemp oils are some of the most affordable CBD products on the market, yet they still maintain a high standard of quality. CBDistillery has a wide variety of CBD potencies across its product line (ranging from 500mg to 5000mg per bottle) and offers both full-spectrum and broad-spectrum CBD oils to give customers a completely thc-free option.</p>
$35
FAB CBD
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIyNS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY2NDIwOTEyMn0.MlTjz096FJ0ev_-soK7_Z-FeQeJczWoeh9Qi9SSkHsY/img.jpg?width=980" id="04b26" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="76aa4862f44603242e318982acea6646" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="fab cbd oil" /><p>For an organic CBD oil that has it all, FAB CBD offers plenty of variety for any type of consumer. All of its products are made with zero pesticides and extracted from organically grown Colorado industrial hemp. FAB CBD oil comes in five all-natural flavors (mint, vanilla, berry, citrus, and natural) and is also available in four strengths (300, 600, 1200, and 2400mg per bottle).</p>
$39
NuLeaf Naturals
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDY4NjIxOS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY1NzExNTgyMX0.D6qMGYllKTsVhEkQ-L_GzpDHVu60a-tJKcio7M1Ssmc/img.jpg?width=980" id="94e4a" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3609a52479675730893a45a82a03c71d" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="nuleaf naturals organic cbd oil" /><p>As an industry-leading brand, it comes as no surprise that NuLeaf Naturals sources its CBD extract from organic hemp plants grown on licensed farms in Colorado. The comany's CBD oils only contain two ingredients: USDA certified organic hemp seed oil and full spectrum hemp extract.</p><p>NuLeaf Naturals uses one proprietary CBD oil formula for all of its products, so you will get the same CBD potency in each tincture (60mg per mL), but can purchase different bottle sizes depending on how much you intend to use.</p>
$38.50
Charlotte's Web
<img type="lazy-image" data-runner-src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDcwMjk3NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTY0MzQ0NjM4N30.SaQ85SK10-MWjN3PwHo2RqpiUBdjhD0IRnHKTqKaU7Q/img.jpg?width=980" id="84700" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="a2174067dcc0c4094be25b3472ce08c8" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" alt="charlottes web cbd oil" /><p>Perhaps one of the most well-known brands in the CBD landscape, Charlotte's Web has been growing sustainable hemp plants for several years. The company is currently in the process of achieving official USDA Organic Certification, but it already practices organic and sustainable cultivation techniques to enhance the overall health of the soil and the hemp plants themselves, which creates some of the highest quality CBD extracts. Charlotte's Web offers CBD oils in a range of different concentration options, and some even come in a few flavor options such as chocolate mint, orange blossom, and lemon twist.</p>
$60
From Your Site Articles
- Best CBD Oils of 2020: Reviews & Buying Guide - EcoWatch ›
- Best CBD Oil for Pain Management - Top 10 CBD Oil Review 2020 ... ›
- Best CBD for Dogs 2020 - Organic CBD Oil for Pets - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Thanasis Zovoilis / Stone / Getty Images
By Scott Faber
No candidate for president has ever pledged to make the toxic "forever chemicals" known as PFAS a priority – until now.
<p>In his environmental justice plan, President-elect Joe Biden <a href="https://joebiden.com/environmental-justice-plan/" target="_blank">pledged</a> to set enforceable limits for PFAS in drinking water and to designate PFAS as a hazardous substance under the Superfund cleanup law. </p><p>Here's why that matters.</p>
<p>PFAS chemicals are building up in the blood of every American, posing the risk of serious health problems. <a href="https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2019/06/pfas-chemicals-harm-immune-system-decrease-response-vaccines-new-ewg" target="_blank">PFAS makes vaccines less effective</a> and are linked to cancer, harm to the reproductive system and other health hazards.</p><p>More than <a href="https://www.ewg.org/release/study-more-200-million-americans-could-have-toxic-pfas-their-drinking-water" target="_blank">200 million Americans</a> are likely drinking water and eating food contaminated with PFAS. Nevertheless, the <a href="https://www.ewg.org/epa-pfas-timeline/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Environmental Protection Agency,</a> Food and Drug Administration and <a href="https://www.ewg.org/dodpfastimeline/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Defense Department</a> have for decades failed to address the chemicals' health risks. There are no federal limits on PFAS releases and uses and no requirements to clean up PFAS pollution.</p><p>Setting a national drinking water standard for PFAS under the federal Safe Drinking Water would have a huge impact on public health. Right now, only a <a href="https://www.awwa.org/Portals/0/AWWA/ETS/Resources/SummaryStateRegulationPFASDrinkingWaterFeb2020.pdf?ver=2020-02-03-091914-153" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">few states</a> require drinking water utilities to meet tough standards for PFAS in tap water. A national standard that would apply to all utilities would dramatically reduce our overall exposure to PFAS.</p><p>Designating PFAS as "<a href="https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2019/07/it-s-time-designate-pfas-hazardous-substance" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">hazardous substances</a>" under Superfund would also be historic. By doing so, the Biden-Harris administration would not only kick-start the cleanup process but also require polluters to pay their fair share of cleanup costs.</p><p>But that's not all the Biden team has pledged. The president-elect also pledged to prioritize PFAS substitutes in the marketplace. That means Biden could direct the EPA and the FDA to quickly phase out non-essential uses of PFAS in food packaging, cosmetics, sunscreens and other everyday products.</p><p>The Biden team will have other tools at its disposal. The president-elect could quickly restrict industrial discharges of PFAS into the air and water by using the tools provided by the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act, and expand reporting of these releases through the Toxic Release Inventory. Right now, more than <a href="https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2020/04/updated-thousands-industrial-facilities-likely-discharging-toxic-forever" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">2,500 manufacturers</a> are thought to be releasing PFAS with no limits.</p><p>The Biden-Harris administration can also direct the Defense Department to accelerate efforts to end the use of PFAS-based firefighting foam, impose a moratorium on the incineration of remaining stocks of PFAS foam, and accelerate PFAS cleanup at military installations. More than <a href="https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps/2020-military-pfas-sites/map/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">300 military installations</a> are known to be contaminated with PFAS.</p><p>No candidates have ever pledged to do as much to address America's environmental challenges as Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. And that is especially the case for PFAS pollution.</p><p><em><a href="https://www.ewg.org/experts/scott-faber.php" target="_blank">Scott Faber</a> is the Senior Vice President of Government Affairs at the Environmental Working Group. </em></p>
From Your Site Articles
- Trump to Veto Bill Intended to Keep Forever Chemicals out of ... ›
- Toxic 'Forever Chemicals' Detected in California Drinking Water ... ›
- How U.S. Government Conceals Truth About 'Forever Chemicals ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
By Gwen Ranniger
Deciding what household products and foods to buy is tricky.
There are thousands of products out there. Many do the exact same thing, or are nearly identical with slight nuance. But some products contain toxic compounds that can harm us or our children. Even the simple task of choosing a toothpaste can give us anxiety!
<p>While this isn't the definitive Guide to Every Item You Should Ever Purchase (check out what our friends at <a href="https://www.ewg.org/consumer-guides" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">EWG</a> and <a href="https://www.mamavation.com/category/product-investigations" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Mamavation</a> have compiled if you need that!), we sent a survey to 22 endocrinologists asking what they use in their homes.</p><p>These scientists know what ingredients are harmful to your health, and give some important pointers on things to avoid as you do your shopping.</p><p>Explore their answers to questions such as "do you buy organic produce?" and "do you buy scented products?" below.</p><p>Take what you learn as an opportunity to narrow down some of the choices out there.</p>
<p><br></p><iframe src="https://e.infogram.com/d45be043-2443-43cf-a57f-f048fcf6b13d?parent_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.ehn.org%2Fhow-to-buy-non-toxic-products--2648564261.html&src=embed#async_embed" title="Household products survey" style="vertical-align: middle; max-width: 100%; border-width: initial; border-style: none; width: 632px; height: 598px;"></iframe>
<p style="text-align: left;"><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://www.ehn.org/how-to-buy-non-toxic-products--2648564261.html" target="_blank">Environmental Health News</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- How to Stay Healthy at Home During the Coronavirus Lockdown ... ›
- Here's How to Clean Your Groceries During the COVID-19 Outbreak ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Dust From Your Old Furniture Likely Contains Harmful Chemicals — But There’s a Solution
21 October
Health + Wellness
New research finds that dust in buildings with older furniture is more likely to contain a suite of compounds that impact our health. Aleksandr Zubkov / Getty Images
By Hannah Seo
If you've been considering throwing out that old couch, now might be a good time. Dust in buildings with older furniture is more likely to contain a suite of compounds that impact our health, according to new research.
<p>In a new study published in <em><a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2020.106151" target="_blank">Environment International</a></em> researchers examined rooms in three categories: no intervention—rooms in older buildings with conventional furniture; partial intervention—rooms with at least some furniture made with healthier materials; and full intervention—rooms in more recently renovated buildings with furniture free from harmful chemicals. These rooms came from 21 buildings at an unnamed university and included office suites, classrooms, and common rooms. The scientists then examined the dust in those rooms for traces of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), as well as common chemical flame retardants polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) and organophosphate esters (OPEs).</p><p>They found that the dust from rooms furnished with items free of PFAS and chemical flame retardants in more recently renovated buildings had 78 percent lower levels of PFAS, 65 percent lower levels of OPEs, and 45 percent lower levels of PBDEs than rooms in older buildings with older furniture.</p>
<p>"This suggests that replacing harmful materials with these healthier materials is an inexpensive way to reduce exposures to toxic chemicals indoors, which is where we spend most of our time," <a href="https://www.linkedin.com/in/annaswiftyoung/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">Anna Young</a>, a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health and lead author of the paper, told EHN.</p><p>PFAS, PBDEs, and OPEs are all categories of chemicals that have been linked to a slew of health impacts, including certain cancers, decreased birth weights, thyroid disease, decreased sperm quality, high cholesterol, pregnancy-induced hypertension, asthma and ulcerative colitis.</p><p>Several studies have previously linked concentrations of contaminants in dust and air to higher body burdens. Despite their documented harms, all three classes of chemicals are commonly found in furniture and building materials to make products flame, stain, and water resistant.</p>
<p>The team analyzed the dust in 47 rooms—12 with no intervention, 28 with partial intervention, and seven with full intervention. They found at least one kind of PFAS, PBDE and OPE in dust from every room they sampled. And the average concentration of PFAS in rooms with no intervention was more than four times higher than the average concentration of PFAS in rooms that underwent a full intervention.<br></p><p>The paper said the contaminants in the healthier rooms could be due to those rooms existing in the same buildings as rooms that are less healthy, or could be due to newer chemicals like the PFAS perfluorohexanoic acid (PFHxA) slipping through into products that have omitted other substances. Another potential explanation is that these chemicals could persist as older plastics and materials are recycled and used in new products.</p><p>The upside, however, is that these chemicals are "not usually intrinsically bound to products," said Young. "They're used as additives. For example, PFAS is usually applied as a coating. So that means [harmful materials] can be removed without sacrificing the functional integrity of the product."</p>
<p>Making indoor spaces safer and cleaner, therefore, will not necessarily require huge, intrusive interventions.</p><p>Young also said that while the results themselves were somewhat expected—it is unsurprising that furniture made without harmful chemicals would yield dust with lower contaminant levels—what was novel was their intervention-based approach to reducing whole classes of chemical pollutants like PFAS in buildings.</p><p>When discussing solutions to removing harmful chemicals from indoor spaces, talking about entire classes of pollutants is a big help, <a href="https://oneill.indiana.edu/faculty-research/directory/profiles/faculty/full-time/salamova-amina.html" target="_blank">Amina Salamova</a>, an environmental chemist at Indiana University who was not affiliated with the paper, told EHN. There are so many individual chemicals in each of these classes—PFAS alone has around 5,000 different types, with new kinds consistently invented—that they become basically impossible to inventory.</p>
<p>"It's absolutely impossible to develop analytical methods to measure each and every single PFAS out there. It's just too expensive, and we don't even know what half of those chemicals are," Salamova said. By collectively taking stock of a whole class, she said, you remove the need to nitpick at individual exposure levels and their thresholds—details that are important to know but ultimately distract from solutions. Looking at classes of chemicals gives scientists the ability to say that we need to intervene and remove these contaminants across the board.</p><p>Despite the small sample size, Salamova said these results are quite stark and important. The potential for 78 percent less PFAS exposure with these simple interventions is huge, she said, especially since "we still know so little about its toxicity, especially in the indoor environment."</p><p>Most of us are not living in "healthy" buildings, said Young—the majority of buildings in the U.S. are decades old, built in a time when safety concerns associated with certain materials were unknown. That's why this research is important, she said: "The decisions we make today will have decades long impacts on the materials that our buildings, the chemicals we're exposed to, and ultimately, our health."</p>
<p><em>Reposted with permission from </em><em><a href="https://www.ehn.org/pfas-and-flame-retardants-in-house-dust-2648396264.html?rebelltitem=1#rebelltitem1" target="_blank"><span class="redactor-selection-marker" id="selection-marker-1"></span>Environmental Health News</a>.<span class="redactor-selection-marker" id="selection-marker-2"></span></em></p>From Your Site Articles
- How Chemicals Like PFAS Can Increase Your Risk of Severe ... ›
- PFAS Chemicals Contaminate U.S. Food Supply, FDA Confirms ... ›
- This Strategy Protects Public Health From PFAS 'Forever Chemicals ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Fish exposed to endocrine-disrupting compounds, like this inland silverside fish, can pass on health problems to future generations. Bill Stagnaro / Wikimedia Commons / CC by 3.0
By Brian Bienkowski
Fish exposed to endocrine-disrupting compounds pass on health problems to future generations, including deformities, reduced survival, and reproductive problems, according to a new study.
<p>The study, published in<a href="https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.0c02892" target="_blank"> <em>Environmental Science and Technology</em></a>, is the first of its kind in a fish that can live in freshwater, brackish water or salt water, and suggests that compounds in pesticides and birth control that pollute waterways are not only harming fish living there now, but their offspring and the subsequent generation as well.</p><p>The results are troublesome as the negative effects seen in fish offspring—including reduced survival and reproduction problems—could lead to population level declines over time.</p><p>"These effects can carry over into indirectly exposed fish and those not exposed at all," Bethany DeCourten, lead author of the study and a postdoctoral consultant at the University of California Davis' Department of Anatomy, Physiology and Cell Biology, told EHN.</p><p>The research offers the latest evidence of the deeply embedded biological problems for humans and animals exposed to endocrine-disrupting chemicals—which mimic natural hormones—that are pervasive in our environment.</p><p>"These findings suggest that single-generation toxicity testing may not be adequate to determine the effects of these chemicals on long-term population viability," the authors wrote.</p>
Low Levels Lead to Generational Impacts
<p>Researchers exposed inland silverside fish to bifenthrin, levonorgestrel, ethinylestradiol, and trenbolone to levels currently found in waterways.</p><p>"Our concentrations were actually on the low end" of what is found in the wild, DeCourten said, adding that it was low amounts of chemicals in parts per trillion.</p><p>Bifenthrin is a pesticide; levonorgestrel and ethinylestradiol are synthetic hormones used in birth controls; and trenbolone is a synthetic steroid often given to cattle to bulk them up.</p><p>Such endocrine-disruptors have already been linked to a variety of health problems in directly exposed fish including altered growth, reduced survival, lowered egg production, skewed sex ratios, and negative impacts to immune systems. But what remains less clear is how the exposure may impact future generations.</p><p>For their study, DeCourten and colleagues started the exposure when the fish were embryos and continued it for 21 days.</p><p>They then tracked effects on the exposed fish, and the next two generations.</p><p>They found:</p><ul><li>The exposed fish had impacted gene expression and DNA methylation, increased deformities, and decreased egg production;</li><li>The first generation, which was indirectly exposed within their parents, had reduced hatching success, and deformities in developing larvae;</li><li>And the second generation, which had no exposure, had the largest decrease in survival rates, and altered DNA methylation.</li></ul><p>In looking at two subsequent generations, the study roughly corresponds to three years in the wild, DeCourten said. "We saw impacts on survival in the second generation," she said. "This definitely could impact populations as a whole. Right now, we just don't really have an idea of exactly what that could mean for wild populations."</p><p>Senior author of the study Susanne Brander said it's reasonable to think that other fish species would be similarly impacted, especially other estuary and marine fish, as the salt content in water can change the way fish respond to different stressors, including pollution.</p><p>Brander, an assistant professor at Oregon State University, has been working with inland silverside fish for a little more than a decade.</p><p>In addition to her work, the silverside has been used for decades in wastewater effluent testing across the country.<br></p><p>It's a "model organism for estuary and marine and coastal habitats," she told EHN.</p>
Inherited Problems
<p>DeCourten said the altered DNA methylation is one of the plausible ways that future generations would experience health impacts from previous generations' exposure. Hormone-disrupting compounds have been shown to impact DNA methylation, which is an important marker of how an organism will develop.</p><p>"Methyl groups are added to specific sites on the genome, [the exposure] is not changing the genome itself, but rather how the genome is expressed," she said. "And that can be inherited throughout generations."</p><p>In addition, Brander said there are essentially different "tags" that exist on DNA molecules, which tell genes how to turn on and off. She said the exposure to different compounds may be "influencing which methyl tags get taken on or off as you proceed through generations."</p><p>The researchers said the study should prompt future toxics testing to consider impacts on future generations.</p><p>"The results … throw a wrench in the current approach to regulating chemicals, where it's often short-term testing looking at simple things like growth, survival, and maybe gene expression," Brander said.</p><p>"These findings are telling us we really at least need to consider" the next two generations, she added.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Alarming Levels of Cancer-Causing Chemicals Found in Columbia ... ›
- Microplastics Are Killing Baby Fish, New Study Finds - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
The 1.4-gigawatt coal-fired Kingston Steam Plant, just outside Kingston, Tennessee on the shore of Watts Bar Lake on March 31, 2019. In 2008, a coal ash pond at the plant collapsed, leading to the largest industrial spill in modern U.S. history and subsequent industry regulations in 2015. Paul Harris / Getty Images
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a rule change on Friday that will allow some coal power plants to ignore a court order to clean up coal ash ponds, which leech toxic materials into soil and groundwater. The rule change will allow some coal ash ponds to stay open for years while others that have no barrier to protect surrounding areas are allowed to stay open indefinitely, according to the AP.
<p>The arsenic-laced sludge that fills coal ash ponds is likely to leak when just a plastic barrier protects it. It is far more likely to pollute nearby soil and water when the pits have a clay barrier, according to researchers, as <a href="https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/521409-epa-may-violate-courts-with-new-rule-extending-life-of-unlined-coal" target="_blank">The Hill</a> reported.</p><p>A 2018 order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit had forced the EPA to close coal ash ponds that did not have plastic lining and were likely to leak toxic chemicals, making Friday's rule change seem like a blatant move to undermine the court's authority, according to environmental groups who promised to sue to stop the rule change, as The Hill reported.</p>
<p>Environmentalists argue that the rule change is a favor to the coal industry, for which EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler served as a lobbyist prior to joining the <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-watch/">Trump</a> administration. The move allows the industry to dump its byproducts inexpensively and irresponsibly.</p><p>"The reason the utilities are arguing to keep the ponds is because they have put in these unlined pits out the back door of the power plant that act as a catchall for their toxic waste," said Lisa Evans, an attorney for the environmental group Earthjustice, as the AP reported. "They don't want to get rid of them because they are cheap."</p>
<p>Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project commissioned a study on coal ash ponds and found that 91 percent of them were leaking toxic chemicals beyond what was permitted by EPA regulations, as The Hill reported. Their study found that heavy metals from the waste was polluting nearby drinking wells and groundwater.</p><p>Coal ash is produced when coal is burned to produce power. It is full of arsenic, mercury, lead and several other hazardous heavy metals. In the U.S., coal plants create nearly 100 million tons annually of ash and other waste, according to the AP.</p><p>"When ponds without lining leak, it's often more aggressive, faster and harder to control," said Evans, as The Hill reported. "Utilities are asking for favors and exemptions and EPA is willing to give them and is willing to rush to provide these exemptions."</p>
<p>The 2018 court decision found that clay lined coal ash ponds, or unlined ponds, are simply dangerous, as the AP reported.</p><p>Evans noted that the Obama-era Resource Conservation and Recovery Act required power plants to close unlined coal-ash ponds by April 2019, but the EPA keeps extending the deadline, as the AP reported.</p><p>By rewriting the rule, coal plants are able to get around the mandates of the 2015 Resource Conservation and Recovery Act by simply showing that their coal ash ponds pose no threat to human health.</p><p>"The Trump EPA is flouting the court's decision," said Evans, as the AP reported. "I've never seen anything like this before."</p>
From Your Site Articles
- 10 Ways Andrew Wheeler Has Decimated EPA Protections in Just ... ›
- What a Real Coal Ash Cleanup Looks Like - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
A mural reading "The future is Europe" is seen on a building outside the EU Headquarters in Brussels on November 24, 2018. Philippe Lopez LOPEZ / AFP / Getty Images
Europe's chief policy-making body Wednesday called for a safer, more sustainable chemicals market, plotting a zero-tolerance approach that nearly eliminates hormone mimicking compounds.
<p>The strategy, <a href="https://ec.europa.eu/environment/strategy/chemicals-strategy_en" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">approved by the European Commission</a>, represents some of the most ambitious policy recommendations on the planet and draws a stark contrast with the United States, where endocrine-disrupting compounds—such as bisphenol-A (BPA), phthalates, certain flame retardants and pesticides—remain largely unregulated and ubiquitous in products and packaging.</p><h3>'Once-in-a-Decade Opportunity'</h3><p>Environmental health advocates hailed the effort as "the most transformative chemical policy initiative" in 20 years and a "once-in-a-decade opportunity to rethink Europe's approach to chemicals management."</p><p>"Every day, our exposure to cocktails of harmful chemicals is translating in real-life health conditions and diseases for current and future generations," said Natacha Cingotti, senior policy officer for health and chemicals at the Brussels-based <a href="https://www.env-health.org/eu-chemicals-strategy-speedy-implementation-steps-key-to-truly-protect-peoples-health/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Health and Environment Alliance</a>.</p><p>"While we welcome this significant step forward, the reality leaves no room for self-complacency and it is urgent the Commission gets to work to implement the promises made to effectively protect people from harm and support safe innovation for non-toxic material cycles."</p>
Five Main Thrusts
<p>The new European plan, dubbed the Chemicals Strategy for Sustainability, is part of the broader Europe Green Deal, a sweeping proposal for the European Union to achieve carbon neutrality by 2050, eliminate pollution, and promote a sustainable economy.</p><p>The strategy released Wednesday has five main thrusts:</p><ol><li>Tighter scrutiny of hormone-mimicking compounds, along with an early warning system for chemical risks before such compounds hit the market.</li><li>A "one substance, one assessment" approach to increase chemical testing transparency.</li><li>Incentives for green chemistry and non-toxic materials development.</li><li>Information and tools for citizens to understand chemical risks.</li><li>Pressure on international markets to improve chemical safety globally.</li></ol><p>At its core, the strategy makes use of the precautionary principle—forcing companies or manufacturers to prove chemicals are safe before they go to market, and making them pay when there is pollution.</p>Concern From Business
<p>While environmental and health advocates lauded the move, business interests cautioned it will stifle commerce and innovation.<br></p><p>"Production cycles and supply chains are complex ... (and) not always well understood by decision makers," wrote EuroCommerce, representing the continents' retail and wholesale business sectors, in a position paper as the policy was being crafted this summer. "We ask the Commission to keep a close eye on the impact of individual initiatives, and its cumulative effects on the retail and wholesale sector and how it affects their economic viability."</p>Contrast With United States
<p>The Commission's plan stands in sharp contrast to the United States. Despite decades of warnings from academic scientists, U.S. regulators have largely ignored independent, non-industry science about the dangers of chemicals that impact our hormones, often at very low doses.<br></p><p>Endocrine-disrupting compounds are a particular concern, based on science from research labs worldwide. The compounds—added to a broad range of products such as plastics, toys, cosmetics, food packaging—have been linked to myriad health problems, including birth defects, obesity, diabetes, certain cancers, as well as impacts to the brain and reproductive and immune systems.</p><p>The highest profile—and highest dollar— effort by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to get on the same page of academic scientists and Europe on endocrine disruptor science has only deepened divides. An <a href="https://www.ehn.org/is-bpa-dangerous-for-health-2641153205.html" target="_blank">EHN investigation</a> of the FDA's effort on just one chemical, BPA, found the agency stacked the deck against findings from independent scientists studying BPA. It also found that many chemicals used to replace BPA in "BPA-free" products have the same adverse health impacts as the original chemical.</p>Separate Focus on PFAS
<p>Also released Wednesday was an EU strategy that specifically takes aim at PFAS, compounds so persistent they're called "forever chemicals." PFAS, used in products including firefighting foam, non-stick cookware and some clothing, have been found in the water of roughly 2,230 U.S. communities in 49 states, affecting more than 100 million people.<br></p><p>The new European strategy would only allow for PFAS use when the chemicals are "essential for society." In addition, it will fund research for safe alternatives and for monitoring and cleanup.</p>Toward 'Zero Pollution'
<p>The framework stems from political guidelines laid out at the end of 2019 by European Union President Ursula von der Leyen that pointed Europe toward "zero pollution."</p><p>"I will put forward a cross-cutting strategy to protect citizens' health from environmental degradation and pollution, addressing air and water quality, hazardous chemicals, industrial emissions, pesticides and endocrine disruptors," President von der Leyen wrote <a href="https://op.europa.eu/en/publication-detail/-/publication/43a17056-ebf1-11e9-9c4e-01aa75ed71a1" target="_blank">in the report.</a></p><p>The Commission plans to release a Zero Action Pollution Action Plan on air, water and soil next year to complement the chemicals strategy.</p>From Your Site Articles
- U.S. Annually Uses 388 Million Pounds of Potentially Fatal ... ›
- PFAS Chemicals Contaminate U.S. Food Supply, FDA Confirms ... ›
- Most US Apples Coated With Chemical Banned in Europe - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
PFAS are found in clothing, plastic, food packaging, electronics, personal care products, firefighting foams, medical devices and numerous other products. Pxfuel
By Carol Kwiatkowski
Like many inventions, the discovery of Teflon happened by accident. In 1938, chemists from Dupont (now Chemours) were studying refrigerant gases when, much to their surprise, one concoction solidified. Upon investigation, they found it was not only the slipperiest substance they'd ever seen – it was also noncorrosive and extremely stable and had a high melting point.
<p>In 1954 the revolutionary "nonstick" Teflon pan was introduced. Since then, an entire class of human-made chemicals has evolved: per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, better known as PFAS. There are <a href="https://comptox.epa.gov/dashboard/chemical_lists/pfasmaster" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">upward of 6,000 of these chemicals</a>. Many are used for stain-, grease- and waterproofing. PFAS are found in clothing, plastic, food packaging, electronics, personal care products, firefighting foams, medical devices and <a href="https://www.consumerreports.org/toxic-chemicals-substances/pfas-chemicals-should-you-be-concerned/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">numerous other products</a>.</p><p>But over time, evidence has slowly built that some commonly used PFAS <a href="https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/pfas/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">are toxic</a> and <a href="https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/health-effects/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">may cause cancer</a>. It took 50 years to understand that the happy accident of Teflon's discovery was, in fact, a train wreck.</p><p>As a public health analyst, I have studied the <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/scientific-contributions/Carol-F-Kwiatkowski-2002679758" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">harm caused by these chemicals</a>. I am one of hundreds of scientists who are calling for a <a href="https://greensciencepolicy.org/madrid-statement/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">comprehensive, effective plan</a> to manage the entire class of PFAS to protect public health while safer alternatives are developed.</p><p>Typically, when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency assesses chemicals for potential harm, it examines one substance at a time. That approach isn't working for PFAS, given the sheer number of them and the fact that manufacturers commonly replace toxic substances with "<a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/01/new-forever-chemicals-contaminating-environment-regulators-say" target="_blank">regrettable substitutes</a>" – similar, lesser-known chemicals that also threaten human health and the environment.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDUxMDk2Ny9vcmlnaW4ucG5nIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMTgxNjkxOX0.5fy11YaxSlX5QrKsZU7JflRDJ86gF0KxfqTfR10-bOY/img.png?width=980" id="b0784" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="b744bd72f43147a39643ad1250cad000" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
As PFAS are produced and used, they can migrate into soil and water. MI DEQ
Toxic Chemicals
<p>A <a href="https://cen.acs.org/articles/83/i30/DuPont-Faces-Class-Action-Lawsuits.html" target="_blank">class-action lawsuit</a> brought this issue to national attention in 2005. Workers at a Parkersburg, West Virginia, DuPont plant joined with local residents to sue the company for releasing millions of pounds of one of these chemicals, known as PFOA, into the air and the Ohio River. Lawyers discovered that the company <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/10/magazine/the-lawyer-who-became-duponts-worst-nightmare.html" target="_blank">had known as far back as 1961</a> that PFOA could harm the liver.</p><p>The suit was ultimately <a href="https://www.levinlaw.com/dupont-c8-litigation" target="_blank">settled in 2017</a> for $670 million, after <a href="http://www.c8sciencepanel.org/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">an eight-year study</a> of tens of thousands of people who had been exposed. Based on <a href="http://www.c8sciencepanel.org/publications.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">multiple scientific studies</a>, this review concluded that there was a probable link between exposure to PFOA and six categories of diseases: diagnosed high cholesterol, ulcerative colitis, thyroid disease, testicular cancer, kidney cancer and pregnancy-induced hypertension.</p><p>Over the past two decades, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-018-0405-y" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">hundreds of peer-reviewed scientific papers</a> have shown that many PFAS are not only toxic – they also <a href="https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">don't fully break down in the environment</a> and have accumulated in the bodies of people and animals around the world. Some studies have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijheh.2019.10.008" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">detected PFAS in 99% of people tested</a>. Others have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.emcon.2019.06.002" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">found PFAS in wildlife</a>, including polar bears, dolphins and seals.</p><span style="display:block;position:relative;padding-top:56.25%;" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="e62ff1326c2d51afc5f0856eb1ec3795"><iframe lazy-loadable="true" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/JbHeE3YzeRA?rel=0" width="100%" height="auto" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" style="position:absolute;top:0;left:0;width:100%;height:100%;"></iframe></span>
Widespread and Persistent
<p>PFAS are often called "<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/these-toxic-chemicals-are-everywhere-and-they-wont-ever-go-away/2018/01/02/82e7e48a-e4ee-11e7-a65d-1ac0fd7f097e_story.html" target="_blank">forever chemicals</a>" because they don't fully degrade. They move easily through air and water, can quickly travel long distances and accumulate in sediment, soil and plants. They have also been found in <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.06.009" target="_blank">dust</a> <a href="https://www.fda.gov/food/chemicals/and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas" target="_blank">and food</a>, including eggs, meat, milk, fish, fruits and vegetables.</p><p>In the bodies of humans and animals, PFAS <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2013.06.004" target="_blank">concentrate in various organs, tissues and cells</a>. The <a href="https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/assessments/noncancer/completed/pfoa/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">U.S. National Toxicology Program</a> and <a href="https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxprofiles/tp.asp?id=1117&tid=237" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Centers for Disease Control and Prevention</a> have confirmed a long list of health risks, including immunotoxicity, testicular and kidney cancer, liver damage, decreased fertility and thyroid disease.</p><p>Children are even more vulnerable than adults because they can ingest more PFAS relative to their body weight from food and water and through the air. Children also put their hands in their mouths more often, and their metabolic and immune systems are less developed. Studies show that these chemicals <a href="https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14070691" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">harm children</a> by causing kidney dysfunction, delayed puberty, asthma and <a href="https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/assessments/noncancer/completed/pfoa/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">altered immune function</a>.</p><p>Researchers have also documented that PFAS exposure <a href="https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.2034" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">reduces the effectiveness of vaccines</a>, which is particularly concerning amid the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><div id="2f489" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="dc8947d6f28cecd61b99688c8e1f751a"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1291831257790402560" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">PFAS, a class of chemicals that have been associated with health hazards including liver damage, birth defects, can… https://t.co/NtnVkmMQs0</div> — WIRED (@WIRED)<a href="https://twitter.com/WIRED/statuses/1291831257790402560">1596831547.0</a></blockquote></div>
Regulation Is Lagging
<p>PFAS have become so ubiquitous in the environment that health experts say it is <a href="https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/pfas/health-effects/exposure.html" target="_blank">probably impossible to completely prevent exposure</a>. These substances are released throughout their life cycles, from chemical production to product use and disposal. Up to 80% of environmental pollution from common PFAS, such as PFOA, comes from <a href="https://doi.org/10.1021/es0512475" target="_blank">production of fluoropolymers</a> that use toxic PFAS as processing aids to make products like Teflon.</p><p>In 2009 the EPA established a health advisory level for PFOA in drinking water of 400 parts per trillion. Health advisories are not binding regulations – they are <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/drinking-water-contaminant-human-health-effects-information#dw-standards" target="_blank">technical guidelines</a> for state, local and tribal governments, which are primarily responsible for regulating public water systems.</p><p>In 2016 the agency <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/drinkingwaterhealthadvisories_pfoa_pfos_updated_5.31.16.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">dramatically lowered</a> this recommendation to 70 parts per trillion. Some states have set <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/etc.4863" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">far more protective levels</a> – as low as 8 parts per trillion.</p><p>According to a recent estimate by the <a href="https://www.ewg.org/about-us" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Environmental Working Group</a>, a public health advocacy organization, up to 110 million Americans could be <a href="https://www.ewg.org/interactive-maps/pfas_contamination/map/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">drinking PFAS-contaminated water</a>. Even with the most advanced treatment processes, it is <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.watres.2013.10.045" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">extremely difficult and costly</a> to remove these chemicals from drinking water. And it's impossible to clean up lakes, river systems or oceans. Nonetheless, PFAS are <a href="https://oversight.house.gov/legislation/hearings/toxic-forever-chemicals-a-call-for-immediate-federal-action-on-pfas" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">largely unregulated by the federal government</a>, although they are <a href="https://www.inquirer.com/news/pfas-action-act-congress-bill-house-pass-trump-epa-20200110.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">gaining increased attention from Congress</a>.</p>Reducing PFAS Risks at the Source
<p>Given that PFAS pollution is so ubiquitous and hard to remove, many health experts assert that the only way to address it is by <a href="https://www.apha.org/policies-and-advocacy/public-health-policy-statements/policy-database/2016/12/21/reducing-human-exposure-to-highly-fluorinated-chemicals" target="_blank">reducing PFAS production and use as much as possible</a>.</p><p><a href="https://pfascentral.org/" target="_blank">Educational campaigns</a> and <a href="https://toxicfreefuture.org/toxic-free-future-action-center/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">consumer pressure</a> are making a difference. Many forward-thinking companies, including grocers, clothing manufacturers and furniture stores, have <a href="https://pfascentral.org/pfas-basics/pfas-free-products/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">removed PFAS</a> from products they use and sell.</p><p>State governments have also stepped in. California recently <a href="https://news.bloomberglaw.com/environment-and-energy/ban-on-firefighting-foam-with-pfas-signed-by-california-governor" target="_blank">banned PFAS in firefighting foams</a>. Maine and Washington have <a href="https://www.natlawreview.com/article/attack-pfass-extends-to-food-packaging" target="_blank">banned PFAS in food packaging</a>. Other states are <a href="https://www.ncsl.org/research/environment-and-natural-resources/per-and-polyfluoroalkyl-substances-pfas-state-laws.aspx" target="_blank">considering similar measures</a>.<br></p><p>I am part of a group of scientists from universities, nonprofit organizations and government agencies in the U.S. and Europe that has argued for managing the entire class of PFAS chemicals as a group, instead of one by one. We also support an "<a href="https://doi.org/10.1039/C9EM00163H" target="_blank">essential uses" approach</a> that would restrict their production and use only to products that are critical for health and proper functioning of society, such as medical devices and safety equipment. And we have recommended developing safer non-PFAS alternatives.</p><p>As the EPA acknowledges, there is an <a href="https://www.epa.gov/innovation/innovative-ways-destroy-pfas-challenge" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">urgent need for innovative solutions</a> to PFAS pollution. Guided by good science, I believe we can effectively manage PFAS to reduce further harm, while researchers find ways to clean up what has already been released.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Trump to Veto Bill Intended to Keep Forever Chemicals out of ... ›
- How Chemicals Like PFAS Can Increase Your Risk of Severe ... ›
- PFAS Chemicals Contaminate U.S. Food Supply, FDA Confirms ... ›
- Dust From Your Old Furniture Likely Contains Harmful Chemicals - EcoWatch ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Trending
The ozone hole over Antarctica on Oct. 6, 2020. NASA Ozone Watch
The hole in the ozone layer over Antarctica is one of the largest and deepest in the past 15 years, the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) said Tuesday.
<p>The ozone hole over Antarctica usually starts to grow in August and reaches its peak in October, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/europe-antarctica-climate-change-archive-geneva-ec4eeb8da25ef7a7536c05105cf50550" target="_blank">The Associated Press explained</a>. This year, it peaked at 24 million square kilometers (approximately 9.3 million square miles) and is now at 23 million square kilometers (approximately 8.9 million square miles), the WMO said. This means the hole is larger than the average for the past decade and extends over most of Antarctica.</p><p>"With the sunlight returning to the South Pole in the last weeks, we saw continued ozone depletion over the area. <a href="https://public.wmo.int/en/media/news/antarctic-ozone-hole-smallest-record" target="_blank">After the unusually small and short-lived ozone hole in 2019,</a> which was driven by special meteorological conditions, we are registering a rather large one again this year, which confirms that we need to continue enforcing the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/montreal-protocol" target="_self">Montreal Protocol</a> banning emissions of ozone depleting chemicals," Vincent-Henri Peuch, director of the EU's Copernicus Atmosphere Monitoring Service (CAMS) at ECMWF, said in the WMO press release.</p>
<div id="e533d" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="3148f785e224740722e9b973c1f73d13"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="1313453354266382337" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The #ozone hole over the #Antarctic is one of the largest and deepest in recent years, per @CopernicusECMWF,… https://t.co/k8DUe65iqV</div> — World Meteorological Organization (@World Meteorological Organization)<a href="https://twitter.com/WMO/statuses/1313453354266382337">1601986657.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p>The ozone layer is important because it protects the earth from dangerous ultraviolet radiation, <a href="https://atmosphere.copernicus.eu/monitoring-ozone-layer" target="_blank">CAMS explained</a>. In the late 20th century, that layer was damaged by the human release of ozone-depleting halocarbons, which the Montreal Protocol of 1987 sought to control.</p><p>But the size of the ozone hole every year is also impacted by specific weather conditions. This year, a strong polar vortex has chilled the air above Antarctica, and consistently cold air creates the ideal conditions for ozone depletion.</p><p>"The air has been below minus 78 degrees Celsius, and this is the temperature which you need to form stratospheric clouds — and this quite (a) complex process," WMO spokesperson Clare Nullis said at a UN briefing reported by The Associated Press. "The ice in these clouds triggers a reaction which then can destroy the ozone zone. So, it's because of that that we are seeing the big ozone hole this year."</p><p>Specifically, the ice can turn nonreactive chemicals into reactive ones, the WMO explained. Light from the sun then triggers chemical reactions that deplete the ozone layer.</p>
<p>The Montreal Protocol has been <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/montreal-protocol-ozone-climate-change-2641579082.html" target="_self">hailed</a> as an example of effective international collaboration on a major environmental problem. Last year's hole over Antarctica was the smallest it has been since the hole was discovered, but this was due to unusual weather, not emissions reductions, <a href="https://abcnews.go.com/International/ozone-hole-antarctica-largest-deepest-years-researchers/story?id=73451987" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank">ABC News reported</a>.</p><p>"There is much variability in how far ozone hole events develop each year," Peuch said in the WMO release.</p><p>The 2018 hole was also on the larger side.</p><p>Still, the WMO and the UN Environment Programme determined in 2018 that the ozone layer was on the road to recovery and could return to pre-1980 levels over Antarctica by 2060.</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Human Cooperation Can Restore Climate Patterns: The Case of the ... ›
- 'Ozone Friendly' Chemicals Are Polluting the Environment - EcoWatch ›
- Another Hole in the Ozone Layer? ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
Some 269 million people around the world indulged in drugs in 2018, according to the United Nations. PxHere / CC0
By Tim Schauenberg
Whether they smoked a joint on the couch or sniffed a line in a club, some 269 million people around the world indulged in drugs in 2018, according to the United Nations.
<p><a href="https://www.dw.com/en/cocaine-opium-production-hits-record-highs-un/a-44408807" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Cocaine production is at record levels</a>, opium has been on an upward trend for the past decade, the market for synthetic drugs is growing in the Netherlands and some countries are legalizing cannabis. In short, business is booming.</p><p>It is no secret that drug trafficking and cartel wars cost human lives but so far there has been little focus on how this global trade impacts the environment.</p>
Cannabis Vs. Potatoes: Which Has a Bigger Carbon Footprint?
<p>With 192 million users in 2018, <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/global-marijuana-use-rose-by-60-percent-over-the-past-decade/a-49358921" target="_blank">cannabis is by far the most popular drug worldwide</a> — excluding alcohol and tobacco.</p><p>Efforts to legalize marijuana are continuing to gather pace in the United States, where the drug has already become a billion-dollar market. But cultivating the plants in greenhouses, with optimum light, ventilation and temperature, guzzles an enormous amount of resources.</p><p>According to estimates, cannabis production in the U.S. already accounts for around <a href="https://www.swansea.ac.uk/media/Environmental-Impacts-of-the-Legalization-of-Cannabis-in-California.pdf" target="_blank">1% of the country's total energy consumption</a>.</p><p>"Within a single year, approximately 16.5 tons of carbon dioxide are emitted in the United States as the result of indoor cannabis production, equivalent to the annual emissions of 3 million cars," according to a <a href="https://escholarship.org/uc/item/4w64g29s" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">report by the University of California, Davis.</a></p><p>That means that a single joint has a similar carbon footprint to about 6.6 pounds of potatoes.</p>Cannabis Plants Add to Water Stress
<p>Cannabis is also an extremely thirsty plant, needing twice as much water as tomatoes or grapes.</p><p>About 70% of the cannabis consumed across the country is grown in California. Such large-scale cultivation of a crop that requires up to 6 gallons of water per day per plant has only intensified the region's water shortages during dry seasons.</p><p>Scientists from the Californian Department of Fisheries and Wildlife estimate that illegal outdoor cultivation has lowered the water level in some flowing streams by up to a quarter.</p>Clearing Forests to Plant Coca
<p>The ecological footprint of the world's <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/2020-may-set-eu-record-for-cocaine-seizures/a-54585695" target="_blank">19 million cocaine users</a> is particularly apparent in Latin America. According to the United Nations, <a href="https://wdr.unodc.org/wdr2020/field/WDR20_Booklet_3.pdf" target="_blank">Colombia had the potential to produce 1,120 tons of pure cocaine in 2018</a> — a record crop for the South American country.</p><p>Since 2001, about 741,000,000 acres of forest have been cleared for the cultivation of coca — the plant that produces cocaine. </p><p>Following a temporary decline, "we can see actually the same peak of coca that we were watching 20 years ago," Paulo Sandoval, a geographer at the University of Oregon, told DW.</p><p>Sandoval's latest satellite data shows that around 123,000 acres of coca are currently being cultivated in Colombia's Amazon region alone — about half of it in nature reserves that are home to a rich diversity of species.</p><p>But the plantations he surveyed account for only 20% of the total cultivated area.</p>Colombia's Approach 'Harms' the Environment
<p>Until now, the Colombian government has relied on a strategy of eradication in its fight against coca cultivation. As part of its campaign, aircraft sprayed plantations with the highly concentrated herbicide glyphosate. This method effectively destroyed many coca plantations, but it also damaged neighboring forests and farmland.</p><p>Elizabeth Tellman, a geographer at Columbia University's Earth Institute in New York, says this approach harms rather than helps the environment. And once the fields are destroyed, the cartels simply clear more forests elsewhere and plant new coca crops.</p><p>"We do know that it [the destruction of cultivated areas] has not only had no effect (...) it's been really counterproductive," she told DW in an interview. </p><p>Coca leaves aren't just grown in the jungle; they're also processed into cocaine in secret laboratories there. This process requires highly toxic chemicals such as ammonia, acetone and hydrochloric acid. Scientists estimate that several million liters of these substances end up in soils and rivers each year. There are now few aquatic plants or animals living in those contaminated waters, according to a 2015 EU report.</p>MDMA, Ecstasy and Co.
<p>So-called party drugs — from pills to a line of powder in a nightclub bathroom — have grown in popularity in recent years.</p><p>The Netherlands and Belgium are <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/dutch-police-find-netherlands-largest-cocaine-lab/a-54529270" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">hotspots for synthetic drugs</a>. The production of a kilo of pure MDMA, the main substance in ecstasy, results in 10 kilos (22 pounds) of toxic waste — or 30 kilos (66 pounds) in the case of amphetamines. This might include sodium hydroxide, hydrochloric acids and acetone, substances that would normally have to be disposed of as hazardous waste using protective suits.</p><p>The Dutch Water Research Institute (KWR) estimates that in 2017, around 7,000 tons of these substances were either dumped somewhere in drums or leaked into the ground and rivers. "That's unbelievable," says Eric Emke, a scientist at the KWR.</p><p><a href="https://nos.nl/artikel/2264440-politie-ontmantelt-drugslab-in-rijen-dit-was-heel-erg-gevaarlijk.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">A report aired by Dutch public broadcaster NOS</a> showed just how abrasive these liquids can be. In it, a scientist immerses a chicken leg in a yellow sodium hydroxide solution. After two days, the meat has completely dissolved, leaving just the bone behind.</p><p>Emke says the waste is sometimes dumped into containers used to collect cattle excrement, becoming mixed with the dung that is spread on corn crops.</p><p>"And so five years ago, they discovered amphetamine and ecstasy residues in corn lice."</p><p>Jeremy Douglas, the regional representative of the UN's Office on Drugs and Crime for Southeast Asia, says Thailand, Laos and Myanmar have also become a hub for "industrial scale" global synthetic drug production in recent years.</p><p><span></span>"The spillover damage to groundwater and habitats is severe, and frankly it is nothing short of an ecological and public health disaster," he said.</p>Groundwater Sinking in Afghanistan
<p>Around 337,000 football fields, or 23 times the size of Paris — that's the amount of land that was used to cultivate opium worldwide in 2019, according to the UN. The main producers are Myanmar, Mexico and Afghanistan — which accounts for 84% of global cultivation.</p><p>Poppy fields spread mainly across the country's southwest in areas where, until the 1990s, there was nothing but arid desert. Today, some 1.4 million people live there, making a living from cultivating opium and agriculture. That's all possible thanks to more than 50,000 solar-powered water pumps that have greened the desert. But that is not as green as it sounds.</p><p><a href="https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/2006E-When-the-Water-Runs-Out.pdf" target="_blank">A report by socio-economist David Mansfield</a> found that the region's groundwater is sinking by 9.8 feet per year. Wells as deep as 426 feet are now being drilled to find water.</p><p>"Each year, more people are arriving in the desert and installing solar deep wells. There are local fears that there will fast become a time when agricultural production will no longer be viable."</p><p>The poppy farmers also use chemical fertilizers and strong pesticides to control weeds. Groundwater tests have shown that nitrate levels are significantly higher than what is deemed safe. This can increase the risk of blue-baby syndrome, which leads to heart defects and death in newborns.</p><p>Mansfield warns that if water in the region does eventually run out, it will likely force large numbers of people from their homes, sparking a rural exodus.</p>From Your Site Articles
- Fish on Prozac: Anxious, Anti-Social and Aggressive - EcoWatch ›
- Drug Waste Flushed Into World's Freshwater Ecosystems to Rise 65 ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
In the U.S., a variety of federal, state and local entities are involved in regulating safe drinking water. PxHere / CC0
By Brett Walton
Who's responsible for making sure the water you drink is safe? Ultimately, you are. But if you live in the U.S., a variety of federal, state and local entities are involved as well.
<p>The <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sdwa" title="" target="_blank">Safe Drinking Water Act</a> (SDWA) forms the foundation of federal oversight of public water systems — those that provide water to multiple homes or customers. Congress passed the landmark law in 1974 during a decade marked by accumulating evidence of cancer and other health damage caused by industrial chemicals that found their way into drinking water. The act authorized the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the first time to set national standards for contaminants in drinking water. The EPA has since developed standards for <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-06/documents/npwdr_complete_table.pdf" title="" target="_blank">91 contaminants</a>, a medley of undesirable intruders that range from arsenic and nitrate to lead, copper and volatile organic chemicals like benzene.</p><p>In 1996, amendments to the SDWA revised the process for developing drinking water standards, which limit the levels of specific contaminants. Nearly a quarter century after those amendments, an increasing number of policymakers and public health advocates today argue that the act is failing its mission to protect public health and is once again in need of major revision.</p>
<img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDQ1MDI5MS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYzMDI4MTI5OH0.yBsq96HoT9OVGV0cNMCvEBVdnUhdtX4pMImfojQKLmk/img.jpg?width=980" id="8c4e1" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="f59b4a2a9f220da32b1720e32804ab2a" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" />
Setting Limits
<p>The process for setting federal drinking water contaminant limits, which is overseen by the EPA, was not designed to be speedy.</p><p>First, the EPA identifies a list of <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ccl/contaminant-candidate-list-4-ccl-4-0" target="_blank">several dozen</a> unregulated chemical and microbial contaminants that might be harmful. Then water utilities, which are in charge of water quality monitoring, test their treated water to see what shows up. The identification and testing is done on a <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ccl/basic-information-ccl-and-regulatory-determination#what-is-CCL" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">five-year cycle</a>. The EPA examines those results and, for at least five contaminants, as required by the SDWA, it determines whether a regulation is needed.</p><p>Three factors go into the decision: Is the contaminant harmful? Is it widespread at high levels? Will a regulation meaningfully reduce health risks? If the answer is "Yes" to all three, then a national standard <a href="https://www.epa.gov/ccl/basic-information-ccl-and-regulatory-determination#what-crieria-reg-det" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">will be forthcoming</a>. Altogether, the process can take a decade or more from start to finish.</p><p>Usually, however, one of the three answers is "No." Since the 1996 amendments were passed, the EPA has not regulated any new contaminants through this process, though it has strengthened existing rules for arsenic, microbes and the chemical byproducts of drinking water disinfection. The agency did decide in 2011 that it should regulate perchlorate — which is used in explosives and rocket fuel and damages the thyroid — but reversed that decision in June 2020, claiming that the chemical is not widespread enough to warrant a national regulation.</p><p>Two other chemicals have recently advanced to the standard-writing stage. In February, EPA administrator Andrew Wheeler announced that the agency would regulate PFOA and PFOS, both members of the class of non-stick, flame-retarding chemicals known as PFAS. For those two chemicals, the EPA currently has issued a health advisory, which is a non-enforceable guideline.</p><p>The act of writing a national standard introduces more calculations: health risks, cost of treatment to remove the contaminant from water and availability of treatment technology. Considering these, the EPA establishes what is known as a maximum contaminant level goal (MCLG), which is the level at which no one is expected to become ill from the contaminant over a lifetime. The agency then sets a standard as close to the goal as possible, taking treatment cost into account.</p><p>Standards, in the end, are not purely based on health protection and sometimes are higher than the MCLG. These standards, except for lead, apply to water as it leaves the treatment plant or moves throughout the distribution system. They do not apply to water from a home faucet, which could be compromised by old plumbing.</p><p>The EPA also has 15 <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/secondary-drinking-water-standards-guidance-nuisance-chemicals" target="_blank">"secondary" standards</a> that relate to how water tastes and smells. Unless mandated by a state, utilities are not required to meet these standards.</p><p>Once the EPA sets a drinking water standard, the nation's roughly 50,000 community water systems — plus tens of thousands of schools, office buildings, gas stations and campgrounds that operate their own water systems — are <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sdwa/how-epa-regulates-drinking-water-contaminants#water" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">obligated to test</a> for the contaminant. If a regulated substance is found, system operators must treat the water so that contaminant concentrations fall below the standard.</p>
Omissions and Nuances
<p>That is the regulatory process at the federal level. But there are omissions and nuances.</p><p>One big omission is private wells. Water in wells that supply individual homes is not regulated by federal statute. Rather, private well owners are responsible for testing and treating their own well water. The U.S. Geological Survey estimates that about 15% of U.S. residents use a private well. Some states, such as New Jersey, require that private wells be tested for contaminants before a home is sold. County health departments might also have similar point-of-sale requirements.</p><img lazy-loadable="true" src="https://assets.rebelmouse.io/eyJhbGciOiJIUzI1NiIsInR5cCI6IkpXVCJ9.eyJpbWFnZSI6Imh0dHBzOi8vYXNzZXRzLnJibC5tcy8yNDQ1MDI5NS9vcmlnaW4uanBnIiwiZXhwaXJlc19hdCI6MTYxMzEwMzkxN30.-xcoj4qjzQsoxymJvOfSs6VIbMNUKOU5DFkkNVxRdNU/img.jpg?width=980" id="41718" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="21d2871904fff8637721191296cbc054" data-rm-shortcode-name="rebelmouse-image" /><p>The nuance comes at the state level. States generally carry out the day-to-day grunt work of gathering water quality data from utilities and enforcing action against violations. To gain this authority, they must set drinking water standards that are at least as protective as the federal ones. If they want, they can set stricter limits or regulate contaminants that the EPA has not touched.</p><p>State authority had long been uncontroversial because only a few states — California and some northeastern states — were setting their own standards. That has changed in the last few years as states, responding to public pressure in the absence of an EPA standard, began regulating PFAS compounds.</p><p>"There was always a little bit of state standards-setting," says Alan Roberson, executive director of the Association of State Drinking Water Administrators, an umbrella group for state regulators. "But it's gone from a little bit to a lot."</p><p>Six states — Massachusetts, Michigan, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York and Vermont — adopted drinking water standards for certain PFAS compounds, while four others, including North Carolina and Minnesota, have issued health advisories or guidelines for groundwater cleanup.</p><p>States are also putting limits on other chemicals that the EPA has ignored. In July, New York adopted the nation's first drinking water standard for <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/ffrro_factsheet_contaminant_14-dioxane_january2014_final.pdf" target="_blank">1,4-dioxane</a>, a synthetic chemical that was used before the 1990s as an additive to industrial solvents. The EPA deems it likely to cause cancer, but the agency has not regulated it in drinking water. In 2017, California approved a limit for <a href="https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/ffrrofactsheet_contaminant_tcp_january2014_final.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">1,2,3-TCP</a>, another manufactured industrial solvent that the EPA considers likely to be carcinogenic.</p><p>The burst of state standards, especially for PFAS chemicals, has raised eyebrows. Some lawmakers worry that mismatched standards are confusing to residents. New York and New Jersey, for instance, set different limits on PFOA and PFOS in drinking water.</p><p>"This can create poor risk communication and a crisis of confidence by the public who have diminished trust in their state's standard when it fails to align with a neighboring state," Rep. Paul Tonko of New York said during a <a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/committee-activity/hearings/hearing-on-theres-something-in-the-water-reforming-our-nations-drinking" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing</a> in July.</p><p>Other representatives countered with the view that the EPA should concentrate on a select number of the most concerning contaminants so as not to overwhelm utilities and states with too many rules that are too hastily put together. Rep. John Shimkus from Illinois, echoing statements made by other committee members, said he does not want a system in which "quantity makes quality."</p><p>Tonko, however, argued that the federal process "<a href="https://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/democrats.energycommerce.house.gov/files/documents/072820%20ECC%20SDWA%20Reform%20Hearing%20PT%20Opening_0.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">has not worked</a>," pointing to the two-plus decades since a new contaminant was regulated.</p><p>This debate, and other considerations like regional drinking water standards, is likely to carry over into the next Congress.</p>
<p><em>Editor's note: This story is part of a nine-month investigation of drinking water contamination across the U.S. The series is supported by funding from the Park Foundation and Water Foundation. Read the launch story, "Thirsting for Solutions," <a href="https://ensia.com/features/thirsting-for-solutions/" rel="noopener noreferrer" target="_blank" title="">here</a>.</em></p><p><em>Reposted with permission from <a href="https://ensia.com/articles/drinking-water-contamination-regulation-pollution-health/?ct=t" target="_blank">Ensia</a>.</em></p>From Your Site Articles
- Trump Admin's Clean Water Rollback Will Hit Some States Hard ... ›
- Weak Water Regulations Hurt the Economy - EcoWatch ›
- Trump EPA Won't Regulate Toxic Drinking Water Chemical That ... ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less