Walmart Joins Ranks of Retailers Pulling Toxic Paint Strippers From Shelves – When Will EPA Follow Suit?
20 August 2018
Health + Wellness
SOPA Images / Getty Images
By Sarah Vogel
Monday, Walmart announced that it will stop selling paint strippers containing methylene chloride or N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) in stores by February 2019—making it the first general merchandise retailer to take such action. Walmart's announcement follows the strong leadership demonstrated by Lowes, Home Depot and Sherwin Williams, all of which have committed not to sell methylene chloride- and NMP-based paint stripping products by the end of the year. Importantly, Walmart's action goes beyond its U.S. stores, including those in Mexico, Canada and Central America, as well as their online store.
<p>The announcement signals an important step by Walmart to better protect consumers from dangerous paint strippers. Methylene chloride is highly neurotoxic and acutely lethal. The chemical is responsible for more than 50 reported deaths from acute exposure over the last 35 years—though many more likely have gone unreported. NMP is linked to fetal development problems, including low birth weight and birth defects.</p><p>The Environmental Defense Fund has <a href="http://blogs.edf.org/health/2015/03/31/epa-identifies-another-risky-chemical-can-it-succeed-in-using-tsca-to-restrict-it/" target="_blank">advocated</a> for several years for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to ban both methylene chloride- and NMP-based paint strippers, using its enhanced authority under the reformed Toxic Substance Control Act. In January 2017, EPA proposed to ban methylene chloride and restrict NMP in paint strippers, but <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/19/health/epa-toxic-chemicals.html" target="_blank">action has stalled under the Trump administration</a>. For over a year, the agency made no effort to finalize these actions—<a href="http://blogs.edf.org/health/2017/12/20/systematic-slowdown-epa-indefinitely-delays-virtually-all-proposed-actions-to-restrict-chemicals-under-tsca/" target="_blank">even taking steps to delay any progress</a>.</p><p>This past May, families whose sons died from using paint strippers containing methylene chloride <a href="http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-follow-through-and-ban-this-chemical-20180621-story.html" target="_blank">met with former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt</a> to personally ask him to finalize the ban on these products. Just two days after the meeting, <a href="https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-announces-action-methylene-chloride" target="_blank">EPA announced</a> its intention to finalize the proposed ban on methylene chloride-based paint strippers.</p><p>Three months later, EPA has yet to make good on its promise. But retailers across the nation are stepping up. We applaud the leadership demonstrated by these retailers and strongly urge EPA to follow suit and ban methylene chloride- and NMP-based paint strippers. It is the <a href="http://blogs.edf.org/health/2018/05/15/methylene-chloride-in-paint-strippers-a-ban-is-the-only-health-protective-path-forward/" target="_blank">only health-protective path forward</a>.</p>
From Your Site Articles
Read More
Show Less
Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency Scott Pruitt. Mitchell Resnick
In the coming weeks, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt is expected to announce a proposal that would limit the type of scientific studies and data the agency can use in crafting public health and environmental regulations.
The planned policy shift, first reported by E&E News, would require the EPA to only use scientific findings whose data and methodologies are made public and can be replicated.
<p>
The idea has long been championed by House Science, Space and Technology Chairman
<a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/Lamar-Smith">Lamar Smith</a> (R-Texas). The <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/clovis-lamar-smith-2505889566.html">prominent climate change denier</a> proposed a <a href="https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr1430/BILLS-115hr1430rfs.pdf" target="_blank">bill</a> last year called the Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment (HONEST) Act, formerly known as The Secret Science Reform Act, that prohibits any future regulations from taking effect unless the underlying scientific data is public.
</p><p>
Smith's legislation, which is widely criticized by scientific organizations, passed in the House last March but hasn't left the Senate Environment And Public Works Committee.
</p><p>
Pruitt indicated at a closed-door meeting at the conservative Heritage Foundation last week that he would adopt elements of Smith's stalled bill, E&E News reported.
</p><p>
Also, in a recent interview with
<a href="http://dailycaller.com/2018/03/19/epa-scott-pruitt-secret-science/" target="_blank">The Daily Caller</a>, the EPA boss said his latest proposal was a transparency measure against what he and his Republican colleagues consider "secret science."
</p><p>
"We need to make sure their data and methodology are published as part of the record," Pruitt told the conservative news site. "Otherwise, it's not transparent. It's not objectively measured, and that's important."
</p><p>
Last year, the EPA head <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/epa-science-advisors-2504339714.html">controversially announced</a> a policy that would limit the presence of researchers who have received EPA research grants on the agency's Scientific Advisory Board.</p><p>
Those in opposition to Pruitt's latest policy move say it would undermine the essential mission of the EPA.
</p><p>
Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the
<a href="https://www.ucsusa.org/" target="_blank">Union of Concerned Scientists</a>, pointed out that the proposed changes would prohibit the use of personal health data such as private medial records, and confidential business information from even being considered in EPA policymaking.
</p><p>
"Companies could evade accountability for the pollution they create by declaring information about that pollution a 'trade secret,'" Rosenberg said.
</p><p>
"Fortunately, this nonsensical and dangerous proposal has never been able to make it out of Congress, but Pruitt seems intent on imposing it anyway."</p><p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed">
</p><div id="8dada" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="RKZ77H1576662792"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="939214084792311808" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">The Mission of Scott Pruitt: End the #EPA as We Know It https://t.co/iAxWupGNqa #ScottPruitt @350 @foe_us… https://t.co/fJFy8gz70y</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/939214084792311808">1512761062.0</a></blockquote></div>
<p></p><p>
<a href="https://www.sierraclub.org/" target="_blank">Sierra Club</a> Associate Director of Federal & Administrative Advocacy Matthew Gravatt said, "By limiting what studies can be used to help keep our air and water clean, our climate safe, and our homes free of toxic chemicals, Pruitt is trying to make it harder for the EPA to protect the health and safety of American families."
</p><p>
<span></span>On Tuesday, the <a href="https://www.edf.org/" target="_blank">Environmental Defense Fund</a> (EDF) announced it filed a Freedom of Information Act <a href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/files/2018/03/EPA-FOIA-Request-Science-Comittee-Legislation-3.20.18-.pdf" target="_blank">request</a> seeking documents that outline the details of this new policy and its development.
</p><p>
"By limiting what studies can be used to help keep us safe, this reported policy would make it harder for EPA to protect American families from pollution, toxic chemicals, and other threats. The result would be more serious health impacts—from asthma to cancer—for communities across the country," said EDF Senior Attorney Martha Roberts.
</p>
From Your Site Articles
- Scott Pruitt: California Can't 'Dictate' National Emissions Policy ›
- EPA Sued Over Failure to Release Correspondence With Heartland ... ›
- Pruitt Sees EPA As Political Stepping Stone ›
Related Articles Around the Web
Read More
Show Less
EcoWatch Daily Newsletter
By Keith Gaby
Like a television executive peddling reality shows, Scott Pruitt has decided to stage an exercise pitting the well-established science of climate change against a grab bag of fringe theories.
It will be marketed by the Trump administration as an effort in the best traditions of scientific inquiry, but the real goal is to confuse the public and distract from the serious damage Pruitt is doing to our air, water and health.
<p>Here's the first red flag for anyone who cares about science: A legitimate climate exercise would be organized by scientific leaders in the field—rather than by officials with a political motivation for seeding doubt.</p><p>That's like Pope Gregory trying Galileo Galilei back in 1633, OJ searching for the real killers or Trump looking for 3 million illegal votes. Pruitt's "Red Team-Blue Team" exercise—for which his agency is now soliciting participants—is a show based on everything but reality.</p><p><strong>Science: Grueling and Unglamorous Work</strong></p><p>Climate science is not speculation devised by a clever professor alone in his study; it's based on satellite images, ice core samples, temperatures records, <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/sea-level-rise">sea level</a> measurements and millions of other data points across the globe since long before we put a man on the moon.</p><p>The <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2014/03/31/6-key-insights-latest-ipcc-climate-report" target="_blank">conclusions drawn</a> from such data have been challenged and refined countless times by the international scientific community. That includes NASA, the National Academies of Sciences and every globally recognized scientific organization.</p><p>A new and trust-worthy science inquiry, in other words, would move on to important, still-open questions and not waste everybody's time with what's already known.</p><p><strong>Cigarettes Don't Cause Lung Cancer, After All?</strong></p><p>Now you're thinking, "Okay, if the science is so strong, what's the harm?"</p><p>But just imagine the U.S. Federal Drug Administration (FDA) suddenly holding a public trial to determine whether smoking actually causes lung cancer.</p><p>Then consider the FDA letting tobacco companies appoint a team that presents clever-sounding theories "proving" that smoking isn't so dangerous, after all—just to protect their business. All that would do is sow confusion among non-experts.</p><p>It's even worse in the case of <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a>, because the details are less well-known by the general public and the issue is caught up in our <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2016/03/02/poll-gop-not-anti-climate-monolith" target="_blank">partisan divisions</a>.</p><p><strong>Beware of "Alternative Facts"</strong></p><p>Pruitt is a clever man and will pick "reasonably-sounding" advocates for his position to build excuses for inaction. Growing doubt about whether climate change is real would be a huge victory for the <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/06/22/what-scott-pruitt-doesnt-want-you-know-and-why-it-matters" target="_blank">polluting industries that enabled</a> Pruitt's political career. </p><p>A real science inquiry would not solicit participation by fringe groups such as the <a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/tag/heartland-institute">Heartland Institute</a>, known for comparing climate scientists with the Unabomber. It would hear from a range government agencies with deep climate expertise, such as the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, NASA—and, of course, experts at Pruitt's own agency.</p><p><strong>2 or 4 Degrees? Questions Remain.</strong></p><p>So is there nothing to debate about climate science? Is every detail settled? No, of course not. Scientists around the world continue to explore the details and impact of climate change, as global decisions evolve and emissions rise or fall. </p><p>What year will Earth cross the 1.5-degree centigrade temperature threshold? Exactly what level of global sea rise should we expect by 2100? </p><p>Just as public health experts don't gather to explore whether or not viruses cause disease, climate scientists today are focused on the real questions in their field.</p><p>Treating Pruitt's reality TV show like a legitimate exercise in scientific inquiry would accomplish just two things: Setting back our effort to solve the largest environmental crisis facing us, and create baseless confusion.</p><p><em>Keith Gaby is senior communications director for Climate, Health and Political Affairs at <a href="https://www.edf.org/" target="_blank">Environmental Defense Fund</a>.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less
By Rory Christian and Larissa Koehler
Electric vehicles (EVs) don't make much noise on the road, but they're generating a lot of buzz about the future of this technology and what it means for business and the environment.
Cars, buses and trucks are the second biggest source of pollution in the U.S. after electricity production. They are responsible for more than 26 percent of emissions that adversely affect the health and well-being of the population, and put communities located close to highways and other major thoroughfares at risk. These communities, typically low-income, are often plagued by elevated asthma rates and other pollution-induced health conditions.
<p>When thinking about ways to reduce pollution, EVs can make a world of difference. And, when charged using <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/renewable-energy/">renewable energy</a> sources, they produce no emissions and can be much cheaper to operate than traditional, internal combustion vehicles. As such, let's take a look at the global EV market and impacts in the U.S. on the electric grid in two environmentally progressive states—New York and California.</p>
<p class="shortcode-media shortcode-media-twitter_embed"></p><div id="2f0d4" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="AYFJSR1553274950"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="890959351984160768" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Electric Vehicles Enter the Here & Now https://t.co/mOSeXfvwvg @TeslaMotors @elonmusk @LeoDiCaprio @DeSmogBlog @PopSci @PopMech @VolvoCarUSA</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/890959351984160768">1501256237.0</a></blockquote></div><p></p>
<p><strong>The Global Market—and Future Outlook</strong><br></p><p>More and more automakers are shifting their focus to EVs, a market that is expected to grow faster every year. A few examples:</p><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/tesla">Tesla</a> invested $5 billion in its <a href="https://www.tesla.com/gigafactory" target="_blank">Nevada gigafactory</a>—where they will make batteries for EVs—and is grabbing headlines with the roll-out of its <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/business/tesla-model-3-elon-musk.html?_r=0" target="_blank">first mass-market EV, the Model 3</a>.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><a href="https://www.ecowatch.com/volvo-electric-cars-2453719182.html">Volvo</a> made waves by announcing its intent to focus <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-volvocars-geely-breakingviews-idUSKBN19Q2UW" target="_blank">new vehicle production solely on electric and hybrid vehicles</a>. The company is owned by Geely Automotive holdings, a Chinese firm, and many speculate that China's pervasive air pollution problems and a desire to find a long-term solution were a motivating factor behind the announcement.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li><a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/us-daimler-china-idUSKBN19Q1I4" target="_blank">Mercedes Benz is investing $740 million</a> in a new battery factory.</li></ul><p>These exciting developments all point to a trend where electric cars are much more than just a niche—indeed, they show that global competition is heating up quickly and that companies around the world see EVs as key to the automobile industry. These movements should not be understated, as it gives a hint of a clean energy future that can't come fast enough.</p><p><strong>EVs on the Grid</strong></p><p>Overall, strategic deployment of charging stations will be essential to EV growth—drivers need convenient places to charge. What's more ...</p><p>Here's what we can do now to prepare for a clean car economy:</p><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><strong>Chase innovation:</strong> Testing out more nascent technologies, such as <a href="http://www1.udel.edu/V2G/V2Gconcept.html" target="_blank">vehicle-to-grid</a> capabilities, will ultimately help make EV charging more convenient and ensure the electric grid can cleanly and reliably handle a significant uptick in electrified transport.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><strong>Educate consumers</strong>: Utilities must ensure their customers are well-positioned to take advantage of EV benefits by educating them about how their charging behavior can impact the grid and the integration of renewable energy. More specifically, utilities must exercise load management via well-designed rates and other means in order to ensure their customers are charging their vehicles at times when renewables (rather than fossil fuels) are abundant and when the grid can best handle it. By reaching out to their customers through multiple means and languages, utilities can better ensure the robust participation needed in order to bring success.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li><strong>Emphasize vulnerable communities: </strong>Plans must genuinely consider benefits to and impacts on communities most likely to be harmed by pollution. <a href="https://www.edf.org/" target="_blank">Environmental Defense Fund</a> (EDF) recommends a minimum percentage of charging stations be placed in these communities where applicable, and that all projects focus on enhancing transportation electrification in areas positioned to benefit them most.</li></ul><p><strong>New York</strong></p><p>Earlier this year, New York State committed to the purchase of two thousand electric vehicles by 2025, more than doubling its current fleet of government automobiles.</p><p>New York is also doing its share to expand electrification to make it easier for customers to buy and use electric vehicles. The State's <a href="http://blogs.edf.org/energyexchange/2014/04/24/new-york-among-the-first-states-to-re-evaluate-its-utility-business-model/?_ga=2.76662933.1409513799.1499958922-575668674.1457389706" target="_blank">Reforming the Energy Vision</a> aims to align utility needs with marketplace innovations, and is doing the following:</p><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>Decentralizing the electric grid so customers can make and buy renewable energy, New York is working toward a future where EVs and less pollution are commonplace.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li>Developing favorable electricity rates to encourage charging of EVs at times when renewable energy is readily available and affordable. This way, EV adoption will benefit the grid and the environment.</li></ul><p><a href="https://www.coned.com/en/save-money/rebates-incentives-tax-credits/rebates-incentives-tax-credits-for-residential-customers/electric-vehicle-rewards" target="_blank">Con Edison's Smart Charge NY program</a>, an early stage effort in New York City, is paving the way for mainstream EV use; the results will be an example for how other cities can adopt the policies and tools necessary to seamlessly integrate EVs.</p><p><strong>California</strong></p><p>With more than <a href="http://www.pevcollaborative.org/pev-sales-dashboard" target="_blank">300,000 EVs</a> and more than 12,000 charging stations, California leads the nation in clean car sales. Moreover, that number is poised to grow rapidly—<a href="http://www.latimes.com/business/autos/la-fi-hy-ev-sales-california-20170519-story.html" target="_blank">California EV sales rose 91 percent</a> in the first quarter of 2017 from the same time last year.</p><p>Even in the face of threats from the current U.S. Environmental Protection Agency head <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/tag/scott-pruitt">Scott Pruitt</a> to <a href="https://www.nrdc.org/experts/irene-gutierrez/baseless-threats-californias-clean-car-waiver" target="_blank">take away California's waiver</a> allowing the state to exceed national clean car standards, the Golden State has made clear its progress won't be stalled anytime soon. State legislators, cities and agencies have taken a tremendous amount of initiative on EVs, including:</p><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>The California Air Resources Board has <a href="https://www.arb.ca.gov/newsrel/newsrelease.php?id=908&utm_content=buffer5d25a&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer" target="_blank">reaffirmed its commitment</a> to maintaining stronger vehicle emissions standards.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li>Volkswagen <a href="https://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/vw_info/vsi/vw-zevinvest/documents/california_zev_investment_plan_supplement_062917.pdf" target="_blank">updated its plan</a> for investing $800 million to accelerate electrified transportation in California, with input from the California Air Resources Board.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"> <li><a href="https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=201520160SB350" target="_blank">Senate Bill 350</a> prioritizes widespread transportation electrification.</li></ul><ul class="ee-ul"><li>In Los Angeles, half of all municipal vehicle purchases will be electric starting this year, and that share will increase to 80 percent by 2025. The city is also moving forward with a pilot <a href="http://rideshare.lacounty.gov/" target="_blank">EV ride share program</a> to extend their benefits to communities with fewer car owners.</li></ul><p>Moreover, as part of Senate Bill 350, investor-owned utilities <a href="http://www.cpuc.ca.gov/sb350te/" target="_blank">filed applications</a> with the California Public Utilities Commission for investments in light-duty, medium-duty and heavy-duty sectors.</p><p>The utility plans in particular represent an exciting new opportunity to accelerate electric transportation in all its forms. With planned projects from placing charging infrastructure for passenger EVs in single family homes, to providing car dealers with incentives and education to sell more EVs, to electrifying buses and ship ports—and everything in between—these plans are well-designed to clean the sector most responsible for harmful emissions.</p><p>Still, changes to the utility proposals would further strengthen them. <a href="http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/PublishedDocs/Efile/G000/M179/K246/179246839.PDF" target="_blank">EDF recommended</a> to the California Public Utilities Commission that the plans focus more on load management as well as the other key elements listed above.</p><p><strong>Forging Ahead</strong></p><p>Despite obvious benefits, widespread EV adoption around the U.S. faces a number of challenges. For example, some analysts believe that even California will need another 200,000 charging stations to properly serve the number of EVs expected by 2030.</p><p>The internal combustion engine has had a long run, but it's about to burn out. As we work to address domestic barriers to EV adoption, it is important to note that even if it is a global effort, this is a race the U.S. may need to catch up on. As the electric vehicle market continues to flourish, EDF will continue to advocate and make sure environmental benefits follow financial rewards.</p>
Read More
Show Less
By Jeremy Symons
While running for president, Donald Trump threatened to virtually eliminate the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), leaving only "little tidbits."
Scott Pruitt, Trump's EPA administrator, has been tasked with the job of tearing down the agency from within. This is the man who sued the EPA 14 times—with strong financial backing from companies seeking to weaken clean air and clean water standards—when serving as Oklahoma's Attorney General.
<p>The president has used <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trumps-war-on-epa-part-i-deception_us_58b873e2e4b0ffd61787bd21" target="_blank">deception</a> to reassure the general public that critical environmental laws will continue to protect public health and he is now taking our country in a dangerous direction.</p><p>Here are five ways he and Pruitt will go about weakening the agency responsible for keeping our air clean, drinking water safe and toxic chemicals from harming our families:</p><p><strong>1. Gut the EPA's Budget</strong></p><p><a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/inhofe-epa-brainwash-kids-2316957996.html">Deep budget cuts at the EPA</a> are being proposed under the guise of fixing budget issues.</p><p>In reality, the agency accounts for a mere two-tenths of one percent of federal spending. Any claim that major budget issues can be dealt with on the back of such a small sliver of the budget <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/10-facts-show-trumps-epa-budget-is-a-fantasy_us_58b83792e4b0ffd61787bc56" target="_blank">is false</a>.</p><p>Instead, the proposed budget cuts are <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/03/03/severe-real-world-casualties-trumps-epa-budget-cuts" target="_blank">a clear signal</a> to a narrow group of special interests and supporters who share Trump's disdain for the EPA because environmental regulations don't serve their agenda.</p><p><strong>2. Relax Enforcement Against Illegal Pollution</strong></p><p>Leaked budget documents show that Trump has already directed the EPA to curtail pollution-monitoring and get states "to assume more active enforcement roles." But this isn't about states' rights; it's merely a convenient cover for gutting federal enforcement responsibility without any assurance that states will pick up the slack.</p><p>In fact, Pruitt took Oklahoma in the opposite direction as attorney general by <a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/pruitt-shut-down-environmental-enforcement-office-in_us_5854132be4b0630a25423205" target="_blank">shutting down</a> the state's environmental enforcement unit.</p><p>Meanwhile, delegating enforcement to states puts everyone at the mercy of neighboring states' enforcement. Almost every state has communities that are downwind or downstream from polluters across state boundaries.</p><p><strong>3. Roll Back Pollution Standards</strong></p><p>"The future ain't what it used to be at the EPA," Pruitt explained in a fiery speech to the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington shortly after his contentious and narrow confirmation by the Senate. He went on to pledge he would "roll back the regulatory state."</p><p>President Trump has already issued an <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/trump-clean-water-rule-2292421509.html">executive order seeking to weaken</a> Clean Water Act protections for American rivers and streams. With Pruitt now at his side, he is expected to next take aim at rolling back standards that reduce toxic emissions from cars and power plants.</p><p>Trump says he is slashing federal clean air and water standards to ease what he calls "job-crushing regulations." Of course, increasing pollution does not grow the economy.</p><div id="7caaa" class="rm-shortcode" data-rm-shortcode-id="DXWKKT1524750158"><blockquote class="twitter-tweet twitter-custom-tweet" data-twitter-tweet-id="837059985637064704" data-partner="rebelmouse"><div style="margin:1em 0">Trump Orders EPA to Dismantle Clean Water Rule https://t.co/tE9jGaekp1 @Earthjustice @earthisland</div> — EcoWatch (@EcoWatch)<a href="https://twitter.com/EcoWatch/statuses/837059985637064704">1488405627.0</a></blockquote></div><p><strong>4. Use Misinformation to Justify Political Agenda</strong><br></p><p>During his confirmation hearing, Pruitt ran away from his anti-environmental record and <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/01/20/pruitts-actions-undermine-his-testimony-he-runs-his-own-record" target="_blank">assured senators</a> that he was "concerned" about pollution contributing to <a href="http://www.ecowatch.com/climate-change/">climate change</a>, that mercury "should be regulated" and that ground-level ozone is "a dangerous pollutant."</p><p>Once he had been confirmed as EPA administrator, his tone <a href="http://time.com/4697551/epa-scott-pruitt-carbon-dioxide/" target="_blank">changed</a> back to his roots. Pruitt is already a ready partner to Trump when it comes to <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/02/10/3-examples-his-senate-testimony-show-scott-pruitt-cant-be-trusted-climate-science" target="_blank">spreading misinformation</a> and denying climate change.</p><p>Political interference in science will come in many forms, but the most dangerous may be an effort to permanently meddle with the EPA's scientific capacity under the guise of "reforming" the scientific process. Such meddling is a top Trump transition goal, according to <a href="http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/02/06/stories/1060049598" target="_blank">Myron Ebell</a>, the head of Trump's EPA transition team.</p><p>Ebell makes no bones about it: The objective, <a href="http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/02/06/stories/1060049598" target="_blank">he's said</a>, is to permanently cripple the agency's capacity to bounce back under future presidents.</p><p><strong>5. Surrender to Allow "Sue and Pollute" Lawsuits</strong></p><p>We expect Pruitt and U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions to take up a new practice of surrendering to "sue and pollute" lawsuits in court. That would abandon the legal defense of EPA rules against suits brought by some polluters who would rather fight in court than invest in cleaner technology.</p><p>Pruitt may even take the unprecedented step to refuse to recuse himself from overseeing decisions about <a href="http://www.edfaction.org/scott-pruitts-web-fundraising-and-lawsuits?landing_pg=www.edf.org%2Fblog%2F2017%2F03%2F15%2Ftrump-has-declared-war-epa-5-chilling-examples&landing_pg_1st_visit=www.edf.org%2Fblog%2F2017%2F03%2F15%2Ftrump-has-declared-war-epa-5-chilling-examples&source_1st_visit=direct%20(www.edf.org)&subsource_1st_visit=(blank)&custom_source=direct%20(www.edf.org)&custom_sub_source=(blank)&custom_transfer=1490366926179" target="_blank">lawsuits</a> that he himself brought against the EPA as Oklahoma's attorney general—conveniently switching sides from plaintiff to defendant.</p><p>The question now is how Pruitt and Trump will contend with growing opposition as they walk the tightrope between <a href="https://www.edf.org/blog/2016/11/11/these-numbers-prove-americans-did-not-vote-dirty-air-and-water" target="_blank">broad public support</a> for the EPA's mission while serving the narrow interests of those who want to permanently weaken the agency.</p><p>If we remain vigilant and demand accountability from our elected officials, we can make every step they take along that tightrope more strenuous than the last.</p>
Read More
Show Less
Environmental Defense Fund
The hearing is the first of three that will allow for public input on proposed fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions standards for model years 2017-2025 passenger vehicles. Hilary Sinnamon will testify in favor of the historic proposal for Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).
“Cleaner, more efficient cars are a triple play for Americans,” said Sinnamon. “They’ll help reduce our dependence on imported oil, save families money at the gas pump, and reduce dangerous air pollution. This is an opportunity to improve both our economy and our environment in one step; that’s why the auto industry, labor unions and environmentalists are all supporting it.”
You can read Sinnamon’s full testimony here.
The proposed standards call for fleet-wide average performance comparable to 54.5 miles per gallon, or 163 grams per mile of carbon dioxide, by model year 2025.
Together with the model year 2012-2016 clean car standards finalized in 2010, the light duty fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas program is expected to reduce oil consumption by an estimated 12 billion barrels, cut heat-trapping carbon dioxide pollution by over 6 billion metric tons, and provide $1.7 trillion in national fuel savings over the life of the program.
America’s fleet of cars and light trucks now consumes more than 360 million gallons of fuel per day and emits about 20 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution. Under the new standards, we will reduce our oil consumption by an estimated 2.2 million barrels a day by 2025—more than our daily 2010 oil imports from the entire Persian Gulf.
The new standards will also put money back in consumers’ pockets. Based on the projected fuel savings from the proposal, owners could save more than $4,000 over the life of their new car or truck. Those fuel savings will offset higher vehicle costs in less than four years, and consumers who buy a vehicle with a typical five year loan will see immediate savings of about $12 a month.
The proposal already has broad support from such widespread groups as auto manufacturers, United Auto Workers, small businesses, American consumers, veterans and military groups, economists, and environmental advocates—including EDF.
For more information, click here.
<p></p><p><em><a href="http://edf.org/">Environmental Defense Fund</a>, a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships.</em></p>
Read More
Show Less