EWG
Twitter
Air pollution threatens key crop pollinators, study finds
By Shannon Kelleher
Air pollution jeopardizes bees and other pollinators essential for food production, according to a new study that sheds light on a significant but underrecognized threat to beneficial insects.
In a study published Thursday in the journal Nature Communications, researchers found that bees, as well as some moths and butterflies, became about a third less efficient at foraging for food, on average, after exposure to elevated air pollution levels. The findings were based on an analysis of data from 120 scientific papers on how 40 types of insects respond to ozone, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide and particulate matter.
“Air pollution is not generally considered as a driver of pollinator declines, but these results indicate that air pollution should be considered as a further factor that is driving pollinator declines,” said James Ryalls, an ecologist at the University of Reading and an author of the study. Declines in pollinator health can translate to declines in crop yields, Ryalls said.
The researchers noted that insects generally seen as harmful to agriculture, such as sap-sucking aphids, did not experience significant declines in their ability to forage from exposure to air pollution.
Air pollution may be more disruptive for bees and other insects because it muddles the chemical signals they use to communicate and sense their surroundings, the researchers suggest, while pests tend to rely more heavily on visual cues or others.
Surprisingly, even low concentrations of air pollutants below the threshold considered safe for humans harmed the pollinators, Ryalls said.
Congress should follow science and reject Bayer push to block lawsuits
By Nathan Donley
Millions of American users of glyphosate-based Roundup have likely assumed the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would never have approved the pesticide unless it was safe.
But the science-based truth has never been as cut and dried as the EPA and Bayer, which bought Roundup maker Monsanto in 2018, have made it sound. In a series of trials across the country, juries – and the public – have learned that despite the safety claims by Bayer and the EPA, hundreds of studies by independent scientists link glyphosate herbicides to serious health harms, including cancer.
Even though Bayer maintains that its glyphosate products are safe and not carcinogenic, the company has thus far agreed to pay out more than $10 billion in settlement costs to tens of thousands of glyphosate users suffering from non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), and thousands of lawsuits remain.
In an effort to block further litigation, the chemical giant has turned its focus to getting federal and state legislation passed to block Roundup users from suing the company for damages. According to a recent Washington Post article, Bayer helped draft language for a legislative measure that would limit the types of lawsuits brought by the Roundup users. That measure is included in the US House of Representatives version of the 2024 Farm Bill, which is slated to be finalized later this year. The company has also been pushing lawmakers in several states to pass similar measures.
Key to Bayer’s messaging to legislators is that, because glyphosate is EPA-approved, research showing its harms should be rejected. But the process by which the EPA approved glyphosate decades ago has never been reassuring to independent scientists such as myself.
Monsanto Roundup trial win overturned by Oregon court
By Carey Gillam
An Oregon appeals court on Wednesday overturned a trial victory by Monsanto owner Bayer AG in a decision that adds to an ongoing debate over the company’s efforts to create a nationwide legal and legislative shield from lawsuits alleging Roundup weed killer causes cancer.
The court found that the trial judge in the case improperly barred key evidence about the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from being presented to the jury, which could have led the jury to find in favor of the plaintiff. And, notably, the court rejected arguments by the company that claims about the dangers of its products should be barred because those products carry the EPA’s stamp of approval.
Other courts have similarly rejected so-called “preemption” arguments by Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018. But after failing to get court backing, Bayer has been pushing state and federal lawmakers to give it and other pesticide makers the protection the courts have rejected. A proposed measure is being considered by lawmakers for inclusion in the US Farm Bill. Monsanto unsuccessfully argued to the appeals court that the case never should have even gone to a jury because the claims should have been preempted.
Bayer did not respond to a request for comment on the latest ruling.
Attorney Andrew Kirkendall, who represented the plaintiff in the case, said he welcomed the court’s decision and was eager to retry the case with the evidence about the EPA included.
The testimony that the trial judge refused to allow was to have come from Charles Benbrook, a former research professor who served at one time as executive director of the National Academy of Sciences board on agriculture. Benbrook has authored papers critical of the EPA’s handling of glyphosate herbicides, noting that the agency has given little weight to independent research regarding the actual products sold into the marketplace and used by millions of people around the world. Instead, the EPA has mostly relied on studies paid for by Monsanto and other companies selling glyphosate herbicides that found no cancer concerns.
“There is important new science to share with the jury that clarifies why and how Roundup can cause cancer,” Benbrook said this week after learning of the court ruling.
In bid to slash chemical use, robots take on farm fields
By Carey Gillam
Cheney, Kan. – On a sweltering summer day in central Kansas, farm fields shimmer in the heat as Clint Brauer watches a team of bright yellow robots churn up and down the rows, tirelessly slicing away any weeds that stand in their way while avoiding the growing crops.
The battery-powered machines, four feet long and two feet wide, pick their way through the fields with precision. Programmed with myriad data points about the field, the artificial intelligence (AI)-driven bots run without any human hand to guide them.
Brauer, a former California-based tech executive who moved back to his family farm in central Kansas after his father developed Parkinson’s disease, sees the robots as critical tools to help farmers reduce their reliance on chemicals and be more protective of their health and the environment.
His Greenfield agricultural technology company now builds and programs its robots in a shed behind an old farmhouse where his grandmother once lived. Farmers who hire the robots are charged a flat rate per acre weeded. Twenty farmers are signed up for the robotic services this season, and the company hopes to weed 10,000 acres this year.
“The answer is here,” he said. “This solves a lot of problems for farmers.”
Greenfield is one of many agricultural robotic companies springing up amid a confluence of concerns over the future of farming. Fears about the harmful impacts of farm chemicals on the environment and on public health are key drivers, as is the need to deal with the diminishing effectiveness of overused weed killing chemicals, labor shortages, and the high costs that farmers face with conventional farming practices.
Financial backing is flowing to these companies from venture capital funds, private investors and large food and agricultural companies eager to make bets on the bots as a means to promote more sustainable food production – a notion increasingly finding favor with consumers.
The investment arm of Chipotle Mexican Grill, a global restaurant chain, is among Greenfield’s investors. Christian Gammill, who leads Chipotles venture fund, said Greenfield’s work is “important and impactful.” Greenfield has raised about $12 million in capital, and is seeking more, according to Brauer.
ReGen Ventures, a venture capital fund operating in Australia and the US, has so far sunk $6 million – with more planned – into North Dakota-based Aigen Robotics, which uses AI and camera vision to sense plants and remove weeds while avoiding crops. Aigen declares on its website to be “building a future with no harmful chemicals in our food.” The compact robots are powered via solar panels fixed to the top of each machine and are designed to work autonomously, sleeping and waking up on farms fields.
“They are well on their way to displacing chemicals from ag and enabling a new, regenerative food production system,” said ReGen founder Dan Fitzgerald.
Electric vehicle batteries adding to toxic PFAS pollution, study finds
By Shannon Kelleher
A type of toxic PFAS in lithium-ion batteries that power electric vehicles and other electronics is polluting air, soil and water in the United States and Europe, adding to concerns that the growing clean energy sector could harm the environment even as it strives to combat climate change, according to a new study.
Researchers said they analyzed samples of soil, sediment and surface water collected in 2022 near manufacturing plants in Minnesota, Kentucky, Belgium, and France, finding they were commonly contaminated with a subtype of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) called bis-perfluoroalkyl sulfonimides (bis-FASIs) at concentrations in the parts per billion.
The study, published Monday in the journal Nature Communications, also found that bis-FASI emitted into the air at these sites may travel long distances, potentially polluting areas far from the facilities where they are made and used.
“If we are not careful about the choices of materials and chemicals used in renewable energy technologies, then it is a concern that this may become a new source of PFAS pollution,” said Ariana Spentzos, a science and policy associate at the Green Science Policy Institute. Spentzos was not involved in the study.
“However, it is a false choice to choose between renewable energy and less PFAS pollution,” she added, noting that there are viable alternatives for many uses of PFAS in renewable energy.
Proposed rule could protect 36 million workers from hazardous heat
By Shannon Kelleher
As dangerous heat waves sweep the US, the Biden administration this week announced a first-of-its-kind proposed rule that could help protect about 36 million workers from heat-related deaths and injuries.
If finalized, the safety standard, proposed July 2 by the Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), would require employers to develop plans to address workplace heat hazards and to put in place requirements for rest breaks and access to shade and drinking water.
The announcement came as the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a new report on the impacts of climate change on health and the environment in the US, revealing that almost 1,000 workers died from heat exposure between 1992 and 2022, about one-third of which were construction workers. The report also found that the average number of heat waves increased from two per year in the 1960s to six per year in the 2010s and 2020s.
“Workers all over the country are passing out, suffering heat stroke and dying from heat exposure from just doing their jobs, and something must be done to protect them,” Doug Parker, Assistant Secretary for Occupational Safety and Health, said in a press release. The proposal marks “an important next step in the process to receive public input to craft a ‘win-win’ final rule that protects workers while being practical and workable for employers,” said Parker.
US failed to clean up radioactive Superfund site, lawsuit claims
By Shannon Kelleher
The US government has failed dangerously in its duty to clean up a radioactive former naval shipyard in San Francisco, jeopardizing the health of community members for decades and potentially putting hundreds of thousands of people at risk if plans to turn the site into a residential area materialize, alleges a lawsuit filed on Friday.
The lawsuit, which was filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California by the group Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice, alleges that both the Navy and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) violated the federal law that governs Superfund site cleanups known as the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA).
The Navy has not properly characterized the full extent of the contamination at the Hunters Point Naval Shipyard, according to the complaint, and failed to follow through on its promise to retest all the soil that was improperly remediated by a former contractor, Tetra Tech.
The Navy has also failed to account for how rising sea and groundwater levels, driven by climate change, may exacerbate contamination risks for vulnerable neighborhoods nearby, the lawsuit alleges.
“Our community is sick and tired of the Navy and US EPA ignoring our demands for full retesting and a full cleanup of all the toxic and radioactive waste at the Hunters Point Shipyard,” Leaotis Martin, a long-time area resident and Greenaction member, said in a press release.
Rain-fed streams lacking federal protections are vital for water quality, study finds
By Shannon Kelleher
New data supports environmental advocates’ long-held position that small, rain-fed streams make major contributions to water quality in rivers and lakes across the US.
So-called “ephemeral streams,” which only flow after precipitation falls and are not currently protected under the Clean Water Act, contribute more than half of the water discharged from US regional rivers, according to the study, which published on Thursday in the journal Science. These streams are likely a major pathway for downstream water pollution, the study concluded.
The findings back concerns that a 2023 US Supreme Court decision in the case titled Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) may put many US waterways and communities living downstream at risk of exposure to pollutants. The ruling effectively removed federal protections for ephemeral streams and wetlands, narrowly defining “waters of the United States” as “relatively permanent, standing or continuously flowing bodies of water.”
The study provides “some scientific confirmation that pollution would flow significantly downstream from these smaller waterways,” said John Rumpler, clean water director and senior attorney for the organization Environment America.
“That’s a really important finding,” he said. “If polluters are allowed to dump into ephemeral streams with impunity and there’s no federal recourse, then downstream water quality can be dramatically impacted.”
The Supreme Court’s move to limit the Clean Water Act has been met with alarm by environmentalists and sharp criticism from the Biden administration, with President Joe Biden saying in a statement last May that it “upends the legal framework that has protected America’s waters for decades.”
A 2022 brief filed in the Supreme Court by 45 senators and 154 House members expressed support for more limited federal control in the Clean Water Act, siding with petitioners in the then-pending Sackett v. EPA case.
Plastics producers face potential wave of lawsuits, report suggests
By Dana Drugmand
As scientific understanding and public awareness of the health and environmental harms of plastics pollution continues to mount, plastics producers and plastic packaging manufacturers could face a rising tide of lawsuits from communities and states seeking to recover damage costs, a new report suggests.
The report, released on Wednesday from the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL), details the substantial impacts of plastic pollution and related burdens on local governments, and explains how the plastics industry could be held legally responsible for these quantifiable harms and costs.
“The plastics crisis is causing harm to individuals, to communities, and to ecosystems,” said Steven Feit, a senior attorney at CIEL and co-author of the report. “There is going to be a [rising] wave of litigation in the plastics context, particularly as the evidence and the understanding of those impacts accrues.”
States and municipalities are already pursuing litigation against major fossil fuel producers, aiming to hold them accountable for localized climate damages and costs and alleging that the oil and gas industry knew decades ago about the potential for their products to cause “catastrophic” climate consequences and yet hid those risks from the public.
Such litigation over previous other toxic harms demonstrates how states and municipalities can pursue legal avenues for redress for the impacts of plastics, according to CIEL.
The American Chemistry Council called the CIEL report a “misdirected distraction” in a statement. The industry association touted the plastics industry’s efforts to improve plastic recycling and cut waste.
California set to loan $400 million to controversial nuclear power plant
By Benjamin Purper
California will loan $400 million to utility Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E) to keep the state’s last nuclear power plant running, according to the final budget deal between the Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom.
The agreement authorizes a $400 million loan from the state’s general fund to help PG&E continue operating the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant near San Luis Obispo, California, according to the California Department of Water Resources.
Diablo Canyon, which accounts for about 9% of the state’s total electricity supply, became California’s last operating nuclear power plant after the closure of the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station in 2013. The plant has been controversial from the beginning, as some environmentalist and anti-nuclear organizations fear the plant could suffer a catastrophic failure and endanger nearby communities.
PG&E maintains that the plant is safe, citing the lack of any major accidents in its nearly 40-year history.
The loan was a point of contention in this year’s budget process. Gov. Newsom originally included it in his budget proposal to the legislature, which then cut it from their own counterproposal in June.
Legislators including Budget Committee Chair Scott Weiner raised concerns that the agreements with PG&E “do not provide the state with sufficient access to information to ensure fiscal accountability.” Weiner and other lawmakers worried that the state could never receive reimbursement for the loan, leaving taxpayers on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars.
The new loan adds to the $1.4 billion the state authorized to PG&E in 2022 to keep the plant running until 2030. The utility had planned to fully decommission the plant by next year, but the state intervened, citing projected energy shortages.
PG&E did not respond to request for comment on the new loan.