Trump

November 15, 2024

Can anything be done to Trump-proof the environment?

By Douglas Main

As advocacy groups brace for a new administration under President-elect Donald Trump —fearing a slew of deregulation and policy changes that would undermine a range of environmental health measures —some are pondering ways to try to “Trump-proof” the planet.

Trump racked up the worst environmental record of any president during his first term, according to several advocacy organizations, and many worry his second time around will be even worse.

They expect across-the-board cuts to federal budgets and staff, including the Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Interior, and other agencies that play key roles in protecting human and environmental health. And they forecast efforts to reverse environmentally friendly policies protested by powerful corporate players.

“I suspect Trump will be less restrained than last time… more aggressive and damaging,” said Brett Hartl, with the Center for Biological Diversity. “We’ll wait for the storm to hit and fight back,” he added.

These concerns come after the Biden administration has implemented of many hard-fought measures such as new standards to address widespread contamination of US drinking water with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and environmental justice initiatives to better protect marginalized communities from industrial pollution.

The current administration has, just this month alone, completed a series of steps lauded by conservationists and environmentalists that include finalizing rules to limit oil drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, and finishing a proposal to restrict oil exploration and grazing in 65 million acres of sage grouse habitat.

November 14, 2024

US EPA enables polluting plastics plants by failing to update wastewater limits, report says

By Shannon Kelleher

Federal regulators have enabled US plastics plants across the country to dump dangerous chemicals into waterways by failing to update wastewater limits for over 30 years, according to a new analysis by a watchdog group.

While the Clean Water Act requires the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review wastewater discharge limits every five years to keep up with advances in water treatment technologies, the agency has not updated its guidelines for the plastics sector since 1993.

“Most folks don’t know that the plastics industry is not required to use modern wastewater treatment controls to limit the amount of pollution they pour into our waterways,” Jen Duggan, the executive director of EIP, said in a press call Thursday. “It’s long past time these plants clean up.”

In its analysis, the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) focused on 70 plants that make raw plastics called “nurdles,” tiny pellets later used to make products such as water bottles, food containers and toy

Over 80% of the plants violated pollution limits in their permits at least once between 2021 and 2023, according to the report, yet the EPA only issued financial penalties to 14% of violators, the report found. The Chemours Washington Works plant in West Virginia received 115 violations over this period – more than any other plant studied – but was not issued any penalties by regulators, the EIP analysis found.

Additionally, 40% of the plastics plants are operating on outdated water pollution control permits, the study found.

The EPA said it is reviewing the report and would “respond appropriately.”

January 27, 2024

EPA rushed to issue 2020 dicamba approval despite scientific concerns, documents reveal

By Johnathan Hettinger

In December 2021, a small team of scientists working for the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a stark report on a controversial weed killer that had been the subject of years of complaints from farmers and environmentalists.

Despite new restrictions, the government scientists confirmed that the damage from the weed killer known as dicamba was nearly impossible to contain; once sprayed onto targeted farm fields where genetically engineered crops were designed to withstand the chemical, dicamba then easily and frequently moved far off target to harm millions of acres of other crops and endangered species. The agency scientists concluded that because of these broad risks, it was doubtful that dicamba, used on tens of millions acres of cotton and soybean crops in the U.S., could legally be kept on the market.

“EPA has reason to believe the number of incidents reported significantly understates the actual number of incidents related to dicamba use,” the agency said at the time.

Despite the public acknowledgements of the problems posed by dicamba, the EPA has taken little action over the last two years to curtail its use. And now, as US farmers prepare for another growing season, dicamba spraying is expected to lead to costly crop damage on farms throughout the US Midwest and southern farming states, just as it has in prior years.

Documents obtained through an ongoing lawsuit against the EPA over its approval of dicamba show that the agency’s lack of action to address the documented harms of dicamba is in sharp contrast to the agency’s rush to renew approval of the chemical in 2020.

And, notably, the documents also show that the EPA’s urgency to grant the 2020 renewal came amid numerous meetings with executives from Bayer, the German company that bought Monsanto in 2018, inheriting Monsanto’s portfolio of weed killing products that included dicamba brands.

November 21, 2023

EPA internal emails suggest science took back seat to political pressure in pesticide approval

By Johnathan Hettinger

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is considering a new approval for a pesticide that would be used on Florida oranges and grapefruits despite the fact that agency scientists have repeatedly found the chemical does not meet safety standards designed to protect children’s health, internal agency records show.

EPA emails suggest that persistent pressure from chemical industry lobbyists, politicians and political appointees led the agency’s Office of Pesticide Programs (OPP) to change its position on aldicarb from one that favored public health to one that critics say instead favored the interests of a North Carolina-based company called AgLogic that is seeking to expand sales of the insecticide. The EPA communications were obtained by the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity through a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit and reviewed by The New Lede.

In one 2020 email, for example, an EPA regulatory specialist wrote to AgLogic that while the EPA was not yet able to make a safety finding, the agency has “spent time brainstorming possible solutions”. The emails also show that scientists within the agency felt they had to “defend” their concerns about aldicarb as top agency administrators and lawmakers made expanded approval of the chemical a priority.

“What this shows is just how difficult it is for the agency to say no,” said Nathan Donley, Environmental Health Science Director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “They were going to reject it so many times, and [AgLogic] just said, ‘no, no no.’”

The revelations underscore whistleblower complaints made by EPA scientists in 2021 alleging that they have been routinely pressured for years to minimize or remove scientific evidence of the dangers certain chemicals posed to public health.

A risk to babies’ brains
Aldicarb is considered “extremely hazardous” by the World Health Organization and has been banned in more than 100 countries. It also is banned by the Rotterdam Convention, a global agreement to regulate the world’s most hazardous chemicals.

In the US, the EPA found in 2010 that aldicarb posed unacceptable risks to the developing brains of infants and young children, leading German conglomerate Bayer AG to cancel its registration for sales of aldicarb. At that time, the highest risk for infants and children was found to be when aldicarb was used in citrus. Since then, the EPA has allowed AgLogic a limited approval to sell aldicarb for use on cotton, dry beans, peanuts, soybeans, sugar beets, and sweet potatoes. Those uses have been rare, according to US Geological Survey data.

In recent years AgLogic has been pushing for expanded approval to allow the insecticide to be used by farmers on Florida grapefruits and oranges. The EPA did grant the approval in 2021 in the waning days of the Trump Administration, but that approval was overturned by a federal court in response to litigation brought by opponents. Approval was additionally rejected by Florida regulators who found that the continued use of the pesticide posed “an unacceptable risk to human, animal and environmental health in Florida.”

After a renewed effort by AgLogic, EPA approval for aldicarb use on citrus is now under consideration again.

November 1, 2023

“Time is up” – EPA facing threat of citizens’ lawsuit seeking cap on climate pollution

By Dana Drugmand

US regulators are breaking the law by failing to set a national cap on climate pollution, endangering human health and the environment, according to a consortium threatening to file a citizens’ lawsuit against the government to force “stronger, faster actions to address the climate emergency.”

The states of Oregon and Minnesota, along with the San Carlos Apache Tribe and climate advocacy organizations 350.org and the Center for Biological Diversity, said this week that they plan to sue the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) demanding the agency respond to a 2009 petition for regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

In a letter addressed to EPA Administrator Michael Regan, the consortium pointed out that the EPA has long known that climate changes are occurring that are harming human health and that the “effects will only worsen over time” without regulatory action.

“In the nearly fourteen years since the petition has been pending before EPA, the climate crisis has become far more dire, devastating lives, livelihoods, and ecosystems,” the letter states.

The letter references a new “state of the climate report” from scientists that warns: “Life on planet Earth is under siege. We are now in an uncharted territory” and that “time is up.” And the letter quotes the UN Secretary General warning of an approaching “climate time-bomb.”

The EPA has 180 days to respond to the letter, called a notice of intent to sue, after which time a lawsuit would be filed in federal district court in the District of Columbia.

May 20, 2022

Guest column: Fragmented FDA leadership contributed to formula failure

By Scott Faber

America’s infant formula shortage has raised urgent questions about the safety of our food supply. Most Americans believe America has the safest food supply in the world. But, the tragic failure to address contaminated infant formula as well as a hard-hitting investigation about the failures at FDA’s food safety division has revealed dangerous holes in our food safety net.