The war on the environment

[Admin]

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), founded half a century ago in 1970, has existed under nine different presidents including Donald Trump. One of the people who has been encouraging the EPA to weaken its environmental standards is John DeSesso, who has a long history of lobbying on behalf of chemical companies. And science reporter Elizabeth Shogren, in an article for Reveal News, describes DeSesso’s campaign to persuade the EPA that trichloroethylene or TCE — a toxic chemical linked to fetal heart defects — is perfectly safe. DeSesso, Shogren reports, met with “a dozen EPA scientists and officials” in the hope of convincing them that TCE is not dangerous. According to Shogren, DeSesso has “primarily earned his living” as a “contract scientist for chemical companies and their trade associations, promoting their positions on toxic chemicals from arsenic to Roundup. As cancer clusters, immune disorders and fetal abnormalities mounted in communities contaminated by TCE, DeSesso was paid to cast doubt on the research establishing TCE’s toxic effects on the human body.” In making his case for TCE to the EPA, Shogren notes, DeSesso set out to “undercut” a 2003 study that was led by scientist Paula Johnson for the University of Arizona and was “a landmark in establishing that TCE exposure at trace levels was highly toxic to developing embryos.” John’s study, according to Shogren, “had been pivotal in past EPA evaluations of TCE’s risks.” In February, the EPA released an evaluation of the effects of TCE — one that, Shogren warns, “appears to show the influence of DeSesso and his chemical company sponsors.” “Dismissing the findings of the Johnson study and decades of scientific research, the published evaluation rejects fetal heart malformations as a benchmark for unsafe exposure levels to TCE,” Shogren observes.

‘This decision is grave’: How the Trump White House gave the green light to a dangerous chemical linked to fetal heart defects – Alternet.org

[Admin]

The Environmental Protection Agency, headed by former coal lobbyist Andrew Wheeler, announced on Thursday a sweeping and indefinite suspension of environmental rules amid the worsening coronavirus pandemic, a move green groups warned gives the fossil fuel industry a “green light to pollute with impunity.”

Under the new policy (pdf), which the EPA insisted is temporary while providing no timeframe, big polluters will effectively be trusted to regulate themselves and will not be punished for failing to comply with reporting rules and other requirements. The order—applied retroactively beginning March 13, 2020—requests that companies “act responsibly” to avoid violations. 

“Outrageous. Suspending all environmental regulations indefinitely? This has nothing to do with coronavirus. This has everything to do with protecting Big Business.” —Rep. Mark Pocan

‘Holy crap this is insane’: Citing coronavirus pandemic, EPA indefinitely suspends environmental rules – Alternet.org

[Admin]

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has gutted an Obama administration regulation requiring coal plants to cut their emissions of mercury and other pollutants that carry significant risks to human health. The EPA, currently headed up by former coal industry lobbyist Andrew Wheeler, argues the mercury cleanup requirement was not “appropriate and necessary” – a legal benchmark under the country’s landmark Clean Air Act. Characterising the regulation as government overreach, Mr Wheeler said the latest move better balanced the cost to utilities against public safety.

Trump administration scraps mercury emissions rule as rollback of Obama-era regulations continues | The Independent

[Admin]

Environmental campaigners vowed to fight President Donald Trump's EPA Thursday after the agency said it would propose that the rocket-fuel chemical perchlorate does not need to be regulated, despite its links to cognitive damage in fetal and child development. According to the New York Times, the EPA plans to tell the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) that it is "not in the public interest" to regulate the chemical at all, a year after the agency recommended the allowable amount in drinking water be limited to 56 parts per billion (ppb). The 2019 proposal was already 10 to 50 times higher than what water safety experts recommend, the Times reported.

'Shameful Does Not Even Begin to Describe' Trump EPA Decision on Chemical Known to Damage Children's Brains | Common Dreams News

[Admin]

Decades of research paint a clear picture: The No. 1 environmental health risk in the US is soot. Also known as particulate pollution, it is made up of extremely small particles spewed into the air by power generation, industrial processes, and cars and trucks. There are “coarse particles,” between 2.5 and 10 micrometers in diameter, and “fine particles,” at 2.5 micrometers and smaller. By way of comparison, the average human hair has a diameter of about 70 micrometers.

Research has consistently found that inhaling these particles is incredibly harmful to human physiology, at high concentrations over short periods or low concentrations over extended periods. Particulate pollution is linked to increased asthma, especially among children, along with lung irritation and inflammation, blood clots, heart attacks, weakened immune systems, and, according to a wave of recent research, long-term cognitive impacts (reduced productivity, inability to concentrate, and dementia).

Research is equally consistent on another point: the harms of particulate pollution are not equitably distributed. They fall most heavily on vulnerable populations like children, the elderly, people with preexisting health conditions, low-income people, and, above all, people of color. A groundbreaking 2019 study from researchers at the Universities of Minnesota and Washington attempted to quantify both sides of particulate pollution, who produces it and who suffers from it. They found that the consumption producing the pollution was concentrated in majority white communities, while exposure to the pollution was concentrated in minority communities.

“On average, non-Hispanic whites experience a ‘pollution advantage’: They experience ∼17% less air pollution exposure than is caused by their consumption,” the study concluded. “Blacks and Hispanics on average bear a ‘pollution burden’ of 56% and 63% excess exposure, respectively, relative to the exposure caused by their consumption.”

To put it more bluntly: People of color are choking on white people’s pollution. The current regulatory limits on particulate pollution under the Clean Air Act were set in 2012, based on scientific review concluded in 2010. As subsequent science has revealed, they are inadequate to protect public health. That was the strong and unanimous conclusion of the panel of 19 scientists assembled in 2015 to assess the evidence. Nonetheless, EPA claims the science is not settled and is refusing to tighten the standards, which will mean, on an ongoing basis, well over 10,000 unnecessary deaths in the US every year..

Trump’s EPA balks at a chance to save black lives from pollution - Vox

[Admin]

Confronting a climate crisis that threatens the fossil fuel industry, oil companies are racing to make more plastic. But they face two problems: Many markets are already awash with plastic, and few countries are willing to be dumping grounds for the world’s plastic waste. The industry thinks it has found a solution to both problems in Africa.

According to documents reviewed by The New York Times, an industry group representing the world’s largest chemical makers and fossil fuel companies is lobbying to influence United States trade negotiations with Kenya, one of Africa’s biggest economies, to reverse its strict limits on plastics — including a tough plastic-bag ban. It is also pressing for Kenya to continue importing foreign plastic garbage, a practice it has pledged to limit.

Plastics makers are looking well beyond Kenya’s borders. “We anticipate that Kenya could serve in the future as a hub for supplying U.S.-made chemicals and plastics to other markets in Africa through this trade agreement,” Ed Brzytwa, the director of international trade for the American Chemistry Council, wrote in an April 28 letter to the Office of the United States Trade Representative.

Big Oil Is in Trouble. Its Plan: Flood Africa With Plastic. - The New York Times

[Admin]

An advocacy group on Thursday sued the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) over its decision not to regulate a chemical that has been linked to fetal and infant brain damage. The agency announced in June that it would not regulate the chemical perchlorate even though it estimated that up to 620,000 people could be drinking water with a concerning amount of the chemical. The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) sued Thursday in an attempt to get the agency to withdraw its decision not to regulate the chemical, which is used in rocket fuel. 

EPA sued over decision not to regulate chemical linked to fetal brain damage | TheHill

President Trump described himself as “truly an environmentalist” at a campaign event Thursday before attacking bans on single-use plastic products.

Trump says, he's 'truly an environmentalist', slams bans on plastic products | TheHill

[Admin]

AAnother explanation for Trump’s indifference is that the wildfires are tied to human-caused climate change, which Trump has done everything humanly possible to worsen. Extreme weather disasters are rampaging across America. Last Wednesday, the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration released its latest State of the Climate report, finding that just in August the US was hit by four billion-dollar calamities. In addition to wildfires, there were two enormous hurricanes and an extraordinary Midwest derecho.

These are inconvenient facts for a president who has spent much of his presidency dismantling every major climate and environmental policy he can lay his hands on. Starting with his unilateral decision to pull out of the Paris climate agreement, Trump has been the most anti-environmental president in history. He has called climate change a “hoax”. He has claimed, with no evidence, that windmills cause cancer. He has weakened Obama-era limits on planet-warming carbon dioxide from power plants and from cars and trucks. He has rolled back rules governing clean air, water and toxic chemicals. He has opened more public land to oil and gas drilling.

He has targeted California in particular, revoking the state’s authority to set tougher car emission standards than those required by the federal government. In all, the Trump administration has reversed, repealed, or otherwise rolled back nearly 70 environmental rules and regulations. More than 30 rollbacks are still in progress. Now, seven weeks before election day, with much of the nation either aflame or suffering other consequences of climate change, Trump unabashedly defends his record and attacks Joe Biden..

Robert Reich (As the West Goes Up in Flames, Trump Couldn’t Care...)

[Admin]

A 2019 draft report on coal-soot emissions by scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency indicated that tightening regulations even slightly could save thousands of lives. In a preliminary study from April, researchers at Harvard University found that those living in areas with long-term exposure to the fine particulate matter were more likely to die from COVID-19 than those who lived in less polluted areas. One week after the preliminary findings of the Harvard study came out, the Trump administration announced its decision to not tighten regulations on industrial soot emissions.

How 'Clean Coal' Affected a Pennsylvania Town - The Atlantic

[Admin]

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday finalized one of its most controversial rules, limiting the types of studies the agency can weigh when crafting its policies. The rule has been one of the top concerns for public health advocates and environmentalists who say it will restrict the EPA’s ability to consider landmark public health research and other studies that do not make their underlying data public. Dubbed by former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt as a way to battle “secret science,” the agency has billed the rule as a transparency measure. But critics say it’s unnecessary for the agency to review spreadsheets full of sensitive personal health data or proprietary business information rather than evaluating the scientific underpinnings of the research itself. “Too often Congress shirks its responsibility and defers important decisions to regulatory agencies. These regulators then invoke science to justify their actions, often without letting the public study the underlying data. Part of transparency is making sure the public knows what the agency bases its decisions on,” EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler wrote in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal late Monday before the rule was unveiled. The first version of the 2018 rule sparked major pushback — the 600,000 comments it elicited made it one of the EPA’s most commented-on regulations ever. Its merits were even questioned by the agency’s independent science board, who said the agency had not resolved how to protect sensitive data.

EPA finalizes 'secret science' rule, limiting use of public health research | TheHill