- PFAS on our shelves and in our bodies
- Fractured
- Exposed: BPA science
- Agents of Change
- Cutting edge of science
- Climate catastrophe in the South
- Cancer risk in Pittsburgh
- PFAS contamination
- Breathless: Childhood asthma
- Peak Pig: The soul of rural America
- Sacred Water
- Winged Warnings
- Pollution, Poverty, People of Color
Top news in Toxics
From The Web
With all of these hyper-dramas, we quietly managed to harpoon some of the half-century-old cornerstones of environmental law.
How — and why — on Earth did we do that?
Supreme Court takes aim at wetlands
At the end of May, the Supreme Court took a major bite out of the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) ability to protect wetlands under the Clean Water Act. An Idaho couple initiated the case in 2007 when the Clean Water Act prevented them from building a home on a property that contained wetlands.
Over the next 16 years, Sackett v. EPA became the focal point for farmers, homebuilders, industrialists, anti-regulatory groups and many more who saw the EPA as an out-of-control federal agency.
Before a Supreme Court re-cast by three conservative Trump nominees, the 5-4 SCOTUS vote actually saw Trump nominee Brett Kavanaugh side with the court’s three remaining liberal justices. But the Sackett ruling played the same role for EPA politics that the 2022 Dobbs case did for neutralizing Roe v. Wade in abortion rights.
In June 2022, West Virginia v. EPA was another long-simmering case on the EPA’s ability to regulate power plants for greenhouse gas emissions. The court’s full 6-3 conservative majority ruled in favor of West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and more than a dozen of his state colleagues. The decision monkey-wrenched the Biden administration’s ability to meet carbon reduction goals under the Paris climate accord.
But wait, there’s more! Also, in June 2022, a federal district court scored a win for environmental advocates by knocking down Trump administration rules limiting Endangered Species Act enforcement. That one, or other Endangered Species Act cases, will fall into the lap of SCOTUS sooner rather than later.
SCOTUS anti-regulatory turn
Justice Elena Kagan has been a consistent voice of futile outrage over the Court’s anti-regulatory turn. In a dissent to the Sackett decision last week, she wrote that the Court’s majority had its “thumb on the scale” of justice.
With Trump’s three relatively young lifetime appointees, SCOTUS seems locked into a generation of anti-regulatory, pro-business judgment. And the judicial undercard? In his single term, Trump made 54 appeals court and 174 federal court picks, effectively tying up much of the federal courts system before reaching the Supreme Court.
By now, surely you must be thinking it’s a good thing that there are two other branches of government. But no. Not this week.
Debt limit giveaway to oil and gas
As a major giveaway in the compromise to raise the debt limit, President Biden and the congressional Democrats agreed to “streamline” the permitting process for energy projects. That meant weakening the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), another key law from 1970. NEPA required an environmental impact statement for any consequential development using federal land or funds.
Oil and gas pipeline projects would benefit deeply and quickly, as would methane export projects and new plastics factories stateside, with appeals and public comment periods shortened.
It was progressive Rep. Jared Huffman who told the Washington Post, “They must think we’re really, really stupid,” (if Republican leaders thought the Dems’ leaders would agree to this).
Then, the Democrats did agree to it.
The environment as a political pawn
US Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2019. Gorsuch's mom, Anne Gorsuch Burford, was Ronald Reagan’s first EPA administrator and was openly hostile to the agency she ran.
Credit: George W. Bush Presidential Center/flickr
I’m afraid that this illustrates just how little clout environmental issues still have. Even as we proclaim climate change an “existential” threat, it’s one of the first items tossed under the bus.
It’s a far cry from the time when the high court had its own treehugger. Justice William O. Douglas served 36 years on the court. He once asked during a case involving a ski resort if trees should have the same rights as humans.
Today’s court has a bizarre, mirror-image environmental twist of its own. Justice Neil Gorsuch was the first of Trump’s appointees. His mom, Anne Gorsuch Burford, was Ronald Reagan’s first EPA administrator. She openly expressed contempt for the agency’s mission and was forced out by scandal after two years.
Now her son and other Trump appointees are taking up her cause — and it’s our planet that will suffer.
Featured
Subscribe
to Above the Fold
The report comes as negotiators from more than 180 nations meet in Paris this week to discuss a global plastics treaty, developing regulations to address the plastic pollution crisis. The backdrop is stark: Plastics production is currently on track to triple by 2060, causing harm to human health and the environment throughout its lifecycle from creation to disposal.
Capping plastics production is a key point of debate. Fifty-eight countries, aligned in a group called the High Ambition Coalition to End Plastic Pollution, want to see a treaty that slows production. Industry groups and countries that stand to profit from plastic production want to focus on waste management and recycling instead, according to scientists and advocates.
Plastics manufacturing is one of the largest industries in the U.S., but the country is still committed to a treaty with “strong binding provisions, not only voluntary actions,” said Jose Fernandez, under secretary of state for economic growth, energy and environment, at a High Ambition Coalition briefing. The U.S. is not a member of the coalition, instead calling for the treaty to direct nations to develop individual action plans.
Current plastic recycling systems “mold this unknown cocktail of potentially harmful substances together,” Melanie Bergmann, a biologist at the Alfred Wegener Institute and a member of the Scientists’ Coalition for an Effective Plastics Treaty, who was not speaking on behalf of the coalition, told Environmental Health News (EHN).
That chemical cocktail can harm workers and communities around recycling sites and leach from recycled plastic products, the Greenpeace and IPEN report found.
Chemical additives in plastic
A resolution on plastic is passed at the first round of global plastic treaty talks in March 2022.
Credit: UNEP/ Cyril Villemain
Only 9% of plastic is recycled and the rest is burned in incinerators, left to pollute nature or tossed in landfills that are often located in low and middle-income countries. But increasing recycling isn’t a viable solution, scientists and advocates point out. Plastics contain toxic chemicals, such as bisphenols (like BPA), phthalates and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), and can also absorb materials from other products in the wastestream, like pesticides and pharmaceuticals, which can later leach out of the plastic. IPEN and Greenpeace advocate for limiting plastic production alongside eliminating toxic chemicals added to plastics to make safe recycled products feasible.
Related: UN plastics treaty should prioritize health and climate change
Fossil fuels are the raw material that makes plastic, and more than 13,000 chemicals are added to change durability, flexibility, color, UV-protection and more. Roughly 3,200 of those chemicals are considered a concern for human health, and an additional 6,000 have never been screened, according to a report from the United Nations Environment Program.
“Six thousand with no data is like driving blind,” Bjorn Beeler, international coordinator at IPEN, told EHN. Many chemicals added to plastics are linked with health risks including cancers, hormonal system disruptions and reproductive harms.
Plastic production cap
One solution involves simplification and transparency of ingredients in plastics. Lists of approved and unsafe chemicals could guide production and improve the safety of the end material, Bergmann said. Full transparency of ingredients could also help improve recycling and reduce the risk of creating new toxics.
But, “the single most important measure that we need to take is a cap on plastic production,” she said.
A statement released Friday by the High Ambition Coalition echoed this, saying the treaty must reduce plastic production and consumption. “We need to first close the tap by addressing the unsustainable sourcing and extraction of raw materials to make plastics,” Sir Molwyn Joseph, Antigua & Barbuda’s minister of health, wellness and the environment said at a briefing that day.
He emphasized that, as with climate change, developing countries contribute little to the plastic pollution crisis but bear the brunt of the impact. “We have a very small window to address and arrest the severe damage being done by plastics not only to the environment but to human health,” he said.
The mandate for the treaty was agreed on in March 2022, and is currently in its second of five weeks of discussions, spread across three years. The first meeting in late 2022 focused on procedures for the talks, and this week negotiators are expected to dive into substantive issues.
So far, some countries including Saudi Arabia, Russia, India and China have held up talks with procedural issues, opposing the possibility of a vote on a final treaty if consensus can’t be reached. These are countries that profit significantly from the production of fossil fuels, plastics or petrochemicals.
Countries’ ability to agree on a treaty objective will be the measure of success for the week, Beeler said. He hopes to see an objective to protect the environment and human health from adverse impacts at all stages of the plastic lifecycle.
“We are now more than one year into negotiations,” said Jeanne d’Arc Mujawamariya, Rwanda’s minister of environment, at the High Ambition Coalition briefing. “However, since then more than 400 million tons of new plastic have been produced and another 22 million tons of plastic waste has ended up in nature…We need to move quickly into treaty-making mode.”
Change comes hard to healthcare institutions, but a growing movement of doctors, nurses, medical school students and hospital system executives are working to clean up the industry.
Around 650 health care professionals from around the world gathered in Pittsburgh last week to strategize about ways to reduce waste and air pollution, disinvest from fossil fuels, better integrate communities, drive down the industry’s climate-warming emissions and hear success stories from people on the front lines of this work.
“[This] is not just a conference — we’re intentionally building a movement,” said Gary Cohen, president and co-founder of Health Care Without Harm, the organization that hosts the CleanMed conference, during his opening remarks. “This is the work of our lifetime. Are we ready to get going?”
Healthcare’s environmental toll
Ironically, the healthcare industry takes a significant toll on the environment in ways that negatively impact human health. The sector accounts for an estimated 4.4% of total global greenhouse gas emissions and up to 9.8% of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
Related: Visiting health care professionals take “environmental justice tour” of Pittsburgh
Health damages from the U.S. healthcare sector’s pollution – including greenhouse gasses, carcinogenic emissions and other toxic air pollutants – from 2003-2013 are estimated to have cost Americans more than 400,000 years of full health, defined as years lived free of disease or disability. It’s estimated that nearly eight million, or one in five deaths globally, are caused by air pollution — more than the number of deaths caused by AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis combined.
Institutional investments are also problematic: The U.S. has more than 1,200 private hospital systems, which invest an estimated $10 billion in fossil fuels.Cleaning up the healthcare sector
People who have successfully initiated new sustainability programs or policies at their organizations shared tools and tips.
Credit: Kristina Marusic for Environmental Health News
The doctors and nurses attending CleanMed were joined by operations managers, sustainability directors, budget analysts, medical device providers and health-care-strategy consultants, along with people in numerous other roles.
People who have successfully initiated new sustainability programs or policies at their organizations shared tools and tips.
Elizabeth McLellan was one of those people. In the early 2000s, while working as a nurse administrator at Maine Medical Center, she was troubled by the huge volume of unused supplies like gloves, gowns, gauze, bandages and masks going into the trash because they’d been left in a patient’s room or opened in an operating room.
McLellan had lived and worked abroad and knew there was a dire need for these supplies in other parts of the world, so she started collecting them. There was nowhere on site at her hospital to store the supplies she saved, so she took them home.
By 2009 the bottom floor of her house was filled with about 11,000 pounds of rescued medical supplies, which she eventually figured out how to warehouse, ship and donate to hospitals in need around the world. After running the project entirely by herself for years, McLellan scaled the operation into a regional nonprofit, Partners for World Health, with 10 staff members and 800 volunteers, that has saved more than 180,000 pounds of medical supplies from landfills and shipped them to countries in need including Ukraine, Syria, Turkey, Zambia, Haiti, Ethiopia, South Sudan and Kenya.
“It’s easier to ask for forgiveness than for permission,” she said in a session about hospitals making progress toward becoming zero-waste. “That has worked my whole career, and it worked for this project, too.”
In one of two talks about reducing single-use plastics, Dr. Sara Angelilli, director of perioperative education at the Allegheny Health Network, talked about implementing reusable respirators. Dr. Preetri Preeti Mehrotra, a senior medical director at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, shared tips on finding the people who “can help pull the levers,” and discussed both infection control and financial benefits in switching to reusable products. And Daniel Vukelich, president of the Association of Medical Device Reprocessors, cautioned about the false promise of “chemical recycling” of single-use plastics, which is associated with a host of climate and environmental health concerns. Health Care Without Harm is also calling for the global plastics treaty currently in its second round of talks this week in Paris, to not allow medical exemptions.
Other health care professionals shared advice about incorporating environmental justice and community health advocacy into clinical care by setting and meeting renewable energy goals, managing hazardous pharmaceutical waste, getting clinicians involved in climate action and increasing patient access to healthy and sustainable foods inside hospitals and at home. Health Care Without Harm partners with hospitals around the world to help them meet these types of goals through its Practice GreenHealth program.
“In the last year or two, hospitals are increasingly looking beyond their four walls when talking about community resilience and environmental health,” Paul Bogart, executive director of Health Care Without Harm, told EHN. “They’re starting to think about economic drivers of community health and social determinants of health — things like housing, transportation, employment and exposure to polluting facilities.”
“That type of work, for many health care institutions, is just beginning,” Bogart added. “Those relationships with community leaders are just beginning.”
Why Pittsburgh?
Walking along the Allegheny River with scenic views of the city’s iconic yellow bridges, the group learned about how pollution from the steel industry was once so bad that Pittsburgh was nicknamed “hell with the lid off."Credit: Kristina Marusic for Environmental Health News Attendees representing at least 15 countries, including Argentina, Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Japan, Nepal, South Korea and Taiwan attended the CleanMed conference.
Previous conferences have been held in cities across the U.S. and across the world, and conference organizers connect what’s happening locally with the broader movement.
Related: A guide to environmental health in southwestern Pennsylvania
In Pittsburgh, that meant acknowledging the city’s industrial history, discussing ongoing problems with air pollution and childhood lead exposure and addressing the significant role that extractive industries, particularly fracking and petrochemical development, play in shaping the region’s health. It also meant asking questions about the health care industry’s obligations to communities impacted by these problems.
“The fossil fuel and petrochemical industries require externalizing harm,” said Cohen during a plenary on building partnerships between health care institutions and community advocacy. “We need to understand who is harmed by an economy that’s based on fossil fuels and toxic chemicals … What does it mean for the health care industry to truly partner with these communities to help build community health, wealth and resilience?”