By Lindsay McCormick

Every day we are exposed to potentially hazardous chemicals we can’t see —chemicals used in everything from the clothes we wear to the lotions we use and even the couch we sit on. Synthetic chemicals are used to make 96% of products in the United States. Yet scientific research continues to link chemicals in common use to health effects like cancer, infertility, and asthma.

EDF selected 10 individuals across the country to wear a novel wristband technology designed to detect chemicals in their environment for one week – including Gordon, Karen, and Averi.

Gordon is a lieutenant for the Memphis Fire Department. Gordon’s wristband detected 16 chemicals, including gamma-chlordane, a pesticide that has been banned in the U.S. since the 1980s, and 3,4-dichlorophenyl isocyanate, a “chemical intermediate,” which is reportedly used exclusively for chemical manufacturing processes. While there were no fires to fight the week he wore the wristband, Gordon wondered if he came into contact with these chemicals from a site visit to a location that formerly housed chemical stockpiles, his local auto repair shop, the nearby highway – or even his fire suit.

Karen is an 8th grade science teacher who engages her students in citizen science projects like measuring air pollutants using portable air monitors. The chemical-detecting wristband was another great teaching tool for Karen's students. Among other chemicals, Karen’s wristband detected the flame retardant BDE 47, which was phased out of U.S. production in the mid-2000s due to health impacts on the developing brain and persistence in the environment. Karen hopes that personal exposure monitors like the wristband will become more available to the general public in the future, noting that her students would love to wear the wristbands themselves: “The students are very curious. They love this project!”

Averi is a student at The College of Wooster, currently doing her senior research project on sustainable interior design. Averi’s wristband detected several chemicals that can be found in personal care products – such as lotions, shampoos and conditioners – including the fragrance enhancer diethyl phthalate, the preservative benzyl benzoate and the synthetic fragrance galaxolide. After wearing the wristband, Averi reflected, “It struck me that I may be interacting with the most toxic chemicals when I am showering… in the place where I am trying to get clean.”

The wristbands and other emerging chemical monitoring technologies promise to transform our understanding of environmental exposures to chemicals – by making the invisible, visible – and in so doing, open up new opportunities for reducing exposures.

Learn more about the project and what our participants had to say about the experience here.

As the ecological restoration industry convenes for its flagship meeting this week, two restoration players highlight the sector’s role as a big economic driver. They also stress the need

As the ecological restoration industry convenes for its flagship meeting this week, two restoration players highlight the sector’s role as a big economic driver. They also stress the need

Written by Jackie Semmens

My husband and I have been talking about taking the kids to Glacier National Park every summer since they were born. Living in Montana, we suffer from the backyard curse – when you live so close to something so spectacular, it’s easy to find yourself never actually going. Each summer we say, “I guess we will try to go next year.”

This year, we’ve picked a date and made our reservations. There seems to be a greater sense of urgency now. It’s not just the fact the kids are getting older, and we realize it won’t be long before their days are filled with school and summer camps. We need to go because I want them to actually see a glacier before they disappear.

In 1850, there were an estimated 150 glaciers in the Glacier National Park. Today, only 25 remain. The last is predicted to disappear between 2030 and 2080. This is well within my children’s lifetimes. Climate change has accelerated their disappearance, ensuring that it will be humans – not glaciers – who carve out the final version of the park.

Even more than the rapidly retreating glaciers, I worry about my children’s accessing public lands. Our family visits Forest Service land that surrounds our small town almost every single week for more toddler-sized hiking. President Trump’s proposed budget would cut $1.5 billion from the Interior Department, which oversees vital programs such as the National Park Service and the Forest Service.

Montanans are taking this threat seriously. Our former Congressman – Ryan Zinke is now Secretary of the Interior. He stated during his confirmation hearing that he’s not happy about the cuts, and plans to fight them. The national parks face a $12.5 billion backlog in needed maintenance. This will be even more difficult to address given these steep cuts. Montana’s economy is heavily reliant on outdoor tourism, which generates thousands of jobs and millions of dollars in state and local tax revenue. We need our national parks up and running not only for our weekend adventures – but for a stable economy as well.

On an unusually warm winter day, I packed the twins up in the stroller and headed to a rally at our state capitol to protest the Disposal of Excess Federal Lands Act, which would have shifted federal lands to the states. Because states will not be able to pick up the hefty cost of maintaining these lands, much will likely have been sold off. We stood shoulder to shoulder with hundreds of hunters, anglers, parents, grandparents, and hikers. We jammed every corridor and flowed down staircases. Washington heard us loud and clear. The bill was withdrawn the next week.

In Montana, public lands are not thought of as simply nice tracts of land, or a beautiful feature of our state. This is our birthright. And the more time children spend exploring these lands, the better. Researchers at Cornell University have found that the more time children spend doing wild nature activities – such as camping, hiking, playing in the woods, fishing, hunting – the more likely they are to care about the environment when they are older. We need children who have had a chance to truly experience what we are asking them to protect.

I’m not sure my children will actually remember seeing a glacier this summer. In fact, I’m pretty sure that if they remember any of this trip ten years from now, it will be the s’mores. But I want to stand in front of a glacier with them, and remind myself about the urgency of preserving these sacred lands. My children are growing faster than the glaciers are melting. This is their inheritance we are spending.

TELL CONGRESS: PROTECT EPA

By Adam Peltz

Today, the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission and the Ground Water Protection Council published a new report entitled “Underground Gas Storage Regulatory Considerations: A Guide for State and Federal Regulatory Agencies.” Like the title says, the report helps regulators make decisions that will ultimately make gas storage facilities across the country safer and more secure.

Gas storage reached many Americans’ attention in the aftermath of the major leak at the Aliso Canyon Storage Facility, which forced thousands of families to evacuate their homes after a massive leak caused more than 100,000 tons of methane to escape into the air.

It came to light that the various protections for gas storage facilities were, in many cases, skimpy and outdated. With more than 400 gas storage facilities across the country, this not only threatens our health and environment but also our energy supply. More than a third of our nation’s electricity comes from natural gas and the majority of American households depend on it for cooking and hot water. If our storage facilities aren’t up to snuff, we risk disrupting that energy supply – exactly what occurred in Aliso Canyon.

In order to help states and other jurisdictions — like the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration — make smart decisions about updating their programs, the two state oil and gas regulatory associations teamed up to write this guide, and recruited dozens of experts from across government, industry, academia, and the non-profit world (including EDF) to help. The guide is comprehensive, covering essential topics like well construction and conversion, ongoing integrity testing, and leak detection.

This guide (in addition to recommendations from the Department of Energy) is an invaluable resources for states and other agencies looking to upgrade their gas storage rules – which, in the spirit of a process of continuous improvement, should ultimately be all of them.

Incidents like Aliso Canyon have happened all too frequently in recent decades, and industry self-regulation just is not cutting it anymore. Using this guide, states can design and refine programs to considerably reduce risks of leaks and other incidents and help keep gas storage working safely and reliably for all Americans.

By Adam Peltz

Today, the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission and the Ground Water Protection Council published a new report entitled “Underground Gas Storage Regulatory Considerations: A Guide for State and Federal Regulatory Agencies.” Like the title says, the report helps regulators make decisions that will ultimately make gas storage facilities across the country safer and more secure.

Gas storage reached many Americans’ attention in the aftermath of the major leak at the Aliso Canyon Storage Facility, which forced thousands of families to evacuate their homes after a massive leak caused more than 100,000 tons of methane to escape into the air.

It came to light that the various protections for gas storage facilities were, in many cases, skimpy and outdated. With more than 400 gas storage facilities across the country, this not only threatens our health and environment but also our energy supply. More than a third of our nation’s electricity comes from natural gas and the majority of American households depend on it for cooking and hot water. If our storage facilities aren’t up to snuff, we risk disrupting that energy supply – exactly what occurred in Aliso Canyon.

In order to help states and other jurisdictions — like the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration — make smart decisions about updating their programs, the two state oil and gas regulatory associations teamed up to write this guide, and recruited dozens of experts from across government, industry, academia, and the non-profit world (including EDF) to help. The guide is comprehensive, covering essential topics like well construction and conversion, ongoing integrity testing, and leak detection.

This guide (in addition to recommendations from the Department of Energy) is an invaluable resources for states and other agencies looking to upgrade their gas storage rules – which, in the spirit of a process of continuous improvement, should ultimately be all of them.

Incidents like Aliso Canyon have happened all too frequently in recent decades, and industry self-regulation just is not cutting it anymore. Using this guide, states can design and refine programs to considerably reduce risks of leaks and other incidents and help keep gas storage working safely and reliably for all Americans.

By Adam Peltz

Today, the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission and the Ground Water Protection Council published a new report entitled “Underground Gas Storage Regulatory Considerations: A Guide for State and Federal Regulatory Agencies.” Like the title says, the report helps regulators make decisions that will ultimately make gas storage facilities across the country safer and more secure.

Gas storage reached many Americans’ attention in the aftermath of the major leak at the Aliso Canyon Storage Facility, which forced thousands of families to evacuate their homes after a massive leak caused more than 100,000 tons of methane to escape into the air.

It came to light that the various protections for gas storage facilities were, in many cases, skimpy and outdated. With more than 400 gas storage facilities across the country, this not only threatens our health and environment but also our energy supply. More than a third of our nation’s electricity comes from natural gas and the majority of American households depend on it for cooking and hot water. If our storage facilities aren’t up to snuff, we risk disrupting that energy supply – exactly what occurred in Aliso Canyon.

In order to help states and other jurisdictions — like the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration — make smart decisions about updating their programs, the two state oil and gas regulatory associations teamed up to write this guide, and recruited dozens of experts from across government, industry, academia, and the non-profit world (including EDF) to help. The guide is comprehensive, covering essential topics like well construction and conversion, ongoing integrity testing, and leak detection.

This guide (in addition to recommendations from the Department of Energy) is an invaluable resources for states and other agencies looking to upgrade their gas storage rules – which, in the spirit of a process of continuous improvement, should ultimately be all of them.

Incidents like Aliso Canyon have happened all too frequently in recent decades, and industry self-regulation just is not cutting it anymore. Using this guide, states can design and refine programs to considerably reduce risks of leaks and other incidents and help keep gas storage working safely and reliably for all Americans.

By Adam Peltz

Today, the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission and the Ground Water Protection Council published a new report entitled “Underground Gas Storage Regulatory Considerations: A Guide for State and Federal Regulatory Agencies.” Like the title says, the report helps regulators make decisions that will ultimately make gas storage facilities across the country safer and more secure.

Gas storage reached many Americans’ attention in the aftermath of the major leak at the Aliso Canyon Storage Facility, which forced thousands of families to evacuate their homes after a massive leak caused more than 100,000 tons of methane to escape into the air.

It came to light that the various protections for gas storage facilities were, in many cases, skimpy and outdated. With more than 400 gas storage facilities across the country, this not only threatens our health and environment but also our energy supply. More than a third of our nation’s electricity comes from natural gas and the majority of American households depend on it for cooking and hot water. If our storage facilities aren’t up to snuff, we risk disrupting that energy supply – exactly what occurred in Aliso Canyon.

In order to help states and other jurisdictions — like the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration — make smart decisions about updating their programs, the two state oil and gas regulatory associations teamed up to write this guide, and recruited dozens of experts from across government, industry, academia, and the non-profit world (including EDF) to help. The guide is comprehensive, covering essential topics like well construction and conversion, ongoing integrity testing, and leak detection.

This guide (in addition to recommendations from the Department of Energy) is an invaluable resources for states and other agencies looking to upgrade their gas storage rules – which, in the spirit of a process of continuous improvement, should ultimately be all of them.

Incidents like Aliso Canyon have happened all too frequently in recent decades, and industry self-regulation just is not cutting it anymore. Using this guide, states can design and refine programs to considerably reduce risks of leaks and other incidents and help keep gas storage working safely and reliably for all Americans.

By Adam Peltz

Today, the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission and the Ground Water Protection Council published a new report entitled “Underground Gas Storage Regulatory Considerations: A Guide for State and Federal Regulatory Agencies.” Like the title says, the report helps regulators make decisions that will ultimately make gas storage facilities across the country safer and more secure.

Gas storage reached many Americans’ attention in the aftermath of the major leak at the Aliso Canyon Storage Facility, which forced thousands of families to evacuate their homes after a massive leak caused more than 100,000 tons of methane to escape into the air.

It came to light that the various protections for gas storage facilities were, in many cases, skimpy and outdated. With more than 400 gas storage facilities across the country, this not only threatens our health and environment but also our energy supply. More than a third of our nation’s electricity comes from natural gas and the majority of American households depend on it for cooking and hot water. If our storage facilities aren’t up to snuff, we risk disrupting that energy supply – exactly what occurred in Aliso Canyon.

In order to help states and other jurisdictions — like the federal Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration — make smart decisions about updating their programs, the two state oil and gas regulatory associations teamed up to write this guide, and recruited dozens of experts from across government, industry, academia, and the non-profit world (including EDF) to help. The guide is comprehensive, covering essential topics like well construction and conversion, ongoing integrity testing, and leak detection.

This guide (in addition to recommendations from the Department of Energy) is an invaluable resources for states and other agencies looking to upgrade their gas storage rules – which, in the spirit of a process of continuous improvement, should ultimately be all of them.

Incidents like Aliso Canyon have happened all too frequently in recent decades, and industry self-regulation just is not cutting it anymore. Using this guide, states can design and refine programs to considerably reduce risks of leaks and other incidents and help keep gas storage working safely and reliably for all Americans.

Written by Diane MacEachern

The Clean Air Act is coming under attack for being unnecessary and too costly to enforce. But the ‘State of the Air 2017’ report from the American Lung Association (ALA), shows that millions of people are still getting sick from breathing dirty air. “While most of the nation has much cleaner air quality than even a decade ago,” says the report’s authors, people living in many cities face “an unrelenting increase in dangerous spikes in particle pollution.”

In fact, more than four in 10 Americans live in places where the air is unhealthy to breathe – making a strong case not only for maintaining the Clean Air Act, but strengthening it.

Why We Need the Clean Air Act

The Clean Air Act was passed in 1970 to protect the public from hazardous air pollutants, like the easy-to-inhale toxic particles emitted when utilities burn coal, or when cars burn gasoline.

Reducing air pollution is good for everyone, of course. But it’s especially important for kids with asthma, for anyone suffering from respiratory illnesses, and for people with heart problems. Research shows that almost 300,000 women die each year from heart disease, an ailment that is made substantially worse when we breathe dirty air.

Most cities have experienced strong reductions in air pollution since the Clean Air Act was passed. The number of people exposed to unhealthy levels of air pollution dropped from 166 million in 2012-2014, to 125 million today, and many cities report fewer “code red” or “code orange” days. We can thank cleaner power plants and more fuel-efficient cars and trucks for these gains.

The Clean Air Act helps reduce climate change, too. Power plants are the largest stationary source of carbon pollution in the U.S. In fact, power plants that burn coal contribute around 30 percent of all energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in America. Because the Clean Air Act requires utilities to operate more cleanly, it helps reduce the amount of CO2 coal-fired plants generate, as well.

Dirty Air Remains, and Threatens

Looking at the nation as a whole, the ‘State of the Air 2017’ report shows that, “even with ongoing improvement, too many people in the U.S. live where the air is unhealthy for them to breathe.” That includes:

• People both older and younger – Nearly 16.7 million adults age 65 and over and more than 29.5 million children under 18 years old live in counties that received an F for at least one of the most common pollutants that contaminate our air.
• Asthma sufferers – Nearly 2.5 million children and nearly 8.3 million adults who suffer from asthma also live in counties that received an F for at least one toxic pollutant.
• People with COPD, lung cancer and cardiovascular disease, and diabetes – Millions of people suffering from these diseases live in counties that are marked by unacceptable levels of air pollution.

Climate change remains a dire threat, too. Data from NASA and NOAA indicate that 2016 was the warmest year on record globally, evidencing a long-term warming trend that is causing extreme weather events, droughts, fires, and rising sea levels that threaten the entire coastline of the U.S.

What Can We Do?

• Protect and Enforce the Clean Air Act – First and foremost, it’s critical to enforce the Clean Air Act. Send a message to your Representative and Senators in Congress urging them to strengthen the Act and support adequate funds for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to implement and enforce it. EPA helps states make sure air pollution gets cleaned up, but they can’t do that unless the agency is adequately funded and retains the mandate to do its job.
• Elect Environmental Advocates and Scientists to Congress – We need Senators and Representatives who value the Clean Air Act and will stick up for it against efforts to weaken its enforcement or even repeal it. A new organization called 314 Action is helping to recruit and train scientists to run for political office. The League of Conservation Voters helps elect pro-environment candidates to Congress and state office.
• Do Your Part to Use Energy More Efficiently – We can all do more to use less energy and use it more efficiently. Here are some tips for creating your own Clean Power Plan at home.
• Find Out How Clean Your City’s Air Is – You can get a report card for your state’s air quality from ALA here. See how the air in your city, county and state compare to others here.
• Join Moms Clean Air Force – If you’re not yet a member, please join us. We’re a force of 1 million moms and dads strong who are fighting for our children’s right to breathe clean air!

TELL YOUR SENATOR: PROTECT OUR HEALTH FROM AIR AND CLIMATE POLLUTION

Lindsay McCormick is a Project Manager. Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist. On February 24th, President Trump signed Executive Order 13777, calling on all government agencies to recommend regulations for “potential repeal, replacement, or modification.” As of this writing, EPA has received 46,050 comments on its regulatory reform process. Interestingly, the overwhelming majority of these […]

The post Our health protections at risk: TSCA reform undone by “regulatory reform”? first appeared on EDF Health.

By Lindsay McCormick

Lindsay McCormick is a Project Manager. Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.

On February 24th, President Trump signed Executive Order 13777, calling on all government agencies to recommend regulations for “potential repeal, replacement, or modification.” As of this writing, EPA has received 46,050 comments on its regulatory reform process. Interestingly, the overwhelming majority of these comments come from individuals across the country voicing their support for strengthening EPA’s regulatory protections, demonstrating that Americans stand strong in their opposition to regulatory roadblocks and rollbacks.

In compliance with this executive order, EPA held a stakeholder meeting last week to identify “regulatory reform” opportunities under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

The irony – and absurdity – of this process is that not even a year ago, Congress passed, with overwhelming bipartisan support, sweeping reforms to TSCA, finally providing EPA with new tools and authority to review and manage chemicals more effectively. The need for a credible regulatory agency—one able to make timely, independent, science-based decisions about chemical safety—was seen by all parties as essential to increase public confidence in the safety of chemicals. Under-regulation, not over-regulation, has been the clear problem in this arena for decades. 

EDF has submitted comments addressing the impact of this anti-regulatory process on implementing TSCA. EDF’s comments specifically address four actions that EPA has initiated or recently taken that are now under attack:

1. Early Actions: EPA recently proposed bans – for the first time in nearly 30 years – of high-risk uses of three dangerous chemicals: trichloroethylene, dichloromethane, and N-methylpyrrolidone. Congress specifically authorized EPA to take these early actions to demonstrate that the new law was working. EDF has urged EPA leadership to follow and act on the science – which clearly points to the unreasonable risks of these chemicals – and not allow companies with a vested interest in these toxic chemicals to use this anti-regulatory process to derail these critical health protections. (You, too, can urge EPA to do so, here.)
2. New Chemicals: Prior to TSCA reform, hundreds of new chemicals were allowed on the market every year without any demonstration that they were safe. Over the past year, EPA has made major improvements to its New Chemicals Review Program. However, some industry representatives are now attacking the program based on false assertions and are suggesting actions that are inconsistent with the law. Our comments address these claims.
3. Framework Rules: The Lautenberg Act mandates that EPA develop three “framework” procedural rules to establish a robust system to identify, review, and manage chemicals already in commerce. The rules are required to be finalized by June (one year after the law’s enactment).  All three were proposed in January, and have gone through public comment. We strongly oppose consideration of these rules in the regulatory reform process: Not only are these rules mandated by law and not yet finalized, but stakeholders have been provided ample opportunity to comment on the rules, including on opportunities to create efficiencies.
4. Nanomaterial Reporting: In January, EPA finalized a TSCA section 8 nanomaterial reporting rule after more than a decade of delay. The rule will finally allow EPA to obtain basic risk-relevant information on such Nanomaterials often exhibit unique properties that can allow for novel applications, but those same properties also present the potential for novel or enhanced negative impacts on health or the environment. We have strongly urged EPA to retain and not further delay this rule, as such information has been identified by numerous expert bodies as essential to understand and manage their potential risks.

The agency is just starting to implement the new system mandated by Congress to better protect the public’s health from toxic chemical exposures. Taking anti-regulatory aim at TSCA’s vital new protections will only further undermine public and market confidence in EPA and do nothing to provide the stability that the business community sought through TSCA reform.

We invite those interested in weighing in on behalf of protecting health and the environment to submit their own comments (feel free to use our comments as a resource). EPA is accepting comments to the docket until May 15th.