RICHMOND, Va. — Environmental groups plan to speak out against the Trump administration's rollback of regulations that have cut mercury emissions at coal-fired power plants by 85 percent in the last decade.
The Environmental Protection Agency's daylong public hearing tackles proposed changes to an Obama administration rule, known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. Utility companies say the rule has cost them $18 billion so far to reduce emissions from coal-plant smokestacks.
Despite those cleanup efforts, Shenandoah Riverkeeper Mark Frondorf said more work is necessary at chemical plants like the former DuPont facility - now known as Invista - in Waynesboro, which stopped its mercury contamination in the 1950s.
"Sixty-nine years later, we still have fish consumption advisories in the Shenandoah River, we have fish consumption advisories in the South River, and it's impacted the environment,” Frondorf said.
The Trump administration argues it is "providing regulatory certainty" by accurately estimating the costs of the rule. Frondorf will testify against the rule changes during today's public hearing at EPA headquarters in Washington. The hearing will run from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
Mercury causes brain damage, learning disabilities and other birth defects in children, among other problems. Frondorf said the mercury levels are so high in the South River, government officials have issued warnings saying no fish, with the exception of trout, should be consumed from the river.
"If you have an 8-year-old boy that you want to take fishing, are you really going to take them to the South River and let him eat trout, or let her eat trout, just because they say they're the only fish safe to eat?” Frondorf questioned. “So, it’s also impacted not just the environment, but also the economy of that area down there."
Frondorf added changing the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards now would also affect all the plants that have already invested in upgrades over the years to reduce their pollution output.
get more stories like this via email
A coalition of advocacy groups has helped defeat a bill in the Idaho Legislature which would have given the pesticide industry blanket immunity from liability lawsuits.
The Pesticide Immunity Bill, Senate Bill 1245, was defeated 15-to-19 Friday by the Republican-controlled state Senate. The coalition was led by the Idaho Conservation League and included the Northwest Center for Alternatives to Pesticides, the Idaho Trial Lawyers Association and the Idaho Association of Resource Councils.
Jonathan Oppenheimer, governmental relations director for the Idaho Conservation League, said the motivation for them was consumer protection.
"We're not coming at this from a perspective of 'pesticides shouldn't be used,'" Oppenheimer explained. "We're coming at this from a perspective of, 'there should be justice for those who may be harmed by using products if they are not warned about those potential health consequences.'"
Oppenheimer noted the Senate's five Democrats joined with a group of right-wing Republicans to defeat the Idaho bill. He pointed out the pesticide industry is pushing similar bills in several other states, including Missouri. Iowa and Florida.
Liability-lawsuit immunity is controversial. Businesses argued it keeps them from getting hit with multimillion-dollar settlements, while consumer advocates countered it closes the courthouse door. Oppenheimer emphasized pesticide users who get sick would have little recourse.
"The pesticide industry is seeking broad immunity that would shield them from "failure to warn" claims that basically relate to the label that is provided on the pesticide products," Oppenheimer outlined. "As long as that label is approved by EPA and that the pesticide is approved for use in the United States, they would be immune from any liability under state law or federal law because federal law defers to the states relative to liability."
Only a few major industries have either federal or state immunity from lawsuits. The best known are firearms manufacturers and the computer technology sector. In addition, most federal, state and local governments are immune when they are performing statutory duties.
get more stories like this via email
Wildlife advocates are urging New York Gov. Kathy Hochul to sign what's known as the Birds and Bees Protection Act.
The bill bans neonicotinoids, a neurotoxic pesticide used to coat plants and seeds, since numerous studies have linked these chemicals to massive bee and pollinator die-offs. Between 2020 and 2021, it is estimated beekeepers lost more than 45% of their colonies.
Daniel Raichel, acting director of the pollinator initiative for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said it is more than a warning.
"Bees are effectively 'canaries in the coal mine' for a much broader hollowing out of ecosystems that we see across the board; basically, hollowing them out from the bottom up," Raichel explained. "We see mass losses of insect life, with ripple effects to birds and fish."
He added the pesticides can affect human health, including muscle tremors, lower testosterone levels and birth defects. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates more than half of the U.S. population has been exposed to neonicotinoids on a regular basis, with the greatest exposure among children ages 3-5.
The bill is expected to be on the governor's desk soon.
The legislation was originally introduced in 2017, with changes made in the years since then. Raichel noted opposition came primarily from the chemical companies manufacturing 'neonic' products, but after a 2021 report from Cornell University explored the issue further, the bill gained traction.
"We were told, 'Hey, the state is looking into the science on this. Let's wait for the science,'" Raichel recounted. "The science came out in 2020. The bill adapted to the science, and here we are, right? The science is clearer than ever."
Raichel added signing the bill would curb improper use in New York of chemicals proven to be highly toxic. One recent study showed neonicotinoids make up 92% of the increase in toxins found in insect populations.
get more stories like this via email
Environmental groups say a proposal to cut $4 billion from the Environmental Protection Agency budget would gut the regulations designed to clean up toxic chemicals from public water systems in Illinois and across the country.
A group of House Republicans is demanding the cuts in exchange for their votes to keep the government from shutting down later his month, but they would jeopardize federal plans to eliminate "forever chemicals" known as PFAS found in U.S. water supplies.
Betsy Sutherland, who had directed EPA's Office of Science and Technology and worked on water issues, said this isn't the time to play politics with cleaning up the environment.
"Budget cuts will have real consequences for EPA's ability to protect human health and the environment," she said, "not just from PFAS, but from every environmental threat our country is facing."
These chemicals are among the most persistent toxic compounds in existence, contaminating everything from drinking water to food, packaging and personal-care products -- and they never break down in the environment. Illinois ranks in the middle of the pack for the level of PFAS in the state. Neighboring Michigan has among the highest rates in the country.
A bill in the House Appropriations Committee, which funds the EPA, proposes cutting the agency's budget by more than one-third in fiscal year 2024. If the measure is approved, Sutherland said, EPA funding would plummet to levels unseen in three decades.
"The cuts are incredibly short-sighted," she said. "Two weeks ago, EPA released PFAS monitoring data for 2,000 drinking water systems that show multiple PFAS chemicals are in the drinking water of over 26 million people."
John Reeder, vice president for federal affairs at the Environmental Working Group, said most PFAS emanate from the air emissions of industrial plants. He said the group's Federal PFAS Report Card found these chemicals in all 50 states, but industrial regions such as the Upper Midwest had the most sites.
"We hope that Congress is listening," he said. "Budget cuts for EPA, as well as DoD's cleanup program, have real consequences and would likely delay protection for millions of people exposed to PFAS, including many environmental-justice communities."
get more stories like this via email