G1. Progressive Green

by Victor Menotti, DCJ US Coordinator

Collapse of World Trade Organization’s 13th Ministerial (WTO MC13) is good news for climate justice because the Abu Dhabi agenda was old free-trade-wine in new greenwashed-bottles.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) reports 40% of global GHG emissions have happened since WTO was established in 1995, with WTO’s export-driven economic model intensifying use of fossil fuels while reducing protections for the environment and equity. If trade ministers want to help counter today’s climate crisis, they should support UN climate convention commitments for the transfer of climate-friendly technologies by allowing developing countries to waive monopoly patent rights enforced by WTO’s Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights.

Too many trade ministers still see more “trade in environmental goods and services” as their main solution on offer. Given the disaster for small farmers resulting from 30 years of WTO rules on farm subsidies, and now seeing the similar disaster that would befall small-scale fisherfolk from WTO’s proposed rules on fisheries subsidies, we are relieved there is no new WTO mandate to now take up fossil fuel subsidies; this urgent challenge must happen in another venue guaranteeing their equitable elimination.

Outcomes from Abu Dhabi for WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment (CTE) almost included language to keep WTO from expanding its mandate over climate and energy policies, emphasizing instead that trade officials explore the impacts of unilateral trade measures in climate policies by developed countries that unfairly hit developing countries.

The Philippines had proposed a paragraph for the official outcome document, but ultimately was not accepted, calling for WTO’s CTE “foster dialogue…on trade related aspects of environmental measures and their effects on market access, and on experiences of environmental and climate technology transfer, particularly focusing on needs of developing and least developed countries.”

The EU’s Green New Deal imposes a Carbon Border Adjustment Measure (CBAM) to “establish a level playing field” between European companies and imports from countries with lower pollution standards.

However, UNCTAD studies show CBAM would prevent only 0.1 percent of global emissions while raising revenue in the EU by $2.5 billion yet costing developing countries $5.9 billion, resulting in a substantial transfer of wealth from rich to poor.

Developed countries should instead deliver on their commitments from thirty years ago in the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to provide finance and technology to developing countries who have much less historical responsibility for creating today’s climate crisis. For example, North America’s 4% of the global population is responsible for almost 25% of the global emissions since 1850, whereas Southern Asia’s 25% of the global population produced only 4% of the global emissions, according to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

WTO’s most significant contribution to countering today’s climate crisis could be to facilitate UNFCCC commitments for the transfer of climate-friendly technologies by allowing developing countries to waive patent rights enforced by WTO’s Agreement on Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). TRIPs currently keeps costs too high for developing countries who want to use cleaner technologies.

The post WTO’s creep into climate policy fails, for now… appeared first on Global Campaign to Demand Climate Justice.

The output of Russian nuclear power plants in 2023 decreased by 2.8% compared to 2022. A decrease in output occurred for the first time in 10 years and only the second time in 20 years – the last one was in 2013. This seemingly purely internal event can actually tell a lot about the state of the Russian nuclear industrial giant and show several key points that are important both for Russia’s neighboring countries and for the prospects of Rostom’s foreign projects and its role in the global nuclear market in the next few years.   

According to The Federal Service for State Statistics (Rosstat), nuclear power plant output in 2023 amounted to 217 billion kWh. This is 6.4 billion kWh less than the 2022 figure of 223.4 billion kWh, which became a record for the entire time of the Russian and Soviet nuclear industry. The output indicator of a nuclear power plant is extremely important for a state corporation that is proud of the fulfillment of important government tasks – both in state defense orders (nuclear weapons and their carriers), in the volume of transportation along the Northern Sea Route and the construction of nuclear icebreakers, and in foreign projects. In terms of electricity generation, Rosatom has also been given a task personally by Vladimir Putin – to achieve 25% of the share of nuclear energy in the country’s energy balance by 2045, compared to about 18%-20% in recent years.  

Therefore, the annual increase in electricity generation has always been an important indicator of which Rosatom was publicly proud. It is no coincidence that Rosatom has still not publicly announced the exact output figures for 2023, more than a month after the end of the year, since they show both a decrease in output from year to year and a decrease in the share of nuclear energy in the country’s energy balance to 18.4% (it has been declining for the 4th year in a row). And in the coming years it will not be easy to even keep these indicators at their previous values. 

Historical electricity generation by Russian nuclear power plants from 1991 to 2023 and the share of nuclear energy in total electricity generation in Russia. Author’s graph based on Rosstat data.

The decline in output itself was expected for those who closely follow events in the Russian nuclear industry. And Rosatom itself, at the level of statements made by not top officials, recognized the upcoming difficulties. Commenting at the beginning of 2023 on the high output figures of 2022, First Deputy General Director for NPP operation, and since June 2023, General Director of Rosenergoatom concern (Electric Energy Division of Rosatom), Alexander Shutikov, said: “By optimizing repair campaigns and increasing the efficiency of electricity production, we were able to support until 2023 there is a constant increase in the level of production, but miracles do not happen. The output for the next three years will be lower. We know this and are ready for it.”  

The forecast indicators reflected what was said in words. For 2023, the state target for the production of Russian nuclear power plants, agreed with the federal antimonopoly service, was 214.2 billion kWh, which is almost 2% lower than a year earlier. This reduction allowed Rosatom to once again report on exceeding the state target, elegantly veiling the decline in output in absolute terms. At the same time, Rosenergoatom failed to achieve its own target of 218.8 billion kWh.  

The main reason for this natural decline is the aging of the country’s nuclear fleet and the gradual closure of old power units, to replace which there is no time to build new capacities. In recent years, 4 large first-generation RBMK uranium-graphite reactors at the Leningrad and Kursk NPPs, which had exhausted their service life in 45 years, have been closed in Russia. The last one was just the other day, on January 31, 2024. But they were replaced by only two VVER-1200 units at Leningrad NPP-2. New units at Kursk NPP-2 lag behind the closure of old reactors by at least 3 years. This is precisely what accounts for the three-year period of expected decline. It is curious that the previous decline in nuclear power plant output in Russia in 2013 was also associated with first-generation RBMK reactors, which were taken out for repairs to carry out work to restore the parameters of the graphite stack.  

In such conditions, when no new capacities are commissioned, it is possible to maintain or increase electricity generation only through more efficient and trouble-free operation of existing capacities. This actually happened to be done in 2022, perhaps at the cost of a partial shift in some repairs to next year, but not in 2023. As Shutikov rightly noted, miracles do not happen.  

Although in the first six months of 2023, the concern apparently had such hope, and the stations worked beyond the plan, so that Rosenergoatom in June even increased its annual production targets, reaching 218.8 billion kWh instead of the approved 214.2 billion kWh. However, in the end, it was still not possible to reach it (otherwise this would have been solemnly announced). Summing up the results of 2023, Shutikov said that despite exceeding the indicators at eight stations, three nuclear power plants failed to fulfill their production plans – Leningrad, Novovoronezh and Beloyarsk. Indeed, it was precisely in them, and precisely in the second half of the year, that serious unscheduled equipment failures occurred. 

What exactly went wrong at the Leningrad, Novovoronezh and Beloyarsk nuclear power plants with the newest reactors in Russia

It is easy to see that the main problems in 2023 were at stations with the newest and most promising reactors – VVER-1200 and BN. It was the VVER-1200 reactors, first built at the second stages of the Novovoronezh and Leningrad NPPs, that became the main export product for Rosatom – first Russian powerful generation 3+ PWRss. The corporation is building them at 14 of 19 power units at its foreign projects in Turkey, Egypt, China and Bangladesh, and has already launched them at two units of the Belarusian NPP completed last year. And the fast sodium reactors BN-800 and BN-600 at the Beloyarsk NPP are prototypes of promising 4th generation reactors.  

More specifically, at the Novovoronezh Nuclear Power Plant (NVNPP), problems arose precisely at the very first VVER-1200 in the country, at the 6th unit, launched in 2016. In 2023, it underwent a major overhaul with the replacement of the turbogenerator stator. This is the first equipment of its kind with such power, with water cooling, manufactured by the Russian JSC Power Machines. As Rosatom itself writes, quite soon after the unit was launched, an increased level of vibration was detected in this stator. For the next unit, NVNPP-7, commissioned in 2019, a modernized stator has already been installed. And on the first-born it was replaced only in 2023. The entire complex overhaul lasted 82 days.  

But, in addition to this, during the year the unit was disconnected from the grid 6 more times (!) for small (from several hours to 5 days) unplanned repairs due to breakdowns of “electrical equipment”. In normal operation, units operate without such unscheduled shutdowns, and their presence may indicate problems with equipment that could not be eliminated or prevented during scheduled shutdowns for repairs and refueling. The NVNPP-7 unit with the second VVER-1200 at the station was also switched off for several days at the end of the year for this reason (problems with “electrical equipment”). As a result, NVNPP produced less in 2023 than planned.  

Novovoronezh NPP-2 with the first two VVER-1200 units in Russia, launched in 2016 and 2018. If we carry out continuous numbering of the station’s units, then these are units No. 6 and No. 7 of the Novovoronezh NPP. Photo: Rosenergoatom.

At the Leningrad NPP, the main problems were with the 5th unit. This is the first VVER-1200 at this site and the second in the country after NVNPP-6, launched in 2018. The main problem is that the unit stopped twice due to broken turbine blades in the low-pressure cylinder, which in general is a rather rare and very unpleasant occurrence. The first time, at the end of summer, it took 2 months to fix the breakdown; the second repair in the fall took more than 3 months. The turbine, by the way, is produced by the same Power Machines that produced them for all 4 VVER-1200s in the country. In addition, there were 2 more emergency stops to eliminate minor breakdowns, and this is not counting the stop for scheduled repairs and refueling. As a result, this unit stood idle for more than 6 (!) months in 2023. On the 6th unit, in addition to scheduled repairs and refueling, there were also 4 unscheduled shutdowns for short-term repairs. Summing up the station’s work in 2023, its director chose not to announce production figures at all.

The low-pressure cylinder of the turbine of unit No. 5 of the Leningrad NPP during installation. Photo: Rosenergoatom.

At the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant with two fast neutron reactors, the plan also failed to be fulfilled. The catch there was that the BN-600 (commissioned in 1980), which was being prepared for extended operation, was under repair for almost 5 months during the year. The BN-800, launched in 2015, in 2023 marked its first full year of operation on a full load of MOX fuel – mixed uranium-plutonium fuel made from nuclear materials recovered from the reprocessing of spent fuel from other reactors. This process itself, important for closing the nuclear fuel cycle and truly unique for the global nuclear industry, has become another cause for pride and advertising for Rosatom.  

But any technical achievement has a downside and consequences that usually do not come into the spotlight but fall on the shoulders of the operating personnel. After a second scheduled repair and refueling in October 2023, the unit operated at reduced power, and a couple of weeks later it had to be briefly shut down to “optimize operating parameters”, as was vaguely described in the station’s press release. And a month after the launch, the power had to be reduced again by almost half due to a “malfunction in the thermal-mechanical equipment”. Beloyarsk NPP is one of the smallest in Russia, however, its reduction in output by almost 1 billion kWh due to the problems described above contributed to Rosenergoatom’s overall performance.  

BN-800 reactor at unit No. 4 of the Beloyarsk NPP. Photo: Newspaper “Strana Rosatom”

Why is it important for us to know these details about the production of Russian nuclear power plants and what conclusions can a foreign reader who is interested in the environmental issues of Russian nuclear power and the foreign policy influence of the nuclear state corporation during the war in Ukraine draw for themselves? We can highlight at least three important aspects of the current situation.  

1. By 2030, Rosatom will be more focused on building nuclear power plants in Russia than abroad.

To achieve the goal of increasing the share of nuclear power generation in Russia to 25% by 2045 and replacing retired capacities, Rosatom urgently needs to begin massive construction of new units. According to our calculations, published in the Bellona report on the Russian nuclear industry, if this is not done, then by 2035 the total capacity of the Russian nuclear fleet will be reduced by a third, and by 2045 – by almost half from the current level of 29.5 GW.  

Currently, only three units are being built in Russia – two 1250 MW VVER-TOI units at Kursk NPP-2 and a 300 MW BREST-OD reactor in Seversk. However, permission has already been received for the construction of two more VVER-1200 at Leningrad NPP-2, and in total, according to the current general scheme, Rosatom plans to build 10 large power units by 2035. By 2030, 8 of them will be under construction with a total capacity of 9 GW. 

Abroad, at the beginning of 2024, Rosatom is constructing 19 nuclear power units at 7 nuclear power plants in 6 countries: 4 each in Turkey, Egypt, China, India, two in Bangladesh and one in Iran. By 2030, almost all of them should be completed, except maybe 1-2. According to current contracts and discussed plans, most likely by 2030, two more units will be under construction in Hungary at the Paks-2 nuclear power plant, two units at the nuclear power plant in Uzbekistan, and construction of 2 to 4 new units will possibly begin in India. However, Rosatom has not signed new contracts for the construction of units in recent years. Potentially, if luck is on Rosatom’s side, then in the coming years it may receive contracts for the construction of a second nuclear power plant in Turkey, another nuclear power plant in India, it is possible to win a tender for two units in Kazakhstan, and receive several more orders in China, which are rarely widely known in advance announced, as well as bring the intentions for the construction of nuclear power plants in African countries to the level of contracts. However, even if new projects appear in the coming years, it is still unlikely that by 2030 they will reach the construction stage. In total, by 2030, Rosatom will be constructing from 6 to 10 large nuclear units abroad. We are deliberately not considering SMR projects yet due to their smaller power scale.  

Thus, according to known plans and projects, the volume of construction of large nuclear power units with the participation of Rosatom in the world will be reduced from 22 at the beginning of 2024 to 14-18 by 2030, i.e. by 20-40%. At the same time, the share of foreign projects will decrease by almost half, from about 90% now (19 out of 22) to about 55% (no more than 10 out of 18) in 2030. Thus, in 6 years, Rosatom will be more focused on building nuclear power plants inside Russia than abroad, and the total volume of construction of large blocks under his projects may decrease by a third. Only the sudden start in the coming years of new Rosatom projects in China in the amount of at least 4 large blocks can maintain the total volume of construction by 2030.  

If Western countries, as part of the sanctions pressure on Russia due to the outbreak of the war in Ukraine, plan to use various measures to restrain Rosatom’s foreign expansion in developing countries, then in the coming years “natural” reasons will come to their aid, since Rosatom will be more occupied with resolving issues within Russia.  

2. Rosatom is forced to extend the service life of those old units that it had not previously planned to extend. 

Even the announced plans for large-scale construction in the next 10 years will most likely not be enough for Rosatom to compensate for the impending failure with the withdrawal of old units. Therefore, in recent years, Rosatom has started talking about extending for another 5 years (up to 50 years of operation) 7 operating second-generation RBMK-1000 reactors and the first two units of the Kola NPP to 65 years. Just a couple of years ago, no one publicly voiced such plans. And even its director is not yet sure about the possibility of extending two VVER-440 units at the Kola NPP. 

Such an extension of the units’ operation should allow Rosenergoatom to avoid a whole wave of closures of old units in the coming years and maintain a stable level of output until the commissioning of new capacities after 2030.  

Despite the fact that extending the life of units is a common global practice, such decisions must be carefully considered and assessed for each unit individually, and carried out in conditions of transparency of the decisions made. A closed procedure may carry risks not only of future accidents or equipment failures, but also risks of cost overruns and public fears. 

NPP Units inside Russia, which will be under construction stage by 2030. Compared to the situation at the beginning of 2024. Author’s infographics.

In addition, all these reactors are located closest to the western borders of Russia. In particular, RBMK reactors at the Leningrad, Kursk and Smolensk nuclear power plants are located no further than 70 km from the European borders. All of them are Chernobyl-type reactors. All such reactors abroad, in Lithuania and Ukraine, have already been shut down due to political and safety concerns. The Kola Nuclear Power Plant is located 100 km from the border with Finland, is the world’s largest nuclear power plant beyond the Arctic Circle and one of the oldest nuclear power plants in Russia. Therefore, extending the operation of these reactors for another 5 years may cause already existing concerns among neighboring countries both about the possible consequences for themselves and for the Arctic region as a whole. Moreover, in the context of the current confrontation between Russia and the West, a full-fledged international dialogue to reduce concerns on these issues will be impossible. However, in conditions of war, the concerns of neighboring Western countries on this issue will not play any significance for the Russian authorities.  

3. The quality of Rosatom projects in foreign markets depends on cooperation with foreign partners in terms of turbine equipment. 

The third important aspect concerns the provision of Rosatom’s foreign projects with domestic equipment. As we can see from the example of problems in 2023, many of them were related specifically to the quality of equipment at VVER-1200 power units, namely in terms of turbine equipment produced by JSC Power Machines. On foreign projects, Rosatom offers foreign customers its main export project of the VVER-1200 power unit with the option of choosing a supplier of engine room equipment.  

For example, for 4 VVER-1200 units in China at the Tianwan NPP and Xudapu NPP, Rosatom supplies only nuclear island equipment. And China equips turbine halls with equipment of its own production. Most other projects, in particular all 4 units at Akkuyu NPP in Turkey, 4 units at El Dabaa NPP in Egypt, two planned units at Paks II NPP in Hungary and the canceled Hanhikivi single-unit NPP project in Finland were or are expected to be installed French Arabelle turbines from Alstom Power Systems (owned by the French Alstom, and previously, from 2016 to 2022, by General Electric). 

Equipment for turbine halls from Power Machines was produced in the amount of 8 pieces – for 4 VVER-1200 in Russia, two units of the Belarusian NPP (where they also had problems) and for two units under construction at the Rooppur NPP in Bangladesh. 

Thus, the direct participation of Western industrial companies, in particular French ones, allows Rosatom to offer foreign customers who have the opportunity to choose more competitive products or increase the chances of winning tenders. If the West is seriously concerned about how to limit Rosatom’s activity in third countries, then reducing cooperation in the supply of turbine units for new projects could be a serious and significant step.  

Conclusions

A decrease in output from Russian nuclear power plants is an expected and natural stage in the development of the country’s nuclear energy industry, which is experiencing a period of aging of a certain part of its nuclear fleet. In recent decades, Rosatom has taken a leading position in the construction of nuclear power plants abroad, but has delayed the construction phase of replacement capacities within the country. Over the next 5 years, there will be a gradual reorientation of Rosatom’s activities from foreign nuclear power plant construction projects to domestic ones. At the same time, the quality of Russian turbine equipment still leads to periodic technical problems and is mainly used on domestic Russian projects. It is unlikely that the situation will change quickly in the coming years, therefore, in many cases of competitive selection of projects, the success of Rosatom’s new export proposals for the construction of nuclear power plants will depend on effective cooperation with foreign, primarily Western, partners. And in the future, perhaps even Chinese. 

The post Rosatom’s output dropped over the last year. We look at three reasons why appeared first on Bellona.org.

Safer sprayers: Options for spring cleaning JR Culpepper March 13, 2024

*/ /*-->*/ /*-->*/ /*-->*/

It’s official: spring is right around the corner. With the warmer weather and the season’s holidays approaching, people everywhere are dusting window sills, wiping counters and spraying bathrooms. But think twice before using your usual cleaning supplies.

Some contain potentially harmful chemicals, or may not be fully transparent about their product formulas, so you don’t know what’s in them.

To help you sort through the clutter of cleaning products, we’ve searched EWG's Guide to Healthy Cleaning and assembled a quick and easy list of some of the safest general purpose spray cleaners that are also available at big box stores like CVS, Walgreens, Walmart and Target. 

Each product on this list is rated either an A or a B in EWG's Guide to Healthy Cleaning, which rates over 2,500 cleaning products on a scale of A through F, based on their hazard level and ingredient transparency. 

Some of the products are EWG VERIFIED®. Products carrying this mark are reviewed by our scientists to ensure that they are produced according to the strictest health and transparency standards, are formulated without EWG’s ingredients of concern and publicly disclose their ingredients.

For product ratings on the go try our Healthy Living App.

EWG VERIFIED products ATTITUDE Nature + All-Purpose Cleaner, Unscented

Available online at Walmart, $13; Amazon, $11.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Green rated products: Fantastik Commercial All Purpose Cleaner

Available at Walmart, CVS, Walgreens $4-6; Amazon, $3.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details LYSOL Hydrogen Peroxide Action Multi-Purpose Cleaner

Available at Walmart, Target $4-8; Amazon, $3.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Seventh Generation Disinfecting Multi-Surface Cleaner

Available at Walmart, Target, CVS, $5-10; Amazon, $18, pack of 4.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Fit Organic Multi-Surface Cleaner & Degreaser

Available at Walmart, $15

View details EverSpring All Purpose Cleaner, citrus and basil

Available at Target $2.99; Amazon, $3.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details

Protecting your right to know

In order to choose safer cleaning products, it’s important to have access to information about the chemicals in these products. A concerning bill in Congress, if enacted, would deny consumers the right to find out what toxic chemicals are in cleaning products. At EWG, we’ve dubbed it the DARK Act.

This legislation, H.R. 5978, not only seeks to override state laws creating more transparency about cleaning product ingredients but also sets up an endless regulatory process that, at best, would yield a far weaker chemical disclosure system. The enactment of this bill would, without a doubt, result in a significantly reduced disclosure of chemicals, and consumers who are far less informed.

Please contact your representatives in Congress and urge them to stand up for your rights and oppose H.R. 5978. 

Spring cleaning tips

Here are some tips to further minimize exposure to harmful chemicals in cleaning products:

• Whenever possible, open a window to ventilate the cleaning area.
• Use gloves and other protective gear while handling cleaning products.
• Follow instructions and pay attention to warnings provided on product labels.
• Avoid mixing different cleaning products, since it can lead to the release of hazardous fumes.
• Remember to store cleaning products securely when you aren’t using them, to prevent accidental exposure.

###

Areas of Focus Cleaning Supplies Toxic Chemicals Chemical Policy Disqus Comments Authors JR Culpepper March 14, 2024

Cy pres support rcoleman March 13, 2024

In class action lawsuits, courts use cy pres to award any unallocated, unclaimed or undeliverable funds from a settlement or judgment to a non-profit organization.

As a national leader on the impact of chemicals on human health, EWG is an excellent candidate for cy pres funding. These funds may come from money awarded in  lawsuits related to environmental harm or consumer protection. These lawsuits stem from misleading claims about the health and safety of products.

Cy pres awards directly support EWG’s work shining a spotlight on outdated legislation, harmful agricultural practices and industry loopholes that pose a risk to our health and the health of our environment. EWG uses cy pres funds to support our: 

• Research and education. Enhance our research into harmful chemicals in consumer products, food, and water, and educate the public and policymakers about our findings.
• Advocacy. Support legislative and regulatory advocacy efforts aimed at reducing exposure to harmful chemicals and promoting transparency in labeling.
• Consumer guides. Develop and update consumer guides, like EWG’s Skin Deep® cosmetics database and the Shopper's Guide to Pesticides in Produce™, to help consumers make safer choices.

 To help support our mission through cy pres, please email Wes at wes.pyron@ewg.org

Enviva officially declared bankruptcy. They profited from excessive carbon emissions, destroying forests, and polluting communities is on the verge of collapse.

The post Statement: World’s Largest Wood Pellet Company Declares Bankruptcy first appeared on Dogwood Alliance.

Yokosuka’s Mayor Katsuaki Kamiji has attracted worldwide attention by demanding the Navy release PFAS test results of treated sewer water routinely discharged into Tokyo Bay.The sewer water contains dangerous levels of PFOS and PFOA, two highly carcinogenic compounds.

By Pat Elder
March 13, 2024

There are hundreds of products containing carcinogenic PFAS that are routinely used and discarded by the U.S. Navy at Yokosuka. Here we have four products made with PFAS that the U.S. military says are irreplaceable because of national security concerns.

The tape is made of Poly Tetra Fluoro Ethylene (PTFE), a kind of PFAS, known commercially as Teflon.  Nothing works better, although there is no way to safely dispose of this product in Japan without jeopardizing human life. The same is true with the other products shown here.

3M’s 74 Spray Adhesive bonds foam and fabric to a wide range of substances - better than anything. Viton, a product of the Chemours Company, is made with PFAS and is added to synthetic rubber. Nothing else does a better job and nothing cleans engine parts better than PFAS chemicals.  3M’s Novec Cleaner is loaded with PFAS. It is all irreplaceable, according to the U.S. military.

PFAS is superman.

An open letter to Katsuaki Kamiji, Mayor of Yokosuka City, Japan

Katsuaki Kamiji, Mayor of Yokosuka City, Japan

Dear Mayor Kamiji,

Your Request to the Japanese Minister of Defense (Feb 20, 2024) addressing carcinogenic PFAS entering the sea through the wastewater treatment facility at United States Fleet Activities Yokosuka is a historic document. You are a champion of human health over political expediency!

You have repeatedly asked for the results of the PFAS testing of the effluent at Fleet Activities Yokosuka, but the U.S. Navy refuses to respond. This is indefensible. The people of the great city of Yokosuka, Japan should be entitled to know the levels of the carcinogens routinely discharged into Tokyo Bay.

We must understand the history to confront the injustice taking place while the U.S. Navy continues to pollute the region and withholds scientific data concerning the environmental devastation.

In September, 2022, the U.S. Navy shocked the world when it released data showing Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) at 12,900 ppt (parts per trillion) in industrial wastewater at United States Fleet Activities Yokosuka. Mainichi Shimbun reported that 8,592 ppt of PFOS were detected in the wastewater discharged from the base's treatment plant.

Mr. Mayor, you understand that these carcinogens are so powerful that one part per trillion in the Tokyo Bay’s water can contaminate aquatic, plant, and animal life. PFOA tends to congregate in the solid waste at wastewater treatment plants, so it is important to know how the PFOA-loaded sewer sludge is being “disposed.” If it is spread on farm fields, the crops are likely to be poisonous. Incinerating the material typically fails to break the compounds down, resulting in poisoned skies, rain, soil, and seas. 

PFOS may bioaccumulate in fish filet up to 2,000 times the levels in the water. Yokosuka is in big trouble and so is Tokyo Bay, where industries and the military in the great cities of Tokyo, Kawasaki, Yokohama, and Yokosuka routinely discharge these chemicals into Tokyo Bay.

PFOS concentrations in the liver and blood of five species of fish in Tokyo Bay are shown here in parts per trillion.  

PFHxS and PFBS were also found at dangerous levels in the fish. Many other PFAS compounds are known to bioaccumulate in fish tissue.

People are alarmed when PFAS levels exceed 50 ppt in drinking water, but few are thinking about the fish.

Env. Sci & Tech, 2003

These chemicals infiltrate the water. They coat the sediment of the bays, rivers, and the ocean. They become part of the coastal shoreline and are dried by the sun and lifted by the wind. The carcinogens PFOA, PFOS, and PFHxS have been found in dust in homes in millions of parts per trillion near military installations in the U.S., threatening the smallest children.

The chief pathway to human ingestion, however, is through the fish we consume.

Mayor Kamiji, Although I only possess an embarrassing and cursory understanding of Japanese intellect, history, and culture, I don’t believe the Japanese people comprehend the threat here, although you sure do.

I remember reading a statement from your office in 2022 expressing concern for the fishing industry considering the levels of PFOS being released by the Navy.

This is astounding!

You understand the carcinogen PFOS bioaccumulates in fish and you’re willing to say it publicly. This is the mark of a great statesperson. I still cannot find a single Maryland politician willing to say the fish in the Chesapeake watershed are poisoned by the military’s activities.

We are all subjects to the same authority, and I don’t think the Japanese people are being singled out for harsh treatment if that makes you feel any better. The United States Navy has poisoned the seawater and fish here in Maryland as well, and we are also powerless to do much about it.

When we see elevated blood levels among segments of the Japanese population it is the result of eating the fish as well as drinking the water and breathing the dust and the air. 

Yokosuka, Japan September 24, 2023

In late 2022, the Navy installed the red granular activated carbon (GAC) filters shown here at the wastewater treatment facility. This occured after the city’s vehement reaction upon learning of the dangerous levels.  

Although GAC is effective in the removal of long-chain PFAS, the technology shows generally poorer performance in treating short-chain PFAS. Both short-chain and long-chain PFAS compounds are found in the seafood people eat.

On October 21, 2023, a year after installing the filters, the Navy suddenly reported that the operation of the granular activated carbon filters had stopped. The Navy told the city the values of PFOS, etc. were “stable.”

The Navy explained to the town that “It would be difficult to determine the cause (of PFAS releases) because the wastewater treatment facility processes all the wastewater from the large-scale Yokosuka naval facility.”

The mayor wrote that the GAC filters were discontinued after confirming that the water before and after passing through the granular activated carbon filter was below the provisional guideline values of 50 ppt. This may be true - at a certain moment in time – when mostly non-PFAS bearing waste streams flow in and out of newly installed GAC filters. But we don’t really know because the Navy won’t tell us.

The monitoring ought to be constant and the process must be transparent. People should know these levels like they know the day’s temperature.

Let’s examine how they’re using PFAS on base.

Congress directed the DOD to prepare a report outlining the uses of PFAS that are critical to the national security of the United States.  In response, the DOD published a report on Critical Per-and Polyfluoroalkyl substance uses in August, 2023.

The U.S. government recognized that individual U.S. states were increasingly passing laws restricting the use of PFAS. In response, the military carved out all of its uses of the toxins and deemed them to be necessary for national security -  the god of law.

Critical PFAS uses were identified in every major weapon system.

Here’s a quick listing of several broad categories of hundreds of ways the U.S. Forces Japan use PFAS.

A crime is inherent in the manufacture of each of these commodities.

·        Energy Storage and Batteries

·        Microelectronics and Semiconductors

·        Castings and Forgings and Strategic and Critical Minerals

·        Refrigeration and Air Conditioning, Cooling

·        Electronics Thermal Control

·        Fire Suppression in Naval Vessels, Aircraft and Vehicles

·        Aqueous Film Forming Foam

·        Lines, Hoses, O-Rings, Seals and Gaskets,

·        Tapes, and Cables and Connectors

·        Electronic/Dielectric Fluids

·        Advanced Oils, Greases, Fluids, and Lubricants

·        Precision Cleaning Fluids

·        Degreasing/Cleaning Fluids

·        Adhesives

·        Insulation and Foam Blowing

·        Resins for Specialty Materials

·        Specialty Filters and Membranes

·        Uniform fabrics, Fabric Liners, and Fabric Barriers        

              =====================

Mr. Mayor, You have spent too much time demanding accountability from the U.S. Forces Japan. Forget about the Status of Forces Agreement and the unfairness of it all. Verify the existence of the commercial products specifically mentioned in the DOD’s Report on Critical Uses of Per-and polyfluoroalkyl substances and go after the manufacturers of these products. 3M and Chemours come to mind. It is the only remedy available to you.

The  Downs Law Group  helps to make this work possible. Their support allows us to research and write about military contamination around the world.

The firm is working to provide legal representation to individuals in the U.S. and abroad with a high likelihood of exposure to trichloroethylene, PFAS, and other contaminants.

The Downs Law Group employs attorneys accredited by the Department of Veterans Affairs to assist those who have served in obtaining VA Compensation and Pension Benefits they are rightly owed.

If you spent time in the military and you think you or your dependents may be sick as a result of your service, think about joining this group to learn from others with similar issues.

Are you interested in joining a multi-base class action lawsuit pertaining to illnesses stemming from various kinds of environmental contamination? Contact James Bussey at busride1969@hotmail.com

Consider joining the Veterans & Civilians Clean Water Alliance Facebook group. 2,700 members and growing.

It’s time to ban toxic artificial coloring in school food rcoleman March 12, 2024

It’s good news that California will soon consider legislation to ban toxic artificial colors in the food offered in public schools.

The bill, introduced this week by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino), would ban six food colors that have been linked to behavioral difficulties like inattentiveness and impaired memory in some children, and titanium dioxide, which has been associated with chromosomal damage (Figure 1).

The percentage of children and adolescents diagnosed with ADHD has nearly doubled in the past 20 years. So prohibiting schools from offering food with chemicals that may be contributing to behavioral difficulties makes sense – for students, parents and teachers.

The legislation, Assembly Bill 2316, would apply only to food offered in California public schools. It would not apply to food sold in retail stores or online. 

Schools can offer students plenty of options made without these harmful colors.

Using data from the Department of Agriculture’s Child Nutrition Food Programs and analysis by the Center for Science in the Public Interest, EWG found that few foods available in schools use the ingredients that A.B. 2316 would ban. The vast majority of school foods are already made without toxic chemicals linked to behavioral problems.

Many students from low-income and under-resourced backgrounds often rely on free meals provided at school, so this bill would help ensure that, at least when it comes to school food, a student’s socioeconomic status doesn’t determine their ability to eat food free of these toxic chemicals.

Figure 1. Artificial colors that A.B. 2316 would ban in school foods

Chemical Health risks Type of product Most recent FDA review Alternatives Red 40 Behavioral difficulties in children Cereal, ice cream, drinks, candy, popsicles, cheese-flavored chips, toaster pastries, yogurt, jellies, sprinkles, fruit cups 1971 Anthocyanins, black/purple carrot, elderberry, purple sweet potato, beet Yellow 5 Behavioral difficulties in children Cereal, ice cream, drinks, candy, popsicles, cheese-flavored chips, toaster pastries, sprinkles, fruit cups 1969 Annatto, saffron, turmeric, beta-carotene, paprika Yellow 6 Behavioral difficulties in children Cereal, ice cream, drinks, candy, popsicles, cheese-flavored chips, toaster pastries, sprinkles, fruit cups 1986 Annatto, saffron, turmeric, beta-carotene, paprika Blue 1 Behavioral difficulties in children Cereal, ice cream, drinks, popsicles, candy, sprinkles, yogurt 1969 Spirulina, butterfly pea flower extract, anthocyanin, red cabbage Blue 2 Behavioral difficulties in children Cereal, ice cream, drinks, popsicles, candy, sprinkles, yogurt 1983 Spirulina, butterfly pea flower extract, anthocyanin, red cabbage Green 3 Behavioral difficulties in children Cereal, ice cream, drinks, popsicles, candy, sprinkles 1982 Spirulina, chlorophyll, matcha Titanium dioxide (white pigment) Genotoxicity, immunotoxicity, inflammation Candy, salad dressing, processed desserts, frosting, cheese, canned soup 1973 Calcium carbonate, rice and corn starches and flours

The evidence linking behavioral problems to the consumption of synthetic food colors is compelling.

An exhaustive review by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA, concluded that consumption of these toxic food colors can result in behavioral difficulties in some children. The OEHHA’s scientists found that children vary in their sensitivity to synthetic food dyes – much as they do with food allergens.

The levels in food deemed “safe” by the Food and Drug Administration may not sufficiently protect children’s behavioral health, the scientists found. Those levels were established by the FDA decades ago and, according to OEHHA, do not reflect the latest research.

The experts said the FDA’s “acceptable daily intake” levels for synthetic food dyes are based on decades-old studies that were not designed to detect the types of behavioral effects that have been observed in children.

Several “challenge studies” assessed by OEHHA show that some children are likely to be more adversely affected by synthetic food dyes than others.

Animal studies also show that synthetic food dyes affect activity, memory and learning, change the way chemicals carry signals from one nerve to the next in the brain, and cause microscopic changes in brain structure.

The FDA’s failure to periodically review the safety of food chemicals, not just food colors, is well-documented.

Almost 99 percent of the food chemicals that have entered the marketplace since 2000 were reviewed by food and chemical companies, not the FDA. Even when the FDA does conduct its own review, decades typically pass before the FDA completes another review, if ever.

The FDA’s most recent list of chemicals “under review” includes only one of the seven food chemicals in the new California bill – titanium dioxide – and only because groups like EWG formally petitioned the agency to act.

Both titanium dioxide and Green Dye No. 3 are prohibited from all foods sold in the European Union, and three others can be used only if accompanied by warnings.

States should not wait for the FDA to act. California recently banned four toxic food chemicals from foods sold, manufactured or distributed in the state. Now California should go further by protecting our kids from toxic food colors when they're at school.

Areas of Focus Food & Water Food Family Health Children’s Health Toxic Chemicals Food Chemicals Regional Issues California Disqus Comments Authors Gianfranco Cesareo Bennett Rosenberg March 12, 2024

California bill seeks to keep school children safe from harmful food dyes JR Culpepper March 12, 2024

SACRAMENTO, Calif. – On March 12, a bill to ban six harmful food dyes and titanium dioxide from food provided in California’s public schools was introduced by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino).

If enacted, Assembly Bill 2316 would ban Red Dye No. 40, Yellow Dye No. 5, Yellow Dye No. 6, Blue Dye No. 1, Blue Dye No. 2 and Green Dye No. 3 and the food additive titanium dioxide. The chemicals have been linked to behavioral problems in children.

“California has a responsibility to protect our students from chemicals that harm children and that can interfere with their ability to learn,” said Gabriel. “As a lawmaker, a parent, and someone who struggled with ADHD, I find it unacceptable that we allow schools to serve foods with additives that are linked to cancer, hyperactivity and neurobehavioral harms.

This bill will empower schools to better protect the health and wellbeing of our kids and encourage manufacturers to stop using these dangerous additives.”

Last year, Gabriel successfully authored, and Gov. Gavin Newsom signed into law, the California Food Safety Act, which banned potassium bromate, propyl paraben, BVO and Red Dye No. 3 from food sold, delivered and manufactured in the state.

In 2021, the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment released a study finding that many food dyes and colorants are known to make some children vulnerable to behavioral difficulties and decreased attention.

Other human studies have linked these dyes to inattentiveness, learning difficulties and restlessness. And titanium dioxide has been shown to cause DNA damage and harm to the immune system. 

“Many children rely on school meals as a source of their daily nutrition and calorie intake,” said Tasha Stoiber, Ph.D., senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group. “Kids deserve wholesome foods that don’t negatively impact their ability to learn, and parents deserve the confidence that the schools they’re sending their kids to aren’t serving them food that may harm them.”

Assembly Bill 2316 is co-sponsored by EWG and Consumer Reports. The bill will be referred to a policy committee and receive its first hearing this spring.

Toxic chemicals

Thousands of chemicals are allowed for use in food sold in the U.S. Many of the food chemicals that the Food and Drug Administration has reviewed have not been evaluated for decades, even when new science is available. For instance:

• Titanium dioxide, which has been linked to damage to DNA and harm to the immune system, hasn’t been assessed since 1966. In 2022, the European Union prohibited it from use in food offered for sale, but it is still allowed in food sold in the U.S.
• Red Dye No. 40 has not been evaluated for health risks since 1971. Many studies show it may pose a risk to brain development in children, hyperactivity and even cancer.
• Yellow Dye No. 5 has been approved for use since 1931. The FDA affirmed its use with good manufacturing practices in 1969.
• Yellow Dye No. 6 was approved for use in 1931, and the FDA reaffirmed its use in 1986. 
• Blue Dye No. 1 has been approved for use since 1931. Its use was affirmed in 1969.
• Blue Dye No. 2 was last reviewed in 1983.
• Green Dye No. 3 has been allowed for use since 1931 and hasn’t been reviewed since 1982.

“Why are foods with these toxic dyes being served in schools?” said Susan Little, EWG’s senior advocate for California government affairs. 

“We know they are harmful, especially to some children. We need to protect this vulnerable group, especially from being exposed at school, a place where they eat meals and are expected to learn,” Little said.

“We appreciate Assemblymember Gabriel’s efforts to remove these harmful dyes and colorants from these products,” she added.

Children have lower tolerance levels to chemical exposure than adults, and their developing bodies make them especially vulnerable.  

“These dangerous dyes should not be allowed in foods sold in schools, because they put kids at risk for hyperactivity and other neurobehavioral issues,” said Brian Ronholm, director of food policy at Consumer Reports. 

“Removing these harmful dyes from school foods will protect the health and well-being of kids in California. Consumer Reports applauds Assemblyman Gabriel for introducing this critical food safety legislation,” he added.

Consumers consistently rank food chemical concerns ahead of other food safety issues. But the FDA does not adequately regulate additives. 

“The FDA continues to fail to keep us safe from harmful chemicals in our food,” said Melanie Benesh, EWG’s vice president of government affairs. “In the absence of federal leadership, states like California continue to step up to keep us safe from toxic chemicals we and our families enjoy.”

###

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Founded in 1936, Consumer Reports has a mission to create a fair and just marketplace for all. Widely known for our rigorous research and testing of products and services, we also survey millions of consumers each year, report extensively on marketplace issues, and advocate for consumer rights and protections around safety as well as digital rights, financial fairness, and sustainability. CR is independent and nonprofit.

Areas of Focus Family Health Children’s Health Toxic Chemicals Food Chemicals California Disqus Comments Press Contact Iris Myers iris@ewg.org (202) 939-9126 March 12, 2024

• 25 organisations are calling on the EU and governments across Europe to cap air traffic
• The coalition of groups have published a tribune ahead of two days of action in France and other European countries
• The organisations are local residents groups and climate activists campaigning against the five largest airports in Europe: Paris Charles de Gaulle, London Heathrow, Madrid Barajas, Frankfurt Airport, and Amsterdam Schiphol Airport
• Twenty mobilisations will take place in France on March 13 2024 to demand the Minister of Transport caps air traffic


 

March 12th – Residents groups and climate activists are calling on the EU and governments across Europe to cap air traffic as part of two days of action across Europe.

25 groups campaigning against Europe’s five largest airports have released a tribune calling for a capping of flights at airports, aerodromes and heliports below the 2019 level, in line with the historic decision taken at Amsterdam Schiphol Airport.

The tribune has been released ahead of two days of action taking place on 13th and 15th March. The groups are local residents groups and climate activists campaigning against the five largest airports in Europe: Paris Charles de Gaulle, London Heathrow, Madrid Barajas, Frankfurt Airport, and Amsterdam Schiphol Airport. Research has shown these five airports emit more than the whole of Sweden.

Twenty mobilisations will take place in France on March 13 2024 to demand the Minister of Transport caps air traffic. Following local actions, the associations will meet in Paris for a meeting at the Ministry of Transport on March 15th – an appointment confirmed by the minister’s office – which will be followed by a humorous musical event and speeches at 12:30 p.m. Actions will also be held in other European countries.

In the tribune, the groups also call for stronger curfews to be put in place at European airports.

The tribune states: “We, the victims of airport nuisance and present and future victims of global warming, call on our governments and on Europe to follow the necessary path opened up by the Netherlands by finally taking concrete measures: limiting and reducing the number of flights while ensuring that noise, air pollution and CO2 emissions are also brought down – and generalising curfews at airports, aerodromes and heliports.”

According to predictions from the aviation industry we could see air traffic levels double by 2040. This would hugely threaten both the climate and the health of local residents.

“Aviation is the fastest way to fry the planet“, says Magdalena Heuwieser, spokesperson from the Stay Grounded network. “Taking one flight generates more emissions than many people around the world emit in an entire year. We need to urgently cap flights at airport level. The attempts at Schiphol airport to reduce the amount of flights and ban private jets and night flights need to be applied in Paris and other airports“, she concludes.

PRESS CONTACT:

Lounes Dupeux, Stay Grounded, +33 6 11 67 96 40, lounes@stay-grounded.org

NOTES FOR EDITORS:

• The tribune and actions have been organised by UFCNA and Stay Grounded. Read the full tribune here: https://stay-grounded.org/capping-air-traffic-an-emergency-response-for-health-and-climate/
• Stay Grounded is a network for 215 member initiatives around the world, including community groups surrounding airports, NGOs, and trade unions. The network campaigns for a fair reduction of aviation and for a just mobility system that works for all, now and in the future.
• The UFCNA, French Union Against Aircraft Nuisances, is a national organisation which brings together the main French associations for the defence of the environment, protection of the quality of life and health of residents near airports.
• Mobilisations in France from March 13th and 15th:
  • List of cities where actions are taking place: Nice, Cannes-Mandelieu, Marseille, Lille, Beauvais, Bordeaux, Roissy, Orly, Toussus-le-Noble, Pontoise, Toulouse, Montpellier, Nantes, Aix-en-Provence, Saint-Etienne, Caen, Basel -Mulhouse, Rhône-Alpes, Villefranche-Beaujolais, Le Mans, as well as Liège!
  • An action for capping of air traffic will be held in Paris on March 15 at 12:30 p.m. in front of the Ministry of Ecological Transition, Hôtel de Roquelaure; 246, boulevard Saint-Germain; Paris 7th: https://www.facebook.com/events/925777472614867/

Der Beitrag Upcoming actions demand flight caps for Europe’s 5 largest airports erschien zuerst auf Stay Grounded.

EWG statement on DOD’s fiscal year 2025 budget request rcoleman March 11, 2024

WASHINGTON – The Department of Defense’s fiscal year 2025 budget request, released today, includes $1.6 billion in funding for DOD cleanup of contaminated sites. The sites include current and former military installations contaminated by the toxic “forever chemicals” known as PFAS.

The Department’s request for cleanup is $100 million more than what they requested for FY 2024 but $600 million less than Congress has provided in the past. Much more funding will be needed to tackle the sheer scale of the PFAS contamination problem.  

The following is a statement from John Reeder, the Environmental Working Group’s vice president for federal affairs:

While we recognize the DOD has requested additional funding over previous budget requests, we’re disappointed that the funding falls far short of addressing the soaring costs of cleaning up PFAS. The cost of cleaning up the backlog of contaminated sites continues to grow and now exceeds $38 billion, per estimates provided by the Pentagon in 2022.

It’s clear that incremental increases in funding cannot possibly catch up to DOD’s rising cleanup obligations. Service members, military communities and farmers need the cleanup of toxic PFAS pollution to move much more quickly – they have waited far too long.

EWG recommends that Congress provide at least $2.75 billion in total PFAS cleanup funding in FY 2025.

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action. 

Areas of Focus Food & Water Water Toxic Chemicals PFAS Chemicals Regional Issues Defense Communities Disqus Comments Press Contact Iris Myers iris@ewg.org (202) 939-9126 March 11, 2024

The greenwashing of lithium mining Trying to hide the damage

We replicate the journalistic article published by the newspaper El Ciudadano together with Fundación Tantí, via our YLNM member OPSAL.

The extraction of this mineral is leaving traces that go beyond what is shown in corporate campaigns and the enormous publicity in the media. The consequences on the ecosystems and the social tissue of local communities highlight the contradictions of a controversial practice that some describe as greenwashing.

The greenwashing of lithium mining: trying to hide the damage By Yasna Mussa

The worn iron gate is wide open. A red 4×4 truck parks in the background and two women install a banner with the SQM (Chemical and Mining Society of Chile) logo and the phrase “solutions for human development.” They announce that the workshop for women will begin shortly. At the place where the Tierra Viva space operates, a space that belongs to the Fundación del Agua (Water Foundation), the first participants have already begun to arrive and gather on a terrace and around the tables prepared for this instance.

Mining in this town seems to be inherent to the landscape. Wherever the eye lands there is a reminder: pollution, a wall with graffiti that says Ecocide, posters promoting foundations financed or created by mining companies, and mud-stained red trucks with company logos circulating everywhere.

–Here there is not only an environmental extractivism, but also a social, a cultural heritage, and a territorial one– the Licanantay farmer Rudecindo Espíndola bluntly utters.

In his comings and goings through the communities of San Pedro de Atacama, he has seen how the mining companies’ strategies work and the consequences they have on the communities. “They recruit two or three people from the towns and make or convert them into territorial operators. That is, political operators for the mining companies,” explains Espíndola.

Community workshops on bottle recycling, yoga, and body expression. A remedial education program. A biennial of contemporary art. A community training program that invites you to learn about the hydrogeology of the Salar de Atacama basin; environmental monitoring techniques; water reuse techniques; hydroponic crops; sustainable agriculture; biodiversity in the Atacama Salt Flats; urban irrigation; water quality. These are all posters set up around the main square. On the lower side of each of these advertisements, the SQM logo appears in white, green, and blue. SQM is the company that has been exploiting the lithium reserves in the Salar de Atacama since 1993, and that according to an analysis carried out by Production Development Corporation (Corfo) , has been responsible, due to environmental violations, for the vegetation cover decrease on the east margin of the salt flat.

For Ingrid Garcés, a chemical civil engineer, PhD in Science, and an academic at the University of Antofagasta, this is a sensitive area of the salt flat that has been greatly impacted environmentally. The east side of the salt flat supports freshwater wetlands that cannot survive on brines, and that in turn allow for local biodiversity, including flora and fauna that depend on these wetlands to survive.

For this researcher who studies the salt flats, sustainable mining does not exist, since it is a contradiction to talk about caring for nature and at the same time extracting lithium on a large scale. “When we talk about sustainability we also talk about people not being abandoned. We have only extracted the mineral resource, but what is left in the soil and what they share with the communities is nothing,” says Garcés.

As demand for lithium grows, the impacts of mining “increasingly affect the communities where this harmful extraction takes place, endangering their access to water,” says a report made by Friends of the Earth.

For Espíndola and members of the local communities, SQM actions are greenwashing, defined as a green marketing practice aimed at creating an outward image of ecological responsibility. It is a term used to condemn companies that claim to care about the environment but whose practices demonstrate the opposite, because they actually pollute the planet.

The phenomenon is not new, but lithium-producing companies such as SQM have enhanced their relationships, contributions, and collaborations with local communities, in addition to increasing their presence in the media with million-dollar advertising campaigns that seek to disseminate this “green” social profile.

Broadcasted on television, during primetime, an emotional commercial shows a bird flying over the territory landing at different spots: first at a mobile dental clinic, then next to an elderly woman happily weaving during a workshop, on a sign that says Sustainability, and finally on an hydroponic garden. The voice-over says: “SQM equals experience, sustainability, innovation and technology.” A narrative repeated in advertising spaces on the radio, in newspapers, and in commercials that link lithium to mental health, although SQM has no relationship with this aspect of the mineral.

Media advertising is just one aspect of their campaign and corporate image. They also carry out permanent recreational activities and other more essential undertakings for the local communities’ daily life where the SQM banner has a constant presence.

–Here we perceive an increasing image-washing of mining companies, especially where the State is absent– says Rudecindo Espíndola.

He describes it in an image: a van that works as a dental clinic drives through the desert. It serves remote areas, distant places forgotten by State institutions, where getting sick or suffering from pain adds to the sorrow of living so far from healthcare institutions, in isolation. The van belongs to SQM and is the same one that appears in its television commercial.

SQM’s website states that the company’s motivations stem from a program that since 2019 has expanded its actions to sports and healthy living, as they assure that they detected “a special interest from the communities and an important commitment on behalf of the neighbors to participate in recreational activities and sports of various kinds”. In their program SQM proposes lines for community which, they claim, allow them to focus on relationship strategies and shared social values: Education and culture; social and productive development; historical heritage, and healthier life. Exactly the kinds of activities they describe on the posters spread throughout the city.

A vicious circle

The dependence of local communities on mining companies’ resources and aid is seen on a small scale, through, for example, donations to achieve specific goals such as study tours for highschool students. But it is also observed at a higher level: the municipality of San Pedro de Atacama has received more than 22 billion pesos in contributions from SQM and Albemarle, an American company and one of the largest lithium producers in the world. These contributions have been made in spite of the recommendations of the Contraloría, an administrative audit of the State of Chile, that has requested the municipalities to refrain from receiving donations from private companies.

Nicolás Villalobos is a sociologist working at the National Service for the Prevention and Rehabilitation of Drugs and Alcohol Consumption (Senda) through an agreement with the Municipality of San Pedro de Atacama. He has witnessed how mining companies are involved in donations for the development of community programs.

“We, as a program, suddenly do not have funds to carry out a campaign here and the issue of alcoholism is worrying. But we would never think of, for example, asking for money from mining companies. We are aware of what the exploitation process has been like and the consequences it has brought to the territory,” says Villalobos.

This sociologist exemplifies this with a recurring scene in San Pedro de Atacama: he was walking and suddenly saw that awnings with the SQM logo were all over the town square. They were promoting a talk about the environment, when at the same time “They are the ones who are drying up the Atacama salt flat basin and who are finally going to leave this entire area that we love so much, so damaged,” explains Villalobos.

“The mining companies strategically pry and fill in these cracks where the State does not have the capacity to aid people. And the State is not disgusted by this either,” says Villalobos. He has seen that on many occasions communities end up accepting help from the mining companies because they lack basic services such as electricity or a water well. But, though the money they receive from the companies solves material and infrastructural problems, at the same time it generates others: conflicts between neighbors, confrontations, betrayals, and inequality.

“All the communities, except two, are receiving money from mining companies. So the Municipality, the regional government, and everyone receives money from mining companies,” says Andrés Honorato, executive director of the Fundación del Agua. “When people from the communities tell you that they believe they are image-washing, they are also part of what is happening,” says Honorato. “Lithium’s worth is shared between the inhabitants of the territory, the company that operates the mining of the territory, and hopefully, it will reach the environment. Although this is the only concept that is not being directly defended by anyone. Communities talk about the environment but do not invest in it. None of the communities are using the money that the mining companies are giving to them, specifically SQM and Albemarle, to take care of it,” says Honorato. “They maintain that the State is not there for them. It is clearly not there, but they have lived their entire lives without the State. So now that there are resources, they are accepting them.”

–Mining, of course, is everywhere. And it is already a part of people’s mentality, as well,” says Valerie Silvestre, a neighbor and member of the San Pedro de Atacama Irrigators Association.

This mother of two young children explains what it means to live in a community so far from the big cities and where basic services are so limited. That is why she is not surprised that on a wall near the town square, a poster announces a study tour financed by a mining company. She, as an attorney, has witnessed these practices firsthand: where the State is not present, money from mining companies is always an option. If the school does not have the resources to take students to the beach at the end of the school year, about 400 km from San Pedro, mining companies or their respective foundations will likely be asked to collaborate.

SQM assures on its website that the programs it carries out “are promoted by the company under our four lines of action to engage with the community. We execute these actions along with our neighbors, with whom we keep a direct relationship based on trust.”

Rudecindo Espíndola sees reality very differently from how SQM defines it. “There has been violence between residents who defend SQM and others who are in a different position concerning the massive extraction of water, due to an environmental, cultural, and community issue,” says Espíndola. “Deep down, some communities are accepting that the mining companies are fulfilling the role of an absent State. The closest thing we have is the Municipality, but it does not shine, it is not there, it only does basic and minimal things.”

.

 

Over 20 organisations campaigning against the five biggest European airports have published the below tribune calling on national governments and the EU to cap flights and implement stronger curfews at airports across Europe. 

We, the neighbours of Europe’s five largest airports – Paris-CDG, London-Heathrow, Madrid-Barajas, Frankfurt, Amsterdam-Schiphol – call on our governments and Europe to cap all airports, aerodromes and heliports to halt the uncontrolled growth of air traffic. Air traffic has returned to its 2019 level, and if we are to believe the players in the sector, it could double by 2040. This is a disaster when we know that this increase in the number of flights is compatible neither with our climate objectives nor with protecting the health of people affected by noise and air pollution. The scientific studies are clear and leave no room for doubt1. What’s more, there are rail alternatives for many European destinations. Given this situation, clear and determined political choices must be made, as was recently the case for Amsterdam-Schiphol airport. 

The Dutch government and the airport operator have realised that the growth in air traffic is no longer sustainable. They have therefore expressed the wish to reduce the number of flights, introduce a curfew, ban private aviation and abandon plans for a new runway. “We can’t ask the people of the region to make sacrifices for years on end for those who fly just for their holidays,” said Ruud Sondag, the airport’s CEO2. Tens of millions of people suffer from aircraft noise and pollution day and night. Noise is a major public health problem, causing sleep disorders, cognitive problems, high blood pressure and cardiovascular disease3. In France alone, its social cost has been estimated at €6.1 billion a year. Yet none of Europe’s airports are actually complying with the European directives and regulations that require them to draw up plans to reduce air noise, because noise levels are continuing to rise around airports, as shown by the strategic noise maps.

Every year, air pollution causes more than 250,000 deaths in Europe, and aviation is a significant local contributor. The ultrafine particles emitted by aircraft engines are smaller than those emitted by diesel engines, and therefore way more toxic. But they are neither regulated nor measured. Air pollution from airports remains the forgotten issue in air quality policies.

As far as the climate is concerned, commercial aviation accounts for almost 5% of European CO2 emissions, and almost 7% of those in France4. A study reveals that in 2019, the world’s 20 most polluting airports – including Paris-CDG, London-Heathrow, Frankfurt and Amsterdam-Schiphol – emitted as much CO2 as 58 coal-fired power stations!5 To this must be added the climatic impact of emissions other than carbon dioxide, in particular condensation trails, which at least double the impact of CO2 alone6. Twice as important as it was 30 years ago, the weight of the aviation sector in global emissions is all the more disproportionate given that this mode of transport is still mainly used by a small proportion of the population, mainly for leisure. At a time when Europe and our governments are asking everyone to make an effort, it is hard to understand why air transport should be exempt.

However, if the sector is to play its part in reducing emissions, a reduction in traffic is essential. Neither technological progress nor so-called “sustainable” aviation fuels will be available in sufficient quantities in the time required. Two reports published in January 2024 by Amsterdam Airport Schiphol show that a reduction of at least 30% in its emissions and those of European aviation compared with 2019 is needed by 2030 to comply with the Paris Climate Agreement7. The airport management recognises that there is no other solution in the short and medium term than to halt the growth in air traffic and reduce it rapidly. This would also limit the impact on health. As such a change of course would have an impact on employment, it is essential to take into account the retraining of the workers concerned.

We, the victims of airport nuisance and present and future victims of global warming, call on our governments and on Europe to follow the necessary path opened up by the Netherlands by finally taking concrete measures: limiting and reducing the number of flights while ensuring that noise, air pollution and CO2 emissions are also brought down – and generalising curfews at airports, aerodromes and heliports.

Signatory collectives and associations:

Paris-CDG:

• ADVOCNAR
• GARE
• Collectif Non au T4
• UFCNA Union Française contre les Nuisances des Aéronefs

London-Heathrow: 

• HACAN Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft Noise
• Stay Grounded United Kingdom
• Flight Free UK
• South-West Essex Fight the Flights

Frankfurt-Main: 

• BBI-Bündnis der Bürgerinitiativen im Rhein-Main-Gebiet – gegen Flughafenausbau – für eine Nachtflugverbot von 22 Uhr-6 Uhr

Amsterdam-Schiphol:

• Schipholwatch
• Amsterdam Fossielvrij
• Omgeving Zonder Vlieghinder
• Platform Vliegoverlast Amsterdam
• Stichting Mobilisation

Madrid-Barajas:

• Plataforma contra la ampliación de Barajas
• Ecologistas en Acción
• Fridays For Future España
• Federación Regional de Asociaciones Vecinales de Madrid
• Asociación Española de Educación Ambiental
• Asociación Vecinal de Mejorada del Campo
• Plataforma contra el ruido de San Fernando de Henares
• Asociación Vecinal Parque Henares
• Asociación Vecinal Jarama
• Asociación por la Defensa de Belvis

Notes:

1. Stay-Grounded/UECNA (2024) : Aviation is a health issue

2. Schiphol Airport (2023) : Schiphol to be quieter, cleaner and better: night closure, ban on private jets and people first 

3. Le Monde (2022, French) : Plus de cent professionnels de santé alertent sur le bruit aérien : « C’est l’espérance de vie qui est menacée »

4. DGAC, Transports Minister: Les émissions gazeuses liées au trafic aérien en France en 2020

5. Airports, air pollution and climate change | ODI

6. Stay-Grounded (2022) : It’s about more than just C02 

7. Schiphol Airport (Jan 2024) : Accelerated CO₂ reduction necessary

Der Beitrag Capping air traffic: an emergency response for health and climate! erschien zuerst auf Stay Grounded.

Cancer-causing benzene found in some popular acne products rcoleman March 8, 2024

WASHINGTON – Valisure, an independent laboratory, has detected cancer-causing benzene in tests of acne treatments made with benzoyl peroxide. As a result, the company petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to issue a voluntary recall of these over-the-counter products.  

The products tested included popular brands like Proactiv, Clearasil and PanOxy, as well as products from Clinique, Target, Walgreens and Walmart. 

“The fact benzoyl peroxide can decompose into benzene with extended temperatures is not new. What is shocking is that the majority of these over-the-counter acne products don’t seem to be properly stabilized to prevent benzene,” said Homer Swei, Ph.D., senior vice president of Healthy Living Science at the Environmental Working Group.

“Once again, the finding comes not from a government agency or federal safety authority, but from an independent laboratory,” Swei said. “Benzoyl peroxide is not allowed in EWG Verified® personal care products.”

The Environmental Protection Agency classifies benzene as known to cause cancer in humans. There is no safe level of human exposure.

Valisure previously detected benzene in tests of sunscreens, hand sanitizers, antiperspirant and deodorant, antifungal treatments, and spray shampoos and conditioners. The earlier benzene contamination led to product recalls from major manufacturers, including Procter & Gamble, Johnson & Johnson and Unilever.  

In 2023, the FDA re-issued a statement alerting manufacturers to the risk of benzene contamination and warned that any drug containing more than 2 parts per million, or ppm, benzene was adulterated and should be recalled. According to the agency, a daily exposure of 2 ppm in products represents a 1 in 100,000 risk for cancer, that is, a potential for 3,000 Americans to develop cancer over their lifetimes.

“Benzene is a potent carcinogen, and we recommend reducing exposure as much as possible,” said David Andrews, Ph.D., a senior scientist at EWG.  

“Besides potential benzene formation in the product, benzoyl peroxide has many drawbacks, since it is highly irritating and bleaches textiles like clothing and towels. Many manufacturers have already reformulated away from it,” he added. 

Valisure’s test results suggest that use of products formulated with salicylic acid or adapalene is the best way to avoid benzene exposure related to acne treatments.

EWG's Quick Tips for Choosing Safer Personal Care Products

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Personal Care Products Cosmetics Toxic Chemicals Disqus Comments Press Contact Monica Amarelo monica@ewg.org (202) 939-9140 March 8, 2024

Five fatal flaws in EPA’s justification for using toxic weedkiller paraquat rcoleman March 8, 2024

More than 60 countries have banned the weedkiller paraquat because of its links to Parkinson’s disease. But the Environmental Protection Agency continues to defend its use in the U.S., based on a scientific analysis that has at least five fundamental flaws.

EPA ignores paraquat risks

The agency dismisses a growing body of research linking the toxic weedkiller paraquat to Parkinson’s disease. A recent EPA interim decision reiterating approval of the chemical ignores 90 articles of evidence, including cutting edge studies submitted by the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research, that make the connection clear.

This includes a study that reported people who sprayed paraquat were more than twice as likely to develop Parkinson’s disease as those who applied other pesticides. It also includes a 2019 analysis combining data from 13 earlier studies that reported exposure to paraquat increased the likelihood of developing Parkinson’s by 64 percent.

EPA sides with chemical companies

The EPA ignores new evidence about the potential health risks of paraquat that has emerged from legal action against its makers. Syngenta, the Swiss-based chemical giant owned by a Chinese state-owned chemical conglomerate, produces paraquat and has long understood these risks. But it spent decades hiding what they knew from the public and the EPA. 

Ironically, Chinese and Swiss farmers are prohibited by their governments from using paraquat due to potential health risks from exposure to it.

EPA ignores risks to frontline communities

The EPA ignores the fact that paraquat is used far more heavily in some communities than others. More than 10 million pounds of paraquat were used in the U.S. in 2018, the most recent year for which national estimates are available. In California, which has pesticide tracking laws, more than half the paraquat used in 2021 was concentrated in a few counties, including major agriculture centers of Fresno, Kern and Kings.. In those areas, it’s used on almonds and pistachios, cotton, grapes, including those used for wine, and other crops.

A February 2024 study reported that living or working within 500 meters – about a third of a mile – increased the likelihood of developing Parkinson’s disease by 75 to 100 percent.

EPA is out of touch with how paraquat is used or its environmental impacts

The EPA continues to exclude from its paraquat analysis some of the ways people who work in or live near farm fields are exposed to toxic chemicals.

In particular, the agency excluded paraquat applications that might drift through the air and failed to consider how the chemical might be resuspended in farm dust on windy days. The EPA assumes people spraying paraquat will follow instructions designed to contain chemical drift and harm. But studies show “off label” use of pesticides that doesn’t adhere to these directions is common, with virtually no enforcement of labeling requirements.

EPA doesn't consider how communities are affected

The EPA fails to properly balance the costs and benefits of a paraquat ban, as other nations have. The agency considered the costs to farmers, but it failed to review the health and environmental costs to farmers, farm workers and people who live near farm fields, especially the costs associated with Parkinson’s disease. 

Overdue paraquat ban

Instead of relying on fatal scientific flaws to justify the continued use of paraquat, the agency should follow the lead of the 60-plus countries that have banned the toxic weedkiller.

But states shouldn’t wait for the EPA to act.

Federal pesticide law sets a floor, not a ceiling – states can choose to restrict a chemical, even without an EPA ban. To protect their residents and public health, state and local governments should exercise their power to ban paraquat.

Areas of Focus Food & Water Food Farming & Agriculture Toxic Chemicals Paraquat Disqus Comments Authors Geoff Horsfield Alexis Temkin, Ph.D. March 12, 2024

Photo: Heñói Center for Studies and Promotion of Democracy, Human Rights and Socio-environmental Sustainability, Paraguay.

 

By Chithira Vijayakumar

We live in a time where the agrifood system, driven by capitalism, colonialism and patriarchy, are actively failing both people and the planet. Therefore, it stands to reason that the solutions lie firmly in the hands of agro-ecological feminist movements led by Indigenous Peoples, as well as local communities and small peasants who are working towards food sovereignty.

Patriarchy, with its emphasis on hierarchical power dynamics and gender roles, deepens inequalities within the agrifood system. Women in all their diversities, who play significant roles in food production, caring for and the preservation of seeds, and agricultural labour, face oppression, discrimination and marginalisation, with limited access to land, resources, and decision-making power. Women produce between 60 and 80 percent of the food in most developing countries and are responsible for half of the world’s food production, but they are consistently paid less than their male counterparts. The share of women agricultural landholders globally is less than 15 per cent. In addition, patriarchal norms perpetuate a narrow definition of agriculture, privileging large-scale, industrialised production methods over diverse practices traditionally used by Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities who protect more than 80 percent of forests and biodiversity worldwide. 

This crisis is compounded by capitalism’s single-minded pursuit of profit and unlimited growth, which has enabled the corporate capture of international policy spaces, prioritised efficiency over true sustainability, and created a handful of agribusiness giants, many of them related to industrial livestock. A 2013 Oxfam study found that just ten companies control nearly every aspect of the global food supply chain, from seeds and pesticides to processing and distribution, commodity trading, processing, and retail. The ETC Group has highlighted the concentration of power and control over seeds in the hands of less than ten agrochemical corporations. This level of corporate consolidation can have significant implications for small-scale farmers, food prices, food security, forests, biodiversity, and land rights of IPs as well as local communities worldwide. 

The consequences of this system’s shortcomings are stark. According to the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), agriculture, including both crop cultivation and unsustainable livestock production, is the leading cause of deforestation, responsible for around 80% of deforestation worldwide. It also contributes to soil degradation, water scarcity, air pollution, biodiversity loss, and the weakening of human rights, particularly of communities at the intersection of multiple marginalisation, all of which contribute to a global crisis. According to reports from the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the United Nations (UN), about one-third of all food produced is wasted, while at least 828 million people – or 10 percent of the world’s population – go to bed hungry each night, two-thirds of whom are women.

So, this International Women’s Day, the Global Forest Coalition (GFC) brings you three photo essays that exemplify feminist strength and innovation led by women in all their diversities, who are standing up against large-scale commercial agrifood corporations and their devastating impacts on the world’s marginalised communities, forests, and biodiversity. 

Through our series of photo essays titled “Guardians of Earth’s Tomorrow,” we bring you stories of three visionary organisations actively shaping utopias today. Each essay tells the story of a community that is forging alternative pathways towards food sovereignty, environmental stewardship, and gender justice.

All three movements are based on circular agricultural practices that work towards food sovereignty and reclaiming public spaces and rights, unlike the current ‘produce-consume-discard with no limits’ model that industrial agriculture uses. These essays showcase the diverse ways in which Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities are working to heal the planet and build resilient, equitable food systems. They remind us that even in the face of daunting challenges, there are tangible actions we can take to create positive change.

On this International Women’s Day, let us celebrate and amplify the feminist visions and voices of those who are leading the way towards a brighter, more just future for all.

 

The Seed Fairs of Heñói
Heñói, Paraguay

In the heart of Asunción, Paraguay, two extraordinary fairs took place in 2023 against the backdrop of a fight for food sovereignty: the ‘Heñói Jey Native and Creole Seed Fair’ and the ‘Karú Soberano Fair’, which means ‘Sovereign Eating’ in the Guaraní language. They were organised under the guidance and leadership of the Heñói Seed Network. At these fairs, seeds emerge not just as agricultural treasures but as custodians of a profound legacy.

To view and download the photo essay, click here.
Available in EN and ES.

The TreeBox Project Armenian Forests NGO, Armenia

The TreeBox Project is a unique initiative by Armenian Forests NGO that combines sustainable agriculture, environmental protection, and gender justice. It allows people to plant a forest in Armenia simply by ordering a box of healthy vegan food. Most importantly, this project centers gender justice, and is run by an all-women team of eight staff members and 25 farmers. Every element that goes into a TreeBox is procured directly from women farmers and entrepreneurs.

To view and download the photo essay, click here.
Available in EN and RUS.

Agromandala Agromandala, Colombia

Agromandala is a Colombian agroecological project that grows, harvests, and markets fresh and processed foods 100% free of pesticides and cared for with all respect and love. At the core of Agromandala’s ethos lies the Community Supported Agriculture (CSA) model, a groundbreaking initiative born in August 2020 as a response to the COVID-19 pandemic. This innovative approach ensures a direct link between local organic farms and families invested in the well-being of their food sources. With over 150 varieties of edible plants, the project currently feeds around 80 families a week, of which 40 are members of the CSA.

To view and download the photo essay, click here.
Available in EN and ES.

The post Guardians of Earth’s Tomorrow: How three visionary feminist organisations are changing the landscape of food justice and forest/biodiversity-protection appeared first on Global Forest Coalition.

Gov. Lujan Grisham has line-item vetoed a tax exemption in House Bill 252 that would have effectively forced taxpayers to pay “stripper well” operators’ costs to comply with the state’s methane waste and ozone precursor rules, rules designed to protect the climate and public health.The 29 New Mexico civic and environmental groups who formally urged the governor to veto this unnecessary and unsound tax giveaway today applaud her for holding strong against this proposed special interest handout to low-producing wells. The governor’s veto helps dispel the myth that “stripper wells” are run by struggling small businesses, when in fact more than half of all of such wells in New Mexico belong to major oil and gas companies.

“We commend the governor for standing up to this powerful, dirty industry and defending the public interest,” said Erik Schlenker-Goodrich, executive director of the Western Environmental Law Center. “The oil and gas industry’s appetite for taxpayer handouts and subsidies is endless. Stripper wells produce very little energy, but can create significant pollution that harms people and the environment. It is time to have a serious discussion about retiring and cleaning up these wells, not propping them up with additional tax subsidies.”

“A fundamental economic principle is that businesses should bear the external social costs they create. Despite special treatment for decades, this principle can and should apply to oil and gas businesses,” said Kayley Shoup, community organizer for Citizens Caring for the Future. “Oil and gas operators—not the public—should pay the compliance costs of reducing methane emissions from oil and gas operations to protect our climate and to reduce toxic air pollutants that harm public health. A tax break to the industry that is polluting the air where my neighbors and I live in the Permian Basin was simply not warranted. The governor demonstrated leadership vetoing this tax giveaway.”

The New Mexico Legislative Finance Committee, the New Mexico Taxation and Revenue Department, the New Mexico State Land Office, and the New Mexico Attorney General all also identified pitfalls in this concept.

The groups signing the letter include the Western Environmental Law Center, 350 New Mexico, Albuquerque Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, Center For Civic Policy, Chaco Alliance, Citizens Caring For The Future, Earth Action, Inc., Earthworks, Environmental Defense Fund, FracTracker Alliance, Indivisible Albuquerque, League Of Women Voters New Mexico, Moms Clean Air Force New Mexico Chapter, New Energy Economy, New Mexico Climate Justice, New Mexico Interfaith Power And Light, New Mexico Sportsmen, New Mexico Voices For Children, New Mexico Voices For Children Action Fund, New Mexico Wild, Progressive Democrats Of America – Central New Mexico, ProgressNow New Mexico, Prosperity Works, Rio Arriba Concerned Citizens, Rio Grande Indivisible, New Mexico, San Juan Citizens Alliance, See (Social Eco Education), and WildEarth Guardians.

Contacts:

Erik Schlenker-Goodrich, Western Environmental Law Center, 575-751-0351, eriksg@westernlaw.org

Kayley Shoup, Citizens Caring for the Future, 575-302-7587, kayley.shoup.ccff@gmail.com

The post Groups applaud Gov. for standing up for New Mexicans, vetoing low-producing oil and gas well tax exemption appeared first on Western Environmental Law Center.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

MARCH 6, 2024

Media contacts:

Jackie Fielder, jackie@stopthemoneypipeline.com

SEC fails to ensure transparency in corporate reporting as financial risks from climate grow 

 

WASHINGTON, DC — Wednesday morning, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) passed a rule on climate disclosure that falls significantly short of the necessary measures to address the financial risks posed by climate change. Partisan political pressure by self-serving politicians and litigation threats from corporate lobbyists caused the SEC to weaken the rule. This ruling leaves the retirement savings of millions vulnerable and fails to ensure workers’ jobs are protected through the transition.

The rule’s notable omissions, particularly the lack of requirement for companies to disclose Scope 3 emissions, present a stark deficiency. Scope 3 emissions, which account for the majority of a company’s carbon footprint through its supply chain, are critical to understanding the full extent of a corporation’s climate financial risk. The decision to allow companies to omit this information, based solely on their materiality assessment, further dilutes the rule’s efficacy. This discretion leaves investors in the dark about the true climate risks and financial implications associated with their investments.

“Chair Gensler claims the SEC dropped Scope 3 disclosures due to ‘public feedback.’ Yet, almost 18,000 members of the public demanded quick adoption of stringent standards: specific climate risk financial data and compulsory, comprehensive emissions reporting. The SEC yielded to corporate lobbying, sidelining savers worried about their financial future by opting for voluntary measures. This marks a blatant failure to act, and indicates that California and Governor Newsom need to step up with implementation of the Corporate Accountability Act” said Jackie Fielder, Co-director of Stop the Money Pipeline. 

Nowhere is climate financial risk more irrefutable than in the insurance industry, where homeowners face unprecedented premiums and coverage denials. This crisis is a harbinger of the broader financial instability posed by unchecked climate risks. 

“In their reports last year, State Farm and Allstate appear to have omitted any hint of possibly exiting California over wildfire dangers in reporting. Similarly, Bankers, Travelers, and AIG seem to have kept silent about the threat extreme weather and flooding in Florida pose to insurance coverage. And yet, within a year, all five insurers made massive changes to their coverage in each state and reported huge losses. Savers should back firms that act in our best interest, not those fleeing disasters they contributed to. This requires robust, compulsory climate risk disclosures—a task the SEC failed to accomplish. Companies gamble our savings on climate chaos and leave us holding the bag” said Frankie Iannuzzi, an educator who organizes with Planet over Profit. 

The rule’s failure to mandate the quantification of financial impacts from both physical and transition risks related to climate change significantly undermines investors’ ability to make informed decisions. This omission is a glaring oversight in the face of an escalating climate crisis that threatens to destabilize global financial markets.

“This loophole-riddled rule is a win for Wall Street, and a loss for everyone else. Corporations could have been required to disclose their unpreparedness for climate challenges, to show us how they would transition to a clean and just economy, and fully disclose pollution. But under this rule, New Yorkers who want to protect both the planet and their retirement portfolios won’t be able to compare one company to another under a decent federal rule,” said Pete Sikora, Climate Campaigns Director of New York Communities for Change.

This weak stance on climate risk disclosure is a departure from international norms and best practices. As countries around the globe, including China and the European Union, advance their regulatory frameworks to include rigorous climate risk disclosures, the SEC’s proposed rule lags, jeopardizing the United States’ position in the global market. Furthermore, the Inflation Reduction Act’s (IRA) potential is significantly hampered by the absence of robust climate risk disclosures, which are essential for mobilizing capital towards sustainable investments.

“Retirees want to ensure their retirement savings aren’t at risk from industries that aren’t planning for the needed transition to climate solutions. This rule could have required companies to reveal their strategies for handling climate risk. Instead, the SEC chose to let companies decide what climate risks to disclose, so investors still will not have adequate information on which to make decisions for managing their retirement portfolios and investments securely,” said Deborah Moore, Campaign Strategist with Third Act.

Real-world examples abound of the financial toxicity hidden by inadequate disclosures. Diversified Energy Co.’s 20% loss in share value and Exxon and Chevron’s $6.6bn in asset write-offs underscore the urgent need for transparency in how companies are navigating the transition to a low-carbon economy. Without this transparency, the financial system remains vulnerable to the disruptive shocks of climate-related bankruptcies, reminiscent of the 2008 financial crisis but with far-reaching environmental consequences.

With the adoption of new, quantifiable, and enforceable guidelines for transition plans underway on the international stage, the United States must intensify its efforts to avoid falling behind.

###

The post SEC fails to ensure transparency in corporate reporting as financial risks from climate grow  appeared first on Stop the Money Pipeline.

New House bill targets harmful additives in meat and dairy products rcoleman March 6, 2024

WASHINGTON – The Environmental Working Group applauds today’s introduction of House legislation that would require the Department of Agriculture to reassess seven potentially harmful food chemicals used in meat, poultry and eggs.

The Agricultural Food Chemical Reassessment Act of 2024 would require the secretary of agriculture to update its regulation of the seven chemicals based on a fresh review of their potential to harm human health. The reassessment would be carried out by the administrator of the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service.

The bill was introduced by Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-Ill.).

The chemicals the bill takes aim at are butylated hydroxyanisole, or BHA, butylated hydroxytoluene, or BHT, cetylpyridinium chloride, sodium aluminum phosphate, sodium nitrate, sulfuric acid and titanium dioxide. They are added to meat, dairy and eggs as emulsifiers, colorants and preservatives and as disinfecting agents in the packaging process.

“Harmful additives in food are a top concern for consumers, and for good reason,” said Tasha Stoiber, Ph.D., senior scientist with the Environmental Working Group. “The chemicals targeted by this bill haven’t been meaningfully reviewed for safety for decades – if ever. EWG applauds Rep. Schakowsky for making the safety of our food a priority.”

Some of the chemicals entered the marketplace through  a loophole that lets food additive makers – and not federal regulators – determine that the substances are generally recognized as safe, or GRAS.

The USDA has not thoroughly reviewed any of the seven chemicals for decades, despite new science suggesting they may harm human health.

• BHA was last evaluated in 1977. It can cause hormone disruption and increase the risk of cancer. It’s been on California’s Proposition 65 list of cancer-causing chemicals since 1990.
• BHT was last evaluated in 1977. The chemical has been linked to a higher risk of cancer, endocrine disruption and harm to the kidneys, blood, liver and lungs.
• Cetylpyridinium chloride was last reviewed in 2004 and has been recognized as GRAS by the Food and Drug Administration. It’s been linked to eye and skin irritation, environmental toxicity, and possible hormonal and immunological harm. It’s been banned for use in the European Union.
• Sodium nitrate was approved for use in 1958 and has not been reevaluated since 1984. It may be harmful to the reproductive system and an increased risk of cancer. Its use has been banned in Norway and Sweden.
• Sodium aluminum phosphate was listed as GRAS in 1977. It’s been linked to toxicity and aluminum accumulation, which is associated with harm to the nervous system, especially for people with impaired kidney function who are less able to remove aluminum from the body. Most uses of this additive have been banned in the EU, including all uses in meat, poultry and egg products.
• Sulfuric acid was recognized as GRAS in 1980. It has been linked to cancer, ulcerative colitis, changes to DNA and inflammation from sulfur exposure. 
• Titanium dioxide has been approved for use as a color additive since 1972. The EU and six other countries have banned it from use. The nanoparticles of titanium dioxide may damage DNA.

“Other countries regularly review the safety of chemicals used in food and food processing to reflect new science,” said Scott Faber, EWG’s senior vice president for government affairs. “And the USDA periodically reviews other chemical safety standards, including those for pesticides. But these food chemicals have fallen into a regulatory black hole.

“This legislation will ensure the USDA takes much needed action to get these harmful chemicals out of our meat and dairy,” he added.

### 

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Food & Water Food Toxic Chemicals Food Chemicals Disqus Comments Press Contact Iris Myers iris@ewg.org (202) 939-9126 March 8, 2024

Job Title: JC Woodley Memorial Fellowship for Storytelling in Environmental Justice (Documentary) Reports to: Advancement Outreach & Recruitment Manager, Kimala Luna Organization: Dogwood Alliance Location: Remote and In-Person Position Type: Full-time, Hourly, Internship About Dogwood Alliance For over 25 years, Dogwood Alliance has fought threats to Southern US forests and frontline communities. We promote forest […]

The post Now Hiring: JC Woodley Memorial Fellowship for Storytelling in Environmental Justice first appeared on Dogwood Alliance.

Hundreds of activists disrupted the awards gala of the world's largest mining convention in Toronto this evening to call attention to the industry’s record of violence, human rights abuse, and environmental harm.