Environmental Law

Judge Rules Trump International 

Violated Illinois Environmental

Protection Act

Hotel and Tower Found Liable on All Counts

    CHICAGO - (SIERRA CLUB) – 9/12/24 - Cook County Circuit Court Judge Thaddeus L. Wilson ruled recently that the Trump International Hotel & Tower violated and is in violation of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act and committed a continuing public nuisance through a series of failures to comply with state and federal law dating back to 2008. The judge ruled that the evidence was uncontested that Trump Tower, operating as 401 N. Wabash, is liable on all remaining counts brought by Friends of the Chicago River, the Sierra Club Illinois Chapter, and the State of Illinois in this long-running litigation.

    Friends, the Sierra Club, and the Illinois Attorney General filed the lawsuit in 2018 after Friends and the Sierra Club discovered the Trump Tower cooling water intake permit violations during a routine permit review. The Trump Tower can draw in up to about 21 million gallons of water from the Chicago River every day to cool the building. Trump Tower ignored and violated federal and state laws and regulations that require buildings using systems like Trump Tower’s to be designed to minimize impacts on aquatic life, secure permits, operate with protective measures that minimize damage to fish and other aquatic organisms from water intake structures, and prevent harmful heat pollution from its discharges back to the river. A 2018 Chicago Tribune survey found no other cooling intake permits holders had similarly violated the applicable rules.

    The Trump Tower is one of the largest users of water from the Chicago River for cooling and failing to follow the permit requirements resulted in the death of thousands of fish and other aquatic organisms which were sucked into the building cooling system by the intake structure or trapped against its screens. The Trump Tower also failed to accurately compute and report the rate at which the skyscraper’s cooling system withdraws water by approximately 44 percent for more than 10 years. By ruling on the summary judgment, Judge Wilson found that the Trump Tower could not even genuinely dispute that it was in violation of the applicable laws and creating a public nuisance.

    “Judge Wilson’s decision brings us close to the end of a six-year journey to bring justice to the wildlife for whom these laws were designed to protect and the people who enjoy this wildlife,” said Margaret Frisbie, Friends of the Chicago River’s executive director. “The Trump Tower’s complete disregard for the rules carelessly killed countless creatures and degraded the value of the significant public investments over decades to bring about the healthy transformation of the river for people, fish, and other aquatic wildlife.”

     Friends of the Chicago River and Sierra Club Illinois Chapter are represented in this action by Albert Ettinger; the Abrams Environmental Law Clinic at the University of Chicago Law School; and the Environmental Advocacy Center at the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law. Rob Weinstock of the Northwestern Pritzker School of Law argued the case for Friends of the Chicago River and Sierra Club.

    “The recovery of the Chicago River into the healthy heart of our downtown is a major accomplishment for the people of Chicago and the Clean Water Act,” Sierra Club Illinois Director Jack Darin said. 

    Friends of the Chicago River was founded in 1979 to protect and restore the Chicago-Calumet River system for all people, water, and wildlife. Supported by 43,000 members, volunteers, and online activists and recognized by more than 50 awards in 45 years, Friends of the Chicago River is at the forefront of the river’s recovery and renaissance and is the only organization exclusively dedicated to the river and its watershed. For more information, vision chicagoriver.org

    “Trump Tower openly violated the Clean Water Act for years, putting the river and the wildlife that call it home at risk. We’re proud to hold these scofflaws accountable, and applaud our pro bono attorneys and the Attorney General for stepping up to protect our river and its recovery. Friends and Sierra Club look forward to further proceedings that will determine how best to restore and protect the Chicago River and uphold the Clean Water Act and the Illinois Environmental Protection Act,” Frisbie said.

  

About the Sierra Club

The Sierra Club is America’s largest and most influential grassroots environmental organization, with millions of members and supporters. In addition to protecting every person's right to get outdoors and access the healing power of nature, the Sierra Club works to promote clean energy, safeguard the health of our communities, protect wildlife, and preserve our remaining wild places through grassroots activism, public education, lobbying, and legal action. For more information, visit www.sierraclub.org.

The Environment

Illinois Law Seeks to Limit 

PFAS-Based Air Pollution 

 

By Jonah Chester
Public News Service

    ILLINOIS - (PNS) - 6/14/2022 - Illinois has enacted a new law to prohibit the incineration of some PFAS-based substances.

    The man-made chemical compounds are most commonly associated with groundwater pollution.

    But Sonya Lunder - senior toxics policy advisor with the Sierra Club - said the per-and poly-fluoroalkyl substances may even be able to withstand high-power incinerators, which have been used to dispose of PFAS-based materials.

    She explained that the extreme heat can even cause chemical reactions in the compounds.

    "If they're partially reacted, they form a variety of harmful breakdown products," said Lunder, "and/or the PFAS would literally just be going up the stack and falling out in the nearby community."

    The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reports that scientists are still learning about the exact health effects PFAS could have. But high levels of PFAS contamination may lead to - among other issues - lower birth weights, increased risk of cancer and decreased vaccine response in children.

    The National Institutes of Health reports there are about 5,000 distinct members of the PFAS family. Lunder explained the bill was narrowed to cover about 170 older PFAS compounds that are still found in some stored-but-unusable firefighting foams.

    She said as new PFAS are developed and implemented, more expansive policies may be necessary.

    "We are concerned," said Lunder, "because the chemical industry is so rapidly innovating and shifting to new and closely related chemicals that the narrowing that happened to the bill will mean that over time there will be other types of waste that could be burned."

    While Illinois' ban may be relatively narrow in scope, Nicole Saulsberry - Illinois state government representative with the Sierra Club - contends it's one of the most robust PFAS-incineration policies in the country.

    She explained the measure was based on similar policies in New York, but that those only cover specific communities.

    "But with Illinois, it's a statewide ban," said Saulsberry. "So this bill that was passed in Illinois is historic in the sense that we're the only state to have a statewide ban on the incineration of PFAS."

    PFAS are also known as "forever chemicals," as they'll essentially never break down under normal environmental conditions.

    But Lunder explained that the Environmental Protection Agency is investigating a potential solution - using heat and pressure to destroy the compounds through a process known as supercritical water oxidation.

Disclosure: Sierra Club contributes to our fund for reporting on Climate Change/Air Quality, Energy Policy, Environment, Environmental Justice. If you would like to help support news in the public interest, click here.
 

References:
HB4818: Amends the Environmental Protection Act. Provides that the disposal by incineration... the Illinois Legislature 2022
What are the health effects of PFAS? CDC 2022
PFAS Research NIH 2022

Story credit: Jonah Chester, Public News Service, 6/13/2022 

Economic Analysis

Survey: Gen Z Purchasers 

Value Sustainability More 

Than Older Generations

    PITTSBURGH-- (BUSINESS WIRE) -- 11/26/2021 -- As sustainability and climate change dominate the headlines globally, new consumer research conducted by First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania shows the power that Gen Z consumers have over older generations to influence purchasing decisions around sustainability. Fully three-quarters of Gen Z consumers said that sustainability was more important to them than the brand name when making purchase decisions. As a result of Gen Z’s influence over their Gen X parents on this issue, Gen X consumers’ preference to shop sustainable brands increased by 24 percent and their willingness to pay more for sustainable products increased by 42 percent since 2019.

    Gen Z, the demographic cohort born after 1997, has historically been the most vocal about the health of the planet. The survey, conducted by First Insight and the Baker Retailing Center at the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, found that Gen Z leads the way in sustainability. In fact, consumers across all generations—from Baby Boomers to Gen Z—are now willing to spend more for sustainable products. Just two years ago, only 58 percent of consumers across all generations were willing to spend more for sustainable options. Today, nearly 90 percent of Gen X consumers said that they would be willing to spend 10 percent extra or more for sustainable products, compared to just over 34 percent two years ago.

   “Our research points to a seismic shift in sentiment around sustainability purchasing decisions, with significant increases in just two years. When the previous study was fielded in 2019, older generations were not as sustainability-conscious as they are today. The global pandemic caused many to rethink their consumption and its impact on the health of the planet, yet Gen Z have been consistent in remaining true to their sustainability values while also educating and influencing the generations that came before them,” First Insight CEO Greg Petro said.

 
    Download the report to see all the key findings from the study here.

Additional Key Findings:

    Today, the majority of respondents across every generation expect retailers and brands to be more sustainable. The survey found, however, that there is some disconnect across the generations about what sustainability actually means. Nearly half of the Boomers (44 percent), Gen X (48 percent), and Millennials (46 percent) agree that sustainability means “products made from recycled, sustainable and natural harvested fibers and materials.” Meanwhile, nearly half of the Gen Z (48 percent) respondents believe that sustainability means sustainable manufacturing. One thing most could agree on is that packaging should be sustainable. Across generations, 73 percent combined feel that sustainable packaging is very or somewhat important today, compared to only 58 percent in 2019.

    The survey found that values-based purchase decisions—whether they are personal, social, or environmental—are more likely to be made by Gen X (76 percent), Millennials (77 percent), and Gen Z (75 percent), and within those groups, men (77 percent) are more likely than women (67 percent) to make values-driven purchases.

Methodology:

    First Insight’s findings are based on the results of a U.S. consumer study of a targeted sample of more than 1,000 respondents, balanced by gender, geography, and generation, and was fielded between July 1, 2021, and July 10, 2021. The study was completed through proprietary sample sources among panels who participate in online surveys. Further details on the findings are available upon request.

Approval of 'Enlist Duo' Weed Killer Criticized

   Washington, D.C. – 10/26/2014 - Officials with the Environmental Working Group said on October 15 that they were “deeply disappointed” that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency had decided to approve a toxic weed killer known as Enlist Duo, despite overwhelming opposition from the scientific and public health community.
   Enlist Duo, manufactured by Dow AgroSciences, a subsidiary of Dow Chemical Company, is a toxic combination of the herbicide 2,4-D and glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup. The EPA’s decision means Dow can sell Enlist Duo in conjunction with its new genetically engineered products, 2,4-D-tolerant corn and soybean seeds. The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently approved Dow’s application to market these seeds.
   Dow has announced plans to start marketing Enlist Duo in Iowa, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
   “The EPA ignored science pointing to the serious health risks – especially to children – associated with 2,4-D,” said Mary Ellen Kustin, EWG’s senior policy analyst. “Giving a chemical company the green light to bring a known harmful weed killer to market for use on millions of acres of crops puts public health and the environment in danger.”
   Last summer, 35 doctors and scientists warned the EPA against expanding the use of 2,4-D, highlighting links between pesticide exposure and health problems such as suppressed immune function and greater risk of Parkinson’s disease. Later, 50 members of Congress asked EPA and USDA to reconsider their approval of the 2,4-D-tolerant seeds and weed killer.
The USDA estimates that use of 2,4-D will triple by 2020, compared to current usage. EWG research shows that more than 480 elementary schools nationwide are within 200 feet of corn and soybean fields that could be sprayed with 2,4-D.
   “Children who are most vulnerable and susceptible to these toxic weed killers will have an increased risk of being exposed to a defoliant linked to cancer and Parkinson’s disease,” added Kustin.
   In addition to toxicity concerns, increasing the use of weed killers could further escalate the evolution of “superweeds” resistant to known herbicides.
   “This continued arms race between chemical companies and superweeds is a threat to sustainable farming and public health,” added Kustin. “EPA’s decision to up the ante of Roundup by approving Enlist Duo is unconscionable.”
   Source: Environmental Working Group

Report: Corn ethanol mandate hurting environment

   Washington, D.C. – 7/18/2014 - A proposal now being considered by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to cut the amount of corn ethanol required in gasoline would lower greenhouse gas emissions by 3 million metric tons, according to a new report released by the Environmental Working Group.
  If the EPA reduces corn ethanol by 1.39 billion gallons as proposed, it would prevent as much greenhouse gas pollution as taking 580,000 cars off the road annually, EWG found.
  The current mandate, known as the Renewable Fuel Standard, requires oil companies to increase so-called renewable fuels in gasoline every year, from 9 billion gallons in 2008 to 36 billion gallons in 2022. For the first time since this law took effect, the EPA has proposed to reduce the amount of corn-based ethanol used as fuel for the nation’s cars and trucks.
   “The Obama administration has a real opportunity to scale back the corn ethanol mandate and make a significant contribution in the fight against climate change,” said Emily Cassidy, EWG research analyst and co-author of EWG’s new report, Ethanol’s Broken Promise. “As our research shows, corn-based ethanol is actually worse for the climate than regular gasoline.”
  Click here to read the full report.
  Blending corn ethanol into gasoline has significantly increased greenhouse gas emissions because higher demand for ethanol for fuel has encouraged farmers to plow up wetlands and grasslands to grow corn. This increased agricultural activity releases more soil carbon into the atmosphere. Corn requires intensive fertilizer, which breaks down to emit nitrous oxide, another greenhouse gas, according to EWG’s study.
   EWG estimates that 85 million to 236 million metric tons of greenhouse gases were emitted from 2008 to 2011, when more than 23 million acres of grassland and wetlands were converted to grow crops. Researchers found that most studies that claim the corn ethanol mandate reduces emissions do not properly account for the resources needed to improve crop yields and significantly underestimate the emissions from conversion of land to corn production driven by the federal ethanol mandate.
   Since President Obama took office in January of 2009, his administration has made substantial progress to combat climate change. New fuel economy standards and a 10-fold increase in solar energy production have helped reduce U.S. greenhouse gas pollution to the lowest level in almost 20 years.
   “In the absence of any real effort by Congress to address climate change, President Obama has stepped up repeatedly, doing more than any previous President to lower greenhouse gas emissions,” Scott Faber, EWG senior vice president for government affairs, said. “If the administration stands strong against the ethanol lobby and implements EPA’s proposed ethanol rollback, it will be a huge victory for the environment.”
  Source: environmental working group

Law would ban BPA from food containers

   WASHINGTON, D.C. – 7/17/2014 - Several members of Congress are pushing a bill to better protect consumers – particularly the elderly, pregnant women children, and workers – from a known toxic hormone disruptor bisphenol-A, or BPA.
   Introduced  by long-time champion Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), the Ban Poisonous Additives Act of 2014 would ban BPA from food and beverage containers. It would also grant waivers to manufacturers seeking safer replacements for BPA while requiring them to place specific warning labels on any packaging that still contains the toxic substance. The legislation would also mandate the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to review the safety of all materials deemed safe for use in food and beverage containers .
   Reps. Lois Capps (D-Calif.) and Grace Meng (D-N.Y.) introduced a companion bill in the House.
   “Science shows that BPA is present in the vast majority of Americans and is harmful to human health,” said Jason Rano, EWG’s director of government affairs. “It has been linked to cancer, obesity, diabetes, infertility, hormone disruption and early puberty in children. Congress is taking an important step on behalf of our most vulnerable populations to help reduce exposure to BPA.”
   BPA, a synthetic estrogen, is in the epoxy linings that coat the inside of most canned foods and beverages and ultimately leaches into those products. Some companies have voluntarily taken BPA out of the linings of their containers, and in 2012 the FDA banned BPA in baby bottles and children's sippy cups.
   “It was an important step when the FDA banned BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups, but BPA has no place in food packaging and must be replaced with alternatives that don’t pose a serious health threats to humans,” added Rano. “This legislation would help make that a reality while providing manufacturers with the additional time they need to find safer options.”
   EWG recommends that consumers limit their intake of canned food and beverages and look for products labeled “BPA-free” or packed in glass jars or cardboard cartons, not metal cans.
   Source: Environmental Working Group

Web Tool Expands Access to Info on Chemicals

(EPA) - 9/19/2013 - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has launched a web-based tool, called ChemView, to significantly improve access to chemical specific regulatory information developed by EPA and data submitted under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

   “This online tool will improve access to chemical health and safety information, increase public dialogue and awareness, and help viewers choose safer ingredients used in everyday products,” said James Jones, assistant administrator for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. “The tool will make chemical information more readily available for chemical decision-makers and consumers.” 

   The ChemView web tool displays key health and safety data in an online format that allows comparison of chemicals by use and by health or environmental effects. The search tool combines available TSCA information and provides streamlined access to EPA assessments, hazard characterizations, and information on safer chemical ingredients. Additionally, the new web tool allows searches by chemical name or Chemical Abstracts Service (CAS) number, use, hazard effect, or regulatory action. 

   It has the flexibility to create tailored views of the information on individual chemicals or compare multiple chemicals sorted by use, hazard effect or other criteria. The new portal will also link to information on manufacturing, processing, use, and release data reported under the Chemical Data Reporting Rule, and the Toxics Release Inventory. In the months ahead, EPA will be continuously adding additional chemicals, functionality and links. 

   When fully updated, the web tool will contain data for thousands of chemicals. EPA has incorporated stakeholder input into the design, and welcomes feedback on the current site. By increasing health and safety information, as well as identifying safer chemical ingredients, manufacturers and retailers will have the information to better differentiate their products by using safer ingredients. 

   In 2010, EPA began a concerted effort to increase the availability of information on chemicals as part of a commitment to strengthen the existing chemicals program and improve access and usefulness of chemical data and information.
   This included improving access to the TSCA inventory, issuing new policies for the review of confidential business information claims for health and safety studies, and launching the Chemical Data Access Tool.  

   The recent launch of the ChemView provides the public with a single access point for information that has been generated on certain chemicals regulated under TSCA. View and search ChemView at:  http://www.epa.gov/chemview

Source: U.S. EPA

Budget Would Reduce Wasteful Farm Programs

   Washington, D.C. – 3/13/2012 - The draft budget released by the House Budget Committee takes a first step toward reforming wasteful farm programs by calling for $31 billion in savings from farm subsidies and crop insurance, Environmental Working Group said in a March 12 statement.
   The budget document cited record farm income over the last few years in the face of crippling federal deficits as a reason to reexamine farm subsidies and the structure of the bloated crop insurance program.
   “Chairman Paul Ryan should be commended for looking to farm subsidies as ripe areas of reform that can yield large budget savings in a responsible manner,” EWG Vice President for Government Affairs Scott Faber said.
   EWG has identified $100 billion that could be cut from these programs over 10 years while leaving intact a robust safety net for farmers when they need it and without harming programs that feed hungry families or protect clean water, public health and the environment.
   Faber cautioned that the budget proposal would fail to achieve the planned savings if it leaves the details up to the House Agriculture Committee. “The budget plan leaves it up to the committee to decide where the savings should come from,” Faber said. “The committee has proven time and again that it is unwilling to reduce the flow of taxpayer dollars going to the most well-off farmers.”
   Following passage of last year’s budget blueprint, the House Agriculture Committee voted to take the full $35 billion in savings out of the nutrition assistance program for low income families rather than take a single penny from farm programs.
    The five-year farm bill passed by the committee last summer, which never reached the House floor, would have saved only $26.6 billion over 10 years, according to the latest estimates by the Congressional Budget Office. It would have taken more than $16 billion out of nutrition and conservation programs while spending $11 billion more on federally subsidized crop insurance.
   Source: Environmental Working Group

Group says ethanol blend would be nightmare

   (EWG) 2/19/2013 - The Environmental Working Group recently welcomed the introduction of legislation to block the use of gasoline containing 15 percent corn ethanol by U.S. Sens. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) and David Vitter (R-La.), calling it a good first step in addressing concerns about the broader use of higher ethanol blends.
   Currently most gasoline contains no more than 10 percent corn ethanol, but the Environmental Protection Agency decided last year to permit the use of the higher blend, known as E15, in cars and trucks made since 2001.
   “E15 is a consumer nightmare waiting to happen,” EWG Vice President of Government Affairs Scott Faber said. “If every major carmaker, AAA and the Coast Guard are all saying the same thing, it’s time for Congress to take notice.”
   E15 has been found to cause engine damage in tests conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy and manufacturers of boats and cars. Chrysler, Toyota and other auto makers have that said that their warranties will not cover E15-related claims, and others warn that E15 does not meet the fuel requirements detailed in their owners’ manuals.
   The American Automobile Association has called on EPA to suspend the sale of E15 due to the likelihood of confusion at the pump and costly vehicle damage. In July 2009, the U.S. Coast Guard told the EPA that it, too, opposed the introduction of E15, citing possible safety risks to recreational boaters.

   Source: Environmental Working Group

Cleaning Products Contain Known Carcinogen

   WASHINGTON, D.C. – (EWG) - 10/12/2012 – In a dramatic illustration of why it is essential that makers of cleaning products fully disclose their ingredients on product labels, the release of Environmental Working Group’s Guide to Healthy Cleaning has resulted in the revelation that more than half of a line of cleaners marketed to parents of babies contain an ingredient that releases formaldehyde, a known human carcinogen.
   The company is New York state-based BabyGanics, whose representative has described its products as “so safe that you can even drink them” in a video posted online. In the video uploaded by BabyTVcom on Feb. 13, 2008, he then drank from a bottle of a BabyGanics cleaner.
   EWG’s Guide to Healthy Cleaning, which gave more than 2,000 products grades of A-to-F based on the potential hazards of their ingredients and the completeness of their ingredient disclosures, gave “F” scores to a number of BabyGanics products because of poor disclosure. After the company contacted EWG and protested its grades, it agreed to post a full ingredient list on its website. This list, in turn, revealed that more than half of its products contain a preservative called HHT (Hexahydro-1,3,5-tris(2-hydroxyethyl)-s-triazine), which releases formaldehyde during product use. As a result, those products will continue to be graded “F” on the EWG guide until their formulations are changed.
   Executives of BabyGanics told EWG that the company is making plans to remove the preservative from its entire line.
   “Consumers should be wary of products that release formaldehyde because it is a carcinogen that experts believe is unsafe even in small amounts,” said Johanna Congleton, a senior scientist at EWG. “It would be hard to find anyone, especially parents, who believe it’s acceptable for products marketed as safe to use around babies to contain a substance known to release a known human carcinogen.”
   The BabyGanics revelation is a dramatic reminder that consumers cannot take companies’ labeling and marketing claims at face value.
   “As a mother of two young children, I am shocked that companies don’t have to tell consumers what’s in their cleaning products,” said Heather White, EWG’s chief of staff and general counsel. “So many families buy these products because they think they are safe, when in fact they contain chemicals that could pose serious dangers, including cancer. My advice to consumers is simple – don’t buy products labeled only with generic terms like ‘surfactants’ or ‘preservatives.’ Companies need to tell us exactly what’s in the products they’re selling. We have a right to know what chemicals we’re bringing into our homes in the products we buy. And EWG’s Guide to Healthy Cleaning was created to help consumers exercise that right.”
   The BabyGanics line is sold by national retailers such as Babies R Us and Bed, Bath & Beyond.
   EWG’s guide has highlighted how many cleaning products contain toxic chemicals and how difficult it is for even careful consumers to find out exactly what’s in them. Many companies use generic names like “surfactants” and “mineral salts” to describe some of their ingredients. Current federal law does not require disclosure of ingredients on the vast majority of cleaning products. EWG’s rating system and the information provided by the guide is challenging other companies to reevaluate what they put in their products and to detail that information on their product labels and on their web sites.
   EWG plans to do further research to evaluate more closely the use of toxic preservatives in household cleaning products.

  Source: Environmental Working Group

High Crop Prices, Subsidies Called Destructive

  Washington, D.C. - (EWG) - 8/30/2012 - Responding to high crop prices and unlimited insurance, growers plowed under more than 23 million acres of grassland, shrub land and wetlands in order to plant commodity crops between 2008 and 2011, a new report by Environmental Working Group and Defenders of Wildlife shows.
   The analysis, titled “Plowed Under,” uses U.S. Department of Agriculture satellite data to produce the most accurate estimate currently available of the rate of habitat conversion in the farm belt. It shows that more than 8.4 million acres were converted to plant corn, more than 5.6 million to raise soybeans and nearly 5.2 million to grow winter wheat. Most of the destroyed habitat was in states in the Great Plains and Upper Midwest, but some of the highest rates of habitat conversion to grow crops were in drought-plagued portions of West Texas and Oklahoma.
   “Policymakers are right to attend to the short term crisis created by the current drought, but what we’ve lost sight of in recent years is the long term crisis,” said Ken Cook, president of EWG. “A generation of conservation gains has been wiped out because costly, misguided government policies have caused ten of millions of acres of fragile land and wildlife habitat to be plowed under."
   Using a sophisticated mapping technique, “Plowed Under” found that 11 states had habitat losses of at least 1 million acres each over the three-year period, and a total of 147 counties lost at least 30,000 acres each. The losses were greatest in counties that received the largest amounts of crop insurance subsidies.
   According to USDA, widespread destruction of grassland is threatening habitats for important wildlife species such as the swift fox, as well as putting at risk sage grouse, the lesser prairie chicken, whooping cranes and mountain plover.
   The comprehensive analysis underscores the need for Congress to fully fund conservation programs designed to mitigate the devastating effects of severe weather and restore wildlife habitat, and to reject proposals to extend unlimited insurance subsidies without environmental protections. The full Senate and the House Agriculture Committee have each approved competing 2012 farm bill versions, and both would expand insurance subsidies, while cutting conservation programs by more than $6 billion over 10 years.
   Extravagant crop insurance subsidies are not only a threat to wildlife and the environment, but they also take a heavy toll on American taxpayers. Today, USDA pays, on average, 62 percent of farmers’ premiums for crop insurance and lavishes $1.3 billion a year on the insurance companies and agents that sell the policies. At current rates, taxpayers can expect to send another $90 billion to farmers and insurance companies over the next decade.
   “When Congress returns from recess and considers the 2012 farm bill, it should pass reasonable reforms to crop insurance subsidies, such as payment limits, and require every recipient to carry out basic conservation practices to protect the health of our land, water and soil, as the Senate version does,” said Scott Faber, EWG’s vice president of government affairs. (Read the full report)
   Source: EWG release of August 6, 2012

U.S., Mexico Sign Agreement on Environment

   WASHINGTON – 8/10/2012 - U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson joined Mexico’s Secretary for the Environment and Natural Resources Juan Elvira Quesada recently to sign the Border 2020 U.S.-Mexico Environmental program agreement.
The signing was witnessed by a number of leaders including the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico E. Anthony Wayne, Vice Chairman of the Tohono O’odham Nation Wavalene Romero, California Secretary for Environmental Protection Matthew Rodriquez, Baja California Governor José Guadalupe Osuna Millán and Tijuana Mayor Carlos Bustamante Anchondo. The Border 2020 agreement, developed with significant stakeholder input, will work to address high priority environmental and public health problems in the 2,000 mile border region. It follows the Border 2012 environmental agreement which ends this year.
    "Addressing the environmental issues along the border has long been a priority we share with our colleagues in Mexico, because we know that environmental degradation, pollution, and the diseases they trigger don’t stop at the national boundaries,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Thanks to help from our partners in government, industry, academia and local communities, the Border 2020 agreement will build upon the significant progress already made, and families on both sides of the border will continue to benefit from cleaner, healthier communities for decades to come.”
    The Border 2020 program works to reduce pollution in water, air, and on land, reduce exposure to chemicals from accidental releases or terrorism, and improve environmental stewardship. It is the latest environmental program implemented under the 1983 U.S.-Mexico La Paz Agreement. It builds on the Border 2012 program and encourages meaningful participation from communities and local stakeholders through regional task forces.
    Over the next eight years, the Border 2020 Environmental program will work towards significant improvements that will focus on five key areas:

• Reducing air pollution in bi-national air sheds by promoting vehicle inspection programs and road paving, and encouraging anti-idling technologies such as diesel truck electrification at ports-of-entry.
• Improving access to clean and safe water as well as improving water quality in the bi-national watersheds.
• Promoting materials and waste management, and addressing contaminated sites as well as management practices for addressing electronics, lead acid batteries, tires, and trash.
• Enhancing joint preparedness for environmental and emergency response.
• Enhancing compliance assurance and environmental stewardship.

    The new Border 2020 program also strengthens its focus in regional areas where environmental improvements are needed most: establishing realistic and concrete goals, supporting the implementation of projects, considering new fundamental strategies, and encouraging the achievement of more ambitious environmental and public health goals.
    Border 2012, which concludes this year, resulted in numerous achievements, including connecting households to drinking water and wastewater services benefitting more than 8.5 million border residents. In addition, the program helped remove more than 12 million scrap tires from dump sites border wide and more than 75.5 metric tons of obsolete pesticides from rural areas in California, Sonora, and Tamaulipas.
    As the home to over 14 million people and one of the busiest cross-border trade regions in the world, protecting human health and the environment in the border region is essential to ensuring that the U.S. continues to be safe, healthy and economically productive. The Border 2020 U.S.-Mexico Environmental program will protect the environment and public health for 10 states on both sides of the 2,000-mile border, including 26 U.S. tribes and seven groups of Mexican indigenous people.
    Reference: http://www.epa.gov/usmexicoborder/

Health Experts Denounce Flawed House Farm Bill

   Washington, D.C. – (EWG) - 7/27/2012 0- More than 60 leading chefs, authors, food and agriculture policy and nutrition experts, business leaders and environment and health organizations have sent an open letter to Capitol Hill objecting that the House agriculture committee’s proposed farm bill would “steer the next five years of national food and farm policy in the wrong direction.”
   The notable signatories urged lawmakers “to vote a resounding ‘no’ should the legislation come to a House floor vote (before the August recess), unless the bill is extensively rewritten through the amendment process.”
   Signers include Chefs Mario Batali and Ann Cooper, Food Inc. film director Robert Kenner, authors Michael Pollan and Laurie David, New York University nutrition professor Marion Nestle, pediatrician Dr. Harvey Karp and medical expert Dr. Andrew Weil.
   “The House bill will leave millions of people without enough food to eat, help fewer farmers and contribute to the loss of millions of acres of wetlands and grasslands,” said Ken Cook, president of Environmental Working Group. “Meanwhile the cost of crop insurance is poised to set another record---at the expense of the American taxpayer.”
   You can read the full letter and list of signers here.
   Kari Hamerschlag of Environmental Working Group and authors Dan Imhoff and Anna Lappé initiated the group letter to express frustration that the House Agriculture Committee slashes $16 billion in nutrition assistance and $6.1 billion from conservation programs while spending $36 billion on new farm subsidies and failing to include meaningful reforms to the costly federal crop insurance program.
   Hamerschlag, Imhoff, and Lappé organized a similar letter denouncing the Senate version of the farm bill last month.
   "We are speaking up for the millions of Americans who share the belief that the farm bill should use taxpayer dollars wisely and fairly,” Lappé said. “The 2012 legislation should promote healthy food, reward farmers who are good stewards of the land, and provide the much-needed resources for struggling families to put food on the table."
   The letter sent to the House acknowledges that the committee retained some of the Senate bill’s modest but positive elements, including programs that scale up local production and distribution of healthy foods and bolster marketing and research for fruit, nut and vegetable farmers.
   “On the whole, however, this is a huge step backward in almost every other regard,” the letter says. “We are deeply concerned that the bill would continue to give away tens of billions of taxpayer dollars to the largest commodity crop growers, insurance companies, and agribusinesses while drastically underfunding programs to protect natural resources, invest in beginning and disadvantaged farmers, revitalize local food economies, and promote health and food security.”
   The letter strongly criticizes the House panel’s failure to retain the Senate-approved conservation compliance amendment. Moreover, its version contains dangerous anti-environmental provisions that would roll back fundamental regulatory and constitutional protections, gut common-sense rules that protect water quality and wildlife from agricultural pesticides, exempt GMO crops from meaningful environmental review and federal oversight, and prevent states from setting their own standards for farm and food production.
   "Rather than making real reforms to alleviate hunger, strengthen stewardship, and boost rural economies, the House farm bill would continue sending billions to agribusinesses and weaken regulations around pesticides and genetically modified crops,” Imhoff said. “Americans deserve better."
   Signers of the letter hope that floor action on the bill would give House lawmakers the opportunity to dramatically improve the legislation. They are calling on lawmakers to pass amendments that eliminate harmful extraneous provisions, support local, healthy and organic food, provide full funding for nutrition assistance programs and include fiscally responsible reforms to crop insurance and commodity programs.

EPA Publishes U.S. Greenhouse Gas Inventory

   WASHINGTON - (EPA) - 4/16/2012 - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has released the 17th annual U.S. greenhouse gas inventory. The final report shows overall emissions in 2010 increased by 3.2 percent from the previous year. The trend is attributed to an increase in energy consumption across all economic sectors, due to increasing energy demand associated with an expanding economy, and increased demand for electricity for air conditioning due to warmer summer weather during 2010.
    Total emissions of the six main greenhouse gases in 2010 were equivalent to 6,822 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. These gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride. The report indicates that overall emissions have grown by over 10 percent from 1990 to 2010.
    The Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks: 1990-2010 is the latest annual report that the United States has submitted to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which sets an overall framework for intergovernmental efforts to tackle the challenge posed by climate change.
   EPA prepares the annual report in collaboration with experts from multiple federal agencies and after gathering comments from stakeholders across the country.
    The inventory tracks annual greenhouse gas emissions at the national level and presents historical emissions from 1990 to 2010. The inventory also calculates carbon dioxide emissions that are removed from the atmosphere by “sinks,” e.g., through the uptake of carbon by forests, vegetation and soils.
   Source: EPA

Pesticides Associated With Lower Birth Weight

   Oakland, Calif. – (EWG) - 4/9/2012 - A new study is reinforcing obstetricians’ standard warning that pregnant women should avoid exposure to pesticides in foods and weed killers because the chemicals can harm the developing fetus.
   In the study, Cincinnati-area women had levels of organophosphate insecticides that significantly affected birth weight and gestation period.
   “This latest report is further evidence that babies in the womb are exquisitely sensitive to pesticide exposure,” said Ken Cook, president and co-founder of Environmental Working Group. “While much has been done to reduce people’s exposure to organophosphates, this important study shows that even remaining exposures are harmful.”
   Lead researcher Bruce Lanphear MD MPH, and his colleagues tracked an ethnically and economically diverse group of more than 300 expectant mothers from the Cincinnati area. They found that newborns of women with the highest levels of organophosphates in their urine were delivered, on average, about half a week earlier and weighed one-third of a pound less than those of women with the lowest exposures.
   The abstract of the new study can be found in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
   For years, EWG has urged the US Environmental Protection Agency to reduce the use of these highly toxic pesticides in agriculture and advised consumers to avoid fruits and vegetables with the highest levels of pesticides. Last year, three studies found that prenatal exposure to organophosphates was associated with diminished IQ in children. Other research has linked organophosphate exposure in children to increased risk of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).
   Source: EWG release

EPA Issues 2011 Fuel Economy Trends Report

   WASHINGTON (EPA) - 3/15/2012 - The average fuel efficiency for new cars and light duty trucks has increased while the average carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions continue to decrease for the seventh consecutive year, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s annual report, “Light-Duty Automotive Technology, Carbon Dioxide Emissions, and Fuel Economy Trends: 1975 Through 2011.”
    “Today’s report shows that we are making significant strides toward saving families money at the pump, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and cleaning up the air we breathe,” said Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation. “The historic steps taken by the Obama administration to improve fuel economy and reduce our dependence on foreign oil is accelerating this progress, will spur economic growth and create high-quality domestic jobs in cutting edge industries across America.”
    For 2010, the last year for which EPA has final data from automakers, the average real world CO2 emissions from new vehicles were 394 grams per mile and the average fuel economy value was 22.6 miles per gallon (mpg). EPA projects an improvement in 2011, based on pre-model year sales estimates provided to EPA by automakers, to 391 grams of CO2 per mile and 22.8 mpg.
    Fuel economy will continue to improve significantly as part of the Obama administration’s historic standards that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase fuel economy to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025. The U.S. Department of Transportation and EPA are implementing the first phase of these standards which already improved fuel economy in 2010 and will raise fuel efficiency to 35.5 mpg by 2016. These standards will save American families $1.7 trillion dollars in fuel costs, and by 2025 result in an average fuel savings of over $8,000 per vehicle. Additionally, these programs will dramatically cut the oil we consume, saving a total of 12 billion barrels of oil, and by 2025 reduce oil consumption by 2.2 million barrels a day – as much as half of the oil we import from OPEC every day.
    The report also details the growth of more efficient technologies, such as six-speed transmissions, advanced fuel injection, and turbochargers that are making significant inroads into the mainstream market. EPA expects these and other new technologies to become even more popular in the next few years as automakers prepare to meet and fuel economy standards that will further drive up fuel efficiency and reduce emissions.
    The CO2 emissions and fuel economy values above reflect EPA’s best estimates of real world CO2 emissions and fuel economy performance. They are consistent with the fuel economy estimates that EPA provides on new vehicle window stickers and in the Fuel Economy Guide. These real world fuel economy values are about 20 percent lower, on average, than those used for compliance with the corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) program.
    The new report can be found at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/fetrends.htm

EPA Proposes $16.4 Million Plan to Clean Up Site

  (EPA) - New York, N.Y. - 3/2/2012 - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has proposed a plan to clean up contaminated sediment, soil and debris in streams and in an area near lagoons in which industrial wastewater was stored at the Universal Oil Products Superfund site in East Rutherford, New Jersey. The proposed cleanup plan will eliminate the threat of contaminants spreading off the site through the streams that carry water into Berry’s Creek, located on the eastern border of the site. The EPA is simultaneously overseeing a comprehensive study of the site to determine what other measures may be necessary to address the contamination.
   The EPA is encouraging the public to comment on the plan through March 30, 2012 and will hold a public meeting on March 6, 2012 at 6:30 p.m. at the East Rutherford Memorial Library, 143 Boiling Springs Avenue, East Rutherford, New Jersey. The plan is available at the library and on line at http://www.epa.gov/region2/superfund/npl/universaloil/.
   "This is a heavily contaminated site which includes mercury, PCBs and other pollutants that could potentially spread off the site by streams. EPA is taking action to protect public health and, the environment and wildlife. This is a complex, toxic site. I urge the public to become informed and involved in this important issue," EPA Regional Administrator Judith A. Enck said.
   Volatile organic compounds, semi-volatile organic compounds, polychlorinated biphenyls and metals from the former chemical laboratory and recovery facility have contaminated soil, ground water, sediment and surface water. Mercury, PCBs and other chemicals impact Berry’s Creek as they move to and from the site through the tidal action of the creek. Fish and crabs in Berry's Creek and adjacent water bodies are contaminated with chemicals at levels that exceed U.S. Food and Drug Administration guidelines for human consumption.
   PCBs can cause cancer in humans, as well as a variety of other adverse health effects on the immune, reproductive, nervous and endocrine systems. Mercury exposure at high levels can harm the brain, heart, kidneys, lungs and immune system of people of all ages. Birds and mammals that eat fish are also affected by mercury and PCBs in contaminated water and sediment, and can be harmful to the health of people who eat them.
   Beginning in 1932, Trubeck Laboratories operated an aroma chemicals laboratory and later a solvent recovery operation at the site. Universal Oil Products acquired the property and facilities in 1960. Operations at the facility ended in 1979 and the buildings were demolished in 1980. In 1999, Honeywell acquired the site through a merger.
   The Universal Oil Products site is approximately 74 acres, which are divided into uplands and stream areas. The uplands, located in the northwest corner of the site, are man-made lands and municipal trash placed there years ago on top of native soils and peat. Cleanup work there has been completed, including the excavation of contaminated soil. Honeywell is currently conducting a long-term study of the nature and extent of contamination in and around streams under a legal agreement with the EPA. Sampling has shown that contamination in the vicinity of lagoons where wastewater was once stored is substantially higher than the rest of the site and that contamination has the potential to move into other areas.
   Under the proposed cleanup plan about 27,000 cubic yards of contaminated sediment, soil and debris from the area in and around the previous wastewater lagoon and adjacent stream channels will be excavated, dewatered and taken off site for disposal. A tide gate will be installed at Murray Hill Parkway and water will be taken out of the lagoon and channels to allow for dry excavation down to the natural clay layer that is present throughout most of the site. Soil will be added to provide cover and allow vegetation to grow to provide habitat for wildlife. The estimated cost of this proposed cleanup is $16.4 million. Honeywell has agreed to pay for and perform the cleanup work.
   A document, called an Engineering Evaluation/Cost Analysis, which evaluates the various cleanup options considered in developing the proposed cleanup plan is available at the East Rutherford Memorial Library and on the websitehttp://www.epa.gov/region2/superfund/npl/universaloil/. The EPA encourages the public to submit comments to the EPA. The EPA is accepting public comment on the proposed cleanup until March 30, 2012. Written comments may be mailed or emailed to: Doug Tomchuk, Remedial Project Manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 290 Broadway, 19th Floor, New York, New York 10007-1866; Email: tomchuk.doug@epa.gov

New ethanol blend could damage some vehicles

   (EWG) - 2/19/2012 - The Environmental Protection Agency’s decision on February 17 to pave the way for the sale of gasoline blended with up to 15 percent ethanol is likely to prove a nightmare for car owners who improperly fuel their gas tanks.
   Every major automaker has warned that millions of vehicle warranties will be voided if drivers fill up with E15. That means consumers will pull into gas stations that could have as many as four pumps with different kinds of fuel: one for E10 (up to 10 percent ethanol); one for E15; possibly one for E85 (between 70 and 85 percent ethanol); and maybe one for old-fashioned gasoline. The EPA intends to approve E15 only for vehicles manufactured after 2000. But some gas station pumps may not even have labels specifying which ethanol blend is which, because not every state requires them.
   "It is going to be extremely confusing and dangerous for consumers," said Sheila Karpf, a legislative analyst at the Environmental Working Group. "If they make a mistake and put E15 into an older car or small engine, there's a good chance they'll ruin their engine and the manufacturer's warranty won't cover the damage."
   To advance consumer safety, EWG analysts have created an Ethanol Blends Guide and Fact Sheet to help drivers choose the right fuel for their vehicles. The analysis provides more information about the new E15 label requirements.
   Ethanol is more corrosive and burns hotter than gasoline, properties that could cause some engines to stall, misfire and overheat. Fuel with higher ethanol blends emits more nitrous oxide and formaldehyde than gasoline, lowers mileage and damages fuel tanks and pumps.
   "Instead of approving a fuel that will pose health and safety hazards and damage engines, the U.S. should invest in energy efficiency measures and research and development for truly sustainable biofuels," said Karpf. "The high cost of replacing or repairing engines will be tacked onto corn ethanol's other costs -- including higher food prices, increased soil erosion and polluted water supplies."
   To be safe, EWG recommends that consumers stick with E10 or regular unleaded gasoline if they can find it. If gas pumps are not labeled, consumers should ask a service station employee for more information about the fuel and the amount of ethanol it contains. Consumers should check with their engine manufacturers or mechanics to find out if their cars or small engines can safely run on E15 or other ethanol blends.
   Source: Environmental Working Group

Gas Drilling Doublespeak; Landowners Speak Out

   Washington D.C. – 1/11/2012 - Gas drilling companies routinely warn their investors of a litany of possible disasters – such as leaks, spills, explosions, bodily injury and even death – but regularly fail to mention these risks when persuading landowners to sign leases for drilling rights, an Environmental Working Group investigation found.
   EWG researchers compared federal Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filings and natural gas drilling leases used by major companies engaged in hydraulic fracturing (fracking) and horizontal drilling and found that, at best, the leases offered only vague mentions of risks that are explicitly listed in the legally required SEC reports. Twenty-three landowners in five states who had signed or been asked to sign drilling leases also told EWG that company representatives who offered the leases made no mention of possible risks.
   “These landowners who were left in the dark about drilling risks are likely just the tip of the iceberg,” said EWG senior counsel Dusty Horwitt, J.D. “Industry documents, regulators and lawyers all indicate that there may be thousands of landowners who unknowingly put their water, homes and health at risk by signing natural gas leases. It’s time to level the playing field so that landowners know the facts about drilling before they sign a lease.”
   Federal law designed to protect investors against fraud requires companies to disclose “the most significant factors that make the offering speculative or risky.” But in the midst of perhaps the largest natural gas rush in U.S. history, there has been little or no regulation of the transactions that give drilling companies access to private lands atop gas and oil reserves.
   “We were never told about any kind of risks whatsoever,” Craig Sautner of Dimock, Penn., told an EWG researcher. Craig and his wife Julie leased about 3 1/2 acres to Houston-based Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. in 2008.
   Water wells serving the Sautners and 18 other nearby families were contaminated and became unusable after Cabot began drilling in 2009, according to Pennsylvania officials. Cabot, which has publicly disputed the finding, did not respond to EWG’s request for comment. The state recently lifted an order requiring Cabot to provide replacement water to the families over the objection of the Sautners, who say their well water is still contaminated. Several affected residents in Dimock, including the Sautners, have sued Cabot for damages.
   The company’s 2008 10-K form filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission contains explicit warnings that appear nowhere in the Sautners’ lease agreement and that the couple says never came up in their discussions with company representatives:
   “Our business involves a variety of operating risks, including: well site blowouts, cratering and explosions; equipment failures; uncontrolled flows of natural gas, oil or well fluids; fires; formations with abnormal pressures; pollution and other environmental risks; and natural disasters.
   “Any of these events could result in injury or loss of human life.”
   The pollution in Dimock is not an isolated incident. State officials in Wyoming, Ohio and Colorado have documented recent cases of water contamination linked to natural gas drilling, and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has documented serious problems associated with drilling as far back as 1987. On Thursday, Dec. 8, the EPA also concluded that fracking could be responsible for a case of groundwater contamination in Wyoming.
   EWG’s report calls on states to require that companies disclose drilling risks to landowners in the same way the SEC requires it for shareholders.
   The report is available online at: http://static.ewg.org/pdf/Drilling_Doublespeak.pdf.
For more information on gas and oil drilling, visit: http://www.ewg.org/gas-drilling-and-fracking.
   Source: Environmental Working Group release, 12/12/2011

EPA Proposes New Rules On Hazardous Waste

   WASHINGTON – 7/7/2011 - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing new safeguards for recycling hazardous materials to protect public health and the environment. Today’s proposal modifies EPA’s 2008 Definition of Solid Waste (DSW) rule, which revised hazardous waste regulations to encourage recycling of hazardous materials. Today’s proposal will improve accountability and oversight of hazardous materials recycling, while allowing for important flexibilities that will promote its economic and environmental benefits. The EPA is opening up this proposal for public comment.
    The EPA is also releasing for public comment its draft expanded environmental justice analysis of the 2008 DSW final rule, which evaluates the rule’s potential impact on low-income and minority communities. EPA is also requesting public comment on the environmental justice analysis as well as on suggested changes received from peer review. The analysis and peer review comments will be available in the docket for this rule making once the proposal is published.
   “Safe recycling of hazardous materials conserves vital resources while protecting the environmental and economic health of our communities,” said Mathy Stanislaus, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response. “Today’s proposed enhancements show EPA’s commitment to achieving sustainable materials management through increased recycling, while retaining safeguards to protect vulnerable communities and the environment.”
    The EPA’s re-examination of the 2008 DSW final rule identified areas in the regulations that could be improved to better protect public health and the environment with a particular focus on adjacent communities by ensuring better management of hazardous waste. Today’s proposal includes provisions to address those areas through increased transparency and oversight and accountability for hazardous materials recycling. Facilities that recycle on site or within the same company under the reduced regulatory requirements retained under the proposal would be subject to enhanced storage and record keeping requirements as compared to the 2008 rule.
   Companies that send their hazardous materials off site for recycling would have tailored storage standards, while being required to send their materials to a permitted hazardous waste recycling facility. The proposed rule also creates a level playing field by requiring all forms of hazardous waste recycling to meet requirements designed to ensure materials are legitimately recycled and not being disposed of illegally.
    EPA will accept comment on this proposal for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register. The docket for the rule making is EPA-HQ-RCRA-2010-0742 and can be accessed at http://www.regulations.gov once the proposal is published.
    More information about this rule making: http://www.epa.gov/waste/hazard/dsw/rulemaking.htm