Harvard University red brick buildings with a green lawn and people rowing on a river in the foreground.

Credit: Kaz Tanaka/BigStock Photo ID: 2398044

How a government feud threatens decades of scientific progress

The Trump administration’s move to cut off $2.6 billion in federal research funding to Harvard has upended a vital engine of American science, with ripple effects that reach far beyond a single university.

Emily Badger, Aatish Bhatia, and Ethan Singer report for The New York Times.

In short:

Nearly 900 grants supporting projects in neuroscience, opioid treatment, environmental health, and more were halted after the administration accused Harvard of failing to meet federal conditions tied to civil rights and research integrity.
The funding freeze impacts long-term, high-risk science — including regenerative medicine, sleep studies, and cancer research — that typically isn’t pursued by industry due to cost or lack of near-term profit.
These grants also train the next generation of scientists, sustain critical partnerships across institutions, and support research that underpins national policy, from trans fat bans to telehealth effectiveness.

Key quote:

“What we are losing is a future.”

— Glorian Sorensen, professor and co-director of a worker health and safety center at Harvard

Why this matters:

Shutting down nearly 900 research grants puts real-world public health, environmental policy, and future breakthroughs at risk. The consequences might not be seen today, but years from now, the impacts will be felt — in the therapies the world doesn't have, the gaps in climate data, the lives that could have been saved but weren't.

www.nytimes.com

A residential garbage can overflows with plastic bottles and other waste.

Credit: the blowup/Unsplash

New pricing system helps small town slash its garbage output

When Plympton, Massachusetts started charging by the bag for trash, it nearly halved the town’s garbage — and saved thousands of dollars in the process.

Tik Root reports for Grist.

In short:

Plympton cut its annual trash output from 640 to 335 tons after shifting from a flat-fee dump sticker to a “pay-as-you-throw” model charging per bag.
The new pricing system incentivized recycling and composting, saving the town about $65,000 a year and reducing landfill-related emissions.
Nearly half of Massachusetts municipalities now use PAYT, and experts say volume-based pricing drives waste reduction without unfairly burdening small or low-income households.

Key quote:

“We found that demand for waste disposal was really responsive to price. If you raise the price of trash, people are going to find ways to not put as much out at the curb.”

— John Halstead, retired professor of environmental economics at the University of New Hampshire and an author of a study on New Hampshire's pay-as-you-throw model

Why this matters:

Less landfill use means fewer toxics in the air and water, lower greenhouse gas emissions, and more recycled materials in circulation. Plympton’s story shows that smart policy doesn’t have to be punitive or complicated — it just has to make people see the cost of their choices, and let common sense do the rest.

How a government feud threatens decades of scientific progress

New pricing system helps small town slash its garbage output

Heat and pollution are combining to threaten public health as U.S. temperatures rise

Trump administration must release EV charger funds, judge rules in federal lawsuit

Greenwashing law reversal deepens political rift in European Union

UK advisers say reaching 2050 climate targets is within reach, but urgent policy shifts needed

Global support grows for carbon tax that also reduces poverty

Opinion: Trump’s “gold standard science” order gives politics control over public health and climate policy

Multiple Houston-area oil and gas facilities that have violated pollution laws are seeking permit renewals

One facility has emitted cancer-causing chemicals into waterways at levels up to 520% higher than legal limits.

Pennsylvania health advocates say Trump’s first 100 days in office have caused “100 harms” to local communities

“They're terrorizing these scientists because they want to keep them silent.”

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

"The reality is, we are not exposed to one chemical at a time.”

Two years into his term, has Gov. Shapiro kept his promises to regulate Pennsylvania’s fracking industry?

A new report assesses the administration’s progress and makes new recommendations

An open letter from EPA staff to the American public

“We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to hold this administration accountable.”

New evidence links heavy metal pollution with wildfire retardants

“The chemical black box” that blankets wildfire-impacted areas is increasingly under scrutiny.