toxics
US and China work together to cut nitrous oxide emissions
The Biden administration announced a plan to reduce nitrous oxide emissions from chemical plants, aiming for significant greenhouse gas reductions through cooperation with China.
In short:
- The U.S. and China aim to reduce nitrous oxide emissions, a potent greenhouse gas, through a cooperative agreement.
- Nitrous oxide, 273 times more potent than CO2, significantly contributes to climate change and ozone depletion.
- Industry leaders and policymakers discussed these initiatives at a White House summit, emphasizing voluntary industry participation and carbon credits.
Key quote:
“This is a big opportunity. The fruit is large, it’s low [hanging], it’s ripe.”
— Manish Bapna, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council
Why this matters:
Nitrous oxide emissions are a major driver of climate change and ozone layer depletion. Reducing these emissions could have a substantial impact on global greenhouse gas levels, comparable to removing millions of cars from the roads.
Toxic coal ash complicates Chapel Hill redevelopment plans
Officials in Chapel Hill, NC, face criticism over a plan to redevelop a coal ash site near a popular greenway, as community members fear health risks from lingering toxic metals.
In short:
- Chapel Hill aims to redevelop a coal ash site but faces backlash over a cleanup plan deemed insufficient by some community members and lawyers.
- The site, containing 46,000 tons of coal ash, has restricted uses, excluding residences and parks, due to contamination concerns.
- High levels of arsenic, radium, and other toxic metals persist, posing potential health risks and environmental hazards.
Key quote:
"Simply burying the ash under a layer of soil will do nothing to clean up the contamination and address these environmental and public health hazards."
— Perrin de Jong, Southeast staff attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity
Why this matters:
Coal ash, a byproduct of burning coal for electricity, contains harmful substances such as arsenic, lead, and mercury. These toxins have been linked to a variety of health issues, including cancer and neurological damage. As the town officials push forward with redevelopment plans, community members are rallying to ensure that proper safety measures are taken to mitigate any exposure to these dangerous contaminants.
Biden administration unveils plan to wean US government off single-use plastics
“Because of its purchasing power … the Federal Government has the potential to significantly impact the supply of these products.”
The U.S. government will stop using single-use plastics in all federal operations by 2035, according to a strategy released by the Biden administration on Friday.
The announcement also set a goal for the federal government to stop buying plastic for food service, events and packaging by 2027. While the strategy isn’t enforceable by law and could change under future administrations, it is the first government-wide strategy aimed at reducing plastic pollution and recognizes that the plastic pollution “crisis” encompasses the entire lifecycle: from the fossil fuels used as building blocks in plastic manufacturing to the microplastic bits lining our shorelines.
“With its multitude of environmental impacts across its supply chain, broad global effects, and severe public health consequences, plastic pollution has become one of the most pressing and consequential environmental problems in the U.S. and around the globe,” said Brenda Mallory and Ali Zaidi, two White House environmental and climate officials, in the joint letter accompanying the strategy document.
Changes in federal purchasing can have huge impacts: The U.S. federal government is the largest buyer of consumer goods in the world, with nearly $600 billion in annual spending. “Because of its purchasing power, by reducing the demand of plastic products through procurement changes, the Federal Government has the potential to significantly impact the supply of these products,” the strategy reads.
The document also points to already underway federal efforts to curb plastic pollution’s impact — including an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rule set in April to tackle chemical emissions, a Department of the Interior order to phase-out single use plastics on public lands by 2032, ongoing EPA recycling grants, and a National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration effort to tackle marine debris.
"Plastic pollution has become one of the most pressing and consequential environmental problems in the U.S. and around the globe." - Brenda Mallory and Ali Zaidi, White House officials
The announcement comes as the plastic crisis continues to grow. The world generates roughly 400 million tons of plastic waste each year, and less than 10% of plastic ever made has been recycled. Plastic waste is set to triple by 2060.
The crisis has garnered international attention as more than 175 countries are negotiating a global plastics treaty. The talks have stalled over issues such as regulating the chemicals in plastic, production caps, and the role of chemical recycling and bioplastics. There is a High Ambition Coalition of countries that want an end to plastic pollution by 2040. There is also a Global Coalition for Plastics Sustainability — made of nations economically reliant on fossil fuels — that is pushing for a larger focus on addressing plastic waste (via chemical and mechanical recycling and other means) rather than plastic bans or production limits. The U.S. — the largest exporter of oil and gas in the world — is not part of either and has been criticized for not taking a stronger stance on limiting production.
The new strategy similarly does not call for any plastic production caps, but many environmental groups said it is a step in the right direction.
“This report is the clearest articulation to date from the White House of the scale and urgency of the plastic pollution crisis and the threat it poses for our ocean and communities,” Jeff Watters, Ocean Conservancy’s vice president of external affairs said in a statement.
Erin Simon, vice president and head of plastic waste and business for the World Wildlife Fund, praised the strategy for focusing on the entire lifecycle.
“We’re heartened to see this report doesn’t shy away from the negative impacts that plastics have on human health and analyzes the problem through the full life cycle of plastic,” Simon said in a statement. “Cleaning up the global plastic mess must start at home. And today under President Biden and Vice President Harris’ leadership, the U.S. government is doing exactly that."
Chemical recycling has an economic and environmental injustice problem: Report
“It wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of plastic pollution out there.”
PITTSBURGH — Chemical recycling projects are unlikely to generate local economic benefits or help reduce global plastic pollution, according to a new report.
The report, published by the progressive think tank Ohio River Valley Institute, investigated the technological and economic challenges associated with chemical recycling, with a focus on the Ohio River Valley, which spans western Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia.
“There’s a tendency to co-locate these facilities where there’s already a petrochemical cluster of some sort, which means communities already burdened by petrochemical industries, such as Ohio River Valley, become even more polluted,” Kathy Hipple, one of the report’s authors, told EHN.
Chemical recycling, sometimes referred to as advanced or molecular recycling, refers to processes that use heat, chemicals or both to break down plastic waste into component parts for reuse as plastic feedstocks or as fuel. These processes are different from conventional or mechanical plastic recycling, which breaks down plastic waste physically but not at a molecular level.
Only 5% to 6% of plastic waste gets recycled in the U.S., and the proponents of chemical recycling say the industry could help change that.
“We’re not going to create circularity for plastics with one single solution,” Chris Layton, director of sustainability for specialty plastics at Eastman Chemical Company, told EHN. “We’re going to have to eliminate some plastics we really don't need, figure out ways to reduce and reuse and maximize what we can do for mechanical and advanced recycling.”
But environmental and health advocates say the process is still inefficient, energy intensive and emits hazardous chemicals into the air and water. As much as 80% of plastic waste put into chemical recycling processes is lost as hazardous emissions, according to a report by the International Pollutants Elimination Network (IPEN) and Beyond Plastics.
The Ohio River Valley Institute’s report concluded that chemical recycling only converts 15%-20% of plastic waste into recycled plastic products (the rest become emissions, fuel or hazardous waste), that none of the chemical recycling plants currently operating in the U.S. are commercially successful, that chemical recycling is technically and financially risky and that the chemical recycling process is toxic and poses health and safety risks to workers and communities — particularly those that are already overburdened by pollution from the petrochemical industry.
“Going into writing this report, I thought maybe chemical recycling was a good solution to the global plastic pollution problem,” Hipple said. “Unfortunately, it turns out that chemical recycling is not the solution — it wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of plastic pollution out there.”
There are 10 functional chemical recycling facilities in the U.S., according to the report, two of which are in the Ohio River Valley (Alterra and Purecycle, both of which are in Ohio). Most are still operating in pilot phases, according to the report, processing only small amounts of plastic, because chemical recycling is expensive and it’s still cheaper to buy virgin plastic and fossil fuels.
“Unfortunately, it turns out that chemical recycling is not the solution — it wouldn’t even make a dent in the amount of plastic pollution out there.” - Kathy Hipple, report author
As an example of the industry’s financial challenges, Hipple noted that Shell, which operates a large petrochemical plant in the Ohio River Valley, recently conceded that it would abandon its pledge to turn more than 1 million tons into oil per year by 2025 because the plan is “unfeasible.”
“If a company like Shell is backing away from its pledge to increase advanced recycling when they have some of the biggest capital expenditure budgets in the world, that really demonstrates that this technology is immature and there’s no business case for doing this at the moment,” Hipple said.
Despite these challenges, at least nine chemical recycling plants have been proposed throughout the Ohio River Valley, including now-canceled or on-hold projects in Youngstown, Ohio and Point Township, Pennsylvania. Other plants proposed in the region have faced stark community opposition.
Environmental justice concerns
At the national level, 70% of constructed chemical recycling plants are located
in low-income areas and 60% in neighborhoods of color, according to Beyond Plastics, prompting concerns about environmental injustice.
The new report adds to these concerns, as it found that six of the nine chemical recycling facilities proposed in the region would be located in environmental justice communities with a higher percentage of low-income households than the state average. Three would be located in neighborhoods predominantly populated by people of color.
“These communities are already overburdened by pollution and the emissions from chemical recycling facilities are highly polluting and highly toxic,” Hipple said.
Credit: "Chemical Recycling: A False Promise for the Ohio River Valley"
A database compiled in March revealed that more than 16,000 chemicals are used in plastics production, with thousands of them being toxic even in very small quantities. Many of these chemicals are released into air or water during the chemical recycling process.
“These industries often promise jobs and economic growth that never materialize for local communities,” Hipple said. “It isn’t fair that these communities wind up bearing the environmental and health costs.”
Activists demand halt to uranium mining near Grand Canyon
Environmentalists and tribal members are urging Arizona officials to end uranium mining near the Grand Canyon, citing health and environmental risks.
In short:
- Activists delivered a petition with over 17,500 signatures to Governor Katie Hobbs, calling for the closure of the Pinyon Plain Mine.
- Uranium mining poses significant health risks and threatens water sources critical to the Grand Canyon's ecosystem and local communities.
- The governor’s office acknowledged receipt but has yet to take action on the petition.
Key quote:
“The safe thing to do, the prudent thing to do, is to avoid that risk altogether and close the mine.”
— Taylor McKinnon, director of the Center for Biological Diversity
Why this matters:
The Grand Canyon has long been a battleground for conservation efforts. Uranium mining, with its potential to contaminate water sources and disrupt ecosystems, adds a new layer of urgency to these efforts. The Havasupai Tribe, whose ancestral lands lie within the Grand Canyon, has been vocal about the threats posed to their health and way of life. Contaminated water sources could have devastating effects on both human populations and the diverse wildlife that call the canyon home.
Drilling in Permian Basin linked to high ozone levels in New Mexico park
Oil and gas drilling in the Permian Basin is causing excessive ozone pollution at Carlsbad Caverns National Park, a new study reveals.
In short:
- The study found summer ozone levels at Carlsbad Caverns frequently exceed EPA health standards, linking this to increased drilling in the Permian Basin.
- Researchers identified oil and gas extraction as major contributors to high ozone levels, with nitrogen oxide emissions from drilling operations being significant.
- The study suggests electrified, grid-powered drill rigs could help mitigate ozone pollution.
Key quote:
"Our measurements confirm that activity such as drilling and natural gas flaring is a major driver of the high ozone levels we see."
— Andrey Marsavin, PhD candidate, Colorado State University.
Why this matters:
Ozone pollution can cause asthma and other health issues and harm crops and ecosystems. Understanding its sources helps in developing strategies to protect both human health and the environment.
A Nevada community fights lithium mine to protect rare fish and water resources
A Nevada community is uniting to fight a proposed lithium mine that threatens the scarce water resources vital to the rare Devil’s Hole pupfish and other local species.
In short:
- The Ash Meadows Wildlife Refuge, known as the "Galapagos of the Mojave Desert," is home to 26 endemic species, including the endangered Devil’s Hole pupfish.
- A proposed lithium mine near the refuge could significantly deplete water resources, endangering the wildlife and local community wells already running dry.
- Local residents, environmentalists, and tribal leaders are leveraging the Endangered Species Act to oppose the mine, seeking federal intervention to protect the area.
Key quote:
“We want to save Ash Meadows, but Ash Meadows is going to save us.”
— Carolyn Allen, chair of the Amargosa Valley Town Board
Why this matters:
The proposed lithium mine could devastate the fragile ecosystem and water supply in one of the hottest and driest regions of the U.S., highlighting the ongoing conflict between renewable energy development and environmental conservation.