Yves here. Due to so much competing news, we’ve been light on climate and environment coverage. Established readers may recall that Jerri-Lynn covered the war on plastics intensely. Then and now, the media reports how scientists are finding plastic in more and more places in human tissue. A few of many sightings:
Presence of microplastics in human stomachs Forensic Science International
Is plastic killing you?
A team of Italian scientists recently published an eye-opening study on microplastics and cardiovascular diseases.
Here’s what they found (it’s not good): pic.twitter.com/ffXGbCeTA5
— Max Hertan (@maxhertan) April 18, 2024
Microplastics found in brain tissue in new study EHN
In the 20 years since the term “microplastics” was first coined, a rapidly growing body of research has consistently shown how pervasive and problematic the pollutants have become.
A new #ScienceReview provides an overview of this research and the progress made in understanding… pic.twitter.com/DBtezQTtbP
— Science Magazine (@ScienceMagazine) October 25, 2024
Given the regular news about the extent and health damage from plastic pollution, one wonders why the considerable number of health fetishists in the elite aren’t loudly demanding reforms.
And the worst is it’s not as if this environmental threat can’t be greatly reduced:
Our new research with @BerkeleyDataSci, @SchmidtDSE, and @UCSBenioffOcean can assist policymakers in their push to nearly end global plastic pollution. Read more about our latest study: https://t.co/sasnG8sw0l
— Berkeley Rausser College of Natural Resources (@NatureAtCal) November 14, 2024
So why didn’t Trump appoint RFK, Jr., an environmental lawyer, to the EPA, where he could have done a lot of good by going after abuses and weak enforcement in areas where it affects health? It seems that the real agenda is deregulation. Trump and RFK, Jr. seem to labor under the misguided view that deregulation n the medical area will improve health, when the record with the environment shows the opposite.
By Shannon Kelleher. Originally published at The New Lede
ederal regulators have enabled US plastics plants across the country to dump dangerous chemicals into waterways by failing to update wastewater limits for over 30 years, according to a new analysis by a watchdog group.
While the Clean Water Act requires the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to review wastewater discharge limits every five years to keep up with advances in water treatment technologies, the agency has not updated its guidelines for the plastics sector since 1993.
“Most folks don’t know that the plastics industry is not required to use modern wastewater treatment controls to limit the amount of pollution they pour into our waterways,” Jen Duggan, the executive director of EIP, said in a press call Thursday. “It’s long past time these plants clean up.”
In its analysis, the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP) focused on 70 plants that make raw plastics called “nurdles,” tiny pellets later used to make products such as water bottles, food containers and toy
Over 80% of the plants violated pollution limits in their permits at least once between 2021 and 2023, according to the report, yet the EPA only issued financial penalties to 14% of violators, the report found. The Chemours Washington Works plant in West Virginia received 115 violations over this period – more than any other plant studied – but was not issued any penalties by regulators, the EIP analysis found.
Additionally, 40% of the plastics plants are operating on outdated water pollution control permits, the study found.
The EPA said it is reviewing the report and would “respond appropriately.”
The report comes as nations prepare for further negotiations this month in Busan, Korea over a global treaty designed to curb plastic pollution. While the plastics treaty is “incredibly important,” said Duggan, it wouldn’t directly address discharges of harmful pollutants from plastics plants “anytime soon, if at all,” while implementing the existing Clean Water Act would dramatically reduce discharges, she said.
Most of the plants EIP analyzed lacked any limits in their permits for a number of concerning pollutants. None of the plants had limits on total nitrogen and only one had a limit on phosphorus— nutrients that can lead to toxic algae blooms and “dead zones” that damage waterways.
In 2023, the 70 plants released nearly 10 million pounds of nitrogen and almost 2 million pounds of phosphorus into rivers, lakes and streams across the country, according to the analysis.
The report noted that the EPA has not set any federal wastewater limits for 1,4-dioxane, a chemical classified by the EPA as a likely carcinogen that is produced when plants make plastic for water bottles, and dioxins, which the report calls “one of the most toxic chemicals known to science.” While a few plants’ permits included limits on these chemicals that were set by states, most did not.
Eight plastics plants reported releasing over 74,000 pounds of 1,4-dioxane into waterways in 2022 while 10 PVC plants reported releasing 1,374 grams of dioxins and similar compound the same year, according to the report.
“All of this data was provided to us by the industry itself,” James Hiatt, executive director of the nonprofit For a Better Bayou, said at the press conference. “The reality is, the numbers that we have are probably lower than the actuality.”
Petrochemical plants are also potential sources of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), so-called “forever chemicals” linked to certain cancer, hormone disruption and other health problems that are found in rivers and streams across the US. However, there is little data on PFAS released by these plants due to a lack of EPA limits or monitoring requirements, notes the report.
In April 2023, EIP and other environmental groups filed a lawsuit in the US Court of Appeals in the Ninth Circuit against the EPA over the agency’s outdated limits on toxic chemicals in wastewater from plastics plants, as well as oil refineries, fertilizer factories and other industrial facilities.
On December 5, the groups will present their oral arguments for the case, said an attorney for EIP.
Despite the shifting political tide following Donald Trump’s recent presidential win, Duggan said she expects the court will uphold standards set by the Clean Water Act.
“No matter what Trump’s plans are, Trump cannot unilaterally wave away these kinds of mandatory, statutory requirements,” she said. “The Clean Water Act has a very clear mandate that EPA update these water pollution standards to keep pace with technology. Even one of the most conservative courts in the country, the US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, has ruled to this effect.”
“This is a mandatory obligation imposed by a statute,” Duggan added. “It is a must-do. EPA can’t ignore it no matter who is in the White House.”
12 comments
Comments are closed.
Plastic is a byproduct of oil. I wouldnt expect this society to be able to be meaningfully address this issue until we can enforce a reduced oil consumption.
As to your question of why we don’t hear alarms being sounded by elites regarding mircroplastics, I’d guess it’s because they can choose glass water bottles and such. Down here, we have a cornucopia of choices between plastic crap made by some subsidiary of five or so companies. The feeling at the grocery store is one of defeat. “This is what you people eat” the isles and shelves command us.
Let’s hope Kennedy can real some of this bad behavior in. I just can not understand why reports like this show up, people complain about plastics (or other poisonous chemicals) in their food, water and of course their bodies – yet not one major factory has been closed. Well, wait a minute, I’m sorry. I think there was a lawyer who won a few legal battles and forced some factories to clean up their act in the Hudson river valley. Not sure who it was.
It really comes down to RFK’s word against the McDonald’s CEO complaints in Trump’s ear.
Plastics pollution is not in the HHS remit. Surely you know that.
On the bright side, still about 60 days left to do something about it all. Same with transportation where the big railroads let their equipment go until a ‘whoocoodanode?’ disaster happens. Article in Chicago Sun-Times today re Trump / environment mentions lead pipes, an old reliable monster like Universal’s Frankenstein movies. Goes on and on.
That first embedded tweet from Hertan: time to throw out my sexy new underwear.
Seriously, very useful link.
To drink water from plastic bottle or from my kitchen faucet, that is the question.
Whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The pollution and fluoride coming out of my faucet
Or to drink from a plastic bottle that gets tossed in the sea
And by choosing one or the other. To die—to sleep,
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
With regard to the finding of plastics in, or over the olfactory bulb (brain tissue) what it stands to me is as a marker for the entry of other material known to be toxic such as some or all classes of PM2.5 through the respiratory and olfactory tracts and already associated with neuropathologies and other diseases. PM2.5, unlike plastics, is an known important cause of disease and death, generally overlooked even if known as important, because what can we do about it? Like airborne viruses we make our best to ignore it.
Can someone explain why animal bodies can absorb plastic particles while other substances, such as silts, metals, and pollen, are not?
Animals do absorb other toxins. Most prominent contemporary example is fish and mercury warnings for pregnant women. Predator fish like tuna and shark concentrate environmental toxins. Another famous example is DDT in raptors.
We also have algae blooms. Avoid oysters from certain areas from at certain times of year..
As for silt, that’s mixture of a bunch of stuff, so immune system, passing through digestive track, kidneys, liver. But those systems can’t eliminate everything or do so slowly, so things like dioxins and PCBs accumulate. For pollen, the same.
History sure is rhyming here… Roundup glyphosate, DDT, dioxins, lead, etc.
All your counterexamples are liquids or vapours.
What we have been told about microplastics is that they remain solid at very small dimensions.
“Trump Taps Fossil Fuel Ally Lee Zeldin to Head EPA, Push “Anti-Environmental Agenda”
https://www.democracynow.org/2024/11/13/epa_zeldin
quick interview with:
Judith Enck, who served as EPA regional administrator under President Obama, now president of Beyond Plastics. We’re speaking to her outside Albany.
“Environmental defenders are raising alarm over Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, former New York Congressmember Lee Zeldin, who has a history of opposing critical environmental protections and clean energy job investments. Zeldin’s nomination comes as Trump is reportedly discussing moving the EPA headquarters outside of Washington, D.C., which could lead to an exodus of staff and expertise from the agency. “I really don’t think this is about government efficiency. I think this is about terrorizing the career staff,” says Judith Enck”