SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
"During the 20 years since our first study, the amount of plastic in our oceans has increased by around 50%, only further emphasizing the pressing need for action," said one leading researcher.
Some of the key scientists who first informed the world of the potential damage being done to natural systems by microplastics are now calling for world leaders to take decisive action to curb the introduction of these polluting materials into the environment—and they hope the looming United Nations treaty process on plastics can be a key vehicle for progress.
Alongside a new scientific review published cataloging the growing body of research on microplastics—defined as plastic particles smaller than 5 millimeters and "composed of polymers together with functional additives as well as other intentionally and unintentionally added chemicals"—the international group of scientists says concerted actions must be taken, including bans on certain materials and a focus on plastic pollution mitigation that puts less emphasis on consumer habits and recycling efforts by keeping microplastics out of the supply chain "in the first place."
According to the abstract of the review, published Thursday in the journal Science:
Twenty years after the first publication using the term microplastics, we review current understanding, refine definitions and consider future prospects. Microplastics arise from multiple sources including tires, textiles, cosmetics, paint and the fragmentation of larger items. They are widely distributed throughout the natural environment with evidence of harm at multiple levels of biological organization. They are pervasive in food and drink and have been detected throughout the human body, with emerging evidence of negative effects. Environmental contamination could double by 2040 and widescale harm has been predicted. Public concern is increasing and diverse measures to address microplastics pollution are being considered in international negotiations. Clear evidence on the efficacy of potential solutions is now needed to address the issue and to minimize the risks of unintended consequences.
Professor Richard Thompson of Plymouth University, who co-authored that first scientific study and coined the term microplastics just two decades years ago, says researchers now have more than enough evidence to show world leaders that serious action must be taken to curb the use of plastics, with special attention to the minuscule and microscopic forms of the material that are increasingly being found polluting ecosystems—both on land as well as in the sea—and embedded within living organisms, including humans.
"There are still unknowns, but during the 20 years since our first study, the amount of plastic in our oceans has increased by around 50%, only further emphasizing the pressing need for action," Thompson said in a statement put out by Plymouth.
In the statement, the university noted:
Since the publication of the first study in 2004, an estimated 7,000 research studies have been conducted on microplastics, providing considerable evidence in their sources and impacts as well as potential solutions.
Microplastics have been found on every corner of the planet, in more than 1,300 aquatic and terrestrial species, in the food and drink we consume, and in multiple tissues and organs of the human body.
With emissions of microplastics to the environment estimated to be up to 40 megatons per year, a number that could double by 2040, predictions indicate the potential for widescale environmental harm moving into the next century.
The research details how microplastics demand an international response due to their transitory nature. While they enter the environment in various ways—whether from direct release as fibers into the air from textiles or dust, discharged through water systems via runoff or sewage drains, or via breakdown or fragmentation—once discarded, the study says, "microplastics can travel far from their point of entry and are not constrained by national boundaries highlighting the importance of actions at a global level."
Professor Sabine Pahl, who teaches Urban and Environmental Psychology at the University of Vienna and is an honorary professor at the University of Plymouth, said, "Plastic pollution is completely caused by human actions. That's why we need research on perceptions of risks and benefits of plastic as well as other drivers of policy support and change, integrating a social science perspective."
With the next round of talks in the UN's Plastic Pollution Treaty set for November, the researchers said the negotiations offer a "tangible opportunity" for nations to act on this issue. "In our view," they wrote, "science will be just as important guiding the way toward solutions as it has been in identifying the problems."
"This election is too important for our union not to do its duty," said the former labor leader of his successor.
The former longtime president of the International Brother of Teamsters, James P. Hoffa, called out his successor Sean O'Brien late Thursday over the powerful union's announcement earlier in the week that it would effectively sit on the sidelines of this year's presidential election by refusing to endorse either Kamala Harris or Donald Trump.
"This is a critical error and frankly, a failure of leadership by Sean O'Brien," Hoffa said in a statement. "This election is too important for our union not to do its duty. We must take a stand for working Americans. There is only one candidate in this race that has supported working families and unions throughout their career, and that is Vice President Kamala Harris."
Before retiring as leader of the Teamsters in 2022, Hoffa—whose father was the high-profile union leader Jimmy Hoffa who went mysteriously missing in 1975—served as president for over two decades. O'Brien, known for his brash style and was roundly criticized for speaking at this year's Republican National Convention, took over as Teamsters president the same year Hoffa left.
"In the Teamsters' messy handling of a presidential endorsement, O’Brien has appeared weak, short-sighted, and feckless."
On Wednesday, as Common Dreams reported, the Teamsters announced they would withhold an endorsement after polling of its members showed that neither Harris nor Trump had overwhelming support.
Due to Trump's pronounced and consistent hostility to organized labor and fealty to the corporate class, however, most major unions have treated his potential return to the White House as an existential threat to working people and their families.
As veteran labor reporter Steven Greenhouse wrote this week for Slate:
Trump is an unarguably anti-union candidate. He once said he'd sign a national right-to-work law, he's denounced prominent labor leaders like UAW president Shawn Fain, and he's embraced extremely anti-union business leaders including Elon Musk. Trump recently launched a missile at organized labor's heart by praising the idea of firing striking workers (even though that is illegal under federal law). Three days after O'Brien—in an unusual step for a union leader—spoke at the Republican National Convention to urge the GOP to be nicer to labor, Trump kicked unions in the teeth in his acceptance speech by mocking the United Auto Workers.
Following the announcement by the Teamsters' national leadership, a slew of Teamster locals across the nation, including in key battleground states, rushed their endorsements of Harris out the door.
"Teamsters regional councils—representing hundreds of thousands of members and retirees—in Michigan, Wisconsin, Nevada and western Pennsylvania—endorsed Harris" just hours after O'Brien's announcement, reported the Washington Post's labor correspondent Lauren Kaori Gurley.
"Separately," Gurley added, "powerful local Teamsters unions in Philadelphia; New York City; Long Beach, Calif.; and Miami—as well as the union's National Black Caucus and a group of retirees—have endorsed Harris and urged members to vote for her."
In his statement endorsing the Democratic ticket, William Hamilton, president of the Pennsylvania Conference of Teamsters, said: "In the 45 years the PA Conference of Teamsters has been in existence, it is extremely rare to have a pro-labor candidate for president and a pro-labor candidate for vice president running together. Kamala Harris and Tim Walz are exactly that team."
What stood out to Greenhouse about the nature of the Teamsters' internal polling, which did show broad support for Trump, comes back around to what Hoffa termed a "failure of leadership" when it comes to O'Brien. He wrote:
That internal survey showing so many Teamsters backing Trump highlighted something else: The union’s leadership must have done a dreadful job informing and educating rank-and-file members about how hugely anti-union Trump is and how aggressively anti-union and anti-worker Trump's first administration was (and appointees were). Also, Teamster leaders evidently also failed to explain to rank-and-file members that Harris has fought for policy after policy strongly backed by the Teamsters and other unions, including the Protecting the Right to Organize Act, which is the labor movement’s No. 1 legislative priority and would make it considerably easier for the Teamsters and other unions to organize. Trump opposes the PRO Act. Harris also supported the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act, the CHIPS Act, and the Inflation Reduction Act, which together will create hundreds of thousands of good-paying union jobs for Teamsters and other union members. Harris, unlike Trump, also supports increasing the pathetically low $7.25-an-hour federal minimum wage to at least $15.
"When Sean O’Brien ran to be president of the mighty Teamsters union, he promised to be a strong leader," concluded Greenhouse. "But in the Teamsters' messy handling of a presidential endorsement, O'Brien has appeared weak, short-sighted, and feckless."
Crucially, he added, O'Brien "failed to provide strong leadership on one of his most important tests: to get his union’s rank-and-file and board to reject anti-union Trump" and embrace the Harris, the clear pro-worker candidate in the race.
If Trump ultimately wins, Greenhouse said, the snub of Harris may be something O'Brien and the Teamsters "end up regretting because a second Trump administration will probably be even more of a danger to unions (and democracy) than the first one."
The witness—who claims he falsely identified Owens as the killer because he feared for his life—said that barring a stay, the condemned man "will die for a crime that he did not commit."
Barring an unlikely 11th-hour reprieve from South Carolina's governor or U.S. Supreme Court, correctional officials are set to carry out the state's first execution in 13 years after its attorney general brushed off a key prosecution witness' bombshell claim that the convicted man did not commit the murder for which he is condemned to die.
Freddie Owens—who legally changed his name to Khalil Divine Black Sun Allah while imprisoned—was convicted and sentenced to die by lethal injection for the shooting death of convenience store cashier Irene Graves, a 41-year-old mother of three, during a 1997 robbery.
Although there was no forensic evidence linking the then-19-year-old man to the murder, state prosecutors relied upon the testimony of co-defendant Steven Golden, who pleaded guilty and agreed to testify against Owens as part of a plea deal to spare his own life.
On Wednesday Golden filed an affidavit in the South Carolina Supreme Court in which he declared that he lied about the identity of Graves' killer.
"If this court does not grant a stay, Freddie will die for a crime he did not commit," he wrote.
However, on Thursday the state's highest court rejected Owens' bid.
"Freddie Owens is not the person who shot Irene Graves at the Speedway on November 1, 1997," Golden's filing stated. "Freddie was not present when I robbed the Speedway that day."
"The detectives told me they knew Freddie was with me when I robbed the Speedway," wrote Golden, who was 18 years old at the time of the crime. "They told me I might as well make a statement against Freddie because he already told his side to everyone and they were just trying to get my side of the story."
"I was scared that I would get the death penalty if I didn't make a statement," he continued. "I signed a waiver of rights form and then signed a statement on November 11, 1997."
"In that statement, I substituted Freddie for the person who was really with me in the Speedway that night," Golden claimed. "I did that because I knew that's what the police wanted me to say, and also because I thought the real shooter or his associates might kill me if I named him to the police. I am still afraid of that. But Freddie was actually not there."
Golden—who said he did not name the person who he says killed Graves for fear of his life—added: "I'm coming forward now because I know Freddie's execution date is September 20 and I don't want Freddie to be executed for something he didn't do. This has weighed heavily on my mind and I want to have a clear conscience."
The office of Republican South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson responded to Golden's affidavit on Thursday, calling his claim "inherently suspect" and stating that he "has now made a sworn statement that is contrary to his multiple other sworn statements over 20 years."
The attorney general's statement came after a federal judge on Wednesday declined to halt Owens' execution over his legal team's concerns about the provenance of South Carolina's supply of pentobarbital, which is used in lethal injections.
South Carolina unofficially paused executions in 2011 as lethal injection drugs became increasingly difficult to obtain because pharmaceutical companies enacted bans on their use for capital punishment. The state subsequently passed a law protecting the identity of drug suppliers, resulting in renewed stocks.
Additionally, the state Supreme Court ruled in July that executions by firing squad and electrocution do not violate the U.S. Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment, validating a law signed in 2021 by Republican Gov. Henry McMaster that forces condemned inmates to choose between the two methods of execution at a time when lethal injection drugs were still scarce.
Anti-death penalty campaigners on Wednesday submitted a petition with more than 10,000 signatures asking McMaster to grant Owen clemency.
Although the number of U.S. executions has been steadily decreasing from 85 in 2000 to 24 last year, a flurry of impending state killings has raised alarm among human rights activists. Amnesty International says that in addition to Owens, seven men are scheduled to be put to death in the coming month.
"No government should give itself the power to execute people," Amnesty said Thursday on social media. "It is past time for the U.S. to align with other countries that no longer carry out this cruel and inhuman punishment."
A 2014 study determined that at least 4% of people on U.S. death rows were likely innocent.