SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
chemical pollution
Biden Must Choose—People or Plastic
As the penultimate round of negotiations for the Global Plastics Treaty begin in Ottawa, Canada, the U.S. must back a strong agreement that protects our health, our communities, and the planet.
Apr 16, 2024
Plastic pollution has become an omnipresent threat, infiltrating every corner of our planet and leaving a trail of devastation in its wake. From endangering human health to exacerbating social injustices, decimating biodiversity, and intensifying the climate crisis at every turn, the urgency to address this crisis cannot be overstated.
In just a few days, world leaders will convene in Ottawa, Canada, for the fourth round of negotiations to develop a Global Plastics Treaty. Mandated as a critical tool in the fight against pollution, the treaty's significance is underscored by the resounding support it receives from the global public.
In a recent Greenpeace International poll spanning 19 countries, an overwhelming 82% of respondents called for reducing plastic production to halt pollution, 75% backed a ban on single-use plastics, and a staggering 90% advocated for a transition to reusable packaging. This groundswell of support reflects not only a commitment to safeguarding our environment but also a deep-seated concern for the health and well-being of our loved ones. With 80% expressing worry about the health impacts of plastic on their families and 84% concerned about its effects on children, the call for action is undeniable. The world is ready for change, and the time to act is now.
We must seize this moment to turn the tide on plastic pollution and safeguard our planet for this and future generations.
Yet, at each of the three previous rounds of negotiations, the plastic industry, together with a small minority of governments, have tried to water down the treaty's ambition, stripping it of its power to deliver the outcomes that science and justice demand. Despite the efforts of at least 143 industry lobbyists working to drop measures to limit production, ban dangerous chemicals, and eliminate single-use plastics, representatives from Pacific Island and Latin American countries held the line.
At this pivotal juncture, everything we need to end the plastic crisis is still on the table. We cannot afford for this meeting to be another failure, where low-ambition countries and industry interests hijack the negotiations and thwart substantive progress. At this penultimate round, the fate of the treaty hangs in the balance, and we must hold decision-makers accountable to deliver solutions that match the scale of the crisis we face.
Plastic recycling, once thought to be the answer to plastic pollution, is now debunked as little more than an industry scam. Less than 9% of plastic produced globally gets recycled, while the industry continues to churn out more plastics annually and is set on tripling plastic production by 2050.
So, at this decisive moment, we must ask ourselves: Is the plastic industry’s profit-driven version of ‘convenience’ worth the sacrifice of our health? Are we willing to mortgage the future of children for the fleeting ease offered by the billions of tons of single-use plastics the industry produces? Is it worth risking our lives for single-use and corporate profits?
The answer is clear; the time for half-measures is over. We must seize this moment to turn the tide on plastic pollution and safeguard our planet for this and future generations. The clock is ticking, and we refuse to be silenced. We refuse to have any more mothers face the prospect of their unborn children being exposed to toxic chemicals in their placenta. We refuse to normalize climate chaos—floods, heatwaves, fires, and storms—driving us out of our homes. We refuse to have to bury any more of our loved ones from cancer and other diseases caused by toxic plastic chemicals.
The Global Plastics Treaty stands as our beacon of hope. But to deliver on its mandate to break free from the deadly cycle of runaway plastic production, it must begin with bold targets: reducing plastic production by at least 75% by 2040; ensuring a just transition away from virgin production and toward a low-carbon, zero-waste economy; eliminating single-use plastics; and prioritizing sustainable livelihoods, empowering workers, and championing Indigenous Peoples' rights. The treaty must also be rooted in a human rights-based approach that not only prioritizes human health and justice but also ensures fair representation for those disproportionately affected by the plastic pollution crisis. Above all, to be truly effective, the Global Plastics Treaty must create binding global rules that apply to all countries rather than a voluntary global agreement where governments can choose whether or not to take action.
Right now, millions of people around the world are demanding solutions to this global crisis. As we stand on the precipice of change, President Joe Biden must choose—people or plastic. If the U.S. continues to support only those measures that have already been adopted in federal law, the treaty will not be successful. We call on Biden to show true leadership and take a stand for a strong Plastics Treaty that protects our health, our communities, and the planet. We call on him to heed the voices of the people and embark on a transformative journey toward a plastic-free future for generations to come.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Welcome News': EPA Starts Process of Vinyl Chloride Risk Assessment
"This is one of the most important chemical review processes ever undertaken by the EPA," said one of the agency's former regional administrators.
Dec 14, 2023
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday that it had begun the process of prioritizing vinyl chloride for evaluation under the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Vinyl chloride, which is primarily used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, was one of five chemicals the agency earmarked for a risk assessment. The move comes eight months after a disastrous train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, which included five cars carrying 115,000 gallons of the dangerous chemical.
"We have seen firsthand what vinyl chloride can do to a community," Hilary Flint, vice president of Unity Council for the East Palestine Train Derailment and director of communications and community engagement for Beaver County Marcellus Awareness Community, said in a statement.
"This is a step in the right direction, and we will continue to fight for a total vinyl chloride ban," Flint continued. "We want to make sure what happened after the East Palestine train derailment is the last vinyl chloride disaster in the United States."
Vinyl chloride is a known carcinogen that has been linked to liver, brain, lung, and blood cancers. It can also harm the neurological system and suppress immunity. Despite this, it is one of the most produced chemicals by volume in both the U.S. and internationally. In 2019, billions of pounds were manufactured in the U.S. alone.
"Most vinyl chloride is used to make polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, which poses significant health and environmental problems that have been known for over 50 years," Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics and former EPA regional administrator, said in the EPA announcement. "This is one of the most important chemical review processes ever undertaken by the EPA."
"The examination of all routes of exposure prescribed by the law will lead EPA to the conclusion that vinyl chloride is far too dangerous to make or use, and should be banned."
A TSCA review will require the EPA to assess all the ways people can be exposed to vinyl chloride, both in terms of what it can pollute and how the exposure can take place. That means looking at how it contaminates soil, air, and water and how it impacts workers, frontline communities, and communities exposed during disasters like the East Palestine derailment. A full 27% of the people who live within three miles of a facility where vinyl chloride is used or made are children, and the evaluation will require the EPA to consider how the chemical impacts young people specifically.
Liz Hitchcock, director of Toxic Free Future's Safer Chemicals Healthy Families federal policy program, said the EPA's decision was "welcome news."
"The examination of all routes of exposure prescribed by the law will lead EPA to the conclusion that vinyl chloride is far too dangerous to make or use, and should be banned," Hitchcock said.
The other chemicals that the EPA will assess are acetaldehyde, acrylonitrile, benzenamine, and 4,4'-Methylene bis(2-chloroaniline) (MBOCA). Four out of the five chemicals are used in plastic production and all of them are used to make petrochemicals.
The EPA now has 12 months to determine whether or not the five chemicals are "High Priority Substances," after which it will begin the risk evaluation. The public will be able to comment on all of the chemicals.
"We applaud EPA for echoing states' concerns about the threat of vinyl chloride and PVC to communities. This action, along with action by states to restrict the use of PVC in packaging and building materials in favor of safer materials, will help communities thrive," Sarah Doll, national director of Safer States, said in a statement. "The urgency of vinyl chloride's threat means we need action from all levels of government."
Keep ReadingShow Less
UN Experts Allege Human Rights Violations by PFAS Chemical Giant in North Carolina
In a letter to Chemours, the experts said they were worried about the company's "apparent disregard for the well-being of community members, who have been denied access to clean and safe water for decades."
Nov 28, 2023
United Nations human rights experts have expressed concerns over "alleged human rights violations and abuses" against people living along the lower Cape Fear River in North Carolina due emissions of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, from a Fayetteville chemical plant.
Five U.N. experts signed letters to Chemours—the plant's current operator—as well as DuPont, Corteva, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Dutch environmental regulators. The action marks the U.N. Human Rights Council's first investigation into an environmental problem in the U.S., The Guardianreported Tuesday.
"We are especially concerned about DuPont and Chemours' apparent disregard for the well-being of community members, who have been denied access to clean and safe water for decades," the U.N. experts wrote in the letter to Chemours.
"We hope the U.N.'s action will induce shareholders to bring DuPont and Chemours in line with international human rights law."
The Fayetteville Works manufacturing plant has been releasing toxic PFAS into the environment for more than four decades, according to the allegations detailed in the letter. PFAS dumped in the Cape Fear River have made it unsafe to drink for 100 river miles, and pollution from the plant has contaminated air, soil, groundwater, and aquatic life.
PFAS are a class of chemicals used in a variety of products from nonstick, water-repellent, or stain-resistant items to firefighting foam. They have been linked to a number of health issues including cancers and have earned the name "forever chemicals" for their ability to persist in the environment and the human body. One study found PFAS in 97% of local residents who received testing.
The letter also repeated allegations that DuPont, the plant's previous owner, and Chemours, a spinoff company, had not taken responsibility for cleaning up the local environment and compensating community members, and that DuPont had known about the dangers of PFAS for several years, but chose to hide this information from the public.
"We remain preoccupied that these actions infringe on community members' right to life, right to health, right to a healthy, clean, and sustainable environment, and the right to clean water, among others," the U.N. experts wrote.
The letters were sent in response to a request made in April by Berkeley Law's Environmental Law Clinic on behalf of local environmental advocacy group Clean Cape Fear. In the request, the groups said the matter was particularly urgent because Chemours plans to expand its making of PFAS at the plant.
The U.N. experts, or special rapporteurs, reviewed existing legal and scientific documents and media reports, rather than completing their own investigation, NC Newsline reported. They sent the letters in September, but made them public on Thanksgiving, 60 days later, according to Clean Cape Fear. During that time, Chemours, Corteva, and the Dutch regulator responded, but DuPont and the EPA did not.
"We are grateful to see the United Nations take action on behalf of all residents in our region suffering from decades of human rights abuse related to our PFAS contamination crisis," Clean Cape Fear co-founder Emily Donovan said in a statement. "Clearly, the U.N. recognizes international law is being violated in the United States. We find it profoundly troubling that the United States and DuPont have yet to respond to the U.N.'s allegation letters."
Clean Cape Fear called Chemours' response "classic corporate gaslighting." Chemours claimed to be "a relatively new company," despite being staffed by senior DuPont executives, focused mainly on the PFAS GenX despite the presence of several other pollutants, and focused on the impacts on private well owners, ignoring public utility customers who must pay to filter their own water because of PFAS contamination. However, the letter did acknowledge that Chemours knew about the PFAS pollution before the public learned of it in 2017 and tried to both resolve it internally and prevent the public from finding out.
"If corporate malfeasance had a name in N.C., it would be Chemours," said Rebecca Trammel, leadership team member of Clean Cape Fear and founder of Catalyst Consulting & Speaking. "Impunity is the accomplice of injustice. It is the obligation of governments and regulatory agencies to ensure that innovation, economic gain, and progress are in service of humanity, not at its expense. I extend my deepest thanks to the United Nations for its defense of our right to safe water and life itself."
The letter to the EPA focused in part on its failure to study the health impacts of PFAS exposure on the community, while the letter to the Netherlands focused on imports of GenX from that country to Fayetteville Works.
Clean Cape Fear said it hopes the letters will put pressure on both the private companies and the government regulators to act.
"We hope the U.N.'s action will induce shareholders to bring DuPont and Chemours in line with international human rights law," the group tweeted, noting that both companies are publicly traded.
"We also hope that the risk of being named a violator of international human rights laws will give the U.S. EPA the political courage to do what it must to curb toxic PFAS pollution in North Carolina and nationwide," the group added.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular