Trump Environmental Protection Agency makes it easier to harm infants

The dramatic headline is designed to get your attention, so please forgive the theatrics. Yet, while the president distracts us with his chaotic, incompetent and untruthful actions and words about more headline issues, his misnamed Environmental Protection Agency has struck again.

Amanda Mills penned the following article on June 23, 2020 in the online publication “Nation of Change,” “Trump’s EPA rolls back regulation of chemical linked to brain damage in infants that can be found in drinking water.” I will include her entire brief article below.

“Last week, Trump’s EPA decided to roll back regulations of a chemical that causes brain damage in infants. This chemical, perchlorate, is found in rocket fuel and can also be found in public drinking water.

Environmental experts and Health professionals have been fighting this deregulation that was created during the Obama Administration.

EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler claims this move ‘fulfills President Trump’s promise to pare back burdensome ‘one-size-fits-all’ overregulation for the American people.’

According to Associated Press, perchlorate from runoff contaminates the drinking water of as many as 16 million Americans, the Obama administration said in 2011 when it announced the EPA would act to set maximum limits for perchlorate for the first time.

Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) senior strategic director for Health Erik D. Olson says this decision is ‘illegal, unscientific, and unconscionable. The Environmental Protection Agency is threatening the health of pregnant moms and young children with toxic chemicals in their drinking water at levels that literally can cause loss of IQ points. Is this what the Environmental Protection Agency has come to?’

According to Common Dreams, the NRDC plans to challenge the order in court, claiming the consent decree did not allow for deregulating the chemical.”

I truly wish I were making these things up and kids will not be harmed by the president, but as evidenced by previous EPA actions and his blatant lack of empathy for COVID-19 victims, this is not really a stretch. As conservative pundit David Brooks has said, the president “lacks a sense of decency or empathy.”

These roll back of environmental regulations have been deliberate efforts to make it easier for industry to not worry about pollution. Environmental protections cost money. Sadly, when industry has not been permitted to get away with harming people, animals and the environment, it becomes a major motion picture as “Dark Waters” was last year or “Erin Brockovich” years before.

And, the troubling part is people who live in more rural or town areas near these facilities are the ones who get screwed or killed. These hard working folks make up some of Trump’s voters. The ecologist and biologist Sandra Steingraber has testified in front of Congress and the European Union parliament. She is has authored several books, her first being “Living Downstream” and her second “Raising Elijah.” In these books, it shows how industry outguns and outspends local people harmed by their pollution. It takes a Herculean effort to fight this injustice, hence the heroic movies when it does happen.

One thing Steingraber points out is our pollution metrics tend to measure the impact of pollution on a 50 year old man. That is the wrong metric. Kids have developing brains and lungs, mouth breathe more than adults, put their hands in their mouths more frequently, play outside more and are lower to the ground. They are more susceptible than adults are to chemical pollution. Plus, pregnant women are caring for two lives (maybe more), so we need to be extra careful with them.

So, this is why the Trump EPA’s decision to permit easier pollution is so over-the-top callous. Please question this move. Make people stand up and explain why this is a good idea. As I have mentioned before, I knew of Trump’s negatives, but what I feared most is what Trump would do to our environment and climate change actions more than anything. This is just one more example.

The young folks see the need to act now

“I am growing up in a world whose life systems are unraveling”

Jamie Margolin

The young Mr. Margolin is an attendee at the second annual International Congress of Youth in San Juan, Puerto Rico. People like him and Greta Thunberg recognize the need to act.

Unfortunately, too many of the adults in legislative positions are too beholden to funders to do the right thing. Whether it is not acting on climate change, allowing companies to pollute, or perpetuating profit margins for industries that prey on consumers off fear or some form of pacifier, the legislators are obsequient to their cash cows. And, why do these funders give them money? The Return On Investment (ROI) is huge. The fossil fuel industry has benefitted from multi-trillion dollars of government welfare.

But, these young people look at what is happening and clearly realize what the beholden legislators cannot – WE ARE SCREWED, unless we act. What makes their battles so uphill, is the funders are spending an awful lot of money to keep their ROI going.

The money being spent to convince people climate change is a hoax, not too bad, a natural evolution, etc, dwarfs those trying to get scientific peer reviewed information. As an example, there are about 700 peer reviewed websites discussing the realities of climate change, but there are 30,000 plus faux science sites. And, the current US president’s cabinets are busy burying peer reviewed reports on climate change, deleting data and reports and repositioning or running off climate scientists. Yet, one more climate scientist left the Dept. of Agriculture last week, as his warnings on rice harvests were being buried. “Why?” is an excellent question.

Climate change is not just causing rising sea levels, but that is a huge problem for coastal cities like Miami, the most at risk large city in the world. We are seeing stallled weather systems consistently flood areas. We are seeing drought areas experience worse droughts. We are seeing larger forest fires. And, we are seeing more tick and misquito borne illnesses with more standing water and higher average heat.

Action is occurring due to innovators, cities and states. We need the US federal government to leverage these efforts and not block them or mask the problem. The kids get it. They will also live with the world we are leaving. So, what kind of world do we want to leave them?

Three brief environmental news stories

The following are three snippets from recent news stories on our environment. Two are focused on climate change, while the latter is focused on our global water crisis, which gets so little air time. Yet, when the World Economic Forum polls its members on the greatest long term risks facing our planet, the top two risks are the global water crisis and climate change inaction. It should be noted, climate change worsens the global water crisis, through faster evaporation of reservoirs.

California, four automakers defy Trump, agree to tighten emissions rules – by David Shepardson and Ben Klayman in Reuters on July 25, 2019

“Four major automakers said on Thursday they have reached an agreement with California on fuel efficiency rules, bypassing a Trump administration effort to strip the state of the right to fight climate change by setting its own standards.”

Note: The companies did not want the president to strip away the Bush and Obama intitated standards for improvement on fuel efficiency. Since California has the fourth largest economy, by itself, in the world, this agreement is important.

It feels like something out of a bad sci-fi movie’
A top climate scientist quit USDA, following others who say Trump has politicized science – by Helena Bottemiller Evich in Politico on August 5, 2019

“One of the nation’s leading climate change scientists is quitting the Agriculture Department in protest over the Trump administration’s efforts to bury his groundbreaking study about how rice is losing nutrients because of rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

Lewis Ziska, a 62-year-old plant physiologist who’s worked at USDA’s Agricultural Research Service for more than two decades, told POLITICO he was alarmed when department officials not only questioned the findings of the study — which raised serious concerns for the 600 million people who depend on rice for most of their calories — but also tried to minimize media coverage of the paper, which was published in the journal Science Advances last year.”

Note: This purging of data, suppression of reports and denigration and sidelining of climate change scientists should be raising red flags. Instead of arguing the veracity, the Trump administration is going out of its way to bury the findings of peer reviewed scientists. Why? What further troubles me is if Trump wants to “Make America Great Again,” why is he giving away a scientific expertise to other countries? I recall when President Macron of France extended an open invitation to US climate scientists.

Extreme water stress affects a quarter of the world’s population, say experts
Qatar, Israel and Lebanon top list of places with worst shortages, as climate crisis threatens more ‘day – by Emily Holden and Vidhi Doshi in The Guardian on August 6, 2019

“A quarter of the world’s population across 17 countries are living in regions of extremely high water stress, a measure of the level of competition over water resources, a new report reveals.

Experts at the World Resources Institute (WRI) warned that increasing water stress could lead to more “day zeroes” – a term that gained popularity in 2018 as Cape Town in South Africa came dangerously close to running out of water.”

Note: This is a huge problem, especially in drought prone areas like Texas here in the states. There are competing forces for water, drinking/ food preparation, bathing and washing clothes, agriculture irrigation, fracking, etc. that are exacerbated by increasing populations and climate change. There has also been poor water management in too many areas. Better piping would help, using plants that are more endemic to an area use less water, moving away from fracked natural gas, planning the sources of water to save them, addressing climate change, etc. would help.

I like using this item as it came from an unexpected source – a Duke Energy spokesperson let it slip that they factor into their models an additional 11% evaporation loss from their water reservoirs due to climate change forecasts. If climate change is a hoax, why would one of the largest utilities in America be modeling that?

These three stories highlight that we must plan and do things now, before it is too late. We lost eight years under the Bush administration and have lost about two and half years under Trump to leverage federal climate change action. Bush had a petroleum lobbyist as his White Council on the Environment and Trump has a coal lobbyist as head of the EPA. Plus, Bush’s Vice President was a former petroleum CEO and who had a heavy hand writing in the 2005 Energy Act that fracking need not be subject to the requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act and Clean Air Act. Why?

Why are such great pains being taken to suppress reports, data, laws and scientists? Why would not someone who claims all of this hoax not use fact-based arguments to counter? And, if that is not enough, the Trump administration prevented the authors of a multi-agency report on the risk of climate change from testifying in front of Congress to keep their testimony out of the public record.

 

US DOD is worried about climate change

Per a Politico article yesterday, the US Department of Defense is concerned about climate change, even if the President denies the risk. It should be noted this concern is not new. Per Politico:

“Flooding, drought and wildfires driven by climate change pose threats to two-thirds of the U.S. military’s installations, the Defense Department said in a new report required by Congress.

The authors of the report, which the Pentagon delivered to Congress on Thursday, note that it probably underestimates the full extent of risk to military facilities because it only looks at likely impacts over the next two decades. The UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has said the world needs to become carbon neutral by 2050 to prevent global temperatures from rising 1.5 degrees Celsius, which would lock in many of the most catastrophic effects of climate change.”

This DOD report is following previous cautions that climate change is a risk to national security. This echoes the recent US government report and that of the UN. Yet, the US has a President who denies the human influence on climate change, has called it a hoax, announced the US pullout of the Paris Climate Change Accord and has eased regulations to enable the fossil fuel industry.

The larger irony is this President is inventing a crisis at the border and may declare a national emergency, while fiddling away about climate change. I think I will listen to the DOD than this man.