Epa Plans for Co2 Underground

  • The EPA is looking into storing CO2 emissions underground (Photo by Lester Graham)

The US Environmental Protection
Agency is looking at ways to make sure
carbon dioxide can be stored underground.
The agency is proposing rules that would
keep CO2 from seeping out of the ground or
cause problems for ground water. Chuck
Quirmbach reports:

Transcript

The US Environmental Protection
Agency is looking at ways to make sure
carbon dioxide can be stored underground.
The agency is proposing rules that would
keep CO2 from seeping out of the ground or
cause problems for ground water. Chuck
Quirmbach reports:

Some coal-fired power plants are looking into storing their carbon dioxide emissions
underground.

If the system works, it’d be a way to slow down climate change.

But EPA water administrator Ben Grumbles says injecting large volumes of CO2
to underground storage wells is a concern. So, he says the proposed rule calls for
extensive testing and monitoring.

“So that the CO2 doesn’t migrate. If it did, it could also push other fluids, like
salts, into that underground source of drinking water.”

Grumbles says if there was contamination, companies could be ordered to stop
injecting the gas. He says the rule also aims to make sure the CO2 doesn’t seep
from the ground into the air.

The EPA will take comments on its proposed rule until mid-November.

For The Environment Report, I’m Chuck Quirmbach.

Related Links

U.S. Lax on Chemicals

  • Toy makers use phthalates to make hard plastic pliable (Source: Toniht at Wikimedia Commons)

News about dangerous chemicals in toys,
cosmetics and cleaning products has a lot of
Americans spending extra money. People want to
make sure they’re choosing things that are safe
for their families. Julie Grant reports that
other countries are ahead of the US in efforts
to improve the safety of all products:

Transcript

News about dangerous chemicals in toys,
cosmetics and cleaning products has a lot of
Americans spending extra money. People want to
make sure they’re choosing things that are safe
for their families. Julie Grant reports that
other countries are ahead of the US in efforts
to improve the safety of all products:

So you might expect that the government has tested those
chemicals to make sure they’re safe. But you’d be wrong.

Daryl Ditz is senior policy advisor at the Center for
International Environmental Law.

He says the US Environmental Protection Agency has never
assessed the hazards of most chemicals used in every day
products.

“That means the EPA doesn’t know, and you and I don’t know,
which materials on the shelves are more dangerous and
which are less.”

Ditz says only a few hundred chemicals have been
thoroughly tested by the U.S. government, but there are
80,000 chemicals used in products on the market.

In the U.S., the EPA has to prove a chemical is harmful to
keep it off the market.

(sound of toy store)

Dorothy Bryan is shopping at this upscale toy store in Northeast Ohio.

She’s got three grandkids. She’s looking at an
organic cotton bunny, colorful wooden blocks, and of course
Thomas the Tank Engine. She
pays more for toys at this store than she would at the big box
retailer. But Bryan says they’re worth it.

“They’re not toxic. That’s the big part. They’re not the
plastic toxic things.
I purchase usually the wooden toys. The little one puts
everything in his mouth.”

But most kids’ toys are made of plastic. And lots of plastics are made with phthalates. It makes them pliable.

But phthalates are endocrine disruptors. They’re gender-bender chemicals that make girls develop earlier and reduce testosterone levels in boys.

That’s why
California has banned the use some phthalates in toys. So
have Japan and the European Union.

But Daryl Ditz, chemical expert at Center for International
Environmental Law, says regulators in the U.S. don’t have
much power to ban phthalates or other chemicals.
Chemicals here are innocent until proven guilty.

“That is, companies can sell virtually anything in a product or in a barrel unless it’s been proven
to be dangerous.”

But other countries are starting to take the opposite
approach. Ditz says the European Union is rolling out a new
set of laws that make chemicals guilty until proven
innocent.

“They’re putting the responsibility squarely on the shoulders
of the chemical makers. As opposed to having the
environmental authorities look for a needle in the haystack,
they’re saying, ‘this should be the responsibility of the
companies who make these materials.’”

Under the EU law, manufacturers will have to study and
report the risks posed by each chemical: whether they
cause cancer, birth defects, or environmental problems.

The Bush administration and chemical manufacturers tried to
block the European law. But they couldn’t.

Ditz says leaders in the
chemical makers’ trade group are now running around like
their hair is on fire. They’re worried – the costs to comply
could be in the tens of millions of dollars for some
companies that export chemicals to Europe.

But many individual companies have already started to
comply with the law.

Walter van het Hoff is spokesperson for Dow Chemical in
Europe. He says cataloging Dow’s 7000 chemicals is a
huge effort, but they don’t have a choice.

“You need to comply; otherwise you cannot sell them
anymore in the European Union.”

There are a half billion consumers in the EU and Dow wants to keep them. Dow and other
manufacturers might have to reformulate – or even abandon
some chemicals if the EU decides they’re unsafe.

While the U.S. is not considering a comprehensive chemical
review like Europe’s new laws, about 30 states are
considering new regulations on chemicals in toys. The Toy
Industry Association doesn’t want a patchwork of laws, so
it’s called for national toy safety standards.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Soap Suds Whip Up Toxic Chemical

  • Consumer advocates say most soaps, shampoos, and cosmetics contain 1, 4 dioxane (Photo by Rebecca Williams)

Consumer advocates say your children might
be at risk because of the soaps you use. They say
most shampoos and cosmetics contain a chemical that
might cause cancer. Julie Grant reports they want
the government to clean up these products:

Transcript

Consumer advocates say your children might
be at risk because of the soaps you use. They say
most shampoos and cosmetics contain a chemical that
might cause cancer. Julie Grant reports they want
the government to clean up these products:

(sound of laughter)

Moxii Rose has been running around all afternoon. She’s
this tiny two and a half year old. She giggles as she dumps
her toys and spills juice on the carpet.

She’s excited when it’s time for a bubble bath.

(sound of running water and child in bathtub)

And so is her mother, Khalilah Pickings. Once Moxii gets into
the tub, she finally quiets down.

“And normally when we have bubble bath time, I just sit right
here. And let her do whatever she needs to do. Gives her a
minute to calm down, and me a minute to calm down.”

Khalilah says she hasn’t thought about it a lot, but figures if
the stores can sell kids bubble bath and lotion, they must
be safe.

But some consumer advocates aren’t so sure.

David Steinman started worrying about the bubble bath his
kids were using. He heard bubble bath might have
something called ‘1, 4 dioxane’ in it. The Environmental
Protection Agency lists it as probable carcinogen.

“I took the products they liked and some others that were
from other companies to a laboratory to have them analyzed, to see
if they did contain this chemical. And they all had it. Every
single product.”

Even the products labeled ‘natural’.

Now, you won’t find 1, 4 dioxane on ingredient lists on the
back of the bottle. It’s not added to soaps and detergents.
When other chemicals are combined, they create 1, 4
dioxane. It helps make soaps foamy and work well.

Steinman says that when children get in a warm bath, their
pores open and can soak the chemical right into their
systems.

Studies show that 1,4 dioxane causes cancer in lab animals.
Scientists are debating how much those findings in rats and
mice apply to people.

Bob Hamilton’s company sells soaps and dishwashing
liquids under the Amway label. He’s an expert on the
regulation of soap.

“There is not a concern based on the best scientific review
that has been done over many decades. The levels that are
found are minor contaminant levels that are well below any
concern levels as expressed by regulators in every country
around the world.”

The US government doesn’t really have any standards for
the amount of 1, 4 dioxane allowed in products. And even
though the EPA lists it as a probable carcinogen, the agency
says the tiny amount in consumer goods is still safe.

Consumer advocate David Steinman says the government
only looks at the amount 1, 4 dioxane in each product
individually. No one considers that we’re using bubble bath,
soap, lotion, and dishwashing detergent every day.

“When do a lot of little bits of chemicals become a whole
lot?”

Steinman wants consumers to force change. He wants
people to buy only the soaps that don’t contain 1, 4 dioxane.

But single mother Khalilah Pickings says she’s already
overwhelmed with trying to be a good mom. How is she
supposed to know whether products have 1, 4 dioxane and if
it’s a real concern or just something environmentalists are
worrying too much about?

“If it hasn’t hurt anyone and if people aren’t like getting
cancer or some crazy weirdo Ebola virus soap-causing
disease, just leave me alone. I’ve got enough to think about, okay?
It’s just me and her here. I don’t have time to think about
the soap that I’m using.”

Pickings says she doesn’t really trust the government, but
she has to assume if it allows the products on the market,
they won’t hurt her little girl.

For The Environment Report, I’m Julie Grant.

Related Links

Epa Corrupted by Bush Administration?

  • An EPA scientist testing online sensors for water distribution systems (Photo courtesy of the US Office of Management and Budget)

The investigative arm of Congress says the
government is taking too long to review safety data
on chemicals. Rebecca Williams reports:

Transcript

The investigative arm of Congress says the
government is taking too long to review safety data
on chemicals. Rebecca Williams reports:

The Government Accountability Office says it’s taking the Environmental
Protection Agency too long to determine the safety of chemicals. The GAO
says reviews of chemicals should only take about 2 years. But some have
taken 10 years or longer.

The GAO also says a recent change could corrupt the system.

That change allows other federal agencies to make comments about chemicals,
but keep those comments hidden from public view.

John Stephenson is with the GAO. He says that threatens the system’s
integrity.

“There are just too many opportunities for non-scientists to intervene in
this scientific process and the result of that is it’s stretched out the
process for a given risk assessment.”

And a recent survey of EPA scientists found that political pressure from the
White House has been more common under the Bush Administration.

For The Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Politics Clouding Science

  • An EPA scientist testing online sensors for water distribution systems (Photo courtesy of the US Office of Management and Budget)

Scientists at the Environmental Protection
Agency say government appointees have interfered
in scientific decisions. Rebecca Williams reports
the scientists say political pressure has become
more common during the past five years:

Transcript

Scientists at the Environmental Protection
Agency say government appointees have interfered
in scientific decisions. Rebecca Williams reports
the scientists say political pressure has become
more common during the past five years:

In a survey, more than 800 scientists reported interference in their work by
government officials. They say political appointees have used data
selectively to influence policy decisions, and ordered scientists to alter
information.

One scientist anonymously wrote, quote: “Do not trust the Environmental
Protection Agency to protect your environment.”

Francesca Griffo is with the Union of Concerned Scientists – the group that
conducted the survey. She says political interference with science has
happened before the Bush Administration.

“But I do think and what we have from the scientists themselves is this idea
that it’s gotten much, much worse, much more pervasive, much more common than it’s
ever been before.”

The EPA did not respond to calls for comment. But it’s been reported the
agency has said it carefully weighs the input of staff scientists in policy
decisions.

For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Pigs Root Out Evil Bugs

  • Apple grower Jim Koan has discovered that baby pigs are best for taking care of fallen wormy apples in his orchard. He says they have very tender noses. The adult pigs like to root around in the dirt and tend to tear up the orchard. (Photo by Rebecca Williams)

There are a lot of insects that love to eat
apples. A harmful insecticide that kills some of
those pests is being phased out. So farmers are
looking for other solutions. Rebecca Williams visits
an apple grower who’s counting on pigs to get some
help with his pest problem:

Transcript

There are a lot of insects that love to eat
apples. A harmful insecticide that kills some of
those pests is being phased out. So farmers are
looking for other solutions. Rebecca Williams visits
an apple grower who’s counting on pigs to get some
help with his pest problem:

(farm animal sounds – turkeys, etc)

The spring rains have started, and at Jim Koan’s pig pen that means mud.

(sound of shoes squishing in mud and piggy snorts)

Of course, these pigs don’t really seem to mind that.

“These Berkshires, you can see, are really friendly, they’re just coming
right up to you.”

Jim Koan really likes his pigs. That’s because he’s hoping the pigs will
take care of one of his worst pests. It’s a beetle called the plum
curculio. In early spring the beetles lay eggs in the little green apples.
The larvae hatch and eat the apples from the inside out.

Then the tree drops the bad wormy apples on the ground. And the worms just
keep on eating.

For a long time, farmers used an insecticide called azinphos-methyl to kill
the beetles. But the Environmental Protection Agency is phasing it out.
That’s because the EPA says the pesticide is very toxic to some wildlife and
it can make farm workers sick.

Jim Koan hasn’t used the pesticide for 10 years, ever since he became an
organic grower. So for years now he’s been trying to find a perfect
predator to stop the beetle larvae.

The chickens were too lazy. Hawks ate the guinea fowl that he tried.

So, finally, Koan says he had a flashback. His grandpa used to have hogs in
the orchard.

“When I would climb up to go up in the tree in the summertime to get a green
apple to eat all the hogs would come running over there and my granddad
always told me you stay away from those hogs they’ll eat you up! I’d be
really scared and be up there for an hour or two until the hogs left again.”

(laughs)

Koan says he knows now that the hogs were just hoping for a snack. So last
year he decided to buy some hogs and see if they would eat the wormy apples
on the ground. He says baby pigs worked best.

“And they’d just go up one row gleaning it, kinda like little vacuum
cleaners (makes sucking sound) and suck up all the apples!”

Koan says the baby pigs ate 98% of the fallen apples with beetle
larvae in them. But he still needed to know that the beetles were actually
gone, so they wouldn’t come back to attack his apples next year.

That job
was up to researchers at Michigan State University. Koan says they fed a
mix of beetle larvae and apples to pigs on campus.

“Then they put diapers on the hogs – truly, diapers!! It was unbelievable.
They took special superglue and velcroed it on their butt so then when they
defecated they caught all that. Then they took these poor students and made
them go through there and wash all that and look for worms.”

Koan says out of 200 worms that were fed to the pigs, they only found one
worm at the other end. That means, so far it looks like pigs are a
pretty good predator.

But the researchers don’t want to let pigs run wild – just yet. David
Epstein is the lead researcher on the project.

“Jim and I are scheming all the time. I have great expectations that this
could be a good management tool in the future but we have to figure out how
to do it properly.”

Epstein says they need to make sure the pigs don’t cause any contamination
problems. Something like E. coli. He says so far there isn’t any
evidence of that, but it’s the kind of thing you have to be sure about.

If this all goes well, the farmer and the scientist will be writing a book
together. It’ll be sort of a self-help book: getting pigs to take care of
what’s bugging you.

For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Report: Epa Limiting Info Access

A government watchdog group says the Environmental
Protection Agency might be limiting the public’s access to
information. Rebecca Williams reports that could hurt future
research on health and safety:

Transcript

A government watchdog group says the Environmental
Protection Agency might be limiting the public’s access to
information. Rebecca Williams reports that could hurt future
research on health and safety:

The EPA has been closing several of its research libraries. The agency
started doing that two years ago to save money. The libraries have
information on chemical safety, Superfund sites, and all kinds of other
health and safety data.

The Government Accountability Office says the EPA cut corners… and acted
too quickly.

The GAO reports the EPA closed the libraries without consulting outside
experts.

The report says the EPA closed its Chemical Library without notifying EPA
staff or the public. EPA scientists used the library to review industry
requests before new chemicals could be put on the market.

Congress has directed the EPA to re-open the libraries. The EPA hasn’t
reopened them yet. But the agency says it’s reviewing its library plans.

For the Environment Report, I’m Rebecca Williams.

Related Links

Many Household Chemicals Not Tested

Two government agencies are agreeing to work together to test chemicals in products we use. But Lester Graham reports… there are still lots of hurdles and years of delays before products already on the shelves can be tested for safety:

Transcript

Two government agencies are agreeing to work together to test chemicals in products we use. But Lester Graham reports… there are still lots of hurdles and years of delays before products already on the shelves can be tested for safety:


Three years ago, a government report showed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency could not assess the health risks of 85% of the chemicals in the products you probably have in your bathroom or out in the garage.

The Government Accountability Office found part of the reason then, and now, was because laws protect corporations’ secrets—over public knowledge about health risks.


On top of that other reports found the EPA was years behind in testing chemicals at all.


Now the EPA and the National Institutes of Health are going to be working together to test chemicals faster and without using lab animals.


The agencies will be testing the safety of chemicals ranging from pesticides to household cleaners to see if they harm human health.


The one problem… it will take, quote, “many years” to validate the new testing methods before the testing program can be fully implemented.

For the Environment Report, this is Lester Graham.

Related Links

Edison’s Invention Getting Dimmer

  • The US government will begin phasing out higher wattage incandescent bulbs in 2012. (Photo by Lester Graham)

One out of every five light bulbs sold in the U.S. is a compact fluorescent. That’s
according to new market data put out by the Environmental Protection Agency. Mark
Brush reports:

Transcript

One out of every five light bulbs sold in the U.S. is a compact fluorescent. That’s
according to new market data put out by the Environmental Protection Agency. Mark
Brush reports:


It appears the days are numbered for Thomas Edison’s most famous invention. That’s because fewer people are buying incandescent light bulbs. The EPA says that compact fluorescent light bulbs made up 20% of the overall light bulb
market last year. That’s more than double than the previous year.


Maria Vargas is with the EPA’s Energy Star Program. She says the compact fluorescent
bulbs – or CFLs – are more expensive to buy, but when you do the math, they’ll save
you money in the long run:


“A CFL lamp will save you about $30 or more in electricity costs over each bulb’s
lifetime. They use about 75% less energy and they last up to about ten times longer.”


The U.S. government will officially begin phasing out the higher wattage incandescent
bulbs in 2012.


For the Environment Report, I’m Mark Brush.

Related Links

Nail Salon Workers Exposed to Fumes

  • A technician at Northbend Nails gives a customer a pedicure. (Photo by Ann Dornfeld)

Anyone who’s been in the same room as an open bottle of nail polish remover
knows how strong it smells. Now imagine working in those fumes all day, every
day. That’s what it’s like to work in a nail salon. There’s growing concern that nail
salon workers are being exposed to such high levels of these fumes that their
health is at risk. Ann Dornfeld reports on a project in Seattle to teach nail
technicians how to keep themselves safe at work:

Transcript

Anyone who’s been in the same room as an open bottle of nail polish remover
knows how strong it smells. Now imagine working in those fumes all day, every
day. That’s what it’s like to work in a nail salon. There’s growing concern that nail
salon workers are being exposed to such high levels of these fumes that their
health is at risk. Ann Dornfeld reports on a project in Seattle to teach nail
technicians how to keep themselves safe at work:


Connie Fields is at Northbend Nails today to get her nails touched up with liquid
acrylic. It’s been her ritual every two or three weeks for the past twenty years.


“Y’know, I work a lot with my hands and when my nails are done it makes
me feel good. It helps complete my dress, so I like nails. (Laughs)”


Still, Fields has her misgivings about the safety of nail products:


“I’ve had concern! Because years ago, whatever the chemical they were
using at the time, some girls had an infection.”


It’s not just the costumers who are at risk. The people who work with these chemicals day in and day out are the most exposed. Often, they’re Vietnamese immigrants. It doesn’t take long to get trained to
do nails, and you don’t need to speak much English. But language barriers can
keep Vietnamese nail salon workers from learning how to protect themselves
from workplace chemicals.


You’ve probably noticed this sounds less like a spa, and more like an auto body
shop. That’s how it smells, too. Salon owner Helen Hoang is combining
chemicals to create liquid acrylic for Connie Fields’ nails:


(Translated from Vietnamese:) “I use two products for this. One product is mixed with powder to make the
powder supple so I can paint it on. And the other one is a polymer to finish
it off.”


The odor is industrial-strength. And Kevin Burrell says that’s no exaggeration:


“The chemistry that’s used in the salon for doing nail finishes are very
similar to the chemicals that are used in auto manufacturing.”


Burrell is the head of the Environmental Coalition of South Seattle. He says most
nail technicians don’t realize that they’re doing a small-scale version of auto
painting, with the same kinds of chemicals and technique: a primer, a base coat
and a top coat.


Common chemicals in nail polish include formaldehyde and toluene. At high
doses, those can cause respiratory problems including asthma, headaches, and
even organ damage. Burrell says acrylic nails might be even more dangerous:


“They’re made of two chemicals, one of which has been banned at full-
strength in our state. You can’t use methyl methacrylate in Washington
State at 100% strength.”


But Burrell says products with 99.9% percent methyl methacrylate are still on the
market. That chemical has been limited or banned by at least 30 states. Studies
on animals suggest inhaling too much of it may cause respiratory and organ
damage. A recent University of Toronto study showed that a group of nail salon
workers’ children had signs of learning disabilities linked to solvent exposure.
And some studies show a chemical in nail polish called dibutylpthalate may stunt
the fetal growth of male testes.


Burrell says to limit exposure, nail salon workers need to use safe chemical
handling practices. So his organization is working on an education
campaign called Toxic Beauty. It’s funded by the Environmental Protection
Agency. The campaign sends a Vietnamese-speaking educator into salons to
show owners and workers how to protect themselves.


At Northbend Nails, owner Helen Hoang welcomed the advice. She already had
a ventilation system and air conditioning:


(Translated from Vietnamese:) “There’s probably just a few places that have ventilation systems because
they’re costly. It takes money to buy them and to run them. I don’t know for
sure, but my customers say the air is much better here than other salons.”


She says the educator showed her some other ways to limit chemical exposure:


(Translated from Vietnamese:) “Before, I threw everything away in just the trash can. They told me to put
everything in trash bags and tie them before I throw them away. Another
thing they recommended was to install vacuums in the manicure tables to
suck up the dust and fumes. I’m planning to do that.”


Ultimately, environmental justice activists want to nail salon
workers and customers to demand safer nail products. Pthalates, formaldehyde
and toluene have all been banned by the European Union in nail products. So far
only one major company, O.P.I., has agreed to change its US formulations, too.


The demand has to come from the ground up. That’s because the US government doesn’t regulate cosmetics for safety.


For the Environment Report, I’m Ann Dornfeld.

Related Links