In America, all chemicals are considered harmless until proven otherwise. That has allowed toxins to rack up high body counts before they are restricted or outlawed.
By contrast, Europe, Japan, and other developed countries ban many chemicals that still flow freely though the stream of American commerce
The agency is creating an office of environmental justice to address the disproportionate harm that climate change has caused in low-income areas and communities of color.
What's left when the Environmental Protection Agency throws facts out the window?
Most Americans breathe unhealthy air, and weakening the EPA won’t help.
According to its own website, “the mission of EPA is to protect human health and the environment.” But the agency is failing us — miserably.
The EPA is calling for more transparency in science. Yes, it’s hypocritical and ill-considered—but let’s be crystal clear about the potential benefits.
The decision created greater opportunities for business interests to challenge regulations, reflecting conservative legal theories developed to rein in administrative agencies.
EPA administrator Michael Regan announces ‘aggressive action’ but new PFAS limits are advisory and critics call them ‘baby steps’
EPA chief Scott Pruitt will launch an initiative to challenge accepted climate science using “red team, blue team” exercises developed by the military to identify weak points in his agency’s field operations.
In the summer of 1969, Nixon established the Environmental Quality Council, which TIME described as “a Cabinet-level advisory group designed to coordinate governmental action against environmental decay at all levels, create new proposals to control pollution, and foresee problems.”
A curious person’s guide to the laws that keep the air clean and the water pure
In addition to protecting public health and natural resources, environmental regulation can benefit businesses in tangible ways – for example, by stimulating innovation that leads to new products and markets.
You’ve probably been hearing the term PFAS in the news lately as states and the U.S. government consider rules and guidelines for managing these “forever chemicals.”
Even if the term is new to you, chances are good that you’re familiar with what PFAS do. That’s because they’re found in everything from nonstick cookware to carpets to ski wax.
The EPA is required, by law, to enforce and continually update air, water, and climate pollution regulations in accordance with the best available science. To that end, the agency employs a variety of scientists who sort through and synthesize the relevant research in order to inform this process.
Ultimately, setting a standard for two of the thousands of PFAS compounds is a win for public health. But whatever rule the EPA proposes will be contentious — either too high to convince environmentalists that it sufficiently protects human health, or so low that water treatment plants, which will be on the hook for implementing the rule, will protest the expense of doing so.
Let’s not forget what America looked like before we had the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Our rivers caught on fire, our air was full of smog, and it stank (literally).