Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Baytown plant with troubled track record could receive up to $332 million from federal government to lower emissions

News Feed
Monday, March 25, 2024

This Friday, Oct. 13, 2017, photo taken from upper Galveston Bay shows the Exxon Mobil Baytown refinery and chemical plant in Baytown, Texas.A Baytown power plant with a track record of federal air quality violations could get up to $332 million from the U.S. Department of Energy as part of a national decarbonization initiative. On Monday, the U.S. Department of Energy announced $6 billion in funding for 33 decarbonization projects across the country — including six projects specifically in Texas. One of those projects could grant up to $331.9 million to the ExxonMobil Baytown Olefins Plant to “enable the use of hydrogen in place of natural gas” for ethylene production, with the goal of cutting down the plant’s total emissions by more than half. However, environmental advocacy groups say they’re skeptical. Luke Metzger, the executive director of Environment Texas, said the hydrogen that Exxon would use would likely be produced using natural gas, which would add to the plant’s omissions and nullify the benefits of the project. “Ultimately, it could be a wash in terms of the emissions impact and further delaying the transition towards clean, renewable energy,” Metzger said. “This hydrogen scheme, I worry, is not actually going to be a net positive for public health or the environment.” Over the last few years, the Baytown plant has repeatedly violated federal standards. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s website, several “high priority” air quality violations were found during at least 12 separate inspections before May 2022 — a total of 25 violations have been found over the last five years. ExxonMobil operates a multi-facility complex in Baytown comprised of the olefins plant, along with a chemical plant and refinery. In total, the ExxonMobil complex has seen at least 60 federal violations over the last five years and has been penalized at least $442,451 for significant violations, according to the EPA. Additionally, at least four workers were injured in an explosion at the ExxonMobil refinery in 2021, which resulted in a $10 million lawsuit against the company. In 2019, more than 30 people were injured in another explosion at the refinery. Environment Texas was among a trio of environmental nonprofits that sued ExxonMobil back in 2010 for violating the EPA’s Clean Air Act for multiple years. The courts kicked the case around for more than a decade, but ultimately ruled against Exxon in March 2021, hitting the company with more than $14 million in fines — a ruling that Exxon is currently appealing. Both ExxonMobil and the U.S. Department of Energy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Federal regulators found at least 25 air quality violations at the ExxonMobil Baytown Olefins Plant over the last five years. However, the facility could receive millions in federal funding as part of a national decarbonization initiative.

This Friday, Oct. 13, 2017, photo taken from upper Galveston Bay shows the Exxon Mobil Baytown refinery and chemical plant in Baytown, Texas. On Tuesday, Oct. 31, 2017, federal officials said that Exxon Mobil settled violations of the clean-air law with the Trump administration by agreeing to pay a $2.5 million civil penalty and spend $300 million on pollution-control technology at plants along the Gulf Coast. The plants are in Baytown, Beaumont and Mont Belvieu, Texas, and Baton Rouge, Louisiana. As part of the settlement, Exxon will spend $1 million to plant trees in Baytown.
This Friday, Oct. 13, 2017, photo taken from upper Galveston Bay shows the Exxon Mobil Baytown refinery and chemical plant in Baytown, Texas.

A Baytown power plant with a track record of federal air quality violations could get up to $332 million from the U.S. Department of Energy as part of a national decarbonization initiative.

On Monday, the U.S. Department of Energy announced $6 billion in funding for 33 decarbonization projects across the country — including six projects specifically in Texas. One of those projects could grant up to $331.9 million to the ExxonMobil Baytown Olefins Plant to “enable the use of hydrogen in place of natural gas” for ethylene production, with the goal of cutting down the plant’s total emissions by more than half.

However, environmental advocacy groups say they’re skeptical. Luke Metzger, the executive director of Environment Texas, said the hydrogen that Exxon would use would likely be produced using natural gas, which would add to the plant’s omissions and nullify the benefits of the project.

“Ultimately, it could be a wash in terms of the emissions impact and further delaying the transition towards clean, renewable energy,” Metzger said. “This hydrogen scheme, I worry, is not actually going to be a net positive for public health or the environment.”

Over the last few years, the Baytown plant has repeatedly violated federal standards. According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s website, several “high priority” air quality violations were found during at least 12 separate inspections before May 2022 — a total of 25 violations have been found over the last five years.

ExxonMobil operates a multi-facility complex in Baytown comprised of the olefins plant, along with a chemical plant and refinery. In total, the ExxonMobil complex has seen at least 60 federal violations over the last five years and has been penalized at least $442,451 for significant violations, according to the EPA.

Additionally, at least four workers were injured in an explosion at the ExxonMobil refinery in 2021, which resulted in a $10 million lawsuit against the company. In 2019, more than 30 people were injured in another explosion at the refinery.

Environment Texas was among a trio of environmental nonprofits that sued ExxonMobil back in 2010 for violating the EPA’s Clean Air Act for multiple years. The courts kicked the case around for more than a decade, but ultimately ruled against Exxon in March 2021, hitting the company with more than $14 million in fines — a ruling that Exxon is currently appealing.

Both ExxonMobil and the U.S. Department of Energy did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Workers were exposed to toxic chemicals in firefighting foam

For decades it was 3M's biggest outside the US, and the factory made nappy fastenings and video tape.

Workers were exposed to toxic chemicals in firefighting foamAnna MeiselandEsme Stallard,BBC File on 4 InvestigatesGeograph/ Nigel DaviesThe 3M factory in Swansea was once its biggest outside the US, but it made the decision to close it two years ago Dozens of factory workers were exposed to toxic chemicals within firefighting foam over decades, BBC File on 4 Investigates can reveal.Multi-billion-pound US manufacturer, 3M, failed to tell employees at its Swansea site they were using foam containing two forever chemicals, now classed as carcinogenic, despite knowing for decades of the health risks.The company said it would stop manufacturing the forever chemicals – so called because they persist in the environment – in 2002, but failed to remove them from the factory resulting in an environmental accident four years later.3M said that the health and safety of its workers and their families were "critical priorities" for the company.The factory in Gorseinon, Swansea, opened in 1952 and for decades was 3M's largest outside of the US. It employed more than 1,000 people from across south Wales to manufacture nappy fastenings and video tape.In 2023, 3M made the decision to close the factory and applied for planning permission to redevelop the site.BBC File on 4 Investigates discovered a land contamination report amongst hundreds of documents 3M submitted to the local council - it said the site is polluted with two toxic forever chemicals, PFOS and PFOA.The company never manufactured the chemicals, part of the PFAS family of substances, at the site. Its report said the chemicals came from "historic firefighting activities" using aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) - a type of firefighting foam.The BBC has tracked down those involved in firefighting on the site, who are speaking publicly for the first time.Every year, a dozen workers at the factory were selected to take on an additional responsibility as members of the "fire party" at the factory."We were on the emergency squad, like part-time firemen," said Ian (not his real name). He worked at the 3M factory for 40 years and was part of the fire party team."Once a month we did the training and we used to train putting out chemical fires," Ian added."They'd have a big tray full of chemicals, put a torch to it, set it up and then we used to use the light water then to put it out, it would come out like foam."Light water is the 3M product name for AFFF, with Ian saying workers were not told anything about chemicals it may contain. Levels of PFOS discovered in soil at the site in 2023 were listed in the report ranging from 50 to more than 1,500 micrograms per kilogram.These upper levels are 500 times greater than the average in British soils.Dr David Megson, an environmental scientist at Manchester Metropolitan University, told the BBC that these levels were a "cause for concern".In a commercial setting he said levels above 600 micrograms may pose a risk to human health because of inhalation of dust and contact with the skin.Members of the PFAS family of chemicals, specifically PFOA and PFOS, have been linked with a range of different adverse health conditions, Dr Megson said. He added: "[They] can cause damage to the liver, cardiovascular system, immune system and in the developing foetus."Both chemicals are now banned in the UK because they are toxic and do not break down easily in the environment. In 2024, the World Health Organization (WHO) determined PFOA was carcinogenic and PFOS "possibly" carcinogenic to humans.But 3M knew as early as the 1970s of the health risks of these chemicals to workers.Bastiaan Slabbers/Getty ImagesSome firefighting foam used in Swansea contained toxic forever chemicals - this is a similar type of foam at a site in the US In 1999, a major civil claim was made against 3M after people started becoming unwell from water contaminated with PFOS and PFOA in the United States.During the case, internal 3M documents were released which showed the company recording elevated levels of PFAS in the blood of its workers and possible increases in cancer."[It] understood, going back many decades, the dangers of these chemicals," said Rob Bilott, partner at US firm Taft Law, who led that litigation."Animal studies started being done by [3M] in the 1960s that was showing incredible toxicity in multiple different animal species. "Rats, mice, rabbits, guinea pigs, dogs, even monkeys were dropping dead by the late 1970s."Cheryl's father worked for decades at the factory in Swansea, starting back in the 70s, and was also on the fire party."He was the provider. He always worked hard. He was at his happiest when he was with his family and his friends," said Cheryl (not her real name).In his early 40s, he was diagnosed with kidney cancer and after treatment briefly returned to work before retiring at 50. A few years later the cancer returned and Cheryl's dad died at the age of 54.She said: "It was a shock because my father was always a big, strong man, so he was never ill. He never used to take time off sick from work."Many things can cause kidney cancer, but research compiled by the World Health Organization has concluded the risk of kidney cancer is probably increased by significant exposure to PFOS and PFOA.Dr Steve Hajioff is an epidemiologist and chairs an independent panel in Jersey looking into contamination of water supply by firefighting foam that also contains the chemicals manufactured by 3M.It was set up by the government after residents fell ill."I do not think you can ever say that [it] is impossible it might be caused or made more likely by PFAS exposure," he said. "But there are things where we can be pretty convinced, and those are things like kidney cancer, testicular cancer, less effective immunisations for children."Cheryl said she cannot understand why the company knew of the risks and failed to test the blood of workers, adding: "Maybe some people who have passed away could have been diagnosed earlier and had treatment earlier."This sentiment is echoed by Ian who said as the workers were never told of any risks, they did not wear breathing equipment and handled the foam in their factory overalls and wellies only."I'm not very happy about it," he said. "I've always said they were a bit blasé about all the chemicals they were really using."Ian also left the factory after being diagnosed with colon cancer after nearly four decades of service.We do not know if Ian's exposure to the foams caused this. The WHO said this year the evidence to link PFOS and PFOA to colon cancer remains unclear as there have not be enough cases identified.When litigation began in the US, 3M announced publicly that it would stop manufacturing PFOS and PFOA in the US, and globally by 2002.But BBC File on 4 Investigates found that even then workers in Swansea were not told of the health risks, and legacy foams were left on site.In October 2006, a major storm caused the system containing the foams to malfunction and release it on the site. At this point, it was just a liquid, and workers thinking it was rain water, pumped it into the aeration pond – used to store wastewater.John Bowers, the health and safety manager for the site at the time, said this suddenly created a serious problem."The aeration then created a huge amount of foam, which basically went from the pond basically up into the air," he said. Mr Bowers told the BBC the storm was so strong it blew the foam on to Gorseinon high street.He added: "It was described to me as if it was, excuse the phrase, like a foam party."Mr Bowers said the workers managed to contain the foam and the next day called 3M headquarters in Minnesota - it was only at this point the company told him the foam contained the toxic chemical PFOS."I found it surprising that 3M didn't contact existing customers to make them aware of the potential hazards and also even more surprising that they didn't contact the 3M facilities," he said. "I was disappointed."Rob Bilott has led legal action against 3M for decades over PFOS contamination in the USThe BBC submitted a freedom of information request to Swansea council and Natural Resources Wales, the environmental regulator, which revealed that this spill was not contained to the site but also contaminated a local waterway – Afon Lliw.Test results also released to the BBC show that PFOS levels in the pond were at 1800 ug/L and in the local river were at 20ug/L. Average levels above 0.00065ug/L in rivers and lakes are considered to be harmful to aquatic organisms – the levels in the river were 31,000 times higher than that.A local farmer was recorded as complaining to the council at the time after seeing foam in the river and raising concerns for her cattle.The company was warned by the regulator that it committed an offence under water regulations in force at the time, but was told it would not be prosecuted or fined.Mr Bowers told the BBC after this 2006 incident that the pond filled with contaminated foam on the site was cleaned and drained.But the planning application documents from 2023 say that the pond had filled back up and had very high levels of PFOS.The contamination report said the pond might "have the potential to act as an ongoing source to the water environment".In 2023, the pond's levels of PFOS were still at 21,000 times the recommended safe level for aquatic life.3M has now remediated the pond and surrounding soil again, which was completed in recent months.A 3M spokesperson told the BBC: "The health and safety of our employees, their families, and our communities, are critical priorities for 3M."It said it had long since phased PFOS and PFOA out of its operations and has permanently discontinued production of this firefighting foam.It told the BBC it would continue to deliver on its commitments – including remediating PFAS and collaborating with communities including by committing "to invest $1bn (£750m) globally in state-of-the-art water treatment technologies at sites where we have historically manufactured PFAS"."Over decades, 3M has shared significant information about PFAS, including by publishing many of its findings regarding PFAS in publicly available scientific journals," it added.Ian and Cheryl are not their real names. Because of their concerns about speaking publicly their names have been changed.

Chemicals
Animals
Health

Ohio vineyard owner relied on toxic weed killer. Now facing Parkinson’s, he wants it banned

Dave Jilbert was diagnosed with Parkinson's after he used a paraquat product at his Ohio vineyard. He's now suing the pesticide manufacturer and trying to get paraquat banned.

Dave Jilbert always wanted to be a farmer. He went to agricultural school, moved to a homestead, started a winery and eventually purchased 16 acres of farmland in the central Ohio valley. He grew grapes for about five years, until he felt himself slowing down. It wasn’t long before the tremors started. Jilbert, at the age of 61, was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease in 2021. “I’m not a doctor,” he said, “but all I know is I used paraquat and I got Parkinson’s.” There’s no definitive cause of Parkinson’s, a brain disease with no cure that gets worse over time, but researchers have found a majority of cases are environmental. Now Jilbert is suing. He argues that spraying a toxic pesticide called paraquat is to blame. And now he’s trying to get it banned. “I’m trying to keep people from doing what I did,” said Jilbert, now 66. “I don’t want people to be damaged like me.” With evidence of its harms stacking up, paraquat has already been banned in dozens of countries all over the world, including the United Kingdom and China, where it’s made. Yet last year, its manufacturer Syngenta, a subsidiary of a company owned by the Chinese government, continued selling paraquat in the United States and other nations that haven’t banned it. Paraquat is highly toxic, but one of the biggest concerns are the mounting allegations that low-level that exposure over a long period of time could be linked to Parkinson’s disease. Thousands of U.S. farmers have made this claim in court, but the cases are still pending.  Ramsey Archibald | rarchibald@al.com‘It’s degenerative’ When Jilbert started growing grapes, he did his research on weed control. He needed to contain suckers, shoots that quickly sprout at the base of the vine, strangling the fruit. It would either take weeks to clip the suckers by hand, or Jilbert could spend a couple of days spraying Gramoxone, a paraquat product manufactured by Syngenta. “It was a great herbicide,” he said. From 2014 through 2018, Jilbert loaded Gramoxone into a 50-gallon sprayer on the back of his tractor and wound through the vineyard, misting the seed bed of the vines. He needed a license to buy it from a farming co-op. But at the time, the only precautions involved wearing rubber gloves, a heavy shirt and goggles. Now, the regulators require respirators, enclosed cabs, among other safety measures. By 2020, Jilbert felt his hands stiffen as he changed the oil on his tractor. He chalked it up to getting older. When the tremors started, a doctor diagnosed Jilbert with Parkinson’s, telling him the brain disease is degenerative. Parkinson’s occurs when the brain cells that make dopamine, a chemical that controls movement, stop working or die. It’s the fastest growing neurodegenerative disease in the world with Parkinson’s Foundation research showing U.S. cases have risen by 50%. Ray Dorsey, a neurologist, says Parkinson’s disease is “largely preventable” with research showing that 87% of those with the disease do not have any genetic risk factors, or in other words, the cause “lies not within us but outside of us.” “If we clean up our environment, we get rid of Parkinson’s disease,” he said. Ohio farmer fights to ban pesticide after Parkinson's diagnosisBefore taking medication, Jilbert couldn’t fasten buttons, tuck in his shirt or tie his shoes. The next step was getting a DaTscan of his brain for a research trial. During that trial, a doctor explained that a healthy brain scan will light up with two bright commas. A brain scan with Parkinson’s will illuminate two periods. Jilbert walked out and looked at his scan results: two periods. “It’s degenerative,” he said. “That’s what keeps ringing back in my mind.” Almost five years in, Jilbert now takes 11 pills a day. His movements have improved, but his head bobs. He has off days and on days. “I’ve got a farm. I’ve got 26 acres. I’ve got the homestead,” Jilbert said. “It looks beautiful. The roads are straight and weeds in check. I followed all the labels. And then I get Parkinson’s.” Mass litigation After learning more about paraquat, Jilbert joined the mass action lawsuit against Syngenta and Chevron USA in 2021. He’s one of thousands of people who claim the chemical manufacturers knew about the dangers of paraquat but sold it anyway. The manufacturers “should have known that paraquat was a highly toxic substance that can cause severe neurological injuries,” the lawsuit argues, and should have taken steps “to ensure that people would not be harmed” by paraquat use. Jilbert’s suit argues he was exposed when mixing, loading and spraying paraquat on his vineyard. During that time, the lawsuit says he breathed in small droplets of the pesticide. “Once absorbed, the paraquat entered his bloodstream, attacked his nervous system and was a substantial factor in causing him to suffer Parkinson’s disease,” the suit claims. Jilbert did not comment on the lawsuit while it’s pending. Dave Jilbert bought a vineyard to grow grapes for his winery, Jilbert Winery, in Valley City, Ohio. After about five years, he felt himself starting to slow down. By 2021, Jilbert was diagnosed with Parkinson's disease. He has since retired from farming and winemaking, but he's now suing the manufacturer of a pesticide called Gramoxone, a paraquat product.  David Petkiewicz | cleveland.comA settlement agreement was reached earlier this year, which would resolve thousands of cases in Illinois, but the negotiations are still being worked out. Without a settlement, it could go to trial in 2026. Syngenta says settling does not imply paraquat causes Parkinson’s disease, but litigation can be costly and distracting. “We stand by the safety of paraquat,” a statement said. Syngenta has also rejected the claims, saying “despite decades of investigation and more than 1,200 epidemiological and laboratory studies of paraquat, no scientist or doctor has ever concluded in a peer-reviewed scientific analysis that paraquat causes Parkinson’s disease.” Chevron, which has never manufactured paraquat and has not sold it since 1986, also disputes the claims. Growing effort to ban In recent decades, more than 70 countries have banned paraquat because of its risks to human health. But it’s still allowed, and widely used, in the United States after the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency re-registered paraquat for another 15 years because it did not find a clear link between paraquat and Parkinson’s disease. “I’m not a doctor, but all I know is I used paraquat and I got Parkinson’s.”Dave Jilbert, an Ohio farmer Several advocacy groups sued the EPA over this decision. Jilbert, since getting diagnosed with Parkinson’s, has joined a growing movement to get paraquat banned. He’s been to Washington D.C. twice to lobby lawmakers. “I didn’t ask for this, so that’s what makes me mad,” he said. “I wanted to tell my story and maybe I can keep it off the market. Do my part to stop the nonsense.” A coalition of Democratic U.S. lawmakers, expressing “grave concern,” also urged the EPA last year to ban paraquat. And legislation has been floated in California and Pennsylvania that would prohibit it on a state level. In the meantime, Jilbert retired from making wine this summer. His future with Parkinson’s feels uncertain. But he knows he wants to spend his remaining time with his wife of 37 years. “I’m reinventing my future philosophy for what’s to come,” he said. “Because I don’t know what’s going to come.”

Chemicals
Government
Health

Like Many Holiday Traditions, Lighting Candles and Fireplaces Is Best Done in Moderation

The warm scents of gingerbread and pine are holiday favorites, but experts warn they can affect indoor air quality

The warm spices in gingerbread, the woodsy aroma of pine and fir trees, and the fruity tang of mulled wine are smells synonymous with the holiday season. Many people enjoy lighting candles, incense and fireplaces in their homes to evoke the moods associated with these festive fragrances.Burning scented products may create a cozy ambiance, and in the case of fireplaces, provide light and heat, but some experts want people to consider how doing so contributes to the quality of the air indoors. All flames release chemicals that may cause allergy-like symptoms or contribute to long-term respiratory problems if they are inhaled in sufficient quantities.However, people don't have to stop sitting by the hearth or get rid of products like perfumed candles and essential oil diffusers, said Dr. Meredith McCormack, director of the pulmonary and critical care medicine division at John Hopkins University’s medical school. Instead, she recommends taking precautions to control the pollutants in their homes.“Clean air is fragrance free,” said McCormack, who has studied air quality and lung health for more than 20 years. “If having seasonal scents is part of your tradition or evokes feelings of nostalgia, maybe think about it in moderation.” What to know about indoor air quality People in the Northern Hemisphere tend to spend more time indoors during the end-of-year holidays, when temperatures are colder. Indoor air can be significantly more polluted than outdoor air because pollutants get trapped inside and concentrated without proper ventilation or filtration, according to the American Lung Association.For example, active fireplaces and gas appliances release tiny airborne particles that can get into the lungs and chemicals like nitrogen dioxide, a major component of smog, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Cleaning products, air fresheners and candles also emit air pollutants at varying concentrations.The risk fragrances and other air pollutants may pose to respiratory health depends on the source, the length and intensity of a person’s exposure, and individual health, McCormack said.It is also important to note that some pollutants have no smell, so unscented products still can affect indoor air quality, experts say. Some people are more vulnerable Polluted air affects everyone but not equally. Children, older adults, minority populations and people of low socioeconomic status are more likely to be affected by poor air quality because of either physiological vulnerabilities or higher exposure, according to the environmental agency.Children are more susceptible to air pollution because of their lung size, which means they get a greater dose of exposure relative to their body size, McCormack said. Pollutants inside the home also post a greater hazard to people with heart or lung conditions, including asthma, she said.Signs of respiratory irritation include coughing, shortness of breath, headaches, a runny nose and sneezing. Experts advise stopping use of pollutant-releasing products or immediately ventilating rooms if symptoms occur.“The more risk factors you have, the more harmful air pollution or poor air quality indoors can be,” McCormack said. Practical precautions to take Ellen Wilkowe burns candles with scents like vanilla and cinnamon when she does yoga, writes or when she is showering at her home in New Jersey. Her teenage daughter, on the other hand, likes more seasonally scented candles like gingerbread.“The candle has a calming presence. They are also very symbolic and used in rituals and many religions,” she said.Wilkowe said she leans toward candles made with soy-based waxes instead of petroleum-based paraffin. Experts note that all lit candles give off air pollutants regardless of what they are made of.Buying products with fewer ingredients, opening windows if the temperatures allow, and using air purifiers with HEPA filters are ways to reduce exposure to any pollutants from indoor fireplaces, appliances and candle displays, McCormack said. She also recommends switching on kitchen exhaust fans before starting a gas-powered stovetop and using the back burners so the vent can more easily suck up pollutants.Setting polite boundaries with guests who smoke cigarettes or other tobacco products is also a good idea, she said.“Small improvements in air quality can have measurable health benefits," McCormack said. "Similarly to if we exercise and eat a little better, we can be healthier.”Rachael Lewis-Abbott, a member of the Indoor Air Quality Association, an organization for professionals who identify and address air quality problems, said people don't usually notice what they are breathing in until problems like gas leaks or mold develop.“It is out of sight, out of mind,” she said.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Chemicals
Health
Pollution

This moss survived in space for 9 months

In an experiment on the outside of the International Space Station, a species of moss survived in space for 9 months. And it could have lasted much longer. The post This moss survived in space for 9 months first appeared on EarthSky.

Meet a spreading earthmoss known as Physcomitrella patens. It’s frequently used as a model organism for studies on plant evolution, development, and physiology. In this image, a reddish-brown sporophyte sits at the top center of a leafy gametophore. This capsule contains numerous spores inside. Scientists tested samples like these on the outside of the International Space Station (ISS) to see if they could tolerate the extreme airless environment. And they did. The moss survived in space for 9 months and could have lasted even longer. Image via Tomomichi Fujita/ EurekAlert! (CC BY-SA). Space is a deadly environment, with no air, extreme temperature swings and harsh radiation. Could any life survive there? Reasearchers in Japan tested a type of moss called spreading earthmoss on the exterior of the International Space Station. The moss survived for nine months, and the spores were still able to reproduce when brought back to Earth. Moss survived in space for 9 months Can life exist in space? Not simply on other planets or moons, but in the cold, dark, airless void of space itself? Most organisms would perish almost immediately, to be sure. But researchers in Japan recently experimented with moss, with surprising results. They said on November 20, 2025, that more than 80% of their moss spores survived nine months on the outside of the International Space Station. Not only that, but when brought back to Earth, they were still capable of reproducing. Nature, it seems, is even tougher than we thought! Amazingly, the results show that some primitive plants – not even just microorganisms – can survive long-term exposure to the extreme space environment. The researchers published their peer-reviewed findings in the journal iScience on November 20, 2025. A deadly environment for life Space is a horrible place for life. The lack of air, radiation and extreme cold make it pretty much unsurvivable for life as we know it. As lead author Tomomichi Fujita at Hokkaido University in Japan stated: Most living organisms, including humans, cannot survive even briefly in the vacuum of space. However, the moss spores retained their vitality after nine months of direct exposure. This provides striking evidence that the life that has evolved on Earth possesses, at the cellular level, intrinsic mechanisms to endure the conditions of space. This #moss survived 9 months directly exposed to the vacuum space and could still reproduce after returning to Earth. ? ? spkl.io/63322AdFrpTomomichi Fujita & colleagues@cp-iscience.bsky.social — Cell Press (@cellpress.bsky.social) 2025-11-24T16:00:02.992Z What about moss? Researchers wanted to see if any Earthly life could survive in space’s deadly environment for the long term. To find out, they decided to do some experiments with a type of moss called spreading earthmoss, or Physcomitrium patens. The researchers sent hundreds of sporophytes – encapsulated moss spores – to the International Space Station in March 2022, aboard the Cygnus NG-17 spacecraft. They attached the sporophyte samples to the outside of the ISS, where they were exposed to the vacuum of space for 283 days. By doing so, the samples were subjected to high levels of UV (ultraviolet) radiation and extreme swings of temperature. The samples later returned to Earth in January 2023. The researchers tested three parts of the moss. These were the protonemata, or juvenile moss; brood cells, or specialized stem cells that emerge under stress conditions; and the sporophytes. Fujita said: We anticipated that the combined stresses of space, including vacuum, cosmic radiation, extreme temperature fluctuations and microgravity, would cause far greater damage than any single stress alone. Astronauts placed the moss samples on the outside of the International Space Station for the 9-month-long experiment. Incredibly, more than 80% of the the encapsulated spores survived the trip to space and back to Earth. Image via NASA/ Roscosmos. The moss survived! So, how did the moss do? The results were mixed, but overall showed that the moss could survive in space. The radiation was the most difficult aspect of the space environment to withstand. The sporophytes were the most resilient. Incredibly, they were able to survive and germinate after being exposed to -196 degrees Celsius (-320 degrees Fahrenheit) for more than a week. At the other extreme, they also survived in 55° degrees C (131 degrees F) heat for a month. Some brood cells survived as well, but the encased spores were about 1,000 times more tolerant to the UV radiation. On the other hand, none of the juvenile moss survived the high UV levels or the extreme temperatures. Samples of moss spores that germinated after their 9-month exposure to space. Image via Dr. Chang-hyun Maeng/ Maika Kobayashi/ EurekAlert!. (CC BY-SA). How did the spores survive? So why did the encapsulated spores do so well? The researchers said the natural structure surrounding the spore itself helps to protect the spore. Essentially, it absorbs the UV radiation and surrounds the inner spore both physically and chemically to prevent damage. As it turns out, this might be associated with the evolution of mosses. This is an adaptation that helped bryophytes – the group of plants to which mosses belong – to make the transition from aquatic to terrestrial plants 500 million years ago. Overall, more than 80% of the spores survived the journey to space and then back to Earth. And only 11% were unable to germinate after being brought back to the lab on Earth. That’s impressive! In addition, the researchers also tested the levels of chlorophyll in the spores. After the exposure to space, the spores still had normal amounts of chlorophyll, except for chlorophyll a specifically. In that case, there was a 20% reduction. Chlorophyll a is used in oxygenic photosynthesis. It absorbs the most energy from wavelengths of violet-blue and orange-red light. Tomomichi Fujita at Hokkaido University in Japan is the lead author of the new study about moss in space. Image via Hokkaido University. Spores could have survived for 15 years The time available for the experiment was limited to the several months. However, the researchers wondered if the moss spores could have survived even longer. And using mathematical models, they determined the spores would likely have continued to live in space for about 15 years, or 5,600 days, altogether. The researchers note this prediction is a rough estimate. More data would still be needed to make that assessment even more accurate. So the results show just how resilient moss is, and perhaps some other kinds of life, too. Fujita said: This study demonstrates the astonishing resilience of life that originated on Earth. Ultimately, we hope this work opens a new frontier toward constructing ecosystems in extraterrestrial environments such as the moon and Mars. I hope that our moss research will serve as a starting point. Bottom line: In an experiment on the outside of the International Space Station, a species of moss survived in space for nine months. And it could have lasted much longer. Source: Extreme environmental tolerance and space survivability of the moss, Physcomitrium patens Via EurekAlert! Read more: This desert moss could grow on Mars, no greenhouse needed Read more: Colorful life on exoplanets might be lurking in cloudsThe post This moss survived in space for 9 months first appeared on EarthSky.

Chemicals
Energy
Nature

Medical Imaging Contributing To Water Pollution, Experts Say

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Dec. 11, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Contrast chemicals injected into people for medical imaging scans...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterTHURSDAY, Dec. 11, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Contrast chemicals injected into people for medical imaging scans are likely contributing to water pollution, a new study says.Medicare patients alone received 13.5 billion milliliters of contrast media between 2011 and 2024, and those chemicals wound up in waterways after people excreted them, researchers recently reported in JAMA Network Open.“Contrast agents are necessary for effective imaging, but they don’t disappear after use,” said lead researcher Dr. Florence Doo, an assistant professor at the University of Maryland Medical Intelligent Imaging Center in Baltimore.“Iodine and gadolinium are non-renewable resources that can enter wastewater and accumulate in rivers, oceans and even drinking water,” Doo said in a news release.People undergoing X-ray or CT scans are sometimes given iodine or barium-sulfate compounds that cause certain tissues, blood vessels or organs to light up, allowing radiologists a better look at potential health problems.For MRI scans, radiologists use gadolinium, a substance that alters the magnetic properties of water molecules in the human body.These are critical for diagnosing disease, but they are also persistent pollutants, researchers said in background notes. They aren’t biodegradable, and conventional wastewater treatment doesn’t fully remove them.For the new study, researchers analyzed 169 million contrast-enhanced imaging procedures that Medicare covered over 13 years.Iodine-based contrast agents accounted for more than 95% of the total volume, or nearly 12.9 billion milliliters. Of those, agents used in CT scans of the abdomen and pelvis alone contributed 4.4 billion milliliters.Gadolinium agents were less frequently used, but still contributed nearly 600 million milliliters, researchers said. Brain MRIs were the most common scan using these contrast materials.Overall, just a handful of procedures accounted for 80% of all contrast use, researchers concluded.“Our study shows that a small number of imaging procedures drive the majority of contrast use. Focusing on those highest-use imaging types make meaningful changes tractable and could significantly reduce health care’s environmental footprint,” researcher Elizabeth Rula, executive director of the Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute in Reston, Va., said in a news release.Doctors can help by making sure their imaging orders are necessary, while radiologists can lower the doses of contrast agents by basing them on a patient’s weight, researchers said.Biodegradable contrast media are under development, researchers noted. Another solution could involve AI, which might be able to accurately analyze medical imaging scans even if less contrast media is used.“We can’t ignore the environmental consequences of medical imaging,” Doo said. “Stewardship of contrast agents is a measurable and impactful way to align patient care with planetary health and should be an important part of broader health care sustainability efforts.”SOURCES: Harvey L. Neiman Health Policy Institute, news release, Dec. 4, 2025; JAMA Network Open, Dec. 5, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Chemicals
Health
Pollution

Suggested Viewing

Lead in the Land

Lead in the Land is a documentary focusing on the harsh reality and far-reaching effects of lead poisoning, an invisible and insidious threat afflicting thousands of children in the United States. The film sheds light on the circumstances around lead poisoning, examining its causes, effects and potential solutions.

Chemicals
Social Justice
Health

We Trees

Ever wonder what trees think of us now that we have created a climate disaster? This 2-minute film answers that question. As Bill McKibben recently tweeted about the film, “Who speaks for trees? In this short and elegant video, the trees themselves.” It has been screened at Green Fest (Serbia), The Colorado Environmental Film Festival, The Wildlife Conservation Film Festival and Winner of Merit at the Nature Without Borders Film Festival.

Forests
Chemicals
Climate

Unacceptable Risk: Dr. Margaret Kripke on Cancer and the Environment

Unacceptable Risk tells the story of a prominent cancer researcher who rethinks her assumptions about the causes of cancer and the true burden of environmentally-induced cancers.

Chemicals
Science
Health

Toxic Business

A documentary on the profits international chemical companies are gaining in Africa at cost of the health of small-scaled-farmers and consumers.International chemical companies sell high toxic agro-chemicals in Kenya, which are banned since long in Europe. They are banned because their ingredients cause cancer and have a major negative impact on the nature and environment. Anyhow – in developing countries like Kenya those toxic chemicals are sold without any regulations through small agro-shops all over the country. The small scaled farmers do believe in the promises of better and safer harvest those companies give. Today, the use of pesticides even inside the villages is already a daily business. Furthermore many of them already depend on hybrid seeds, old and resistant seeds supplants. Most of the consumers do not have the knowledge, how dangerous those agro-chemicals are: the WHO announced that annually 346.000 people die, caused by accidentally poisoning with those chemicals, 2/3 of them within developing countries.In the face of world food, industry is trying to push its way into the markets. On the contrary, statistics and alternative farming methods in East Africa show that it no longer needs chemicals and hybrid seeds to feed the world, but a general rethinking.

Agriculture
Chemicals
Business

Bag It

Bag It examines our society’s use and abuse of plastic. The theme of the film focuses on plastic as it relates to our society’s throw away mentality, our culture of convenience, and our over consumption of throwaway products and packaging—things that we use one time and then, without another thought, we throw them away. Bag It offers a candid view of the disturbing realities of our culture. And, it suggests concrete solutions to our plastic addiction. The film will raise public awareness on the many issues related to plastic and inspire change, both on the individual level and on the public policy level.

Chemicals
Waste
Culture

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.