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.

The US oil and gas industry is emitting less carbon than it used to

News Feed
Monday, June 3, 2024

The U.S. energy industry continues to extract record amounts of fossil fuels, despite climate activists’ calls to ​“keep it in the ground.” But while oil and gas extraction has increased in recent years, the carbon emissions from that industrial activity have actually fallen, a new analysis has found. Even as fossil gas production rose by 40 percent from 2015 to 2022, methane emissions from gas extraction fell by 37 percent, according to a study of Environmental Protection Agency data published today by climate nonprofits Ceres and the Clean Air Task Force. That finding suggests that when energy companies want to, they can effectively reduce emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas with 82 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide over 20 years, and 30 times the warming potential over 100 years. Overall greenhouse gas emissions, which count the industry’s considerable carbon dioxide releases, also fell, but by a more modest 14 percent. There’s a clear playbook for tackling the planet-warming emissions that result from combusting fossil fuels in power plants or vehicles. But the extraction of those fuels happens farther from public view, and adds up to a major source of industrial emissions. Indeed, oil and gas extraction and refining emitted more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than any other industrial subsector last year, the Rhodium Group reports. And while power and transportation emissions are falling, heavy industry is on track to become the largest emitting sector within the next decade. If oil and gas extraction isn’t about to disappear, then making it as clean as possible is a clear win for the climate. The EPA is working on this, with new regulations on the industry’s emissions and an incoming fee on excess methane emissions that was passed in the Inflation Reduction Act. The new report shows that lower-carbon technologies and processes are in fact available, because many, though not all, leading oil companies have already adopted them. “It is possible to produce gas with lower emissions, but not all companies are performing equally,” said Lesley Feldman, who worked on the report and is a research and analysis manager on the Clean Air Task Force’s methane pollution prevention team. ​“We’re poised to have even stronger regulations coming into effect, and it’s important that those are fully implemented.” National fossil fuel production rose substantially from 2015 to 2022, but total methane and overall carbon emissions from that activity actually fell. (Ceres and Clean Air Task Force) Methane emissions fell, even during the Permian oil boom The U.S. oil and gas industry emits a lot of carbon in the process of extracting fossil fuels, which then emit more carbon when they get burned later on. But the emissions trends are heading in the right direction, at least through 2022: Despite vastly more extraction, overall emissions fell. That means the industry is emitting much less carbon per unit of oil or gas produced today than it was seven years ago. The major caveat is that the available EPA dataset underestimates actual emissions, Feldman said. The agency requires reporting only from facilities that emit above a certain threshold, and the rules don’t currently capture super emitter events when large amounts of methane leak out unexpectedly. Field studies have shown that ​“fugitive methane” has been leaking from gas fields at far higher rates than previously assumed; the EPA’s new rules should instigate more accurate reporting of those events. But the current data provides a useful if incomplete picture of the known sources of oil and gas field emissions. To test the thesis that the oil industry can reduce its emissions intensity, there’s no better place to look than the Permian Basin, which has become the heart of domestic oil production since the shale revolution. The basin releases more carbon emissions from fossil fuel extraction than any other U.S. region. Total hydrocarbon production in the Permian more than tripled from 2015 to 2022, and gas production rose by 163 percent. Given that stunning increase in fossil fuel production, one might expect a comparable surge in emissions — but that’s not what happened. Permian methane emissions actually fell by 16 percent by 2022, though they did rise significantly in the intervening years before subsiding again. Driving that improvement, the region’s operators managed to reduce vented methane by 24 percent and cut reported fugitive methane emissions by 22 percent. So far, so good. On the other hand, some producers deal with buildup in gas pressure by burning or flaring it, which converts most of the methane to carbon dioxide before it escapes into the atmosphere. Emissions from flaring in the Permian at the end of 2022 were at double their 2015 levels. Combustion emissions, which come from the equipment that powers extraction, nearly quadrupled during that time. Those increases in carbon dioxide emissions pushed overall GHG emissions up by 65 percent. One big takeaway: Cleaning up Permian oil production will require tackling the on-site combustion of fuels.

The U.S. energy industry continues to extract record amounts of fossil fuels, despite climate activists’ calls to “keep it in the ground.” But while oil and gas extraction has increased in recent years, the carbon emissions from that industrial activity have actually fallen, a new analysis has found. Even as fossil…

The U.S. energy industry continues to extract record amounts of fossil fuels, despite climate activists’ calls to keep it in the ground.” But while oil and gas extraction has increased in recent years, the carbon emissions from that industrial activity have actually fallen, a new analysis has found.

Even as fossil gas production rose by 40 percent from 2015 to 2022, methane emissions from gas extraction fell by 37 percent, according to a study of Environmental Protection Agency data published today by climate nonprofits Ceres and the Clean Air Task Force. That finding suggests that when energy companies want to, they can effectively reduce emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas with 82 times the global warming potential of carbon dioxide over 20 years, and 30 times the warming potential over 100 years. Overall greenhouse gas emissions, which count the industry’s considerable carbon dioxide releases, also fell, but by a more modest 14 percent.

There’s a clear playbook for tackling the planet-warming emissions that result from combusting fossil fuels in power plants or vehicles. But the extraction of those fuels happens farther from public view, and adds up to a major source of industrial emissions. Indeed, oil and gas extraction and refining emitted more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere than any other industrial subsector last year, the Rhodium Group reports. And while power and transportation emissions are falling, heavy industry is on track to become the largest emitting sector within the next decade.

If oil and gas extraction isn’t about to disappear, then making it as clean as possible is a clear win for the climate. The EPA is working on this, with new regulations on the industry’s emissions and an incoming fee on excess methane emissions that was passed in the Inflation Reduction Act. The new report shows that lower-carbon technologies and processes are in fact available, because many, though not all, leading oil companies have already adopted them.

It is possible to produce gas with lower emissions, but not all companies are performing equally,” said Lesley Feldman, who worked on the report and is a research and analysis manager on the Clean Air Task Force’s methane pollution prevention team. We’re poised to have even stronger regulations coming into effect, and it’s important that those are fully implemented.”

National fossil fuel production rose substantially from 2015 to 2022, but total methane and overall carbon emissions from that activity actually fell. (Ceres and Clean Air Task Force)

Methane emissions fell, even during the Permian oil boom

The U.S. oil and gas industry emits a lot of carbon in the process of extracting fossil fuels, which then emit more carbon when they get burned later on. But the emissions trends are heading in the right direction, at least through 2022: Despite vastly more extraction, overall emissions fell. That means the industry is emitting much less carbon per unit of oil or gas produced today than it was seven years ago.

The major caveat is that the available EPA dataset underestimates actual emissions, Feldman said. The agency requires reporting only from facilities that emit above a certain threshold, and the rules don’t currently capture super emitter events when large amounts of methane leak out unexpectedly. Field studies have shown that fugitive methane” has been leaking from gas fields at far higher rates than previously assumed; the EPA’s new rules should instigate more accurate reporting of those events. But the current data provides a useful if incomplete picture of the known sources of oil and gas field emissions.

To test the thesis that the oil industry can reduce its emissions intensity, there’s no better place to look than the Permian Basin, which has become the heart of domestic oil production since the shale revolution. The basin releases more carbon emissions from fossil fuel extraction than any other U.S. region.

Total hydrocarbon production in the Permian more than tripled from 2015 to 2022, and gas production rose by 163 percent. Given that stunning increase in fossil fuel production, one might expect a comparable surge in emissions — but that’s not what happened.

Permian methane emissions actually fell by 16 percent by 2022, though they did rise significantly in the intervening years before subsiding again. Driving that improvement, the region’s operators managed to reduce vented methane by 24 percent and cut reported fugitive methane emissions by 22 percent. So far, so good.

On the other hand, some producers deal with buildup in gas pressure by burning or flaring it, which converts most of the methane to carbon dioxide before it escapes into the atmosphere. Emissions from flaring in the Permian at the end of 2022 were at double their 2015 levels. Combustion emissions, which come from the equipment that powers extraction, nearly quadrupled during that time. Those increases in carbon dioxide emissions pushed overall GHG emissions up by 65 percent. One big takeaway: Cleaning up Permian oil production will require tackling the on-site combustion of fuels.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Russia’s Ukraine Invasion Causes a Deadly Oil Spill on the Black Sea

Russia’s “shadow fleet” of aging oil tankers helps fund the ongoing war but puts the region at risk of more environmental disasters. The post Russia’s Ukraine Invasion Causes a Deadly Oil Spill on the Black Sea appeared first on The Revelator.

On Dec. 15, 2024, in a raging storm, two Russian oil tankers carrying more than 9,000 tons of heavy oil collided off the coast of Port Taman in the Kerch Strait in the Black Sea. A video posted to Telegram allegedly depicting the crash shows one of the tankers, with a broken bow, sinking into the sea. The second vessel reportedly ran aground closer to the port. The crash spilled thousands of tons of toxic heavy fuel oil and has harmed thousands of birds, dozens of dolphins, and other animals, and resulted in a state of emergency in Crimea. By mid-January the fuel had spread far enough that it could be seen from space. Satellite images studied by Greenpeace show coastal contamination stretching from Novorossiysk in the Krasnodar Krai to Ozero Donuzlav in the western coast of Russian-occupied Crimea. Even Russian president Vladimir Putin called the disaster “one of the most serious environmental challenges we have faced in recent years.” For a region accustomed to rough seas and choppy weather, this accident, while unfortunate, was not uncommon. Experts have raised alarms about Russian tankers in the region for years, following previous accidents that caused smaller but still significant spills. With this new crash continuing to cause damage, experts and activists warn that the region remains heavily militarized and under the control of the corrupt, autocratic Russian government, making response to the oil spill increasingly challenging. This has left a vacuum in disaster response, filled sparingly by local volunteers who’ve worked for three months to mitigate the damage. Anna, a student from Moscow, was among the first few volunteers on the scene. “I study at a university that specializes in the oil and gas industry, so I was able to find out quickly how much fuel oil was on the surface and what the government was doing to deal with the emergency,” she told The Revelator. (Anna did not disclose her full name for fear of retribution.) Heavy oil mixed with sand and shells on the polluted beach. Photo provided by volunteers and used with permission. Along with a dozen others, Anna made her way to the Anapa, a coastal resort town in Krasnodar Krai, and began coordinating with groups organizing rescue and cleanup efforts. Within days hundreds of volunteers had mobilized to help, including other students, many of whom traveled from as far as Moscow to help with the cleaning. The reaction from the Russian government has been a lot less enthusiastic. It took the government nearly two weeks to declare the state of emergency Dec. 25. Volunteers, however, have been working relentlessly. “We are catching, cleaning, and helping birds” affected by the spill, Anna said. “This is the easiest part of our work.” Volunteers also engaged in beach-cleaning efforts, but full treatment of the pollution will require specialized workers. A Heavy Problem The problems facing volunteers are not just logistical. The nature of the fuel they’re attempting to clear is itself problematic. “Fuel oil is quite heavy, so it sinks,” Anna explained. “But if the temperature rises or there are storms, it rises in the water and hits the shorelines again.” The vessels carried mazut, a type of low-quality heavy fuel oil that can be very difficult to clean in a spill. “Heavy fuel oil, also known as residual fuel, is what’s left at the end of the refining process,” explained Sian Prior, a marine science expert and lead adviser to the Clean Arctic Alliance, an organization that has advocated for tighter rules on fossil-fuel shipments in the region. “It’s used by a lot of ships in many different parts of the world.  Most of the heavy fuels also have very high sulfur levels, which when burned releases sulfur oxides, which is bad for health and the environment.”   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Andrew Yanayt I Cameraman (@andrewyanayt) In 2020 the International Maritime Organization, which regulates global commercial shipping, introduced a limit on the amount of sulfur allowed in the fuel. But the fuel industry responded by blending fuels, mixing lighter fuels with heavy fuel to create a product that has low sulfur but still has a lot of heavy residual fuel, Prior said. The resulting mix poses several challenges after spills. “It’s very difficult to clean up, because it’s very viscous and emulsifies when it mixes with water, so its volumes actually increase,” she said. “Once this fuel is spilled … it’s virtually impossible to clean it up adequately.” The effects of a mazut spill could be worse than regular oil spills, which in themselves are disastrous. “The lighter fuels, distillate fuels, will break up much more quickly in the environment,” Prior explains. Mazut, however, remains very thick and viscous. “It can even end up forming hard balls of oil that will sink to the seabed, and get mixed into the sediment, sand, and can persist there for a very, very long time,” she said. “If there’s a storm it can get then released back into the environment, or if it gets very warm, it will become a little bit more viscous,” she said, echoing the experiences of volunteers in Anapa. “It clogs everything it mixes with…and can have a smothering effect on wildlife, marine mammals or birds if they come into contact with it. It’s also toxic, so if they ingest it, it will have an effect internally on their organs.” While Prior’s organization mainly focuses on advocacy in the Arctic Sea region, it says the events in Kerch are a warning on the dangers of transporting heavy fuel. As a result of the work by Clean Arctic Alliance, the International Maritime Organization instituted its ban on the use and carriage of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic as of July 2024. “But not all countries have implemented it so far. Russia hasn’t yet.” Shady Oils, Shadow Vessels Russia’s transport of this already dangerous substance has become more precarious because it’s currently being navigated across continents on fleets of extremely old, poorly maintained and uninsured ships. One of the crashed tankers, Volgoneft-239, in 2024. Photo by VladimirPF – Own work, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159254368 In fact, while the total number of oil spills worldwide has declined over the past four decades, the statistics are the opposite in the Russian seas, said Dmitry Lisitsyn, a Russian environmentalist and executive fellow at the Yale School of Environment. Lisitsyn’s organization, Sakhalin Environment Watch, monitors environmental safety and wildlife preservation on the eastern coast of Russia. The Russian government has declared it a “foreign agent,” limiting their work there. Before that they worked on cleaning up after a similar, albeit less pervasive oil spill in the southwest coast of Sakhalin Island in 2015. Lisitsyn said that despite growing number of oil-spill incidents in Russia, the government has lacked the political will to enforce preventive measures or actionable laws. Following December’s crash a local court in Krasnodar Krai filed the company that owned the tankers just 30,000 rubles (about $215) last month. But more worryingly, Lisitsyn said, the stakeholders seem reluctant to learn lessons from previous spills — including one in the Kerch Strait in 2007. “A similar spill, in the same region, involving the same type of tankers in the same kind of weather conditions should have been lesson enough,” he said. “It was about 20 kilometers to the north [of the current site], near the island of Tuzla, and took place around the same time of the year, but was half the amount of mazut spilled,” said Russian environmental scientist Eugene Simonov. “It caused a lot of damage, even though the scale and geographic range was smaller.” But 2007 was not even the first time, Simonov pointed out. In 1999 a tanker, the same kind that crashed in December, crashed “in front of the Istanbul ports. The tanker split in half and heavy fuel poured out in front of some popular tourist spots,” he said. “It was the least problematic because Turkey was really good at handling that and did not even engage with Russia or anyone else. They just went ahead and cleaned it up.” The biggest takeaway from these incidents, Simonov said, is that these tankers need to be decommissioned. “They are beyond their useful working age and not well-equipped to go into the sea, even into the Black Sea,” he said. “They’re built for the river and even the smallest waves put them in a clear danger of splitting, because they are too long and too weak.” Lisitsyn agrees. “These series of tankers should not go to the sea,” he said. “They are completely unsafe in the stormy seas.” Both tankers were built during the Soviet times. The Volgoneft-212 was about 55 years old, while Volgoneft-239 was a little over 40 years old. Why does Russia still use these old, unreliable vessels? The answer lies in its ongoing invasion of Ukraine and the many sanctions on Russian goods, particularly oil exports. Soon after the 2022 invasion, several western countries banned or significantly reduced the import of Russian oil, sanctions implemented largely on pipeline purchases. To bypass the sanctions, Russia has employed fleets of tankers, usually very old and in poor condition with obscure details of ownership, to continue its trade with western companies. The lack of identity of these tankers, widely referred to as “Shadow Fleets,” helps Russia circumvent sanctions to continue selling its prime economic product. One report by the Carnegie Eurasia center documented 2,849 oil tankers in the first nine months of 2024. The vessels carried an estimated average of 48 million barrels of oil per day. In 2024 Greenpeace identified a list of 192 aging tankers carrying Russian oil around the world. “The list covers only crude oil tankers, which are currently not on any sanctions list but are outdated old vessels,” said Natalia Gozak, director at Greenpeace Ukraine. “The ships visited Russian ports at least three times during the observation period, which established their connection to the Russian oil trade, and it was noted that they didn’t have internationally recognized insurance which would cover costs of any potential oil spill.” Since Greenpeace released the list, Gozak said, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union have sanctioned about 70 of the vessels. Another 130 ships continue transporting oil for Russia.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by FREE RUSSIA FOUNDATION (@freerussia_eng) The shadow fleet has several major implications, said Gozak, “the first of which is that it is financing the war and invasion of Ukraine.” Nearly 1,000 Russian tankers sailed along the Baltic coast in 2023, a Greenpeace report noted, averaging two to three ships per day, and the “highest number of Russian oil tankers ever recorded off the German coast.” As Russia increasingly moves its oil trade through shadow fleets, Gozak estimates the revenues from these exports fund approximately one third of its military budget. “It’s a huge source of income that continues fueling the war,” she said. “I’m based in Kyiv, and I can feel the impact here every day when we come under drone and missile attacks. It’s intensive.” The other prominent effect of these fleets is on the environment. “We have conducted a simulation of possible oil spill in the Baltic Sea and calculated the currents any spill in the region could spread really fast and the impact will be absolutely huge, affecting all countries bordering the Baltic Sea,” Gozak warned. He also brought up the 2007 spill in Kerch to emphasize the dangers posed by the most recent tragedy. “At the time about 1,300 tons of mazut was spilled,” much less than the current spill, he says. “But the impact was huge. Nearly 30,000 birds were killed.” The contamination also “lasted for years,” he said. “This type of oil doesn’t remain on the surface. It sinks down, especially when it’s cold, affecting bottom marine life, including filtrating organisms like mussels, and in this way could enter the food chain. We will continue to see the impact in the coming years, much like in 2007, when even two years after, studies showed high levels of contamination in the water there.” Russian War Preventing Response The conflict in the region, beginning with the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and continuing through its invasion of Ukraine, has resulted in heavy militarization of the Black Sea region. This has further complicated redressal of the catastrophe. The war decreases the ability to mobilize international support, said Simonov. To make things worse, “the disputed status of occupied areas creates an incentive to hide the degree of disaster even more than in times of peace.” During the 2007 spill, Simonov said, both Russia and Ukraine participated in a cleanup. The two countries “quarreled with each other but had some joint operation” and allowed for international intervention. “Now you have a militarized area where they don’t want any eyes. So even if they lack technical capacity, they’re unwilling to seek support.” The war has already contributed to environmental pollution in the region, as Simonov wrote in a paper for the Ukraine War Environmental Consequences Working Group. “Risks posed by wrecked ships have also increased, with roughly 100 additional ships, military and civilian, sinking or damaged since the war began,” he noted in the paper. “For example, evidence of a limited oil spill was visible from space at the site where the Moskva military cruiser sank. Most of its fuel reserves, which may exceed 2,000 tons, are probably still stored in its fuel tanks at a depth of 50 meters — a huge risk for the future.” Russia may also not readily admit that it lacks the technical capacity to assess the damage or conduct adequate cleanup. “There are two aspects: the political will and the technological capacity to respond. Russia lacks both,” Simonov said. “Their systems are based on false reporting,” he continued. “Even when the initial figures demanded immediate action, they had no capacity to monitor or respond. It took them ten days to make key decisions.” He pointed to recent documents he discovered from April 2024 that show the company that owned the two ships passed their environmental impact assessments positively. Additionally, Simonov said, Russian officials had a full-scale oil-spill prevention and response drill in October 2024 that was supposedly concluded successfully. “So essentially they faked the whole complex of environmental preparations, because only two months after an emergency drill, they were still unable to do anything,” he said. “They purport themselves to be a great energy empire but lack the technological capacity to deal with a situation that has occurred before, and for which there should have been plans, drills and protocols in place.” Prior said Russia is not alone in this problem. “Obviously things are very difficult in terms of engaging with Russia at the moment, because environmental groups no longer have any status there,” she said. “But they’re not the only ones by any means. Countries that have large shipping fleets tend to be more challenging in terms of getting them to work to the same level.” Assessing Future Risk Parts of the sunken vessels, still holding nearly 4,000 tons of fuel, lie at the bottom of the strait. Environmentalists have raised concerns over the potential effects. The timing of the accident made a difference, though. “It happened during a season when there wasn’t any active breeding of the marine population, or migration,” Simonov said. The colder temperatures also helped prevent some of the active pollution, he pointed out. But as the temperature rises and seasons change, the insufficient response from the government increases vulnerability. “The greatest fear right now is that those tankers still down there with remaining mazut will start actively spilling around March-April…during the active bird and fish migration. That may make things clearly much worse,” he said. With global waters already warmer than previous decades, the mazut at the bottom of the sea increases the risks of marine pollution. Volunteers have been working relentlessly over the past two months but aren’t sure yet of the extend of the damage. “I hope that we will be able to clean the beaches and catch the [affected] birds,” Anna said. “But it’s impossible to say how much has been cleaned and how much remains.” Meanwhile the damage spreads. “The emergency affected not only the city of Anapa, but also Sochi and Crimea,” Anna said. “There are also rehabilitation centers working in the area. Volunteers are helping to get rid of all this because they care.” The tragedy continues to threaten the safety of marine life three months after the initial crash. According to the Delphi Scientific and Ecological Center for Dolphin Rescue, which is operating rescue efforts in the region, at least 84 dolphins have been killed by the oil spill as of February. Anna urges the administration to take coastline health more seriously to mitigate further damage. “We need to bring equipment that can remove one and a half meters of sand at a time,” she said. “We need a system to work with landfill [owners] to remove the contaminated soil.” But most importantly, she said, “we need to improve our oil-spill response plan. We don’t know when or where it might happen again.” That’s a warning echoed by many of the experts we spoke with: Under Russia’s corrupt, autocratic system and fossil-fuel-based economy, the chances of the country’s shadow fleet causing another environmental disaster — and the people and wildlife of the area suffering because of it — remains all too high. Scroll down to find our “Republish” button Previously in The Revelator: War Threatens Ukraine’s Unique Red Seaweed Fields. Here’s How Scientists Monitor Them From Afar The post Russia’s Ukraine Invasion Causes a Deadly Oil Spill on the Black Sea appeared first on The Revelator.

Community activists plead to be heard through “closed doors” outside nation’s top energy conference

HOUSTON — Climate activists expressed concern that discussions behind closed doors at the nation’s largest energy conference, CERAWeek by S&P Global, will further contribute to environmental health risks. As energy executives and political leaders across the nation convened for the conference in Houston, Texas this week to discuss the future of energy, representatives from the Gulf Coast, Rio Grande Valley, Ohio River Valley, and Cancer Alley highlighted the fossil fuel industry's impact in their communities. “It is our communities that are being harmed and hurt,” Yvette Arellano of the Houston environmental organization Fenceline Watch said. “It is our children that are having to play in playgrounds across the street from chemical plants and oil refineries.”Despite attempting to purchase conference tickets at costs of up to $10,500, activists have been barred from the conference in recent years, Arellano said.“The conference has shut out civil society from entering and understanding the projects that are coming to harm our communities,” Arellano said at a press conference at a park about 10 minutes from the convention center on Monday. “We demand transparency.” S&P Global has not responded to Environmental Health News’ request for comment. Health concerns and “energy additions”Some sessions at CERAWeek were devoted to climate discussions, like Monday’s session about climate change priorities featuring industry voices from S&P Global and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI), alongside environmental advocacy groups like the Environmental Defense Fund and the Energy Futures Initiative Foundation.The panel tackled questions about whether climate change will remain a priority for the industry and how the energy transition will continue under the Trump administration. Bob Dudley, chairman of the OGCI, repeatedly rephrased his own statements about the energy transition to “energy additions,” emphasizing the continued use of fossil fuels. “Oil and gas operators in the U.S. alone waste $3.5 billion worth of methane a year through leaks, flaring, and other releases, enough to supply the energy needs of 19 million American homes,” Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund, said in the same conference session. Less than a mile away from the CERAWeek convention, the Buffalo Bayou flows through downtown and into the Houston Ship Channel, which facilitates global access to the “energy capital of the world” for many of the companies in attendance at the conference. According to the Greater Houston Partnership, 44 of 128 publicly traded oil and gas companies and nearly one-third of the nation’s oil and gas jobs are located in Houston. With more than 600 petrochemical facilities, this single area produces about 42% of the nation's petrochemicals. Last year an Amnesty International report dubbed the area a “sacrifice zone,” where fenceline communities, predominantly populated by people of color, are exposed to disproportionately high levels of pollution. In these areas, chemical disasters, climate-warming emissions, and higher cancer risks are common. Several high-profile companies, including ExxonMobil, LyondellBasell, and Chevron Phillips Chemical, receive substantial tax breaks despite having poor environmental track records.“We have people who are over there who are making these decisions for our community,” said Breon Robinson, organizer for Southwest Louisiana and Southeast Texas at the environmental group Healthy Gulf, motioning toward the conference center. “They see us as scraps, they see us as a sacrifice zone … but we tell them hell no.”Protesters arrestedAfter the press conference, hundreds of protestors made their way toward a second public park just steps away from the CERAWeek convention center. Some held banners with messages like “No faith in fossil fuels” and “We need clean air, not another billionaire.” Others held cardboard cutouts or piñatas made in the likeness of oil and gas executives. Alexis Ramírez, Corpus Christi resident and elementary music teacher, played music during the march.Protesters arrestedAfter the press conference, hundreds of protestors made their way toward a second public park just steps away from the CERAWeek convention center. Some held banners with messages like “No faith in fossil fuels” and “We need clean air, not another billionaire.” Others held cardboard cutouts or piñatas made in the likeness of oil and gas executives. Alexis Ramírez, Corpus Christi resident and elementary music teacher, played music during the march.“I want to spread the joy of music and the power of music through this protest for my students,” Ramírez said. “They’re going to be our doctors, our teachers, whatever they are, they are going to take care of me and you when we are old. And that’s why I’m here, to take care of them.”The protest was escorted by dozens of police officers in vehicles and on horseback. As the protesters neared the convention center the group split in two as eight individuals interlocked arms briefly in front of traffic. After asking them to move and pressing forward with their horses, police officers arrested eight protesters, including Arellano of Fenceline Watch.While many groups said their concerns existed before the presidential administration change, some expressed worry that Trump’s policy shift toward “energy dominance” will further exacerbate environmental risks with promises of fast-tracked permitting processes and the repeal of pollution and climate rules.Despite these shifts, local activists are still calling for a just energy transition.“We get there together, or we never get there at all,” the protestors sang. “No one is getting left behind this time.”

HOUSTON — Climate activists expressed concern that discussions behind closed doors at the nation’s largest energy conference, CERAWeek by S&P Global, will further contribute to environmental health risks. As energy executives and political leaders across the nation convened for the conference in Houston, Texas this week to discuss the future of energy, representatives from the Gulf Coast, Rio Grande Valley, Ohio River Valley, and Cancer Alley highlighted the fossil fuel industry's impact in their communities. “It is our communities that are being harmed and hurt,” Yvette Arellano of the Houston environmental organization Fenceline Watch said. “It is our children that are having to play in playgrounds across the street from chemical plants and oil refineries.”Despite attempting to purchase conference tickets at costs of up to $10,500, activists have been barred from the conference in recent years, Arellano said.“The conference has shut out civil society from entering and understanding the projects that are coming to harm our communities,” Arellano said at a press conference at a park about 10 minutes from the convention center on Monday. “We demand transparency.” S&P Global has not responded to Environmental Health News’ request for comment. Health concerns and “energy additions”Some sessions at CERAWeek were devoted to climate discussions, like Monday’s session about climate change priorities featuring industry voices from S&P Global and the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative (OGCI), alongside environmental advocacy groups like the Environmental Defense Fund and the Energy Futures Initiative Foundation.The panel tackled questions about whether climate change will remain a priority for the industry and how the energy transition will continue under the Trump administration. Bob Dudley, chairman of the OGCI, repeatedly rephrased his own statements about the energy transition to “energy additions,” emphasizing the continued use of fossil fuels. “Oil and gas operators in the U.S. alone waste $3.5 billion worth of methane a year through leaks, flaring, and other releases, enough to supply the energy needs of 19 million American homes,” Fred Krupp, president of the Environmental Defense Fund, said in the same conference session. Less than a mile away from the CERAWeek convention, the Buffalo Bayou flows through downtown and into the Houston Ship Channel, which facilitates global access to the “energy capital of the world” for many of the companies in attendance at the conference. According to the Greater Houston Partnership, 44 of 128 publicly traded oil and gas companies and nearly one-third of the nation’s oil and gas jobs are located in Houston. With more than 600 petrochemical facilities, this single area produces about 42% of the nation's petrochemicals. Last year an Amnesty International report dubbed the area a “sacrifice zone,” where fenceline communities, predominantly populated by people of color, are exposed to disproportionately high levels of pollution. In these areas, chemical disasters, climate-warming emissions, and higher cancer risks are common. Several high-profile companies, including ExxonMobil, LyondellBasell, and Chevron Phillips Chemical, receive substantial tax breaks despite having poor environmental track records.“We have people who are over there who are making these decisions for our community,” said Breon Robinson, organizer for Southwest Louisiana and Southeast Texas at the environmental group Healthy Gulf, motioning toward the conference center. “They see us as scraps, they see us as a sacrifice zone … but we tell them hell no.”Protesters arrestedAfter the press conference, hundreds of protestors made their way toward a second public park just steps away from the CERAWeek convention center. Some held banners with messages like “No faith in fossil fuels” and “We need clean air, not another billionaire.” Others held cardboard cutouts or piñatas made in the likeness of oil and gas executives. Alexis Ramírez, Corpus Christi resident and elementary music teacher, played music during the march.Protesters arrestedAfter the press conference, hundreds of protestors made their way toward a second public park just steps away from the CERAWeek convention center. Some held banners with messages like “No faith in fossil fuels” and “We need clean air, not another billionaire.” Others held cardboard cutouts or piñatas made in the likeness of oil and gas executives. Alexis Ramírez, Corpus Christi resident and elementary music teacher, played music during the march.“I want to spread the joy of music and the power of music through this protest for my students,” Ramírez said. “They’re going to be our doctors, our teachers, whatever they are, they are going to take care of me and you when we are old. And that’s why I’m here, to take care of them.”The protest was escorted by dozens of police officers in vehicles and on horseback. As the protesters neared the convention center the group split in two as eight individuals interlocked arms briefly in front of traffic. After asking them to move and pressing forward with their horses, police officers arrested eight protesters, including Arellano of Fenceline Watch.While many groups said their concerns existed before the presidential administration change, some expressed worry that Trump’s policy shift toward “energy dominance” will further exacerbate environmental risks with promises of fast-tracked permitting processes and the repeal of pollution and climate rules.Despite these shifts, local activists are still calling for a just energy transition.“We get there together, or we never get there at all,” the protestors sang. “No one is getting left behind this time.”

RFK Jr Is Running Away From the One Thing He’s Ever Been Right About

As recently as last year, denouncing plastics was a key part of RFK Jr.’s political identity. Running for president as an icon of the health-conscious, he called plastic pollution a “crisis for human health and the environment.” He promised to support an international plastics reduction treaty and to limit the domestic production of plastic. He castigated President Biden for failing to fix the problem. He espoused ambitious solutions to the problem, alarming the plastics industry.These positions, along with concern for food safety and commitment to Making America Healthy Again, won support for his presidential campaign from yoga moms and fitness bros alike. Many of these supporters were then excited when Trump appointed him head of Health and Human Services. His microplastics concern even won him some grudging credit from us here at TNR, alongside sharp criticism of his anti-vaccine actions and other dangerous quackery, which have indeed only gotten more troubling with the death of an unvaccinated child in Texas last month—a tragedy that RFK seemed to minimize in a string of bewildering falsehoods.Now, RFK’s alarmist stance on microplastics is going mainstream. Just as RFK Jr. himself gets quieter on this topic, a host of scientific studies are suggesting that the problem of microplastics may be far worse than we thought—even approaching the scale of climate change as a threat to life on earth. A preliminary Chinese study published on Monday found that microplastics are interfering with plant photosynthesis, a problem that could put more than 400 million people at risk of starvation. Another study, published the next day and authored by researchers at Boston University,  found that microplastics could be contributing to the proliferation of dangerous antibiotic-resistant superbugs. Last month, researchers analyzing the brains of dead humans found, on average, a spoonful of microplastics, which can’t be good. Another new paper found that microplastics were increasingly entering our food supply through fertilizers. All this is especially alarming given that microplastics emitted into our bodies and into the environment have sharply increased over the last decade and, if they continue unchecked, are expected to double by 2040.If this were a normal administration and RFK Jr. a normal activist, such reports would lend momentum and legitimacy to his crusade, perhaps even leading to significant policy change. But this is not a normal administration, and Kennedy is not a normal activist. Despite reports that one of his pet issues is even more urgent than previously supposed, Kennedy seems to have changed the subject. Last week he called anti-Semitism a “malady that sickens societies and kills people with lethalities comparable to history’s most deadly plagues,” as his administration ignores or mishandles both bird flu and measles. (All forms of bigotry can affect human health, but that statement, timed with Trump’s unprecedented crackdowns on universities and on pro-Palestine student protesters, looked more like apologetics for Trump’s authoritarianism.) Another moral panic RFK Jr has been vocal about is “men playing women’s sports” by which he means the tiny number of transgender athletes joining their peers on a ballfield, another bit of rightwing grandstanding irrelevant to public health. He has not issued a single tweet, press release, or policy on microplastics since assuming charge of HHS. Not only is Kennedy saying little about microplastics, even as science mounts to confirm that he has been right to sound the alarm on this issue, but he’s part of an administration that is doing more than any in history to dismantle every mechanism that we could use to address this problem. The Trump administration has decimated the Environmental Protection Agency, are attempting to gut the Endangered Species Act, and are wrecking all the provisions for water protections that they can possibly find. On Wednesday,  in what EPA hatchet man Lee Zeldin called “the most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history,” the administration began rolling back the Clean Water Act itself, lifting most oversight of the nation’s wetlands and waterways in a dramatic reversal not just of Biden policy but of most other presidents since Nixon. Another policy that will badly hamper any plastic-fighting efforts is the withdrawal of more than a billion in National Institutes of Health dollars for scientific research. Some of these cuts are being delayed by a court challenge but the policy has already disrupted medical research on many levels. In the case of Columbia, RFK celebrated the cuts on his X account and on the HHS website (because of alleged antisemitism). Research is inextricable from finding solutions to the microplastics problem, since it is so new and there is still so much that we don’t even understand about it: for example, why do people with dementia have much more plastic in their brains? Is the plastic causing the problem or is there a quality to the brain tissue -or the blood-brain barrier -- that makes it more absorbent or weaker? Without support for science, we won’t even have enough information to attack this problem. The truth is, if RFK Jr were sincere about addressing food and environmental problems, he probably would never have joined the Trump administration in the first place. Indeed, the longer he stays in it, the more he just looks like yet another rich guy with a weird personality helping to sabotage our government. Despite a lifetime of environmentalism and vocal concern for public health, it is his own administration that is the biggest threat right now to our health and our planet. At this point he’s going to be lucky if history remembers him as the freak who left a dead bear in the park. He could go down as the guy who sounded the alarm on microplastics, only to sit back and let them addle our brains and threaten our food supply.

As recently as last year, denouncing plastics was a key part of RFK Jr.’s political identity. Running for president as an icon of the health-conscious, he called plastic pollution a “crisis for human health and the environment.” He promised to support an international plastics reduction treaty and to limit the domestic production of plastic. He castigated President Biden for failing to fix the problem. He espoused ambitious solutions to the problem, alarming the plastics industry.These positions, along with concern for food safety and commitment to Making America Healthy Again, won support for his presidential campaign from yoga moms and fitness bros alike. Many of these supporters were then excited when Trump appointed him head of Health and Human Services. His microplastics concern even won him some grudging credit from us here at TNR, alongside sharp criticism of his anti-vaccine actions and other dangerous quackery, which have indeed only gotten more troubling with the death of an unvaccinated child in Texas last month—a tragedy that RFK seemed to minimize in a string of bewildering falsehoods.Now, RFK’s alarmist stance on microplastics is going mainstream. Just as RFK Jr. himself gets quieter on this topic, a host of scientific studies are suggesting that the problem of microplastics may be far worse than we thought—even approaching the scale of climate change as a threat to life on earth. A preliminary Chinese study published on Monday found that microplastics are interfering with plant photosynthesis, a problem that could put more than 400 million people at risk of starvation. Another study, published the next day and authored by researchers at Boston University,  found that microplastics could be contributing to the proliferation of dangerous antibiotic-resistant superbugs. Last month, researchers analyzing the brains of dead humans found, on average, a spoonful of microplastics, which can’t be good. Another new paper found that microplastics were increasingly entering our food supply through fertilizers. All this is especially alarming given that microplastics emitted into our bodies and into the environment have sharply increased over the last decade and, if they continue unchecked, are expected to double by 2040.If this were a normal administration and RFK Jr. a normal activist, such reports would lend momentum and legitimacy to his crusade, perhaps even leading to significant policy change. But this is not a normal administration, and Kennedy is not a normal activist. Despite reports that one of his pet issues is even more urgent than previously supposed, Kennedy seems to have changed the subject. Last week he called anti-Semitism a “malady that sickens societies and kills people with lethalities comparable to history’s most deadly plagues,” as his administration ignores or mishandles both bird flu and measles. (All forms of bigotry can affect human health, but that statement, timed with Trump’s unprecedented crackdowns on universities and on pro-Palestine student protesters, looked more like apologetics for Trump’s authoritarianism.) Another moral panic RFK Jr has been vocal about is “men playing women’s sports” by which he means the tiny number of transgender athletes joining their peers on a ballfield, another bit of rightwing grandstanding irrelevant to public health. He has not issued a single tweet, press release, or policy on microplastics since assuming charge of HHS. Not only is Kennedy saying little about microplastics, even as science mounts to confirm that he has been right to sound the alarm on this issue, but he’s part of an administration that is doing more than any in history to dismantle every mechanism that we could use to address this problem. The Trump administration has decimated the Environmental Protection Agency, are attempting to gut the Endangered Species Act, and are wrecking all the provisions for water protections that they can possibly find. On Wednesday,  in what EPA hatchet man Lee Zeldin called “the most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history,” the administration began rolling back the Clean Water Act itself, lifting most oversight of the nation’s wetlands and waterways in a dramatic reversal not just of Biden policy but of most other presidents since Nixon. Another policy that will badly hamper any plastic-fighting efforts is the withdrawal of more than a billion in National Institutes of Health dollars for scientific research. Some of these cuts are being delayed by a court challenge but the policy has already disrupted medical research on many levels. In the case of Columbia, RFK celebrated the cuts on his X account and on the HHS website (because of alleged antisemitism). Research is inextricable from finding solutions to the microplastics problem, since it is so new and there is still so much that we don’t even understand about it: for example, why do people with dementia have much more plastic in their brains? Is the plastic causing the problem or is there a quality to the brain tissue -or the blood-brain barrier -- that makes it more absorbent or weaker? Without support for science, we won’t even have enough information to attack this problem. The truth is, if RFK Jr were sincere about addressing food and environmental problems, he probably would never have joined the Trump administration in the first place. Indeed, the longer he stays in it, the more he just looks like yet another rich guy with a weird personality helping to sabotage our government. Despite a lifetime of environmentalism and vocal concern for public health, it is his own administration that is the biggest threat right now to our health and our planet. At this point he’s going to be lucky if history remembers him as the freak who left a dead bear in the park. He could go down as the guy who sounded the alarm on microplastics, only to sit back and let them addle our brains and threaten our food supply.

What’s happening to EPA-funded community projects under Trump?

PITTSBURGH — The Biden administration pledged more than $53 million to community groups across the country for air monitoring projects in 2022, many of which were just getting underway when Trump took office. Trump issued executive orders that temporarily froze federal funding for environment-related projects (along with other key services and programs across the country), then fired and re-hired staff at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has caused confusion and delays in the implementation of key environmental health programs nationwide. The uncertainty has only been intensified by the news that the agency is repealing dozens of environmental regulations and plans to close all of its environmental justice offices. Programs facing a funding freeze included the 132 air monitoring projects in 37 states slated to receive $53.4 million in federal funding, which represent the agency’s largest investment in community air monitoring to date. Western Pennsylvania is one of a handful of geographic regions that received funding for multiple community air monitoring projects under the program. The region is home to numerous pollution sources that impact environmental health, including fracking, steel mills, petrochemical plants, and other industrial manufacturing. Exposure to this pollution increases the risk of cancer, heart and respiratory disease, premature death, and even mental illness. “I think there’s a misconception about abuse and waste of these federal funds that is so important to counter,” Ana Tsuhlares Hoffman, director of the air quality program at Carnegie Mellon University’s CREATE Lab, told EHN. The CREATE Lab is managing and analyzing the data collected from all of the federally-funded community air monitoring projects in western Pennsylvania. Organizations receiving federal funding, Hoffman said, need to be “open and up front about what we stand to lose if we lose this funding.” EHN spoke with Hoffman about how the Trump administration’s actions have impacted air monitoring projects in the region, and environmental health research and advocacy more broadly. Editor’s note: This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. EHN: What impacts on local environmental health research and advocacy have you seen from the federal funding freeze? Hoffman: We had four weeks of waking up not knowing if we’d be able to pay salaries for key staff or keep our promises to community members while our funds weren’t accessible and EPA staff were not allowed to communicate with us at all. It was a long, difficult process to administer the grants for the EPA’s community air monitoring projects. I’m so grateful to the nonprofits that took on this role — they’re all tiny compared to the organizations that usually receive federal funding, but they stepped up to figure out how to administer these grants on behalf of smaller grassroots organizations and individuals who’d been doing this work on their own for decades. Local nonprofits including FracTracker Alliance, Protect PT, GASP, and the Breathe Project worked together to decide who would represent different geographies and specific industrial polluters that had concerned residents for a long time. There was a lot of pressure to comply with the EPA requirements, which included a long list of quality assurance concerns we’d never encountered before. Securing those grants was hard-won and painful to achieve, but at the end of the process we felt like we’d leveled up our air monitoring capabilities in a meaningful way. We spent years getting to this place, and were just starting to collect air monitoring samples and process data when we learned about the funding freeze. It felt like years’ worth of activists’ and researchers’ time and effort was hanging in the balance. The big concern was whether we’d be able to pay people who were just hired to conduct new, federally-funded air monitoring projects, and whether we’d be able to keep the commitments that we’ve made to residents. That was a horrible moment where we had to go to residents to say, “We know we’ve been telling you for years that we’re working to get you answers about what you’re breathing next to this compression station or factory, but we’re not sure if we can follow through on that commitment.” EHN: What’s the status of those air monitoring projects now? Hoffman: As of right now, our grants have been un-suspended and reinstated, and we are able to access our funds, so we’re resuming the work. Our legal advisors have reminded us that we need to stay in compliance with our grant funds by continuing the work, even if it seems like there’s a chance the rug will be pulled out from under us. There’s a national network of federal funding recipients that’s facilitated by the Environmental Protection Network, which has been providing pro bono legal assistance to groups impacted by the federal funding freeze. They helped us organize instead of panicking, and groups across the country were able to successfully win back access to our funding by working in a coordinated way. Speaking as a university representative, there are labs like the CREATE Lab all across the country that serve local environmental research needs and are funded by federal dollars that are in much worse straits than we are. In cases like that, universities will have impossible decisions to make about whether to continue to support those initiatives as they lose funding for the administrative staff that keep universities running. EHN: How do you think Trump's rollbacks of environmental and health regulations could impact enforcement of those regulations at the federal, state, and local level? We’ve always had to use a combined effort of people power and legal support to effectively watchdog industrial polluters. But now we have less hope that our already significantly-underfunded agencies, like the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, will be able to respond to concerns and conduct inspections in the way that they need to. There already aren’t enough investigators to come out when watchdogs produce evidence of pollution events that are worthy of investigation, and I do think enforcement is now being deprioritized. We’ll have to be more thoughtful and diligent in our data collection and evidence collection efforts. We’ll have to be systematic as best we can to try and help fill those gaps. EHN: How are environmental health advocates changing course to adapt to the new political landscape? I think we will have to adjust our hopes for engagement with the EPA. We’ll have to collectively change gears to hold polluters accountable as best we can while federal agencies lose access to the resources they need to properly enforce environmental regulations. We’ll have to accept that “energy dominance for America” means that any push to shift to a more sustainable and environmentally-friendly economy is going to be hampered, and that our hopes for building a better future will likely need to be put on pause while we focus on defending our previous progress. We’ll really need to work together. We all only have so many brain cells and so many hours in the day, but when we work collectively we’re much more powerful.

PITTSBURGH — The Biden administration pledged more than $53 million to community groups across the country for air monitoring projects in 2022, many of which were just getting underway when Trump took office. Trump issued executive orders that temporarily froze federal funding for environment-related projects (along with other key services and programs across the country), then fired and re-hired staff at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which has caused confusion and delays in the implementation of key environmental health programs nationwide. The uncertainty has only been intensified by the news that the agency is repealing dozens of environmental regulations and plans to close all of its environmental justice offices. Programs facing a funding freeze included the 132 air monitoring projects in 37 states slated to receive $53.4 million in federal funding, which represent the agency’s largest investment in community air monitoring to date. Western Pennsylvania is one of a handful of geographic regions that received funding for multiple community air monitoring projects under the program. The region is home to numerous pollution sources that impact environmental health, including fracking, steel mills, petrochemical plants, and other industrial manufacturing. Exposure to this pollution increases the risk of cancer, heart and respiratory disease, premature death, and even mental illness. “I think there’s a misconception about abuse and waste of these federal funds that is so important to counter,” Ana Tsuhlares Hoffman, director of the air quality program at Carnegie Mellon University’s CREATE Lab, told EHN. The CREATE Lab is managing and analyzing the data collected from all of the federally-funded community air monitoring projects in western Pennsylvania. Organizations receiving federal funding, Hoffman said, need to be “open and up front about what we stand to lose if we lose this funding.” EHN spoke with Hoffman about how the Trump administration’s actions have impacted air monitoring projects in the region, and environmental health research and advocacy more broadly. Editor’s note: This conversation has been edited for length and clarity. EHN: What impacts on local environmental health research and advocacy have you seen from the federal funding freeze? Hoffman: We had four weeks of waking up not knowing if we’d be able to pay salaries for key staff or keep our promises to community members while our funds weren’t accessible and EPA staff were not allowed to communicate with us at all. It was a long, difficult process to administer the grants for the EPA’s community air monitoring projects. I’m so grateful to the nonprofits that took on this role — they’re all tiny compared to the organizations that usually receive federal funding, but they stepped up to figure out how to administer these grants on behalf of smaller grassroots organizations and individuals who’d been doing this work on their own for decades. Local nonprofits including FracTracker Alliance, Protect PT, GASP, and the Breathe Project worked together to decide who would represent different geographies and specific industrial polluters that had concerned residents for a long time. There was a lot of pressure to comply with the EPA requirements, which included a long list of quality assurance concerns we’d never encountered before. Securing those grants was hard-won and painful to achieve, but at the end of the process we felt like we’d leveled up our air monitoring capabilities in a meaningful way. We spent years getting to this place, and were just starting to collect air monitoring samples and process data when we learned about the funding freeze. It felt like years’ worth of activists’ and researchers’ time and effort was hanging in the balance. The big concern was whether we’d be able to pay people who were just hired to conduct new, federally-funded air monitoring projects, and whether we’d be able to keep the commitments that we’ve made to residents. That was a horrible moment where we had to go to residents to say, “We know we’ve been telling you for years that we’re working to get you answers about what you’re breathing next to this compression station or factory, but we’re not sure if we can follow through on that commitment.” EHN: What’s the status of those air monitoring projects now? Hoffman: As of right now, our grants have been un-suspended and reinstated, and we are able to access our funds, so we’re resuming the work. Our legal advisors have reminded us that we need to stay in compliance with our grant funds by continuing the work, even if it seems like there’s a chance the rug will be pulled out from under us. There’s a national network of federal funding recipients that’s facilitated by the Environmental Protection Network, which has been providing pro bono legal assistance to groups impacted by the federal funding freeze. They helped us organize instead of panicking, and groups across the country were able to successfully win back access to our funding by working in a coordinated way. Speaking as a university representative, there are labs like the CREATE Lab all across the country that serve local environmental research needs and are funded by federal dollars that are in much worse straits than we are. In cases like that, universities will have impossible decisions to make about whether to continue to support those initiatives as they lose funding for the administrative staff that keep universities running. EHN: How do you think Trump's rollbacks of environmental and health regulations could impact enforcement of those regulations at the federal, state, and local level? We’ve always had to use a combined effort of people power and legal support to effectively watchdog industrial polluters. But now we have less hope that our already significantly-underfunded agencies, like the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, will be able to respond to concerns and conduct inspections in the way that they need to. There already aren’t enough investigators to come out when watchdogs produce evidence of pollution events that are worthy of investigation, and I do think enforcement is now being deprioritized. We’ll have to be more thoughtful and diligent in our data collection and evidence collection efforts. We’ll have to be systematic as best we can to try and help fill those gaps. EHN: How are environmental health advocates changing course to adapt to the new political landscape? I think we will have to adjust our hopes for engagement with the EPA. We’ll have to collectively change gears to hold polluters accountable as best we can while federal agencies lose access to the resources they need to properly enforce environmental regulations. We’ll have to accept that “energy dominance for America” means that any push to shift to a more sustainable and environmentally-friendly economy is going to be hampered, and that our hopes for building a better future will likely need to be put on pause while we focus on defending our previous progress. We’ll really need to work together. We all only have so many brain cells and so many hours in the day, but when we work collectively we’re much more powerful.

In Chicago, an Environmental Organization Feeds a Community

A version of this article originally appeared in The Deep Dish, our members-only newsletter. Become a member today and get the next issue directly in your inbox. At the base of the Little Village Arch, a group of protesters gathered earlier this month. Braced against the biting winter chill, they loudly decried the raids of immigrant communities […] The post In Chicago, an Environmental Organization Feeds a Community appeared first on Civil Eats.

A version of this article originally appeared in The Deep Dish, our members-only newsletter. Become a member today and get the next issue directly in your inbox. A towering, two-story arch, trimmed in barrel tiles with an all-caps marquee, makes it very clear where you are: “BIENVENIDOS A LITTLE VILLAGE.” The structure rises high above bustling 26th Street in Chicago’s Little Village neighborhood, where independent restaurants, retails, and street vendors make it one of the highest-grossing commercial corridors in Chicago. This is the threshold of the Little Village neighborhood, home to many immigrants from Central America as well as the largest community of Mexican Americans in the Midwest. At the base of the Little Village Arch, a group of protesters gathered earlier this month. Braced against the biting winter chill, they loudly decried the raids of immigrant communities ordered by the incoming Trump administration, which aimed to arrest and deport an estimated 2,000 immigrants across this sanctuary city, and more nationwide. In this climate, members of this tight-knit community must rely on each other now more than ever. The entry to Chicago’s Little Village neighborhood. (Photo credit: The City of Chicago, 2021) One of the strongest advocates for the neighborhood is the Little Village Environmental Justice Organization (LVEJO). For decades, the nonprofit has fought to protect Little Village’s land, air, and the life in between. Its multifaceted, community-led food justice program includes hot meal dropoffs, backyard garden startups, and a new farm, just a few blocks from the arch, where fresh produce can be picked up for free. LVEJO is now also a landmark for Little Village. Last December, LVEJO received the national Food Sovereignty Prize, awarded for “grassroots, agroecological solutions from the people most harmed by the injustices of the global food system,” according to a press release from the U.S. Food Sovereignty Alliance. “I felt so glad that the Food Sovereignty Prize committee really got what the team was trying to do here,” says LVEJO’s deputy director, Juliana Pino. “It’s not just about simply growing food. It’s really about committing to the land, defending and protecting each other in the land, and showing up for a community in ways that are really rooted.” LVEJO’s role in the local food system was years in the making, and it began with environmental activism. Pino recalls how, in 1994, a group of parents forced their local elementary school to restrategize renovation plans after some children suddenly became ill, likely from toxins released during the renovation process. That foundational group of parents would soon expand to include other community leaders and go on to tackle environmental injustices neighborhood-wide as Little Village Environmental Justice Organization. “It’s not just about simply growing food. It’s really about committing to the land, defending and protecting each other in the land, and showing up for a community in ways that are really rooted.” Over its 30 years, LVEJO has shuttered two local coal power plants as well as an asphalt roofing manufacturer, Celotex, which was deemed a Superfund site by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and took the better part of a decade to remediate; now it is a 21-acre neighborhood park. Viviana “Vivi” Moreno grew up near the neighborhood, hearing these stories. “I knew people whose family members were affected by the coal power plants,” she says. In college, while elbow-deep in a detailed case study about LVEJO in her environmental health class, she fully connected the dots, and began to see “the legacy that polluting industries have in communities of color and immigrant communities of color.” Moreno joined LVEJO as a volunteer more than a decade ago, and has evolved alongside the organization. Now LVEJO’s senior food justice organizer, she helps facilitate a multigenerational network of neighbors who offer essential insight on traditional farming practices and foodways. Pino sees the work as a multitiered form of sustenance: “A number of those folks . . . had a really hard time sustaining employment due to racism and disrespect for their skills and undervaluing the knowledge that they have. And on top of that, they were looking for ways to sustain the ancestral practices that they had back from their origin countries, as well as feed their families.” Such cultural knowledge risks being lost if it isn’t transferred to the next generation. Viviana Moreno is Little Village Environmental Justice Organization’s senior food justice organizer. (Photo credit: Little Village Environmental Justice Organization) LVEJO’s multi-pronged food justice program is offered free of cost and is communicated primarily through word of mouth. Eight food justice staff members and 50 to 80 volunteers run the program, which includes the pandemic-born Farm Food Familias project, created in collaboration with Getting Grown Collective. The project has served more than 50,000 meals so far, using produce donated by and purchased from local urban farms. “What we noticed with this mutual aid program is that it wasn’t just COVID, it was an economic issue,” says Moreno. “A lot of folks lost their jobs because of either contracting long COVID or losing family members, and were having a hard time getting back to an economic space where they could provide for their families. So, that’s where some of the meals came in and they were really beautiful and healing.” Funding for Farm Food Familias and LVEJO’s other food initiatives, as well as for the organization as a whole, comes largely from private foundations that have supported LVEJO for years, as well as individual donors. Moreno also organizes Backyard Gardens Little Village, a program that supplies residents with education and materials—including plants and garden beds—to activate their own gardens. About 20 homes participate so far. And Moreno is helping to develop a blossoming 1.3-acre greenspace, La Villita Park, which opened in 2014 on a portion of the converted Celotex site. Semillas de Justicia (Seeds of Justice), a half-acre community garden and farm, sits just outside the park. A series of painted vignettes adorn the garden’s fence: people gardening together, whimsical hearts, the landmark arch, and messages affirming the neighborhood’s existence: “Defiende La Villita!” and “Let us breathe!” During the growing season, Semillas’ garden beds are fully occupied by 70 households. The adjoining vegetable farm hosts a weekly free farmers’ market, offering produce freshly harvested from the site. LVEJO collaborates with community members in deciding what to grow, to ensure that the land offers agency to the people of the neighborhood while fortifying their connection to culture and heritage. Yasmin Ruiz, food justice co-organizer at Chicago’s Little Village Environmental Justice Organization. The organization won the national Food Sovereignty Prize in December. (Photo credit: Little Village Environmental Justice Organization) This includes several varieties of tomatoes, corn, beans, pumpkin, medicinal herbs, and edible flowers such as marigolds, a key element of Dia de los Muertos (Day of the Dead) celebrations in the fall. Last year, between the community garden and the farm, LVEJO collectively harvested and distributed nearly 16,000 pounds of produce and about 1,000 fresh eggs during a time when the price of eggs and other groceries had spiked. LVEJO’s farm manager, Nateo Carreño, says it isn’t uncommon for elders to stroll by during the growing season and offer a hand. Every interaction is a chance to pass down ancestral knowledge, and sometimes, a pat on the back. Carreño recalls, “A señora just [told] us, ‘I walked to the park to tell you guys that your potatoes taste like they have butter in them.’” Both of Carreño’s grandfathers were farmers, and Carreño sees the soil as a wonderland of living, breathing organisms that can heal itself over time if given the proper support. Years after being reclaimed and cared for by LVEJO, the soil here not only produces bountiful harvests, but also teems with beneficial bacteria like Mycobacterium vaccae, which get absorbed through the skin and trigger serotonin, the “happy hormone,” in the brain. “I love soil, that’s my jam,” says Carreño. “There’s just something in you that wakes up when you start working with plants and start working with soil.” For now, in the stillness of the winter, the land sleeps. Meanwhile, its caretakers keep planning. When the new season begins, LVEJO will continue to sow its mighty vision for Little Village. The post In Chicago, an Environmental Organization Feeds a Community appeared first on Civil Eats.

Suggested Viewing

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.