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.

California sues Exxon Mobil over ‘sham’ of plastics recycling

News Feed
Monday, September 23, 2024

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a coalition of environmental nonprofits announced two distinct but related lawsuits against Exxon Mobil on Monday — not over the oil giant’s contribution to climate change, but over its role in the plastic pollution crisis. The attorney general’s lawsuit, filed in the San Francisco County Superior Court, represents the culmination of a two-year investigation into what Bonta has called the petrochemical industry’s “decades-long deception campaign” over the sustainability of plastics and the feasibility of plastics recycling. Drawing on documents subpoenaed from Exxon Mobil and trade groups that it belongs to, the complaint says that Exxon Mobil has known since the 1970s about the technical and economic limitations of plastics recycling but promoted it anyway, using it to justify booming plastic production. “The company has propped up sham solutions, manipulated the public, and lied to consumers,” Bonta told reporters at a press conference on Monday. “It’s time for Exxon Mobil to pay the price for its deceit.”  The attorney general’s complaint includes six discrete claims against Exxon Mobil, including destruction of natural resources, false advertising, greenwashing, public nuisance, water pollution, and unfair competition. The nonprofits involved in the second, more limited lawsuit include the Sierra Club and three water protection organizations: Heal the Bay, San Francisco Baykeeper, and Surfrider Foundation, which link the failure of plastics recycling to surging aquatic plastic pollution that they have spent millions of dollars scrambling to clean up. According to Bonta, the two lawsuits put more pressure on Exxon than just one. “More is more, more is better,” he said on Monday. The lawsuits single out Exxon Mobil as the world’s largest producer of polymers used to make single-use plastics — products like grocery bags, cutlery, and takeout containers that are used for just a few minutes before being thrown away. These products, along with packaging, account for nearly 40 percent of global plastic production, and are unlikely to be recycled due to technological and economic constraints. In the U.S., the overall plastics recycling rate is just 5 percent. It has never been higher than 10 percent. Most plastic is burned or sent to a landfill, or becomes litter in the natural environment. According to Heal the Bay CEO Tracy Quinn, who addressed reporters on Monday, the cleanup and prevention of plastic pollution costs taxpayers in California alone some $420 million a year. Chemicals used in plastics, as well as the accumulation of small plastic particles throughout the environment and in people’s bodies, may also be contributing to health problems. A woman walks with a plastic shopping bag in Sacramento, California. Associated Press The attorney general’s 147-page lawsuit says Exxon Mobil’s actions have directly contributed to the proliferation of plastic. First, it says, Exxon Mobil’s predecessor companies and trade groups worked to normalize the use of disposable plastics in the early 20th century. By the 1960s, Exxon and Mobil were pushing dozens of disposable plastic products designed to supplant their more natural, degradable counterparts. The 2011 book Plastic: A Toxic Love Story details how Mobil’s plastic produce bags, for example, were designed to replace the paper versions that had once been the norm in grocery stores, and how the company’s Hefty-brand plastic garbage bags helped displace the common consumer practice of lining trash cans with newspaper.  When plastic started ending up as litter on the side of the road and in waterways, Exxon, Mobil, and trade groups the companies belonged to tried to quell the public’s concern — and the threat of government regulation to reduce plastic production — by promoting anti-litter campaigns that deflected blame onto consumers, according to the attorney general’s lawsuit.  They also promoted recycling, allegedly spending millions of dollars on advertising beginning in the 1980s and ‘90s. A 12-page, editorial-style advertisement in the July 1989 issue of Time magazine, for example, told readers there was an “urgent need to recycle” in order to keep plastics out of landfills and the environment. Documents cited in the lawsuits, however, show that members of the Society of the Plastics Industry — one of the trade groups Exxon and Mobil belonged to — had been discussing the infeasibility of plastics recycling since as early as the 1970s. An internal report from 1973 claimed that “when plastics leave fabrication points, they are almost never recovered” for recycling. Documents show that other industry groups publicly set targets for recycling that they knew they would be unable to meet. “Lies,” Bonta told reporters. “The end goal was to drive people to buy, buy, buy, and to drive Exxon Mobil’s profits up, up, up.” The newest deception, he alleged, is related to a supposedly new way to recycle products that Exxon Mobil and other companies call “chemical recycling” or “advanced recycling.” This kind of recycling involves melting plastic into its constituent polymers and, in theory, reshaping it back into plastic products. Exxon’s corporate communications suggest there are “no evident technical limitations regarding how many times a plastic product can be put through advanced recycling processes.” Most chemical recycling ventures, however, have been unable to operate beyond a demonstration capacity, and they cannot handle large volumes of postconsumer plastic waste. Exxon Mobil has one operational facility, in Texas, and according to documents obtained by the attorney general’s office, 92 percent of the plastic that undergoes chemical recycling processes there is not turned into new plastic products; it is converted into fuel.  An Exxon Mobil petrochemical refinery in Baytown, Texas. AP Photo / Pat Sullivan Bonta’s office called Exxon Mobil’s promotion of chemical recycling “nothing more than a public relations stunt meant to encourage the public to keep purchasing single-use plastics that are fueling the plastics pollution crisis.” In response to Grist’s request for comment, an Exxon Mobil spokesperson said that “advanced recycling works” and that the company has used it to process “more than 60 million pounds of plastic waste into usable raw materials, keeping it out of landfills.” “For decades, California officials have known their recycling system isn’t effective,” the spokesperson said. “They failed to act, and now they seek to blame others. Instead of suing us, they could have worked with us to fix the problem and keep plastic out of landfills.” Other companies facing legal action over their contribution to the plastic pollution crisis include Coca-Cola, Frito Lay, and Pepsi, all of which were named in a lawsuit filed earlier this year by the City of Baltimore. Separately, New York state Attorney General Letittia James sued Pepsi last year over pollution along the Buffalo River. Bonta told reporters on Monday that he’s seeking civil penalties against Exxon Mobil, and for the company to be forced to give up revenue it earned as a result of its deceptive marketing. He said he wants “billions of dollars” from Exxon Mobil to clean up existing plastic pollution and reeducate California consumers about the risks of plastics and the limitations of recycling. His lawsuit and the nonprofits’ also seek an injunction that would force Exxon to stop promoting plastics recycling. “It’s time for Exxon Mobil to tell the truth.” Bonta said. Environmental groups not involved in the complaints applauded the attorney general’s efforts and said they hope it will lead to legal action in other jurisdictions. “This is the single most consequential lawsuit filed against the plastics industry for its persistent and continued lying about plastics recycling,” Judith Enck, president of the environmental advocacy group Beyond Plastics and a former regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency, said in a statement. “This lawsuit will set an invaluable precedent for others to follow.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline California sues Exxon Mobil over ‘sham’ of plastics recycling on Sep 23, 2024.

Attorney General Rob Bonta said the company has “manipulated the public and lied to consumers.”

California Attorney General Rob Bonta and a coalition of environmental nonprofits announced two distinct but related lawsuits against Exxon Mobil on Monday — not over the oil giant’s contribution to climate change, but over its role in the plastic pollution crisis.

The attorney general’s lawsuit, filed in the San Francisco County Superior Court, represents the culmination of a two-year investigation into what Bonta has called the petrochemical industry’s “decades-long deception campaign” over the sustainability of plastics and the feasibility of plastics recycling. Drawing on documents subpoenaed from Exxon Mobil and trade groups that it belongs to, the complaint says that Exxon Mobil has known since the 1970s about the technical and economic limitations of plastics recycling but promoted it anyway, using it to justify booming plastic production.

“The company has propped up sham solutions, manipulated the public, and lied to consumers,” Bonta told reporters at a press conference on Monday. “It’s time for Exxon Mobil to pay the price for its deceit.” 

The attorney general’s complaint includes six discrete claims against Exxon Mobil, including destruction of natural resources, false advertising, greenwashing, public nuisance, water pollution, and unfair competition. The nonprofits involved in the second, more limited lawsuit include the Sierra Club and three water protection organizations: Heal the Bay, San Francisco Baykeeper, and Surfrider Foundation, which link the failure of plastics recycling to surging aquatic plastic pollution that they have spent millions of dollars scrambling to clean up. According to Bonta, the two lawsuits put more pressure on Exxon than just one. “More is more, more is better,” he said on Monday.

The lawsuits single out Exxon Mobil as the world’s largest producer of polymers used to make single-use plastics — products like grocery bags, cutlery, and takeout containers that are used for just a few minutes before being thrown away. These products, along with packaging, account for nearly 40 percent of global plastic production, and are unlikely to be recycled due to technological and economic constraints.

In the U.S., the overall plastics recycling rate is just 5 percent. It has never been higher than 10 percent. Most plastic is burned or sent to a landfill, or becomes litter in the natural environment.

According to Heal the Bay CEO Tracy Quinn, who addressed reporters on Monday, the cleanup and prevention of plastic pollution costs taxpayers in California alone some $420 million a year. Chemicals used in plastics, as well as the accumulation of small plastic particles throughout the environment and in people’s bodies, may also be contributing to health problems.

Cropped view of a shopper dressed in black, walking while holding a Rite Aid-branded plastic bag.
A woman walks with a plastic shopping bag in Sacramento, California. Associated Press

The attorney general’s 147-page lawsuit says Exxon Mobil’s actions have directly contributed to the proliferation of plastic. First, it says, Exxon Mobil’s predecessor companies and trade groups worked to normalize the use of disposable plastics in the early 20th century. By the 1960s, Exxon and Mobil were pushing dozens of disposable plastic products designed to supplant their more natural, degradable counterparts. The 2011 book Plastic: A Toxic Love Story details how Mobil’s plastic produce bags, for example, were designed to replace the paper versions that had once been the norm in grocery stores, and how the company’s Hefty-brand plastic garbage bags helped displace the common consumer practice of lining trash cans with newspaper. 

When plastic started ending up as litter on the side of the road and in waterways, Exxon, Mobil, and trade groups the companies belonged to tried to quell the public’s concern — and the threat of government regulation to reduce plastic production — by promoting anti-litter campaigns that deflected blame onto consumers, according to the attorney general’s lawsuit. 

They also promoted recycling, allegedly spending millions of dollars on advertising beginning in the 1980s and ‘90s. A 12-page, editorial-style advertisement in the July 1989 issue of Time magazine, for example, told readers there was an “urgent need to recycle” in order to keep plastics out of landfills and the environment. Documents cited in the lawsuits, however, show that members of the Society of the Plastics Industry — one of the trade groups Exxon and Mobil belonged to — had been discussing the infeasibility of plastics recycling since as early as the 1970s. An internal report from 1973 claimed that “when plastics leave fabrication points, they are almost never recovered” for recycling. Documents show that other industry groups publicly set targets for recycling that they knew they would be unable to meet.

“Lies,” Bonta told reporters. “The end goal was to drive people to buy, buy, buy, and to drive Exxon Mobil’s profits up, up, up.”

The newest deception, he alleged, is related to a supposedly new way to recycle products that Exxon Mobil and other companies call “chemical recycling” or “advanced recycling.” This kind of recycling involves melting plastic into its constituent polymers and, in theory, reshaping it back into plastic products. Exxon’s corporate communications suggest there are “no evident technical limitations regarding how many times a plastic product can be put through advanced recycling processes.”

Most chemical recycling ventures, however, have been unable to operate beyond a demonstration capacity, and they cannot handle large volumes of postconsumer plastic waste. Exxon Mobil has one operational facility, in Texas, and according to documents obtained by the attorney general’s office, 92 percent of the plastic that undergoes chemical recycling processes there is not turned into new plastic products; it is converted into fuel. 

Smokestacks in background with sign in foreground reading ExxonMobil Baytown Complex Refinery North Gate
An Exxon Mobil petrochemical refinery in Baytown, Texas. AP Photo / Pat Sullivan

Bonta’s office called Exxon Mobil’s promotion of chemical recycling “nothing more than a public relations stunt meant to encourage the public to keep purchasing single-use plastics that are fueling the plastics pollution crisis.”

In response to Grist’s request for comment, an Exxon Mobil spokesperson said that “advanced recycling works” and that the company has used it to process “more than 60 million pounds of plastic waste into usable raw materials, keeping it out of landfills.”

“For decades, California officials have known their recycling system isn’t effective,” the spokesperson said. “They failed to act, and now they seek to blame others. Instead of suing us, they could have worked with us to fix the problem and keep plastic out of landfills.”

Other companies facing legal action over their contribution to the plastic pollution crisis include Coca-Cola, Frito Lay, and Pepsi, all of which were named in a lawsuit filed earlier this year by the City of Baltimore. Separately, New York state Attorney General Letittia James sued Pepsi last year over pollution along the Buffalo River.

Bonta told reporters on Monday that he’s seeking civil penalties against Exxon Mobil, and for the company to be forced to give up revenue it earned as a result of its deceptive marketing. He said he wants “billions of dollars” from Exxon Mobil to clean up existing plastic pollution and reeducate California consumers about the risks of plastics and the limitations of recycling. His lawsuit and the nonprofits’ also seek an injunction that would force Exxon to stop promoting plastics recycling.

“It’s time for Exxon Mobil to tell the truth.” Bonta said.

Environmental groups not involved in the complaints applauded the attorney general’s efforts and said they hope it will lead to legal action in other jurisdictions. “This is the single most consequential lawsuit filed against the plastics industry for its persistent and continued lying about plastics recycling,” Judith Enck, president of the environmental advocacy group Beyond Plastics and a former regional administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency, said in a statement. “This lawsuit will set an invaluable precedent for others to follow.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline California sues Exxon Mobil over ‘sham’ of plastics recycling on Sep 23, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Grieving orca spotted carrying 2nd dead baby in Puget Sound

It’s also the second time Tahlequah, also known as J-35, has been seen carrying her dead child.

An endangered whale was spotted off Washington carrying her calf’s deceased body over a week after the baby was first documented by researchers.The baby Southern Resident killer whale was confirmed dead Dec. 31, the Center for Whale Research said in a Facebook post.“The death of any calf in the SRKW population is a tremendous loss, but the death of J61 is particularly devastating,” the nonprofit said.The calf was named J-61 after it was seen swimming with J pod Dec. 20 in the Puget Sound, McClatchy News reported and the group said.The news of a baby brought hope to researchers and whale watchers as Southern Resident killer whale numbers have dwindled over the years due to lack of prey, chemical pollution, noise disturbances from vessels and other factors, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.It’s also the second time Tahlequah, also known as J-35, has been seen carrying her dead child.In 2018, she tugged her dead baby for 17 days, the nonprofit said.Tahlequah has lost two of her four calves.But as researchers learned about the death of J-61, they confirmed a new calf swimming with J-pod and identified it as J-62.“The calf was amongst multiple females throughout their encounter, so more observations are needed to verify who the mother is,” the group said.Its sex hasn’t been confirmed yet, but it appears to be “physically and behaviorally normal.”Southern Resident killer whales were listed as endangered species in 2005 and are listed as depleted under the Marine Mammal Protection Act, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.They are made up of three groups: J, K and L pods. The killer whales spend summer and fall months in the Puget Sound, NOAA said.©2025 The Charlotte Observer. Visit charlotteobserver.com. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

Nanotech Scientists Build on an Insect’s Odd Soccer Ball-Like Excretions to Design Ingenious Camouflage

Artificial versions of nanoscale soccer-ball-like structures called brochosomes might be used to make new forms of military camouflage, self-cleaning surfaces or hydrogen fuel

January 2, 20255 min readNanotech Scientists Build on an Insect’s Odd Soccer Ball-Like Excretions to Design Ingenious CamouflageArtificial versions of nanoscale soccer-ball-like structures called brochosomes might be used to make new forms of military camouflage, self-cleaning surfaces or hydrogen fuelBy Ivan Amato edited by Gary StixScience Photo Library/Alamy Stock PhotoIn the early 1950s biologists at Brooklyn College were using an electron microscope to pursue a lead that the leafhopper, a common insect that is about the size of a rice grain and named after one of its signature behaviors, could be an agent of viral transmission. In their research, the scientists incidentally observed, in their words, “certain ultramicroscopic bodies, hitherto undescribed,” on the wings of leafhoppers. In a 1953 note in the Bulletin of the Brooklyn Entomological Society, they dubbed these minuscule, spherical, jacklike structures “brochosomes,” after a Greek word meaning “mesh of a net.”Since then a thin but determined line of scientists and engineers has built a brochosome-anchored hyperspecialty. These researchers are drawn to these subpinpoints of highly structured matter by the biological wonders they embody and the technological possibilities their elaborately porous forms and physical properties suggest. Brochosome aficionados do not hesitate to share their delight at having run across such an evolutionary tour de force.“Our group first became intrigued by brochosomes around 2015, drawn to their nanoscale dimensions and intricate, three-dimensional buckyball-like geometries,” says Tak-Sing Wong, a biomedical and mechanical engineer at Pennsylvania State University. “We were amazed by how leafhoppers can consistently produce such complex structures at the nanoscale, especially considering that even with our most advanced micro- and nanofabrication technologies we still struggle to achieve such uniformity and scalability.”On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.As much as anyone interested in these structures, Wong has been working to channel his brochosome envy into the creation of a cabinet of technological curiosities based on brochosomes’ knack for absorbing specific ranges of visible and ultraviolet wavelengths. Wong, with his partners at Penn State and Carnegie Mellon University, has been granted two U.S. patents and has others pending for processes to manufacture synthetic counterparts to brochosomes.Wong says the synthetic brochosomes are potentially suitable for a range of applications, including antireflection and camouflage materials, anticounterfeiting, data encryption and an “optical security,” tactic in which hidden information becomes visible only when it is illuminated with, say, infrared or ultraviolet light. The researchers have been able to garner grant money from the Office of Naval Research, which is always on the lookout for the next way to make it harder for adversaries to detect and track naval vessels, aircraft and other U.S. military assets.Much of the recent brochosome-inspired R&D around the world, Wong notes, derives from the ultra-antireflective upgrade that nature-made brochosomes add to leafhoppers’ body. It’s not just cool optical physics: this trick of the light renders the insects stealthy on leaf surfaces where hungry insects, birds and spiders scan for prey.Some of the forays into brochosome biology have revealed that these natural nanoscale innovations are composed of proteins and lipids that get assembled into the stealth-making nanospheres within specialized compartments of the insects’ Malpighian tubules, which are kidneylike excretory organs. With their hind legs, the insects groom their entire little selves with brochosome-packed microdroplets from their anus, resulting in light-absorptive cloaks that help them live another day.But the nanospheres are good for more than just concealment. In a recent addition to the growing list of concepts and prototypes of brochosome-inspired technologies, Wong’s Penn State team joined Carnegie Mellon University researchers, led by mechanical engineer Sheng Shen, with an eye to delivering new materials not just for camouflage but for novel security and encryption devices as well. The technology leverages people’s inability to perceive infrared light.As the researchers were making measurements of optical and other physical aspects of synthetic brochosomes, they noticed that “while these structures appeared identical under visible light, they exhibited dramatic contrasts in infrared imaging,” Shen says. And that sparked an encryption- and security-technology idea, which the researchers now are pursuing. The team is asking whether it might be possible to encode infrared information invisibly within the visible spectrum. A small dot of such an infrared-active brochosome material on currency could serve as a signature of authenticity and add an additional hurdle for would-be counterfeiters.Researchers have explored a half-dozen ways of fabricating synthetic brochosomes of various sizes and geometries. Through the use of different polymeric, ceramic and metallic materials, the cabinet of brochosome-inspired technocuriosities is only becoming more eye-catching.A team of Chinese researchers who are brochosome fans recently reported a process for making a vivid spectrum of color-bestowing particles by filling tiny indentations—“nanobowl” spaces—on silver brochosome structures with tiny polystyrene spheres. When the researchers tailored the sizes of the spheres with a precise etching method, they were able to tweak the electromagnetic interactions between the spheres and, thereby, the apparent colors of the synthetic brochosome-structures. In an ACS Nano paper in which the researchers rolled out their color-making strategy, they suggested this opened a pathway for producing longer-lasting and more stable colors compared with shorter-lived chemical dyes and pigments.A different Chinese research group, attempting to emulate the master-of-disguise feats of chameleons, cephalopods and other creatures, fabricated tungsten-oxide-based brochosome structures that become less reflective when they are electrically stimulated. One possible end point for this work could be energy-saving applications—windows that could regulate the amount of solar and thermal energy that passed through them over the course of the day.On an even more expansive and eclectic to-do list are light-harvesting electrodes that could generate and corral energized electrons to make hydrogen fuel and self-cleaning surfaces that could repel liquids and adhesives. Also on the list are sensors that could be tailored for detecting specific bacteria and proteins for environmental monitoring and health applications. Additionally, there is the prospect of brochosome-inspired particles whose pores and surfaces could be tailored to carry specific drugs to target tissues.The promise seems enormous, but an era of brochosome-inspired technology is not an immediate prospect. “One of the major bottlenecks to the widespread use of synthetic brochosomes is the lack of scalable production technologies, as their complex 3D shapes and nanoscale dimensions remain challenging to replicate at scale,” Wong cautions.Whether specific brochosome-inspired technologies get to the finish line or not, Wong says that he loves sharing his work with nonscientist family members and friends. “They are immediately captivated by the beauty of the brochosomes’ soccer-ball-looking structures,” he says. “When I explain that the structures are about 100 times thinner than the diameter of a hair, they can hardly believe it.”Meanwhile Shen welcomes a humbling aspect of this research romance with brochosomes. “It’s a powerful reminder that innovation doesn’t always need to come from human ingenuity,” he says. “Sometimes nature has already solved the problems we’re working on.”

Women on the Front Line: The Fight for a Better Life in Cancer Alley

Photographer Wayan Barre features some of the women fighting environmental injustice in the heartland of Louisiana.

In the heartland of Louisiana, between Baton Rouge and New Orleans, a 150-mile corridor along the Mississippi River tells a tale of environmental degradation, social injustice, and economic struggle. This region, home to more than 150 behemoth chemical facilities and oil refineries, is also home to numerous communities, predominantly low-income and marginalized. Nearly 50 percent of the residents are African American, their roots intertwined with the land for centuries, dating back to the days of slavery when they were forced to cut and process sugarcane on vast plantations that dominated Louisiana’s River Parishes. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) reports a staggering 95 percent higher risk of cancer due to air pollution for residents in this area compared with the rest of the United States. This tragedy has earned the corridor the morbid moniker “Cancer Alley,” a term underscored in 2021 by United Nations human rights experts as a stark example of environmental racism. On the front lines of this battle, women—most of them African American—are powering the environmental justice movement. Here are a few of their stories. These photos, along with another version of this story, are scheduled to appear in the January 2025 edition of Country Roads magazine in Baton Rouge, Louisiana.

Maryland Sues Maker of Gore-Tex Over Pollution From Toxic 'Forever Chemicals'

Maryland is suing the company that produces the waterproof material Gore-Tex

Maryland is suing the company that produces the waterproof material Gore-Tex often used for raincoats and other outdoor gear, alleging its leaders kept using “forever chemicals” long after learning about serious health risks associated with them.The complaint, which was filed last week in federal court, focuses on a cluster of 13 facilities in northeastern Maryland operated by Delaware-based W.L. Gore & Associates. It alleges the company polluted the air and water around its facilities with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, jeopardizing the health of surrounding communities while raking in profits.The lawsuit adds to other claims filed in recent years, including a class action on behalf of Cecil County residents in 2023 demanding Gore foot the bill for water filtration systems, medical bills and other damages associated with decades of harmful pollution in the largely rural community.“PFAS are linked to cancer, weakened immune systems, and can even harm the ability to bear children,” Maryland Attorney General Anthony Brown said in a statement. “It is unacceptable for any company to knowingly contaminate our drinking water with these toxins, putting Marylanders at risk of severe health conditions.”Gore spokesperson Donna Leinwand Leger said the company is “surprised by the Maryland Attorney General’s decision to initiate legal action, particularly in light of our proactive and intensive engagement with state regulators over the past two years.”“We have been working with Maryland, employing the most current, reliable science and technology to assess the potential impact of our operations and guide our ongoing, collaborative efforts to protect the environment,” the company said in a statement, noting a Dec. 18 report that contains nearly two years of groundwater testing results.But attorney Philip Federico, who represents plaintiffs in the class action and other lawsuits against Gore, called the company’s efforts “too little, much too late.” In the meantime, he said, residents are continuing to suffer — one of his clients was recently diagnosed with kidney cancer.“It’s typical corporate environmental contamination,” he said. “They’re in no hurry to fix the problem.”The synthetic chemicals are especially harmful because they’re nearly indestructible and can build up in various environments, including the human body. In addition to cancers and immune system problems, exposure to certain levels of PFAS has been linked to increased cholesterol levels, reproductive health issues and developmental delays in children, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.Gore leaders failed to warn people living near its Maryland facilities about the potential impacts, hoping to protect their corporate image and avoid liability, according to the state’s lawsuit. The result has been “a toxic legacy for generations to come,” the lawsuit alleges. Since the chemicals are already in the local environment, protecting residents now often means installing complex and expensive water filtration systems. People with private wells have found highly elevated levels of dangerous chemicals in their water, according to the class action lawsuit.The Maryland facilities are located in a rural area just across the border from Delaware, where Gore has become a longtime fixture in the community. The company, which today employs more than 13,000 people, was founded in 1958 after Wilbert Gore left the chemical giant DuPont to start his own business. Its profile rose with the development of Gore-Tex, a lightweight waterproof material created by stretching polytetrafluoroethylene, which is better known by the brand name Teflon that’s used to coat nonstick pans. The membrane within Gore-Tex fabric has billions of pores that are smaller than water droplets, making it especially effective for outdoor gear. The state’s complaint traces Gore’s longstanding relationship with DuPont, arguing that information about the chemicals' dangers was long known within both companies as they sought to keep things quiet and boost profits. It alleges that as early as 1961, DuPont scientists knew the chemical caused adverse liver reactions in rats and dogs.DuPont has faced widespread litigation in recent years. Along with two spinoff companies, it announced a $1.18 billion deal last year to resolve complaints of polluting many U.S. drinking water systems with forever chemicals. The Maryland lawsuit seeks to hold Gore responsible for costs associated with the state’s ongoing investigations and cleanup efforts, among other damages. State oversight has ramped up following litigation from residents alleging their drinking water was contaminated.Until then, the company operated in Cecil County with little scrutiny.Gore announced in 2014 that it had eliminated perfluorooctanoic acid from the raw materials used to create Gore-Tex. But it’s still causing long-term impacts because it persists for so long in the environment, attorneys say. Over the past two years, Gore has hired an environmental consulting firm to conduct testing in the area and provided bottled water and water filtration systems to residents near certain Maryland facilities, according to a webpage describing its efforts. Recent testing of drinking water at residences near certain Gore sites revealed perfluorooctanoic acid levels well above what the EPA considers safe, according to state officials. Attorneys for the state acknowledged Gore’s ongoing efforts to investigate and address the problem but said the company needs to step up and be a better neighbor. “While we appreciate Gore’s limited investigation to ascertain the extent of PFAS contamination around its facilities, much more needs to be done to protect the community and the health of residents,” Maryland Department of the Environment Secretary Serena McIlwain said in a statement. “We must remove these forever chemicals from our natural resources urgently, and we expect responsible parties to pay for this remediation.”Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

EPA to formally review risks of vinyl chloride and other toxic chemicals

Evaluation could lead to limits or bans on substances commonly used in the production of plastic and rubberThe Environmental Protection Agency is launching a formal review of five highly toxic plastic chemicals, including vinyl chloride, the notorious compound at the center of the East Palestine, Ohio, train wreck fire.The move could lead to strong limits or bans on the substances. Continue reading...

The Environmental Protection Agency is launching a formal review of five highly toxic plastic chemicals, including vinyl chloride, the notorious compound at the center of the East Palestine, Ohio, train wreck fire.The move could lead to strong limits or bans on the substances.Vinyl chloride is most commonly used in PVC pipe and packaging production, but is also cancerous and highly flammable. For about 50 years, the federal government has considered limits on the substance, but industry has thwarted most regulatory efforts, hid the substances’ risks and is already mobilizing against the new review.The step is “one of the most important chemical review processes ever undertaken” by the agency, said Judith Enck, president of Beyond Plastics and a former EPA administrator.“I applaud the EPA,” she added.The federal government designates vinyl chloride as a known carcinogen, and the substance is also a neurotoxicant linked to liver damage, permanent changes to bones, and other serious health issues. The EPA is also reviewing acetaldehyde, benzenamine, acrylonitrile and MBOCA, each used in the production of plastic and rubber. All the chemicals are considered to be or are probable carcinogens and linked to other health problems, like anemia, kidney damage and neurotoxicity.The nation’s use of vinyl chloride drew intense scrutiny after dozens of cars on a Norfolk Southern train derailed and burned in February 2023 in East Palestine. The fire burned near tankers carrying vinyl chloride, and, two days later, fearing a “major explosion”, officials conducted a controlled burn of the chemical as a preventive measure.When vinyl chloride burns, it creates dioxins, a highly toxic and carcinogenic chemical class that can stay in the environment for generations. The levels of dioxin found in East Palestine in the days after the wreck were hundreds of times greater than the exposure threshold above which the EPA in 2010 found poses cancer risks. Soil and food contamination are considered to be among the most common exposure routes, and the controlled burn’s towering plume also sent dioxins across 16 states.Vinyl chloride is transported in freight trains that are prone to accidents, and East Palestine was only one in a series of vinyl chloride incidents – experts expect a similar accident. A recent report found more than 3 million Americans live within one mile of railroad tracks on which vinyl chloride is transported.The Vinyl Institute, which represents vinyl chloride and PVC producers, has downplayed the risk, and labeled the reports “publicity stunts”.The EPA’s announcement concludes a year-long period in which it gathered comments from industry, public health advocates, labor and others involved in the substances’ use, as is required under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which covers the nation’s use of toxic chemicals.It will spend the next three months gathering more information, and, following that, determine whether to classify the chemicals as high-priority substances under TSCA. That would trigger a formal study to determine if vinyl chloride presents an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment.That assessment could take three years, and, following that, the EPA would establish new rules. But the action faces an uncertain future – incoming Trump allies have already signaled that they will kill any proposed regulations that have not been finalized.Opposition from industry against PVC limits is expected to be stiff in part because the substance is used in medical devices, vinyl siding for buildings, drinking water pipes, electrical wiring, household goods like shower curtains and raincoats. Industry groups have already touted the substance’s ubiquity in a statement on the EPA’s announcement.“[It] presents a welcome opportunity to share our expertise on the many indispensable uses of this highly regulated material,” the Vinyl Institute wrote.

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.