Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

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

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Residents say Pennsylvania has failed communities after state studies linked fracking to child cancer

News Feed
Thursday, September 19, 2024

PITTSBURGH — More than a year after the Pennsylvania Department of Health published three studies linking fracking to cancer and other health effects, advocates say the agency failed to keep promises to help residents living near fracking wells. The studies, conducted by University of Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania Department of Health researchers, found that residents living near fracking wells were more likely to experience childhood cancer, severe asthma attacks and low birth weights. They added to dozens of other studies linking living near fracking wells with various health problems, including cancer, poor birth outcomes and cardiovascular and respiratory issues Former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf ordered the studies, commonly referred to as “the Pitt studies,” after residents of fracking communities with high rates of rare childhood cancers demanded more research. The researchers who conducted the study shared the results in August 2023 at a public meeting. They looked at health records and fracking data from 2010-2020 in the eight county Southwestern Pennsylvania region and found, among other things, that children who lived within one mile of one or more fracking wells were five to seven times more likely to develop lymphoma compared to children who don’t live near fracking wells. It also found people with asthma living within 10 miles of fracking wells were four to five times more likely to experience a severe asthma attack during the production phase and an increased risk of having babies that are small for gestational age among Pennsylvanians living within 10 miles of fracking wells. The Pennsylvania Department of Health pledged action in response to the findings, but residents and environmental advocates say the agency hasn’t done enough. “Millions of dollars have been spent on this study only for it to be buried,” said Stacy Magda, a community organizer with the Mountain Watershed Association during a virtual press conference organized by five environmental and health advocacy groups on Tuesday. The groups that held the press conference, which included the Center for Coalfield Justice, the Pennsylvania chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Mountain Watershed Association, the Environmental Health Project and FracTracker Alliance, also launched a petition asking Governor Josh Shapiro and the Pennsylvania Department of Health to take further action aimed at protecting residents who live near fracking wells. Janice Blanock, a resident of Cecil Township, Pennsylvania, about 20 miles from Pittsburgh, held back tears as she spoke at the press conference over Zoom from a neighbor’s backyard, where a new fracking well was visible in the background. In 2016, her 19-year-old son Luke died from a rare bone cancer. “I’ll never know exactly what caused my son's cancer,” Blanock said. “I'll never know why there are such high rates of rare cancers in my community. But I do know that harm is being done. And that pollution can make us sick … I am here to demand that Governor Shapiro address the results of the [studies].” During the 2023 public meeting when the studies were presented, the Pennsylvania Department of Health announced the launch of a continuing medical education program on environmental exposures, said it would start a program to educate schools in fracking communities about air quality, said it had developed a new form for submitting environmental health complaints, and promised to continue reviewing cancer data in the region. “Disseminating public health guidance and research are critical functions of the Department of Health,” said Talor Musil, a field manager at the Environmental Health Project during the press conference. “Neither has yet taken place in relation to these three studies, or any shale gas development topics. And this ultimately indicates a lack of leadership by Governor Shapiro to defend the health and safety of Pennsylvanians.” Barry Ciccocioppo, the communications director for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, defended the department’s actions. In an email, he told EHN “the [Pitt studies] help advance our understanding of the potential health impacts from hydraulic fracturing operations, and we are continuing to take action to improve the health and safety of Pennsylvania residents.” He pointed to several initiatives related to educating medical professionals about fracking and health, including a recent presentation on the topic by Department of Health staff to a group of medical care providers and seeking approval for continuing education credits for nursing with a recorded version of that presentation (which will be publicly posted online “in the near future”). He also pointed to both past and planned presentations on the topic through a Penn State University program called ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes). “Disseminating public health guidance and research are critical functions of the Department of Health. Neither has yet taken place in relation to these three studies, or any shale gas development topics." - Talor Musil, Environmental Health ProjectHe said the Department of Health is still working with the Department of Education to provide educational materials for schools and families, and the first of those documents is available online. He did not specify a timeline for this work. The Department of Health also said it would begin work on an updated review of the literature on health and fracking. Ciccocioppo pointed to the agency’s 2019 literature review and said DOH is reviewing new scientific papers on health and fracking as they’re published and will post summaries on those papers on its website eventually, but he did not say that a formal literature review is underway. Governor Shapiro’s fracking stanceSeveral speakers at the press conference expressed frustration with Governor Shapiro’s shifting stance on fracking. As attorney general, Shapiro oversaw a grand jury investigation that concluded there was “systematic failure by government agencies in overseeing the fracking industry,” filed criminal charges against several fracking companies for environmental violations and recommended bolstered industry regulations. But as governor, Shapiro has entered into a controversial partnership with CNX Resources, a fracking company that pleaded no contest to criminal charges for misreporting air monitoring data in violation of the state’s Air Pollution Control Act in 2021 — charges that were brought by Shapiro while he was the state’s Attorney General. The company has also received more than 2,000 violations from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection since 2004. CNX’s “Radical Transparency” project launched in 2023, and a recent press release from the company claims that preliminary data from several months of self-reported air monitoring at selected fracking wells “expose the flawed nature of the oft-cited University of Pittsburgh Health Study and its highly suspect results,” and indicate “that natural gas development done the CNX way is safe and inherently good for the communities where we operate.” “CNX has claimed that fracking poses no public health risks with a photo of Governor Shapiro at the top of the report to apply an endorsement from his Administration of these findings,” Environmental Health Project’s Musil said. She added that it’s not meaningful to compare results from a months-long self-monitoring air emissions report by a fracking company to a years-long study of health data by academic and regulatory agency researchers. Jodi Borello, a community organizer with the Center for Coalfield Justice, added, “CNX Resources cannot be trusted to accurately report air data — that’s what their criminal charges were originally for. Governor, Shapiro's relationship with the criminal company CNX Resources is not a public health response.”Westmoreland County resident Diana Steck, who says her family’s health has been impacted by a landfill that processes fracking waste, said the state agencies’ innaction “is not only unacceptable, it is immoral,” in a statement that was read during the press conference. “Governor Shapiro, it’s time for you to stop cozying up to polluters like CNX … and take action to protect our public health, especially that of our children.”

PITTSBURGH — More than a year after the Pennsylvania Department of Health published three studies linking fracking to cancer and other health effects, advocates say the agency failed to keep promises to help residents living near fracking wells. The studies, conducted by University of Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania Department of Health researchers, found that residents living near fracking wells were more likely to experience childhood cancer, severe asthma attacks and low birth weights. They added to dozens of other studies linking living near fracking wells with various health problems, including cancer, poor birth outcomes and cardiovascular and respiratory issues Former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf ordered the studies, commonly referred to as “the Pitt studies,” after residents of fracking communities with high rates of rare childhood cancers demanded more research. The researchers who conducted the study shared the results in August 2023 at a public meeting. They looked at health records and fracking data from 2010-2020 in the eight county Southwestern Pennsylvania region and found, among other things, that children who lived within one mile of one or more fracking wells were five to seven times more likely to develop lymphoma compared to children who don’t live near fracking wells. It also found people with asthma living within 10 miles of fracking wells were four to five times more likely to experience a severe asthma attack during the production phase and an increased risk of having babies that are small for gestational age among Pennsylvanians living within 10 miles of fracking wells. The Pennsylvania Department of Health pledged action in response to the findings, but residents and environmental advocates say the agency hasn’t done enough. “Millions of dollars have been spent on this study only for it to be buried,” said Stacy Magda, a community organizer with the Mountain Watershed Association during a virtual press conference organized by five environmental and health advocacy groups on Tuesday. The groups that held the press conference, which included the Center for Coalfield Justice, the Pennsylvania chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Mountain Watershed Association, the Environmental Health Project and FracTracker Alliance, also launched a petition asking Governor Josh Shapiro and the Pennsylvania Department of Health to take further action aimed at protecting residents who live near fracking wells. Janice Blanock, a resident of Cecil Township, Pennsylvania, about 20 miles from Pittsburgh, held back tears as she spoke at the press conference over Zoom from a neighbor’s backyard, where a new fracking well was visible in the background. In 2016, her 19-year-old son Luke died from a rare bone cancer. “I’ll never know exactly what caused my son's cancer,” Blanock said. “I'll never know why there are such high rates of rare cancers in my community. But I do know that harm is being done. And that pollution can make us sick … I am here to demand that Governor Shapiro address the results of the [studies].” During the 2023 public meeting when the studies were presented, the Pennsylvania Department of Health announced the launch of a continuing medical education program on environmental exposures, said it would start a program to educate schools in fracking communities about air quality, said it had developed a new form for submitting environmental health complaints, and promised to continue reviewing cancer data in the region. “Disseminating public health guidance and research are critical functions of the Department of Health,” said Talor Musil, a field manager at the Environmental Health Project during the press conference. “Neither has yet taken place in relation to these three studies, or any shale gas development topics. And this ultimately indicates a lack of leadership by Governor Shapiro to defend the health and safety of Pennsylvanians.” Barry Ciccocioppo, the communications director for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, defended the department’s actions. In an email, he told EHN “the [Pitt studies] help advance our understanding of the potential health impacts from hydraulic fracturing operations, and we are continuing to take action to improve the health and safety of Pennsylvania residents.” He pointed to several initiatives related to educating medical professionals about fracking and health, including a recent presentation on the topic by Department of Health staff to a group of medical care providers and seeking approval for continuing education credits for nursing with a recorded version of that presentation (which will be publicly posted online “in the near future”). He also pointed to both past and planned presentations on the topic through a Penn State University program called ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes). “Disseminating public health guidance and research are critical functions of the Department of Health. Neither has yet taken place in relation to these three studies, or any shale gas development topics." - Talor Musil, Environmental Health ProjectHe said the Department of Health is still working with the Department of Education to provide educational materials for schools and families, and the first of those documents is available online. He did not specify a timeline for this work. The Department of Health also said it would begin work on an updated review of the literature on health and fracking. Ciccocioppo pointed to the agency’s 2019 literature review and said DOH is reviewing new scientific papers on health and fracking as they’re published and will post summaries on those papers on its website eventually, but he did not say that a formal literature review is underway. Governor Shapiro’s fracking stanceSeveral speakers at the press conference expressed frustration with Governor Shapiro’s shifting stance on fracking. As attorney general, Shapiro oversaw a grand jury investigation that concluded there was “systematic failure by government agencies in overseeing the fracking industry,” filed criminal charges against several fracking companies for environmental violations and recommended bolstered industry regulations. But as governor, Shapiro has entered into a controversial partnership with CNX Resources, a fracking company that pleaded no contest to criminal charges for misreporting air monitoring data in violation of the state’s Air Pollution Control Act in 2021 — charges that were brought by Shapiro while he was the state’s Attorney General. The company has also received more than 2,000 violations from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection since 2004. CNX’s “Radical Transparency” project launched in 2023, and a recent press release from the company claims that preliminary data from several months of self-reported air monitoring at selected fracking wells “expose the flawed nature of the oft-cited University of Pittsburgh Health Study and its highly suspect results,” and indicate “that natural gas development done the CNX way is safe and inherently good for the communities where we operate.” “CNX has claimed that fracking poses no public health risks with a photo of Governor Shapiro at the top of the report to apply an endorsement from his Administration of these findings,” Environmental Health Project’s Musil said. She added that it’s not meaningful to compare results from a months-long self-monitoring air emissions report by a fracking company to a years-long study of health data by academic and regulatory agency researchers. Jodi Borello, a community organizer with the Center for Coalfield Justice, added, “CNX Resources cannot be trusted to accurately report air data — that’s what their criminal charges were originally for. Governor, Shapiro's relationship with the criminal company CNX Resources is not a public health response.”Westmoreland County resident Diana Steck, who says her family’s health has been impacted by a landfill that processes fracking waste, said the state agencies’ innaction “is not only unacceptable, it is immoral,” in a statement that was read during the press conference. “Governor Shapiro, it’s time for you to stop cozying up to polluters like CNX … and take action to protect our public health, especially that of our children.”



PITTSBURGH — More than a year after the Pennsylvania Department of Health published three studies linking fracking to cancer and other health effects, advocates say the agency failed to keep promises to help residents living near fracking wells.

The studies, conducted by University of Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania Department of Health researchers, found that residents living near fracking wells were more likely to experience childhood cancer, severe asthma attacks and low birth weights. They added to dozens of other studies linking living near fracking wells with various health problems, including cancer, poor birth outcomes and cardiovascular and respiratory issues

Former Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf ordered the studies, commonly referred to as “the Pitt studies,” after residents of fracking communities with high rates of rare childhood cancers demanded more research.

The researchers who conducted the study shared the results in August 2023 at a public meeting. They looked at health records and fracking data from 2010-2020 in the eight county Southwestern Pennsylvania region and found, among other things, that children who lived within one mile of one or more fracking wells were five to seven times more likely to develop lymphoma compared to children who don’t live near fracking wells. It also found people with asthma living within 10 miles of fracking wells were four to five times more likely to experience a severe asthma attack during the production phase and an increased risk of having babies that are small for gestational age among Pennsylvanians living within 10 miles of fracking wells.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health pledged action in response to the findings, but residents and environmental advocates say the agency hasn’t done enough.

“Millions of dollars have been spent on this study only for it to be buried,” said Stacy Magda, a community organizer with the Mountain Watershed Association during a virtual press conference organized by five environmental and health advocacy groups on Tuesday.

The groups that held the press conference, which included the Center for Coalfield Justice, the Pennsylvania chapter of Physicians for Social Responsibility, the Mountain Watershed Association, the Environmental Health Project and FracTracker Alliance, also launched a petition asking Governor Josh Shapiro and the Pennsylvania Department of Health to take further action aimed at protecting residents who live near fracking wells.

Janice Blanock, a resident of Cecil Township, Pennsylvania, about 20 miles from Pittsburgh, held back tears as she spoke at the press conference over Zoom from a neighbor’s backyard, where a new fracking well was visible in the background. In 2016, her 19-year-old son Luke died from a rare bone cancer.

“I’ll never know exactly what caused my son's cancer,” Blanock said. “I'll never know why there are such high rates of rare cancers in my community. But I do know that harm is being done. And that pollution can make us sick … I am here to demand that Governor Shapiro address the results of the [studies].”

During the 2023 public meeting when the studies were presented, the Pennsylvania Department of Health announced the launch of a continuing medical education program on environmental exposures, said it would start a program to educate schools in fracking communities about air quality, said it had developed a new form for submitting environmental health complaints, and promised to continue reviewing cancer data in the region.

“Disseminating public health guidance and research are critical functions of the Department of Health,” said Talor Musil, a field manager at the Environmental Health Project during the press conference. “Neither has yet taken place in relation to these three studies, or any shale gas development topics. And this ultimately indicates a lack of leadership by Governor Shapiro to defend the health and safety of Pennsylvanians.”

Barry Ciccocioppo, the communications director for the Pennsylvania Department of Health, defended the department’s actions. In an email, he told EHN “the [Pitt studies] help advance our understanding of the potential health impacts from hydraulic fracturing operations, and we are continuing to take action to improve the health and safety of Pennsylvania residents.”

He pointed to several initiatives related to educating medical professionals about fracking and health, including a recent presentation on the topic by Department of Health staff to a group of medical care providers and seeking approval for continuing education credits for nursing with a recorded version of that presentation (which will be publicly posted online “in the near future”). He also pointed to both past and planned presentations on the topic through a Penn State University program called ECHO (Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes).

“Disseminating public health guidance and research are critical functions of the Department of Health. Neither has yet taken place in relation to these three studies, or any shale gas development topics." - Talor Musil, Environmental Health Project

He said the Department of Health is still working with the Department of Education to provide educational materials for schools and families, and the first of those documents is available online. He did not specify a timeline for this work.

The Department of Health also said it would begin work on an updated review of the literature on health and fracking. Ciccocioppo pointed to the agency’s 2019 literature review and said DOH is reviewing new scientific papers on health and fracking as they’re published and will post summaries on those papers on its website eventually, but he did not say that a formal literature review is underway.

Governor Shapiro’s fracking stance


Josh Shapiro fracking

Several speakers at the press conference expressed frustration with Governor Shapiro’s shifting stance on fracking. As attorney general, Shapiro oversaw a grand jury investigation that concluded there was “systematic failure by government agencies in overseeing the fracking industry,” filed criminal charges against several fracking companies for environmental violations and recommended bolstered industry regulations.

But as governor, Shapiro has entered into a controversial partnership with CNX Resources, a fracking company that pleaded no contest to criminal charges for misreporting air monitoring data in violation of the state’s Air Pollution Control Act in 2021 — charges that were brought by Shapiro while he was the state’s Attorney General. The company has also received more than 2,000 violations from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection since 2004.

CNX’s “Radical Transparency” project launched in 2023, and a recent press release from the company claims that preliminary data from several months of self-reported air monitoring at selected fracking wells “expose the flawed nature of the oft-cited University of Pittsburgh Health Study and its highly suspect results,” and indicate “that natural gas development done the CNX way is safe and inherently good for the communities where we operate.”

“CNX has claimed that fracking poses no public health risks with a photo of Governor Shapiro at the top of the report to apply an endorsement from his Administration of these findings,” Environmental Health Project’s Musil said. She added that it’s not meaningful to compare results from a months-long self-monitoring air emissions report by a fracking company to a years-long study of health data by academic and regulatory agency researchers.

Jodi Borello, a community organizer with the Center for Coalfield Justice, added, “CNX Resources cannot be trusted to accurately report air data — that’s what their criminal charges were originally for. Governor, Shapiro's relationship with the criminal company CNX Resources is not a public health response.”

Westmoreland County resident Diana Steck, who says her family’s health has been impacted by a landfill that processes fracking waste, said the state agencies’ innaction “is not only unacceptable, it is immoral,” in a statement that was read during the press conference. “Governor Shapiro, it’s time for you to stop cozying up to polluters like CNX … and take action to protect our public health, especially that of our children.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Why Are Pesticide Companies Fighting State Laws to Address PFAS?

Adam Nordell is one of the farmers who lost it all. After he was forced to hang up his hoe and relocate his family, he went to work for a local nonprofit called Defend Our Health, where he now uses what he calls his “unwanted knowledge base” to do outreach and education in farm communities […] The post Why Are Pesticide Companies Fighting State Laws to Address PFAS? appeared first on Civil Eats.

What Our Investigation Revealed Several states are trying to phase out the use of pesticides containing per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), long-lasting chemicals linked to serious health risks including cancer, liver damage, and reproductive effects that have already contaminated farm fields, drinking water, and human bodies. CropLife America and Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment (RISE), the pesticide industry’s trade organizations, have been working to stop and slow those efforts. CropLife America and RISE hire local lobbyists, some of whom also head up farmer organizations and represent local farmers in comments, hearings, and meetings with legislators. RISE also deploys a “grassroots network” of individuals who work in and with pesticide companies—e.g., retailers, golf courses, and landscapers—to contact their state lawmakers using tested “key” messages and encourages them to emphasize their personal experiences as citizens. Beyond PFAS, when state lawmakers introduce bills to restrict pesticide use in other ways, CropLife America and RISE often utilize a similar playbook to influence legislation. About five years ago, regulators in Maine started to find alarming levels of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances—commonly called PFAS or forever chemicals—in farm fields. They soon discovered the main source: sewage sludgespread as fertilizer. Some farmers could no longer produce safe food due to PFAS’ links to cancer and other health risks. Some had to shift what and where they planted, while others shut down their operations for good. Tests found water in hundreds of rural wells unsafe to drink, and families faced an uncertain future with fear. Chemical Capture: The Power and Impact of the Pesticide IndustryRead all the stories in our series: Overview: Chemical Capture: The Power and Impact of the Pesticide Industry How the agrichemical industry is shaping public information about the toxicity of pesticides, how they’re being used, and the policies that impact the health of all Americans. Inside Bayer’s State-by-State Efforts to Stop Pesticide Lawsuits As the agrichemical giant lays groundwork to fend off Roundup litigation, its use of a playbook for building influence in farm state legislatures has the potential to benefit pesticide companies nationwide. Are Companies Using Carbon Markets to Sell More Pesticides? Many programs meant to help farmers address climate change are now owned by companies that sell chemicals, which could boost practices that depend on pesticides rather than those that reduce their use. Why Farmers Use Harmful Insecticides They May Not Need Neonicotinoids coat nearly all the corn and soybean seeds available for planting. Agrichemical companies have designed it that way. Why Are Pesticide Companies Fighting State Efforts to Address PFAS? In Maine, Maryland, and beyond, the industry is using a ‘grassroots’ network of farmers, lobbyists, and other tactics to slow legislators’ attempts to get forever chemicals out of food and water. Adam Nordell is one of the farmers who lost it all. After he was forced to hang up his hoe and relocate his family, he went to work for a local nonprofit called Defend Our Health, where he now uses what he calls his “unwanted knowledge base” to do outreach and education in farm communities and connect affected farmers with resources. Nordell is still living with the consequences of PFAS contamination, and he prefers not to linger on the topic of the trauma it caused his family. But if there’s one positive thing he remembers about 2020, when all of this was coming to light, it’s that the state’s often fractured farming community came together. “I was an organic vegetable farmer, and conventional dairy farmers were reaching out expressing concern,” he said. “The prospect of chemical contamination is something that nobody wants on their farm and that everyone recognizes as posing a potential threat.” Sensing a public health and food security crisis of epic proportions, Maine’s legislators got to work. In short order, they wrote and passed trailblazing state laws to tackle the thorny problem from multiple directions. They created a $60 million fund to support affected farmers, for example, and started a phaseout of consumer products that contain “intentionally added” PFAS. Most importantly for farmers at the time, they banned the spreading of sludge, a move Nordell said drew enthusiastic support from many, but not all, farmers. At the same time, in 2020, watchdog groups first discovered PFAS in certain pesticides, which directed national attention to whether farm chemicals might be another source of contamination. How significant of a PFAS source pesticides might be remains unresolved, especially because different highly accredited labs have produced conflicting tests. One initial study found high levels of PFAS in common pesticides, but when the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did its own testing on the same products, it reported none. Environmental groups are currently contesting the agency’s report. “The prospect of chemical contamination is something that nobody wants on their farm and that everyone recognizes as posing a potential threat.” Regardless of those results, a few things have become clear: Based on the most commonly used global definition of PFAS, more than 60 pesticides registered by the EPA contain an active ingredient defined as PFAS. Other pesticides may contain PFAS as undisclosed additives or from chemicals leaching from the plastic containers in which they’re stored. When Maine lawmakers turned their attention to tackling pesticides as a source of PFAS, they encountered new opposition. Between 2021 and 2024, CropLife America and Responsible Industry for a Sound Environment (RISE), the pesticide industry’s trade organizations, paid lobbyists in the state more than $100,000 to work on multiple bills, including PFAS regulations. At the same time, RISE alerted Maine-based members of what it calls its “grassroots network.” To create that network, RISE recruits individuals who make, sell, or are heavily invested in the use of pesticides (like golf course superintendents and landscapers) around the country, provides trainings and messaging, and then sends advocacy alerts when laws are introduced in a given state. So, while Maine passed the country’s first laws requiring companies to disclose whether pesticides they sell contain PFAS and to eventually phase out those that do, the fight continues. After the trade groups pushed for delays in the implementation of the law, legislators in 2023 delayed the phaseout of PFAS in pesticides by two years. Then, in 2024, based on Maine lobbying records, CropLife and RISE advocated for a bill to exempt agriculture entirely from the requirements. Although it initially failed, lawmakers expect it will be introduced again next year. In 2023 testimony submitted to Maine legislators supporting rollbacks to the regulations on PFAS in pesticides, Karen Reardon, vice president of public affairs for RISE, argued that the state’s PFAS definition is overly broad and lacks a scientific basis. She also said companies were worried that submitting affidavits on PFAS in their products could expose their trade secrets, and state regulators needed more time to develop a system that would adequately protect “confidential business information.” Some farm groups, including the Maine Potato Board and Maine Farm Bureau, also oppose the rules for PFAS in pesticides and have called for the agricultural exemption, citing the fact that losing access to certain pesticides could hurt the state’s farmers. In arguing for an exemption for agriculture last March, Donald Flannery, then the executive director of the Maine Potato Board, cited the economic value Maine’s farmers bring to the state. He noted that pesticides used in Maine “are all approved and licensed by EPA,” and said that while he acknowledged the need to clean up PFAS pollution, business and industry should be allowed to move forward in the meantime. If pesticides are not exempt from PFAS regulations, he said, “there is risk of losing products, which will have a negative impact on our ability to grow and protect our crops.” Supporters of the PFAS regulations dispute that idea because the law contains a safeguard allowing farmers to use pesticides that contain PFAS if there is a “currently unavoidable use.” (For example, if a farmer shows there is no alternative product that can address a pest issue they face.) A Well-Worn Playbook The battle over regulating PFAS in pesticides in Maine looks a lot like another heating up in Maryland. In fact, it illustrates a scenario repeated in states nationwide each year, where the pesticide industry activates a well-worn playbook in an effort to stop restrictions on pesticide use that are intended to address a broad range of impacts.And it involves some of the same tactics Civil Eats reported on in this series, in our story on Bayer’s lobbying efforts to pass laws limiting their liability for alleged harms caused by glyphosate.  First, CropLife, RISE, and the companies they represent fund state-level lobbying. At the same time, they activate individuals within companies that sell and use pesticides to advocate for what the companies want. Lastly, they align with farmer organizations that likely have more clout in the eyes of lawmakers and the public. Rick Zimmerman, a New York lobbyist who has represented both pesticide companies and farm groups to oppose state pesticide restrictions, said that alignment was not about using farmer capital. Instead, he said, it happens because farmer groups and the pesticide industry are generally opposed to state governments getting involved in the regulation of farm chemicals. “The various organizations and companies that I represented are on common ground,” he said. “It’s just a natural opportunity for organizations and companies with similar interests to be able to collaborate and work together.” However, whether the issue is neonicotinoid use in New York or small towns in Colorado passing their own pesticide laws, the strategy has real impacts. In the case of PFAS, Nordell and others said that it could mean consequences for farmers, farmworkers, and broader communities. “Are there large out-of-state corporations that have a financial incentive engendering opposition to [Maine’s pesticide] laws? Yes, certainly. They show up in committee every session, and I think there’s a lot of misinformation about what will happen as we regulate PFAS out of the economy.” Maine’s initial assessment found close to 1,500 pesticide products that are made with an active ingredient that meets the state’s definition of PFAS. Nordell said that while the contamination from sludge was relatively easy to test and trace, pesticides may not be as visible as a source of PFAS. “We should really think about farmworkers who are spraying the pesticides. We should think about the neighbors of the farmers who depend on clean water like we all do. All of us are dependent on a clean food system. When, for the sake of commerce, we turn a blind eye to environmental toxins, we all suffer in any scenario—but certainly when we’re talking about the safety of the food supply,” Nordell said. “Are there large out-of-state corporations that have a financial incentive engendering opposition to [Maine’s] laws? Yes, certainly. They show up in committee every session, and I think there’s a lot of misinformation about what will happen as we regulate PFAS out of the economy.” Representatives from CropLife America and RISE did not respond to Civil Eats’ repeated requests for interviews, or to detailed questions sent asking for their comments on points covered in this article. CropLife and RISE Lead the Way While Maine grappled with PFAS within its borders, other sources of PFAS, like fire-fighting foam and takeoutcontainers, entered the national conversation. PFAS pollution was increasingly measured in drinking water and human bodies, and information  on the health risks linked to exposure to common PFAS like PFOA and PFOS, even at very low levels, began to accumulate. A few states to the south, Maryland has also been trying to stay ahead of the game, and the Maryland Pesticide Education Network (MPEN) is central to that effort. MPEN has been one of the most active pesticide watchdog groups in the country for three decades, and over the last few years, they turned their attention to PFAS. PFAS expert Linda Birnbaum is a toxicologist who spent 20 years at the EPA and directed the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences. As she put it during MPEN’s annual conference in November, “You give me a physiological system, and it’s likely there will be evidence that PFAS disrupt it,” she said, pointing to associated harms including kidney cancer, liver toxicity, high cholesterol, and birth defects. Even so, Ruth Berlin, MPEN’s executive director, was not surprised when CropLife and RISE showed up earlier this year, after Delegate Sheila Ruth introduced a state law to ban selling pesticides that contain PFAS as an active ingredient starting in June 2025. Berlin said that RISE representatives came with many of the same talking points they’d used to fight previous pesticide restrictions. For example, if lawmakers take away the use of any pesticide, “they’re going to destroy farming. They’re going to destroy public health. And it’s safe because EPA vets these pesticides.”  CropLife America is a well-known trade association that advances the interests of farm chemical giants. RISE presents itself as a separate organization that represents the “specialty” pesticide industry and tends to work on the off-farm side of things. They operate under the same 501(c)(6) and share a D.C. address. They hold joint conferencesand share lobbyists . But RISE flies more under the radar than CropLife America, even though it played a pivotal role in a coalition that helped pass laws now on the books in more than 40 states that prevent local governments from further restricting pesticide use. Those laws make it illegal, for example, for a given city council to ban pesticide spraying at schools. Astroturfing 101: Creating a ‘Grassroots’ Network Developing and operating its “grassroots network” is key to how RISE responds to state laws. As RISE’s director of state affairs, Jon Gaeta, explained in a webinar at the start of 2022, “When there’s a regulatory issue at the state level, RISE is ready to spring into action.” “This committee is very interesting because we do have what I like to call ‘activist legislators’ . . . that truly do believe in the environmental cause, and, unfortunately, they have run a significant amount of pesticide legislation that can be detrimental to our industry.” During the presentation, Gaeta showed participants where that was currently happening. He flagged Maine as a “battleground situation,” particularly with pesticide regulation bills coming out of the state’s committee on agriculture, conservation, and forestry. “This committee is very interesting because we do have what I like to call ‘activist legislators,’” he said. “These are legislators that truly do believe in the environmental cause, and, unfortunately, they have run a significant amount of pesticide legislation that can be detrimental to our industry.” However, Gaeta noted that RISE had been able to leverage the fact that the committee provides easy opportunities for testimony. “We had a lot of great people show up last year and tell their stories about how they use certain pesticides and what they do for a living and that really does make a difference,” he said. Gaeta pointed to Colorado as another focal point. RISE was anticipating that lawmakers there would try to pass a bill that would again allow local communities to restrict pesticide use where they saw fit. “This is going to be an uphill battle,” he said. “We really do need folks to flex their grassroots muscle in Colorado.” Kate Burgess, conservation manager for the National Council of Environmental Legislators, tracks state pesticidelaws around the country. She pointed to Colorado as “an example that saw intense lobbying from the pesticide industry.” The Colorado bill failed to gain traction, and RISE touted its role in its 2024 annual report: “With mounting political pressure for local control, 36 pesticide applicators showed up to testify in person against the bill. Leveraging these voices, our in-state lobbyist managed the vote count throughout the session, ultimately preventing a full floor vote in both legislative chambers.” Two screenshots from the RISE 2024 Annual Report. At left, a “legislative heat map” showing the states where the most bills were introduced that could affect the pesticide industry. Right: A list of “successes in the states” that notes how the group’s targeted lobbying efforts tracked 684 bills nationwide, and through lobbying pressure in Colorado was able to prevent a vote on the state’s pesticide preemption law. Ensuring those applicators showed up with effective talking points is a key function of RISE’s grassroots network. During another 2022 RISE webinar on messaging, McGavock Edwards, a senior vice president at PR firm Eckel & Vaughn, presented key messages that would later be provided to members in a toolkit. The messages had been developed using RISE public survey results and tested for resonance. They are also prominent on RISE’s public-facing website. They include that pesticides improve quality of life by enabling green spaces like athletic fields and by eliminating invasive species, and that they benefit public health by controlling disease-carrying insects like mosquitos and ticks. At left, a screenshot from a RISE webinar spotlighting the key messages the group asks their network of advocates to use when communicating with policymakers. At right: A screenshot of a RISE webinar with Jon Gaeta showing how members of the group’s advocacy network can get involved. The National Association of Landscape Professionals, a RISE member, deployed several of those messages in its comments submitted in opposition to the Colorado law. It also included that, “Experts at the Environmental Protection Agency rigorously evaluate each pesticide’s active ingredients for human and environmental safety and efficacy before deciding to register the product for sale and use.” That language is similar to points on a list of five key regulatory messages provided in the 2022 RISE messaging webinar by Karen Reardon, vice president of public affairs at the organization. They were selected as being especially resonant based on the results of the RISE survey. “These are the ones that work,” she said, mentioning, specifically, that they’d also tested the word “rigorous.” In Maryland, the same language was applied to argue against phasing out pesticides that contain PFAS. “EPA subjects all new pesticide products to rigorous human health and environmental review and testing requirements to satisfy these standards for registration,” Reardon wrote in RISE’s testimony. Some of RISE’s grassroots training webinars are created and presented in conjunction with CropLife America, but CropLife also does its own trainings of industry professionals who advocate for pesticides in state legislatures. In a 2021 grassroots advocacy webinar hosted by RISE and CropLife America, Leslie Garcia, manager of sustainability and stewardship at Valent USA, a California-based pesticide maker owned by Japanese chemical giant Sumimoto Chemical Company, talked about bringing the CropLife AgVocate training program to employees at Valent. In particular, she said, Valent focused on training employees in departments such as IT and finance, who might not have expertise in agriculture or chemistry and “who aren’t aways aware of the legislative threats to our industry or how to be a voice for the industry within their own personal networks,” Garcia said. After a series of trainings at Valent, she reported in the webinar, 80 percent of employees signed up for the CropLife America “Call-to-Action Network.” CropLife also works closely with the Clyde Group, a D.C.-based branding and communications agency, to train advocates and affect state laws. According to Clyde’s website, its team has done more than 100 CropLife trainings “to prepare advocates to confidently speak to their elected officials, give testimonies, and engage media.” They have also “engaged advocates to speak” on CropLife’s behalf in 15 states. In October 2022, the California Association for Pest Control Advisors dedicated more than a day of its annual conference to advocacy training. There, Anthony LaFauce from the Clyde Group told the pest control advisors that they should never show up to advocate in a business suit. Instead, he said, they should dress the part of a farmer. Farmer or Pesticide Lobbyist? Back in Maine, Representative Bill Pluecker, an Independent, is one of the “activist legislators” Gaeta referred to in the RISE webinar. Pluecker is an active farmer who has served in the House of Representatives since 2018 and also works for the Maine Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association. For several years, he’s been one of the lawmakers leading the charge to get pesticides that contain PFAS out of Maine. “PFAS is something that Mainers across the political spectrum are paying attention to,” he told Civil Eats. This is because, in Maine as elsewhere, contamination extends beyond farms: “We have large chunks of area where not only can you not eat the fish, but you also can’t eat the turkey, and you can’t eat the deer.” While not everyone agrees on exactly what bans on PFAS in pesticides should look like, Pluecker said farmers have rarely shown up to oppose the regulations. Instead, he said it always seemed to be representatives of CropLife and RISE. But Pluecker added that heading into the 2025 legislative session, it seems like the industry is working harder to leverage farmer voices on the issue, because of the political sway they hold. When the session starts, he expects exempting agriculture from the rules on PFAS in pesticides may be back on the table. At the end of 2023, Julie Ann Smith, former executive director of the Maine Farm Bureau, posted on her LinkedIn that she had started as a lobbyist for a new advocacy organization called the Maine Farmers Coalition. The first publicly available record of the organization’s website is from January 2024, where it says the organization “represents the backbone of the state’s agricultural sector” and lists two members, a large potato company that spans farms and processing and the state’s biggest wild blueberry company. In March, Smith testified at a hearing on behalf of Maine Farmers Coalition in support of exempting pesticides from PFAS regulations. Smith said the farmers she represents understand concerns surrounding PFAS and their potential health effects but that the EPA has already implemented a roadmap to address PFAS pollution. Exempting pesticides “would ensure that farmers are still able to grow and protect their crops and strike a balance between protecting the environment and ensuring food security for all,” she said. In April, the Maine Farmers Coalition hosted an online meeting for farmers. PFAS was on a list of discussion topics related to “critical legislation that will impact your farm.” In August, according to an email provided to Civil Eats, Smith reached out to Maine Senators Henry Ingwersen and Tracy Brenner and Representatives Lori Gramlich and Bill Pluecker, from her Maine Farmers Coalition email, to try to organize a dinner with industry representatives from Syngenta, a global pesticide giant that is a subsidiary of ChemChina. Smith said she would review questions from Civil Eats but did not respond to an email that provided detailed questions by press time. Syngenta did not report lobbying in Maine last year, but it has been active in efforts to slow the implementation of PFAS restrictions in the past. In 2023, CropLife and RISE were pushing the Maine Board of Pesticides to delay reporting requirements for PFAS in pesticides. When the Board failed to extend the deadline, Syngenta declared in a letter to its distributors and retailers that it would not re-register its products in the state going forward, because reporting on PFAS in their products would pose “too high of a risk” that their formulas would be disclosed. “Although the BPC [Board of Pesticides Control] confirmed that such information must be held confidential as a matter of law, the BPC has not provided sufficient assurances regarding how it could ensure the protection of this information. Without confidence in that process, the potential economic and competitive harm that would result from such a disclosure (inadvertent or otherwise) is too high of a risk,” wrote Vern Hawkins, president of Syngenta Crop Protection. Pluecker called the move a “threat” the industry used to try to get regulators to roll back the requirements. According to state records, Syngenta did register a long list of its pesticides for use in the state in 2024. A Syngenta representative said the company would review detailed questions from Civil Eats, including on whether the company is affiliated with Maine Farmers Coalition in any way and why they changed course on registration. After several follow-up emails from Civil Eats, she said, “We are to unable to help you with this story at this time.“ Meanwhile, between 2022 and 2024, state records show CropLife America and RISE employed the same lobbyists from Mitchell Tardy Jackson, a Maine lobbying firm, to convince lawmakers to oppose multiple pesticide restrictions, including regulating PFAS. Mitchell Tardy Jackson also lobbies for the Maine Potato Board. This pattern of alignment of farm groups with CropLife America and RISE is in line with how opposition to pesticide restrictions has manifested in other states, where individuals who represent local farmer groups are also being compensated by the pesticide industry. In Maryland in March, lobbyist Lindsay Thompson submitted comments in opposition to the proposed state law to ban PFAS in pesticides on behalf of the Maryland Grain Producers Association, “the voice of grain farmers growing corn, wheat, barley, and sorghum across the state.” At the same time, she was being paid to lobby for the Maryland Green Industry Council and the Maryland Association of Green Industries, trade groups for pesticide sellers and users (like nurseries and turf makers) that often work closely with RISE. A few months earlier, she was registered as a lobbyist on behalf of RISE. She is now registered as a lobbyist for CropLife America. Thompson did not respond to a request for comment. In New York, Rick Zimmerman, who at one time led the New York Farm Bureau, has a client list that includes CropLife America and Syngenta. Before the state passed a law to ban the use of neonicotinoid coatings on some seeds, he submitted comments in opposition to the law on behalf of the Northeast Agribusiness and Feed Alliance, the Northeast Dairy Producers’ Association, and the New York State Vegetable Growers’ Association. Many lobbyists work for multiple clients in related industries, said Dan Raichel, director of pollinators and pesticides at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), so in some ways the situation is not uncommon. “But there is a tension there,” he said. In the case of New York, he pointed to the fact that the bill would have restricted the use of chemicals known to be lethal to pollinators so they could not be used on corn, soy, and wheat seeds. Fruit and vegetable growers would have been able to continue spraying the insecticides as needed. Still, Zimmerman opposed the bill on behalf of vegetable growers. “That always struck me as odd. These are people that rely on pollinators,” Raichel said. “So, here’s a bill that would help with pollinator populations and beneficial insects and soil health. It was not targeted towards the fruit and vegetable industry and would not affect them at all.” Zimmerman disputed that idea. Many of New York’s vegetable farmers, he said, plant sweet corn, and their ability to use neonicotinoid coatings on those seeds was impacted by the ban. Overall, he added, the farm groups he represents are opposed to state lawmakers regulating specific groups of pesticides because they believe the current registration and review process in place is already science-based and thorough. “It’s a fundamental question as to whether the state should take the authority to ban a particular pesticide product through legislation,” he said. “Whenever the legislature gets involved in these sorts of decisions, it goes well beyond the science, and it becomes a politically driven campaign to eliminate a particular product.” “It’s a fundamental question as to whether the state should take the authority to ban a particular pesticide product through legislation. Whenever the legislature gets involved in these sorts of decisions, it goes well beyond the science, and it becomes a politically driven campaign to eliminate a particular product.” Still, Raichel doesn’t see it as politics; he’s focused on environmental impacts he feels current regulations don’t adequately take into account. And after years of working to support the New York bill, he hadn’t heard a lot from growers on those points. “The people that we were seeing in Albany were the [industry] representatives,” he said. “I’m sure there were farmers involved, but how much of an issue was this, that real farmers actually cared about? It was hard to say.” Whether or not farmers will show up to oppose restricting PFAS in pesticides is one big question heading into Maine’s 2025 session, Pluecker said. Lobbying data shows that compared to 2021 and 2022, CropLife America and RISE started to shift spending toward targeting Maine’s executive branch in 2023 and 2024. If the industry successfully organizes more farmers through its network and the new Maine Farmers Coalition, they may have more momentum. “It’s going to be an interesting conversation in the statehouse, because farmers are going to come forward and they’re going to try to say they’ve been harmed in some way by the existing law, but the existing law hasn’t gone into effect,” says Pluecker. “In fact, it has been pushed back for another two years since it was passed three years ago.” In the end, Pluecker said, he hears the argument often that there’s no need to regulate PFAS in pesticides because most of the PFAS contamination detected so far came from sludge and that’s been taken care of. But Nordell said farmers and others should look to the situation with sludge as an analogy for how to act now to avoid a similar fate due to other PFAS sources, including pesticides. “There were strong critiques of the safety of using sewage sludge as a fertilizer back in the ‘80s. There were toxicologists who recognized that it was not a safe practice, and concerns were overridden,” Nordell said. In fact, sludge application was embraced by state and federal regulators. In most states , it still is. Nordell sees stark parallels to sludge in the 1980s and PFAS in pesticides today—and says that it’s time to learn from past mistakes. “We need to be asking hard questions and . . . to move as quickly as we can to protect farming communities from further exposure, to protect our farming resources, our farm soils, and our irrigation and drinking water on farms from further contamination.” The post Why Are Pesticide Companies Fighting State Laws to Address PFAS? appeared first on Civil Eats.

Education
Health
Agriculture

MIT affiliates named 2024 Schmidt Futures AI2050 Fellows

Five MIT faculty members and two additional alumni are honored with fellowships to advance research on beneficial AI.

Five MIT faculty members and two additional alumni were recently named to the 2024 cohort of AI2050 Fellows. The honor is announced annually by Schmidt Futures, Eric and Wendy Schmidt’s philanthropic initiative that aims to accelerate scientific innovation. Conceived and co-chaired by Eric Schmidt and James Manyika, AI2050 is a philanthropic initiative aimed at helping to solve hard problems in AI. Within their research, each fellow will contend with the central motivating question of AI2050: “It’s 2050. AI has turned out to be hugely beneficial to society. What happened? What are the most important problems we solved and the opportunities and possibilities we realized to ensure this outcome?”This year’s MIT-affiliated AI2050 Fellows include:David Autor, the Daniel (1972) and Gail Rubinfeld Professor in the MIT Department of Economics, and co-director of the MIT Shaping the Future of Work Initiative and the National Bureau of Economic Research’s Labor Studies Program, has been named a 2024 AI2050 senior fellow. His scholarship explores the labor-market impacts of technological change and globalization on job polarization, skill demands, earnings levels and inequality, and electoral outcomes. Autor’s AI2050 project will leverage real-time data on AI adoption to clarify how new tools interact with human capabilities in shaping employment and earnings. The work will provide an accessible framework for entrepreneurs, technologists, and policymakers seeking to understand, tangibly, how AI can complement human expertise. Autor has received numerous awards and honors, including a National Science Foundation CAREER Award, an Alfred P. Sloan Foundation Fellowship, an Andrew Carnegie Fellowship, and the Heinz 25th Special Recognition Award from the Heinz Family Foundation for his work “transforming our understanding of how globalization and technological change are impacting jobs and earning prospects for American workers.” In 2023, Autor was one of two researchers across all scientific fields selected as a NOMIS Distinguished Scientist.Sara Beery, an assistant professor in the Department of Electronic Engineering and Computer Science (EECS) and a principal investigator in the Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL), has been named an early career fellow. Beery’s work focuses on building computer vision methods that enable global-scale environmental and biodiversity monitoring across data modalities and tackling real-world challenges, including strong spatiotemporal correlations, imperfect data quality, fine-grained categories, and long-tailed distributions. She collaborates with nongovernmental organizations and government agencies to deploy her methods worldwide and works toward increasing the diversity and accessibility of academic research in artificial intelligence through interdisciplinary capacity-building and education. Beery earned a BS in electrical engineering and mathematics from Seattle University and a PhD in computing and mathematical sciences from Caltech, where she was honored with the Amori Prize for her outstanding dissertation.Gabriele Farina, an assistant professor in EECS and a principal investigator in the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS), has been named an early career fellow. Farina’s work lies at the intersection of artificial intelligence, computer science, operations research, and economics. Specifically, he focuses on learning and optimization methods for sequential decisio­­­n-making and convex-concave saddle point problems, with applications to equilibrium finding in games. Farina also studies computational game theory and recently served as co-author on a Science study about combining language models with strategic reasoning. He is a recipient of a NeurIPS Best Paper Award and was a Facebook Fellow in economics and computer science. His dissertation was recognized with the 2023 ACM SIGecom Doctoral Dissertation Award and one of the two 2023 ACM Dissertation Award Honorable Mentions, among others.Marzyeh Ghassemi PhD ’17, an associate professor in EECS and the Institute for Medical Engineering and Science, principal investigator at CSAIL and LIDS, and affiliate of the Abdul Latif Jameel Clinic for Machine Learning in Health and the Institute for Data, Systems, and Society, has been named an early career fellow. Ghassemi’s research in the Healthy ML Group creates a rigorous quantitative framework in which to design, develop, and place ML models in a way that is robust and fair, focusing on health settings. Her contributions range from socially aware model construction to improving subgroup- and shift-robust learning methods to identifying important insights in model deployment scenarios that have implications in policy, health practice, and equity. Among other awards, Ghassemi has been named one of MIT Technology Review’s 35 Innovators Under 35; and has been awarded the 2018 Seth J. Teller Award, the 2023 MIT Prize for Open Data, a 2024 NSF CAREER Award, and the Google Research Scholar Award. She founded the nonprofit Association for Health, Inference and Learning (AHLI) and her work has been featured in popular press such as Forbes, Fortune, MIT News, and The Huffington Post.Yoon Kim, an assistant professor in EECS and a principal investigator in CSAIL, has been named an early career fellow. Kim’s work straddles the intersection between natural language processing and machine learning, and touches upon efficient training and deployment of large-scale models, learning from small data, neuro-symbolic approaches, grounded language learning, and connections between computational and human language processing. Affiliated with CSAIL, Kim earned his PhD in computer science at Harvard University; his MS in data science from New York University; his MA in statistics from Columbia University; and his BA in both math and economics from Cornell University. Additional alumni Roger Grosse PhD ’14, a computer science associate professor at the University of Toronto, and David Rolnick ’12, PhD ’18, assistant professor at Mila-Quebec AI Institute, were also named senior and early career fellows, respectively.

Education
Government
Health

Partisan divides complicate push for disaster aid

Lawmakers are navigating partisan divides as they seek to pass a bipartisan disaster aid bill by the end of the year. Republicans and Democrats appear to agree on the main issue at hand: the need to replenish funds for communities recovering from disasters. But they disagree on whether to allocate funds toward programs for the...

Lawmakers are navigating partisan divides as they seek to pass a bipartisan disaster aid bill by the end of the year. Republicans and Democrats appear to agree on the main issue at hand: the need to replenish funds for communities recovering from disasters. But they disagree on whether to allocate funds toward programs for the Department of Education and the Environmental Protection Agency — creating hurdles for what would otherwise be easily agreed-upon legislation.  “It needs to be a very robust package. We understand that. We agree with that,” House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (R-Okla.) told reporters last week.  “Where we have some disagreement at this point is some of the programmatic … adds the administration wants and there’s some things we think they left out that they ought to consider,” he said.  Asked what he would like to see in the package, Cole said “more infrastructure, less programmatic money.” However, he added that he hopes lawmakers will be able to come up with bill text by the first week in December, with a package passing by the end of the year. “I think it would be a good way to end this year — is to get out of here with ... a disaster relief bill attached to a CR,” he said, referring to a continuing resolution (CR), a stopgap funding measure that would prevent a government shutdown. Major storms in recent months, including hurricanes Helene and Milton, have depleted the nation’s Disaster Relief Fund, which pays for response to and recovery from major disasters.  Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Deanne Criswell told lawmakers this week that the fund has dwindled to less than $5 billion. That’s down from $11 billion in October.  If the fund runs out entirely, the U.S. will still be able to respond to immediate emergencies, but it will not be able to pay for longer-term recovery projects.  This would hurt efforts to rebuild infrastructure in places like Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas in the wake of the recent hurricanes, as well as Hawaii, which is still recovering from last year’s wildfires.  This week, the White House put forward a $98 billion proposal to replenish the nation’s disaster aid — jump-starting negotiations on Capitol Hill.  That bill included $40 billion for the disaster relief fund itself, as well as $24 billion in assistance for farmers, $12 billion for grants through the Department of Housing and Urban Development and $8 billion to repair highways, roads and bridges. It also contains $4 billion for the Environmental Protection Agency for water system upgrades, hazardous waste cleanup and air monitor repairs; $3 billion for the Department of Health and Human Services for health care and social support in affected areas; and $1 billion for the Department of Education to help restart schools, help with staffing shortages and provide mental health support.  The top-line figure received a lukewarm reception from Republicans.  “It’s very clear that we need to have a disaster relief package. Whether $98 billion is the right number or not I don’t know. There’s some provisions that I have questions about,” said Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the top Republican on the Senate Appropriations Committee.  Others, like Rep. Mario Díaz-Balart (R-Fla.), want to see it reduced.  “I think that, as always, that can probably be pared down a bit, quite a bit,” said the lawmaker, who sits on the House Appropriations Committee. “I think it can be clearly reformed and potentially pared down rather substantially.” But the GOP took more issue with the specifics. “I think we need to scrub it and make sure we don't have extraneous things in there for education. … I think some of it will fall out,” said Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), top Republican on the Senate subcommittee that crafts annual funding for the Education Department. Pressed about the administration’s request for the department, Capito said “those kinds of things, I think we need to really look at, and that's what we're in the process of doing.” “I think some of it will fall out,” she added. Meanwhile, Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.) said he would want to add tax cuts to the legislation. “They don’t include the disaster tax relief which they’ve always done for prior disasters, so that needs to be in there,” he told The Hill.  It’s also not clear whether disaster aid will be tied to a potential funding stopgap, as leadership continues to plot next steps on spending.  Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), top Democrat on the House Appropriations Committee, said she thinks any forthcoming disaster aid package should move as a stand-alone measure, rather than being tacked on to a larger government funding deal. “If we could go Dec. 20 and do that, that's possible,” DeLauro told The Hill. But, she added, lawmakers “ought to do the disaster at the earliest possible moment.” Lawmakers expressed optimism that they would be able to reach an agreement — whatever form it takes. “I actually have high confidence in [Sen. Patty Murray (D-Wash.)] and Sen. Collins,” Cole said, referring to the top appropriations senators.  “Rosa DeLauro and I worked together famously for many, many years. So it’s something we can do,” he added.  Mychael Schnell contributed. 

Education
Government
Health

How to Volunteer in Costa Rica’s National Parks and Wildlife Areas

Most travel experiences are learning experiences, and in Costa Rica, much of tourism markets itself as ecotourism. Yet, only a handful of programs stand out as both ecological and educational. For tourists looking to complement their beach time with something more impactful, Costa Rica offers opportunities to protect turtle eggs in national parks or study […] The post How to Volunteer in Costa Rica’s National Parks and Wildlife Areas appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Most travel experiences are learning experiences, and in Costa Rica, much of tourism markets itself as ecotourism. Yet, only a handful of programs stand out as both ecological and educational. For tourists looking to complement their beach time with something more impactful, Costa Rica offers opportunities to protect turtle eggs in national parks or study volcanoes alongside university professors. Various nonprofit environmental organizations have prioritized educating the public, including tourists. The Organization for Tropical Studies (OTS) has, for decades, provided scientists from around the globe with research and knowledge-sharing opportunities at its three field stations. In recent years, they have expanded their offerings to include undergraduate and graduate programs emphasizing ecological and environmental issues, language study, and tropical culture. These programs range from day hikes and workshops to semester-long courses. The goal is to make Costa Rica’s biodiversity accessible to everyone, regardless of scientific background. “Our programs are designed to provide hands-on, mentored-research experiences to undergraduate students from groups most underrepresented in the sciences,” explained an OTS representative. “As soon as you arrive at our field stations, you’re immersed in a scientific community dedicated to tropical ecology research.” OTS has expanded its reach beyond Costa Rica, now offering programs in South Africa as well. Day hikes and workshops start at around $50, while longer programs can cost several thousand dollars for a semester. Visitors at the biological stations—La Selva in Sarapiquí, Las Cruces in San Vito, and Palo Verde in Guanacaste—can experience Costa Rica’s premier botanical gardens, diverse bird species, dense jungles, and wetlands. Prices vary depending on the program and duration. PROMAR, a project dedicated to marine conservation, shares this educational mission. “To conserve effectively, we can’t operate in isolation. We must engage with the public,” said a PROMAR representative. PROMAR offers various tools and guidelines for local action against marine litter, including pilot projects like river interceptors and strategies for integrating marine litter management into municipal waste plans. The Association of Volunteers for Protected Areas (ASVO) continues to allow anyone over 18 to help protect Costa Rica’s Sea turtles. Through ASVO, volunteers guard turtle eggs, clean beaches, and maintain trails in protected areas. Volunteers are typically asked to commit to at least two weeks, with options for longer stays. International participants pay a fee that covers meals and lodging, with free time to explore local attractions. Conservation efforts now emphasize the importance of involving local communities and promoting sustainable practices. Many programs now include components on sustainable tourism, cultural exchange, and environmental education. With Costa Rica’s tourism market projected to continue to grow significantly in the coming years, these educational ecotourism initiatives play an important role in promoting responsible travel and environmental stewardship. As Costa Rica continues to be a leader in ecotourism and sustainability, these programs offer unique opportunities for visitors to engage deeply with the country’s rich biodiversity while contributing to its conservation efforts. The post How to Volunteer in Costa Rica’s National Parks and Wildlife Areas appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Education
Conservation
Science

A Historic but Dilapidated Illinois Prison Will Close While Replacement Is Built, Despite Objections

The Illinois Department of Corrections has spent September moving hundreds of inmates from Stateville Correctional Center in suburban Chicago in preparation for replacing the century-old lockup

SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (AP) — When film star James Stewart went on location in 1948 at Stateville prison's notorious roundhouse while portraying a Chicago newspaper reporter whose work freed a wrongly convicted killer in “Call Northside 777,” the lockup had already been standing nearly a quarter of a century.Now, 76 years and hundreds of millions of dollars of neglected repairs later, the Illinois prison home of infamous killers Leopold and Loeb and Richard Speck, and the site of John Wayne Gacy's execution, is shutting down. The Illinois Department of Corrections already has begun transferring inmates from the facility in the Chicago suburb of Crest Hill, a contentious decision bolstered by a federal court order last month. Last spring, Gov. JB Pritzker's administration announced a $900 million plan to replace Stateville, which opened in 1925, with a state-of-the-art facility on adjacent, state-owned land. The campus also could see a new women's prison. Supplanting the deteriorated Logan Correctional Center in central Illinois is part of the proposal; it might move to the Stateville campus. Completion could be three to five years away. But that's about all the administration has said. There has been no disclosure of a design plan; no timeline for demolition, groundbreaking or even deciding what will happen to prison staff. Nonetheless, Corrections officials' decision to shutter the facility this month was made long before the court decision made it inevitable. Ruling in a decade-old lawsuit challenging the health and safety of Stateville's environment, U.S. District Judge Andrea Wood on Aug. 9 ordered most of the prison's 430 inmates to be evacuated by Sept. 30. “The primary reason for the facility’s closure during the rebuild is to address serious safety and security concerns posed to those who work and live in Stateville,” acting Corrections Director Latoya Hughes told a legislative review panel in June. “This is not just a matter of preference but a necessary step to ensure safety, efficiency and the fulfillment of our rehabilitative mission.”Employees and service providers, such as institutions that supply a variety of educational courses and social programs to inmates, want Stateville to stay open while its replacement is constructed to avoid disruption to services or destruction of a tightly knit and highly experienced staff. The prison is behind on maintenance by $286 million, according to a long-range capital needs study released in May 2023. It identified $12 million in immediate upgrades, but Hughes said that “grossly underestimates the full spectrum of urgent needs.” Wood's court order focused on falling chunks of concrete, bird feathers and feces and foul-smelling tap water. The ramshackle F-House, a circular unit with cells around the perimeter and a guard tower in the middle, was closed in 2016 — the last of the nation's roundhouse prison housing units — although it was briefly reopened during the COVID-19 pandemic to put more space between inmates. F-House and other buildings no longer in use are part of the backlog of repairs, but they still require maintenance, Hughes said. It doesn't make sense to pay for rehabilitation while also preparing for a huge outlay on a new facility. What's more, much of the work would require moving inmates anyway, Hughes said.But it doesn't make sense to state Sen. Rachel Ventura that the department has not followed through on resolving concerns she and other lawmakers raised during public hearings in June — she said in one case, an inmate promised a continued education course no longer has access post-transfer. The Joliet Democrat said she has asked repeatedly for updates but is told there's no new information. “If they’re going to shut it down (Sept. 30), well, what are you doing with it? Are you transferring furniture out of there? Are you getting out a demo plan? Are you getting an environmental study done?” Ventura said. “These would be the next logical steps, but to have nothing, no response from DOC on this — again, highly concerning.”An email was sent to Corrections’ spokesperson, followed up by a telephone message, seeking comment on activity at Stateville: timelines for closure, demolition and groundbreaking, and what measures are necessary after inmate evacuation. The hearings in June before the bipartisan, bicameral legislative Commission on Government Forecasting and Accountability, were understandably packed with American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees members jittery about not just losing their jobs but breaking up collegial, cooperative staff environments at Stateville and Logan. Stateville has 939 staff members, including 676 who provide security. Hughes noted that Corrections Department understaffing works in their favor. In June, she said the agency had 1,000 vacancies within 63 miles (101 kilometers) of Stateville, including at facilities that will remain open on the Stateville campus. There are 500 vacancies to the south at the larger — and older — Pontiac Correctional Center and 168 at Sheridan prison to the west. When Stateville reopens, its former employees will have first dibs on returning. But many employees have a long commute to Stateville. Charles Mathis drives 45 minutes from his south Chicago home. A transfer to Sheridan or Pontiac would mean a one-way trip of up to two hours, to say nothing of double shifts employees work once they get there because of staff shortages.“That kind of commute round trip would take an enormous toll on my mind and body," Mathis said. “It would take away from the precious time that I have with my family and friends. I speak for all my co-workers when I say that that may be nearly impossible to justify.”Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Education
Government
Health

Suggested Viewing

Trashy Waters

Alabama is not a dumpster. Litter washing into our waterways is a problem not only affecting our pocketbooks and well-being, but it also spoils our enjoyment of Alabama’s great outdoors. Join a passionate group of watershed guardians as they address the enormous issue of litter accumulating in our creeks, streams and rivers.

Water
Waste
Education

Mayday Terranean

Mayday Terranean is a documentary film portraying the problems of the Mediterranean Sea as well as the beauty it still has to offer. Scientists, conservationists and activists from countries around the Mediterranean Sea talk about the topic, their relationship to ocean conservation and shed light on the story of this wonderful but endangered place.

Water
Pollution
Conservation

Women Are The Answer

Population growth has been left out of the climate debate because it is considered controversial, yet it is one of the most important factors. The global population has passed the 7 billion mark and India will soon overtake China as the most populous nation in the world, but one state in southern India has found the solution: Kerala educates its women. The unique history of Kerala and ‘the Kerala Model’ is outlined, using it as an example of achieving population control in developing countries without coercion. Links are highlighted within the documentary between issues such as women’s education, women’s rights and status in society, women’s health, population growth, global poverty and global food shortage, economic growth and environmental stability.

Education
Culture
Documentary

Living with Landslides

This film documents the devastating costs of landslides to both private property owners and taxpayers, and offers solutions. Climate change means landslides will only get worse.

Land Use
Education
Climate

Can Hydroponic Farming Help Reduce the Effects of Climate Change?

"Can Hydroponic Farming Help Reduce the Effects of Climate Change?" is an entertaining and educational short film. Rachel and her remarkable robot companion, Rex, witness the dire consequences of climate change through news reports of devastating natural disasters. When Rex encounters an alien emissary, he embarks on a journey to a ruined world where pollution and climate change led to the collapse of an entire civilization. Returning to Earth the three main causes of global warming are reveal—electricity production, transportation, and wasteful agriculture—and stress the importance of transitioning to clean energy sources, electric transport, and hydroponic farming. Rex takes on the mission of educating robots and humans alike about combating climate change. The film ends with a global commitment to address the crisis and a poignant celebration of Rex's role in this vital endeavor, reminding us of the urgency to protect our planet from climate catastrophe.

Conservation
Education
Climate

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.