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.

‘Solar powered vacuum cleaners’: the native plants that could clean toxic soil

News Feed
Sunday, April 14, 2024

It almost looked like a garden. In Taylor Yard, a former railyard near downtown Los Angeles, volunteers knelt down to tend to scrubby plants growing in neat rows under the sweltering sun.But beneath the concrete of the 60-acre site overlooking the Los Angeles River, the soils were soaked with an assortment of hazardous heavy metals and petrochemicals like lead, cadmium, diesel, and benzene. As the volunteers worked to dig up entire plants for closer study – some with roots nearly 12ft deep – they wore protective gear and carefully avoided inhaling or touching the toxic soil. Even a brief exposure to the contaminants could cause serious health consequences.The volunteers were part of a study led by Danielle Stevenson, a researcher with the environmental toxicology department at the University of California, Riverside, investigating how native California plants and fungi could be used to clean up contaminated brownfields: land abandoned or underutilized due to industrial pollution. There are nearly half a million registered brownfields in the United States, about 90,000 of them in California alone. Typically, they are concentrated near or within low-income communities and communities of color, leading to disparate health impacts such as increased likelihood of cancers.As the culmination of her PhD research last year, Stevenson and her mostly volunteer team had planted California native shrubs and bushes along with symbiotic fungi in plots at three contaminated sites. As the plants established themselves over the course of a year, the team studied how effectively they could suck up contaminants into their roots, shoots and leaves – acting, in Stevenson’s words, “like solar-powered vacuum cleaners”.According to Stevenson, the soil at Taylor Yard was black, lifeless, and stinking of diesel when her team got to work. Two other sites involved in the study – a former chroming facility in South LA and a former auto shop in the Los Angeles Ecovillage, an intentional neighborhood near Koreatown – were similarly desolate. “There was very little life,” she said. “I didn’t see a worm in the soil, so there weren’t birds. They were bleak.”Plans are under way to convert Taylor Yard into a park, as part of a $9m grant from the city for revitalization and infrastructure. But before it can be redeveloped, soil contaminants must be dramatically reduced to levels and through methods chosen by the California department of toxic substances control (DTSC), a process done in consultation with site owners and members of the community. For heavy metals, one of the most common options is called dig-and-haul, in which contaminated dirt is simply hauled off in trucks, to be dumped elsewhere and replaced with uncontaminated soil.The dig-and-haul approach is relatively straightforward and quick. But it can kick up and spread contaminated dust, and do irreversible damage to sites that are culturally or ecologically sensitive. “One reason dig-and-haul is so popular is […] you’re not having to adapt to the site location and its limitations as much,” said Dr Lauren Czaplicki, a Colorado-based environmental engineering scientist.Stevenson at her research site. Biology may offer a more environmentally friendly and cost-effective way of decontaminating soils and waterways. Photograph: Nasuna Stuart-UlinA growing body of research suggests biology may offer a slower but more environmentally friendly and potentially cost-effective way of decontaminating soils and waterways. Called bioremediation, it involves utilizing plants, fungi, and bacteria to clean up contamination. Through her research, Stevenson sought to explore the bioremediation potential of native California plants, aided by symbiotic fungi, an approach dubbed phyto/mycoremediation.For the first phase of her study, Stevenson traveled to seven different contaminated sites throughout LA to see what native plants were already thriving despite heavy metal contamination. She then tested the plants to determine which ones were the best metal accumulators. The winners: telegraph weed, California buckwheat, and mulefat. “They ‘volunteered’,” said Stevenson. “They’re very adapted not only to the regional climate conditions but also to the contaminants there.”Stevenson found significant reductions in heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, and copper across all three sites. She reported that soil composition, irrigation, and the presence or absence of fungi had the largest impact on their reductions.The findings are preliminary, and much more research is required before the processes are fully understood, let alone widely adopted. Stevenson hopes the methods can eventually provide a protocol that could be regionally adapted to clean up polluted sites almost anywhere using native plants. The Los Angeles brownfields program, which partnered with Stevenson on her research, noted both the potential and limitations of these methods.Mushrooms at Stevenson’s research site. Stevenson hopes her methods can provide a protocol that can clean up polluted sites almost anywhere. Photograph: Nasuna Stuart-Ulin“After the conclusion of her study, we were excited to see the results show promise,” the office of the brownfields program said in a statement. The program added that there were “limiting factors” that could hinder the application of Stevenson’s methods elsewhere, such as the time it takes to remove contaminants, and the depth and types of contamination it they address. But the office stated it was open to considering this and other alternative types of remediation if proven effective.Stevenson’s study has not undergone peer review. Additional research is required before the study is ready for that process, according to Dr Sam Ying, Stevenson’s adviser at UC Riverside.In the meantime, phyto/mycoremediation has gained the attention of several local Indigenous and environmental justice groups, who see bioremediation as a promising alternative to dig-and-haul, as well as a means of advocating for more responsible land stewardship in southern California and beyond.Can you (not) dig it?The former Santa Susana Field Laboratory sits on the edge of the San Fernando Valley. On a hilltop above several residential neighborhoods, the 2,800-acre site is one of the most contaminated places in the country. Opened in 1947, it was host to early rocket tests, liquid metal research, and nuclear experiments, including a radioactive meltdown that was covered up for decades.For years the question of how to clean up the site has been a pressing and sensitive one for the local community, who point to the lingering contamination as a proximate cause of illnesses.Today, the land is owned by Boeing and Nasa. But the location is also of deep cultural significance to the Chumash, Gabrieleño, Fernandeño and other nations, whose ancestors left pictographs on cave walls throughout the site.Following years of delays, the DTSC recently announced the decision to employ dig-and-haul to clean up a former burn pit at the site. Despite assurances that measures will be taken to reduce contaminated dust dispersal and other hazards, some members of the public have expressed frustration over decisions that allegedly emerged from closed-door meetings between DTSC and the site’s owners.EPA contractors collect soil samples at the former site of Santa Susana Field Laboratory in the suburbs of Los Angeles in 2011. Photograph: Kyodo News/Kyodo News Stills/Getty Images“Their methods have always been very destructive when it comes to cultural resources as well as natural resources,” said Matthew Teutimez, chair of the tribal advisory committee, a group within the California environmental protection agency that represents tribal perspectives and priorities on environmental issues. He is also the tribal biologist for the Kizh Nation, part of the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians, the only non-federal tribe on the tribal advisory committee. “We have a whole different concept for how to manage and heal our land, and those concepts are not being integrated.”Teutimez, who is advising on the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, said tribes’ preference for bioremediation at the site had not been taken seriously until Stevenson presented her research at a meeting with high-level representatives from Boeing, Nasa, and DTSC.“They won’t make any changes unless there’s data involved, and that’s the big component where [Stevenson] comes in,” said Teutimez, who added: “Her data now can be used to make the point that tribes have been saying for years, that the Earth is able to heal itself.” (The DTSC declined to comment on the matter, citing department policy.)Without being subject to peer review – a process Stevenson’s study hasn’t undergone yet – and a series of feasibility studies, phyto/mycoremediation is unlikely to be approved and utilized by regulatory and oversight agencies, except as part of limited pilot studies. But the early evidence of its potential has already inspired local Indigenous and environmental justice groups to do their own tests of the methods as they champion the adoption of bioremediation on sensitive sites.South of Los Angeles, bioremediation is being taken up as a means of community empowerment. Orange County Environmental Justice (OCEJ), a non-profit formed in 2016 to address environmental concerns among the area’s low-income and marginalized communities, approached Stevenson about applying phyto/mycoremediation in and around Santa Ana.“It really fit well with the kind of ethos we’ve been trying to embody, which is that all of these solutions and changes we’re trying to push for need to be in collaboration with Indigenous peoples,” said Patricia Jovel Flores, executive director of OCEJ.Indigenous activists and supporters march down Atherton Street to support efforts to protect Puvungna land on the Cal State Long Beach campus. Photograph: MediaNews Group/Long Beach Press-Telegram/Getty ImagesStevenson and OCEJ are coordinating to test phyto/mycoremediation at the Puvungna sacred site. Situated on what is now property of California State University Long Beach, the ancient village and ceremonial site is of profound importance to the Tongva and Acjachemen nations. For decades there has been contention between the university and Indigenous communities over stewardship of the site, including plans to build a strip mall and a parking lot on the grounds. In 2019, the university dumped debris from a dormitory construction project, including heavy-metal-laden soils, on the site. A lawsuit and settlement later prohibited the university from further damaging the site, but let it off the hook for removing the construction debris.OCEJ is leading clean up efforts at Puvungna, including testing phyto/mycoremediation as part of a broader effort to train community members in bioremediation and permaculture methods, and to make these the preferred approach for the city as it issues contracts for cleanup. “We basically want to be able to train the workforce so that those jobs stay within our community,” said Flores.The interest of groups like OCEJ shows an appetite for alternatives to the status quo for cleanup, and illustrates a tension between the priorities and agency of Indigenous and marginalized communities, and those of site owners and regulators.“What I keep hearing from communities is that trust has been so broken, because the consultation they feel can be like a token gesture,” said Stevenson.For his part, Teutimez hopes that, if phyto/mycoremediation can be successfully deployed on federally recognized tribal lands in California, then it can also be used by the broader network of federal tribes.“I want to bring these solutions to tribal lands, to then show the state and the federal government … how these techniques can be used,” he said. “Once it goes from federal tribes in California, you can go to federal tribes such as Fort Mojave, which is Nevada and Arizona.”

Indigenous groups see hope in the environmentally friendly process of bioremediation. But will cities pay attention?It almost looked like a garden. In Taylor Yard, a former railyard near downtown Los Angeles, volunteers knelt down to tend to scrubby plants growing in neat rows under the sweltering sun.But beneath the concrete of the 60-acre site overlooking the Los Angeles River, the soils were soaked with an assortment of hazardous heavy metals and petrochemicals like lead, cadmium, diesel, and benzene. As the volunteers worked to dig up entire plants for closer study – some with roots nearly 12ft deep – they wore protective gear and carefully avoided inhaling or touching the toxic soil. Even a brief exposure to the contaminants could cause serious health consequences. Continue reading...

It almost looked like a garden. In Taylor Yard, a former railyard near downtown Los Angeles, volunteers knelt down to tend to scrubby plants growing in neat rows under the sweltering sun.

But beneath the concrete of the 60-acre site overlooking the Los Angeles River, the soils were soaked with an assortment of hazardous heavy metals and petrochemicals like lead, cadmium, diesel, and benzene. As the volunteers worked to dig up entire plants for closer study – some with roots nearly 12ft deep – they wore protective gear and carefully avoided inhaling or touching the toxic soil. Even a brief exposure to the contaminants could cause serious health consequences.

The volunteers were part of a study led by Danielle Stevenson, a researcher with the environmental toxicology department at the University of California, Riverside, investigating how native California plants and fungi could be used to clean up contaminated brownfields: land abandoned or underutilized due to industrial pollution. There are nearly half a million registered brownfields in the United States, about 90,000 of them in California alone. Typically, they are concentrated near or within low-income communities and communities of color, leading to disparate health impacts such as increased likelihood of cancers.

As the culmination of her PhD research last year, Stevenson and her mostly volunteer team had planted California native shrubs and bushes along with symbiotic fungi in plots at three contaminated sites. As the plants established themselves over the course of a year, the team studied how effectively they could suck up contaminants into their roots, shoots and leaves – acting, in Stevenson’s words, “like solar-powered vacuum cleaners”.

According to Stevenson, the soil at Taylor Yard was black, lifeless, and stinking of diesel when her team got to work. Two other sites involved in the study – a former chroming facility in South LA and a former auto shop in the Los Angeles Ecovillage, an intentional neighborhood near Koreatown – were similarly desolate. “There was very little life,” she said. “I didn’t see a worm in the soil, so there weren’t birds. They were bleak.”

Plans are under way to convert Taylor Yard into a park, as part of a $9m grant from the city for revitalization and infrastructure. But before it can be redeveloped, soil contaminants must be dramatically reduced to levels and through methods chosen by the California department of toxic substances control (DTSC), a process done in consultation with site owners and members of the community. For heavy metals, one of the most common options is called dig-and-haul, in which contaminated dirt is simply hauled off in trucks, to be dumped elsewhere and replaced with uncontaminated soil.

The dig-and-haul approach is relatively straightforward and quick. But it can kick up and spread contaminated dust, and do irreversible damage to sites that are culturally or ecologically sensitive. “One reason dig-and-haul is so popular is […] you’re not having to adapt to the site location and its limitations as much,” said Dr Lauren Czaplicki, a Colorado-based environmental engineering scientist.

Stevenson at her research site. Biology may offer a more environmentally friendly and cost-effective way of decontaminating soils and waterways. Photograph: Nasuna Stuart-Ulin

A growing body of research suggests biology may offer a slower but more environmentally friendly and potentially cost-effective way of decontaminating soils and waterways. Called bioremediation, it involves utilizing plants, fungi, and bacteria to clean up contamination. Through her research, Stevenson sought to explore the bioremediation potential of native California plants, aided by symbiotic fungi, an approach dubbed phyto/mycoremediation.

For the first phase of her study, Stevenson traveled to seven different contaminated sites throughout LA to see what native plants were already thriving despite heavy metal contamination. She then tested the plants to determine which ones were the best metal accumulators. The winners: telegraph weed, California buckwheat, and mulefat. “They ‘volunteered’,” said Stevenson. “They’re very adapted not only to the regional climate conditions but also to the contaminants there.”

Stevenson found significant reductions in heavy metals such as lead, arsenic, and copper across all three sites. She reported that soil composition, irrigation, and the presence or absence of fungi had the largest impact on their reductions.

The findings are preliminary, and much more research is required before the processes are fully understood, let alone widely adopted. Stevenson hopes the methods can eventually provide a protocol that could be regionally adapted to clean up polluted sites almost anywhere using native plants. The Los Angeles brownfields program, which partnered with Stevenson on her research, noted both the potential and limitations of these methods.

Mushrooms at Stevenson’s research site. Stevenson hopes her methods can provide a protocol that can clean up polluted sites almost anywhere. Photograph: Nasuna Stuart-Ulin

“After the conclusion of her study, we were excited to see the results show promise,” the office of the brownfields program said in a statement. The program added that there were “limiting factors” that could hinder the application of Stevenson’s methods elsewhere, such as the time it takes to remove contaminants, and the depth and types of contamination it they address. But the office stated it was open to considering this and other alternative types of remediation if proven effective.

Stevenson’s study has not undergone peer review. Additional research is required before the study is ready for that process, according to Dr Sam Ying, Stevenson’s adviser at UC Riverside.

In the meantime, phyto/mycoremediation has gained the attention of several local Indigenous and environmental justice groups, who see bioremediation as a promising alternative to dig-and-haul, as well as a means of advocating for more responsible land stewardship in southern California and beyond.

Can you (not) dig it?

The former Santa Susana Field Laboratory sits on the edge of the San Fernando Valley. On a hilltop above several residential neighborhoods, the 2,800-acre site is one of the most contaminated places in the country. Opened in 1947, it was host to early rocket tests, liquid metal research, and nuclear experiments, including a radioactive meltdown that was covered up for decades.

For years the question of how to clean up the site has been a pressing and sensitive one for the local community, who point to the lingering contamination as a proximate cause of illnesses.

Today, the land is owned by Boeing and Nasa. But the location is also of deep cultural significance to the Chumash, Gabrieleño, Fernandeño and other nations, whose ancestors left pictographs on cave walls throughout the site.

Following years of delays, the DTSC recently announced the decision to employ dig-and-haul to clean up a former burn pit at the site. Despite assurances that measures will be taken to reduce contaminated dust dispersal and other hazards, some members of the public have expressed frustration over decisions that allegedly emerged from closed-door meetings between DTSC and the site’s owners.

EPA contractors collect soil samples at the former site of Santa Susana Field Laboratory in the suburbs of Los Angeles in 2011. Photograph: Kyodo News/Kyodo News Stills/Getty Images

“Their methods have always been very destructive when it comes to cultural resources as well as natural resources,” said Matthew Teutimez, chair of the tribal advisory committee, a group within the California environmental protection agency that represents tribal perspectives and priorities on environmental issues. He is also the tribal biologist for the Kizh Nation, part of the Gabrieleño Band of Mission Indians, the only non-federal tribe on the tribal advisory committee. “We have a whole different concept for how to manage and heal our land, and those concepts are not being integrated.”

Teutimez, who is advising on the Santa Susana Field Laboratory, said tribes’ preference for bioremediation at the site had not been taken seriously until Stevenson presented her research at a meeting with high-level representatives from Boeing, Nasa, and DTSC.

“They won’t make any changes unless there’s data involved, and that’s the big component where [Stevenson] comes in,” said Teutimez, who added: “Her data now can be used to make the point that tribes have been saying for years, that the Earth is able to heal itself.” (The DTSC declined to comment on the matter, citing department policy.)

Without being subject to peer review – a process Stevenson’s study hasn’t undergone yet – and a series of feasibility studies, phyto/mycoremediation is unlikely to be approved and utilized by regulatory and oversight agencies, except as part of limited pilot studies. But the early evidence of its potential has already inspired local Indigenous and environmental justice groups to do their own tests of the methods as they champion the adoption of bioremediation on sensitive sites.

South of Los Angeles, bioremediation is being taken up as a means of community empowerment. Orange County Environmental Justice (OCEJ), a non-profit formed in 2016 to address environmental concerns among the area’s low-income and marginalized communities, approached Stevenson about applying phyto/mycoremediation in and around Santa Ana.

“It really fit well with the kind of ethos we’ve been trying to embody, which is that all of these solutions and changes we’re trying to push for need to be in collaboration with Indigenous peoples,” said Patricia Jovel Flores, executive director of OCEJ.

Indigenous activists and supporters march down Atherton Street to support efforts to protect Puvungna land on the Cal State Long Beach campus. Photograph: MediaNews Group/Long Beach Press-Telegram/Getty Images

Stevenson and OCEJ are coordinating to test phyto/mycoremediation at the Puvungna sacred site. Situated on what is now property of California State University Long Beach, the ancient village and ceremonial site is of profound importance to the Tongva and Acjachemen nations. For decades there has been contention between the university and Indigenous communities over stewardship of the site, including plans to build a strip mall and a parking lot on the grounds. In 2019, the university dumped debris from a dormitory construction project, including heavy-metal-laden soils, on the site. A lawsuit and settlement later prohibited the university from further damaging the site, but let it off the hook for removing the construction debris.

OCEJ is leading clean up efforts at Puvungna, including testing phyto/mycoremediation as part of a broader effort to train community members in bioremediation and permaculture methods, and to make these the preferred approach for the city as it issues contracts for cleanup. “We basically want to be able to train the workforce so that those jobs stay within our community,” said Flores.

The interest of groups like OCEJ shows an appetite for alternatives to the status quo for cleanup, and illustrates a tension between the priorities and agency of Indigenous and marginalized communities, and those of site owners and regulators.

“What I keep hearing from communities is that trust has been so broken, because the consultation they feel can be like a token gesture,” said Stevenson.

For his part, Teutimez hopes that, if phyto/mycoremediation can be successfully deployed on federally recognized tribal lands in California, then it can also be used by the broader network of federal tribes.

“I want to bring these solutions to tribal lands, to then show the state and the federal government … how these techniques can be used,” he said. “Once it goes from federal tribes in California, you can go to federal tribes such as Fort Mojave, which is Nevada and Arizona.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Researchers Solve Decades-Old Color Mystery in Iconic Jackson Pollock Painting

Scientists have identified the origins of the blue color in one of Jackson Pollock’s paintings with a little help from chemistry

NEW YORK (AP) — Scientists have identified the origins of the blue color in one of Jackson Pollock's paintings with a little help from chemistry, confirming for the first time that the abstract expressionist used a vibrant, synthetic pigment known as manganese blue. “Number 1A, 1948,” showcases Pollock's classic style: paint has been dripped and splattered across the canvas, creating a vivid, multicolored work. Pollock even gave the piece a personal touch, adding his handprints near the top. The painting, currently on display at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, is almost 9 feet (2.7 meters) wide. Scientists had previously characterized the reds and yellows splattered across the canvas, but the source of the rich turquoise blue proved elusive.In a new study, researchers took scrapings of the blue paint and used lasers to scatter light and measure how the paint's molecules vibrated. That gave them a unique chemical fingerprint for the color, which they pinpointed as manganese blue. The analysis, published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, is the first confirmed evidence of Pollock using this specific blue.“It’s really interesting to understand where some striking color comes from on a molecular level,” said study co-author Edward Solomon with Stanford University.The pigment manganese blue was once used by artists, as well as to color the cement for swimming pools. It was phased out by the 1990s because of environmental concerns.Previous research had suggested that the turquoise from the painting could indeed be this color, but the new study confirms it using samples from the canvas, said Rutgers University’s Gene Hall, who has studied Pollock’s paintings and was not involved with the discovery.“I’m pretty convinced that it could be manganese blue,” Hall said.The researchers also went one step further, inspecting the pigment’s chemical structure to understand how it produces such a vibrant shade.Scientists study the chemical makeup of art supplies to conserve old paintings and catch counterfeits. They can take more specific samples from Pollock's paintings since he often poured directly onto the canvas instead of mixing paints on a palette beforehand. To solve this artistic mystery, researchers explored the paint using various scientific tools — similarly to how Pollock would alternate his own methods, dripping paint using a stick or using it straight from the can.While the artist’s work may seem chaotic, Pollock rejected that interpretation. He saw his work as methodical, said study co-author Abed Haddad, an assistant conservation scientist at the Museum of Modern Art.“I actually see a lot of similarities between the way that we worked and the way that Jackson Pollock worked on the painting," Haddad said.The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education and the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. The AP is solely responsible for all content.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Sept. 2025

California Votes To Ban PFAS ‘Forever Chemicals’ in Cookware, Other Items

By I. Edwards HealthDay ReporterMONDAY, Sept. 15, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Every time you reach for a nonstick pan, you could be using chemicals...

MONDAY, Sept. 15, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Every time you reach for a nonstick pan, you could be using chemicals that are now on the chopping block in the state of California.Lawmakers have approved a bill to phase out PFAS — also called “forever chemicals” — in cookware, cleaning products, dental floss, ski wax, food packaging and certain children’s items.The proposal, Senate Bill 682, passed in a 41-19 vote and quickly cleared the state Senate. It now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has until Oct. 12 to sign it into law, CBS News reported.PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) have been widely used for decades, because they resist heat and water stains. But the chemicals build up in the body and environment and have been linked to cancers, liver and kidney damage and reproductive problems."Exposure to PFAS poses a significant threat to the environment and public health," the bill says.If signed, the law will roll out in stages: cookware must comply by 2030; cleaning products by 2031; and all other covered items by 2028.The plan has drawn sharp debate. Some chefs, including Rachael Ray, Thomas Keller and David Chang, argue that banning nonstick cookware made with PTFE (a type of PFAS better known as Teflon) could make cooking harder and more expensive for families, CBS News reported. “PTFEs, when manufactured and used responsibly, are proven to be safe and effective,” Ray, who sells a line of cookware bearing her name, wrote in a letter to lawmakers.But environmental groups, including the Natural Resources Defense Council, say nonstick pans can release PFAS particles when scratched or overheated. Actor Mark Ruffalo also urged support for the bill. "Independent science shows that the PFAS in cookware can wind up in our food," he wrote on X.State Sen. Ben Allen proposed the legislation.“PFAS pose a level of serious risks that require us to take a measured approach to reduce their proliferation and unnecessary use,” he said.California has already banned PFAS in items like carpets, firefighting foam and cosmetics. If signed into law, SB 682 would make California one of the first states to phase out PFAS in cookware.The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has more on PFAS.SOURCES: CBS News, Sept. 13, 2025; California Legislative Information, Sept. 9, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

The Trump Team Wants to Boost Birth Rates While Poisoning Children

“I want a baby boom,” Trump has said. His administration is indeed exploring a range of approaches to boost the birth rate, including baby bonuses and classes on natural fertility. Yet his focus is entirely on the production of babies. When it comes to keeping these babies alive, this administration is leaving parents on their own, facing some horrifying and unprecedented challenges. It’s common for right-wing American governments, whether at the state or federal level, to be only half-heartedly natalist: restricting abortion, birth control, and sex education, while also failing to embrace any policy that makes it easier to raise a family, like universal childcare, robust public education, school lunch, cash supports for parents, or paid family leave. But the Trump-Vance government has taken this paradox to a new level, with natalist rhetoric far surpassing that of other recent administrations, while real live children are treated with more depraved, life-threatening indifference than in any American government in at least a century. Due to brutal cuts at the Food and Drug Administration, where 20,000 employees have been fired, the administration has suspended one of its quality-control programs for milk, Reuters reported this week. Milk is iconically associated with child health, and this is not a mere storybook whimsy: Most pediatricians regard it as critical for young children’s developing brains and bones. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends two cups a day for babies between 1 and 2 years old. While some experts—and of course the administration—are downplaying the change, emphasizing that milk will still be regulated, a bird flu epidemic hardly seems like the right time to be cutting corners. A government so focused on making more babies shouldn’t be so indifferent to risks to our nation’s toddlers.This reckless approach to child safety is not limited to food. Also this week, The New York Times reported that the Environmental Protection Agency was canceling tens of millions of dollars in grants for research on environmental hazards to children in rural America. These hazards include pesticides, wildfire smoke, and forever chemicals, and the grants supported research toward solutions to such problems. Many focused on improving child health in red states like Oklahoma. Children are much more vulnerable than adults to the health problems that can stem from exposure to toxins. That makes Trump’s policies, for all his baby-friendly chatter, seem pathologically misopedic; he is reversing bans on so-called “forever chemicals” and repealing limits set by the Biden administration on lead exposure, all of which will have devastating effects on children’s mental and physical development.And of course there’s RFK Jr.’s crazy campaign against vaccines. This week, the health secretary said he was considering removing the Covid-19 vaccine from the list of vaccines the government recommends for children, even though to win Senate confirmation, he had agreed not to alter the childhood vaccine schedule. Even worse, RFK Jr. has used his office to promote disinformation about extensively debunked links between vaccines and autism, while praising unproven “treatments” for measles as an outbreak that has afflicted more than 600 people and killed at least three continues to spread. Trump’s public health cuts are meanwhile imperiling a program that gives free vaccines to children. So far, I haven’t even mentioned children outside the United States. Trump has not only continued Biden’s policy of mass infanticide in Gaza—at least 100 children there have been killed or injured every week by Israeli forces since the dissolution of the ceasefire in March—he has vastly surpassed that shameful record by dismantling USAID. (The Supreme Court demanded that the government restore some of the funding to the already-contracted programs, but it’s unclear what the results of that ruling will be.) Children across the globe will starve to death due to this policy. The cuts to nutrition funding alone, researchers estimate, will kill some 369,000 children who could otherwise have lived. That’s not even counting all the other children’s lives imperiled by USAID funding cuts to vaccines, health services, and maternal care, or the children who will go unprotected now that Trump has cut 69 programs dedicated to tracking child labor, forced labor, and human trafficking.Natalist or exterminationist? Pro-child or rabidly infanticidal? It’s tempting to dismiss such extreme contradictions within the Trump administration as merely chaotic and incoherent. But the situation is worse than that. Trying to boost births while actively making the world less safe for children is creepy—but not in a new way. The contradiction is baked into the eugenicist tradition that Vance and Trump openly embrace. Vance said at an anti-abortion rally in January that he wanted “more babies in the United States of America.” Vance also said he wanted “more beautiful young men and women” to have children. Notice he doesn’t just say “more babies”: the qualifiers are significant. Vance was implying that he wanted the right people to have babies: American, white, able-bodied, “beautiful” people with robust genetics. Children dying because of USAID cuts aren’t part of this vision, presumably, because those children are not American or white. As for infected milk, environmental toxins, or measles—here too, it’s hard not to hear social Darwinist overtones: In a far-right eugenicist worldview, children killed by those things likely aren’t fit for survival. In a more chaotic and dangerous environment, this extremely outdated logic goes, natural selection will ensure that the strongest survive. It’s also worth noting that this way of thinking originates in—and many of these Trump administration policies aim to return us to—an earlier era, when people of all ages, but especially children, were simply poisoned by industrial pollution, unvaccinated for diseases, and unprotected from industrial accidents. In such an unsafe world for children, people had many more of them; the world was such a dangerous place to raise kids that families expected to lose a few. That all-too-recent period is the unspoken context for natalist and eugenicist visions. That’s the world Trump and Vance seem to be nostalgic for, one in which women were constantly pregnant and in labor, and children were constantly dying horrible deaths. Doesn’t that sound pleasant for everyone?

“I want a baby boom,” Trump has said. His administration is indeed exploring a range of approaches to boost the birth rate, including baby bonuses and classes on natural fertility. Yet his focus is entirely on the production of babies. When it comes to keeping these babies alive, this administration is leaving parents on their own, facing some horrifying and unprecedented challenges. It’s common for right-wing American governments, whether at the state or federal level, to be only half-heartedly natalist: restricting abortion, birth control, and sex education, while also failing to embrace any policy that makes it easier to raise a family, like universal childcare, robust public education, school lunch, cash supports for parents, or paid family leave. But the Trump-Vance government has taken this paradox to a new level, with natalist rhetoric far surpassing that of other recent administrations, while real live children are treated with more depraved, life-threatening indifference than in any American government in at least a century. Due to brutal cuts at the Food and Drug Administration, where 20,000 employees have been fired, the administration has suspended one of its quality-control programs for milk, Reuters reported this week. Milk is iconically associated with child health, and this is not a mere storybook whimsy: Most pediatricians regard it as critical for young children’s developing brains and bones. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends two cups a day for babies between 1 and 2 years old. While some experts—and of course the administration—are downplaying the change, emphasizing that milk will still be regulated, a bird flu epidemic hardly seems like the right time to be cutting corners. A government so focused on making more babies shouldn’t be so indifferent to risks to our nation’s toddlers.This reckless approach to child safety is not limited to food. Also this week, The New York Times reported that the Environmental Protection Agency was canceling tens of millions of dollars in grants for research on environmental hazards to children in rural America. These hazards include pesticides, wildfire smoke, and forever chemicals, and the grants supported research toward solutions to such problems. Many focused on improving child health in red states like Oklahoma. Children are much more vulnerable than adults to the health problems that can stem from exposure to toxins. That makes Trump’s policies, for all his baby-friendly chatter, seem pathologically misopedic; he is reversing bans on so-called “forever chemicals” and repealing limits set by the Biden administration on lead exposure, all of which will have devastating effects on children’s mental and physical development.And of course there’s RFK Jr.’s crazy campaign against vaccines. This week, the health secretary said he was considering removing the Covid-19 vaccine from the list of vaccines the government recommends for children, even though to win Senate confirmation, he had agreed not to alter the childhood vaccine schedule. Even worse, RFK Jr. has used his office to promote disinformation about extensively debunked links between vaccines and autism, while praising unproven “treatments” for measles as an outbreak that has afflicted more than 600 people and killed at least three continues to spread. Trump’s public health cuts are meanwhile imperiling a program that gives free vaccines to children. So far, I haven’t even mentioned children outside the United States. Trump has not only continued Biden’s policy of mass infanticide in Gaza—at least 100 children there have been killed or injured every week by Israeli forces since the dissolution of the ceasefire in March—he has vastly surpassed that shameful record by dismantling USAID. (The Supreme Court demanded that the government restore some of the funding to the already-contracted programs, but it’s unclear what the results of that ruling will be.) Children across the globe will starve to death due to this policy. The cuts to nutrition funding alone, researchers estimate, will kill some 369,000 children who could otherwise have lived. That’s not even counting all the other children’s lives imperiled by USAID funding cuts to vaccines, health services, and maternal care, or the children who will go unprotected now that Trump has cut 69 programs dedicated to tracking child labor, forced labor, and human trafficking.Natalist or exterminationist? Pro-child or rabidly infanticidal? It’s tempting to dismiss such extreme contradictions within the Trump administration as merely chaotic and incoherent. But the situation is worse than that. Trying to boost births while actively making the world less safe for children is creepy—but not in a new way. The contradiction is baked into the eugenicist tradition that Vance and Trump openly embrace. Vance said at an anti-abortion rally in January that he wanted “more babies in the United States of America.” Vance also said he wanted “more beautiful young men and women” to have children. Notice he doesn’t just say “more babies”: the qualifiers are significant. Vance was implying that he wanted the right people to have babies: American, white, able-bodied, “beautiful” people with robust genetics. Children dying because of USAID cuts aren’t part of this vision, presumably, because those children are not American or white. As for infected milk, environmental toxins, or measles—here too, it’s hard not to hear social Darwinist overtones: In a far-right eugenicist worldview, children killed by those things likely aren’t fit for survival. In a more chaotic and dangerous environment, this extremely outdated logic goes, natural selection will ensure that the strongest survive. It’s also worth noting that this way of thinking originates in—and many of these Trump administration policies aim to return us to—an earlier era, when people of all ages, but especially children, were simply poisoned by industrial pollution, unvaccinated for diseases, and unprotected from industrial accidents. In such an unsafe world for children, people had many more of them; the world was such a dangerous place to raise kids that families expected to lose a few. That all-too-recent period is the unspoken context for natalist and eugenicist visions. That’s the world Trump and Vance seem to be nostalgic for, one in which women were constantly pregnant and in labor, and children were constantly dying horrible deaths. Doesn’t that sound pleasant for everyone?

The greater Pittsburgh region is among the 25 worst metro areas in the country for air quality: Report

PITTSBURGH — The greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area is among the 25 regions in the country with the worst air pollution, according to a new report from the American Lung Association.The nonprofit public health organization’s annual “State of the Air” report uses a report card-style grading system to compare air quality in regions across the U.S. This year’s report found that 46% of Americans — 156.1 million people — are living in places that get failing grades for unhealthy levels of ozone or particulate pollution. Overall, air pollution measured by the report was worse than in previous years, with more Americans living in places with unhealthy air than in the previous 10 years the report has been published.The 13-county region spanning Pittsburgh and southwestern Pennsylvania; Weirton, West Virginia; and Steubenville, Ohio received “fail” grades for both daily and annual average particulate matter exposure for the years 2021–2023.The region ranked 16th worst for 24-hour particle pollution out of 225 metropolitan areas and 12th worst for annual particle pollution out of 208 metropolitan areas. Particulate matter pollution, which comes from things like industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, wildfires, and wood burning, causes higher rates of asthma, decreased lung function in children, and increased hospital admissions and premature death due to heart attacks and respiratory illness. Long-term exposure to particulate matter pollution also raises the risk of lung cancer, and research suggests that in the Pittsburgh region, air pollution linked to particulate matter and other harmful substances contributes significantly to cancer rates. According to the report, the Pittsburgh metro area is home to around 50,022 children with pediatric asthma, 227,806 adults with asthma, 173,588 people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), 250,600 people with cardiovascular disease, 1,468 people with lung cancer, and around 25,746 pregnant people, all of whom are especially vulnerable to the harmful impacts of particulate matter pollution exposure."The findings help community members understand the ongoing risks to the health of people in our region," said Matt Mehalik, executive director of the Breathe Project and the Breathe Collaborative, a coalition of more than 30 groups in southwestern Pennsylvania that advocate for cleaner air. "These findings emphasize the need to transition away from fossil fuels — in industry, transportation and residential uses — if we are to improve our health and address climate change." Allegheny County has received a failing grade for particulate matter pollution from the American Lung Association every year since the "State of the Air" report was first issued in 2004. The region is home to numerous polluting industries, with an estimated 80% of toxic air pollutants in Allegheny County (which encompasses Pittsburgh) coming from ten industrial sites, according to an analysis by the nonprofit environmental advocacy group PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center. The Ohio River near Pittsburgh Credit: Kristina Marusic for EHN In the 2024 State of the Air report, which looked at 2020-2022, Pittsburgh was for the first time ever not among the 25 cities most polluted by particulate matte, and showed some improvements in air quality, some of which may have resulted from pollution reductions spurred by the COVID-19 shut-down in 2020.The region earned a grade D for ozone smog this year, but its ranking improved from last year — it went from the 50th worst metro area for ozone smog in 2024’s report to the 90th worst in this year’s. Ozone pollution also comes from sources like vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions, and occurs when certain chemicals mix with sunlight. Exposure to ozone pollution is linked to respiratory issues, worsened asthma symptoms, and long-term lung damage.Each year the State of the Air Report makes recommendations for improving air quality. This year those recommendations include defending funding for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), because sweeping staff cuts and reduction of federal funding under the Trump administration are impairing the agency’s ability to enforce clean air regulations. For example, the report notes that EPA recently lowered annual limits for fine particulate matter pollution from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to 9 micrograms per cubic meter, and that states, including Pennsylvania, have submitted their recommendations for which areas should be cleaned up. Next, the agency must review those recommendations and add its own analyses to make final decisions by February 6, 2026 about which areas need additional pollution controls. If it fails to do so due to lack of funding or staffing, the report suggests, air quality might suffer.“The bottom line is this,” the report states. “EPA staff, working in communities across the country, are doing crucial work to keep your air clean. Staff cuts are already impacting people’s health across the country. Further cuts mean more dirty air.”

PITTSBURGH — The greater Pittsburgh metropolitan area is among the 25 regions in the country with the worst air pollution, according to a new report from the American Lung Association.The nonprofit public health organization’s annual “State of the Air” report uses a report card-style grading system to compare air quality in regions across the U.S. This year’s report found that 46% of Americans — 156.1 million people — are living in places that get failing grades for unhealthy levels of ozone or particulate pollution. Overall, air pollution measured by the report was worse than in previous years, with more Americans living in places with unhealthy air than in the previous 10 years the report has been published.The 13-county region spanning Pittsburgh and southwestern Pennsylvania; Weirton, West Virginia; and Steubenville, Ohio received “fail” grades for both daily and annual average particulate matter exposure for the years 2021–2023.The region ranked 16th worst for 24-hour particle pollution out of 225 metropolitan areas and 12th worst for annual particle pollution out of 208 metropolitan areas. Particulate matter pollution, which comes from things like industrial emissions, vehicle exhaust, wildfires, and wood burning, causes higher rates of asthma, decreased lung function in children, and increased hospital admissions and premature death due to heart attacks and respiratory illness. Long-term exposure to particulate matter pollution also raises the risk of lung cancer, and research suggests that in the Pittsburgh region, air pollution linked to particulate matter and other harmful substances contributes significantly to cancer rates. According to the report, the Pittsburgh metro area is home to around 50,022 children with pediatric asthma, 227,806 adults with asthma, 173,588 people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), 250,600 people with cardiovascular disease, 1,468 people with lung cancer, and around 25,746 pregnant people, all of whom are especially vulnerable to the harmful impacts of particulate matter pollution exposure."The findings help community members understand the ongoing risks to the health of people in our region," said Matt Mehalik, executive director of the Breathe Project and the Breathe Collaborative, a coalition of more than 30 groups in southwestern Pennsylvania that advocate for cleaner air. "These findings emphasize the need to transition away from fossil fuels — in industry, transportation and residential uses — if we are to improve our health and address climate change." Allegheny County has received a failing grade for particulate matter pollution from the American Lung Association every year since the "State of the Air" report was first issued in 2004. The region is home to numerous polluting industries, with an estimated 80% of toxic air pollutants in Allegheny County (which encompasses Pittsburgh) coming from ten industrial sites, according to an analysis by the nonprofit environmental advocacy group PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center. The Ohio River near Pittsburgh Credit: Kristina Marusic for EHN In the 2024 State of the Air report, which looked at 2020-2022, Pittsburgh was for the first time ever not among the 25 cities most polluted by particulate matte, and showed some improvements in air quality, some of which may have resulted from pollution reductions spurred by the COVID-19 shut-down in 2020.The region earned a grade D for ozone smog this year, but its ranking improved from last year — it went from the 50th worst metro area for ozone smog in 2024’s report to the 90th worst in this year’s. Ozone pollution also comes from sources like vehicle exhaust and industrial emissions, and occurs when certain chemicals mix with sunlight. Exposure to ozone pollution is linked to respiratory issues, worsened asthma symptoms, and long-term lung damage.Each year the State of the Air Report makes recommendations for improving air quality. This year those recommendations include defending funding for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), because sweeping staff cuts and reduction of federal funding under the Trump administration are impairing the agency’s ability to enforce clean air regulations. For example, the report notes that EPA recently lowered annual limits for fine particulate matter pollution from 12 micrograms per cubic meter to 9 micrograms per cubic meter, and that states, including Pennsylvania, have submitted their recommendations for which areas should be cleaned up. Next, the agency must review those recommendations and add its own analyses to make final decisions by February 6, 2026 about which areas need additional pollution controls. If it fails to do so due to lack of funding or staffing, the report suggests, air quality might suffer.“The bottom line is this,” the report states. “EPA staff, working in communities across the country, are doing crucial work to keep your air clean. Staff cuts are already impacting people’s health across the country. Further cuts mean more dirty air.”

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.