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

Medical Imaging Contributing To Water Pollution, Experts Say

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

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

Cars to AI: How new tech drives demand for specialized materials

Generative artificial intelligence has become widely accepted as a tool that increases productivity. Yet the technology is far from mature. Large language models advance rapidly from one generation to the next, and experts can only speculate how AI will affect the workforce and people’s daily lives. As a materials scientist, I am interested in how materials and the technologies that derive from them affect society. AI is one example of a technology driving global change—particularly through its demand for materials and rare minerals. But before AI evolved to its current level, two other technologies exemplified the process created by the demand for specialized materials: cars and smartphones. Often, the mass adoption of a new invention changes human behavior, which leads to new technologies and infrastructures reliant upon the invention. In turn, these new technologies and infrastructures require new or improved materials—and these often contain critical minerals: those minerals that are both essential to the technology and strain the supply chain. The unequal distribution of these minerals gives leverage to the nations that produce them. The resulting power shifts strain geopolitical relations and drive the search for new mineral sources. New technology nurtures the mining industry. The car and the development of suburbs At the beginning of the 20th century, only 5 out of 1,000 people owned a car, with annual production around a few thousand. Workers commuted on foot or by tram. Within a 2-mile radius, many people had all they needed: from groceries to hardware, from school to church, and from shoemakers to doctors. Then, in 1913, Henry Ford transformed the industry by inventing the assembly line. Now, a middle class family could afford a car: Mass production cut the price of the Model T from US$850 in 1908 to $360 in 1916. While the Great Depression dampened the broad adoption of the car, sales began to increase again after the end of World War II. With cars came more mobility, and many people moved farther away from work. In the 1940s and 1950s, a powerful highway lobby that included oil, automobile, and construction interests promoted federal highway and transportation policies, which increased automobile dependence. These policies helped change the landscape: Houses were spaced farther apart, and located farther away from the urban centers where many people worked. By the 1960s, two-thirds of American workers commuted by car, and the average commute had increased to 10 miles. Public policy and investment favored suburbs, which meant less investment in city centers. The resulting decay made living in downtown areas of many cities undesirable and triggered urban renewal projects. Long commutes added to pollution and expenses, which created a demand for lighter, more fuel-efficient cars. But building these required better materials. In 1970, the entire frame and body of a car was made from one steel type, but by 2017, 10 different, highly specialized steels constituted a vehicle’s lightweight form. Each steel contains different chemical elements, such as molybdenum and vanadium, which are mined only in a few countries. While the car supply chain was mostly domestic until the 1970s, the car industry today relies heavily on imports. This dependence has created tension with international trade partners, as reflected by higher tariffs on steel. The cellphone and American life The cellphone presents another example of a technology creating a demand for minerals and affecting foreign policy. In 1983, Motorola released the DynaTAC, the first commercial cellular phone. It was heavy, expensive, and its battery lasted for only half an hour, so few people had one. Then in 1996, Motorola introduced the flip phone, which was cheaper, lighter, and more convenient to use. The flip phone initiated the mass adoption of cellphones. However, it was still just a phone: Unlike today’s smartphones, all it did was send and receive calls and texts. In 2007, Apple redefined communication with the iPhone, inventing the touchscreen and integrating an internet navigator. The phone became a digital hub for navigating, finding information, and building an online social identity. Before smartphones, mobile phones supplemented daily life. Now, they structure it. In 2000, fewer than half of American adults owned a cellphone, and nearly all who did used it only sporadically. In 2024, 98% of Americans over the age of 18 reported owning a cellphone, and over 90% owned a smartphone. Without the smartphone, most people cannot fulfill their daily tasks. Many individuals now experience nomophobia: They feel anxious without a cellphone. Around three-quarters of all stable elements are represented in the components of each smartphone. These elements are necessary for highly specialized materials that enable touchscreens, displays, batteries, speakers, microphones, and cameras. Many of these elements are essential for at least one function and have an unreliable supply chain, which makes them critical. Critical materials and AI Critical materials give leverage to countries that have a monopoly in mining and processing them. For example, China has gained increased power through its monopoly on rare earth elements. In April 2025, in response to U.S. tariffs, China stopped exporting rare earth magnets, which are used in cellphones. The geopolitical tensions that resulted demonstrate the power embodied in the control over critical minerals. The mass adoption of AI technology will likely change human behavior and bring forth new technologies, industries, and infrastructure on which the U.S. economy will depend. All of these technologies will require more optimized and specialized materials and create new material dependencies. By exacerbating material dependencies, AI could affect geopolitical relations and reorganize global power. America has rich deposits of many important minerals, but extraction of these minerals comes with challenges. Factors including slow and costly permitting, public opposition, environmental concerns, high investment costs, and an inadequate workforce all can prevent mining companies from accessing these resources. The mass adoption of AI is already adding pressure to overcome these factors and to increase responsible domestic mining. While the path from innovation to material dependence spanned a century for cars and a couple of decades for cellphones, the rapid advancement of large language models suggests that the scale will be measured in years for AI. The heat is already on. Peter Müllner is a distinguished professor in materials science and engineering at Boise State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Generative artificial intelligence has become widely accepted as a tool that increases productivity. Yet the technology is far from mature. Large language models advance rapidly from one generation to the next, and experts can only speculate how AI will affect the workforce and people’s daily lives. As a materials scientist, I am interested in how materials and the technologies that derive from them affect society. AI is one example of a technology driving global change—particularly through its demand for materials and rare minerals. But before AI evolved to its current level, two other technologies exemplified the process created by the demand for specialized materials: cars and smartphones. Often, the mass adoption of a new invention changes human behavior, which leads to new technologies and infrastructures reliant upon the invention. In turn, these new technologies and infrastructures require new or improved materials—and these often contain critical minerals: those minerals that are both essential to the technology and strain the supply chain. The unequal distribution of these minerals gives leverage to the nations that produce them. The resulting power shifts strain geopolitical relations and drive the search for new mineral sources. New technology nurtures the mining industry. The car and the development of suburbs At the beginning of the 20th century, only 5 out of 1,000 people owned a car, with annual production around a few thousand. Workers commuted on foot or by tram. Within a 2-mile radius, many people had all they needed: from groceries to hardware, from school to church, and from shoemakers to doctors. Then, in 1913, Henry Ford transformed the industry by inventing the assembly line. Now, a middle class family could afford a car: Mass production cut the price of the Model T from US$850 in 1908 to $360 in 1916. While the Great Depression dampened the broad adoption of the car, sales began to increase again after the end of World War II. With cars came more mobility, and many people moved farther away from work. In the 1940s and 1950s, a powerful highway lobby that included oil, automobile, and construction interests promoted federal highway and transportation policies, which increased automobile dependence. These policies helped change the landscape: Houses were spaced farther apart, and located farther away from the urban centers where many people worked. By the 1960s, two-thirds of American workers commuted by car, and the average commute had increased to 10 miles. Public policy and investment favored suburbs, which meant less investment in city centers. The resulting decay made living in downtown areas of many cities undesirable and triggered urban renewal projects. Long commutes added to pollution and expenses, which created a demand for lighter, more fuel-efficient cars. But building these required better materials. In 1970, the entire frame and body of a car was made from one steel type, but by 2017, 10 different, highly specialized steels constituted a vehicle’s lightweight form. Each steel contains different chemical elements, such as molybdenum and vanadium, which are mined only in a few countries. While the car supply chain was mostly domestic until the 1970s, the car industry today relies heavily on imports. This dependence has created tension with international trade partners, as reflected by higher tariffs on steel. The cellphone and American life The cellphone presents another example of a technology creating a demand for minerals and affecting foreign policy. In 1983, Motorola released the DynaTAC, the first commercial cellular phone. It was heavy, expensive, and its battery lasted for only half an hour, so few people had one. Then in 1996, Motorola introduced the flip phone, which was cheaper, lighter, and more convenient to use. The flip phone initiated the mass adoption of cellphones. However, it was still just a phone: Unlike today’s smartphones, all it did was send and receive calls and texts. In 2007, Apple redefined communication with the iPhone, inventing the touchscreen and integrating an internet navigator. The phone became a digital hub for navigating, finding information, and building an online social identity. Before smartphones, mobile phones supplemented daily life. Now, they structure it. In 2000, fewer than half of American adults owned a cellphone, and nearly all who did used it only sporadically. In 2024, 98% of Americans over the age of 18 reported owning a cellphone, and over 90% owned a smartphone. Without the smartphone, most people cannot fulfill their daily tasks. Many individuals now experience nomophobia: They feel anxious without a cellphone. Around three-quarters of all stable elements are represented in the components of each smartphone. These elements are necessary for highly specialized materials that enable touchscreens, displays, batteries, speakers, microphones, and cameras. Many of these elements are essential for at least one function and have an unreliable supply chain, which makes them critical. Critical materials and AI Critical materials give leverage to countries that have a monopoly in mining and processing them. For example, China has gained increased power through its monopoly on rare earth elements. In April 2025, in response to U.S. tariffs, China stopped exporting rare earth magnets, which are used in cellphones. The geopolitical tensions that resulted demonstrate the power embodied in the control over critical minerals. The mass adoption of AI technology will likely change human behavior and bring forth new technologies, industries, and infrastructure on which the U.S. economy will depend. All of these technologies will require more optimized and specialized materials and create new material dependencies. By exacerbating material dependencies, AI could affect geopolitical relations and reorganize global power. America has rich deposits of many important minerals, but extraction of these minerals comes with challenges. Factors including slow and costly permitting, public opposition, environmental concerns, high investment costs, and an inadequate workforce all can prevent mining companies from accessing these resources. The mass adoption of AI is already adding pressure to overcome these factors and to increase responsible domestic mining. While the path from innovation to material dependence spanned a century for cars and a couple of decades for cellphones, the rapid advancement of large language models suggests that the scale will be measured in years for AI. The heat is already on. Peter Müllner is a distinguished professor in materials science and engineering at Boise State University. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Synthetic chemicals in food system creating health burden of $2.2tn a year, report finds

Scientists issue urgent warning about chemicals, found to cause cancer and infertility as well as harming environmentScientists have issued an urgent warning that some of the synthetic chemicals that help underpin the current food system are driving increased rates of cancer, neurodevelopmental conditions and infertility, while degrading the foundations of global agriculture.The health burden from phthalates, bisphenols, pesticides and Pfas “forever chemicals” amounts to up to $2.2tn a year – roughly as much as the profits of the world’s 100 largest publicly listed companies, according to the report published on Wednesday. Continue reading...

Scientists have issued an urgent warning that some of the synthetic chemicals that help underpin the current food system are driving increased rates of cancer, neurodevelopmental conditions and infertility, while degrading the foundations of global agriculture.The health burden from phthalates, bisphenols, pesticides and Pfas “forever chemicals” amounts to up to $2.2tn a year – roughly as much as the profits of the world’s 100 largest publicly listed companies, according to the report published on Wednesday.Most ecosystem damage remains unpriced, they say, but even a narrow accounting of ecological impacts, taking into account agricultural losses and meeting water safety standards for Pfas and pesticides, implies a further cost of $640bn. There are also potential consequences for human demographics, with the report concluding that if exposure to endocrine disruptors such as bisphenols and phthalates persists at current rates, there could be between 200 million and 700 million fewer births between 2025 and 2100.The report is the work of dozens of scientists from organisations including the Institute of Preventive Health, the Center for Environmental Health, Chemsec, and various universities in the US and UK, including the University of Sussex and Duke University. It was led by a core team from Systemiq, a company that invests in enterprises aimed at fulfilling the UN sustainable development goals and the Paris agreement on climate change.The authors said they had focused on the four chemical types examined because “they are among the most prevalent and best studied worldwide, with robust evidence of harm to human and ecological health”.One of the team, Philip Landrigan, a paediatrician and professor of global public health at Boston College, called the report a “wake-up call”. He said: “The world really has to wake up and do something about chemical pollution. I would argue that the problem of chemical pollution is every bit as serious as the problem with climate change.”Human and ecosystem exposure to synthetic chemicals has surged since the end of the second world war, with chemical production increasing by more than 200 times since the 1950s and more than 350,000 synthetic chemicals currently on the global market.Three years ago, researchers from the Stockholm Resilience Centre (SRC) concluded that chemical pollution had crossed a “planetary boundary”, the point at which human-made changes to the Earth push it outside the stable environment of the past 10,000 years, the period in which modern human civilisation has developed.Unlike with pharmaceuticals, there are few safeguards to test for the safety of industrial chemicals before they are put into use, and little monitoring of their effects once they are. Some have been found to be disastrously toxic to humans, animals and ecosystems, leaving governments to pick up the bill.This report assesses the impact of four families of synthetic chemicals endemic in global food production. Phthalates and bisphenols are commonly used as plastic additives, employed in food packaging and disposable gloves used in food preparation.Pesticides underpin industrial agriculture, with large-scale monoculture farms spraying thousands of gallons on crops to eliminate weeds and insects, and many crops treated after harvest to maintain freshness.Pfas are used in food contact materials such as greaseproof paper, popcorn tubs and ice-cream cartons, but have also accumulated in the environment to such an extent they enter food via air, soil and water contamination.All have been linked to harms including endocrine (hormone system) disruption, cancers, birth defects, intellectual impairment and obesity.Landrigan said that during his long career in paediatric public health he had seen a shift in the conditions affecting children. “The amount of disease and death caused by infectious diseases like measles, like scarlet fever, like pertussis, has come way down,” he said. “By contrast, there’s been this incredible increase in rates of non-communicable diseases. And of course, there’s no single factor there … but the evidence is very clear that increasing exposure to hundreds, maybe even thousands of manufactured chemicals is a very important cause of disease in kids.”Landrigan said he was most concerned about “the chemicals that damage children’s developing brains and thus make them less intelligent, less creative, just less able to give back to society across the whole of their lifetimes”.“And the second class of chemicals that I worry really worried about are the endocrine-disrupting chemicals,” he added. “Bisphenol would be the classic example, that get into people’s bodies at every age, damage the liver, change cholesterol metabolism, and result in increased serum cholesterol, increased obesity, increased diabetes, and those internally to increase rates of heart disease and stroke.”Asked whether the report could have looked beyond the groups of chemicals studied, Landridge said: “I would argue that they’re only the tip of the iceberg. They’re among the very small number of chemicals, maybe 20 or 30 chemicals where we really have solid toxicologic information.“What scares the hell out of me is the thousands of chemicals to which we’re all exposed every day about which we know nothing. And until one of them causes something obvious, like children to be born with missing limbs, we’re going to go on mindlessly exposing ourselves.”

More than 520 chemicals found in English soil, including long-banned medical substances

Fertilising arable land with human waste leaves array of toxins that could re-enter food chain, study findsMore than 520 chemicals have been found in English soils, including pharmaceutical products and toxins that were banned decades ago, because of the practice of spreading human waste to fertilise arable land.Research by scientists at the University of Leeds, published as a preprint in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, found a worrying array of chemicals in English soils. Close to half (46.4%) of the pharmaceutical substances detected had not been reported in previous global monitoring campaigns. Continue reading...

More than 520 chemicals have been found in English soils, including pharmaceutical products and toxins that were banned decades ago, because of the practice of spreading human waste to fertilise arable land.Research by scientists at the University of Leeds, published as a preprint in the Journal of Hazardous Materials, found a worrying array of chemicals in English soils. Close to half (46.4%) of the pharmaceutical substances detected had not been reported in previous global monitoring campaigns.The anticonvulsants lamotrigine and carbamazepine were among the human-use medicines reported for the first time in English soils.A category of chemicals of particular concern to scientists are emerging contaminants, which are pharmaceuticals and other chemicals which have not been widely studied for their impacts on the environment or human health when they re-enter the food chain.Water companies treat human faeces and remove some of the contaminants from wastewater at their treatment centres. The resulting product is treated biosolids, the organic matter from the human waste, and this is often disposed of by being spread on fields as fertiliser.However, it appears that despite decontamination, hundreds of chemicals are leaching into the soil and in some cases staying there for many years. Several chemicals banned or withdrawn from use decades ago were found to persist in agricultural soils.One of the researchers, Laura Carter, a professor of environmental chemistry at the University of Leeds, said: “Some of the chemicals were banned for use decades ago and their presence suggests that they are really persistent … so soils are a long-term sink of these pollutants.”It is possible these chemicals will enter the food chain and be ingested by humans who eat food grown in these fields, she said. It could also harm farm productivity if the chemicals inhibit plant growth or negatively affect soil health.“Some of the work which we did before this monitoring campaign was focused on the uptake and accumulation into crops and looking at effects on soil health and plant health,” she said. “What we need to understand is the subsequent pathway moving from the crops to consumption. Some of these contaminants can [affect] the soil health, and inhibit the nutrients taken up into crops.”To conduct the research, Carter and her team asked farmers to send soil samples to their lab, and also visited some farms themselves. They took a variety of measures to detect what she calls a “chemical fingerprint” of the soil, using methods including mass spectrometry.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionThe EU is working to remove these emerging contaminants from wastewater across the continent by passing legislation requiring countries to implement “quaternary treatment”, which is an advanced pollution removal method that can get rid of micropollutants such as these chemicals. The UK has no plans to do this, and for now is sticking with the less precise tertiary treatment systems.“Wastewater treatment processes can remove some contaminants,” Carter said. “We found that the processes are not as efficient as they need to be to remove them.“These chemicals aren’t regulated for so there isn’t a drive to develop or to focus on technologies that can remove them. More advanced treatment like the EU’s planned quaternary treatment will typically remove more.”Soil pollution is understudied compared with wastewater and river research, despite soil being so important for human and environmental health, and the fact contaminants can persist for decades.“This is because of a combination of factors. There are analytical challenges, the chemicals are often at trace levels so you need to develop methods to extract them; the soil and the biosolids and the more agricultural focus means you have the complexity of the environmental metrics to contend with when you are trying to monitor them. And there is a lack of awareness about the pathways in which they enter the environment,” Carter said.The contaminants can be removed, she said: “You can do processes such as actively planting crops so they take up the contaminants and that is a way of removing contaminants from the soil. But then you’d be left with trying to dispose of that contaminated plant.”She was most surprised to find the banned chemicals, because this showed the long-term persistence of contaminants in soil. “They have been prohibited for use for quite some years so we were surprised by their persistence in the soils,” Carter said.“We were also able to detect some anti-cancer drugs which was surprising because there isn’t very much research in this space so we haven’t seen those detected before.”It is not the fault of farmers for spreading this, she said, as it is what they have been told to do in order to be sustainable.“We need to regulate for them properly and we need education to make sure that everybody knows what is being applied and what the potential risks are that are associated with that,” Carter said.

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.