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

Want to Lower Chemical Exposures in Pregnancy? Quit Nail Polish, Makeup and Hair Dye

By Carole Tanzer Miller HealthDay ReporterTUESDAY, Nov. 19, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- Women who won't leave the house without makeup or a spritz of...

By Carole Tanzer Miller HealthDay ReporterTUESDAY, Nov. 19, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- Women who won't leave the house without makeup or a spritz of hairspray may want to think twice about those habits when they're pregnant or breastfeeding.New research links these and other personal care products, including hair dyes, fragrances, lotions, moisturizers and nail polishes to higher levels of so-called PFAS "forever chemicals" that are harmful to health. Researchers report in the November issue of the journal Environment International that they found significantly higher levels of these synethetic chemicals -- called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) -- in the blood and breast milk of women who used the products during pregnancy. Because they resist water, oil and heat, PFAS have been used in consumer products and industry since the mid-20th century, researchers said in background notes. Over the years, they have been linked to many health issues, including heart problems, liver disease and cancers.The new study suggests that exposure to PFAS during pregnancy could lead to variety of health issues for babies. They include preterm birth and lower birth weight, as well as neurodevelopmental disorders -- even a poorer response to vaccines, said study author Amber Hall, a postdoctoral research associate at Brown University School of Public Health in Rhode Island."People who are concerned about their exposure to these chemicals during pregnancy or while breastfeeding may benefit from cutting back on personal care products during those times," Hall said in a university news release.Her team analyzed data from a study conducted between 2008 and 2011 of 2,000 pregnant women in 10 Canadian cities. The data included measurements of PFAS levels in the blood at six to 13 weeks of gestation and in breast milk after the birth. Participants self-reported how often they used eight types of products during their first and third trimesters, as well as one to two days postpartum and then again, at two to 10 weeks after giving birth.At all points, higher use of nail care products, fragrances, makeup, hair sprays, gels or dyes was associated with higher levels of PFAS in the blood. Results for third-trimester use and breast-milk concentrations were similar.By way of example, researchers noted that pregnant women who wore makeup every day in their first and third trimesters had higher levels of PFAS than those who didn't. Those who used permanent hair color one or two days after delivery had 16% to 18% higher levels of PFAS in their milk. But Hall cautioned that the study probably underestimated the extent of PFAS exposure. It examined only four types of forever chemicals among thousands deployed in industry and commerce.She conducted the investigation with the director of children's environmental health at Brown, Joseph Braun, who has studied health effect of PFAS chemicals for more than a decade."Not only do studies like these help people assess how their product choices may affect their personal risk, but they can also help us show how these products could have population-level effects," he said. "And that makes the case for product regulation and government action."SOURCE: Brown University, news release, Nov. 12, 2024Copyright © 2024 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Turning automotive engines into modular chemical plants to make green fuels

The MIT spinout Emvolon is placing its repurposed engines next to methane sources, to generate greener methanol and other chemicals.

Reducing methane emissions is a top priority in the fight against climate change because of its propensity to trap heat in the atmosphere: Methane’s warming effects are 84 times more potent than CO2 over a 20-year timescale.And yet, as the main component of natural gas, methane is also a valuable fuel and a precursor to several important chemicals. The main barrier to using methane emissions to create carbon-negative materials is that human sources of methane gas — landfills, farms, and oil and gas wells — are relatively small and spread out across large areas, while traditional chemical processing facilities are huge and centralized. That makes it prohibitively expensive to capture, transport, and convert methane gas into anything useful. As a result, most companies burn or “flare” their methane at the site where it’s emitted, seeing it as a sunk cost and an environmental liability.The MIT spinout Emvolon is taking a new approach to processing methane by repurposing automotive engines to serve as modular, cost-effective chemical plants. The company’s systems can take methane gas and produce liquid fuels like methanol and ammonia on-site; these fuels can then be used or transported in standard truck containers."We see this as a new way of chemical manufacturing,” Emvolon co-founder and CEO Emmanuel Kasseris SM ’07, PhD ’11 says. “We’re starting with methane because methane is an abundant emission that we can use as a resource. With methane, we can solve two problems at the same time: About 15 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions come from hard-to-abate sectors that need green fuel, like shipping, aviation, heavy heavy-duty trucks, and rail. Then another 15 percent of emissions come from distributed methane emissions like landfills and oil wells.”By using mass-produced engines and eliminating the need to invest in infrastructure like pipelines, the company says it’s making methane conversion economically attractive enough to be adopted at scale. The system can also take green hydrogen produced by intermittent renewables and turn it into ammonia, another fuel that can also be used to decarbonize fertilizers.“In the future, we’re going to need green fuels because you can’t electrify a large ship or plane — you have to use a high-energy-density, low-carbon-footprint, low-cost liquid fuel,” Kasseris says. “The energy resources to produce those green fuels are either distributed, as is the case with methane, or variable, like wind. So, you cannot have a massive plant [producing green fuels] that has its own zip code. You either have to be distributed or variable, and both of those approaches lend themselves to this modular design.”From a “crazy idea” to a companyKasseris first came to MIT to study mechanical engineering as a graduate student in 2004, when he worked in the Sloan Automotive Lab on a report on the future of transportation. For his PhD, he developed a novel technology for improving internal combustion engine fuel efficiency for a consortium of automotive and energy companies, which he then went to work for after graduation.Around 2014, he was approached by Leslie Bromberg ’73, PhD ’77, a serial inventor with more than 100 patents, who has been a principal research engineer in MIT’s Plasma Science and Fusion Center for nearly 50 years.“Leslie had this crazy idea of repurposing an internal combustion engine as a reactor,” Kasseris recalls. “I had looked at that while working in industry, and I liked it, but my company at the time thought the work needed more validation.”Bromberg had done that validation through a U.S. Department of Energy-funded project in which he used a diesel engine to “reform” methane — a high-pressure chemical reaction in which methane is combined with steam and oxygen to produce hydrogen. The work impressed Kasseris enough to bring him back to MIT as a research scientist in 2016.“We worked on that idea in addition to some other projects, and eventually it had reached the point where we decided to license the work from MIT and go full throttle,” Kasseris recalls. “It’s very easy to work with MIT’s Technology Licensing Office when you are an MIT inventor. You can get a low-cost licensing option, and you can do a lot with that, which is important for a new company. Then, once you are ready, you can finalize the license, so MIT was instrumental.”Emvolon continued working with MIT’s research community, sponsoring projects with Professor Emeritus John Heywood and participating in the MIT Venture Mentoring Service and the MIT Industrial Liaison Program.An engine-powered chemical plantAt the core of Emvolon’s system is an off-the-shelf automotive engine that runs “fuel rich” — with a higher ratio of fuel to air than what is needed for complete combustion.“That’s easy to say, but it takes a lot of [intellectual property], and that’s what was developed at MIT,” Kasseris says. “Instead of burning the methane in the gas to carbon dioxide and water, you partially burn it, or partially oxidize it, to carbon monoxide and hydrogen, which are the building blocks to synthesize a variety of chemicals.”The hydrogen and carbon monoxide are intermediate products used to synthesize different chemicals through further reactions. Those processing steps take place right next to the engine, which makes its own power. Each of Emvolon’s standalone systems fits within a 40-foot shipping container and can produce about 8 tons of methanol per day from 300,000 standard cubic feet of methane gas.The company is starting with green methanol because it’s an ideal fuel for hard-to-abate sectors such as shipping and heavy-duty transport, as well as an excellent feedstock for other high-value chemicals, such as sustainable aviation fuel. Many shipping vessels have already converted to run on green methanol in an effort to meet decarbonization goals.This summer, the company also received a grant from the Department of Energy to adapt its process to produce clean liquid fuels from power sources like solar and wind.“We’d like to expand to other chemicals like ammonia, but also other feedstocks, such as biomass and hydrogen from renewable electricity, and we already have promising results in that direction” Kasseris says. “We think we have a good solution for the energy transition and, in the later stages of the transition, for e-manufacturing.”A scalable approachEmvolon has already built a system capable of producing up to six barrels of green methanol a day in its 5,000 square-foot headquarters in Woburn, Massachusetts.“For chemical technologies, people talk about scale up risk, but with an engine, if it works in a single cylinder, we know it will work in a multicylinder engine,” Kasseris says. “It’s just engineering.”Last month, Emvolon announced an agreement with Montauk Renewables to build a commercial-scale demonstration unit next to a Texas landfill that will initially produce up to 15,000 gallons of green methanol a year and later scale up to 2.5 million gallons. That project could be expanded tenfold by scaling across Montauk’s other sites.“Our whole process was designed to be a very realistic approach to the energy transition,” Kasseris says. “Our solution is designed to produce green fuels and chemicals at prices that the markets are willing to pay today, without the need for subsidies. Using the engines as chemical plants, we can get the capital expenditure per unit output close to that of a large plant, but at a modular scale that enables us to be next to low-cost feedstock. Furthermore, our modular systems require small investments — of $1 to 10 million — that are quickly deployed, one at a time, within weeks, as opposed to massive chemical plants that require multiyear capital construction projects and cost hundreds of millions.”

The US no longer supports capping plastic production in UN treaty

Environmental advocates understand the announcement as a reversal, calling it “absolutely devastating.”

The Biden administration has backtracked from supporting a cap on plastic production as part of the United Nations’ global plastics treaty. According to representatives from five environmental organizations, White House staffers told representatives of advocacy groups in a closed-door meeting last week that they did not see mandatory production caps as a viable “landing zone” for INC-5, the name for the fifth and final round of plastics treaty negotiations set to take place later this month in Busan, South Korea. Instead, the staffers reportedly said United States delegates would support a “flexible” approach in which countries set their own voluntary targets for reducing plastic production. This represents a reversal of what the same groups were told at a similar briefing held in August, when Biden administration representatives raised hopes that the U.S. would join countries like Norway, Peru, and the United Kingdom in supporting limits on plastic production.  Following the August meeting, Reuters reported that the U.S. “will support a global treaty calling for a reduction in how much new plastic is produced each year,” and the Biden administration confirmed that Reuters’ reporting was “accurate.”  After the more recent briefing, a spokesperson for the White House Council on Environmental Quality told Grist that, while U.S. negotiators have endorsed the idea of a “‘North Star’ aspirational global goal” to reduce plastic production, they “do not see this as a production cap and do not support such a cap.” “We believe there are different paths available for achieving reductions in plastic production and consumption,” the spokesperson said. “We will be flexible going into INC-5 on how to achieve that and are optimistic that we can prevail with a strong instrument that sends these market signals for change.”  Jo Banner, co-founder and co-director of The Descendants Project, a nonprofit advocating for fenceline communities in Louisiana’s “Cancer Alley,” said the announcement was a “jolt.” “I thought we were on the same page in terms of capping plastic and reducing production,” she said. “But it was clear that we just weren’t.” Frankie Orona, executive director of the nonprofit Society of Native Nations, which advocates for environmental justice and the preservation of Indigenous cultures, described the news as “absolutely devastating.” He added, “Two hours in that meeting felt like it was taking two days of my life.” Delegates follow the day’s proceedings at the third round of negotiations over a global plastics treaty in Nairobi, Kenya. James Wakibia / SOPA Images / LightRocket via Getty Images The situation speaks to a central conflict that has emerged from talks over the treaty, which the U.N. agreed to negotiate two years ago to “end plastic pollution.” Delegates haven’t agreed on whether the pact should focus on managing plastic waste — through things like ocean cleanups and higher recycling rates — or on tamping down the growing rate of plastic production. Nearly 70 countries, along with scientists and environmental groups, support the latter. They say it’s futile to mop up plastic litter while more and more of it keeps getting made. But a vocal contingent of oil-exporting countries has pushed for a lower-ambition treaty, using a consensus-based voting norm to slow-walk the negotiations. Besides leaving out production limits, those countries also want the treaty to allow for voluntary national targets, rather than binding global rules. Exactly which policies the U.S. will now support isn’t entirely clear. While the White House spokesperson told Grist that it wants to ensure the treaty “addresses … the supply of primary plastic polymers,” this could mean a whole host of things, including a tax on plastic production or bans on individual plastic products. These kinds of so-called market instruments could drive down demand for more plastic, but with far less certainty than a quantitative production limit. Bjorn Beeler, executive director of the nonprofit International Pollutants Elimination Network, noted that the U.S. could technically “address” the supply of plastics by reducing the industry’s projected growth rates — which would still allow the amount of manufactured plastic to continue increasing every year. “What the U.S. has said is extremely vague,” he said. “They have not been a leading actor to move the treaty into something meaningful.” To the extent that the White House’s latest announcement was a clarification and not an outright reversal — as staffers reportedly insisted was the case — Banner said the Biden administration should have made their position clearer months ago, right after the August meeting. “In August, we were definitely saying ‘capping,’ and it was never corrected,” she said. “If there was a misunderstanding, then it should have been corrected a long time ago.” Another apparent change in the U.S.’s strategy is on chemicals used in plastics. Back in August, the White House confirmed via Reuters’ reporting that it supported creating lists of plastic-related chemicals to be banned or restricted. Now, negotiators will back lists that include plastic products containing those chemicals. Environmental groups see this approach as less effective, since there are so many kinds of plastic products and because product manufacturers do not always have complete information about the chemicals used by their suppliers. Read Next Plastic chemicals are inescapable — and they’re messing with our hormones Joseph Winters Orona said focusing on products would push the conversation downstream, away from petrochemical refineries and plastics manufacturing facilities that disproportionately pollute poor communities of color. “It’s so dismissive, it’s so disrespectful,” he said. “It just made you want to grab a pillow and scream into the pillow and shed a few tears for your community.” At the next round of treaty talks, environmental groups told Grist that the U.S. should “step aside.” Given the high likelihood that the incoming Trump administration will not support the treaty and that the Republican-controlled Senate will not ratify it, some advocates would like to see the high-ambition countries focus less on winning over U.S. support and more on advancing the most ambitious version of the treaty possible. “We hope that the rest of the world moves on,” said a spokesperson for the nonprofit Break Free From Plastic, vesting hope in the EU, small island developing states, and a coalition of African countries, among others.  Viola Waghiyi, environmental health and justice program director for the nonprofit Alaska Community Action on Toxics, is a tribal citizen of the Native Village of Savoonga, on the island of Sivuqaq off the state’s western coast. She connected a weak plastics treaty to the direct impacts her island community is facing, including climate change (to which plastics production contributes), microplastic pollution in the Arctic Ocean that affects its marine life, and atmospheric dynamics that dump hazardous plastic chemicals in the far northern hemisphere. The U.S. “should be making sure that measures are in place to protect the voices of the most vulnerable,” she said, including Indigenous peoples, workers, waste pickers, and future generations. As a Native grandmother, she specifically raised concerns about endocrine-disrupting plastic chemicals that could affect children’s neurological development. “How can we pass on our language, our creation stories, our songs and dances, our traditions and cultures, if our children can’t learn?” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The US no longer supports capping plastic production in UN treaty on Nov 18, 2024.

Yorkshire town may bring first ‘forever chemicals’ legal case in UK

Residents claim contamination from Angus Fire factory has left them trapped and unable to sell their homesResidents in the UK town with the country’s highest identified concentration of “forever chemicals” have instructed lawyers to investigate the possibility of a first-of-its-kind legal claim against the firefighting foam manufacturer located in the centre of Bentham.In May this year, an investigation by the Ends Report and the Guardian revealed that the rural North Yorkshire town is the most PFAS-polluted place known to exist in the UK. The town is home to the firefighting foam manufacturer Angus Fire. Continue reading...

Residents in the UK town with the country’s highest identified concentration of “forever chemicals” have instructed lawyers to investigate the possibility of a first-of-its-kind legal claim against the firefighting foam manufacturer located in the centre of Bentham.In May this year, an investigation by the Ends Report and the Guardian revealed that the rural North Yorkshire town is the most PFAS-polluted place known to exist in the UK. The town is home to the firefighting foam manufacturer Angus Fire.PFAS, short for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and commonly known as “forever chemicals” owing to their persistence in the environment, are a family of about 10,000 chemicals that have been linked to a wide range of serious illnesses, including certain cancers. They are used in many consumer products, from frying pans to waterproof coats, but one of their most common uses is in firefighting foams.The Law firm Leigh Day has informed Angus Fire that, acting on behalf of residents, it has been instructed to investigate a case against the firm as a result of “alleged PFAS pollution in Bentham”.A spokesperson for Angus Fire said: “We have been advised by Leigh Day that it is under instruction to investigate a potential claim on behalf of one residency. We have not received notice of any legal action.”In the past 25 years, nearly 10,000 court cases have been filed in the US alleging harm from PFAS exposure. Some of these cases have already resulted in multi-billion dollar settlements. The case against Angus Fire would be be the first ever PFAS-related legal case in the UK.Charlotte Armstrong, a senior associate solicitor at Leigh Day, said: “Angus Fire state that they no longer manufacture or test any PFAS-containing foam products in Bentham, but that doesn’t help the people of Bentham. PFAS are ‘forever chemicals’, and unfortunately that means that the chemical pollution in the area is anything but a historic issue. Our clients and the wider community in Bentham are entitled to fully understand the extent of PFAS pollution in their community, so that those allegedly responsible can be held to account in terms of financial compensation and remediation.”After the initial investigation, Bentham town council asked Angus Fire to test the environment on Duke Street – a narrow residential road next to the factory – for PFAS.The test results, which were made available in October, revealed that soil adjacent to gardens on Duke Street was contaminated with elevated levels of PFAS. The land is owned by Angus Fire and is made available for use by residents, who use it to grow food. Residents were advised by Angus Fire to wash and peel vegetables grown on the land, to clean their homes of dust regularly, and to remove shoes before entering their homes.Residents of Duke Street have said that since finding out about the contamination they felt “trapped”.“At any point of buying a house, you would want the option to sell it, depending on what you want to do in your life,” said one person, who asked to remain anonymous. “At the moment, that would be a significant challenge. And with the uncertainty over how long it will take to remediate the land, we are essentially trapped in this situation.”Angus Fire has offered residents on Duke Street a series of financial “goodwill gestures”.A spokesperson for Angus Fire said it had “presented a number of options to residents whose properties border the legacy foam manufacturing and testing areas, which we believe could offer a constructive way forward and which also underscores our commitment to addressing the situation responsibly.“We recognise the concerns about potential environmental impacts from historic operations at our facility and regret the inconvenience and worry that this has caused.”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 info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionDuke Street residents have expressed concern about the risk of the contamination to their health.Dr Anna Watson, the director of policy and advocacy at the Chem Trust charity, said that while it was welcome that Angus Fire was “admitting responsibility for the irreversible PFAS pollution near their site in Bentham”, it was “heartbreaking to think of people being uprooted from their community, as well as having to deal with the anxiety of potential long-term health impacts from these toxic chemicals”.“The UK government needs to take urgent action to ban the use and manufacture of these chemicals as a group and be at the forefront of a global PFAS-free economy,” she said.Residents said they had had no correspondence with local or government officials over the contamination.An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We are working with North Yorkshire council and looking into historic PFAS contamination from the Angus Fire site. Our primary focus is to assess the risk to the environment and provide support to our partners on risk to residents.”North Yorkshire council’s assistant director for regulatory services, Callum McKeon, said: “We continue to work with partner agencies to assess historic PFAS contamination from the Angus Fire site at Bentham. Our key priority is to identify and address the risk to residents and continue to support our partner agencies with their ongoing investigations.”The Angus Fire spokesperson said: “Angus continues to work closely with independent industry-leading environmental consultants and in cooperation with our UK regulator, the Environment Agency, to better characterise the Bentham site and surrounding areas. These further investigations will help us better understand the extent of any PFAS contamination and assist in determining the remediation required.”

New report: Dow Freeport chemical plant leads nation in wastewater polluting

The Dow Freeport petrochemical plant in Brazoria County was found to be the top polluter of three toxic chemicals, causing downstream health risks to nearby communities of color and low-income households.

Michael StravatoThe Dow chemical plant along the Brazos River in Freeport, Texas.The Dow petrochemical plant in Freeport, Texas was found to be the worst wastewater polluter in the nation, according to a new report. That's one of the findings of the Environmental Integrity Project's (EIP) latest study entitled, "Plastic's Toxic River," which was released Thursday afternoon. The report, which looks into data from 2021 to 2023, found that dozens of petrochemical plants — factories that use oil and gas to make plastics, industrial chemicals and pesticides — have been breaking federal regulations without substantial, if any, repercussions. Among the 70 petrochemical plants the EIP reported on, 58 were found to have violated at least one wastewater regulation. Only eight plants have been penalized, with the average fine being $266. Krisen Schlemmer, a senior legal director at Bayou City Waterkeeper, a Houston-based environmental protection nonprofit, emphasized in a webinar that when it comes to violating wastewater regulations, "some of the worst actors are here in our backyard in Texas." Among the plants that have violated the Clean Waters Act, 28 are in Texas, leaving only two plants in the state that have not broken federal wastewater regulations. Local environmental experts and the report's authors point to the Environmental Protection Agency's lax regulations for why plants have continued to dump dangerous — and at high amounts lethal — chemicals into waterways. Jen Duggan, the EIP’s executive director, said it’s communities of color and low-income households that are the most at risk. "The unchecked pollution from these plants hurts peoples' livelihoods and quality of life, it puts our health at risk," Duggan said. "It puts our health at risk, and it shifts the cost of cleaning up this pollution to communities instead of the companies who are creating it.” The Dow plant in Brazoria County was the report's top wastewater polluter of three toxic chemicals: dioxin, nitrogen and phosphorus, and dioxin. Dioxin is a potent and toxic chemical that has been linked to cancer, reproductive and developmental problems, hormone imbalances and weakened immune systems. Just one drop of dioxin is enough to contaminate 44 swimming pools, according to the EPA. Yet, there aren't federal limits to the amount of dioxins plastics and chemical plants can release into waterways. The Dow Freeport plant released more than 800 grams of dioxins into the Brazos River in 2022. Additionally, according to the report, in 2023 it released more than 3.3 million pounds of nitrogen and nearly 700,000 pounds of phosphorus into the river. Schlemmer said both chemicals "degrade water quality, making it difficult for life to survive in the water. Yet, these are exactly the things that the Dows Freeport facility was found to have discharged into the Brazos River, which is upstream from popular fishing spots as well as a surfside beach." To encourage tougher regulations over petrochemical plants, the report's authors made five recommendations to protect communities and wildlife: Require the use of modern wastewater pollution tracking technology Prohibit dumping plastic pellets into waterways Update and improve monitoring requirements in permit applications and permits Increase enforcement of Clean Water Act permit violations and impose penalties Improve permit transparency and recordkeeping

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.