State officials pass nation's strictest ban on chemical found in common household products: 'We simply cannot clean our way out of this problem'
Sometimes, it's the little victories that can inspire much bigger change. For the people of Minnesota, the strictest ban of its kind in the country may just help save lives in the long run.
For decades, many companies have known about the harmful side effects of PFAS, or polyfluoroalkyl substances. The group of chemicals is best known for its resistance to heat, water, oil, and grease.
On January 1, 2025, Amara's Law went into effect in Minnesota. The law prohibits the willful addition of PFAS to 11 product categories, including cleaning products, adult mattresses, automotive maintenance products, cookware, and others. By 2032, the law will expand to ban nearly all uses of PFAS.
Amara's Law is named after Amara Strande, a Minnesota native who died from a rare liver cancer. Strande's cancer was attributed to a contaminated water source located next to a 3M plant outside of Minneapolis-Saint Paul.
A week after the PFAS law went into effect, the Cookware Sustainability Alliance filed a complaint against Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA) Commissioner Katrina Kessler. The organization is one of many fighting to prevent the ban of PFAS.
According to the Cookware Sustainability Alliance, not only is the ban discriminatory against out-of-state commerce, but it is also unconstitutional, violating the Commerce Clause. The clause was designed to prevent states from standing in the way of interstate commerce.
In response, the MPCA issued a statement urging the removal of harmful PFAS from the environment before it is too late. "It is estimated Minnesota taxpayers will have to spend $28 billion in the next 20 years to remove PFAS from wastewater and landfill leachate in the state; we simply cannot clean our way out of this problem," the MPCA said.
According to the EPA, PFAS are extremely resistant to breaking down over time, leading to an excess of waste, which earned them their "forever chemicals" nickname. Additionally, PFAS have made their way into drinking water, food products, and personal care products.
According to the National Cancer Institute, forever chemicals like PFAS have been under scrutiny since their discovery in the 1940s. Researchers have worked for years to determine if PFAS may contribute to the development of hormone-related cancers such as breast, thyroid, and prostate cancer.
Do you think gas stoves should be banned nationwide?
No way
Let each state decide
I'm not sure
Definitely
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
While PFAS do pose a threat to the environment and our health, actions like Amara's Law can help prevent further damage.
Join our free newsletter for easy tips to save more and waste less, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Politico
40 minutes ago
- Politico
A good day to be a fossil fuel
The Trump administration is intensifying its efforts to boost the fossil fuel industry. Its latest move: proposing a free pass to pollute. The Environmental Protection Agency today announced it would roll back Biden-era limits on carbon and toxic air pollution from power plants. While the nation is the world's second-biggest climate polluter, lagging only behind China, EPA argues that the U.S. power sector's pollution does not contribute enough to global climate change to justify regulating it, write Alex Guillén and Jean Chemnick. That's even though the power sector alone emits more carbon pollution than most countries and accounts for one-quarter of U.S. greenhouse gases. Former President Joe Biden's climate rule for power plants requires new natural gas plants and existing coal-fired units to eventually capture and store their greenhouse gas emissions. Analysts had anticipated that the measure — which the Trump administration aims to repeal by the end of the year — would make a significant dent in power sector climate pollution. The administration does not plan to issue a replacement rule, a person familiar with the agency's plans told Jean and Zack Colman. EPA also announced today that it aims to repeal a separate rule that curbs toxic mercury pollution from power plants. The agency's moves build on a slew of other Trump administration efforts to decimate U.S. climate policy. Trump plans to sign a trio of resolutions Thursday to revoke California's national-leading vehicle emissions standards, writes Alex Nieves. The administration has also taken a sledgehammer to executive branch programs dealing with climate change, from NASA's climate research division to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's heat team. And congressional Republicans are weighing to what extent they will unravel hundreds of billions of dollars in tax credits for clean energy production from Democrats' 2022 climate law. Era of inertia: If Trump's newest EPA rule repeal sticks, it will extend a 15-year-long streak of setbacks for regulators' and lawmakers' attempts to address one of the nation's biggest climate pollution sources, Zack, Benjamin Storrow and Annie Snider write: 'The years of whipsawing moves have left Washington with no consistent approach on how — or whether — to confront climate change, even as scientists warn that years are growing short to avoid catastrophic damage to human society.' It's Wednesday — thank you for tuning in to POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, Arianna Skibell. Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to askibell@ Today in POLITICO Energy's podcast: Josh Siegel breaks down why Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, the top Democrat on the Energy and Natural Resources Committee, thinks the GOP megabill will cost Republicans at the ballot box. Power Centers AI boom could boost 'forever chemicals'The artificial intelligence boom isn't only driving up demand for power, it's also spurring production of so-called forever chemicals used to build semiconductor chips needed for data centers, writes Miranda Willson. Chemical giant Chemours, for example, is pushing to expand production of forever chemicals to meet surging demand, raising concerns about whether the company can scale up its output without releasing more toxic pollutants. Heat déjà vuLast month was the world's second-warmest May on record, European scientists have found, writes Louise Guillot. The same scientists found that this April was also the second-warmest April globally on record. It followed a March that was the warmest on record. In Other News AI futures: Data centers are building their own natural gas power plants in Texas. Trash sucks: A Norwegian city uses vacuum tubes to whisk waste away. Subscriber Zone A showcase of some of our best subscriber content. Energy Secretary Chris Wright was put in the uncomfortable position of defending Trump's decision to save a New York offshore wind project that it had pushed to the brink of collapse. Federal employee unions secured a legal victory this week when a federal court issued an order blocking the Office of Personnel Management from giving DOGE access to its records. The Transportation Department is set to release a draft of its overhauled guidance for the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program later this month. That's it for today, folks! Thanks for reading.
The Hill
an hour ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump proposes axing all climate rules for power plants
The Trump administration is moving to ax all climate rules alongside Biden-era and pollution rules for power plants. The moves come as the Trump administration looks to promote a fossil fueled future — and are expected to worsen global warming and air pollution. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to find that power plants' greenhouse gas emissions 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous air pollution' and therefore should not be regulated. In effect, this proposal would overturn Biden-era rules that required existing coal and new gas plants to capture at least 90 percent of their carbon emissions and tighten restrictions on coal plants' releases of mercury and other toxic metals. The climate rule that the Trump administration is proposing to ax would have prevented 1.4 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions between the years 2038 and 2047 – emissions equivalent to taking more than 300 million gas-powered cars off the road for a year, according to Biden-era projections. EPA administrator Lee Zeldin, in a written statement, accused the previous administration of trying to regulate fossil fuels 'out of existence.' 'According to many, the primary purpose of these Biden-Harris administration regulations was to destroy industries that didn't align with their narrow-minded climate change zealotry,' he said. Together, these rules have been criticized as being designed to regulate coal, oil and gas out of existence.' The administration's moves were criticized by environmental advocates, who said they would both worsen climate change and expose Americans to more air pollution. 'The Trump EPA is recklessly disregarding its responsibility under our nation's clean air laws to protect the American people from mercury, arsenic and climate pollution from industrial smokestacks,' Vickie Patton, general counsel of the Environmental Defense Fund, said in a written statement. The administration appears to be going further than even the first Trump administration on power plants. During Trump's first tenure, the EPA put forward weakened power plant rules that would be easier to comply with, while now it is proposing to stop regulating planet-warming emissions from the sector entirely. Updated at 3:37 p.m. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
