The climate superfund and protecting the health of our kids
Sen. Raj Mukherji speaks at a rally in Trenton on Sept. 30, 2024, in support of the Climate Superfund Act, which would require fossil fuel firms to pay for economic damages borne of climate change. (Courtesy of Food & Water Watch)
I have spent the last 10 years working with thousands of wonderful health professionals in New Jersey and across the country who are speaking out about climate change and health.
One problem most people recognize is the obvious (and predicted) increase in the frequency and severity of flooding, wildfires, and heat waves. Lately, medical colleagues from the Carolinas to California tell us stories about how flooding and wildfires are slamming their patients.
Over the years, I have heard too many stories about people hurt in storms, children with asthma suffering severe respiratory effects from wildfire smoke, and older people having heart attacks brought on by heat waves — three among many more frightening, sometimes deadly, predicted health impacts. From Hurricane Sandy to the wildfire smoke of 2023, it's abundantly clear that New Jersey will also not escape the reality of climate science.
Unfortunately, there is a second category of major health concern here. Public health professionals focus on the phrase 'social determinants of health.' These are defined as: 'the conditions in the places where people live, learn, work, and play that affect virtually all health and quality-of life outcomes.' The most obvious examples are, again, the severe weather events that tear up roads and bridges, prevent the shipment and delivery of goods, overrun our water treatment plants, destroy farmers' fields, wipe out crops, and on and on. The full costs imposed on society for all this — including medical costs — are going through the roof.
The nexus of economic loss and damage to the social determinants of health is irrefutably growing. If you don't believe that idea is true, consider the cost to protect your home. Across this country, home insurance costs are skyrocketing. Big insurers like State Farm, Allstate, and Farmers are no longer offering home insurance in entire states. This problem is spreading quickly, including in New Jersey. The physicians, nurses, veterinarians, and other health professionals within Clinicians for Climate Action New Jersey have front-row seats to this slowly unfolding crisis. In these seats, you can't miss that the cost to New Jerseyans will be beyond staggering.
Meanwhile, as countless court cases are demonstrating, including from New Jersey Attorney General Matt Platkin, fossil fuel companies have understood for decades the harm their products would do to the environment, leading to these devastating health harms. The fossil fuel industry misled the public, denied the realities of climate change, and obstructed efforts to decrease its impact. At the same time, fossil fuel companies continue to bring in record profits. The CEO of Chevron said, 'In 2023, we returned more cash to shareholders and produced more oil and natural gas than any year in the company's history.'
What can New Jersey do? Last year, New Jersey legislators began to consider a new idea: the creation of a 'Climate Superfund.' This initiative mirrors laws that have passed in New York and Vermont, with other states on the same path. The idea is simple: Given the vast costs that New Jersey has spent already on climate change damage, it is only fair that fossil fuel companies share those costs. Funds collected by the state would be spent on essential climate resilience projects, including infrastructure improvements, disaster preparedness, health initiatives, and more. This is a fair, commonsense step toward protecting our state's financial stability and the health of our communities. This is taxpayer relief.
Beloved New Jersey baseball icon Yogi Berra once said, 'The future ain't what it used to be.' He was right. If we don't stick to our commitments, our children and grandchildren will rightfully resent the future we are leaving them.
New Jersey was a leader in passing the Spill Act in 1976 to hold polluters responsible for toxic pollution sites, which led to the passage of the national Superfund program. A generation later, it's time for New Jersey to lead to hold climate polluters accountable.
Dan Quinlan is the co-leader of the Clinicians for Climate Action New Jersey. CCANJ's mission is to promote clean energy initiatives and programs that will protect public health and reduce the impacts of climate change on New Jersey's communities.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists make disturbing discovery after examining effects of food packaging materials: 'This is of great significance'
Microplastic pollution is everywhere, leading researchers to search for plastic alternatives. But according to findings published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers say particles from one type of biodegradable plastic used commonly in food packaging could disrupt metabolic cycles. Polylactic acid is a Food and Drug Administration-approved medical biodegradable material that can help replace petroleum-based plastics, and it's already been widely integrated into food packaging. However, PLA is brittle, making it more likely to break down into microplastic particles. Now, a new study points to some pretty serious consequences of PLA microplastics in the bodies of mice. The researchers found that these particles' entry into the gut carbon cycle triggered metabolic reprogramming, ultimately leading to suppressed feeding behavior and significant weight loss. "[This study] is of great significance for assessing the biosafety of degradable plastics, and provides important data support for understanding the impact of degradable plastics on human physiological processes," said one of the study's authors, Chen Chunying, according to the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Microplastics — small plastic particles that break off from larger plastics — are all around us, from the chicken we eat to the water we drink. One high school student even discovered concerning levels of these particles in water at two remote lakes within Grand Teton National Park. These microplastics enter our bodies through the foods and drinks we consume as well as the air we breathe, ending up in organs such as the brain, uterus, and testes. While scientists are still exploring the health impacts of these particles, they've been tied to reproductive issues, testosterone disruption, learning difficulties in children, and more. Although it's difficult to remove microplastics from the environment, it's not entirely impossible. For instance, one group of scientists discovered a way to separate them from water by using egg whites. To reduce the amount of new microplastics entering the environment, it's imperative that we cut our plastic usage. Countries such as England and France are making strides toward that goal by banning plastic cutlery for most fast food and takeout. You can do your part by avoiding as many single-use plastics as possible. Opt instead for reusable shopping bags and water bottles, shampoo bars, and metal razors, for instance. Do you think we use too much plastic in America? Definitely Only some people Not really I'm not sure Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Join our free newsletter for weekly updates on the latest innovations improving our lives and shaping our future, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Yahoo
Your Favorite Snacks May Soon Carry An Alarming Warning Label In Texas. Here's What You Need To Know
If you're a lover of Doritos, Sour Patch Kids, and dozens of other popular snack foods, your favorite treats might soon carry a shocking warning label in Texas. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has made targeting additives a key part of his "Make America Healthy Again" initiative to improve America's food supply, setting off a wave of legislation and government action. The controversial red dye no. 3 was banned in January 2025, and the Food & Drug Administration has started working with food companies on the voluntary removal of other synthetic ingredients and dyes. But some states are taking things even farther, and in Texas, allies of Kennedy are looking to add a warning label to many products that would say they are not recommended for human consumption. The warning label would be an extraordinary step, not just because of how strong it is but because it is based on regulations from other countries, not the U.S. According to USA Today, the warning label would read "WARNING: This product contains an ingredient that is not recommended for human consumption by the appropriate authority in Australia, Canada, the European Union, or the United Kingdom." The label would apply to 44 ingredients that have been banned or have warning labels in other countries. If passed, the regulation will affect popular brands like M&Ms, Mountain Dew, Gatorade, and many chips, packaged baked goods, breakfast cereals, and even less snacky foods like frozen dinners and hot dogs. Read more: The Most Iconic Snack In Every State The disparity between American food regulations and other countries, especially in Europe, has long been a sore spot for activists fighting for cleaner food. This is because the U.S. takes a much different, more hands-off approach to regulating food additives and ingredients. In the EU new ingredients are assumed to be unhealthy and must be proven to be safe before they are added to food. In the U.S., it's the opposite, and new ingredients are assumed to be safe unless proven dangerous through more rigorous scientific testing. This has created a long list of ingredients that are banned in foreign countries that are allowed in the U.S. and is the reason why some American products like Gatorade are banned in certain European countries. Representatives from the food industry have argued against the pending legislation, arguing that the ingredients lists are considered safe by the FDA and that the regulation will increase costs for consumers. The actual level of danger of many of these ingredients is still a source of contentious debate, but some on the list, like potassium bromate, have been linked with side effects like tumor growth. It's still unclear whether the law will pass or if Texas Governor Greg Abbott will veto the bill, but with a state as big as Texas considering a bill like this, America could be taking the first steps towards more stringent European-style regulation of food. Read the original article on Tasting Table.
Epoch Times
2 days ago
- Epoch Times
Ban on Disposable Vapes Comes Into Force Amid Concerns Users Might Switch Back to Smoking
A ban on selling disposable vapes will come into effect across the whole of the UK on Sunday, in a bid to cut their use among children as well as the litter created when improperly thrown away. From June 1, it will be illegal for all retailers to sell single-use vapes, whether or not they contain nicotine. Traders who continue to sell them risk a £200 fine in the first instance, then unlimited fines and possible jail for repeat offences. However, it will still be legal to sell reusable vapes, which are refillable and rechargeable. The Department for Environment, Food, and Rural Affairs (Defra) said the ban would 'put an end to their alarming rise in school playgrounds and the avalanche of rubbish flooding the nation's streets.' Circular economy minister Mary Creagh said: 'For too long, single-use vapes have blighted our streets as litter and hooked our children on nicotine. That ends today. The government calls time on these nasty devices.' Related Stories 4/16/2025 8/28/2024 Last year, the British Medical Association (BMA) Aid to Quit Smoking However, those in the industry warned of the 'serious unintended consequences' that banning disposable vapes could bring. The UK Vaping Industry Association (UKVIA) said that vaping was intended to help smokers quit, and disposable products were successful in aiding smokers to do so because the devices are simple to use and 'most closely replicate the sensation of smoking.' 'We are concerned that this ban will encourage former smokers who have already transitioned from cigarettes—which kill 220 people every day in the UK—to return to combustible tobacco or opt for unregulated vapes,' said John Dunne, the UKVIA's director general. Similar concerns were raised by Yorkshire Cancer Research, which supports the use of vapes to quit smoking and asks the government to make sure vaping products remain accessible to those who want to quit smoking. Stuart Griffiths, the charity's director of research, policy, and impact, said on Thursday that disposable vapes are often used by people on low incomes who may find the initial expense of a starter kit to be too high. 'Since smoking and smoking-related cancers disproportionately affect people from disadvantaged backgrounds, there is a real risk that the ban on disposable vapes could negatively affect efforts to address health inequalities,' he said. 'Not Completely Harmless' The NHS has also However, the health service said that while nicotine vaping 'is less harmful than smoking,' it is not completely harmless 'and we don't know yet what the long-term effects may be.' Children under 18 and adults who have never smoked are advised against vaping, because it can lead to nicotine addiction. File photo of a man exhaling whilst using a vaping product dated Feb. 21, 2020. Wire One concern is that ex-smokers move on to becoming habitual vape users. Analysis conducted by Action on Smoking and Health last year Tobacco and Vapes Bill The separate Tobacco and Vapes Bill is currently working its way through Parliament and includes powers to potentially restrict the packaging, flavours, and marketing of vapes to make them less appealing, especially to children. Dubbed the 'smoking ban' bill, its main purpose is to create a 'smoke-free generation' by banning anyone born after Jan. 1, 2009 from ever legally being able to buy tobacco products. However, it will not criminalise smoking itself. On Thursday, the Scottish Parliament granted its consent to the national legislation, meaning that it agrees to Westminster passing a law that affects the devolved area. The Scottish Government's public health minister Jenni Minto said she was 'determined to ensure a tobacco-free Scotland, where people live longer and healthier lives.' Minto added, 'The bill, once passed, will also ban vapes and nicotine products from being deliberately promoted and advertised to children, stopping the next generation from becoming hooked on nicotine.' File photo of a smoker stubbing out a cigarette dated Feb. 14, 2006. Owen Humphreys/PA Wire Prohibiting certain people from buying tobacco products has sparked criticism from civil liberties campaigners, in particular raising how the law will create a two-tiered system where some adults can buy cigarettes and others cannot, based purely on their date of birth. Simon Clark, director of the smokers' rights group FOREST, 'Creeping prohibition will simply drive the sale of tobacco underground and into the hands of criminal gangs and illicit traders.' PA Media contributed to this report.
