Landfill sparks alarm after test reveals toxic chemicals exceed safe limits: 'The plume size is completely unknown'
A landfill in Central Washington that was tested for elevated levels of toxic "forever chemicals" could be contaminating the local water supply and endangering residents.
Advocacy group Friends of Rocky Top had previously called out other environmental problems at the Rocky Top Environmental landfill near Yakima, per Northwest Public Broadcasting. The concerns included fire, pungent odors, and airborne litter.
Now, it's worried that soil tainted with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances and dumped at the site has contaminated groundwater. In response to protests by the group, the landfill set up monitoring wells, and testing showed PFAS levels surpassed cleanup levels. One well tested at 21 nanograms per liter; the Environmental Protection Agency considers levels of 4 nanograms per liter too high, per the report.
"The amount of the contamination and the plume size is completely unknown," said Scott Cave, a consultant for Friends of Rocky Top, according to Northwest Public Broadcasting. "We have no idea where that plume is gone or if we're even going to find it in neighbors' wells."
PFAS are a group of human-made chemicals that are found in a variety of consumer products including nonstick cookware and water-repellent clothing along with firefighting foams. Exposure to these substances has been associated with a number of negative health impacts. For instance, one study found that exposure to PFAS through drinking water before birth could lead to an increased risk of childhood cancers. Another paper tied these chemicals to an increased risk of cardiovascular diseases in postmenopausal women.
Meanwhile, these chemicals are all around us. For instance, one study found that over 20% of Americans may be exposed to detectable levels of PFAS in their tap water, and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry says most Americans have been exposed to PFAS and have it in their blood.
In April 2024, the EPA issued its first national and legally enforceable drinking water standard for PFAS, part of the agency's PFAS Strategic Roadmap. However, it is unknown how the EPA will move forward with PFAS regulations under the Trump administration. For instance, in February, the administration rescinded a proposed rule that would have set national limits on the discharge of PFAS into waterways.
However, some states are taking action to protect residents. For one, Minnesota recently enacted a law that prohibits the willful addition of PFAS to 11 product categories, including cleaners, mattresses, automotive maintenance products, cookware, and other items. The law will expand to ban nearly all uses of PFAS by 2032.
You can help reduce your exposure by opting for PFAS-free brands and limiting your purchases of nonstick cookware as well as stain- and water-resistant clothing.
What source of air pollution do you worry most about at home?
Wildfires
Gas stove
Fireplace
Something else
Click your choice to see results and speak your mind.
Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, 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
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Who's in charge? CDC's leadership 'crisis' apparent amid new COVID-19 vaccine guidance
WASHINGTON (AP) — There was a notable absence last week when U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced in a 58-second video that the government would no longer endorse the COVID-19 vaccine for healthy children or pregnant women. The director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — the person who typically signs off on federal vaccine recommendations — was nowhere to be seen. The CDC, a $9.2 billion-a-year agency tasked with reviewing life-saving vaccines, monitoring diseases and watching for budding threats to Americans' health, is without a clear leader. 'I've been disappointed that we haven't had an aggressive director since — February, March, April, May — fighting for the resources that CDC needs,' said Dr. Robert Redfield, who served as CDC director under the first Trump administration and supported Kennedy's nomination as the nation's health secretary. $9.2 billion-a-year agency without leader as nomination awaits The leadership vacuum at a foremost federal public health agency has existed for months, after President Donald Trump suddenly withdrew his first pick for CDC director in March. A hearing for his new nominee — the agency's former acting director Susan Monarez — has not been scheduled because she has not submitted all the paperwork necessary to proceed, according to a spokesman for Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-La., who will oversee the nomination. HHS did not answer written questions about Monarez's nomination, her current role at the CDC or her salary. An employee directory lists Monarez, a longtime government employee, as a staffer for the NIH under the Advanced Research Projects Agency for Health. Redfield described Kennedy as 'very supportive' of Monarez's nomination. Instead, a lawyer and political appointee with no medical experience is 'carrying out some of the duties' of director at the agency that for seven decades has been led by someone with a medical degree. Matthew Buzzelli, who is also the chief of staff at the CDC, is 'surrounded by highly qualified medical professionals and advisors to help fulfill these duties as appropriate,' Andrew Nixon, an HHS spokesperson said in a statement. Adding to the confusion was an employee-wide email sent last week that thanked 'new acting directors who shave stepped up to the plate." The email, signed by Monarez, listed her as the acting director. It was was sent just days after Kennedy said at a Senate hearing that Monarez had been replaced by Buzzelli. The lack of a confirmed director will be a problem if a public health emergency such as the COVID-19 pandemic or a rapid uptick in measles cases hits, said Michael Osterholm, an epidemiologist at the University of Minnesota. 'CDC is a crisis, waiting for a crisis to happen,' said Osterholm. 'At this point, I couldn't tell you for the life of me who was going to pull what trigger in a crisis situation." An acting director rarely seen, and stalled decisions At CDC headquarters in Atlanta, employees say Monarez was rarely heard from between late January – when she was appointed acting director – and late March, when Trump nominated her. She also has not held any of the 'all hands' meetings that were customary under previous CDC chiefs, according to several staffers. One employee, who insisted on anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media and fears being fired if identified said Monarez has been almost invisible since her nomination, adding that her absence has been cited by other leaders as an excuse for delaying action. The situation already has led to confusion. In April, a 15-member CDC advisory panel of outside experts met to discuss vaccine policy. The panel makes recommendations to the CDC Director, who routinely signs off on them. But it was unclear during the meeting who would be reviewing the panel's recommendations, which included the expansion of RSV vaccinations for adults and a new combination shot as another option to protect teens against meningitis. HHS officials said the recommendations were going to Buzzelli, but then weeks passed with no decision. A month after the meeting ended, the CDC posted on a web site that Kennedy had signed off on recommendations for travelers against chikungunya, a viral disease transmitted to humans by mosquitos. But there continues to be no word about a decision about the other vaccine recommendations. Controversial COVID-19 vaccine recommendations bypassed CDC panel The problem was accentuated again last week, when Kennedy rolled out recommendations for the COVID-19 vaccine saying they were no longer recommended for healthy children or pregnant women, even though expectant mothers are considered a high-risk group if they contract the virus. Kennedy made the surprise announcement without input from the CDC advisory panel that has historically made recommendations on the nation's vaccine schedule. The CDC days later posted revised guidance that said healthy kids and pregnant women may get the shots. Nixon, the HHS spokesman, said CDC staff were consulted on the recommendations, but would not provide staffer's names or titles. He also did not provide the specific data or research that Kennedy reviewed to reach his conclusion on the new COVID-19 recommendations, just weeks after he said that he did not think 'people should be taking medical advice' from him. 'As Secretary Kennedy said, there is a clear lack of data to support the repeat booster strategy in children,' Nixon said in a statement. Research shows that pregnant women are at higher risk of severe illness, mechanical ventilation and death, when they contract COVID-19 infections. During the height of the pandemic, deaths of women during pregnancy or shortly after childbirth soared to their highest level in 50 years. Vaccinations also have been recommended for pregnant women because it passes immunity to newborns who are too young for vaccines and also vulnerable to infections. Nixon did not address a written question about recommendations for pregnant women. Kennedy's decision to bypass the the advisory panel and announce new COVID-19 recommendations on his own prompted a key CDC official who works with the committee – Dr. Lakshmi Panagiotakopoulos – to announce her resignation last Friday. 'My career in public health and vaccinology started with a deep-seated desire to help the most vulnerable members of our population, and that is not something I am able to continue doing in this role,' she wrote in an email seen by an Associated Press reporter. Signs are mounting that the CDC has been 'sidelined' from key decision-making under Kennedy's watch, said Dr. Anand Parekh, the chief medical adviser for The Bipartisan Policy Center. 'It's difficult to ascertain how we will reverse the chronic disease epidemic or be prepared for myriad public health emergencies without a strong CDC and visible, empowered director,' Parekh said. 'It's also worth noting that every community in the country is served by a local or state public health department that depends on the scientific expertise of the CDC and the leadership of the CDC director.'
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
NASA scientists describe ‘absolute sh*tshow' at agency as Trump budget seeks to dismantle top US climate lab
NASA scientists are in a state of anxious limbo after the Trump administration proposed a budget that would eliminate one of the United States' top climate labs – the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, or GISS – as a standalone entity. In its place, it would move some of the lab's functions into a broader environmental modeling effort across the agency. Career specialists are now working remotely, awaiting details and even more unsure about their future at the lab after they were kicked out of their longtime home in New York City last week. Closing the lab for good could jeopardize its value and the country's leadership role in global climate science, sources say. 'It's an absolute sh*tshow,' one GISS scientist said under condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media. 'Morale at GISS has never been lower, and it feels for all of us that we are being abandoned by NASA leadership.' 'We are supposedly going to be integrated into this new virtual NASA modeling institute, but (we have) no idea what that will actually look like,' they said. NASA is defending its budget proposal, with a nod toward the lab's future. 'NASA's GISS has a significant place in the history of space science and its work is critical for the Earth Science Division, particularly as the division looks to the future of its modeling work and capabilities,' NASA spokesperson Cheryl Warner said in a statement. 'Fundamental contributions in research and applications from GISS directly impact daily life by showing the Earth system connections that impact the air we breathe, our health, the food we grow, and the cities we live in,' Warner said. GISS has a storied history in climate science on the global scale. James Hansen, a former director, first called national attention to human-caused global warming at a Senate hearing during the hot summer of 1988. The lab, founded in 1961, is still known worldwide for its computer modeling of the planet that enable scientists to make projections for how climate change may affect global temperatures, precipitation, extreme weather events and other variables. The about 125 scientists who work there are also known for tracking global temperatures, with GISS' records serving as one of the independent checks on other labs around the world monitoring global warming. The lab stands out, the scientist said, for its 'fundamental work contributing to our understanding of global warming, volcanic and aerosol forcing of climate, and advances in detection and attribution' of climate change impacts. 'All work that was curiosity-driven and enabled by the autonomy we had at GISS to pursue these questions,' they said, adding: 'Everyone is stressed because we have no clarity from leadership on even what the long-term plan is. (It) Really feels like we are just being left to die on the vine.' Another GISS scientist, who also spoke under the condition of anonymity, said the lab's independence has been key to its success, which can be seen in the abundance of published studies from researchers at the facility. The autonomy afforded to GISS over the years, given its distance from NASA headquarters in Washington, and its academic-like freedom helped its researchers take on important studies that might not be pursued in other circumstances, they said. And unlike high-level managers at NASA, GISS' leadership received high marks for their communications and advocacy of the center's work, according to three researchers. 'It is important for climate modeling to continue,' one of the GISS researchers said. 'They're the best tools that we have for the planet.' A technical NASA budget supplement released late last week committed to 'strengthening America's leadership in space exploration while exercising fiscal responsibility. NASA is adapting the way we work and invest to accomplish our mission,' Warner, the spokesperson, said. That Republicans' proposed NASA budget includes funding for climate modeling at all is notable, considering its cuts for space exploration and overall Earth science. Numerous space exploration missions and satellites would be abandoned under the budget, including some satellites already in space that are actively sending climate-related data back to Earth. The budget supplement makes GISS' fate both clear and hazy. It states Earth system modeling activities at four different NASA centers will be merged into one 'virtual institute.' This would incorporate 'core capabilities' of GISS 'as needed,' it adds. 'GISS as an independent entity will not continue,' the document says. This fate may be considerably better for NASA's climate scientists than the worst-case scenario seen at agencies like the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, where the budget for nearly its entire weather and climate research portfolio would be zeroed out and most of its research labs shuttered. Overall, the NASA budget would be a 24% cut compared to last year, with a 47% cut to agency science activities, according to The Planetary Society, a group that advances space science and innovation. Its analysis found the NASA funding level would be the smallest since 1961 when adjusted for inflation. The ultimate decisions on the future of climate modeling at NASA, as well as its space exploration activities, will fall to Congress as members consider the budget proposal, adding even more uncertainty to an already fraught period for GISS's staff.
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
BYU geologist studies shrapnel remains from WWII buried in the sands of Normandy
NORMANDY, France () — A team of geologists excavated the beaches of Normandy searching for shrapnel left from one of the bloodiest battles in modern history. In June of 2024, BYU geology professor Sam Hudson led a team of four geologists on an excavation of each of the five landing sites along the Normandy coastline. The team's goal was to study the changes in the beaches over time. 'It's really important to see how long man-made materials like shrapnel remain in a natural setting,' Hudson said. According to a BYU press release, debris during wartime can play a large role in geological research and help researchers track and measure geological change. Researchers are using the shrapnel as a way to study coastal processes, including how much sediment has been built up since the war. 'Understanding the rate of change in natural systems is a big deal, and it's something that's usually really hard to measure,' Hudson said. World War II pilot from Bountiful accounted for nearly 80 years after death on warfront The team was comprised of geologists from the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Just last month, Hudson returned to Normandy along with six students to collect more samples. 'It's been a really exciting opportunity to show this intersection of geology and history to the world,' said Liv Tatum, a student at BYU. Hudson said the project has been an opportunity for him to honor his grandfather, who served in the Pacific Theater during WWII. Hudson will be speaking at the International Conference on Military Geosciences at West Point next year. President Trump meets with German chancellor BYU geologist studies shrapnel remains from WWII buried in the sands of Normandy Trump says Egypt excluded from travel ban because 'they have things under control' Trump 'disappointed' by Musk criticism of 'big, beautiful bill' Thousands affected by downtown Salt Lake City power outage Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
