Latest news with #EnvironmentalDefenseFund
E&E News
12 hours ago
- Business
- E&E News
Relaxing tailpipe rules would hurt climate and consumers, critics say
New cars and trucks wouldn't have to go as far on a gallon of gas under new standards being considered by the Trump administration. The changes to Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards are still under discussion. But the possibility already has sparked an outcry among critics, who say the move wouldn't necessarily make cars cheaper but would increase both tailpipe emissions and fuel costs for consumers. 'The Trump administration's reported plans to weaken fuel economy standards will mean higher costs for Americans at the gas pump and more reliance on foreign oil,' said Peter Zalzal, associate vice president for clean air strategies at the Environmental Defense Fund. Advertisement It's still unclear when the Trump administration plans to make the move or how much it plans to lower fuel economy standards. But Trump's Transportation Department already has taken a step in that direction by declaring last month that it aims to reset the tailpipe rules put in place by the Biden administration.
Fashion United
27-05-2025
- Health
- Fashion United
Indian textile industry faces scrutiny over toxic chemical contamination
A recent study by environmental advocacy group Toxics Link, in collaboration with the Environmental Defense Fund, has raised concerns over the presence of hazardous chemicals in India's textile industry. The report highlights the widespread use of nonylphenol and its ethoxylates (NPEs) in textile manufacturing processes, substances known for their endocrine-disrupting properties and environmental persistence. The research involved sampling various textiles, detergents, and environmental media across key industrial regions in India. Findings indicate that nonylphenol contamination is prevalent, not only in textile products but also in wastewater and surrounding ecosystems. This contamination poses risks to aquatic life and potentially to human health through water sources and food chains. Human exposure to NP and NPE occurs through multiple pathways, including ingestion of contaminated food and water, inhalation of polluted air, and contact with household dust. Additional exposure risks arise from NP migration from plastic packaging into food and beverages, as well as the use of textiles, detergents, and personal care products containing NP. - Report "TOXIC THREADS" Assessing Nonylphenol Contamination in Indian Textiles & the Environment. Despite global regulatory measures restricting the use of such chemicals—such as the European Union's REACH regulation and similar policies in other countries—India's regulatory framework remains less stringent. The continued use of NPEs in Indian textiles may have implications for international trade, especially as global markets increasingly demand environmentally compliant products. The report calls for urgent policy interventions, including stricter regulations on hazardous substances in textiles, improved wastewater treatment infrastructure, and increased transparency in chemical usage within the industry. It also emphasizes the need for consumer awareness and corporate responsibility to drive demand for safer, sustainable textile production practices. As the global textile market moves towards sustainability, India's industry faces the challenge of aligning with international environmental standards to maintain its competitiveness and protect public health.
The Independent
26-05-2025
- Politics
- The Independent
‘Deeply concerning': Climate scientists sound alarm over Trump plans to remove limits on power plant emissions
Climate scientists are slamming plans from Donald Trump 's administration to end limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. The Environmental Protection Agency is drafting a plan to end all limits on greenhouse gases emitted by coal and gas-fired power plants, The New York Times reports. The agency argues that the greenhouse gases emitted by these plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution,' according to a draft plan reviewed by the newspaper. However, fossil fuels are the 'single largest industrial source of climate destabilizing carbon dioxide in the U.S.,' according to Vickie Patton, general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund. The United States is one of the world's top greenhouse gas producers —second only to China. The new rule is 'an abuse of the E.P.A.'s responsibility under the law,' Patton said. The agency sent the draft to the White House on May 2, and it's expected to be released in June, according to The Times. Climate scientists say the potential move is 'deeply concerning.' 'If true, this is a deeply concerning move from the Trump EPA,' according to Dr. Gretchen Goldman, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists. 'There is no meaningful path to reducing U.S. carbon emissions without limiting greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants — the largest domestic stationary source of [ greenhouse gases ],' she wrote. 'This is an agency with 'environmental protection' in its name and it is trying to slow down phasing out of these plants and disincentivize renewables,' added environmental researcher Dr. Diren Kocakuşak. Patrick Drupp, director of climate policy at the Sierra Club, told The Washington Post the move is 'reprehensible' and designed to 'curry favor and earn some brownie points with the fossil-fuel industry.' The rule comes after a 2022 Supreme Court decision that said the EPA can't force utilities to shut down coal plants and switch to renewable energy sources. The Trump administration's new rule will also overturn rules introduced in President Joe Biden 's final year in office, which sought to limit U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. 'Many have voiced concerns that the last administration's replacement for that rule is similarly overreaching and an attempt to shut down affordable and reliable electricity generation in the United States, raising prices for American families, and increasing the country's reliance on foreign forms of energy,' an EPA spokesperson said in a statement to The Independent. The proposal will be published after an interagency review and approval from EPA chief Lee Zeldin, the spokesperson said. 'In reconsidering the Biden-Harris rule that ran afoul of Supreme Court case law, we are seeking to ensure that the agency follows the rule of law while providing all Americans with access to reliable and affordable energy,' Zeldin said in a statement. The rule will likely face legal challenges once it's official, but some say it could open the door for further deregulation. 'If the administration is going to do this, it is the strategically smartest way,' Jonathan Adler, a law professor at Case Western University, told the Times. 'If they're successful with regard to power plants, they're pretty much going to be successful with everything else,' he added.
Boston Globe
25-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Documents show EPA wants to erase greenhouse gas limits on power plants
Advertisement The EPA sent the draft to the White House for review on May 2. It could undergo changes before it is formally released and the public is given the opportunity to offer comments, likely in June. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The proposed regulation is part of a broader attack by the Trump administration on the established science that greenhouse gases threaten human health and the environment. Scientists have overwhelmingly concluded that carbon dioxide, methane, and other greenhouse gases from the burning of oil, gas, and coal are dangerously heating the planet. 'Fossil fuel power plants are the single-largest industrial source of climate-destabilizing carbon dioxide in the United States, and emit pollution levels that exceed the vast majority of countries in the world,' said Vickie Patton, general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, an environmental group. Advertisement She called the proposed regulation 'an abuse of the EPA's responsibility under the law' and added, 'It flies in the face of common sense and puts millions of people in harm's way to say the single-largest industrial source of carbon dioxide in the United States is not significant.' The draft reviewed by the Times said the agency 'is proposing to repeal all greenhouse gas emissions standards for fossil fuel-fired power plants.' That would include Biden-era requirements that existing coal-fired units capture carbon pollution before it leaves the smokestack and store it, and that require some new gas plants use technologies that pollute less. 'We are seeking to ensure that the agency follows the rule of law while providing all Americans with access to reliable and affordable energy,' Lee Zeldin, the EPA administrator, said in a statement. Zeldin's spokesperson, Molly Vaseliou, declined to offer more information about the plan, other than to say 'the proposal will be published once it has completed interagency review and been signed by the administrator.' The Trump administration is methodically uprooting policies aimed at curbing climate change, and the EPA is at the epicenter of that effort. In recent weeks, Zeldin has shuttered offices responsible for regulating climate and air pollution and has launched the repeal of more than two dozen regulations and policies. The agency is feeling pressure from the White House to finalize its deregulations by December, according to two people briefed on internal discussions who spoke on the condition of anonymity in order to describe them. That would be an extraordinarily fast pace. Rewriting regulations can typically take more than a year. Advertisement One target is a 2009 EPA finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health. That determination underpins most federal climate regulations, and repealing it would erase the agency's legal authority to regulate carbon pollution from power plants, vehicles, oil and gas infrastructure, and other sources. Zeldin said deregulation would drive 'a dagger straight into the heart of the climate change religion.' In proposing to lift regulations on power plants, the EPA points to the fact that the US share of global power sector emissions represented about 3 percent of worldwide greenhouse gases in 2022, down from 5.5 percent in 2005. So, it argued, even if US power plants erased all their greenhouse gases from the power sector, the risk to public health would not be 'meaningfully' improved. But in the U.S., power plants were responsible for about 25 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in 2022. They emitted about 1.5 billion metric tons of emissions in 2023, which is more than the total greenhouse gas emissions produced by most countries. Just a year ago, when the Biden administration announced tough new limits on pollution from existing coal-fired power plants as well as some new gas-burning plants, the EPA said the restrictions would mean that by 2035, the nation would annually avoid up to 1,200 premature deaths, 870 hospital visits, 1,900 cases of asthma, 48,000 school absences, and 57,000 lost work days. Attorneys who represent utility companies said they agree that the sector is a small part of the global climate problem. 'The argument is a solid argument,' said Jeffrey Holmstead, who served in the EPA during both Bush administrations and now represents utility companies as a lawyer for the firm Bracewell. Advertisement But he wondered if it would hold up under a legal challenge. 'I just don't know, if you're contributing 3 percent of greenhouse gas emissions, the court will say, 'That's not significant,' when there's hardly anybody that contributes more than that.' Only China releases more pollution from its power plants than the United States. The EPA plan is likely to face lawsuits once it is finalized. If it survives, it could block future administrations from regulating carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, eliminating a tool that Democratic administrations have relied on to tackle climate change. It also could make it easier to unravel other climate regulations, some experts said. 'If the administration is going to do this, it is the strategically smartest way,' said Jonathan Adler, a conservative law professor at Case Western University. 'If they're successful with regard to power plants, they're pretty much going to be successful with everything else,' he said. This article originally appeared in
Yahoo
24-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
GOP bill would gut clean energy manufacturing in Arizona, analysts and advocates say
House Republicans passed their "One, Big, Beautiful Bill" through the reconciliation process on May 22, sending it to the U.S. Senate and one step closer to being signed into law by President Donald Trump. Ways and Means Chairman Rep. Jason Smith, R-Missouri, issued a statement claiming the bill "locks in the successful 2017 Trump tax cuts" and, if passed, would result in "made-in-America incentives" and secure more than 7 million jobs over the next four years, with wage increases of more than $11,000. 'This bill represents an historic opportunity to deliver economic freedom for working families, farmers and small businesses," Smith said. But a long list of analysts and advocates are adamant that it would have devastating consequences for clean energy progress, related manufacturing projects and jobs, air quality and electricity prices in Arizona — all while adding between $3.3 trillion and $5.2 trillion to the federal debt, which Trump promised and has so far failed to lower. The House passed the reconciliation package at 3:54 a.m. MST on May 22 with a margin of just one vote — 215 Republicans were in favor and 214 opposing votes came from two other Republicans and all 212 Democrats present. Within the hour, national and local organizations began issuing statements vehemently opposing the bill's continued progress through the Senate on the grounds that it would reverse gains in air quality and wildlife protections, for domestic clean energy and electric vehicle industries and in ensuring affordable and equitable access to electricity for all Americans. Many had been watching the bill's progress through the House closely in recent weeks. 'This bill is an ugly mess for companies and workers, families and communities,' said Joanna Slaney, vice president for political and government affairs at Environmental Defense Fund, in a statement issued at 4:33 a.m. on May 22. 'Its nearly full repeal of the tax credits that help the U.S. produce some of the world's cleanest energy would raise household electricity prices, create uncertainty for businesses, send jobs to other countries and threaten people's health with more pollution." Environmental Defense Fund shared statistics from an Energy Innovation analysis that a repeal of Biden-era clean energy tax incentives would raise household energy costs by $32 billion over the next decade and cut about 700,000 American jobs, while emitting unnecessary climate pollution equal to an additional 116 million cars. In Arizona specifically, which has benefited more than most states from clean energy investments related to then-President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act since 2022, the cuts would jeopardize more than 25,000 solar and EV manufacturing and construction jobs and add nearly $160 to average annual household energy costs by 2035, according to the nonpartisan energy and climate policy think tank's report. Arizona utilities issued "blank check": Gov. Hobbs signs utility financing bill, reigniting opposition, raising donation questions The budget reconciliation package would also "mark a harmful reversal of efforts to address crises facing wildlife and people," according to the National Wildlife Federation in a statement sent at 6:23 a.m. The National Wildlife Federation flagged the bill's removal of protections for clean air and water and efforts to "short-circuit proper environmental review for government-approved projects." 'At a time when wildlife and people need Congress to meet the moment and address the immense and interconnected challenges they face, this legislation callously struts in the opposite direction,' said Abby Tinsley, National Wildlife Federation's vice president for conservation policy, in the statement. 'The Senate should reject this bill and go back to the drawing board.' Defenders of Wildlife also opposed how the reconciliation bill "authorizes the destruction and degradation of large swaths of public lands and waters currently home to hundreds of imperiled species," in a statement sent at 8:19 a.m. The organization's vice president of government relations, Robert Dewey, warned of "unchecked logging and energy extraction designed to increase corporate profit at the expense of our public health and natural habitat." In one exception to the overall tone from environmental groups, the Center for Western Priorities celebrated the last-minute removal from the bill of provisions to sell or swap hundreds of thousands of acres of public land in Utah and Nevada, a momentary win for wildlife, recreation enthusiasts and nature lovers, as well as for the effective management of clean air and water across the region. 'Clearly, selling off public lands is still a third rail for members of Congress on both sides of the aisle,' said the Center for Western Priorities' Deputy Director Aaron Weiss in a statement issued just before 7 a.m. Other organizations highlighted injustices still likely to result from the proposal's remaining language, or language added just before the vote. "This anti-environmental billionaire tax scam would limit our ability to build new power generation fast enough to meet rising electricity demands," said Vianey Olivarría, state executive director for Chispa Arizona, in a statement released at 11:28 p.m. "And in the case of low income and communities of color who have borne the brunt of air pollution for generations, it will reverse decades of progress in protecting our air." And the Guttmacher Institute objected to provisions added at the last minute that it said in a 9:30 a.m. statement would "have major implications for people's access to reproductive health care nationwide," which has been linked to climate concerns among young people reconsidering parenthood in an environmentally destabilized world. In a release sent at 3:15 p.m. from local organizations including Poder Latinx, the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club, the Arizona branch of Mom's Clean Air Force, Arizona Alliance for Retired Americans and the Arizona coalition of Mountain Mamas, the groups joined together to condemn the bill's "harmful impact on Arizona families and businesses" while saying Congress "should be doubling down on innovation and energy independence." That innovation and independence won't come from the business-as-usual policies benefiting the oil and gas industry, according to cleaner electrification advocates. 'This policy about-face couldn't come at a worse time: energy prices have surged 30 percent since 2020," noted Rewiring America's CEO Ari Matusiak in a statement about the bill sent at 10:51 a.m. "Maintaining these tax credits gives American households an opportunity to offset these price hikes, potentially saving up to $990 a year with efficiency upgrades, $2,240 a year with rooftop solar and 60% on fuel costs with an EV." On top of more than a dozen statements issued from groups active in Arizona opposing the reconciliation bill on the same day it passed in the U.S. House, members of the organization Climate Power, in a briefing that morning, called out specific Arizona representatives for supporting the bill — or helping to write it and then "stepping out" from the session just moments before the vote. That accusation was lobbed at Rep. David Schweikert, the Arizona Republican who is on the Ways and Means Committee that authored the bill but was the only representative from Arizona to not vote on it. All five other House Republicans from the state voted with their party, as did the two Arizona Democrats. Schweikert did not immediately respond to The Arizona Republic's request for comment on his missed vote. Rep. Juan Ciscomani, R-Tucson, also received a critical spotlight from the Grand Canyon Chapter of the Sierra Club in its 3:10 p.m. statement for his "deciding vote to advance Donald Trump's massive budget reconciliation package that would endanger clean air and water, repeal investments in clean energy, and raise costs on Arizona families — all to give more tax cuts and handouts to billionaires and corporate polluters." With 19 of the 22 Arizona projects that have received clean energy tax credits located in Republican districts, according to Climate Power, the organization views these acts by GOP representatives as a striking failure to support the clear benefits to their constituents from the state's momentum in the global economic movement toward energy generation from renewable sources. "This (bill) is going to be a massive challenge for almost all projects that have already been announced," said Jesse Lee, a senior adviser for clean energy economy with Climate Power and a former senior communications adviser to the National Economic Council. "These (provisions) are all unique ways to tie up clean energy projects that don't apply to anything else." Lee referenced a requirement in the reconciliation bill that projects awarded federal funding must break ground within 60 days of receiving clean energy tax credits and be in service by 2028. This would make it nearly impossible for large, complex clean energy projects to succeed and could cause others to lose financing options for reasons that are totally outside of their control, the Climate Power team said. More local impact of Trump orders: Energy emergency? Trump cuts to efficiency, aid programs in AZ could create one They added that recent polling shows 70% of Americans do not want these clean energy tax credits to be repealed. "This is the opposite of a careful process," Lee said. "If you require everything to be built right away, then you can't build anything here, and that's kind of the point. This bill forfeits manufacturing to China and other countries." Lee predicted that, if this bill were to pass, Arizona industries engaged in solar panel installation, electric vehicle battery manufacturing and other efforts to clean up air pollution caused by the transportation and electricity generation sectors would be "revising their projections downward, I'm sure." Joan Meiners is the climate news and storytelling reporter at The Arizona Republic and Her award-winning work has also appeared in Discover Magazine, National Geographic, ProPublica and the Washington Post Magazine. Before becoming a journalist, she completed a doctorate in ecology. Follow Joan on Twitter at @beecycles, on BlueSky at @ or email her at Sign up for AZ Climate, The Republic's weekly climate and environment newsletter. Read more of the team's coverage at by subscribing to This article originally appeared on Arizona Republic: Trump tax bill would gut clean energy progress in Arizona, experts say
