air pollution

toxic-chemicals-from-ohio-train-derailment-lingered-in-buildings-for-months

Toxic chemicals from Ohio train derailment lingered in buildings for months

This video screenshot released by the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) shows the site of a derailed freight train in East Palestine, Ohio.

Enlarge / This video screenshot released by the US National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) shows the site of a derailed freight train in East Palestine, Ohio.

On February 3, 2023, a train carrying chemicals jumped the tracks in East Palestine, Ohio, rupturing railcars filled with hazardous materials and fueling chemical fires at the foothills of the Appalachian Mountains.

The disaster drew global attention as the governors of Ohio and Pennsylvania urged evacuations for a mile around the site. Flames and smoke billowed from burning chemicals, and an acrid odor radiated from the derailment area as chemicals entered the air and spilled into a nearby creek.

Three days later, at the urging of the rail company Norfolk Southern, about 1 million pounds of vinyl chloride, a chemical that can be toxic to humans at high doses, was released from the damaged train cars and set aflame.

Federal investigators later concluded that the open burn and the black mushroom cloud it produced were unnecessary, but it was too late. Railcar chemicals spread into Ohio and Pennsylvania.

As environmental engineers, I and my colleagues are often asked to assist with public health decisions after disasters by government agencies and communities. After the evacuation order was lifted, community members asked for help.

In a new study, we describe the contamination we found, along with problems with the response and cleanup that, in some cases, increased the chances that people would be exposed to hazardous chemicals. It offers important lessons to better protect communities in the future.

How chemicals get into homes and water

When large amounts of chemicals are released into the environment, the air can become toxic. Chemicals can also wash into waterways and seep into the ground, contaminating groundwater and wells. Some chemicals can travel below ground into nearby buildings and make the indoor air unsafe.

A computer model shows how chemicals from the train may have spread, given wind patterns. The star on the Ohio-Pennsylvania line is the site of the derailment.

Enlarge / A computer model shows how chemicals from the train may have spread, given wind patterns. The star on the Ohio-Pennsylvania line is the site of the derailment.

Air pollution can find its way into buildings through cracks, windows, doors, and other portals. Once inside, the chemicals can penetrate home items like carpets, drapes, furniture, counters, and clothing. When the air is stirred up, those chemicals can be released again.

Evacuation order lifted, but buildings were contaminated

Three weeks after the derailment, we began investigating the safety of the area near 17 buildings in Ohio and Pennsylvania. The highest concentration of air pollution occurred in the 1-mile evacuation zone and a shelter-in-place band another mile beyond that. But the chemical plume also traveled outside these areas.

In and outside East Palestine, evidence indicated that chemicals from the railcars had entered buildings. Many residents complained about headaches, rashes, and other health symptoms after reentering the buildings.

At one building 0.2 miles away from the derailment site, the indoor air was still contaminated more than four months later.

Nine days after the derailment, sophisticated air testing by a business owner showed the building’s indoor air was contaminated with butyl acrylate and other chemicals carried by the railcars. Butyl acrylate was found above the two-week exposure level, a level at which measures should be taken to protect human health.

When rail company contractors visited the building 11 days after the wreck, their team left after just 10 minutes. They reported an “overwhelming/unpleasent odor” even though their government-approved handheld air pollution detectors detected no chemicals. This building was located directly above Sulphur Run creek, which had been heavily contaminated by the spill. Chemicals likely entered from the initial smoke plumes and also rose from the creek into the building.

Our tests weeks later revealed that railcar chemicals had even penetrated the business’s silicone wristband products on its shelves. We also detected several other chemicals that may have been associated with the spill.

Homes and businesses were mere feet from the contaminated waterways in East Palestine.

Enlarge / Homes and businesses were mere feet from the contaminated waterways in East Palestine.

Weeks after the derailment, government officials discovered that air in the East Palestine Municipal Building, about 0.7 miles away from the derailment site, was also contaminated. Airborne chemicals had entered that building through an open drain pipe from Sulphur Run.

More than a month after the evacuation order was lifted, the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency acknowledged that multiple buildings in East Palestine were being contaminated as contractors cleaned contaminated culverts under and alongside buildings. Chemicals were entering the buildings.

Toxic chemicals from Ohio train derailment lingered in buildings for months Read More »

memo-to-the-supreme-court:-clean-air-act-targeted-co2-as-climate-pollutant,-study-says

Memo to the Supreme Court: Clean Air Act targeted CO2 as climate pollutant, study says

The exterior of the US Supreme Court building during daytime.

Getty Images | Rudy Sulgan

This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy, and the environment. It is republished with permission. Sign up for its newsletter here

Among the many obstacles to enacting federal limits on climate pollution, none has been more daunting than the Supreme Court. That is where the Obama administration’s efforts to regulate power plant emissions met their demise and where the Biden administration’s attempts will no doubt land.

A forthcoming study seeks to inform how courts consider challenges to these regulations by establishing once and for all that the lawmakers who shaped the Clean Air Act in 1970 knew scientists considered carbon dioxide an air pollutant, and that these elected officials were intent on limiting its emissions.

The research, expected to be published next week in the journal Ecology Law Quarterly, delves deep into congressional archives to uncover what it calls a “wide-ranging and largely forgotten conversation between leading scientists, high-level administrators at federal agencies, members of Congress” and senior staff under Presidents Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. That conversation detailed what had become the widely accepted science showing that carbon dioxide pollution from fossil fuels was accumulating in the atmosphere and would eventually warm the global climate.

The findings could have important implications in light of a legal doctrine the Supreme Court established when it struck down the Obama administration’s power plant rules, said Naomi Oreskes, a history of science professor at Harvard University and the study’s lead author. That so-called “major questions” doctrine asserted that when courts hear challenges to regulations with broad economic and political implications, they ought to consider lawmakers’ original intent and the broader context in which legislation was passed.

“The Supreme Court has implied that there’s no way that the Clean Air Act could really have been intended to apply to carbon dioxide because Congress just didn’t really know about this issue at that time,” Oreskes said. “We think that our evidence shows that that is false.”

The work began in 2013 after Oreskes arrived at Harvard, she said, when a call from a colleague prompted the question of what Congress knew about climate science in the 1960s as it was developing Clean Air Act legislation. She had already co-authored the book Merchants of Doubt, about the efforts of industry-funded scientists to cast doubt about the risks of tobacco and global warming, and was familiar with the work of scientists studying climate change in the 1950s. “What I didn’t know,” she said, “was how much they had communicated that, particularly to Congress.”

Oreskes hired a researcher to start looking, and what they both found surprised her. The evidence they uncovered includes articles cataloged by the staff of the act’s chief architect, proceedings of scientific conferences attended by members of Congress, and correspondence with constituents and scientific advisers to Johnson and Nixon. The material included documents pertaining not only to environmental champions but also to other prominent members of Congress.

“These were people really at the center of power,” Oreskes said.

When Sen. Edmund Muskie, a Maine Democrat, introduced the Clean Air Act of 1970, he warned his colleagues that unchecked air pollution would continue to “threaten irreversible atmospheric and climatic changes.” The new research shows that his staff had collected reports establishing the science behind his statement. He and other senators had attended a 1966 conference featuring discussion of carbon dioxide as a pollutant. At that conference, Wisconsin Sen. Gaylord Nelson warned about carbon dioxide pollution from fossil fuel combustion, which he said “is believed to have drastic effects on climate.”

The paper also cites a 1969 letter to Sen. Henry “Scoop” Jackson of Washington from a constituent who had watched the poet Allen Ginsberg warning of melting polar ice caps and widespread global flooding on the Merv Griffin Show. The constituent was skeptical of the message, called Ginsberg “one of America’s premier kooks” and sought a correction of the record from the senator: “After all, quite a few million people watch this show, people of widely varying degrees of intelligence, and the possibility of this sort of charge—even from an Allen Ginsberg—being accepted even in part, is dangerous.”

Memo to the Supreme Court: Clean Air Act targeted CO2 as climate pollutant, study says Read More »

air-pollution-makes-it-harder-for-bees-to-smell-flowers

Air pollution makes it harder for bees to smell flowers

protect the pollinators —

Contaminants can alter plant odors and warp insects’ senses, disrupting the process of pollination.

Scientists are uncovering various ways that air pollution can interfere with the ability of insects to pollinate plants.

Scientists are uncovering various ways that air pollution can interfere with the ability of insects to pollinate plants.

In the summers of 2018 and 2019, ecologist James Ryalls and his colleagues would go out to a field near Reading in southern England to stare at the insects buzzing around black mustard plants. Each time a bee, hoverfly, moth, butterfly, or other insect tried to get at the pollen or nectar in the small yellow flowers, they’d make a note.

It was part of an unusual experiment. Some patches of mustard plants were surrounded by pipes that released ozone and nitrogen oxides—polluting gases produced around power plants and conventional cars. Other plots had pipes releasing normal air.

The results startled the scientists. Plants smothered by pollutants were visited by up to 70 percent fewer insects overall, and their flowers received 90 percent fewer visits compared with those in unpolluted plots. The concentrations of pollutants were well below what US regulators consider safe. “We didn’t expect it to be quite as dramatic as that,” says study coauthor Robbie Girling, an entomologist at the University of Southern Queensland in Australia and a visiting professor at the University of Reading.

A growing body of research suggests that pollution can disrupt insect attraction to plants—at a time when many insect populations are already suffering deep declines due to agricultural chemicals, habitat loss, and climate change. Around 75 percent of wild flowering plants and around 35 percent of food crops rely on animals to move pollen around, so that plants can fertilize one another and form seeds. Even the black mustard plants used in the experiment, which can self-fertilize, exhibited a drop of 14 percent to 31 percent in successful pollination as measured by the number of seedpods, seeds per pod, and seedpod weight from plants engulfed by dirty air.

Scientists are still working out how strong and widespread these effects of pollution are, and how they operate. They’re learning that pollution may have a surprising diversity of effects, from changing the scents that draw insects to flowers to warping the creatures’ ability to smell, learn, and remember.

This research is still young, says Jeff Riffell, a neuroscientist at the University of Washington. “We’re only touching the tip of the iceberg, if you will, in terms of how these effects are influencing these pollinators.”

Altered scents

Insects often rely on smell to get around. As they buzz about in their neighborhoods, they learn to associate flowers that are good sources of nectar and pollen with their scents. Although some species, like honeybees, also use directions from their hive mates and visual landmarks like trees to navigate, even they critically depend on the sense of smell for sniffing out favorite flowers from afar. Nocturnal pollinators such as moths are particularly talented smellers. “They can smell these patches of flowers from a kilometer away,” Riffell says.

One of the effects of pollution—and what Girling suspects was largely responsible for the pollination declines at the England site—is how it perturbs these flowery aromas. Each fragrance is a unique blend of dozens of compounds that are chemically reactive and degrade in the air. Gases such as ozone or nitrogen oxide will quickly react with these molecules and cause odors to vanish even faster than usual. “For very reactive scents, the plume can only travel a third of the distance than it should actually travel when there is no pollution,” says atmospheric scientist Jose D. Fuentes of Penn State University, who has simulated the influence of ozone on floral scent compounds.

And if some compounds degrade faster than others, the bouquet of scents that insects associate with particular plants transforms, potentially rendering them unrecognizable. Girling and his colleagues observed this in experiments in a wind tunnel into which they delivered ozone. The tunnel was also outfitted with a device that steadily released a synthetic blend of floral odors (an actual flower would have wilted, says coauthor Ben Langford, an atmospheric chemist at the UK Centre for Ecology & Hydrology). Using chemical detectors, the team watched the flowery scent plume shorten and narrow as ozone ate away at the edges, with some compounds dropping off entirely as others persisted.

The scientists had trained honeybees to detect the original flowery scent by exposing them to the odor, then giving them sugar water—until they automatically stuck out their tongue-like proboscises to taste it upon smelling the scent. But when bees were tested with ozonated odor representing the edges of the scent plume, either 6 or 12 meters away from the source, only 32 percent and 10 percent, respectively, stuck out their proboscises. The bee is “sniffing a completely different odor at that point,” Langford says.

Researchers also have observed that striped cucumber beetles and buff-tailed bumblebees struggle to recognize their host plants above certain levels of ozone. Some of the most dramatic observations are at night, when extremely reactive pollutants called nitrate radicals accumulate. Riffell and colleagues recently found that about 50 percent fewer tobacco hornworm moths were attracted to the pale evening primrose when the plant’s aroma was altered by these pollutants, and white-lined sphinx moths didn’t recognize the scent at all. This reduced the number of seeds and fruits by 28 percent, the team found in outdoor pollination experiments. “It’s having a really big effect on the plant’s ability to produce seeds,” Riffell says.

Air pollution makes it harder for bees to smell flowers Read More »