Must-read recap: The New Lede’s top stories
More evidence of pesticide ties to cancer; Supreme Court ruling sparks climate concerns, and crypto mining up close and personal
Pesticide in your pee? CDC says yes, for 80% of us
In fresh evidence of the pervasive nature of pesticides, more than 80% of urine samples drawn from children and adults participating in a U.S. health study contained a weedkilling chemical linked to cancer and other health problems.
The report by a unit of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that out of 2,310 urine samples collected, 1,885 were laced with detectable traces of glyphosate, the active ingredient in herbicides sold around the world, including the widely used Roundup brand.
The new data was released as part of the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), which relies on a series of ongoing studies to evaluate the health and nutritional status of adults and children in the United States. NHANES research is typically highly valued by scientists because the sampling is designed to be representative of the U.S. population.
A pesticide you may not have heard of, and associated cancer risks
Building on years of research that shows links between agricultural chemicals and cancer, researchers say they have found fresh evidence tying certain pesticides to cancers in children and adults in 11 western U.S. states.
Analyzing federal pesticide data and state health registries, the research team reported a close association between the use of pesticides called fumigants and the development of cancers in people living in the 11 states.
The study, published last month in the journal GeoHealth, is the first to analyze the geospatial distribution of cancer incidence with pesticide use in the Western United States. The authors are three researchers from the Idaho Water Resources Research Institute at the University of Idaho and three researchers from Northern Arizona University.
In a press release issued by the University of Idaho, the researchers said the incidence of cancer was more closely associated with fumigants used in western states that produce food such as vegetables and fruit, as opposed to states using pesticides in the production of grains such as corn and wheat.
“We saw a significant relationship,” Alan Kolok, professor at the University of Idaho’s College of Natural Resources, said in the university press release. “It tells us something that we need to explore further.”
The researchers said a cancer connection to the widely used fumigant metam sodium was noteworthy. The fumigant metam is most commonly used in farming carrots, vegetables, potatoes, berries, strawberries and tomatoes, according to California state data. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has previously classified metam as a probable carcinogen. (READ THE REST OF THE STORY.)
The Supreme Court sparks outrage with EPA rule decision
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision to significantly limit the power of the EPA to regulate power plant greenhouse gases sparked outrage and fear in environmental advocates who say the ruling means more harmful climate change to come.
In its opinion in West Virginia v. EPA, the court’s 6-3 conservative majority said the EPA erred in claiming “unheralded” authority from a rule finalized during President Barack Obama’s administration. That rule sought to shift the energy sector from coal-fired power plants to lower-emitting sources such as natural gas or other more environmentally friendly options, such as solar. Although the agency finalized the rule, it was prevented from going into effect.
That power “generation shifting” approach far exceeded the EPA’s regulatory discretion under the Clean Air Act, the Supreme Court opinion stated. Such a fundamental transformation of a major sector of the economy would require Congress to direct such regulation, the court ruled.
The ruling may lead to restrictions on how the EPA can write future rules, observers say.
“This is a significant decision in terms of not only EPA’s authority to regulate emissions on the basis of climate change under the Clean Air Act, but also potentially brings into question numerous other federal regulations,” Joel Johnston, a partner at law firm Hall Estill who specializes in environmental and regulatory issues, said in a statement. (READ THE REST OF THE STORY.)
Crypto mining, controversy, and questions about environmental impacts
For decades, the Mechanicville hydroelectric plant generated power from New York’s Hudson River, converting the flowing waters into energy that fueled General Electric. But last year, the long brick building became the home of a crypto mining operation, forging a very different role as part of a vast network of sites around the world pumping out algorithms that make virtual currency viable.
Opened in 1898, the antiquated hydroelectric plant was an unlikely candidate to combine with the modern technology that is the cryptocurrency industry. And after less than a year in operation, the crypto mining work is on hold amid turmoil and controversy roiling the cryptocurrency market and higher prices for electricity.
“Right now the price of power is sufficiently high that we don’t have to bother doing Bitcoin,” said James Bescha, CEO of Albany Engineering Corp., which owns the Mechanicsville plant.
Environmentalists are harshly critical of crypto mining operations that they say use outsized amounts of energy that should be used for powering homes and businesses and other activities. Crypto mining’s excessive energy consumption contributes to global warming, critics charge.
The soaring popularity of cryptocurrency in recent years has spurred an expanse of crypto mining operations, and with that growth has come a battle now being waged across the country over mining operations.
A crypto mining technique called “proof of work”, which is used for validating transactions and mining new cryptocurrency tokens, is at the heart of the fight. (READ THE REST OF THE STORY)