An annual list of best and worst produce, in terms of pesticide residue, is out - and strawberries, spinach, kale, and collard and mustard greens top the list.

The 2022 "Dirty Dozen" from the Environmental Working Group also include nectarines, apples, grapes, peppers, cherries, peaches, pears, celery and tomatoes. Sydney Swanson, a healthy-living science analyst for the group, said the data comes from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, based on 45,000 produce samples.

"This year, we did find that over 70% of conventional produce sold in the United States was contaminated with pesticides," she said. "While everything tested was within legal limits, we believe that 'legal' does not mean 'safe.'"

Farmers have said they only apply pesticides approved by the feds. EWG said people should still eat lots of fruits and vegetables, but recommends they choose organic produce. Last year, the Biden administration reinstated an Obama-era ban on the notorious pesticide chlorpyrifos, a ban that was lifted during the Trump years.

Swanson said people should wash all fruits and vegetables, but noted that the USDA also washes the produce samples before testing them.

"The USDA washes them and prepares them the exact same way that a consumer would prepare them at home," she said, "and they test it that way. So, the pesticide residue that we would be exposed to is the same amount that the USDA is detecting."

The group also publishes a list of produce it calls the "Clean Fifteen" - on which almost 70% of samples had no detectable pesticide residues. That list includes, starting with the cleanest: avocados, sweet corn, pineapple, onions, papaya, frozen sweet peas, asparagus, honeydew, kiwis, cabbage, mushrooms, cantaloupe, mangoes, watermelon and sweet potatoes.

The U.S. is talking with several nations as part of an emerging framework for trade policy, and in the Midwest, there are concerns about the ripple effect on farmers and consumers when it comes to pesticides.

The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework involves more than a dozen countries and has four negotiating pillars, including decarbonization and anti-corruption.

Steve Suppan, senior policy analyst at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, said while there are motivations to move away from standard trade ideals, influence from large agribusiness firms still might complicate things. Pesticides are one of them.

"Some of the IPEF countries have pesticide policies that are rejecting US imports that have pesticide residues on horticulture and grain exports," Suppan observed.

He predicted it will lead to calls for the elimination of "zero tolerance" policies, with companies arguing they will disrupt the delivery of food. There is added concern the discussions will happen behind closed doors.

The Pesticide Action Network said the U.S. already has lax pesticide rules, and states like Iowa do not strongly enforce existing guidelines, impacting farmers' health and food safety.

Rob Faux, communications manager for the Network, who also has a farm in Iowa, said the U.S. and its agriculture sector have become too used to the reliance on pesticides.

"We've gotten to the point where we're blasé," Faux contended. "'It's just a pesticide, and we use it all the time.' "

Faux pointed to a proposal in Congress, the Protect America's Children from Toxic Pesticides Act, as a way to incorporate incremental improvements. He argued it would give regulators more teeth to keep harmful products off the market.

"That would change the process of both registration, making it a little bit more difficult, a little more burden of proof to show that it's safe," Faux suggested. "And then removing the chemical if it does show that there are dangers and problems with it would become easier"

While the future of the bill is uncertain, supporters say it also protects local governments and their ability to adopt their own pesticide rules. Some in Congress have been fighting a patchwork of regulations.

President Joe Biden's bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act is expected to bring more than 300 jobs to Wyoming to clean up and plug so-called orphaned oil and gas wells on public lands.

Bob LeResche, board member of the Powder River Basin Resource Council and the Western Organization of Resource Councils, is a longtime advocate for restoring Wyoming's iconic landscapes after drilling. He said wells abandoned by oil and gas producers pose a serious hazard for drinking water, agriculture and wildlife habitat.

"They leak methane, they leak volatile organic compounds which are toxic," LeResche explained. "And it just lasts forever. The casings will rust out and whatever is down below will come up and spread over the land. They're very destructive."

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management requires oil and gas operators to post bonds before drilling to ensure cleanup, but LeResche noted bonds can be as low as $10,000 on leases with 20 separate wells. Industry groups and operators have pushed back against efforts to make bond amounts equal to the costs of restoration, arguing the price would reduce exploration, limit outputs and increase dependency on foreign energy.

More than 2,300 well sites have been abandoned by producers in Wyoming, according to a recent Wyofile report. LaResche said most orphans are created when producers sell off leases through layers of limited liability corporations which can declare bankruptcy and walk away, leaving taxpayers on the hook for cleanup.

"There's no reason that the federal government should take on the risk, on behalf of us taxpayers, for somebody who's not going to meet their legal obligation to clean up after themselves," LaResche contended. "Basically, if they can't afford it, then they are not qualified to purchase the lease."

Under the infrastructure legislation, the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is expected to receive $25 million for well-site restoration. LeResche acknowledged it will not solve the underlying problem of current Bureau of Land Management policies before drilling begins.

"BLM does not require enough bonds when they issue a drilling permit to guarantee that the wells will be cleaned up by the companies that should be cleaning them up, that are legally obligated to clean them up," LeResche asserted.

Included in the Inflation Reduction Act is a provision aimed at cutting methane emissions from oil and gas drilling, but it remains to be seen whether it will have a broad effect on the industry.

The bill would levy a fine on oil and gas producers whose wells emit methane above a certain threshold.

But Kassie Siegel - director of the Climate Law Institute at the Center for Biological Diversity - said methane emissions are overseen by the Environmental Protection Agency, and the fines will only be as effective as the EPA's oversight requires.

"Polluters have a choice when it comes to the fee," said Siegel. "They can comply with the regulation or they can pay the fee, but they don't have to do both - it's one or the other."

The Inflation Reduction Act, approved by the Senate and House is headed to the president's desk for a signature. It's the biggest clean-energy package in the country's history.

Erandi Treviño, Texas state coordinator with Moms Clean Air Force, said methane in an invisible super-pollutant that is detrimental to the health of those who live near the wells where it's emitted. She said high-tech companies that sell detection equipment could profit from the new climate provisions.

"Because we can't see them, we can't capture them, our ability to even measure the quality of the air at any given time is limited," said Treviño. "I think the more different technologies that come out, I think that's very beneficial."

This month, the EPA conducted flyovers of the Permian Basin in Texas and New Mexico using infrared cameras to survey oil and gas operations, looking for "super-emitters" of methane gas. The agency says it plans to identify facilities releasing excess emissions and contact those companies.

Siegel said that's a good start, but compliance is only as effective as the EPA's rules.

"I'm not aware of any instance of EPA enforcing its current oil and gas methane rules, and that has to change," said Siegel. "This is a dirty and dangerous industry and oversight's critical."

Despite an agreement to rein in methane emissions, climate action provisions in the new federal legislation require the government to auction millions of acres of oil and gas leases before it can auction acreage for wind and solar farms.