The Environmental Protection Agency has banned the pesticide dacthal, frequently used on farms in West Virginia and other states.
Mounting evidence shows the chemical affects the thyroid system of pregnant women, and is linked to babies born with low birth weight, bone problems, and reduced IQ.
The EPA first issued a warning about the pesticide earlier this year, and temporarily suspended its use over the summer. The agency became concerned about Dacthal, also known as DCPA, around 2013.
The EPA instructed the company that produces it to study its impact on human health.
Bill Jordan volunteers with the Environmental Protection Network, and is former deputy director of the EPA's Office of Pesticide Programs.
"The action EPA took, with regard to DCPA, is really bold and really aggressive," said Jordan. "This is the first time in nearly 40 years that EPA has issued an emergency suspension order."
Dacthal is commonly used to kill weeds on crops like cabbage, onions, broccoli, and brussels sprouts. Farmworkers, particularly those who are pregnant, are at high risk.
First registered for use as a pesticide in 1958, people also spray Dacthal on parks, athletic fields, and other public spaces.
Jordan said he expects Dacthal to be out of the nation's food system by the end of next year, but said regulators have their work cut out for them when it comes to investigating pesticide safety.
"They've got a huge amount of work to do, to re-examine - as the law requires - all registered pesticides within a 15 year period," said Jordan. "And every year, Congress is cutting back on the resources that EPA has to do that."
Research shows widespread pesticide use is linked to the rise in cancer rates, and the decline in soil health and biodiversity.
Dacthal is just one active ingredient among thousands, in more than 17,000 pesticide products in the U.S. according to the group Beyond Pesticides.
get more stories like this via email
By Isabelle Atkins for Grady Newsource.
Broadcast version by Shanteya Hudson for Georgia News Connection reporting for the Solutions Journalism Network-Public News Service Collaboration
When Hunt Revell and Tyler Leslie worked at Seabear Oyster Bar in Athens, they were struck by how many oyster shells they threw in the trash each day. The duo didn't yet know that these shells could be tools for coastal restoration, but they knew throwing them away seemed wasteful.
Through the help of industry professionals, Revell and Leslie discovered that oysters play a vital role in marine ecosystems. They are what's called a keystone species, an organism that other marine life depends on. Oysters filter water, reduce carbon, combat rising sea levels and foster biodiversity. All those oyster shells discarded by restaurants are the perfect material for baby oysters to attach onto to build more oyster reefs.
Three years ago, their curiosity and a grant from the Nature Conservancy led to the creation of Shell to Shore, a nonprofit organization based in Athens that is dedicated to oyster shell recycling.
Soon after Shell to Shore was established, Revell and Leslie brought on University of Georgia Distinguished Research Professor Nik Heynen as a board member, and Malcolm Provost as the recycling coordinator.
"One fun fact that we like to throw at people is that one full-grown oyster can filter 50 gallons of water per day," Provost said. So imagine what an entire oyster reef can do.
The nonprofit started out very grassroots-oriented, collecting from Seabear Oyster Bar and then expanding to restaurants like Five and Ten and, most recently, Square One. While they have continued to diligently work with Athens' restaurants, their reach has expanded to other cities, including Augusta, Savannah and Atlanta.
Thomas Bliss, director of UGA Marine Extension and Georgia Sea Grant's Shellfish Research Laboratory, has been collecting and recycling oyster shells on Skidaway Island for about 20 years.
"It's really great to see a group like Shell to Shore start up because we've been collecting on the coast, but we're very coastal-centric," Bliss said. "It's nice to see a group start to reach those inland areas where we don't have the capacity to always get to."
According to Noah Brendel, co-owner of Seabear Oyster Bar, this relationship is not only benefiting Georgia's coastline but also the restaurants themselves.
"The fact that we can say that we don't throw our shells into the landfill and we actually send them back to the coast to help with different initiatives that are all sustainable, I think bodes well for us. It is good PR," Brendel said.
Shell to Shore also provides opportunities for local restaurants to meet. Fausto Zamorano, chef de cuisine at Five and Ten, has enjoyed ShellFest, an annual fundraising event put on by Shell to Shore with live music, local drinks, and of course, oysters.
"It has been a really good networking opportunity. When they did their first ShellFest festival in 2022...it was a chance to meet other chefs and local restaurants," Zamorano said. "We all love to be a part of it."
According to Seabear Oyster Bar and Five and Ten staff, the act of putting the shells into a separate bin for Shell to Shore to collect adds a mere five minutes to their routine. As long as the shells don't accumulate for too long, which could cause an odor, the protocol creates little to no inconvenience.
In 2023, Shell to Shore recycled more than 72,000 pounds of oyster shells, bringing their three-year total to about 130,000 pounds of recycled shells.
After collecting the shells from the restaurants, they are brought to UGArden, a community farm, where they are dumped into blue and green bins. Just as the shellfish lab that Bliss directs, the shells are then cured by exposure to six months of sun and rain. This process promotes bacterial degradation of the soft tissue and after, Georgia law says the shells can be safely introduced into water systems without fear of microbial contamination.
Shell to Shore takes the shells to Sapelo Island, about 70 miles south of Savannah. However, finding the exact site to situate the shells has posed challenges. The primary sites the team identified were not viable to place incoming shells because there weren't enough oyster larvae.
Shell to Shore continues to work with Marine Extension and the Department of Natural Resources to find areas along the coast that have high enough oyster larvae levels to create more oyster reefs in places most affected by erosion, storm surges and more.
"There are lots of areas along the Georgia coast that are being impacted negatively by sea level rise and climate change in general, so it is just a matter of identifying a good starting point," Provost assured.
Once these sites are identified, volunteers will bag the shells and put them into the water where they will act as wave breaks, flood mitigation barriers and areas for oyster larvae to attach onto.
"In turn, it will build up oyster reefs, living shorelines, keep the soil where it needs to be, clean the water and generally make Georgia's coasts much healthier," Provost said.
As Shell to Shore continues to make waves in coastal conservation, their initiative is prompting a fresh perspective on the life cycle of an oyster. The journey of an oyster shell doesn't have to end at the dinner table, but could begin a new journey in preserving our coastlines.
Isabelle Atkins wrote this article for Grady Newsource.
get more stories like this via email
As worldwide demand for meat and dairy continues to grow, so does evidence showing animal agriculture, as currently practiced, is harming the environment.
Advocates are making the case for widespread adoption of a vegan diet, avoiding animal products, as better for individual health and the environment. It is estimated between 11% and 20% of all greenhouse-gas emissions worldwide come from animal agriculture and livestock grazing has degraded up to 20% of the world's pastures.
Marco Springmann, research fellow in climate change, food systems and health at University College-London and senior environment and health researcher at Oxford University, said a vegan diet would bring a number of benefits.
"Adoption of a completely plant-based, or vegan, diet has many health, environmental and even cost benefits," Springmann explained. "If more people adopted such a diet, it would result in general benefits for climate change, land use as well as population health."
Maryland is home to more than 160,000 cattle, with a $91 million beef cattle industry and a $185 million dairy industry.
Veganism has attracted more attention in recent years, thanks in part to advancements in lab-grown meat technology; however, it's still not a very popular diet, with surveys indicating fewer than 5% are vegan. The prospect of billions of people deciding to eliminate animal products from their diets seems unlikely. Feeding a vegan world would require growing many more plants than we do now.
Springmann pointed out there is enough cropland to meet the nutritional needs of Earth's population through plants alone.
"At the moment, we feed about a third of all grains to livestock," Springmann emphasized. "Which means that if we wouldn't have so much livestock anymore, we actually would have lots of cropland available to grow other things in addition to not having, for example, all this need for pastures anymore."
He said if we shifted to a healthy plant-based diet, then we would still have a net reduction in global cropland use of about 10%.
Benefits of a global vegan diet include an estimated 3 billion hectares of land freed up for other purposes and a 6 billion-ton reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions annually. It is also estimated more than 2 million additional hectares of tropical rainforest would be preserved each year. Springmann added another benefit is cost.
"If you recompose your diet to something that is not made up of those processed products but is just generally healthy, then we calculated that purely on the cost of ingredients, a plant-based diet might actually be much cheaper," Springmann stressed. "Up to a quarter or even a third in high-income countries."
This story is based on original reporting by Seth Millstein at Sentient.
get more stories like this via email
This article was produced by Local First Arizona.
Broadcast version by Alex Gonzalez for Arizona News Connection reporting for the Local First Arizona-Resource Rural-Public News Service Collaboration
Solar panels have been on Anna May Cory's mind for years. But she worried the expense of installing them would outweigh the long-term cost savings.
All that changed last year, when Cory found out about thousands of dollars in grants and tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act designed specifically to help rural businesses affordably upgrade their buildings to cut energy costs.
The 27-room Pines Inn and Suites sits a few miles southwest of Arizona's famous Sedona red rocks in the 12,000-person town of Cottonwood. Cory moved to the community in search of a rural atmosphere, warmer temperatures and a friendly, small-town experience, which she now helps to foster.
"What I like is the friendliness, and everyone caring about our town," Cory said.
With 275 days of sun, solar makes sense
Pines Inn and Suites has been certified as a "green" hospitality outpost by the Arizona Hotel & Lodging Association for more than two decades, in part thanks to Cory's improvements like high-efficiency light bulbs, better ventilation and a water bottle refilling station for guests.
The hotel even became an early adopter of electric vehicle charging stations.
"We were way ahead of our time," said Cory, who runs the inn with her son and daughter-in-law.
In a town that sees 275 days of sun per year, solar was the next logical step.
Cory learned about federal assistance to install solar while attending the Green Business Boot Camp facilitated by Local First Arizona, a nonprofit that supports small businesses throughout the state. The seven-week program covers a series of sustainability topics, helping Cory realize she could tap into the federal funding passed by Congress in 2022 to cover the bulk of the costs that were holding her back.
To help other business owners, Local First Arizona created a Green Project Guide that explains tax credits, grants and other funding available for energy and water efficiency projects.
70% savings with help from federal programs
Cory was able to achieve essentially 70% off the installation cost with the help of a $32,000 reimbursement from the Rural Energy for America Program (REAP) and $23,000 from the renewable energy Investment Tax Credit, both of which were made possible through the Inflation Reduction Act.
"One day, $32,000 appeared in our checking account, and we were like, 'Whoa it's time to celebrate!'" Cory said. "For us, that was quite impressive."
In addition to tax credits and grant funding, Cory estimates she will save more than $10,000 on energy bills every year.
The project was so successful, she's working on a second REAP grant to finance a second solar installation.
"I'm excited about that because it's really going to bring down our costs," Cory said.
Doing her part to keep Cottonwood 'breathing fresh air'
Cory feels good that her upgrades will contribute to better health for the whole town. As zero-emission sources of energy, solar panels help reduce air pollution.
That fits right in with what Cory loves about Cottonwood as a hometown.
"I love the Verde River," she said. "We can enjoy the river here, and there's a lot of opportunity for hiking and outdoor activity and breathing fresh air."
In addition to the solar panels, the Green Business Boot Camp inspired Cory to find a locally based coffee vendor to reduce the pollution generated by ordering products from far away.
"It's a small thing, but a small thing can become a big thing in terms of sustainability," she said.
This article was produced by Local First Arizona.
get more stories like this via email
Contact
