#POLLUTION/REMEDIATION

[reasonsforhope]

"Sunlight dapples the once-denuded forest floor as saplings spread their branches and leaves overhead, slowly forming a lush canopy.

Beside each young tree, a sign notes its species. Lupuna, says one, the colloquial Peruvian term, and below that its scientific name, Ceiba pentandra — in other words, a kapok tree, known for its cotton-like fibers. Huito, says another sign, or Geinpa americana, which produces edible gray berries.

Each sapling is distinct, a reflection of the Amazon's stunning biodiversity, with so many different species that you might go acres without finding a repeat.

Yet this young forest did not spring up naturally. It has been carefully recreated by humans in an area that was, until just three years ago, a heavily contaminated moonscape.

This land was stripped of its dense vegetation by miners scouring the subsoil for tiny specks of gold, using mercury to separate the gold from the sediment. Many thought that a healthy forest would never thrive in impoverished, mercury-laden topsoil and that the piles of sandy tailings, the residue from the gold mining effort, and the pools of wastewater were irremediable...

"It feels good to see the forest grow back," says Pedro Ynfantes, 66, the miner whose legal mining concession of 1,110 acres includes this 10-acre patch of land where this young forest is located. "We don't want to deforest. When we had the opportunity to let the forest grow back, we took it. It's much better this way."

The opportunity he refers to came via U.S. nonprofit Pure Earth, which works with communities across the Global Southto remediate environmental problems left behind by mining, much of it illegal. Their biggest targets are mercury and lead contamination...

Security forces have launched anti-mining operations down the years, even blowing up the miners' equipment deep in the jungle. But most local politicians, including Madre de Dios' members of Peru's national congress, broadly support the miners, who are a powerful constituency in the relatively sparsely populated jungle region.

Restoring the forest

Pictured: France Cabanillas works for the nonprofit group Pure Earth, which is spearheading an effort to plant saplings in areas of the Peruvian Amazon that were devastated by illegal gold mining.

Now there's an effort to address the damage. Initially working with the region's legal miners, most of whom were here before the 2009 gold rush kicked off, the nonprofit group Pure Earth is using this patch of Ynfantes' land as a pilot project to show how the rainforest can be regenerated after the last traces of gold have been plucked from the soil.

It took a sustained outreach effort. Many miners are wary of or even downright hostile to foreign NGOs, which have repeatedly called for gold mining to be banned or severely curbed in the Peruvian Amazon — steps they say would cost them their livelihood.

"I am feeling optimistic," says France Cabanillas, Pure Earth's local coordinator, who has been appealing to the frustration of many miners at the heavy toll they have taken on the jungle and their desire to minimize their environmental footprint for the next generation.

"We still have a lot to do but this pilot is going well. Down the years, the miners have been getting a lot of stick but not much carrot when it comes to their environmental impacts," says Cabanillas. "We are offering them a carrot, allowing them to remediate their own impacts. Many of the miners do not want to be destroying the rainforest."

Before the miners plant the carefully-selected mix of tree species, they had to prepare the earth. Most of the topsoil had been washed away by the miners' heavy use of hoses.

That preparation involved adding biochar (burnt organic material) and even molasses, which contain fixed carbon and minerals, along with various other nutrients. The miners also had to dig tiny moats around the saplings to prevent all of this new planting from being washed away. Now, after three years, the forest is visibly coming back.

The rejuvenated rainforest also mitigates the impact of the mercury used by many of the illegal miners.

Research done by Pure Earth shows that the barren, sandy soil emits mercury. But in a rainforest, the ecosystem actually absorbs some of the metal, boosting public health."

-via NPR, April 2, 2024

[wachinyeya]

Charcoal-like Substance Can Clean Industrial Pollution by Converting Toxic Heavy Metal into Essential Nutrient https://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/charcoal-like-substance-can-clean-industrial-pollution-by-converting-toxic-heavy-metal-into-essential-nutrient/

Researchers from the University of Waterloo have discovered that a special form of charcoal is highly effective at absorbing chromium and transforming it from a toxic industrial waste form into the form seen in nutritional supplements.

Chromium is a heavy metal that exists in two forms. One form, chromium(III), is a safe micronutrient that our body needs. The other, chromium(VI), is a dangerous carcinogen linked to ovarian, lung, and liver cancer, and reproductive problems. The dangerous form is usually created during industrial processes such as leather tanning, stainless steel production, and mining, but it can also occur naturally in the presence of manganese minerals.

Biochar, a form of charcoal produced by heating agricultural waste without oxygen, is being studied as a potential tool for cleaning up chromium pollution at industrial sites, using the natural filtering ability of organic carbon

[wikipediapictures]

Plastic degradation by marine bacteria

“Plastic waste pollution on Singapore beach.” - via Wikimedia Commons

[larchdatabase]

Beaver dam in a stream, visual demonstration of a dams ability to trap sediment and filter pollutants. Via blackbirdenvio on Instagram.

[health-views-updates]

How Is the Oil & Gas Sector Impacting the Bioremediation Market Demand?

The global Bioremediation Market Size was valued at USD 14.86 billion in 2023 and is forecasted to reach USD 35.30 billion by 2032, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.10% during the forecast period. This surge is being fueled by a growing need for eco-friendly, cost-effective solutions for treating contaminated environments across sectors like oil & gas, agriculture, and wastewater management.

https://www.snsinsider.com/assets/images/report/1731997958-709192537.png

Bioremediation — the use of living organisms such as microbes and plants to clean up soil, water, and air contamination — is fast becoming a central pillar of global environmental management strategies. The technology is garnering widespread adoption due to its sustainability, relatively low cost, and efficiency in addressing pollutants compared to conventional chemical or physical treatment methods.

Market Dynamics at a Glance

A combination of regulatory support and industrial transformation is shaping the future of the bioremediation industry. Governments across North America, Europe, and Asia-Pacific are tightening environmental norms, offering incentives for eco-restorative technologies, and encouraging private sector investment in remediation processes. These factors are propelling market demand, especially in countries like the U.S., China, Germany, and India.

Moreover, advancements in biotechnology, such as genetic engineering of microbes for improved contaminant degradation, are expanding the scope of bioremediation applications. The integration of AI and IoT for real-time monitoring of bioremediation processes is also expected to boost efficiency and scalability.

Segment Insights

The market is segmented based on type, technology, application, and region. Among technologies, in-situ bioremediation dominates due to its cost-efficiency and minimal environmental disruption. On the application front, oil spills and industrial waste treatment remain primary contributors to revenue generation, particularly in regions with high levels of industrialization and maritime traffic.

North America currently holds the largest market share, driven by strong environmental policies, government initiatives, and a high level of technological adoption. However, Asia-Pacific is expected to register the fastest growth, owing to increasing industrial activity and growing public awareness regarding environmental protection.

Key Players and Strategic Developments

Several major players are actively investing in R&D and forming strategic alliances to strengthen their market position. Notable companies in the bioremediation space include:

Xylem Inc.

Drylet, Inc.

Suez SA

REGENESIS

Aquatech International LLC

Ivey International Inc.

These firms are focused on developing innovative microbial solutions and expanding their service portfolios to cover more complex pollutants and broader geographical areas.

Future Outlook

With the increasing recognition of environmental sustainability as a core business value, the bioremediation market is expected to transform from a niche industry into a mainstream environmental solution. Emerging markets, evolving regulatory landscapes, and technological innovations will continue to be the driving forces behind its global expansion.

About Us:

SNS Insider is one of the leading market research and consulting agencies that dominates the market research industry globally. Our company's aim is to give clients the knowledge they require in order to function in changing circumstances. In order to give you current, accurate market data, consumer insights, and opinions so that you can make decisions with confidence, we employ a variety of techniques, including surveys, video talks, and focus groups around the world.

Contact Us: Jagney Dave – Vice President of Client Engagement Phone: +1-315 636 4242 (US) | +44- 20 3290 5010 (UK) Email: info@snsinsider.com

[ajaydmr]

Global Bioremediation Market Analysis: Trends, Innovations, and 2025 Forecast Study

[vanamindiafoundation]

What is Bioremediation and its Importance in Environmental Conditions

Bioremediation is a natural, eco-friendly method that removes environmental contaminants using microorganisms and plants.It is cost-effective and sustainable, helping purify soil and water while restoring ecological balance.Though it faces challenges like slow processing, it remains a promising environmental solution.Bioremediation plays a vital role in creating a cleaner and greener planet.

Click here: https://vanamindiafoundation.org/37/blog_detail

[longislandmoldguy]

Get Ready for MOLD SEASON I had the opportunity to be back on the Knowlegable Homeowner Podcast. Long Island Mold Guy 

[playingplayer2]

Sad thing is that, since I've spent my entire life near cities, I would struggle to pick out familiar constellations if faced with a fuller sky of stars.

[healthsphere2]

Acne: Ultimate Guide to Causes, Effective Treatments, and Busting Myths

Introduction Acne affects over 50 million Americans annually, making it the most common skin condition in the U.S. While often linked to adolescence, 15–30% of adults aged 20–40 also struggle with breakouts. Beyond physical symptoms, acne impacts self-esteem and mental health. This guide dives into acne’s root causes, debunks pervasive myths, and offers actionable treatments and skincare routines backed by science.

What Causes Acne? Breaking Down the Science

Acne develops when hair follicles become clogged with oil, dead skin, and bacteria. Let’s explore the key contributors:

Hyperkeratinization:Overproduction of keratin (a skin protein) and dead skin cells block pores, creating comedones (blackheads/whiteheads).Tip: Use exfoliants like salicylic acid (BHA) 2–3 times weekly to unclog pores.

Excess Sebum Production:Hormonal changes (e.g., puberty, menstrual cycles) ramp up sebum, an oily substance that feeds acne-causing bacteria.Example: Oily skin types may benefit from niacinamide, which regulates sebum.

Bacterial Overgrowth:Cutibacterium acnes (C. acnes) thrives in clogged pores, releasing inflammatory fatty acids.Guideline: Benzoyl peroxide (2.5–10%) kills bacteria without antibiotic resistance.

Inflammation:The immune system’s response to C. acnes causes redness and swelling.Tip: Anti-inflammatory ingredients like zinc or green tea extract can calm skin.

Hormonal Imbalances:Androgens (male hormones present in all genders) spike sebum production. Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) often links to hormonal acne.Example: Birth control pills or spironolactone may help regulate hormones.

Gut Health & H. pylori:Emerging research ties gut imbalances (e.g., Helicobacter pylori infections) to severe acne. Symptoms include heartburn and bloating.Guideline: Consult a doctor for breath or stool tests if gut issues accompany acne.

Debunking 6 Common Acne Myths

Myth: “Acne is caused by dirty skin.”Truth: Over-washing strips skin’s barrier, worsening breakouts. Cleanse twice daily with a pH-balanced, fragrance-free formula.

Myth: “Only teenagers get acne.”Truth: Adult acne is rising, driven by stress, hormones, and pollution.

Myth: “Sun exposure clears acne.”Truth: UV rays temporarily reduce redness but damage skin, leading to rebound oil production. Always use non-comedogenic sunscreen.

Myth: “Chocolate and greasy foods cause acne.”Truth: No direct link exists, but high-glycemic diets (sugary snacks) may spike insulin, increasing sebum. Opt for low-glycemic foods like berries and nuts.

Myth: “Popping pimples helps them heal faster.”Truth: Picking spreads bacteria and causes scarring. Instead, apply hydrocolloid patches overnight.

Myth: “Toothpaste dries out pimples.”Truth: Toothpaste contains irritants like menthol. Use spot treatments with sulfur or tea tree oil instead.

Effective Acne Treatments: From OTC to Prescription

Topical Treatments

Retinoids (Adapalene, Tretinoin):Unclog pores and reduce inflammation. Start with adapalene 0.1% (OTC) 3x/week, gradually increasing to nightly use.Pro Tip: Apply pea-sized amounts on dry skin to minimize irritation.

Benzoyl Peroxide:Kills bacteria and reduces oil. Try a 2.5% wash for sensitive skin or 5% gel for stubborn spots.

Combination Therapy (Epiduo):Adapalene + benzoyl peroxide targets multiple causes. Studies show 80% improvement in 12 weeks.

Oral Treatments

Antibiotics (Doxycycline, Minocycline):Short-term use (3–6 months) reduces bacteria and inflammation. Pair with topical treatments to prevent resistance.

Isotretinoin (Accutane):For severe, cystic acne. Low-dose regimens (10–20mg/day) minimize side effects like dryness.

Hormonal Therapies:Spironolactone (for women) blocks androgen receptors, cutting sebum by 50–75% in 3 months.

Lifestyle & Diet

Stress Management: Cortisol spikes increase oil production. Practice yoga, meditation, or 7–9 hours of sleep nightly.

Gut Health: Prebiotics (oats, garlic) and probiotics (kefir, kimchi) support microbiome balance.

Skincare Routine Guidelines for Acne-Prone Skin

AM Routine:

Cleanse with lukewarm water and a gentle foaming cleanser.

Apply niacinamide serum to reduce oil.

Moisturize with oil-free, non-comedogenic lotion.

Finish with SPF 30+ sunscreen.

PM Routine:

Double cleanse: Start with micellar water, then a salicylic acid cleanser.

Treat with retinoids (wait 20 minutes post-cleansing).

Spot-treat with benzoyl peroxide.

Moisturize with ceramide cream.

Avoid: Heavy creams, alcohol-based toners, and physical scrubs.

When to See a Dermatologist

Seek professional help if:

OTC products fail after 8–12 weeks.

You experience painful cysts or scarring.

Acne impacts mental health.

FAQs

Q: Can drinking water clear acne? A: Hydration supports skin health but isn’t a standalone cure. Pair with topical treatments.

Q: How long does it take for acne treatments to work? A: 4–8 weeks for initial results; 3–6 months for significant improvement.

Q: Are natural remedies effective? A: Tea tree oil (5% dilution) can help mild acne, but severe cases need medical intervention.

Conclusion Acne is multifaceted, but understanding its triggers and treatments empowers you to take control. Consistency is key—stick to your routine, avoid myths, and consult a dermatologist for personalized care. Remember, clear skin is a journey, not an overnight fix.

1 vue

[harmeet-saggi]

Breathing Clean In The Hazy Urban Landscape: 5 Herbal Drinks To Nourish Your Lungs

Have you ever wondered how your lungs cope with the relentless assault of environmental pollution in our urban jungles? The hazy air we breathe in cities can take a toll on our respiratory wellness, but fear not! In this blog, we'll explore five herbal drinks that not only detoxify your lungs but also provide a refreshing escape from the hustle and bustle of urban living.

[mostlysignssomeportents]

Greenwashing set Canada on fire

On September 22, I'm (virtually) presenting at the DIG Festival in Modena, Italy. On September 27, I'll be at Chevalier's Books in Los Angeles with Brian Merchant for a joint launch for my new book The Internet Con and his new book, Blood in the Machine.

As a teenager growing up in Ontario, I always envied the kids who spent their summers tree planting; they'd come back from the bush in September, insect-chewed and leathery, with new muscle, incredible stories, thousands of dollars, and a glow imparted by the knowledge that they'd made a new forest with their own blistered hands.

I was too unathletic to follow them into the bush, but I spent my summers doing my bit, ringing doorbells for Greenpeace to get my neighbours fired up about the Canadian pulp-and-paper industry, which wasn't merely clear-cutting our old-growth forests – it was also poisoning the Great Lakes system with PCBs, threatening us all.

At the time, I thought of tree-planting as a small victory – sure, our homegrown, rapacious, extractive industry was able to pollute with impunity, but at least the government had reined them in on forests, forcing them to pay my pals to spend their summers replacing the forests they'd fed into their mills.

I was wrong. Last summer's Canadian wildfires blanketed the whole east coast and midwest in choking smoke as millions of trees burned and millions of tons of CO2 were sent into the atmosphere. Those wildfires weren't just an effect of the climate emergency: they were made far worse by all those trees planted by my pals in the eighties and nineties.

Writing in the New York Times, novelist Claire Cameron describes her own teen years working in the bush, planting row after row of black spruces, precisely spaced at six-foot intervals:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/09/15/opinion/wildfires-treeplanting-timebomb.html

Cameron's summer job was funded by the logging industry, whose self-pegulated, self-assigned "penalty" for clearcutting diverse forests of spruce, pine and aspen was to pay teenagers to create a tree farm, at nine cents per sapling (minus camp costs).

Black spruces are made to burn, filled with flammable sap and equipped with resin-filled cones that rely on fire, only opening and dropping seeds when they're heated. They're so flammable that firefighters call them "gas on a stick."

Cameron and her friends planted under brutal conditions: working long hours in blowlamp heat and dripping wet bulb humidity, amidst clouds of stinging insects, fingers blistered and muscles aching. But when they hit rock bottom and were ready to quit, they'd encourage one another with a rallying cry: "Let's go make a forest!"

Planting neat rows of black spruces was great for the logging industry: the even spacing guaranteed that when the trees matured, they could be easily reaped, with ample space between each near-identical tree for massive shears to operate. But that same monocropped, evenly spaced "forest" was also optimized to burn.

It burned.

The climate emergency's frequent droughts turn black spruces into "something closer to a blowtorch." The "pines in lines" approach to reforesting was an act of sabotage, not remediation. Black spruces are thirsty, and they absorb the water that moss needs to thrive, producing "kindling in the place of fire retardant."

Cameron's column concludes with this heartbreaking line: "Now when I think of that summer, I don’t think that I was planting trees at all. I was planting thousands of blowtorches a day."

The logging industry committed a triple crime. First, they stole our old-growth forests. Next, they (literally) planted a time-bomb across Ontario's north. Finally, they stole the idealism of people who genuinely cared about the environment. They taught a generation that resistance is futile, that anything you do to make a better future is a scam, and you're a sucker for falling for it. They planted nihilism with every tree.

That scam never ended. Today, we're sold carbon offsets, a modern Papal indulgence. We are told that if we pay the finance sector, they can absolve us for our climate sins. Carbon offsets are a scam, a market for lemons. The "offset" you buy might be a generated by a fake charity like the Nature Conservancy, who use well-intentioned donations to buy up wildlife reserves that can't be logged, which are then converted into carbon credits by promising not to log them:

https://pluralistic.net/2020/12/12/fairy-use-tale/#greenwashing

The credit-card company that promises to plant trees every time you use your card? They combine false promises, deceptive advertising, and legal threats against critics to convince you that you're saving the planet by shopping:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/11/17/do-well-do-good-do-nothing/#greenwashing

The carbon offset world is full of scams. The carbon offset that made the thing you bought into a "net zero" product? It might be a forest that already burned:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/03/11/a-market-for-flaming-lemons/#money-for-nothing

The only reason we have carbon offsets is that market cultists have spent forty years convincing us that actual regulation is impossible. In the neoliberal learned helplessness mind-palace, there's no way to simply say, "You may not log old-growth forests." Rather, we have to say, "We will 'align your incentives' by making you replace those forests."

The Climate Ad Project's "Murder Offsets" video deftly punctures this bubble. In it, a detective points his finger at the man who committed the locked-room murder in the isolated mansion. The murderer cheerfully admits that he did it, but produces a "murder offset," which allowed him to pay someone else not to commit a murder, using market-based price-discovery mechanisms to put a dollar-figure on the true worth of a murder, which he duly paid, making his kill absolutely fine:

https://pluralistic.net/2021/04/14/for-sale-green-indulgences/#killer-analogy

What's the alternative to murder offsets/carbon credits? We could ask our expert regulators to decide which carbon intensive activities are necessary and which ones aren't, and ban the unnecessary ones. We could ask those regulators to devise remediation programs that actually work. After all, there are plenty of forests that have already been clearcut, plenty that have burned. It would be nice to know how we can plant new forests there that aren't "thousands of blowtorches."

If that sounds implausible to you, then you've gotten trapped in the neoliberal mind-palace.

The term "regulatory capture" was popularized by far-right Chicago School economists who were promoting "public choice theory." In their telling, regulatory capture is inevitable, because companies will spend whatever it takes to get the government to pass laws making what they do legal, and making competing with them into a crime:

https://pluralistic.net/2022/06/13/public-choice/#ajit-pai-still-terrible

This is true, as far as it goes. Capitalists hate capitalism, and if an "entrepreneur" can make it illegal to compete with him, he will. But while this is a reasonable starting-point, the place that Public Choice Theory weirdos get to next is bonkers. They say that since corporations will always seek to capture their regulators, we should abolish regulators.

They say that it's impossible for good regulations to exist, and therefore the only regulation that is even possible is to let businesses do whatever they want and wait for the invisible hand to sweep away the bad companies. Rather than creating hand-washing rules for restaurant kitchens, we should let restaurateurs decide whether it's economically rational to make us shit ourselves to death. The ones that choose poorly will get bad online reviews and people will "vote with their dollars" for the good restaurants.

And if the online review site decides to sell "reputation management" to restaurants that get bad reviews? Well, soon the public will learn that the review site can't be trusted and they'll take their business elsewhere. No regulation needed! Unleash the innovators! Set the job-creators free!

This is the Ur-nihilism from which all the other nihilism springs. It contends that the regulations we have – the ones that keep our buildings from falling down on our heads, that keep our groceries from poisoning us, that keep our cars from exploding on impact – are either illusory, or perhaps the forgotten art of a lost civilization. Making good regulations is like embalming Pharaohs, something the ancients practiced in mist-shrouded, unrecoverable antiquity – and that may not have happened at all.

Regulation is corruptible, but it need not be corrupt. Regulation, like science, is a process of neutrally adjudicated, adversarial peer-review. In a robust regulatory process, multiple parties respond to a fact-intensive question – "what alloys and other properties make a reinforced steel joist structurally sound?" – with a mix of robust evidence and self-serving bullshit and then proceed to sort the two by pantsing each other, pointing out one another's lies.

The regulator, an independent expert with no conflicts of interest, sorts through the claims and counterclaims and makes a rule, showing their workings and leaving the door open to revisiting the rule based on new evidence or challenges to the evidence presented.

But when an industry becomes concentrated, it becomes unregulatable. 100 small and medium-sized companies will squabble. They'll struggle to come up with a common lie. There will always be defectors in their midst. Their conduct will be legible to external experts, who will be able to spot the self-serving BS.

But let that industry dwindle to a handful of giant companies, let them shrink to a number that will fit around a boardroom table, and they will sit down at a table and agree on a cozy arrangement that fucks us all over to their benefit. They will become so inbred that the only people who understand how they work will be their own insiders, and so top regulators will be drawn from their own number and be hopelessly conflicted.

When the corporate sector takes over, regulatory capture is inevitable. But corporate takeover isn't inevitable. We can – and have, and will again – fight corporate power, with antitrust law, with unions, and with consumer rights groups. Knowing things is possible. It simply requires that we keep the entities that profit by our confusion poor and thus weak.

The thing is, corporations don't always lie about regulations. Take the fight over working encryption, which – once again – the UK government is trying to ban:

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2023/feb/24/signal-app-warns-it-will-quit-uk-if-law-weakens-end-to-end-encryption

Advocates for criminalising working encryption insist that the claims that this is impossible are the same kind of self-serving nonsense as claims that banning clearcutting of old-growth forests is impossible:

https://twitter.com/JimBethell/status/1699339739042599276

They say that when technologists say, "We can't make an encryption system that keeps bad guys out but lets good guys in," that they are being lazy and unimaginative. "I have faith in you geeks," they said. "Go nerd harder! You'll figure it out."

Google and Apple and Meta say that selectively breakable encryption is impossible. But they also claim that a bunch of eminently possible things are impossible. Apple claims that it's impossible to have a secure device where you get to decide which software you want to use and where publishers aren't deprive of 30 cents on every dollar you spend. Google says it's impossible to search the web without being comprehensively, nonconsensually spied upon from asshole to appetite. Meta insists that it's impossible to have digital social relationship without having your friendships surveilled and commodified.

While they're not lying about encryption, they are lying about these other things, and sorting out the lies from the truth is the job of regulators, but that job is nearly impossible thanks to the fact that everyone who runs a large online service tells the same lies – and the regulators themselves are alumni of the industry's upper eschelons.

Logging companies know a lot about forests. When we ask, "What is the best way to remediate our forests," the companies may well have useful things to say. But those useful things will be mixed with actively harmful lies. The carefully cultivated incompetence of our regulators means that they can't tell the difference.

Conspiratorialism is characterized as a problem of what people believe, but the true roots of conspiracy belief isn't what we believe, it's how we decide what to believe. It's not beliefs, it's epistemology.

Because most of us aren't qualified to sort good reforesting programs from bad ones. And even if we are, we're probably not also well-versed enough in cryptography to sort credible claims about encryption from wishful thinking. And even if we're capable of making that determination, we're not experts in food hygiene or structural engineering.

Daily life in the 21st century means resolving a thousand life-or-death technical questions every day. Our regulators – corrupted by literally out-of-control corporations – are no longer reliable sources of ground truth on these questions. The resulting epistemological chaos is a cancer that gnaws away at our resolve to do anything about it. It is a festering pool where nihilism outbreaks are incubated.

The liberal response to conspiratorialism is mockery. In her new book Doppelganger, Naomi Klein tells of how right-wing surveillance fearmongering about QR-code "vaccine passports" was dismissed with a glib, "Wait until they hear about cellphones!"

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/05/not-that-naomi/#if-the-naomi-be-klein-youre-doing-just-fine

But as Klein points out, it's not good that our cellphones invade our privacy in the way that right-wing conspiracists thought that vaccine passports might. The nihilism of liberalism – which insists that things can't be changed except through market "solutions" – leads us to despair.

By contrast, leftism – a muscular belief in democratic, publicly run planning and action – offers a tonic to nihilism. We don't have to let logging companies decide whether a forest can be cut, or what should be planted when it is. We can have nice things. The art of finding out what's true or prudent didn't die with the Reagan Revolution (or the discount Canadian version, the Mulroney Malaise). The truth is knowable. Doing stuff is possible. Things don't have to be on fire.

If you'd like an essay-formatted version of this post to read or share, here's a link to it on pluralistic.net, my surveillance-free, ad-free, tracker-free blog:

https://pluralistic.net/2023/09/16/murder-offsets/#pulped-and-papered

[cogitoergofun]

The Environmental Protection Agency approved a component of boat fuel made from discarded plastic that the agency’s own risk formula determined was so hazardous, everyone exposed to the substance continually over a lifetime would be expected to develop cancer. Current and former EPA scientists said that threat level is unheard of. It is a million times higher than what the agency usually considers acceptable for new chemicals and six times worse than the risk of lung cancer from a lifetime of smoking.

Federal law requires the EPA to conduct safety reviews before allowing new chemical products onto the market. If the agency finds that a substance causes unreasonable risk to health or the environment, the EPA is not allowed to approve it without first finding ways to reduce that risk.

But the agency did not do that in this case. Instead, the EPA decided its scientists were overstating the risks and gave Chevron the go-ahead to make the new boat fuel ingredient at its refinery in Pascagoula, Mississippi. Though the substance can poison air and contaminate water, EPA officials mandated no remedies other than requiring workers to wear gloves, records show.

ProPublica and the Guardian in February reported on the risks of other new plastic-based Chevron fuels that were also approved under an EPA program that the agency had touted as a “climate-friendly” way to boost alternatives to petroleum-based fuels. That story was based on an EPA consent order, a legally binding document the agency issues to address risks to health or the environment. In the Chevron consent order, the highest noted risk came from a jet fuel that was expected to create air pollution so toxic that 1 out of 4 people exposed to it over a lifetime could get cancer.

In February, ProPublica and the Guardian asked the EPA for its scientists’ risk assessment, which underpinned the consent order. The agency declined to provide it, so ProPublica requested it under the Freedom of Information Act. The 203-page risk assessment revealed that, for the boat fuel ingredient, there was a far higher risk that was not in the consent order. EPA scientists included figures that made it possible for ProPublica to calculate the lifetime cancer risk from breathing air pollution that comes from a boat engine burning the fuel. That calculation, which was confirmed by the EPA, came out to 1.3 in 1, meaning every person exposed to it over the course of a full lifetime would be expected to get cancer.

Such risks are exceedingly unusual, according to Maria Doa, a scientist who worked at EPA for 30 years and once directed the division that managed the risks posed by chemicals. The EPA division that approves new chemicals usually limits lifetime cancer risk from an air pollutant to 1 additional case of cancer in a million people. That means that if a million people are continuously exposed over a presumed lifetime of 70 years, there would likely be at least one case of cancer on top of those from other risks people already face.

When Doa first saw the 1-in-4 cancer risk for the jet fuel, she thought it must have been a typo. The even higher cancer risk for the boat fuel component left her struggling for words. “I had never seen a 1-in-4 risk before this, let alone a 1.3-in-1,” said Doa. “This is ridiculously high.”

Another serious cancer risk associated with the boat fuel ingredient that was documented in the risk assessment was also missing from the consent order. For every 100 people who ate fish raised in water contaminated with that same product over a lifetime, seven would be expected to develop cancer — a risk that’s 70,000 times what the agency usually considers acceptable.

When asked why it didn’t include those sky-high risks in the consent order, the EPA acknowledged having made a mistake. This information “was inadvertently not included in the consent order,” an agency spokesperson said in an email.

[probablyasocialecologist]

The modern building product industry arose in tandem with the fossil fuel, chemical and plastics industries in the postwar era in the US and Europe. The massive productive capacity that had supplied the war effort was transformed to meet the needs and long‑repressed desires of a populace eager to partake in the fruits of peace, modernity and affluence, resulting in a flood of new plastic consumer goods. Among the new uses for plastic emerged an ever‑widening array of building products from flooring to cladding and furniture. By the late 1960s, however, plastic’s durability began to represent an existential threat to plastics and petrochemical companies as demand for plastic consumer goods began to wane. Industry’s solution? Disposability – not in response to consumers’ demand for convenience, but to the saturation of the market of plastic consumer goods that lasted too long. Disposability transformed a crisis of declining profit into a wellspring of unending demand and plastic waste. Eventually, producers became increasingly unable to credibly deny the problem of discarded plastic accumulating in great heaping piles and circling ocean gyres. What they could do was flood the mediascape with solutions that worked for them: redirecting focus from the obvious step of curtailing production, to downstream, consumer‑focused measures, such as increased recycling and the adoption of biogenic and recycled plastic feedstocks. Though plastic building products are less disposable than single‑use plastics, claims of ‘circularity’ similarly serve to sanction plastic use while ensuring that end‑of‑life costs stay off company ledgers.  Facing the prospect of declining demand for fuel due to electrification and the adoption of electric vehicles in much of the world, petrochemical industries have doubled down on expanding plastic fabrication as an economic lifeline. The immensely powerful nexus of fossil fuel, petrochemical and plastic industries have poured billions of dollars into new refineries and plastic production facilities. With nearly a fifth of plastic demand coming from the construction industry, these cartels have much at stake in maintaining their business. Accordingly, use of plastic in building is widely promoted by their well‑funded trade lobbies, including the American Chemical Council, Plastics Europe and the British Plastics Federation. These trade lobbyists work fervently to influence legislation to ensure the cost and responsibility of recycling is displaced onto consumers and municipalities, ‘externalising’ the cost of remediating what will be a legacy of toxic pollution left for future generations. 

21 May 2025

[mindblowingscience]

A study has uncovered a novel approach to detoxifying toxic arsenic in contaminated soils, offering hope for tackling one of the world's most pressing environmental health challenges. The research shows that the interaction between arsenic-oxidizing bacteria and goethite, a common Fe mineral, significantly accelerates the conversion of arsenic from its highly toxic form, arsenite [As(III)], into the less harmful arsenate [As(V)]. The formed As(V) can be adsorbed on the surfaces of Fe mineral, which is further enhanced by the presence of humic acid, a natural organic compound. These findings suggest a promising, sustainable solution to arsenic pollution, which could be leveraged for more effective remediation strategies. The findings are published in the journal Eco-Environment & Health.

Continue Reading.

[iatrophilosophos]

"Everyone" is not "worse at driving now" because of long covid. Yall.

Long covid is real, it is fucking people up, it seems relatively common, and that is precisely why everyone needs to stop attributing everything under the sun to it and actually adopt a sense of interrogative vigor*, especially among people who are 20-30 and have, lbr, SO MANY reasons to be miserable and ill including:

Shitty moldy apartment buildings & similar environmental hazards of slum&overcrowded housing

Dietary deficiencies/cheap mass-produced and fast food (no judgement! Eat what you can get down! But not eating vegetables WILL make you sick and crazy)

Onset of chronic illnesses folks would've gotten anyway &/ may be caused by factors like air & water pollution esp wrt environmental racism

Getting older 🤷 and conversely, being a young adult struggling to take care of oneself in a world that doesn't prioritize teaching you those skills & is often actively hostile towards using them

*by interrogative vigor i mean looking for information about why something ISNT covid or isn't long covid: lots of ppl are doing gr8 keeping up on the releases around covid! But yknow, when ur hammered you wanna nail everyone. Everything deserves a good faith effort to try on several explanations, you will learn a lot more even if it turns out to be your first thought.

I'm not saying any of this to try to downplay or deny anyone's suffering and im not interested in arguing with specific individuals about whether or not they personally have long covid (idk you! Idk ur history! Not for me to say! Lots of people definitely do!). I also understand that when doctors say things like the above^ it can feel really shitty and be really unhelpful. No one wants to feel like they're miserable and dying for months, finally get in a clinic visit, and be told "idk clean ur apartment, thatll be $400. Come back in six months to pay me another $400 when it doesn't work". That sucks!

What i can say is that whether or not any given individual has long covid, you almost definitely have at least one(1) other problem. this...really ain't my first rodeo. I have been watching especially younger adults who are breaking down & being disabled by the weight of The Everything get a pathology diagnosis, apply it as the root cause of most of their problems, proselytize how everyone, actually, probably has this pathology, and watch it catch on as the definitions get vaguer and the symptoms pool gets bigger. It almost always happens with diagnoses of exclusion & diagnoses that are very subjective: ADHD, autism, crohn's disease, hEDS...

Pathologies are most useful when they define a problem in a way it can be solved. I think in a lot of spaces, especially online, they can be leaned on as a source of validation or emotional support: it's the explanation that makes your misery make sense and justifies it to others. I would suggest that, as disability activists have been saying for decades: we do not have to justify our misery. We don't need an excuse to feel. We don't need an excuse to need help.

What we do need is a) a political critique of the state of disability that doesn't let the rest of the everything off the hook in favor of yelling about individual actions, and b) a personal and community scale understanding of misery that is useful to remediating misery AND!!! GATHERING BETTER DATA about the things that are making people miserable so we can fucking! Work on it!

One of the main things I do like, with my life tbh, is help disabled people understand their health and be less miserable, and when i work with clients in a more professional setting or just chat with friends, we don't start with a pathology: we start with a map. We look at housing, we look at food access, we look at environmental conditions, all in really granular detail, because everyone has so! Many! Problems! And we start work on solving like, two of them. How are we gonna beat the mold in your home back? How are we gonna get more food into you? & this starts to clarify things. One, regardless of what's wrong with people, these kinds of steps almost unilaterally help ease the burden p immediately, and two, fixing as much junk-data misery as we can gives us a WAY better understanding of what's going on and like, lets my clients have more productive relationships with their doctors because they can work up a smaller and more detailed list of complaints to investigate (& that are more within the realm of what those docs are actually trained to handle, most medical professionals just do not have skills for helping ppl with shit life syndrome.)

Caring about long covid as a mass disabling event (which i do, very much so!) should be pushing us to define DOWN the criteria for long covid by building a deep & rich understanding of the multiple other sources of misery and disability and using real tactics to help ourselves&eachother live with that misery. This in turn lets us build more concrete models of the things that are not currently well defined and thus strategize to figure out how to deal with those; rather than lumping everything into the nonspecific symptoms disease de jour and continuing to rot six deep in apartments where everyone's literally allergic to the fucking walls.