Environment, Trump Administration

While more money needed for chemical research, Trump sets out to slash EPA budget, workforce

Coming to a river near you: Chemicals, lots of chemicals (Photo: Joe Sullivan, Flickr, Creative Commons license)

As a planet, we are awash in 10s of millions of synthetic chemicals: They are infused in hormones and perfumes, weed killers and wood turpentine, flame retardants and freon. These synthetics are damaging ecosystems, including waterways, where chemicals are changing the sex of fish.

Unfortunately, while industry has been churning more than 100 million synthetic chemicals in the last 60 years, few scientists and fewer dollars have been devoted to researching the harm these chemicals are wreaking on the environment. And that comparatively puny amount of federal research dollars could soon nearly, if not completely, disappear.

A new study published by researchers at the Duke University Nicholas School of the Environment concludes that the lack of funding and knowledge have translated to a “critical blindspot” in understanding how chemicals are changing global ecology.

From the study’s announcement:

“When compared to climate change and nutrient pollution, synthetic chemicals have fallen off the research radar — despite the threats they pose to human and environmental health. Right now, we lack the data needed to assess the ecological impacts of most of the synthetic chemicals in use today. The situation is unsustainable.”

A second study shows that the amount of EPA funding devoted to this type of research has drastically declined since 2001 — from 1.3 percent of the agency’s research and development budget to just 0.5 percent. This decline has occurred despite the National Academy of Science recommendations that the portion be boosted to 15 to 20 percent.

The worse news? The Trump administration is strongly considering slashing the EPA budget by $1 billion, about 12 percent of its $8 billion annual budget, and its staff by two-thirds — from 15,000 people to just 5,000. More chilling is that Trump wants require all EPA science to be vetted by political staffers.

Check Also

Here’s something to be thankful for: better air through renewable energy, efficiency

  Utilities’ energy efficiency and renewable energy programs ...

Top Stories from NCPW

  • News
  • Commentary

A pivotal legislative task force may be just beginning its dive into North Carolina’s school funding [...]

The controversy over “Silent Sam,” the Confederate monument on UNC’s Chapel Hill campus, has been ra [...]

North Carolina tries to mine its swine and deal with a poop problem that keeps piling up A blanket o [...]

This story is part of "Peak Pig," an examination of the hog industry co-published with Env [...]

Republicans in Congress are rushing to advance a tax reform bill that balloons the federal deficit s [...]

The post Charitable donations and the GOP’s chopping block appeared first on NC Policy Watch. [...]

13---percentage of households in the U.S. that were food insecure on average from 2014-2016. Meaning [...]

Five years ago, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a jaw-dropping civil rights lawsuit again [...]

Spotlight on Journalism

We invite you to join a special celebration of investigative journalism! The evening will feature Mike Rezendes, a member of the Pulitzer Prize-winning Boston Globe Spotlight Team known for their coverage of the cover-up of sexual abuse in the Catholic Church.

Tickets available NOW!

Spotlight On Journalism

This event will benefit NC Policy Watch, a project of the North Carolina Justice Center. Sponsorship opportunities available now!

Featured | Special Projects

NC Budget 2017
The maze of the NC Budget is complex. Follow the stories to follow the money.
Read more


NC Redistricting 2017
New map, new districts, new lawmakers. Here’s what you need to know about gerrymandering in NC.
Read more