It’s possible that I shall make an ass of myself. But in that case one can always get out of it with a little dialectic. I have, of course, so worded my proposition as to be right either way (K.Marx, Letter to F.Engels on the Indian Mutiny)
The first Australian study of PFAS – so called “forever chemicals” – in rainwater has found safe concentrations of the chemicals according to the NHMRC Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.
Researchers from RMIT University and EPA Victoria detected eight PFAS compounds in rainwater samples collected in Melbourne between 2024 and 2025.
PFAS are a large family of human-made chemicals comprising thousands of individual compounds used in products ranging from firefighting foams and food packaging to textiles, cosmetics and non-stick cookware.
While the findings may reassure people who rely on rainwater tanks, the study also offers clues about how these chemicals reach waterways and catchments far from obvious sources of contamination.
PFAS can enter the atmosphere attached to dust particles or tiny water droplets, travelling long distances before returning to the environment through rainfall.
Based on Melbourne rainfall and the concentrations measured in the study, the researchers estimated that rain might deliver about 10.6 kilograms of PFAS directly to Port Phillip Bay each year. That is about 5.5 grams/km² for the entire Port Phillip Bay, which has a surface area of 1,930 km².
The estimate suggests rainfall could be an important pathway for PFAS entering waterways, alongside better-known sources such as wastewater, urban runoff and landfill.
Managing contamination risks
Lead researcher Professor Oliver Jones, from RMIT’s School of Science, said the findings addressed a long-standing question about how PFAS sometimes appear in places where there were no obvious nearby sources.
"Finding PFAS in rain isn't surprising given how widespread these chemicals are in the environment," Jones said.
Jones said detecting a chemical did not automatically mean there was a health risk.
“The more useful question isn't whether a chemical is toxic, but whether it's present at a concentration that could actually cause harm,” he said.
“Dose and exposure matter.”
The researchers hope the work will encourage broader monitoring of PFAS in rainfall across Australia and improve understanding of how these chemicals move through the environment.
"The more important questions are how much is there, where did it come from and what does it tell us about how PFAS moves through the environment?"
"In our samples, concentrations of the two most well-known PFAS – PFOS and PFOA – were below current Australian drinking water guideline values, which should provide some reassurance for people who use rainwater as a source of drinking water."
Tracking PFAS through the atmosphere
The project aimed to test a new analytical method designed to measure very low concentrations of contaminants in small-volume samples such as rainwater.
The researchers analysed rainwater collected on three occasions and tested for 30 PFAS compounds.
“Eight compounds were detected, with concentrations generally measured in nanograms per litre,” Jones said.
“For context, one nanogram per litre is one part per trillion, so we are talking very low concentrations indeed.”
The study took a new turn when EPA Victoria collaborators contributed atmospheric modelling data, enabling the team to investigate the origins of air masses associated with each rainfall event.
Using atmospheric modelling, the researchers found rain linked to air travelling over land contained higher PFAS concentrations compared to over the ocean.
The finding suggests urban and industrial areas may be important sources of airborne PFAS deposited elsewhere through rainfall.
Lead author, PhD student Nav Singh, said the study contributed new and important knowledge on PFAS in the environment.
“This is an important environmental challenge, and I’m proud to be part of research that helps improve our understanding of it.”
EPA Victoria Deputy Chief Environmental Scientist Caroline Martino said the regulator was proud to be part of the study.
“This study provides valuable insights into how PFAS moves through the environment,” Ms Martino said.
“Robust, peer-reviewed evidence is essential for effective regulation, risk assessment and management."
“Science is at the heart of everything EPA does, and we’re always pleased to work with great institutions like RMIT.”
“Forever chemicals” is a misnomer
“PFAS are often called ‘forever chemicals’, but that term can be misleading because it suggests they never break down, which isn't actually the case,” Jones said.
“A more accurate description is that they are highly persistent, or ‘lingering’, chemicals that can remain in the environment for a long time, which is why understanding their behaviour is so important.”
The paper, 'Concentrations of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances in the rainwater of South-Eastern Australia', is published in the international journal Environmental Chemistry and Toxicology (DOI: 10.1093/etojnl/vgag204).
“A model that floods the market with thousands of new daily styles at single-digit price points can only exist by passing its true costs onto labour and the environment.”
Shein’s ultra-fast fashion empire has taken a dramatic fall following its post-IPO valuation collapse.
The e-commerce platform, which is headquartered in Singapore but outsources much of its manufacturing to China, failed to go public in London and New York following concerns around its supply chain and heavy criticism of its environmental impact.
Shein therefore pivoted to the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, where it was valued at around $27 billion (approximately €23.24 billion) on 1 September. It may seem like a huge financial win, but it’s 70 per cent lower than its private market peak of almost $100 billion (€86 billion) back in 2022.
Why was Shein’s IPO such a flop?
“Capital markets aren’t acting out of pure altruism: they’re reacting to material financial risk,” sustainability expert and founder of tech company E&S Solutions Ildiko Almasi Simsic tells Euronews Earth.
“Shein’s delayed public listings and severely discounted valuation prove that investors now recognise ESG issues as direct threats to terminal value.”
Simsic argues that a business model that has been exposed to multiple controversies, such as forced labour and hazardous chemicals in clothing, carries an “enormous risk profile”.
She says environmental and human rights issues have now crossed over from “ethics to equity”, signalling a watershed moment for the fast-fashion industry.
But what makes Shein so controversial in the first place, and can its super cheap garments and on-trend styles ever become sustainable?
Shein’s controversial supply chains
“For years, ultra-fast fashion grew by leveraging hyper-fragmented, outsourced supply chains that kept prices absurdly low while keeping liabilities at arm’s length,” Simsic tells Euronews Earth.
“But that model created a massive structural vulnerability. When your business relies on thousands of sub-contractors operating in grey regulatory zones, supply chain oversight isn’t just an operational headache – it becomes a central business risk.”
Shein’s supply chain has been shrouded in controversy since its conception. In 2022, an investigation by environmental NGO Greenpeace Germany found hazardous chemicals above the EU regulatory limits in seven of 47 Shein products tested.
At the time, Shein acknowledged the chemical contamination and pledged “substantial improvements” to its chemical management.
However, a 2025 investigation found that little had changed. Greenpeace purchased 56 garments from Shein across eight countries and analysed them for hazardous chemicals. They found that 18 of 56 (32 per cent) of the garments exceeded the EU limits, including children’s clothing.
Among other chemicals, the plasticizers phthalates and water- and dirt-repellent “forever chemicals” (PFAS) were detected. These are hazardous chemicals that have been linked to various health concerns, including cancer, reproductive disorders, growth disorders in children, and immunodeficiency disorders.
Workers in producing countries are often exposed without protection, while chemicals are discharged untreated into waterways and soils,
Greenpeace
Global campaigning network
“Consumers are also at risk as they can be exposed to these chemicals through several ways – directly through the skin, by inhaling textile fibres in the air and, in the case of small children, through mouthing contaminated clothes.”In 2023, Shein admitted to finding two cases of child labour in its supply chain during the first nine months of the year.
The firm introduced new rules so that any child labour or forced labour violations have become grounds for immediate termination of contracts.
“Both cases were resolved swiftly, with remediation steps including terminating contracts with underage employees, ensuring the payment of any outstanding wages, arranging medical checkups and facilitating repatriation to parents/ legal guardians as needed,” Shein said at the time.
“Following appropriate remediation, the contract manufacturers were permitted to resume business.”
Despite Shein’s clampdown on labour violations, concerns of poor working conditions remain rife. A 2025 investigation by the BBC found that workers were sitting behind sewing machines for around 75 hours a week in contravention of Chinese labour laws.
Many employers told the publication that they only have one day off each month and have to endure 12-hour shifts, which didn’t include breaks for lunch and dinner, often working until past 10pm.
A 2024 report by Swiss advocacy group Public Eye also found that excessive overtime was still common for many workers – despite Shein promising to improve conditions following previous probes.
Can Shein ever be sustainable?
As Shein geared up for going public, scrutiny on its fast-fashion model grew stronger.
The company’s draft prospectus included the slogan “We believe in doing well by doing good”. However, according to Public Eye, this was removed from the final document.
Shein insists that “commitment to sustainable and responsible growth is woven into the fabric” of its business model. However, the expected IPO proceeds allocate just 10 per cent to sustainability and corporate responsibility.
An investigation by global nonprofit Rest of World found that between July and December of 2021, Shein added anywhere between 2,000 and 10,000 SKUs (stock keeping units, or individual styles) to its app each day.
This is because Shein orders small batches of each garment, sometimes as low as a few dozen pieces, then waits to see how consumers respond. If a particular item seems to be selling well, Shein orders more.
“A model that floods the market with thousands of new daily styles at single-digit price points can only exist by passing its true costs onto labour and the environment,” Simsic says.
“Cheap prices are an illusion created by systemic outsourcing. When garments are produced at a fraction of a cent per stitch, it almost guarantees non-compliance with fair wages, excessive overtime, and cheap, fossil-fuel-derived synthetic fabrics.”
The expert acknowledges that while efficiency and tech-driven demand forecasting can reduce excess inventory, it cannot bypass the “physical limits of planetary resources or basic human rights”.
“Ultra-low cost and sustainability are fundamentally incompatible concepts,” she adds. “One inherently undermines the other.”
Can fast fashion survive the scrutiny?
Shein’s scrutiny has gone far beyond complaints from environmentalists and individuals. Earlier this week, France passed a law targeting companies known for selling large volumes of low-quality clothing at rock-bottom prices.
“The harmful effects of ultra-fast fashion on our environment and our economy are well known and documented,” says Mathieu Lefevre, the minister for ecological transition.
Under the bill, firms like Shein are assessed under two criteria: the volume of clothing placed on the market and the cost of repairing garments relative to their purchase price.
The per-item fee will vary on a set scale according to how each product scores on both of these standards.This year, companies will pay fines such as a 50-cent levy on underwear falling into the ultra-fast fashion category, rising to €2 for T-shirts, €9 for jeans and €12 for a jacket.
The levy could reach up to €19.50 per item by 2030, though the cap remains at 50 per cent of the product’s pre-tax price.
Beijing has bitten back, urging France to abandon the law and describing it as “clearly discriminatory” due to Shein – and sites like Temu – being located in Asia.
“Should France persist in this course of action, China will take necessary measures to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises,” says commerce ministry spokeswoman Huang Ling. “France will bear full responsibility for all consequences arising from this.”
Simsic argues that while fast-fashion giants will still be able to survive new laws like this, it’s likely they won’t reach their historical growth model.
We’re witnessing a decisive shift from voluntary corporate sustainability to hard, enforceable law.
Ildiko Almasi Simsic
Sustainability expert
“Historically, labour issues or toxic chemical findings were managed by public relations or board-level sustainability committees. Today, with legislation like the EU’s Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence Directive and Extended Producer Responsibility, these are strict legal compliance matters carrying fines of up to five per cent of global turnover.”
Simsic adds that if non-compliance directly threatens a company’s bottom line through hefty regulatory penalties and import bans, growth will inevitably slow. It means sites like Shein will have no choice but to internalise these costs, by investing heavily in supply chain traceability and safer materials.
Euronews Earth has contacted Shein for comment.
'Anti-fast-fashion' law: France rejects China's discrimination claims
China has claimed that the new "anti-fast-fashion" law which came into force in France on Tuesday amounts to "discrimination." Responding to these accusations, a source from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs told Euronews that such claims were false.
On Thursday, China claimed that France's new fast-fashion law, targeting major Asian e-commerce platforms including Shein and Temu was "clearly discriminatory." Responding to these accusations, a source from a department linked to France's Ministry of Foreign Minister Affairs told Euronews that these claims were false.
A source from the French Foreign Trade and Attractiveness office said that the new law was "not discriminatory" and that it was introduced to "protect the environment and consumers."
"It is in everyone's interest, including China's, to have a peaceful relationship with France, with the European Union, and a civil trade relationship", the source said.
Speaking at a press conference on Thursday, Chinese commerce ministry spokesperson Huang Ling called for the suspension of the new law, which came into force on Tuesday, after it was voted in July.
The law imposes fees on certain items — which will eventually reach almost 20 euros per garment — as part of a push to curb the industry's environmental and local economic impacts.
"China urges France to immediately halt the implementation of the anti-ultra-fast fashion law," said Huang, adding that China stands in "firm opposition to France's insistence on pushing forward this trade-restrictive measure, which is clearly discriminatory".
"Should France persist in this course of action, China will take necessary measures to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese enterprises," she stated, while warning that "France will bear full responsibility for all consequences arising from this."
"No discrimination"
According to the source at France's Foreign Trade and Attractiveness Office, while there is "no discrimination", China is within its rights to raise issues around the law with the WTO.
"The fact that China feels targeted is indeed something we have heard. We are of course ready to talk to them to understand to what extent they feel targeted [...] If China has technical issues with the law, it is perfectly entitled to submit them to the WTO."
"Our Parliament is sovereign and has had its say. It has passed this law and we will fully respect its decision. This kind of threat, this challenge to a state's sovereign position, is coercion, economic retaliation. But for now, it remains a threat."
The European Commission has expressed reservations about whether France's "anti-fast-fashion" law is compatible with EU law, particularly relating to its advertising ban, which prohibits promotional campaigns and influencer marketing for fast-fashion brands.
However, according to the source, the law has undergone revisions and is robust. "We have taken the time to respond to the European Commission's concerns, to questions about compatibility with various directives. Questions remain, but we are confident",
"From our point of view, there are no outstanding issues".
For now, China has not said what retaliatory measures it could take, but Beijing has already targeted French interests in the past, imposing anti-dumping measures on European brandy in 2024, after the European Union decided to impose duties on Chinese electric vehicles.
Under France's new legislation, what counts as "ultra-fast fashion" is determined on the basis of two sets of criteria: the volume of clothing placed on the market and the cost of repairing garments relative to their purchase price.
The per-item fee is set to vary on a set scale, according to how each product scores on both these standards.
Shein, known for its ultra-low prices and rapidly produced clothes, made a tepid Hong Kong Stock Exchange debut on Tuesday, after previous plans for initial public offerings in New York and London were derailed.
The online retailer moved its headquarters to Singapore between 2021 and 2022, which analysts say was intended to avoid increasing global scrutiny of Chinese firms.
Wednesday, August 26, 2026
Making life more colorful on the wings of a butterfly
Researchers take inspiration from nature to find longer lasting, safer colors for cosmetics, food coatings, and paints
Inspired by butterflies and damselflies, Clara Dou and colleagues create colorants that mimic nature to potentially overcome toxicity concerns associated with the metal oxides used in products such as cosmetic glitter.
CHICAGO, Aug. 26, 2026 — The next time you need to freshen up the paint on your house or apply a bit of cosmetic glitter before heading out for the night, you might want to give a quick nod to the butterflies fluttering in a nearby garden. Taking inspiration from structures on those wings that make their vibrant colors, researchers are now devising more durable and adjustable colors that are also safer for human health and the environment.
The researchers will present their results at the fall meeting of the American Chemical Society (ACS) during the “Carbon-based Nanomaterials: From Fundamental Insights to Applications” symposium in McCormick Place. ACS Fall 2026 is being held August 23-27.
“Because structural color arises from the physical architecture of the material rather than light absorption by a biomolecule, it does not fade over time.” — Leila Deravi
In nature, the chemical structure of some molecules causes them to absorb specific wavelengths of light, reflecting the rest, and it is the reflected light that we perceive as pigmentary color. This is what makes carrots orange (carotenoids), blood red (hemoglobin), and plants green (chlorophyll).
As pigmentary colors are exposed to sunlight and other environmental elements, however, the chemical compounds can break down and the colors fade, requiring a refresh. Additionally, many commercial dye and pigment formulas contain toxic chemicals — or may themselves be toxic.
Nature also produces what are known as structural colors resulting from the physical arrangement (e.g., crystal structures) of molecules. These microscopic formations bend, scatter, and interfere with specific wavelengths of light, so that we only see the reflected wavelengths. Structural colors are what cause the rainbow of opal gemstones, the blues and greens of peacock feathers, and the deep blue of morpho butterfly wings.
“Structural color materials offer two key advantages over most traditional, pigment-based products: durability and vibrancy,” says Leila Deravi, the principal investigator of this study. “Because structural color arises from the physical architecture of the material rather than light absorption by a biomolecule, it does not fade over time.”
Trying to understand how chemical composition and crystal structure influence color generation, Deravi, Associate Professor of Chemistry and Chemical Biology, and her colleagues at Northeastern University studied butterflies in the Pieridaefamily, such as the Cabbage White and Clouded Sulfur varieties commonly found in open meadows. The researchers will present their findings on pterins, compounds that are related to those that make up DNA and found on the surface of butterfly wings.
Deravi suggests color intensity could be adjusted by controlling the size and packing of the pterin crystals rather than requiring many different pigments. There might also be safety advantages because these natural biomolecules are already being produced and used by animals and plants.
“They’re safe for the environment,” Deravi continues. “They’re safe for people, and they don’t have a lot of downstream toxicity like some of the forever chemicals used in synthetic pigmentary dyes.”
The researchers are quick to note, however, that they have not yet initiated studies to validate pterin safety.
Critical to studying structural colors from pterins, however, is the need to produce and modify pterin crystals in the lab, the focus of Clara Dou, a graduate student in Deravi’s lab and presenter of their work at the meeting. To do this, she synthesized pterin granules that mimic the structures on butterfly wings.
As Dou explains, forming the microscopic crystals out of pterins has historically required organic solvents such as dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), chemicals that can present safety concerns for human health and the environment. And crystallization using DMSO takes several weeks to complete.
“If the animals can do this without DMSO, how can we replicate this natural process in the lab?” Dou asks.
“Our work addresses this by exploring how water, salt, and acidity influence crystallization,” she continues. Using the new method, Dou can get crystals to precipitate out of solution and isolate them in a matter of minutes. The researchers can then see how changing crystal growth conditions change the reflected color.
The team’s new process reduces the need for organic solvents, making it more environmentally friendly than the currently used methods.
Although the current work produces only milligram-size (like grains of table salt) amounts of structural colors, the researchers are currently scaling up production as they believe it has commercial potential. They say these pterin structural colors could be a natural and sustainable source that overcomes some of the toxicity concerns associated with, for example, the metal oxides used in products such as cosmetic glitter.
“If we can make some templates for glitter using essentially derivatives of DNA, that would be incredible,” Deravi says.
“Ultimately, there’s still a great deal left to learn about biological color,” she continues. “It’s something we all interact with daily in the flowers, insects, and animals around us, yet the underlying mechanisms behind their long-lived, fade-resistant color are still being defined.”
The research was funded in part by Northeastern University.
###
The American Chemical Society (ACS) is one of the world's largest scientific organizations and a global leader in advancing scientific knowledge. Founded in 1876, ACS' mission is to advance scientific knowledge, empower a global community, and champion scientific integrity. Guided by its vision of a world built on science, ACS brings together people, ideas, and resources to drive discovery and innovation, support the professional growth of scientists and students, and advance scientific discussion. Through its trusted publications, scientific meetings, community networks, education and career resources, and scientific information solutions, ACS helps scientists, educators, and students make a lasting impact on their communities and the world at large. Together, these efforts support ACS' commitment to improve all lives through the transforming power of chemistry.
Title Exploring the structure and optical function of pterin-based materials
Abstract In nature, some animals have evolved complex optical systems that rely on layers of ordered organic crystals that maximally reflect or scatter light. One such subclass of materials includes oxidized pteridine derivatives known as pterins. Pterins are widely found in pierid butterfly wings and the thorax of blue-tailed damselflies as both structural and pigmentary color components In this work, we explore three pterin derivatives (pterine, ixosanthopterin, pterine-6’-carboxylic acid), which differ systematically in their functional group chemistry, to better understand the relationship between their molecular structures and their ability to precipitate as highly reflective nanomaterials. By characterizing the intermolecular forces, we aim to establish clear structure-property relationships linking molecular architecture to bulk optical performance.
Saturday, August 15, 2026
Green Groups Sue Trump EPA for Approving Toxic Semiconductor Chemicals Amid AI Data Center Boom
“The rush to build more and more data centers is causing harm far beyond the data centers themselves.”
An aerial view shows cooling vent fans on the roof next to generators on the lower level of a Digital Realty data center in Ashburn, Virginia on November 12, 2025. (Photo by Andrew Caballero-Reynolds/AFP via Getty Images)
A trio of green groups on Friday sued the US Environmental Protection Agency over its approval of two new chemicals for semiconductor manufacturing, arguing that the EPA allowed potentially dangerous substances to be sold despite acknowledging significant gaps in its understanding of their health risks.
CHIPS Communities United and the Sierra Club, represented by Earthjustice, filed suit in the US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit in San Francisco challenging the approvals. The groups contend that the EPA violated the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) by permitting the chemicals’ use without adequately assessing their risks to employees in semiconductor plants and the communities in which they are located.
According to Earthjustice, the EPA identified potential hazards including cancer, neurological damage, and even sudden death, but also acknowledged that it lacked sufficient information to determine the full extent of those risks. The names of the chemicals are redacted in the complaint—in which they are identified by their EPA premanufacture notice numbers, P-26-0029 and P-26-0045—because the agency has designated their identities as confidential business information.
“The Trump administration is rushing dangerous chemicals to market without the review or the protection that the law requires,” Earthjustice senior attorney Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz said in a statement announcing the lawsuit. “Here, EPA admits that it has not evaluated the full extent of these chemicals’ health risks, yet it is still sending them into communities across the country and leaving the public to discover their effects one doctor’s visit at a time.”
CHIPS Communities United coalition director Judith Barish said: “Neighbors and workers are exposed to toxic chemicals in semiconductor factories. Over decades, workers in chip [factories] have been harmed by workplace exposure and residents of nearby communities have been impacted by hazardous air or water that is contaminated by these chemicals.”
“We call on the EPA to stop approving chemicals that can harm public health without understanding the risks,” Barish added.
As Earthjustice noted: Semiconductor manufacturing is a major ongoing source of [per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances], a large class of toxic “forever chemicals,” along with other industrial manufacturing sources. PFAS don’t easily break down and can persist in our bodies and the environment for decades or more. Semiconductors are also foundational hardware for artificial intelligence (AI) data centers, affecting many communities in addition to those surrounding the massive polluting chip factories.
The groups’ lawsuit comes over a month after the EPA under President Donald Trump—who campaigned on what critics say was a largely empty promise to “make America healthy again”—and agency Administrator Lee Zeldin approved a fifth “forever chemical” pesticide pushed by industry lobbyists.
“EPA’s approval of these unstudied chemicals is just the latest example of the Trump EPA refusing to follow the legal risk assessment processes under TSCA and prioritizing industry profits over public health,” Earthjustice said on Friday. “Last year, the agency proposed shifts to how it conducts risk evaluations for chemicals already in use and on the market that would let it ignore the real-world risks posed by toxic chemicals.”
Harmful chemicals associated with data center cooling, fire suppression, and production of semiconductors and other electronic components include refrigerants such as Freon and Opteon, Teflon coatings for cable insulation, Krytox for pumps and robotics, and Viton for sealing.
Additionally, as the Natural Resources Defense Council explained, data center cooling systems “can consume vast quantities of water and pollute large quantities of water, depending on the type of cooling system used. For example, evaporative cooling consumes large quantities of water while some immersion cooling techniques rely on harmful chemicals such as PFAS.”
While much critical attention on the lack of guardrails on unchecked AI development has focused on the risks of the technology itself and its economic implications—which experts say includes the shorter-term danger of mass unemployment and the long-term threat that superintelligent machines could one day subjugate or even wipe out humanity—the green groups are highlighting environmental and health hazards amid the worsening climate emergency.
“The rush to build more and more data centers is causing harm far beyond the data centers themselves,” Jane Williams, chair of the Grassroots Network National Clean Air Team at Sierra Club, said Friday.
“From the plants where toxic chemicals are used to make semiconductors, to the roads these chemicals are transported on, and finally to the incinerators where they are disposed, EPA’s approval of these dangerously unstudied chemicals places the public at risk,” Williams added. “These chemicals are suspected to be persistent bioaccumulative toxins, a category of chemicals that contaminate breast milk, cord blood, and the next generation. This action is an assault on the future.”
Wednesday, August 12, 2026
Forget Climate Doomerism. We Know What We Must Do to Protect the Planet.
A group of climate experts have several game-changing policies to preserve our right to a clean, healthy environment.
A barn and wind turbines in rural Illinois. (Wikimedia Commons)
2026 could turn out to be the hottest year on record. Yet, climate change is now on the back burner while the Trump administration intensifies its all-out assault on climate and environmental actions, as indicated by the president’s attack on the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine for publishing what he called “fraudulent, biased, and misleading” material on climate change. Still, even the UN General Assembly recognizes that “a clean, healthy and sustainable environment” is a basic human right and this right must be defended.
In the interview that follows, author, naturalist, and a leading scholar of political economy and climate policy James K. Boyce spells out the game-changing policies needed to protect the environment and secure the future of the planet. His proposals are part of the Game Changers project launched by the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. Boyce is professor emeritus of economics and senior fellow at PERI. He is the author of many books, including Economics for People and the Planet: Inequality in the Era of Climate Change. He is also the recipient of awards including the 2025 Common Wealth Prize, the 2024 Global Inequality Research Award, and the 2017 Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought.
The interview that follows has been lightly edited.
C. J. Polychroniou: On July 4, 2026, the United States turned 250 years old. Meanwhile, a record-setting heat wave disrupted celebrations of the event across the country, and this summer could end up as one of the U.S.’s hottest ever. An extraordinary heat wave also spread through Europe, triggering deaths and causing “severe infrastructure stress.” To say then that climate has reached the point of breakdown might be an understatement. Yet the Trump administration not only continues to treat climate change as a “hoax” but has launched an all-out assault on the environment, as if totally unaware of the fact that a “clean, healthy, and sustainable environment” is a basic human right. How do we translate this right into reality in the United States?
James K. Boyce: Rights never exist in the abstract; they are won and sustained through struggles. This is as true for environmental rights as it is for the rights to free expression, freedom of assembly, and free and fair elections. The constitutions of some U.S. states affirm the right to a clean and safe environment, and this right has been formally recognized by the United Nations. It is missing, however, from the U.S. Constitution. An important step for translating this right into reality would be a constitutional amendment that guarantees it, but this will take years. In the meantime, much can and should be done to secure a clean and safe environment for all.
For example, fenceline monitoring of air pollution from industrial facilities is now readily affordable. Monitors should be installed near significant pollution sources and their real-time readings made publicly available online. This is especially vital in communities currently overburdened with pollution, often from multiple sources, many of which are politically disadvantaged by race, ethnicity, and class. Information is a source of countervailing power.
There should also be a moratorium on the introduction of new pollution sources in communities already overburdened with pollution. A good model is the landmark environmental justice law passed in 2020 in New Jersey, which went into effect in 2023.
Overburdened communities ought to have priority in pollution abatement, too. Michael Ash and I propose a target of reducing pollution by 8 percent per year (a rate that would cut pollution in half in nine years) until the community no longer meets the criteria for being classified as overburdened. A similar policy for co-pollutants from fossil fuels is proposed in the Healthy Climate and Family Security Act introduced in 2024 by Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) and Congressman Don Beyer (D-Virginia).
Many corporations are polluting the environment through destructive business practices and because they are simply greedy. Moreover, we have failed to hold such corporations accountable. How do we stop corporate polluters?
There are basically three ways to rein in corporate polluters. These are not mutually exclusive; on the contrary, they are mutually reinforcing. One is to make the invisible visible — reveal the sources of pollution and their human toll — through information, as in the pollution monitoring mentioned above. This alone would strengthen public pressure (and lawsuits) that can alter corporate behavior, a phenomenon known as “informal regulation.” The second is formal regulation: rules that mandate firms to curtail emissions or switch to cleaner technologies. Such rules require enforcement, and again this is facilitated by an informed public. The third is to compel polluters to pay for damages from the environmental harms they inflict. This gives them an incentive to do more than just comply with formal regulations by investing in R&D to find new and cleaner production methods.
We need to hold polluters to account for environmental damage they have inflicted in the past, too. This includes the escalating damages from extreme weather events due to climate destabilization. Today, the costs of disaster recovery and climate adaptation are seriously straining the budgets of households, businesses, and governments alike. The states of Vermont and New York have enacted climate superfund legislation to recover a significant share of these costs from fossil fuel producers based on their historical responsibility for greenhouse gas emissions. Michael Ash and I advocate this sort of policy at the national level to help fund the costs of recovery and adaptation.
The Trump administration’s policy toward the chemical industry is one of deregulation and rolling back limits on “forever chemicals” and other toxins. So much for a clean and safe environment. What’s the game-changing strategy when it comes to the chemical industry?
The chemical industry in the U.S. is currently stuck in outdated technologies of the past. Bold new policies are needed to break out of its toxic and fossil fuel-dependent impasse. The regulatory regime for chemicals in the U.S. is fragmented across multiple agencies; moreover, rather than encouraging improvements, it sometimes creates perverse incentives against them. For example, the Toxic Substances Control Act requires new chemicals to be screened for health and environmental effects prior to their introduction into the economy. This is a good thing, but the tens of thousands of chemicals already in use are not subject to comparable safeguards. In effect, the incumbents are presumed innocent until proven guilty, making it harder to replace them with safer substitutes.
Environmental health expert Joel Tickner proposes a comprehensive set of policies to create a cleaner, safer, and more sustainable chemical industry. These include the establishment of a single agency to coordinate national policy, as Sweden and the European Union have done, which will compile and distribute information on chemical safety, prioritize reductions in the most hazardous chemicals, and incentivize the adoption of superior alternatives.
To tackle the toxic legacies of the past, Tickner proposes to establish a National Remediation Fund financed by fees on the chemical industry to pay for clean-ups, site redevelopment, ecosystem recovery, and health cost reimbursement. He also proposes a National Transition Fund for Safer and Sustainable Chemistry to support R&D, pilot facilities, supply-chain reformulation, and just transitions for communities and workers in the industry affected by the changes.
Climate change poses an existential threat, and the supply of fossil fuels is the elephant in the room. So, when talking about climate breakdown, it should be obvious that we should leave fossil fuels in the ground as they are the main source of greenhouse gas emissions causing global warming. Wouldn’t this be the game changer for climate change? If so, what would a policy of phasing down fossil fuels look like?
You’re right: The basic goal of climate policy should be to keep fossil fuels in the ground. But it is vital to understand two realities. First, fossil fuels cannot and will not be abandoned overnight. We need to phase them out over time, ideally fast and on a predictable timeline. Second, restrictions on the supply of fossil fuels — which are almost certain to be necessary during the phasedown, since demand-reduction measures so far have proven insufficient — inevitably will raise fossil fuel prices. This is a feature of the policy, not a bug, since higher prices provide powerful incentives to invest in energy efficiency and alternative energy sources. For reasons of political feasibility as well as fairness, it is essential to anticipate this price effect and safeguard the energy security of households during the transition.
Michael Ash and I propose a policy to advance energy security both in the short run and the long run. The key to long-run energy security is to move to clean and renewable energy sources that do not have to pass through chokepoints like the Strait of Hormuz and are not vulnerable to price manipulations by corporate cartels and petrostates. In the short run, the key is to make higher fossil fuel prices family-friendly by recycling the money straight back to the public.
Here’s how it works: (1) Set a timetable for the fossil fuel phasedown. We propose a 90 percent reduction over 25 years, with the remaining 10 percent needed to achieve a net-zero economy to be met by improved carbon sequestration. (2) Require corporations that bring fossil fuels into the economy via extraction or imports to surrender one permit for each ton of carbon dioxide that will be released when that fuel is burned, with the total number of permits declining each year in accordance with the timetable. (3) Distribute non-tradable permits via quarterly auctions, where their price is set by supply and demand. These become part of the cost of supplying fossil fuels, and most or all of this cost is passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices. (4) Return 75 percent of the auction revenue to the public as equal per person payments called energy security cashbacks. These will protect the purchasing power of working families during the phasedown, more than offsetting the impact of higher fossil fuel prices. (5) Recycle 25 percent of the revenue to state and local governments in a Resilient Communities Fund. This will protect their own purchasing power and strengthen their ability to invest in climate resilience.Email
James K. Boyce is professor emeritus of economics and senior fellow of the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He is the author of Economics for People and the Planet: Inequality in the Era of Climate Change. He received the 2025 Common Wealth Prize, the 2024 Global Inequality Research Award, and the 2017 Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought.
