. HFC-23 emissions from chemical plants in eastern China and elsewhere likely violate an international climate agreement despite readily available pollution controls. Advocates are pressing for action.Inside Climate News

Chemical exposures, health and environmental justice in communities living on the fenceline of industry. Department of Preventive Medicine, Keck School of Medicine, University of Southern California & Department of Health Education, San Francisco State UniversityJill Johnston , Lara Cushing Polluting industries are more likely to be located in low income communities of color who also experience greater social stressors that may make them more vulnerable than others to the health impacts of toxic chemical exposures. We describe recent developments in assessing pollutant exposures and health threats posed by industrial facilities using or releasing synthetic chemicals to nearby communities in the U.S.

Recent findings.......More people are living near oil and gas development due to the expansion of unconventional extraction techniques as well as near industrial animal operations, both with suggestive evidence of increased exposure to hazardous pollutants and adverse health effects. Legacy contamination continues to adversely impact a new generation of residents in fenceline communities, with recent studies documenting exposures to toxic metals and poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). Researchers are also giving consideration to acute exposures resulting from inadvertent industrial chemical releases, including those resulting from extreme weather events linked to climate change. Natural experiments of industrial closures or clean ups provide compelling evidence that exposures from industry harm the health of nearby residents.

Summary........New and legacy industries, coupled with climate change, present unique health risks to communities living near industry due to the release of toxic chemicals. Cumulative impacts from multiple stressors faced by environmental justice communities may amplify these adverse effects.

Keywords: Environmental justice, climate justice, oil and gas development, industrial pollution, natural technological disasters 

• Introduction: Synthetic chemical compounds have drastically transformed many human activities, such as through the production of food, consumer products and energy. As tens of thousands of new chemicals have been synthesized, highly unequal patterns of exposure to pollution waste streams has resulted with communities living on the fenceline of such industries being particularly at risk of harmful exposures [1]. The past four decades have brought to light the role of policies, land-use decisions, regulations, and market-based forces in contributing to social inequalities in residential proximity to industry and resultant exposures to harmful chemicals that disproportionately impact low-income communities of color [2]. Even as toxic exposures and associated health risks have been on the decline nationally, such reductions have been less evident in low-income communities and communities of color [3] [4]. In many cases, these fenceline industries are un- or under-regulated and the surrounding communities often have less access to resources for conducting research into the relationships between industry, environmental quality, and health conditions [5]. 
• Facing environmental hazards, community organizations and the environmental justice movement have turned to gathering data in the face of government inaction or industry denial about chemical exposures [6]. In many cases, primary or secondary data demonstrating the presence of harmful pollutants in the environment near industry has been insufficient to prompt regulatory or policy action; rather, it has also been necessary to demonstrate people’s exposure and that exposure causes adverse health effects [6, 5]. However, linking local industrial pollution with environmental health impacts presents unique challenges. For example, while advancements in biomonitoring have enabled better estimation of human exposures to synthetic chemicals, attributing those exposures to a local industry is difficult, particularly in environmental justice communities because they often are subject to multiple sources of pollution. Epidemiological studies in fenceline communities must confront power limitations due to small sample sizes and issues of confounding, since fenceline communities are typically also of low socioeconomic status and struggling with social as well as environmental stressors to health. In this paper, we review recent environmental health literature regarding communities living in close proximity to industrial pollution sources and advancements in the field, focusing on studies in the United States (U.S.). We searched for original articles published in the last 3 years that included hazardous point sources of man-made chemicals and measured a health (or biomarker) endpoint among residents living in close proximity. For purposes of this review, our emphasis was on hazardous facilities that use or emit synthetic chemicals. Literature from the past three years fitting these criteria were reviewed and synthesized based on commonalities and methods. 
• We summarize recent evidence that the expansion of oil and gas extraction has resulted in chemical exposures to nearby communities that may be impacting health. Similarly, the growth of industrial animal operations (e.g. hogs, dairies, poultry) has been associated with adverse health impacts in nearby, largely rural communities. We also find that legacy contaminants from other industries continue to impact a new generation due to a lack of adequate clean up. Finally, we find that accidental industrial releases are becoming of greater concern with the increase in extreme weather events due to climate change, with implications for harmful chemical exposures in nearby communities. We also review several recent studies that have used a “natural experiment” design to compellingly demonstrate the health impacts of industry on fenceline communities, overcoming some of the challenges in quantifying the health impacts of exposures related to local industry.......read the study and report     https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7035204/

A ‘Trojan Horse’ for Toxic Chemicals, Regulation of toxic substances has long exempted synthetic chemicals made of large molecules believed too big to escape products to cause harm. A new study shows how dangerous that assumption is. Inside Climate News  Liza Gross March 5, 2025 Five years ago, an international team of scientists compiled the first global inventory of commercially available chemicals with sobering results: they identified three times as many chemicals on the market than previously estimated, driven by the explosive growt h of petrochemical production over the past several decades.  Less than 5 percent of the 350,000 chemicals and mixtures registered for production and use has been tested for safety. And with scant information about the environmental behavior or toxicity of most compounds, it takes academic scientists years to identify their potential risks.  Now, a new peer-reviewed study adds to a growing body of evidence showing the failure of current regulatory approaches to protect environmental and human health.The researchers focused on polymers, very large molecules made of long chains of smaller molecules, which scientists considered too big to leach from products or enter the body’s cells and cause harm. Polymers are exempt from U.S. and European toxics regulations to encourage production of alternatives to chemicals shown to cause harm. In the new study, published Monday in the journal Nature Sustainability, the team found that polymers can not only break down in the environment but also become “substantially more toxic” when they do.

The team focused on polymeric brominated flame retardants, or polyBFRs, which are widely used in electronics to reduce fire risk. They have been marketed as safer alternatives to flame retardants found to pose environmental and health risks.. As one of the very few reports exploring the environmental impacts of polymeric BFRs, our work clearly shows that there are environmental risks associated with these polymers, and their use should be adequately assessed and regulated,” said Da Chen, an environmental chemist at Jinan University in China who led the study. Chen likened polymers to a Trojan horse carrying harmful chemicals inside a seemingly innocuous shell. 

More than 20 years ago, researchers raised concerns about “non-polymeric” brominated flame retardants, substances with simple chemical structures, which were widely used to reduce fire risk in numerous consumer and industrial products, from electronics and TVs to insulating foams and other building materials. At the time, there was little information about the toxicity of the scores of commercially available brominated flame retardants despite their increasing contamination of air, soil and waterways and buildup in people and wildlife species from bald eagles to endangered primates. Since then, independent scientists discovered the non-polymeric brominated flame retardants cause diverse health problems, including reproductive, hormonal and neurodevelopmental damage, reduced IQ and increased risk of dying from cancer.  The polymeric versions emerged to replace brominated flame retardants that had been banned or phased out in the wake of a wealth of research on their ubiquity and toxicity.  Noting that production of polyBRFs will likely continue to expand as the simpler versions are regulated, Chen and his colleague sought to test the claim that they are unlikely to pose risks. The team collected environmental samples from electronic waste recycling facilities in South China, and from homes and outdoor environments within about a mile and at distances of more than 30 miles away. To determine whether the polyBFRs broke down into smaller molecules, they developed a new screening method to analyze the soil, dust and air samples they collected as well as what remained after they subjected the polymers to laboratory treatments designed to simulate real-world conditions that might cause them to degrade in the environment. 

In the new study, published Monday in the journal Nature Sustainability, the team found that polymers can not only break down in the environment but also become “substantially more toxic” when they do. The team focused on polymeric brominated flame retardants, or polyBFRs, which are widely used in electronics to reduce fire risk. They have been marketed as safer alternatives to flame retardants found to pose environmental and health risks. “As one of the very few reports exploring the environmental impacts of polymeric BFRs, our work clearly shows that there are environmental risks associated with these polymers, and their use should be adequately assessed and regulated,” said Da Chen, an environmental chemist at Jinan University in China who led the study. Chen likened polymers to a Trojan horse carrying harmful chemicals inside a seemingly innocuous shell.

More than 20 years ago, researchers raised concerns about “non-polymeric” brominated flame retardants, substances with simple chemical structures, which were widely used to reduce fire risk in numerous consumer and industrial products, from electronics and TVs to insulating foams and other building materials. At the time, there was little information about the toxicity of the scores of commercially available brominated flame retardants despite their increasing contamination of air, soil and waterways and buildup in people and wildlife species from bald eagles to endangered primates. Since then, independent scientists discovered the non-polymeric brominated flame retardants cause diverse health problems, including reproductive, hormonal and neurodevelopmental damage, reduced IQ and increased risk of dying from cancer.The polymeric versions emerged to replace brominated flame retardants that had been banned or phased out in the wake of a wealth of research on their ubiquity and toxicity.  Noting that production of polyBRFs will likely continue to expand as the simpler versions are regulated, Chen and his colleague sought to test the claim that they are unlikely to pose risks.......read on              https://insideclimatenews.org/news/05032025/polymeric-brominated-flame-retardants-toxic-chemicals/