Dear Reader,

This week: A battle with the federal government (again) and untangling toxics news.

 

The Trump Administration announced it will allow economic impacts to be considered when listing a species under the Endangered Species Act, and that agencies will evaluate the outlook for the species over "the foreseeable future," a phrase that doesn't involve the impact of climate change. At least, not the "speculative" impact of long-term climate change predictions, said administration officials. This immediately sent us reporters and editors to merriam-webster.com to look up "speculative," which means, "to take to be true on the basis of insufficient evidence." Well. Nothing in climate science is speculative; in fact, the evidence stacks up impressively that scientists' predictions are coming true faster and worse than expected.

 

California is battling the Trump Administration on this ... and on the Clean Power Plan ... and on multiple environmental and climate fronts. Kevin Stark's stories this week not only follow the struggles for you, they clarify the meaningful points of conflict.
 

In toxics news, Governor Gavin Newsom recently signed a bill ordering water agencies to tell consumers whether any of the thousands of chemicals with the frightening nickname, "forever chemicals" are in their drinking water supply. We turned to Molly Peterson to give you all the background you need on these chemicals in her succinct read on the new PFAS law. 

 

And just in case you're confused by all the toxics news this summer, here are our best explanations of what's happening on other fronts: 1)  chlorpyrifos at the state level and on the ground; 2) the science behind the cases against Monsanto's weedkiller, Roundup.