 |
|
|
|||||
In pain so bad he couldnt stand, Chris Meek was rushed to the hospital with a life-threatening ruptured gallbladder. When he emerged from surgery, he learned he had kidney cancer that thankfully hadnt yet spread. Meek, a social studies teacher in Wilmington, North Carolina, was 47 at the time. But he remained confused for years about why, as someone seemingly not at risk, he had gotten cancer until Emily Donovan, a parent of students at his school, gave a guest talk about high levels of harmful forever chemicals known as PFAS in North Carolina’s environment. When Donovan mentioned kidney cancer, the possible cause of Meek’s diagnosis finally clicked. Until then, Meek said, he had no idea what PFAS was. Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency set the first federal drinking water limits for PFAS, or perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, finding they increased the risk of cardiovascular disease, certain cancers, and babies being born with low birth weight. In a decision with consequences for tens of millions of Americans, the Trump administration is expected to soon say whether it intends to stand by those strict standards and defend the limits against a water utility industry challenge in federal court. PFAS in drinking water created a crisis for many communities In North Carolina, runoff from a Chemours plant contaminated the Cape Fear River, creating a crisis for cities like Wilmington that use it for drinking water. Amid public outcry, Wilmington effectively eliminated it from tap water. Other U.S. communitiesoften near military bases or industrial sitesdid the same when test results were frightening and public pressure, local leadership, or state law forced PFAS-laden wells offline or prompted installation of expensive filtering systems, according to Mark White, drinking water global practice leader at the engineering firm CDM Smith. The EPA said the PFAS found in North Carolina, often called GenX chemicals, can be toxic to the kidney. While other types of PFAS may raise kidney cancer risk, little research has focused on the link between kidney cancer and GenX, according to Sue Fenton, director of the Center for Human Health and the Environment at North Carolina State University. Chemours said evidence doesn’t support arguments that GenX at low levels is a health threat. The company has sharply reduced PFAS discharges. So far, sampling has found nearly 12% of U.S. water utilities are above the recently set EPA limits, but most aren’t above by much. Forcing this group to reduce PFAS more than doubles the rules health benefits but roughly triples its costs, the EPA has said. The Biden administrations rule set standards for two common types of PFAS at 4 parts per trillion, effectively the lowest level at which they can be reliably detected. Standards for several other PFAS chemicals were set, too, and utilities must meet those levels by 2029. PFAS have had wide uses over the decades Manufactured by companies like Chemours and 3M, PFAS were incredibly useful in many applicationsamong them, helping clothes to withstand rain and ensuring that firefighting foam snuffed out flames. But the chemicals also accumulate in the body. As science advanced in recent years, evidence of harm at far lower levels became clearer. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has championed fossil fuels and the rollback of major clean air and water rules. His history with PFAS is more nuanced; during his time as a New York congressman, he supported legislation to regulate forever chemicals in drinking water. Its an issue that touches people in a very tangible way across the political spectrum, including in Lee Zeldins former district,” said Melanie Benesh, vice president of government affairs at the nonprofit Environmental Working Group. Zeldin has offered clues about what the EPA could do. The agency estimated the rule would cost about $1.5 billion annually and Zeldin said recently that communities struggling to afford a fix for PFAS that are just above the standard might be handled differently than wealthy places with lots of it. What we are going to have to be is extremely thoughtful in figuring this out, he said. On Monday, the EPA said it will establish an agency lead for PFAS, develop wastewater limits for PFAS manufacturers, and investigate sources that pose an immediate danger to drinking water, among other actions. EPA decision looms on whether to let the rule stay as it is Soon, the EPA must tell a federal appeals court in Washington whether the rule should stand or be rewritten, although weakening it could be complicated because the Safe Drinking Water Act prevents new rules from being looser than previous ones. The agency could, however, encourage exemptions and deadline extensions, according to Erik Olson, an attorney with the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council supporting the current standards in the court case. Consider Avondale, Arizona, outside of Phoenix, which produces PFAS results modestly above the limits. Officials have done detailed testing and are planning to enhance water treatment. All told, lowering PFAS may cost Avondale more than $120 million, according to Kirk Beaty, the citys public utility director. Thats money a city like Avondale just doesnt have sitting in a back room somewhere,” Beaty said, adding hell defer to federal experts to dictate whats acceptable. Were hoping were a little further ahead of everybody else. If the regulation changes, well you know, we may let off the gas a little bit; we may not, he said, adding that it is hard to justify spending extra money to do more than whats required when the cost falls on residents. If the government decides higher amounts of PFAS are acceptable, that could confuse people, especially in areas where the public is already concerned. If we enter into a gray area over whats healthy and whats not healthy, then utilities are at risk of being caught up in a debate for which they have no real responsibility nor expertise to decide on, said Karine Rougé, CEO for municipal water at Veolia North America, a water operations company. Industry group says the rule goes too far and is too costly The American Water Works Association, an industry group, filed the court challenge to the new rule. It agrees that certain PFAS should be regulated but argues the EPAs standards go too far, underestimate costs, and are neither feasible nor cost-effective. There are serious consequences for residents’ water bills, it says. The burden of complying will fall heavily on small utilities that can least afford it. Many water providers already struggle to maintain their existing infrastructure, some experts say. On topof everything else, they face new requirements to replace lead pipes. The AWWA wants the EPA to extend the PFAS and lead deadlines by two years. There is money available to help. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law provided $9 billion for chemicals like PFAS, and utilities have won multibillion-dollar settlements against PFAS polluters that help as well. Meek, who successfully recovered after surgery from cancer and is now 59, is planning to sue over his illness. He once didnt second-guess using tap water. Now he reaches for bottled water. Donovan, who introduced Meek to PFAS and helped start Clean Cape Fear, says if the governments standards are weakened, it will relieve pressure on utilities to effectively treat the water. Previously, our local utilities could tell us publicly that the water met or exceeded all state and federal guidelines because there werent any, she said. ___ The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of APs environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment Michael Phillis, Associated Press
Category:
E-Commerce
United Parcel Service (UPS) said on Tuesday it will slash 20,000 jobs and close more than 70 facilities to lower costs as it braces for less Amazon shipments, due to global economic uncertainty and changing consumer habits. The package delivery company said in addition to the job cuts, it would shut at least 73 owned and leased locations this year by the end of June, perhaps more, and expects to save $3.5 billion in 2025 from the cost-cutting measures. UPS’ first-quarter revenue fell slightly to $21.5 billion, but the company still beat Wall Street earnings expectations of $21.05 billion, according to data firm LSEG, per Reuters. Shares of the company (NYSE:UPS) rose nearly 2% before the market opened on Tuesday. The stock was down less than 1% in midday trading at the time of this writing. It’s worth noting that news of UPS decreasing its Amazon shipments follows similar earnings guidance from last quarter. In January, the company announced a deal with its largest customer to lower its volume by more than 50% by the second half of 2026. (In 2024, Amazon.com accounted for 11.8% of UPS’ overall revenue, according to CNBC.) As a trusted leader in global logistics, we will leverage our integrated network and trade expertise to assist our customers as they adapt toa changing trade environment,” UPS CEO Carol Tomé said in a statement, likely alluding to the current economic uncertainty and potential for slowing trade as a result of the Trump Administration’s sweeping tariffs. “The macro environment may be uncertain, but with our actions, we will emerge as an even stronger, more nimble UPS,” Tomé added. “The actions we are taking to reconfigure our network and reduce cost across our business could not be timelier.” Like many other companies who have declined to provide a full financial forecast during recent earnings calls, due to the rapidly changing economic landscape, UPS did not provide an update to its full-year outlook on its earnings call.
Category:
E-Commerce
When Donald Trump returned to the White House in 2025, many in the tech world hoped his promises to champion artificial intelligence and cut regulation would outweigh the risks of his famously volatile trade policies. But less than 100 days into his new term, its clear that Trumps aggressive tariffsand the global response to themcould pose a major threat to the AI boom that helped drive the last two years of tech innovation. AI companies are already feeling pressure on multiple fronts. They may face difficulties accessing chips and higher data center costs, and they could be hit even harder if enterprisesthe main revenue source for many budding AI firmsbecome less willing to experiment with new AI solutions during a time of economic uncertainty. World markets tumbled on April 2 when the White House announced a 10% tariff on imports from 90 countries, plus additional reciprocal tariffs on 57 of them. A week later, the president paused the 10% tariffs for 90 days but kept a 145% tariff on Chinese goods in place. Trump has said the China tariff would likely decrease after trade talks, but has presented little evidence that negotiations are happening at all. The tech industry, particularly hardware companies, will be significantly affected, as theyll bear the cost of tariffs on imported components from across Asia, including China. While the Trump administration reportedly exempted AI chips from tariffs, GPUs and other processors could still become more scarce and expensive. Nvidia GPUs, which power the largest AI models, are fabricated in Taiwan but incorporate components from tariffed countries such as South Korea. Additionally, many critical raw materialsrare earth metals, silicon wafers, and packaging materials originating from Taiwan and Chinacould be subject to tariffs as high as 30% when entering the U.S. “While tariffs arent causing VCs to pull back from AI investments overall, they are absolutely reshaping how investors evaluate risk, says Samir Kumar, cofounder of the venture capital firm Touring Capital. Investors are asking much tougher questions about supply chainsnot just where companies are sourcing today, but their ability to second- and third-source critical components, and where their manufacturing is based. Thats the supply side. But how will an unstable trade environment affect demand? Numerous sources say C-suite leaders were eager to start AI experiments during the early AI boom of 2023 and 2024. But after relatively few of those experiments made it into production and proved their value to the business, executives have grown far more cautious about signing new contracts with AI companies in 2025especially with startups, says William Falcon, CEO of Lightning AI, whose cloud-based environment enables quick training and launch of AI applications. And that was before tariffs entered the picture. So if you’re still in an experimental phase and you’ve got tariffs now, that decision kind of narrows and you’ve got to allocate those funds to something else, Falcon tells Fast Company. If you’ve gotten business value from AI . . . you’re more willing to invest into it, you’re more willing to carve out a bit more [budget]. On the other hand, its easy to forget amid the turmoil that the economy remains strong (for now), and enthusiasm around AI is still high. Kumar points out that AI has the potential to act as a major efficiency and productivity multiplier, which could sustainor even boostenterprise adoption. Thanks to these factors, many in the venture capital community had expected tech company exits to rebound in 2025, driven by AI startups getting acquired or going public. But the trade war has put those hopes on hold. No one really knows how disruptive the tariffs will be. Investors hope itll be a blip that vanishes as quickly as it arrived, allowing the AI boom to continue as scheduled. But even if the tariffs were lifted tomorrow, their effects could linger; as with the COVID-era disruptions, supply chains would likely need time to recover. On the demand side, corporationsthe buyers of AI software and servicesmay become more conservative with their tech spending. Corporate IT budgets will increasingly reflect broader economic sentiment. Right now, things are looking gloomier: Reuters surveyed 167 economists, and 60% said the likelihood of a global recession this year was high or very high. Before his election, Trump positioned himself as a champion of the AI industry, promising to shield it from unnecessary regulation. But his reckless trade policies are poised to harm the AI space more than any regulation could. Ironically, Trumps tariffs might actually create more demand for AI and robotics in the long term. Trump believes his tariffs will make it so expensive to manufacture or assemble products overseas that companies will bring factories back to the U.S. But those reshored factories may not offer the kinds of jobs Trump promised his base. We should also expect tariffs to accelerate AI and robotics adoption, as companies look for ways to manage costs when reshoring or expanding into higher labor cost markets, Kumar says.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||