EUR/USD 1.16332
-0.017%
Gold 5185.29
0.909%
Oil 87.238
4.646%
USD/JPY 157.786
0.079%
GBP/USD 1.34399
0.031%
GBP/JPY 212.069
0.175%
Browse More
  • English
  • 简体中文
  • 繁體中文
  • Tiếng Việt
  • ไทย
  • Indonesia
Subscribe
Real-time News
As of 8:30 PM Beijing time, WTI crude oil futures fell 4.21%, and US natural gas futures fell 1.63%.Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Kane, said that if ordered to carry out escort missions in the Strait of Hormuz, a range of options will be considered.Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Kane, stated that most Iranian surface-to-air missiles do not pose a threat.German Chancellor Merz: Expresses concern over the lack of a joint plan to end the war in Iraq.March 10 - U.S. stocks stalled their rally as investor confidence waned in a potential end to the Iran conflict. S&P 500 futures fell 0.4% and Nasdaq 100 futures dropped 0.3%. Major indexes had briefly turned positive late Monday after Trump hinted that the war with Iran might be nearing its end. While Trump believes the conflict wont end this week, he insists military action is progressing faster than expected. "In some ways, this news comes at a good time, given the market downturn," said Tom Essaye of Sevens Report. He added that there are still reasons to doubt the viability of the TACO trade. "Trumps conciliatory remarks were welcomed by the market, but if yesterdays TACO rebound is to signify the end of this downturn, unilateral statements alone are not enough," said Kathleen Brooks, head of research at XTB. She added that Trumps comments "may not be enough to permanently eliminate the risk premium already priced into recent oil prices, especially with the Strait of Hormuz still closed," and she expects oil prices to remain volatile as the conflict continues.

The U.S. Publishes Fresh Cautions About "Forever Chemicals" in Drinking Water

Aria Thomas

Jun 16, 2022 10:48

2.png


Wednesday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued new cautions about synthetic contaminants in drinking water known as "forever chemicals," stating that the poisons may be dangerous even at undetectable levels.


The family of dangerous compounds known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, has been used for decades in items such as nonstick cookware, stain- and water-resistant fabrics, firefighting foam, and industrial goods.


Some PFAS have been linked by scientists to cancer, liver damage, low birth weight, and further health issues. However, compounds that are difficult to degrade are not yet controlled.


In the coming months, the EPA will announce proposed regulations to control PFAS. The advisories are intended to offer information to states, tribes, and water systems on PFAS contamination prior to the implementation of regulations.


The EPA also said that it will release the first $1 billion to combat PFAS in drinking water, out of a total of $5 billion allocated under the infrastructure legislation passed last year. The money would give states with technical help, water quality testing, and central treatment system implementation.


The new health recommendations for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) replace those issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in 2016. The warning limits, based on new evidence that takes into account lifetime exposure, suggest that certain health issues may still occur at concentrations of PFOA or PFOS in water that are close to zero and below the EPA's detection limit.


Radhika Fox, the EPA's assistant administrator for water, said, "Today's measures show EPA's commitment to employ the best available science to combat PFAS contamination, safeguard public health, and share crucial information swiftly and openly."


The EPA urges organizations that detect PFAS in drinking water to notify people, conduct monitoring, and decrease exposure. Individuals worried about the presence of PFAS in their drinking water are advised to consider installing a home filter.


The American Chemistry Council, whose members include 3M and DuPont (NYSE:DD), said that the EPA hurried the notifications by not waiting for a review by the agency's Science Advisory Board. The organization expressed worry that the advisory development process was "fundamentally defective."



Suggestion