Climate change concerns grow, but few think Biden’s climate law will help, an AP-NORC poll finds

posted in: News | 0

By ALEXA ST. JOHN and LINLEY SANDERS (Associated Press)

Like many Americans, Ron Theusch is getting more worried about climate change.

A resident of Alden, Minnesota, Theusch has noticed increasingly dry and mild winters punctuated by short periods of severe cold — symptoms of a warming planet.

As he thinks about that, future generations are on his mind. “We have four children that are in their 20s,” the 56-year-old truck driver and moderate Democrat said. “It’s like, what’s our grandkids’ world going to be like?”

A new poll from The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research shows that 45% of adults in the United States say they have become more concerned about climate change over the past year, including roughly 6 in 10 Democrats and one-quarter of Republicans.

President Joe Biden’s signature climate change policy, the Inflation Reduction Act, was intended to address some of those fears, investing billions in incentives for consumers and businesses to move toward clean energy sources. Biden has pointed to this climate agenda as a major presidential success during his run for reelection. But the poll suggests that although the law has already affected some Americans, it’s not widely known among the general population — and may not be the electoral boost Biden is looking for.

About one-quarter of Americans say tax credits for renewable energy projects such as wind power have benefited people like them so far, with similar numbers for incentives for companies to manufacture clean energy technologies in the U.S. rather than abroad, tax credits for individuals to add solar panels to their homes, or subsidies and tax credits for electric vehicles and energy-efficient appliances like heat pumps. Those numbers are fairly substantial for a law that passed less than two years ago, where the benefits largely hinge on big-ticket purchases like cars or home improvements.

Promoting electric vehicles has also been a major focus for the Biden administration, and 15% of U.S. adults say electric vehicles have had a good impact on them personally.

“I totally agree with the act because it’s done so many things for people,” said Charles Lopez, a 65-year-old liberal Democrat from the Florida Keys. “They help everybody … I’m not ready for a full electric, but I’ll get there when there’s enough charging stations.”

But the people who say they have benefited from the law are disproportionately Democrats. And while only about 1 in 10 U.S. adults think the individual tax credits and subsidies have hurt people like them, those provisions of the law aren’t yet registering with the majority of Americans — roughly one-quarter say those credits haven’t made a difference to people like them. Nearly 4 in 10 in each instance don’t know enough to have an opinion about them.

“I still think that, as much as we’d like for them to be implemented in a way that we can actually see results, it’s not really happening in my eyes,” said Sandra Sherman, a 62-year-old resident of Vero Beach, Florida, who identifies as a liberal Democrat. “With solar panels, although it seems like a really good idea, I see very few people in the area in Florida that I live in that actually have them.”

Generally, U.S. adults also aren’t confident the IRA will have an impact even in more time. The poll found that only between 23% and 35% of U.S. adults say the law’s key components will eventually help address climate change. About 2 in 10 think the main provisions of the law will make no difference in addressing climate change, and about one-third don’t know enough to say.

“A lot of the public feeling on it is, ‘well something needs to be done,’ but not necessarily knowing what needs to be done or not even necessarily having strong feelings about what needs to be done,” said David Weakliem, a University of Connecticut professor emeritus.

Biden still has an advantage over his opponent, former President Donald Trump, when it comes to climate change generally. About 4 in 10 U.S. adults and two-thirds of Democrats have “a lot” or “some” trust in Biden on climate change. That includes 29-year-old Jaime Said, a moderate Republican.

Biden has “talked about it more and he has mentioned a few plans of things he wants to do. So even if he doesn’t do them, at the very least he’s thinking about them. That’s kind of headed in the right direction,” Said, a medical student in Panama City, Florida, said.

“I know already, right off the bat, (Trump is) not going to address it much,” Said added. “That’s why I don’t have too much faith in him doing anything about it.”

Only about 3 in 10 say they have “a lot” or “some” trust in Trump with regard to addressing climate change.

But one of Biden’s major pitches for the IRA — that it will help the American economy and U.S. workers — doesn’t seem to be resonating. According to the poll, only about 2 in 10 Americans say the law has done more to help the U.S. economy, while about one-quarter think it’s done more to hurt the economy, and about half think it either made no difference or don’t know enough to say.

Related Articles

National Politics |


The abortion debate is giving Kamala Harris a moment. But voters still aren’t sold

National Politics |


Republicans scrutinize voting rolls and ramp up for mass challenges ahead of election

National Politics |


Fact check: Biden is right about $35 insulin cap but exaggerates prior costs for Medicare enrollees

National Politics |


Things to know as courts and legislatures act on transgender kids’ rights

National Politics |


Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in US more likely to believe in climate change: AP-NORC poll

And broadly, a majority of Americans say the federal government is currently doing “too little” to address climate change. They generally agree it’s important for the government to support climate solutions. About half say it’s extremely or very important to limit the use of products and technologies that harm the environment, and nearly half say it’s important for the government to pass stricter environmental laws and regulations. About 4 in 10 say it’s important for the government to build a national network of public charging stations for electric vehicles, which is another Biden administration priority.

Most say it’s extremely or very important for the federal government to invest in new, environmentally friendly technologies, and most, like 38-year-old Julio Carmona, a health program associate who lives in Stratford, Connecticut, and identifies as a moderate Democrat, say the same about enforcing current environmental regulations.

“We can all do our part when it comes to saving energy, recycling and all those other things,” said Carmona. “But if the big corporations aren’t doing it, I think that, for me, would be where the government should start.”

The poll of 1,204 adults was conducted April 4-8, 2024, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based AmeriSpeak Panel, which is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 3.9 percentage points.

Alexa St. John is an Associated Press climate solutions reporter. Follow her on X, formerly Twitter, @alexa_stjohn. Reach her at ast.john@ap.org.

The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.

Once praised, settlement to help sickened BP oil spill workers leaves most with nearly nothing

posted in: Society | 0

By TRAVIS LOLLER and MICHAEL PHILLIS (Associated Press)

When a deadly explosion destroyed BP’s Deepwater Horizon drilling rig in the Gulf of Mexico, 134 million gallons of crude erupted into the sea over the next three months — and tens of thousands of ordinary people were hired to help clean up environmental devastation from the biggest offshore oil spill in U.S. history.

These workers were exposed to crude oil and the chemical dispersant Corexit while picking up tar balls along the shoreline, laying booms from fishing boats to soak up slicks and rescuing oil-covered birds.

Recognizing that some members of cleanup crews had likely become sick, BP agreed to a medical claims settlement two years after the 2010 disaster. Experts hailed it as “an extraordinary achievement” that would compensate workers fairly with little hassle.

But it hasn’t turned out that way.

The effort has fallen far short of expectations, leaving many workers who claimed lasting health effects stranded with little or no payment.

Through the settlement, BP has paid ill workers and coastal residents a tiny fraction — $67 million — of the billions the company has spent on restitution for economic and environmental damage. The vast majority — 79% — received no more than $1,300 each.

Many workers claiming illnesses from the spill were forced to sue — and they’ve fared worse. All but a handful of roughly 4,800 lawsuits seeking compensation for health problems have been dismissed.

Attorneys familiar with the cases say they are unaware of any that have gone to trial and know of only one that’s been settled. Former boat captain John Maas received $110,000 from BP for his lung ailments in 2022, according to a confidential copy of the settlement.

The repeated failures demonstrate how extremely difficult it is to prove to a court that a specific illness is caused by chemical exposure — even when those chemicals are recognized causes of illness more generally.

An Associated Press investigation that included dozens of interviews with cleanup workers, attorneys and experts, and a review of voluminous court filings revealed:

—A single switched word in the settlement prevented thousands of workers from receiving anything over the minimum of $1,300 each. To get more, they had to file individual lawsuits — an option that almost always led to defeat.

—Most federal judges hearing those cases required a level of proof connecting chemical exposure to worker illnesses that the lead government epidemiologist studying the spill says is likely impossible to meet.

—Big law firms representing dozens or even thousands of workers failed their clients in various ways. After BP accused one firm of manufacturing medical claims, its cases were dismissed in big batches.

Robin Greenwald, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys who negotiated the settlement, said even her firm has not been able to win a single medical case against BP.

“I wanted people to get their day in court and they win or lose at trial,” said Greenwald, a former federal environmental prosecutor. “Let a jury decide. … But they weren’t even given the chance to do that.”

BP declined to comment for this story, citing ongoing litigation 14 years after the spill.

GETTING SICK

After the explosion on April 20, 2010, the spill was spectacular. A camera live-streamed the rupture on cable news, showing the world in real time gushing oil that wouldn’t stop. Oil floated on the Gulf and washed ashore, covering plants, birds and other animals.

To break up oil, roughly 1.8 million gallons of Corexit were dropped from planes and sprayed from boats — far more than previous U.S. oil spills. The manufacturer said it was safer than dish soap.

But lab research on human tissue and animals has revealed Corexit can damage cells that protect the airways and cause scarring that narrows breathing tubes, according to Dr. Veena Antony, a University of Alabama professor of pulmonary and critical care medicine who has studied Corexit’s effect on lung tissue. Over time, she said, the process can make it harder and harder to breathe.

“I genuinely believe that there was harm done and we didn’t realize the harm was being done — and now people are suffering,” said Antony, who testified as an expert witness in one suit against BP. “I would not, at the present time, put my hand even in Corexit without wearing double gloves.”

The current producer of Corexit, ChampionX, said the dispersant was pre-approved by the government for use on oil spills and the manufacturer had no role in deciding when or how to spray it.

Oil itself has long been known to cause illness. One of its toxic components is benzene, which can cause conditions ranging from skin irritation to cancer.

But now researchers, including Dale Sandler at the National Institutes of Health, are finding that spill workers exposed to amounts of oil assumed safe have suffered from dizziness, nausea, lung problems and heart attacks.

“The exposures on average were still pretty low,” said Sandler, an epidemiologist leading the GuLFSTUDY, a major effort to quantify workers’ exposure and track health woes over years. “What surprised us is that we did see a wide range of health effects that were associated with these exposures.”

Sandler said the study is the largest ever of an oil spill and is ongoing. “We’re looking at long-term risks like diabetes, cancer incidence,” she said.

What researchers have found so far is echoed by other studies, including one involving about 3,500 Coast Guard responders. The responders who reported breathing oil fumes were 40% to 50% more likely to have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease-like symptoms and sinus problems compared to those who said they didn’t breathe fumes. And responders who reported exposure to both oil and Corexit were more than twice as likely to suffer shortness of breath.

A PROMISING SETTLEMENT

Proving to a court that a specific person’s illness was likely caused by their exposure to oil or Corexit can be difficult.

Yet the settlement for medical claims was supposed to make it easier for workers: BP would agree exposure to the spill could cause a host of known health issues — and workers suffering from them could file claims for payment. Initially, attorneys advocating for the settlement said it could help as many as 200,000 possibly injured workers and residents.

The settlement also included $105 million from BP for regional health outreach and free health checkups for exposed workers every three years for 21 years.

But things quickly went awry.

The third-party administrator hired to handle claims, Garretson Resolution Group, initially rejected 78% of roughly 37,000 claims. After many were resubmitted, around 36% still were rejected and claimants received nothing.

Greenwald was especially frustrated her clients’ claims were repeatedly deemed deficient. “We had many a meeting with Garretson’s team to try to shake them loose of some of their narrow reading and obsession with deficiencies,” she said. “We clearly knew the claim form. We negotiated it.”

Matthew Garretson, founder of Garretson Resolution Group, defended his claims handling in an email, saying, “it was the process the parties agreed upon and we had to administer the settlement exactly in the way the parties’ Settlement Agreement mandated.” The company was paid roughly $115 million to $120 million for administering claims and for the outreach program and medical checkup effort as of 2018, he said.

There was a bigger problem.

At the most basic level, workers could submit affidavits attesting to their medical problems and collect $1,300 — and residents could collect $900. About 18,000 received that much.

Those with longer-term illnesses who had proof from medical tests could collect up to $60,700, or more if they had been hospitalized.

But few people had that proof. Forty of about 23,000 with approved claims collected the maximum award — less than 0.2%.

Many people lacked health insurance or easy access to a doctor and the required medical tests — a problem U.S. District Court Judge Carl Barbier, who approved the settlement, acknowledged in a hearing.

“Speaking for south Louisiana, I know — you’re dealing with people who are probably at the lower end of the socioeconomic scale. Most of these people, I feel sure, likely have no health insurance,” he said.

Even when people did seek medical attention, doctors untrained in treating chemical exposures often did not link illnesses to a patient’s cleanup work in medical records, according to Greenwald.

THE NATIONS CLIENTS

The Nations Law Firm, based in Houston, represented thousands of workers like Paul Loup IV, who helped clean an oil-contaminated beach in Pascagoula, Mississippi for several months.

Loup, 68, says he now has chronic respiratory issues, making it hard to stand or speak at length. He quit his job as a procurement manager because it involved too much travel.

The firm had wanted to help clients collect more than the settlement’s $1,300 minimum, so it developed a plan to obtain needed medical proof.

It was an assembly line. Out-of-state nurse practitioners who were paid $20 per plaintiff entered medical histories based on information the law firm — not a doctor — provided. Firm-designed forms listed illnesses that paid more under the settlement — and doctors could simply circle them. The forms included a statement linking a patient’s illness to oil spill work — with a line for the doctor to sign. Doctors didn’t keep their own patient records.

While such a process might seem suspect, firm founder Howard Nations said in an interview that he met with the claims administrator Garretson to try to develop an acceptable one.

Garretson rejected the claims — not based on the process, but on a deadline.

THE DEADLINE AND A SWITCHED WORD

The settlement was designed to make it easy to collect money for illnesses that surfaced quickly after crude oil exposure. People with diseases that can show up years later — such as cancer — would be forced to file individual federal lawsuits.

Early settlement drafts defined this second group as people with a disease that “manifests” after April 16, 2012. However, a later draft changed the word “manifests” to “diagnosed.”

In 2014, BP seized on that change to argue no one diagnosed after the deadline could receive an award for a long-term illness through the settlement, regardless of when they first got sick. Instead, they would need to sue individually to get compensated.

Judge Barbier said that’s not how he was led to believe the settlement he okayed would work.

“It is rather strange … that the court would approve a settlement, a class settlement that really doesn’t settle thousands of claims and requires them to file another lawsuit,” Barbier said at a 2014 hearing. “I mean, it doesn’t sound like much of a settlement.”

BP attorneys said any other interpretation would invite fraud, allowing opportunistic law firms to pay for a medical diagnosis after the deadline to get a settlement claims payout. They also said the word change was requested by the workers’ own attorneys, and Stephen Herman, co-lead counsel for plaintiffs’ attorneys, testified they didn’t recall how it happened.

Despite his doubts, Barbier said he had to follow the settlement language.

His ruling forced thousands of workers out of the relatively easy administrative claims process into federal courts throughout the South.

THE FEDERAL LAWSUITS

The ruling was devastating for Nations clients whose only option was to file federal lawsuits.

After BP attorneys alleged in Mississippi federal court that the firm manufactured medical diagnoses, Nations agreed to dismiss its cases by the dozens. In an interview, Nations did not deny BP’s allegations but said the cases were unwinnable without an adequate expert witness.

Loup, the former beach cleanup worker, said he didn’t know until informed by a reporter last year that his case had been dismissed years earlier. “I call (Nations) every six months or so … and they’ve just said it’s going to take some time,” he said.

Another Nations client was Jeff Herring, the deckhand of Maas, the boat captain believed to be the only person whose case reached a settlement.

When their boat was sprayed with Corexit, Herring started throwing up so badly an ambulance was called to pick him up. Although released from the hospital after a few days, he developed chronic sinus and respiratory problems, according to his lawsuit.

Months later, a doctor at an oil spill medical station referred him to a specialist, and he was hospitalized again, said Herring, now 39. An X-ray found spots on his lungs, and he was supposed to go to New Orleans for further testing but never did.

“That would have took another two weeks being in a hospital over there,” he said. “I couldn’t because I had to get back to work.”

Noting he had no insurance, Herring said he received about $8,000 through the claims process — not enough to even pay hospital bills.

Herring’s suit was thrown out in 2020 along with 235 other Nations cases, but he said he wasn’t told.

Howard Nations said the firm communicated with clients about the status of their cases and although the individual suits were dismissed, he intends to go back to Judge Barbier with new arguments.

EXPERT WITNESSES

Other law firms met a different obstacle:

Workers filing individual lawsuits have to prove they were exposed to enough oil or dispersant to — more likely than not — cause their illness.

The workers’ experts relied on studies, such as those from the National Institutes of Health and the Coast Guard, that found people exposed to oil and Corexit were more likely to develop certain illnesses.

But BP’s experts maintained workers needed to show exactly how much oil and dispersant they had inhaled or ingested and that it was sufficient to cause their sickness.

Greenwald, the attorney who helped craft the settlement, said meeting such a standard is almost impossible: “I mean, ‘How deep did you breathe? Right at the moment you were standing there, was the wind blowing?’” she said. “What mortal human would be able to testify about that?”

Most judges have sided with BP, rejecting workers’ experts as unreliable and effectively ending the cases.

Sandler, the NIH epidemiologist, said its researchers went to great lengths to develop data on exposure like nothing ever been done before. “I’m not sure that they’ll ever meet the standards that the court is imposing on what constitutes evidence,” she said.

It also can be difficult to find an expert witness who knows the science but doesn’t have a conflict of interest through work with the oil industry.

The Falcon Law Firm brought on Jerald Cook, a retired Navy physician trained in occupational and environmental medicine, as an expert on numerous cases. He was rejected again and again by judges as BP poked holes in his professional history and work.

“Your report really doesn’t balance the evidence favoring your conclusions with the evidence that disfavors your conclusions; isn’t that fair?” a BP attorney asked Cook in a deposition.

“Yeah. I think that’s — that’s fair,” Cook replied.

He declined comment, and Falcon did not reply to requests for comment.

Some law firms that took on hundreds of cases have simply buckled under the strain, begging judges for more time so their overloaded experts could produce reports.

LOOKING FORWARD

It’s not completely over.

The Downs Law Group, which has lost hundreds of cases against BP, is appealing in the 5th and the 11th U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeals, hoping they’ll rule federal district judges have misconstrued the level of proof needed for toxic exposure cases. One of those judges said the issue is “very ripe for the Supreme Court to resolve.”

“It has a broader reach than the BP oil spill,” said Jason Clark, a Downs attorney. “If the burden is one that’s too high for any plaintiff to meet, then a lot of people who are exposed … are never going to see justice.”

Meanwhile, Downs is talking to thousands of people interested in suing over illnesses such as cancer that emerged years after the spill, Clark said.

Sandler, the NIH epidemiologist, said the high burden of proof demanded by most judges means “people can’t win.”

“I think at the end of the day, did the oil from the oil spill make people sick? Yes,” Sandler said. “Now, courts may view this from a very different lens, but from a public health standpoint — yes, the oil spill made people sick.”

___

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 AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment

US and UK issue new sanctions on Iran in response to Tehran’s weekend attack on Israel

posted in: News | 0

By FATIMA HUSSEIN (Associated Press)

WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. and U.K. on Thursday imposed a new round of sanctions on Iran as concern grows that Tehran’s unprecedented attack on Israel could fuel a wider war in the Middle East.

Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control targeted 16 people and two entities in Iran that produce engines that power the drones used in the April 13 attack on Israel. OFAC also sanctioned five firms involved in steel production and three subsidiaries of Iranian automaker Bahman Group — which is accused of materially supporting Iran’s military and other sanctioned groups. A representative from Bahman was not immediately available for comment.

Additionally, the U.K. is targeting several Iranian military branches and individuals involved in Iran’s drone and ballistic missile industries.

President Joe Biden said in a statement that he had directed U.S. Treasury “to continue to impose sanctions that further degrade Iran’s military industries.” “Let it be clear to all those who enable or support Iran’s attacks,” he said, “we will not hesitate to take all necessary action to hold you accountable.”

U.K. Prime Minister Rishi Sunak said in a statement that the sanctions “will further limit Iran’s ability to destabilize the region.”

In addition to Treasury’s sanctions, the U.S. Commerce Department is imposing new controls to restrict Iran’s access to basic commercial grade microelectronics, which apply to items manufactured outside the U.S. that are produced using U.S. technology.

The actions come after U.S. officials earlier this week warned that they were readying new sanctions in response to Iran’s activity in the region and to prevent future attacks. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill also have been quickly pushing forward legislation that would financially punish the Islamic Republic and its leaders.

Iran’s attack on Israel early Sunday came in response to what it says was an Israeli strike on Iran’s consulate in Syria earlier this month. Israel’s military chief said Monday that his country will respond to the Iranian attack, while world leaders caution against retaliation, trying to avoid a spiral of violence.

European Union leaders also vowed on Wednesday to ramp up sanctions on Iran, targeting its drone and missile deliveries to proxies in Gaza, Yemen and Lebanon.

EU foreign policy chief Josep Borrell said the existing EU sanctions regime would be strengthened and expanded to punish Tehran and help prevent future attacks on Israel. At the same time, he said, Israel needed to exercise restraint.

“I don’t want to exaggerate, but we are on the edge of a war, a regional war in the Middle East, which will be sending shockwaves to the rest of the world, and in particular to Europe,” he warned. “So stop it.”

The U.S. has already sanctioned hundreds of entities and people in Iran — from the central bank and government officials to drone producers and money exchangers — accused of materially supporting Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and foreign militant groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis.

And U.S. efforts to limit Iran’s income from oil and petroleum products span back decades.

The question remains how effective sanctions will be, and have been, in preventing Iran from ramping up its production of military equipment. American defense officials accuse Iran of supplying drones to Russia as it pursues its invasion of Ukraine, which has reached a third year.

Earlier this week, Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said during a press conference that the U.S. has “been working to diminish Iran’s ability to export oil.”

”There may be more that we could do,” she said.

‘Forever Chemicals,’ Religion, and Family Tragedy in Texas

posted in: News | 0

Editor’s Note: This excerpt is adapted from Loose of Earth: A Memoir (April 2024) with permission from University of Texas Press. The Environmental Protection Agency announced limits on PFAS in drinking water earlier this month.

A blade of light glances off my grandparents’ white Lincoln. They park at the curb. A torque of despair turns in my stomach at the way Dad draws his mother into his arms. There’s a tumor in Dad’s colon. That’s all anyone knows. Mom has continued to say they’ve caught it early, and Dad has agreed and recovered his nonchalance. But my grandmother’s hands pass over his back and pause.

Mom buzzes with questions about my grandparents’ drive, with particular interest in the conditions of the road.

Author of Loose of Earth Kathleen Dorothy Blackburn Courtesy/UT Press

 “How long did it take you?”

“About seven hours,” my grandfather says. “What can I get you all, something to drink?”

I pray against her water monologue. Mom likes to say we have good water; she means our privately filtered system. Our water, she claims, is so pure you can taste what isn’t there. No microbes, no industry pollutants, nor, good Lord, any arsenic or fertilizer runoff. She says city water gives a tell in the skin and teeth, like cigarettes. In time I will understand she is more right than she knows. In the present, I wish that we had something more than water to offer my grandparents. Back in Universal City, they might have sipped sherry from crystal glasses. But now, they follow Dad to the guest room, each with a glass of water. It’s five o’clock somewhere. Not here.

Looking back now from the distance of twenty-five years, I imagine that once inside the guest room, Grandma downed her glass of water and said something like, “That ought to take the edge off.” Humor, rhetorical shrugs, that was the Blackburn way. She would have then set to work placing her folded slacks in the empty dresser. Perhaps her mind darted as it did when she later talked to me about the last year of her son’s life: He’d looked robust as he strode across the yard to greet her. When she took him into her arms, she thought, This has got to be some sick joke. His firm young body, a promise.

As she grappled with the looming details around my father’s health, she clung to a memory of him as boy, a promise that he would outlive her.

In 1971, when Dad was twelve, Bobby ten, my grandparents took the boys on a cross-country road trip from San Antonio to the Grand Canyon. The colonel stopped somewhere in the Southwest to fill the family’s big brown Lincoln. Always a Lincoln. Always an American-made car. Grandma fanned herself with a map in the backseat, while Bobby flipped through the pages of a comic book he’d memorized. Next to the colonel, my father sat up brightly, eyes cobalt and bright as quartz. He pointed to a diner across the highway and asked for money to buy ice cream. Those blue eyes. My grandmother’s were cut of the same crystal. Her mother’s too. Whenever people remarked on the Irish origin of Kennedy, my grandmother’s maiden name, she was quick to mention that her eyes were her mother’s. “From the Danish,” she’d say. But she didn’t tell anyone she was afraid of going blind. Her mother was losing her vision. Worn vessels had opened in her retinas and were leaking blood. Macular degeneration. The condition was hereditary.

Dusk ignited the horizon, a resin line above blacktop. A lighter snapped. Ash whisked through the open window as Grandma watched her son run across the highway to the diner. He held his elbows akimbo, but his gait was smooth, as though he were much older.

My grandmother liked to think she’d also inherited her mother’s resilience. Dorothy Kennedy was born in Racine in 1920. The oldest of five children and the only girl. Little old me, she used to say. Daughter of a salesman, an Irish immigrant, a drunk. Whenever Dorothy heard of people saying they had depression, she scoffed. Depression was using your four-foot-eleven frame to shelter your mother from your father’s vitriol after he’d spent his earnings on whiskey down at a bar called Nick’s. It was lying awake at night in a house in Mansfield, Ohio, just praying you wouldn’t hear his feet stumble up the steps. Drinking wasn’t an addiction. It was a personality, and AA couldn’t cure that. Her father was what they call recovered by the time she brought my grandfather home in 1946 to meet him, but she knew he was still the same man. You don’t recover from who you are. When her father died in 1956, she didn’t attend his funeral.

My grandmother thought of herself as the kind of woman who knew enough to know when you had it good. When, in 1966, Grandpa got stationed at Randolph Air Force Base and they found a place in a suburb outside of San Antonio called Universal City, it sounded right—universal signifying to her not the cosmos but a modern system of highways and underground pipes. Places like Universal City were under development everywhere, their green lawns, strip malls, and good schools manifesting the standardized American dream come true—for a white man with a salary and a family. Twenty miles from downtown San Antonio, Universal City was only 2.7 miles from Randolph Air Force Base, my grandfather’s last station before retirement in 1969. But Universal City could have been anywhere in the United States.

Not everything came up rosy. The war in Vietnam threw its shadow over those early years in Texas. In 1967, a year after they moved to Universal City, a fire consumed the USS Forrestal. The aircraft carrier was stalking Vietnam’s north shore, preparing to attack. Aboard the vessel, young Navy ensign John McCain readied for combat in an A-4 Skyhawk fighter jet. Then a parked F-4 Phantom launched an errant Zuni rocket that struck the Skyhawk’s 400-gallon fuel tank. Petroleum slapped the deck a few feet away from where the future US senator stood. The leaked fuel lit up a path of fire that, in ninety seconds, reached parked jets with pilots strapped inside. Officers on foot scrambled for hand-held extinguishers. The CO2 did little more to stop the fire than their own breath would have done. Inferno trapped the pilots inside their planes. Then the flames detonated at least one 1,000-pound bomb, killing the men who were chasing them. The explosion set off a chain of combustions that blew through the length of the 1,091-foot flight deck and sent half the supercarrier to hell. The conflagration burned for at least seventeen hours, killing 134 sailors and injuring hundreds more.

Never again. The Navy joined forces with the company 3M to develop a new aqueous film-forming foam (AFFF) that could stop petroleum fires.

The magic ingredients for the foam were a group of chemicals that had a carbon-fluorine bond—the strongest bond in organic chemistry. Perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFAS) had high electronegativity, low polarizability, and long carbon backbones. These properties made PFAS ideal ingredients for non-stick products. My grandmother didn’t know about PFAS, but she did own Teflon pans and Scotchgard, some of the more famous household items in which PFAS were present.

Though other formulations of AFFF existed, the foam that 3M exclusively developed and sold between the 1960s and 2002 dominated the market. It was created using an electrochemical fluorination process to produce a long carbon chain that reinforced the strong carbon-fluorine bond. Among PFAS, this group, called perfluoroalkyl acids (PFAAs), were a powerhouse substance. They were highly chemically and thermally stable. They would become some of the most environmentally persistent, bioaccumulative, and toxic PFAS on the planet.

Over fifty years later, certain PFAAs, including perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), perfluorooctanoate (PFOA), and perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), would constitute three of the six forever chemicals targeted for regulation in drinking water by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in 2023 because of their hazardous health impacts. But in the 1960s, 3M branded its foam “Light Water,” as though its presence on the planet would be just as ephemeral and life-giving as those elements.

Petroleum fire had no effect on light water. It was the other way around. Light water spread through fire without disintegrating. The foam resisted heat and every other type of chemical bond. It spread through petroleum fire like a blanket. In some drills, the foam could snuff out flames in less than thirty seconds.

The response to the Forrestal disaster was distilled to acronyms: the DOD contracted with the manufacturer 3M to produce AFFF. Light water was distributed across the nation’s military sites, and PFAS entered the environment on a global scale.

In the decades to come 3M would create so many variants of carbon chains that future toxicologists would only be able to test for a fraction of them. The Department of Defense and 3M would go on to claim there was no way to tie exposure to PFAS to disease, and the EPA would not begin to take steps to set maximum contaminant levels for “forever chemicals” in drinking water sources until 2023. What actually endangered lives? Fuel-fed fire. Now that was an obvious cause and effect, at least to the DOD and industries like 3M. Internal reports on PFAS were locked away in a box.

But the PFAS released into the environment couldn’t be sealed up. They became euphemized as “forever chemicals,” a term one can at least pronounce if not comprehend. The ability of PFAS to repel oil and fire is also what endows them with their durability. The chemicals are described as “forever” because they do not break down but rather persist indefinitely, accumulating in water, sand, soil, and blood. The groundwater surrounding some Air Force sites abounds with PFAS amounts that are three thousand times higher than the federal health limit. It is possible that Dad drank carcinogenic water for most of his life.

Back on the interstate in the Southwest in 1971, a foreboding nudged Grandma to look across the highway.

My father was holding an ice cream cone and waving from the other side of the interstate. He looked far away. Something inside her reached for him. The asphalt between them stretched too wide. The highway swayed, distant and thin, like a telephone wire, and her son perched on it no larger than a bird. His waving hand was a flame flickering on the time line of his life. Sometimes a woman is given God’s view but no power to do anything about it.

A blood vessel ruptured in Grandma’s periphery. A cloud of crimson. A red car careened toward her son with the silence and intent of a meteorite. How long had that rock flown through space before gravity turned it into a four-cylinder bullet? Red is the last color you see before you lose all sight. She leapt from the car and ran toward the highway. She shrieked. To look? To back away? A horn. Her son turned to face it, and she couldn’t help herself: She closed her eyes. There are some things you see but can’t watch. Don’t look at the sun or the dying.

When my grandmother’s eyelids lifted, my father’s hair was dancing in the car’s red wake.