





































EPA Says It Plans to Withdraw Approval of Chevron Fuels Likely to Cause Cancer — ProPublica



































Skip to content  Menu Menu  ProPublica  Donate   ProPublica Investigative Journalism in the Public Interest  Menu Menu  Search Search    Donate   Nonprofit Explorer Local Initiatives Newsletters About Us   Mail Email Address:   Arrow Right Sign Up           Menu Menu  ProPublica  Donate   Close Close  ProPublica  Donate   Search ProPublica:  Search Search  Topics  Racial Justice  Racial Justice Healthcare  Health Care Politics  Politics Criminal Justice  Criminal Justice  more…  Browse by Place   Midwest  Northwest  South  Southwest  Texas  Type   Graphics & Data  Newsletters  Series  Videos    Local Reporting Network  Electionland  Data Store  Info   About Us  Impact  Jobs & Fellowships  Contact Us   Follow ProPublica  Bluesky Bluesky   Instagram Instagram   Facebook Facebook   X (Twitter)   YouTube YouTube   Threads Threads   LinkedIn LinkedIn   RSS RSS    








The Chevron refinery in Pascagoula, Mississippi

Credit: 
        Jonathan Bachman/Reuters
    




Environment

        EPA Says It Plans to Withdraw Approval for Chevron’s Plastic-Based Fuels That Are Likely to Cause Cancer
    
        The decision comes after a ProPublica investigation revealed that the EPA had found that one of the fuels had a cancer risk more than 1 million times higher than the agency usually considers acceptable.
    
 



        by Sharon Lerner 

Sept. 30, 2024, 5 a.m. EDT



  Share  


 Contrast  Change Appearance  Change Appearance AutoLightDark 

Republish


                Co-published with
                        The Guardian 




ProPublica is a nonprofit newsroom that investigates abuses of power. Sign up to receive our biggest stories as soon as they’re published.


The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is planning to withdraw and reconsider its approval for Chevron to produce 18 plastic-based fuels, including some that an internal agency assessment found are highly likely to cause cancer.
In a recent court filing, the federal agency said it “has substantial concerns” that the approval order “may have been made in error.” The EPA gave a Chevron refinery in Mississippi the green light to make the chemicals in 2022 under a “climate-friendly” initiative intended to boost alternatives to petroleum, as ProPublica and The Guardian reported last year.
An investigation by ProPublica and The Guardian revealed that the EPA had calculated that one of the chemicals intended to serve as jet fuel was expected to cause cancer in 1 in 4 people exposed over their lifetime.
The risk from another of the plastic-based chemicals, an additive to marine fuel, was more than 1 million times higher than the agency usually considers acceptable — so high that everyone exposed continually over a lifetime would be expected to develop cancer, according to a document obtained through a public records request. The EPA had failed to note the sky-high cancer risk from the marine fuel additive in the agency’s document approving the chemical’s production. When ProPublica asked why, the EPA said it had “inadvertently” omitted it.
Although the law requires the agency to address unreasonable risks to health if it identifies them, the EPA’s approval document, known as a consent order, did not include instructions on how the company should mitigate the cancer risks or multiple other health threats posed by the chemicals other than requiring workers to wear gloves.



After ProPublica and The Guardian reported on Chevron’s plan to make the chemicals out of discarded plastic, a community group near the refinery in Pascagoula, Mississippi, sued the EPA in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The group, Cherokee Concerned Citizens, asked the court to invalidate the agency’s approval of the chemicals.
Over several months when ProPublica and The Guardian were asking questions about the plastic-based chemicals, the EPA defended its decision to permit Chevron to make them. But in the motion filed on Sept. 20, the agency said it would reconsider its previous position. In a declaration attached to the motion, Shari Barash, director of the EPA’s New Chemicals Division, explained the decision as based on “potential infirmities with the order.”
Barash also wrote that the agency had used conservative methods when assessing the chemicals that resulted in an overestimate of the risk they pose. The EPA’s motion said the agency wants to reconsider its decision and “give further consideration to the limitations” of the risk assessment as well as the “alleged infirmities” identified by environmental groups.
Asked last week for an accurate estimate of the true risk posed by the chemicals, the EPA declined to respond, citing pending litigation. The EPA also did not respond when asked why it did not acknowledge that its approval may have been made in error during the months that ProPublica was asking about it.
Chevron, which has not begun making the chemicals, did not respond to a question about their potential health effects. The company emailed a statement saying that “Chevron understands EPA told the court that the agency had over-estimated the hazards under these permits.”



ProPublica





Read More







How a Risky State Investment in Seafood Cost Alaskans Millions and Left a Fishing Town in Crisis



As ProPublica and The Guardian noted last year, making fuel from plastic is in some ways worse for the climate than simply creating it directly from coal, oil or gas. That’s because nearly all plastic is derived from fossil fuels, and additional fossil fuels are used to generate the heat that turns discarded plastic into fuels.



Katherine O’Brien, a senior attorney at Earthjustice who is representing Cherokee Concerned Citizens in its suit, said she was concerned that, after withdrawing its approval to produce the chemicals, the EPA might again grant permission to make them, which could leave her clients at risk.
“I would say it’s a victory with vigilance required,” O’Brien said of the EPA’s plan to withdraw its approval. “We are certainly keeping an eye out for a new decision that would reapprove any of these chemicals.”



Filed under —


Environment








Sharon Lerner





Facebook









X









Bluesky









LinkedIn







 

I cover health and the environment and the agencies that govern them, including the Environmental Protection Agency.


More Stories



  Contact Me  


 

Please do reach out, either by email or securely on Signal. I take confidentiality seriously and welcome your ideas.
 
 
 







More in Environment


Caret














                                    How Trump’s EPA Threatens Efforts to Clean Up Areas Affected Most by Dangerous Air Pollution
                            


                            In just two weeks, Donald Trump has made drastic changes to the Environmental Protection Agency. Here’s how they could impact efforts to reform toxic hot spots across the U.S. and who will be left to safeguard these communities.
                    

            by Lisa Song,             Feb. 5, 2025, 5 a.m. EST












                                    How Climate Change Could Upend the American Dream
                            


                            Americans have long accumulated wealth by owning their homes, but a new study predicts that spiking insurance rates and climate disasters now herald an era of widespread losses.
                    

            by Abrahm Lustgarten,             Feb. 3, 2025, 5 a.m. EST












                                    North Dakota Sued the Interior Department at Least Five Times Under Gov. Doug Burgum. Now He’s Set to Run the Agency.
                            


                            The state was hostile to Interior Department policies during the Biden administration. A review of its lawsuits under Burgum reveals an aggressively pro-fossil fuel agenda.
                    

            by Mary Steurer, North Dakota Monitor, and Mark Olalde, ProPublica,             Jan. 24, 2025, 5 a.m. EST

Local Reporting Network











                                    Donald Trump’s No. 2 Pick for the EPA Represented Companies Accused of Pollution Harm
                            


                            David Fotouhi, a lawyer who recently challenged a ban on asbestos, worked to roll back climate regulations and water protections while serving in the Environmental Protection Agency during Trump’s first administration.
                    

            by Sharon Lerner,             Jan. 22, 2025, 3:10 p.m. EST












                                    This Storm-Battered Town Voted for Trump. He Has Vowed to Overturn the Law That Could Fix Its Homes.
                            


                            Donald Trump has said he will overturn a law that helps communities better weather the effects of climate change. If he follows through, he’ll be reversing an initiative that has disproportionately benefited areas that make up his base.
                    

            by Sharon Lerner, photography by Annie Flanagan for ProPublica,             Jan. 17, 2025, 5 a.m. EST












                                    After the Palisades Fire, What Can We Really Rebuild?
                            


                            As the community of Pacific Palisades, California, burns, ProPublica’s Tim Golden reflects on how the blaze will transform his hometown.
                    

            by Tim Golden,             Jan. 13, 2025, 5:30 p.m. EST






Most Read











                                    What a $2 Million Per Dose Gene Therapy Reveals About Drug Pricing
                            


                            Taxpayers and charities helped develop Zolgensma. Then it debuted at a record price, ushering in a new class of wildly expensive drugs. Its story upends the widely held conception that high prices reflect huge industry investments in innovation.
                    

            by Robin Fields,             Feb. 12, 2025, 8 a.m. EST














                                    The Staffers Helping Elon Musk Dismantle and Downsize the U.S. Government, One Agency at a Time
                            


                            Musk and his lieutenants are reshaping the government and its mission with the blessing of President Trump. ProPublica has confirmed the names and roles of more than 30 staffers affiliated with the billionaire.
                    

            by Christopher Bing and Annie Waldman,             Feb. 11, 2025, 6:25 p.m. EST














                                    Elon Musk’s Team Decimates Education Department Arm That Tracks National School Performance
                            


                            The Trump administration canceled $900 million in contracts overseen by the Institute of Education Sciences, which partners with scientists and education companies to compile and make public data about schools each year.
                    

            by Jodi S. Cohen and Jennifer Smith Richards,             Feb. 11, 2025, 12:30 a.m. EST












The New Immigration


                                    U.S. Claims Immigrants Held at Guantanamo Are “Worst of the Worst.” Their Families Say They’re Being Unfairly Targeted.
                            


                            ProPublica and The Texas Tribune have identified nearly a dozen immigrants who have been flown to Guantanamo Bay. Government officials have refused to release the names of detainees or provide details about the crimes that landed them in detention.
                    

            by Perla Trevizo and Mica Rosenberg, ProPublica and The Texas Tribune,             Feb. 13, 2025, 1:20 p.m. CST














                                    The Housing Loophole That Lets Wealthy Investors Raise Rents on Poor Tenants
                            


                            As the U.S. struggles with a housing shortage, investors continue to exploit a gap in an affordable housing law to raise rents on 115,000 apartments. Congress has repeatedly failed to act.
                    

            by Jesse Coburn,             Feb. 13, 2025, 6 a.m. EST




 
 


Stay informed with the Daily Digest.  Mail Email Address:   Arrow Right Sign Up            ProPublica Investigative Journalism in the Public Interest © Copyright 2025 Pro Publica Inc.   Sites ProPublica Local Reporting Network Texas Tribune Partnership The Data Store Electionland    Sections Topics Series Videos News Apps Get Involved The Nerd Blog @ProPublica Events    Info About Board and Advisors Officers and Staff Diversity Jobs and Fellowships Media Center Reports Impact Awards Corrections    Policies Code of Ethics Advertising Policy Privacy Policy    Follow Newsletters iOS and Android RSS Feed    More Send Us Tips Steal Our Stories Browse via Tor Contact Us Donate More Ways to Give     







Close




Close this dialogue






Republish This Story for Free
Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Thank you for your interest in republishing this story. You are free to republish it so long as you do the following:

You have to credit ProPublica and any co-reporting partners. In the byline, we prefer “Author Name, Publication(s).” At the top of the text of your story, include a line that reads: “This story was originally published by ProPublica.” You must link the word “ProPublica” to the original URL of the story.
If you’re republishing online, you must link to the URL of this story on propublica.org, include all of the links from our story, including our newsletter sign up language and link, and use our PixelPing tag.
If you use canonical metadata, please use the ProPublica URL. For more information about canonical metadata, refer to this Google SEO link.
You can’t edit our material, except to reflect relative changes in time, location and editorial style. (For example, “yesterday” can be changed to “last week,” and “Portland, Ore.” to “Portland” or “here.”)
You cannot republish our photographs or illustrations without specific permission. Please contact [email protected].
It’s okay to put our stories on pages with ads, but not ads specifically sold against our stories. You can’t state or imply that donations to your organization support ProPublica’s work.
You can’t sell our material separately or syndicate it. This includes publishing or syndicating our work on platforms or apps such as Apple News, Google News, etc.
You can’t republish our material wholesale, or automatically; you need to select stories to be republished individually. (To inquire about syndication or licensing opportunities, contact [email protected].)
You can’t use our work to populate a website designed to improve rankings on search engines or solely to gain revenue from network-based advertisements.
We do not generally permit translation of our stories into another language.
Any website our stories appear on must include a prominent and effective way to contact you.




Copy HTML







 undefined undefined    





















"There are microplastics in everything and everyone. In your sperm balls, in your baby fetus. Everything......


....

...so anyways we're going to aerosolize plastic and shoot it out the exhaust of every car on every street in America at near face level."