Adam+K.+-+EN+-+SP12

29 February 2012 Group sues EPA over popular weed killer

The EPA recently went to court over an ingredient widely used in weed killers. The Natural Resources Defense Council sued the agency over the ingredient 2,4-D, because it was an ingredient used in the herbicide Agent Orange, a toxic Vietnam war herbicide. The NRDC filed suit after the EPA failed to recognize a petition to stop the use of 2,4-D. Senior scientists at the NRDC are arguing that as the chemical is widely used, this hazardous air pollutant is getting all over peoples’ skin. Over 46 million pounds of 2,4-D are used every year in the U.S., and is used in more than two dozen weed killers (Group). Children are particularly susceptible to this chemical, and upon breathing it, it can cause damage to the liver, nervous system and kidneys. Other dangers, including 2,4-D used on crops and high rates of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma caused the NRDC to petition the EPA to stop the use of this chemical. A NRDC member stated, “Given the continuing harms associated with widespread exposure to this dangerous chemical and EPA’s unreasonable delay, NRDC seeks this court’s intervention to compel EPA to act within 45 days of the court’s decision” (Group). Most people who have a yard or lawn probably use a weed killer on it, and more than likely it contains 2,4-D. As the article says, there are dangers to this chemical, which is definitely an issue that would cause many people to want it banned. However, banning it could also hurt the companies that make weed killers, as they would need to find a new, non-harmful ingredient to be able to sell their products. Another argument is the fact that 2,4-D is one of the chemicals used in Agent Orange, a herbicide used on vegetation during the Vietnam War (Agent). There are many veterans that received diseases from exposure to this compound. Most of these people definitely would not want anything that could cause similar health problems to be used. There are without a doubt issues to allowing 2,4-D. It can cause many different negative health conditions, not to mention it is likely unpopular among Americans who have experience with Agent Orange. I personally think that it should be banned, and I also think that this court case will compel the EPA to act. After all, when the Environmental Protection Agency was formed in 1970, it was to work towards “a cleaner, healthier environment for the American people” (EPA). We won’t know until after the case what will happen, but it is likely that something will be done about 2,4-D. 1. Why did the EPA not respond to the petition in the first place? 2. If 2,4-D is banned, will companies try to develop a more environmentally friendly weed killer? 3. Are there other toxins used in weed killers that have been banned in the past or still need to be banned in the future? "Agent Orange - Public Health." Public Health Home. Web. 01 Mar. 2012. .
 * Summary **
 * Relevance **
 * Evaluation **
 * Questions **
 * Bibliography **

"EPA History." //EPA//. Environmental Protection Agency. Web. 01 Mar. 2012. <http://www.epa.gov/history/>.

<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 16px;">"Group Sues EPA over Popular Weed Killer." //CNN Health//. Web. 29 Feb. 2012. <http://thechart.blogs.cnn.com/2012/02/23/group-sues-epa-over-popular-weed-killer/?iref=allsearch>.