Latest news with #EnvironmentalProtectionAuthority
Scoop
3 days ago
- Health
- Scoop
EPA's Glyphosate Decision Challenged In Court
The Environmental Protection Authority is being taken to court over its decision not to re-assess the pesticide glyphosate. The Environmental Law Initiative is arguing that there is enough new evidence around the human health and environmental effects of glyphosate, or Roundup, to warrant a reassessment from our chemicals regulator. The hearing has now finished and we are awaiting the judge's decision. Professor of Toxicology Ian Shaw, School of Physical & Chemical Sciences, University of Canterbury, comments: 'Glyphosate, the active compound in Roundup, was licensed in the mid-1970s. We have learned much about the compound since then and, importantly, its use profile has changed significantly. This points to the need for a review to determine the current risk-benefit balance for environmental and human impact (via operator exposure and food residues). In 2022, the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) decided that a review was not warranted based on its call for information upon which it based its decision. The EPA's report quotes farmers who extol the virtues of glyphosate as evidence against the need for a review. The farmers' views illustrate the key role (benefit) that glyphosate plays in New Zealand agriculture, but does not take account of its risks. 'In my opinion, there are too many unknowns relating to glyphosate's long-term environmental impact and its effects in humans not to review the compound. In addition, the current approval is largely based on 1970s toxicity data (environmental and human): we have learned much (risks and benefits) in the intervening 50-years that warrants consideration via a review. Importantly, other countries have reviewed or are in the process of reviewing glyphosate. 'More recently, the Ministry of Primary Industries (MPI) has proposed an increased maximum residue level (MRL) for glyphosate in some crops and their food products from the default 0.1 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg. This is a completely different issue to the need for a glyphosate review. Indeed, a simple glyphosate residue in food intake calculation shows that the proposed MRL increase will have negligible or no health impact on consumers. This is not evidence against a review of glyphosate's use in New Zealand.' No conflict of interest declared. Professor Oliver Jones, Professor of Chemistry, RMIT University, Melbourne, Australia, comments: 'In my view, the New Zealand EPA was entirely correct to state that there isn't enough new evidence to support another review of glyphosate. There have been extensive reviews by regulatory agencies worldwide on this issue, including those of the US, Canada, Japan, Germany, and the European Union (the EU Commission reapproved glyphosate for 10 years in July 2023). There would have to be substantive new information indicating the risk has changed to warrant the expense of another review in New Zealand, and there just isn't any. 'Judges and court decisions don't make science. Science is based on evidence and logical deduction. However, the Federal Court of Australia reached a similar judgment to others in 2024 in what is known as the McNickle case. The court found no conclusive scientific evidence linking glyphosate/Roundup to non-Hodgkin lymphoma. 'It is also worth noting that non-Hodgkin lymphoma is not a single disease but rather a catch-all term for approximately 60 different lymphoma subtypes that are not all the same. It is a little like classifying all voters as Labour voters or non-Labour voters. It is technically correct but misses essential context. 'Bayer and Monsanto may or may not be perfect corporate citizens, but the overwhelming scientific evidence from over thirty years of testing is that glyphosate does not cause cancer even in the most exposed users such as farm workers.
Scoop
5 days ago
- Business
- Scoop
EPA Seeks Feedback About New Weedkiller For Wheat And Barley Crops
The Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) wants feedback on an application to import or manufacture Tower, a new herbicide used to control certain broadleaf and grass weeds in wheat and barley crops. Adama New Zealand Limited has applied to introduce the new herbicide, which contains the active ingredients: - chlorotoluron at 250 g/L - pendimethalin at 300 g/L - diflufenican at 40 g/L. Chlorotoluron is a new active ingredient to Aotearoa New Zealand. It has been approved in Europe. Pendimethalin and diflufenican have previously been assessed and substances containing these active ingredients are already approved for use in New Zealand. Adama says the product offers a new mode of action and should reduce the risk of resistance developing when used as part of an integrated weed management programme. Almost 100,000 hectares of New Zealand land is used for wheat and barley production. Annual crop sales total around $300 million for both crops combined. The EPA has carried out a human health and environmental risk assessment and is now inviting submissions on this application. If approved, Tower could only be used by professionals in commercial settings using ground-based application. It would be applied after sowing and before wheat and barley plants emerge. Dr Lauren Fleury, EPA Hazardous Substances Applications Manager, says the EPA is making strong progress to boost efficiency in assessing applications, with eight applications for new active ingredients currently in progress. "We understand the importance of timely access to new products. Since 1 July 2024, we have reduced the queue of hazardous substance release applications by 21 percent, and we are on track to complete the highest number of decisions in five years." Submissions close on 30 July.
Scoop
7 days ago
- Health
- Scoop
EPA Faces High Court Challenge Over Glyphosate
The Environmental Law Initiative is challenging the Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) in the High Court today over its decision that there were no grounds to reassess the herbicide glyphosate, along with more than 90 glyphosate-based formulations currently approved for use in Aotearoa. Despite glyphosate being used in Aotearoa for over 50 years, the EPA has never conducted a full risk assessment of the chemical. 'The EPA should have a full understanding of the effects of glyphosate to ensure Aotearoa's regulatory settings are fit for purpose,' says Tess Upperton, Senior Legal Advisor at the Environmental Law Initiative (ELI). 'Glyphosate is the most widely used herbicide in Aotearoa. It's sprayed on our food, roadsides, public spaces, around playgrounds, and in backyards.' 'Given its widespread use, it's alarming that we've never undertaken a comprehensive risk assessment to understand the impacts on our people and the environment,' says Upperton. In addition to glyphosate itself, the EPA has never done a full risk assessment for glyphosate-based formulations that have been 'grandfathered in' under current regulations—many of which are significantly more toxic than glyphosate alone. These formulations often include additional ingredients that amplify glyphosate's toxicity, including surfactants such as POEA (polyethoxylated tallow amine), classified as a "forever chemical" due to its persistence in the environment. 'These formulations should be undergoing risk assessments that consider their effects in Aotearoa—but they're not. And that's deeply concerning, particularly as their approvals do not expire,' says Upperton. Over recent decades, scientific evidence of glyphosate's harm to human health, biodiversity, and ecosystems has grown. Many regulators overseas have responded by tightening restrictions on glyphosate use. In contrast, the regulatory approach in Aotearoa has remained largely unchanged. 'While other countries have moved to protect public health and the environment, Aotearoa remains one of the most permissive regulators of glyphosate globally,' says Upperton. That includes allowing glyphosate use in settings where it's banned elsewhere—for instance, as a pre-harvest desiccant on crops, a practice prohibited in the European Union. Several European countries have also banned the domestic sale of glyphosate, restricting its use to regulated agricultural and commercial settings. Meanwhile, in New Zealand, the Ministry for Primary Industries has recently proposed increasing the Maximum Residue Levels (MRLs) for glyphosate on certain crops—by up to 100 times. 'This legal challenge is not about banning glyphosate,' Upperton clarifies. 'It's about the EPA making informed decisions about how these chemicals are regulated in Aotearoa.' About the Case In 2023, the Environmental Law Initiative formally requested for the EPA to determine whether there were grounds for reassessing glyphosate and glyphosate-based substances under the Hazardous Substances and New Organisms Act. The application was based on significant new scientific information that has emerged since glyphosate was first introduced in Aotearoa in the 1970s. In July 2024, the EPA declined the request, stating it did not believe sufficient grounds for reassessment existed. ELI will challenge that decision in the Wellington High Court on 16 and 17 June 2025.
NZ Herald
12-06-2025
- Business
- NZ Herald
Pātea seabed mine: Caution as Taranaki councils called to declare positions on mine
Taranaki local body politicians are looking to keep their powder dry as the battle over seabed mining intensifies through the new fast-track process. Pressure is mounting as the Environmental Protection Authority selects its panel to rule on an Australian company's bid to mine the South Taranaki seabed under the Fast-track
West Australian
12-06-2025
- Business
- West Australian
Australian Marine Conservation Society rejoices as K+S shelves plans for $850m salt project at Exmouth Gulf
Marine environmentalists are 'really relieved' a German chemical giant has canned a salt project in WA's north. K+S sent an email to various stakeholders on Thursday morning informing them the Ashburton Salt development had been scrapped. The proposal to evaporate briny water and harvest the leftover salt south of Onslow was first announced in 2016. The project was slated to cost $850 million and be operational by 2022, but K+S had made little progress on the development in recent years. WA's Environmental Protection Authority opened up public feedback on the Ashburton Salt mining plan in September 2023, but since then there had been no further mentions of the project's progress. The Australian Marine Conservation Society mounted a fierce campaign to scupper Ashburton Salt, which included hiring billboards in the German city of Kassel — where K+S is headquartered. AMCS WA director Paul Gamblin said he was 'really relieved' by K+S' decision to pull up stumps after 'years of hard fighting'. Mr Gamblin said the AMCS had targeted Ashburton Salt in particular, and not other nearby salt projects, because of Ashburton Salt's potential impacts to the Exmouth Gulf. 'K+S' project would have major negative impacts on the wetlands at Exmouth Gulf, which is designated as a wetland of national significance,' he said. 'The Gulf is Ningaloo Reef's nursery . . . many species on the Reef rely on the Gulf's bio-diverse environment.' The managing director of K+S' Australian arm, Gerrit Gödecke, claimed the decision to abandon the project was 'not made for reasons related to environmental management'. 'K+S remains confident the Ashburton Salt project could have been developed to be one of the world's most environmentally sound solar salt projects,' he said. The project being scrapped was pinned on a change in the 'worldwide strategic direction' at K+S, which 'no longer includes growth in international salt production'. 'I am disappointed we did not finish what we started by ultimately taking this project to production, and that the people of Onslow and the Thalanyji People, Traditional Owners of the Ashburton Salt site, will not realise the significant benefits the project would have brought,' Mr Gödecke said.
