Environmental Protection Network

As EPA weakens protections against pollution, families face greater risks. Safer, Not Sicker is a national campaign bringing trusted expertise to help Americans understand what’s changing, what’s at stake, and how they can take action. Learn more at safernotsicker.org

Trump gave 202 facilities exemptions from clean-air rules. Now EPA political appointees are working to weaken the rules themselves. This @nytimes.com investigation shows why Congress must demand answers. Our health comes first. www.nytimes.com/2026/10/24/c...

What can parents do about toxic exposure – and where do individual choices fall short? Learn where risks can arise, why timing matters, and why federal safeguards are essential for Mothers, Babies, and Children: safernotsicker.org/resources/#mothers-children

A new Safer Not Sicker report examines how federal rollbacks and delays are raising pollution risks in North Carolina, while shifting more burden to the state and families. Read and share the report informed by former EPA experts and scientists: safernotsicker.org/nc

Children’s health is at risk as EPA pulls back protections against harmful pollution. Get a snapshot of how weakened safeguards on air pollution, PFAS and pesticides could put kids in danger: safernotsicker.org/resources

Parents make countless choices to keep their kids healthy. But no family can control the air, water or every exposure their child encounters. On Children’s Environmental Health Day, remember: strong pollution safeguards help give every child a healthier place to grow.

Today is International Children’s Environmental Health Day, which is a day of awareness and action bringing people together to create a healthier, safer, and more equitable world for all children.

The Clean Air Act was written to protect people from pollution. Exxon and Suncor want the Supreme Court to use it to block a Colorado community's lawsuit. Former EPA officials who enforced that law say the companies have it backward. EPN's Marc Boom explains.

A weed killer linked to liver cancer in farmers is back on U.S. fields – and its maker, Bayer, got to pick the rules. Dicamba can vaporize and drift far from where it’s sprayed. Courts rejected its approval twice. This year, EPA approved it again. EPN’s Peter Murchie explains.

Your child faces greater risks from toxic chemicals and pollution than you do. Why? Their size, stage of development and everyday exposure. Pollution safeguards must account for these differences. This Children’s Health Month, learn about risks where kids live, learn and play.

NCLC has joined @enviroprotnet.bsky.social health, enviro and consumer orgs calling on the Trump Administration to develop a Data Center Health Protection Pledge and urging Congress to consider health & electricity costs of AI data centers. www.environmentalprotectionnetwork.org/20260930_dat...

Today, UCS and @enviroprotnet.bsky.social led a coalition of over 75 children's environmental health experts and organizations, including the @ameracadpeds.bsky.social and @nrdc.org in calling on the EPA and RFK, Jr. to protect children nationwide.

As AI data centers expand, their public-health impacts deserve greater attention. A new @enviroprotnet.bsky.social report examines how pollution from the power plants, generators and other infrastructure supporting data centers can affect communities well beyond data-center sites.

PSR has joined @enviroprotnet.bsky.social and other national organizations calling for a Data Center Health Protection Pledge. The health costs of data center growth must receive the same or more attention as electricity costs have! www.environmentalprotectionnetwork.org/20260930_dat...

Polluters save billions. Families pay the price. Sound fair? Joe Goffman, former EPA Assistant Administrator, explains how repealing carbon limits for power plants could shift pollution’s costs onto families through greater health risks. What should EPA’s priorities be? 👇

What if the biggest cost of AI isn’t on your electric bill? Coal, gas and diesel used to power data centers releases pollution linked to asthma, heart and lung disease and early death. As demand grows, strong safeguards matter more, not less. Read the report at the link in bio.

EPA just took a major step back from federal limits on power plant carbon pollution. Protecting people’s health is at the core of EPA’s mission. But right now, EPA is moving in the wrong direction. When pollution safeguards disappear, it’s families’ health that’s put at risk.

New @nytimes.com reporting examines growing consequences of pollution from the AI data center boom. Families deserve protection from health risks, not just electricity costs. That’s why EPN is calling for a Data Center Health Protection Pledge. Read more: nyti.ms/4xJzwq7

81% of voters are concerned that rolling back EPA protections could cost families more. Medical bills and long-term health effects are just part of that burden. Share to keep pollution’s real cost in the conversation.

What if the biggest cost of AI data centers isn't your utility bill, but your family's health? As data centers expand, communities are asking who bears the consequences. Larry Zaragoza, former EPA Associate Branch Chief, explains why the real cost isn't just the grid.

What happens to PFAS after they leave your body? Some can end up where food is grown. Sewage treatment doesn’t remove them all. PFAS can remain in biosolids used as fertilizer, then move into crops, livestock and drinking water. Save and share to show how PFAS can circle back.

Harmful air pollution doesn’t stay on the highway. Kids near highways and truck routes may be exposed to diesel exhaust, putting their health at risk. Instead of protecting them, EPA is proposing to weaken heavy-truck emissions controls. What pollution worries you most?

Families should not carry the health and financial costs of pollution they did not create. Strong EPA safeguards help keep toxic chemicals out of water and air and ensure the same rules apply to every company. Follow for expert-backed updates.

UPDATE: Michigan’s J.H. Campbell coal plant ordered by the DOE to remain active 90 more days, 400+ days past its planned closure. Keeping it open has cost $259M+, EDF estimates, while prolonging toxic pollution linked to asthma, heart and lung disease, and harm to developing brains.

Your child’s trip to school shouldn’t come with a pollution risk. EPA is proposing weaker diesel rules that could mean more smog-forming pollution and harm to developing lungs. Families can’t manage this risk alone. Strong clean-air standards help keep kids’ air safer.

Fracking wastewater is bubbling up from wells near Marietta, Ohio. Jeanne Briskin explains: Underground injection pushed it to the surface, prompting 4 disposal sites to shut down. But thousands more old wells could create pathways upward, raising questions about disposal safety.

Back-to-school routines can bring children close to traffic and idling vehicles. Because their lungs are still developing, soot and smog pose greater risks. Strong clean-air safeguards help reduce pollution where children live, learn and play. Learn more at the link in bio.

The fertilizer on your lawn could contain “forever chemicals.” PFAS from treated sewage can move from soil into crops, livestock & drinking water. EPA acknowledges the risks, but is proposing voluntary guidance instead of enforceable limits, leaving families to manage exposure on their own.

When pollution safeguards weaken, costs can shift from industry to communities through higher medical and insurance costs, missed work, filtration expenses and cleanup costs. Which cost is most often missing from the conversation?

What can you do when the air itself is making your child’s asthma worse? In 2024, EPA strengthened the national soot limit to better protect health. Now, it's trying to roll that limit back. Protecting the air kids breathe is EPA’s job, not something families can do alone.

What’s in the air your kid breathes after school? Ground-level ozone can build through the afternoon. Schools can adjust activities when the air is unhealthy, but that doesn’t remove the pollution. EPA should cut smog-forming pollution at the source, not roll safeguards back.