Science
This Scientist Has a Risky Plan to Cool Earth. There’s Growing Interest.

David Keith was a graduate student in 1991 when a volcano erupted in the Philippines, sending a cloud of ash toward the edge of space.
Seventeen million tons of sulfur dioxide released from Mount Pinatubo spread across the stratosphere, reflecting some of the sun’s energy away from Earth. The result was a drop in average temperatures in the Northern Hemisphere by roughly one degree Fahrenheit in the year that followed.
Today, Dr. Keith cites that event as validation of an idea that has become his life’s work: He believes that by intentionally releasing sulfur dioxide into the stratosphere, it would be possible to lower temperatures worldwide, blunting global warming.
Such radical interventions are increasingly being taken seriously as the effects of climate change grow more intense. Global temperatures have hit record highs for 13 months in a row, unleashing violent weather, deadly heat waves and raising sea levels. Scientists expect the heat to keep climbing for decades. The main driver of the warming, the burning of fossil fuels, continues more or less unabated.
Against this backdrop, there is growing interest in efforts to intentionally alter the Earth’s climate, a field known as geoengineering.
Already, major corporations are operating enormous facilities to vacuum up the carbon dioxide that’s heating up the atmosphere and bury it underground. Some scientists are performing experiments designed to brighten clouds, another way to bounce some solar radiation back to space. Others are working on efforts to make oceans and plants absorb more carbon dioxide.
But of all these ideas, it is stratospheric solar geoengineering that elicits the greatest hope and the greatest fear.
Proponents see it as a relatively cheap and fast way to reduce temperatures well before the world has stopped burning fossil fuels. Harvard University has a solar geoengineering program that has received grants from the Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates, the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation and the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation. It’s being studied by the Environmental Defense Fund along with the World Climate Research Program, an international scientific effort. The European Union last year called for a thorough analysis of the risks of geoengineering and said countries should discuss how to regulate an eventual deployment of the technology.
But many scientists and environmentalists fear that it could result in unpredictable calamities.
Because it would be used in the stratosphere and not limited to a particular area, solar geoengineering could affect the whole world, possibly scrambling natural systems, like creating rain in one arid region while drying out the monsoon season elsewhere. Opponents worry it would distract from the urgent work of transitioning away from fossil fuels. They object to intentionally releasing sulfur dioxide, a pollutant that would eventually move from the stratosphere to ground level, where it can irritate the skin, eyes, nose and throat and can cause respiratory problems. And they fear that once begun, a solar geoengineering program would be difficult to stop.
“The whole notion of spraying sulfur compounds to reflect sunlight is arrogant and simplistic,” the Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki said. “There are unintended consequences of powerful technologies like these, and we have no idea what they will be.”
Raymond Pierrehumbert, an atmospheric physicist at the University of Oxford, said he considered solar geoengineering a grave threat to human civilization.
“It’s not only a bad idea in terms of something that would never be safe to deploy,” he said. “But even doing research on it is not just a waste of money, but actively dangerous.”
Shuchi Talati, the founder of a nonprofit organization called the Alliance for Just Deliberation on Solar Geoengineering, called the technology “a double-edged sword.”
“It could be a way to limit human suffering,” she said. “At the same time, I think it can also exacerbate suffering if used in a bad way.”
In a series of interviews, Dr. Keith, a professor in the University of Chicago’s department of geophysical sciences, countered that the risks posed by solar geoengineering are well understood, not as severe as portrayed by critics and dwarfed by the potential benefits.
If the technique slowed the warming of the planet by even just one degree Celsius, or 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, over the next century, Dr. Keith said, it could help prevent millions of heat-related deaths each decade.
A planet transformed by solar geoengineering would not be noticeably dimmer during the daytime, according to his calculations. But it could produce a different kind of twilight, one with an orange hue.
He agrees that nations should stop burning coal, oil and gas, period. But Dr. Keith believes in going further.
Lean and athletic at 60, with glacier-blue eyes, Dr. Keith has spent his life outside the lab rock climbing, sea kayaking and skiing in the Arctic. He is deeply troubled by the myriad ways climate change is disrupting the natural world.
By lowering global temperatures, solar geoengineering could help restore the planet to its preindustrial state, recreating conditions that existed before enormous amounts of carbon dioxide were pumped into the atmosphere and began to cook the Earth, he said.
If there were a global referendum tomorrow on whether to begin solar geoengineering, he said he would vote in favor.
“There certainly are risks, and there certainly are uncertainties,” he said. “But there’s really a lot of evidence that the risks are quantitatively small compared to the benefits, and the uncertainties just aren’t that big.”
The only thing more dangerous than his solution, he suggested, may be not using it at all.
∴
To understand just how contentious Dr. Keith’s work can be, consider what happened when he tried to perform an initial test in preparation for a solar geoengineering experiment known as Scopex.
Then a professor at Harvard, Dr. Keith wanted to release a few pounds of mineral dust at an altitude of roughly 20 kilometers and track how the dust behaved as it floated across the sky.
A test was planned in 2018, possibly over Arizona, but Dr. Keith couldn’t find a partner to launch a high-altitude balloon. When details of that plan became public, a group of Indigenous people objected and issued a manifesto against geoengineering.
Three years later, Harvard hired the Swedish space corporation to launch a balloon that would carry the equipment for the test. But before it took place, local groups once again rose up in protest.
The Saami Council, an organization representing Indigenous peoples, said it viewed solar geoengineering “to be the direct opposite of the respect we as Indigenous Peoples are taught to treat nature with.”
Greta Thunberg, the Swedish climate activist, joined the chorus. “Nature is doing everything it can,” she said. “It’s screaming at us to back off, to stop — and we are doing the exact opposite.”
Within months, the experiment was called off.
“A lesson I’ve learned from this is that if we do this again, we won’t be open in the same way,” Dr. Keith said.
Behind the scenes, the Harvard team and its advisory committee became mired in finger pointing over who was to blame for the collapse of the project. Dr. Talati, a member of the Scopex advisory board, said it was “the moment of peak chaos.”
It didn’t help that there were personality conflicts. Several committee members said Dr. Keith could be ornery and headstrong, correcting colleagues in casual conversation and belittling those with whom he disagreed.
“I can be abrasive and difficult,” Dr. Keith acknowledged. “I am sometimes inappropriately forceful in making my point. I’m intense.”
∴
Opponents of solar geoengineering cite several main risks.
They say it could create a “moral hazard,” mistakenly giving people the impression that it is not necessary to rapidly reduce fossil fuel emissions.
“The fundamental problem is that we think we’re so smart that we don’t have to pay attention to nature’s boundaries,” Dr. Suzuki said. “But we haven’t dealt with the root cause of the problem, which is us.”
The second main concern has to do with unintended consequences.
“This is a really dangerous path to go down,” said Beatrice Rindevall, the chairwoman of the Swedish Society for Nature Conservation, which opposed the experiment. “It could shock the climate system, could alter hydrological cycles and could exacerbate extreme weather and climate instability.”
And once solar geoengineering began to cool the planet, stopping the effort abruptly could result in a sudden rise in temperatures, a phenomenon known as “termination shock.” The planet could experience “potentially massive temperature rise in an unprepared world over a matter of five to 10 years, hitting the Earth’s climate with something that it probably hasn’t seen since the dinosaur-killing impactor,” Dr. Pierrehumbert said.
On top of all this, there are fears about rogue actors using solar geoengineering and concerns that the technology could be weaponized. Not to mention the fact that sulfur dioxide can harm human health.
Dr. Keith is adamant that those fears are overblown. And while there would be some additional air pollution, he claims the risk is negligible compared to the benefits.
“There’s plenty of uncertainty about climate responses,” he said. “But it’s pretty hard to imagine if you do a limited amount of hemispherically balanced solar geo that you don’t reduce temperatures everywhere.”
Last year, after the failure to launch the Scopex experiment in Sweden, Dr. Keith made a move that stunned his colleagues. He announced he was closing the door on 13 years at Harvard and taking his ambitions to the University of Chicago, where he would build a new program around climate interventions, including solar geoengineering.
“I don’t know whether that stuff will ever get used,” said Mr. Gates, a major investor in climate technology. “I do believe that doing the research and understanding it makes sense.”
∴
Dr. Keith’s career can be traced to his father, Tony Keith, a wildlife biologist who attended the first global gathering to address threats to nature, the 1972 United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm.
Dyslexia prevented him from learning to read until late in 4th grade, but when he was finally able to make sense of written words, he became a voracious reader. He also loved camping and, at 17, hiked a stretch of the Appalachian Trail solo.
After graduating from the University of Toronto, he spent months rock climbing. Looking for a way to get paid to live in the wilderness, he got a job studying walruses in the Canadian Arctic.
Dr. Keith eventually enrolled in a doctoral program at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology to study experimental physics.
In 1992, he published an academic paper, “A Serious Look at Geoengineering,” that raised the questions that would shape his career: Who should authorize the use of these technologies? Who is liable if something goes wrong?
His academic career took him from Carnegie Mellon University to the University of Calgary, where he began investigating ways to capture and store carbon dioxide. The next stop was Harvard, where he got serious about solar geoengineering.
In 2006, a mutual acquaintance introduced him to Mr. Gates, who wanted to learn more about technologies that might help fight global warming. The two men discussed climate and technology in a series of meetings over the next 10 years.
Then in 2009, Dr. Keith founded Carbon Engineering, a company that developed a process for pulling carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Investors included Mr. Gates, Chevron and N. Murray Edwards, who made billions pumping oil from the Canadian oil sands.
Last year Carbon Engineering was acquired by Occidental Petroleum, a major oil and gas producer based in Texas, for $1.1 billion. Dr. Keith owned about 4 percent of the company at the time of the sale, delivering him a personal windfall of about $72 million.
Occidental is now building a series of enormous carbon capture plants. It plans to sell carbon credits to big companies like Amazon and AT&T that want to offset their emissions. Critics say that will only delay the phaseout of fossil fuels while allowing an oil company to profit.
“Of course I’m uncomfortable about it being sold to an oil company, no question,” Dr. Keith said, adding that he plans to give away most of his profits from the sale of Carbon Engineering, perhaps to a conservation group.
∴
On a summer Monday in Cambridge, Mass., the Harvard campus was mostly quiet. But inside one classroom, a standing-room-only crowd listened as experts discussed the merits and risks of solar geoengineering.
Among those featured was Frank Keutsch, Dr. Keith’s former collaborator on the Scopex experiment.
Dr. Keutsch is less sanguine than Dr. Keith when considering its potential risks.
“I compare stratospheric solar geoengineering with opiates,” he said on the panel. “They only treat the symptom and not the actual cause. You can get addicted to it if you don’t actually address the cause. In addition, like any painkiller, you’re going to have side effects. And then there are withdrawal symptoms, and that’s termination shock.”
Dr. Keutsch is now investigating whether calcium carbonate or diamond dust might be a better material than sulfur, and pondering issues around how a deployment might one day be governed. There are no current plans for a field experiment.
Academic energy in the field has followed Dr. Keith to the University of Chicago, which is allowing him to hire 10 full-time faculty members and build a new program focused on various types of geoengineering. The total cost could reach as much as $100 million.
The move has puzzled some. Dr. Pierrehumbert, who recently departed the University of Chicago for Oxford, said he was “flabbergasted” and contended that those research dollars could be better spent investigating ways to reduce the use of fossil fuels.
To celebrate his 60th birthday in October, Dr. Keith went hiking in the Canadian Rockies and came across a glacier that had shrunk dramatically in recent years. It was a visual reminder that global warming is upending the natural world, and it confirmed his central, controversial belief: Humans have already altered the planet, heating the climate with greenhouse gases. To repair the climate and return it to a more pristine state, we may need to take even more drastic action and engineer the stratosphere.
“I’m more motivated even now to push on solar geo because the rationalist case for it is looking stronger,” Dr. Keith said. “While there are still lots of strong individual voices of opposition, there are a lot of people in serious policy positions that are taking it seriously, and that’s really exciting.”

Science
RFK Jr. announces a plan to ban certain food dyes, following California's lead

WASHINGTON — Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the secretary of Health and Human Services, on Tuesday announced a plan to ban synthetic food dyes that color everyday snack items such as Flamin’ Hot Cheetos and M&Ms.
The first step in the plan is for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to revoke authorization of citrus red No. 2 and orange B.
After that, the Department of Health and Human Services said, it will work with industry to eliminate six petroleum-based food dyes: blue 1, blue 2, green 3, red 40, yellow 5 and yellow 6.
California passed a law banning those six dyes last year, citing developmental and behavioral harms in children. The state law is set to go into effect the end of 2027.
The FDA is instead encouraging the use of so-called natural food dyes such as gardenia blue and calcium phosphate. “Red dye? Try watermelon juice or beet juice,” FDA Commissioner Marty Makary said at the media event, holding up a jar of crimson liquid.
The announcement Tuesday is meant to spur the food dye industry to cooperate in eliminating those dyes by the end of next year, according to the department.
“Let’s start in a friendly way and see if we can do this without any statutory or regulatory changes,” Makary said. “They want to do it.”
Makary noted at the event that he worked with government officials in California to develop these proposed federal changes.
Food dyes have been under scrutiny for years, as consumer advocate groups have said they contain additives harmful to humans. In January, the FDA banned red dye no. 3 — used in such common items as fruit-cocktail cherries and Nesquik’s strawberry milk — after some studies showed that the additive raised the risk of cancer in some lab animals.
In keeping with Kennedy’s mission to eliminate synthetic food dyes as soon as possible, the department announcement also calls for food companies to get rid of red no. 3 in their products sooner than the previously agreed-upon deadline. (California banned the use of red 3 in 2023; that law is also set to go into effect in 2027.)
Kennedy has blamed food additives for myriad health issues. His supporters heralded the announcement Tuesday as a major step in the secretary’s movement to “Make America Healthy Again.” A Gallup poll last year found that 28% of respondents did not have much confidence in the federal government’s ability to ensure the food supply is safe. An additional 14% had no confidence at all.
“Industry is making money to keep us sick,” Kennedy said at the announcement.
Science
Mexican child infected with H5N1 bird flu dies from respiratory complications

A 3-year-old girl in Mexico died this month after getting infected with H5N1 bird flu, according to a report issued by the World Health Organization this week.
Authorities say the strain of bird flu is one that has been circulating in wild birds throughout North America, known as D1.1. It is the same strain implicated in the death of a person in Louisiana earlier this year, and in the case of a 13-year-old Canadian who was placed on life-support for several weeks before recovering.
Two others, a person in Wyoming and a poultry worker in Ohio, were also reported to have severe disease after exposure to this strain of the virus.
The strain has been detected in dairy herds from Nevada and Arizona.
“The case in Mexico is another great reminder of how dangerous H5 viruses can be,” said Richard Webby, an infectious disease expert at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital in Memphis, Tenn.
The D1.1 strain is widespread in the U.S. and Canada, but until this week’s WHO report it was unclear how far south the strain had traveled, he said.
“It has been a very active virus to date,” he said, and “further spread will undoubtedly lead to more infections, both in birds and humans. “
He said researchers are now awaiting publication of the genetic sequence, which will provide more information about whether there have been further changes that could make it more severe and/or transmissible.
According to the WHO, the young girl’s symptoms, which included fever, malaise and vomiting, began on March 7. She was admitted to a hospital in the state of Durango on March 13 due to respiratory failure. She was treated with oseltamivir, an antiviral drug, the following day. On March 16, she transferred to another hospital in the city of Torreón.
She died on April 8 from “respiratory complications.”
The girl did not have any underlying medical conditions, had not received a seasonal influenza vaccination, and had no history of travel, according to the WHO report.
The source of the child’s infection remains under investigation.
According to the report, 91 people were identified as contacts of the toddler, including 21 household contacts, 60 healthcare workers and 10 people from a childcare center. Each of these people was tested and all have tested negative for the virus.
Between 2022 and August 2024, there have been 75 reported H5N1 poultry outbreaks across Mexico, although none in Durango. At the end of January 2025, a sick vulture at the Sahuatoba Zoo, in Durango, was diagnosed with the virus. In addition, dozens of wild birds in the state were also reported, including a Canada goose.
The virus is still circulating in U.S. dairy herds, poultry, wild birds and wild mammals. Since April 1, there have been five new reports of infected dairy herds from California, 15 in Idaho and one from Arizona, according to the US Department of Agriculture.
There have also been dozens of domestic cats infected with the virus, including three recent reports from California’s Orange and Alameda counties: two in Orange and one in Alameda.
According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, there have been 70 reported cases of H5N1 bird flu in the U.S. since March 2024, when the virus was first reported in dairy herds. There has been one death, a person older than 65 from Louisiana.
Health officials say the risk of H5N1 bird flu to the general public remains low and there has been no indication of person-to-person spread. Most cases have been associated with contact with infected livestock and poultry.
Science
A 'calamity waiting to unfold': Altadena residents with standing homes fear long-term health effects

On Jan. 7, two residents on opposite sides of Altadena — Francois Tissot, a Caltech professor who studies the geology of ancient Earth and our solar system, living in the east side of town; and Jane Potelle, an environmental advocate living in the west side — fled the intensifying red glow of the devastating Eaton fire.
The inferno devoured home after home, unleashing what experts estimate to be tons of dangerous metals and compounds, from lead to asbestos to the carcinogen benzene. Carried through the vicious winds, the toxins embedded deep into the soil, seeped into the blood of first responders, and leaked into structures in the area that hadn’t burned down.
Within weeks, Altadena residents whose homes had withstood the fire began to return — yet few were testing for contaminants both Tissot and Potelle knew were almost certainly sitting in their still-standing houses.
Working independently, they both decided to create a comprehensive picture of the contamination lurking within surviving homes, both in the burn area and miles outside it.
They came to similar results: In the houses inside the burn zone, there was lead — a metal capable of dealing irreversible damage to the brain and nervous system — at levels far exceeding 100 times the Environmental Protection Agency’s allowable limits. Tissot’s group also found lead levels exceeding the limit over five miles from the fire’s perimeter.
“Children exposed to lead will have diminished cognitive development,” said Tissot, referencing studies that found exposure to leaded gasoline in though the 1990s was correlated with a drop in children’s IQ (an imperfect but useful metric for reasoning ability) by up to seven points.
“To me, what’s at stake is the future of a generation of zero- to 3-year-olds,” Tissot said. “If nothing is done, then these children will be exposed. But it’s totally avoidable.”
Activists and community leaders, along with residents who were force to evacuate when the Eaton fire swept through the city of Altadena, gather at an apartment complex where several residents are living with little to no utilities.
(Jason Armond/Los Angeles Times)
Potelle, frustrated with the lack of government response to contamination concerns, started a grassroots organization with other Altadena residents with standing homes to collect and publish tests conducted by certified specialists.
The organization, Eaton Fire Residents United, or EFRU, found lead in every single one of the 90 homes for which they’ve collected test results. Of those, 76% were above the EPA limits.
EFRU and Tissot’s team were distressed by these data, particularly seeing debris-removal and remediation contractors work without masks in the burn area and some residents even begin to return home.
In early April, Anita Ghazarian, co-lead of EFRU’s political advocacy team, went back to her standing home within the burn zone to pick up mail. She watched as a grandmother pushed a toddler in a stroller down the street.
“She has no idea … this area is toxic,” Ghazarian recalled thinking. The gravity of the situation sunk in. “To me, it’s just — unfortunately — a calamity waiting to unfold.”
Evidence mounted in the 1950s that even small amounts of lead exposure could harm children’s brains. But by the time the U.S. banned lead in paint in 1978, roughly 96% of the homes in Altadena that burned in the Eaton fire were already built. In the Palisades, that number was 78% — smaller, but still significant.

Jared Franz looks at the state of his kitchen, which survived the Eaton Fire, but is inhabitable due to smoke damage.
(William Liang/For The Times)

Dust from the fire inside the Franz family’s home.
(William Liang/For The Times)
After the Eaton fire, Tissot did a quick back-of-the-envelope calculation to understand what his Altadena community might be dealing with: roughly 7,000 homes burnt with 100 liters of paint per house and 0.5% of that paint likely made of lead.
“That’s something like several tons of lead that have been released by the fire, and it’s been deposited where the fire plume went,” he said.
As the Eaton fire roared in the foothills of the Angeles National Forest the night of Jan. 7, Tissot fled with his two kids, along with the rest of east Altadena.
Meanwhile, Potelle sat awake in her living room on the west side of town, listening to the howling winds as the rest of her family slept.
When Potelle got the evacuation order on her phone around 3:30 a.m. Jan. 8, her family joined the exodus. As they raced to gather their belongings, Potelle grabbed protective goggles she had bought for her son’s upcoming Nerf-battle birthday party.
Even with them, the soot, smoke and ash made it impossible to see.
The family made it to a friend’s house in Glendale, but as the toxic smoke plume swelled, Potelle had to evacuate yet again, this time to a friend’s garage. Tissot, then in Eagle Rock, left for Santa Barbara the next day as the smoke’s incursion progressed southwest.
As Altadena turned into a ghost town on Jan. 9, some residents — including Potelle’s husband — crept back in to assess the damage. Potelle waited for her husband’s report and watched on social media from the safety of the garage.
“People are just videotaping themselves driving through Altadena, and it’s block after block after block of burnt-down homes. The reality of it started to strike me,” Potelle said. “This is not just carbon. This is like, refrigerators and dishwashers and laundry machines and dryers and cars.”
Fires like these, with smoke made of car batteries, paints, insulation and appliances — and not trees and shrubs — are becoming increasingly common in California. These fuels can contain a litany of toxic substances like lead and arsenic that are not present in vegetation, waiting to be unlocked by flame.
Potelle’s home sustained visible smoke damage. So, she made two trips to a disaster support center set up temporarily at Pasadena City College, hoping to get support from her insurance company and the government for soil and in-home contamination testing.
Officials directed Potelle back and forth between her insurance company, FEMA, the L.A. County Department of Public Health, and the California Department of Insurance. Potelle — who, at this point, had already started to develop a cough and chest pain, which she suspects came from her visits to the burn area — left with without clear answers, feeling dejected.
“I’m driving, going back to my friend’s garage … and I’m just realizing there’s no one looking out for us,” she said.
Potelle set out to find the answers herself.
“Here’s the thing, if you don’t know what’s in your home when you remediate, you could just be pushing those contaminants deeper into your walls, deeper into your personal items,” Potelle said.
Tissot, meanwhile, visited his home a week after the fires to find the windows exploded, melted or warped; the walls cracked; and ash and soot everywhere. He too decided that he ought to do his own testing for contamination.
In his day job, Tissot runs a lab with sophisticated machinery able to discern what metals are present in samples of material, usually comprised of rock and dirt, based on their atomic mass: Only lead has an atomic mass of 0.34 trillion billionths of a gram. He normally uses the machine to study rare elements and isotopes from space and eons ago.
He gathered his lab team together on the Caltech campus to use the equipment to test samples from their own backyard.
The team took 100 samples from windowsills, desks and stairwells in the Caltech geology and planetary science buildings. Some surfaces were untouched since the fire; others had been cleaned by Caltech’s trained custodians.
For the record:
5:56 p.m. April 16, 2025A previous version of this article incorrectly stated that the Caltech team had tested samples from uncleaned surfaces, then cleaned those surfaces and took second samples. The Caltech team tested some samples from surfaces untouched since the fire, and some from surfaces that had been cleaned by Caltech’s trained custodians.
The team found multiple uncleaned surfaces with lead levels above the EPA’s limits. And while the cleaned surfaces had about 90% less lead, some still exceeded the limits.
Tissot quickly set up a webinar to announce the findings. The chat exploded with requests from homeowners in Altadena asking Tissot to test their houses.
Around the same time, Potelle noticed some folks on Facebook sharing the results of in-home contamination testing — which in many cases, they had paid for out of pocket.
Inspired, she advertised a Zoom meeting to discuss a strategy for mapping the test results. Sixty residents showed up; Potelle coordinated the group so that residents could submit results to EFRU’s Data Unification team for analysis.
Meanwhile, Tissot connected with residents who messaged him to set up a testing campaign. The researchers donned full hazmat suits in early February and entered the burn area to test homes and meet with homeowners.
ERFU posted its first dataset of 53 homes on March 24. Tissot’s group announced their results, which included data from 52 homes, just a week later, confirming what many had feared: There was lead everywhere.
“What was surprising to me is how far it went,” said Tissot. “We got very high levels of lead even miles away from the fire, and what’s difficult is that we still can’t really answer a simple question: How far is far enough to be safe?”
The two groups hope their data can help homeowners make better-informed decisions about their remediation and health — and apply pressure on leaders to take more action.
Tissot wants to see the government update its guidebooks and policy on fire recovery to reflect the contamination risks for intense urban fires, and to require testing companies to report their results to a public database.
Nicole Maccalla, a core member of EFRU’s Data Unification team, hopes to see officials enforce a common standard for insurance claims for testing and remediation so every resident doesn’t have to go through the same exact fight.
“You’ve got people stepping up to fill the void,” she said. “There should be an organized, systematic approach to this stuff, but it’s not happening.”
Times data journalist Sandhya Kambhampati contributed to this report.
-
Culture6 days ago
As likely No. 1 WNBA Draft pick, Paige Bueckers is among new generation of young talent
-
Culture1 week ago
From LeBron James to Alex Ovechkin, untouchable sports records and why they might never be broken
-
Culture1 week ago
Masters fashion: Stretching the concept of quiet luxury underneath a giant oak tree
-
News1 week ago
What to Know About the Deportation of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia to El Salvador
-
Culture1 week ago
2025 NFL Draft matchmaker: Best fits for Cam Ward, Jaxson Dart, other top QBs
-
News1 week ago
Read the Report on President Trump’s Annual Physical Exam
-
Technology1 week ago
Star Wars is getting a turn-based strategy game called Zero Company
-
Education1 week ago
Harvard Will Not Comply With a List of Trump Administration Demands