A major cybersecurity investigation is underway in the United States after more than 30 community water systems in Minnesota were impacted by what authorities describe as malicious cyber activity.

According to Minnesota officials, several water utilities were forced to shift to manual operations after the attack disrupted their systems. Cities including Plymouth, South St. Paul, Maple Plain, and Braham have publicly reported cyber incidents.

Federal investigators, including the FBI, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), are examining the breach. Investigators are exploring whether the attacks show signs of involvement by Iran-linked hackers, though officials have stressed that the findings remain preliminary and no specific actor has been officially blamed.

 Iran Hackers Under FBI Radar Over Minnesota Water Cyberattacks

President Donald Trump's nominee to head the US Environmental Protection Agency was confirmed by the Senate on Wednesday, drawing cheers from the fossil fuel industry and sparking alarm among green groups.
Lee Zeldin, a former US congressman from New York, has committed to Trump's campaign pledges of boosting US energy dominance and rolling back environmental regulations enacted under former president Joe Biden.
The 44-year-old's nomination was confirmed by a 56-42 vote, with Democrats John Fetterman of Pennsylvania as well as Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly of Arizona crossing the aisle to vote with their Republican colleagues.&nbsp;
Senators Cory Booker of New Jersey and Jon Ossoff of Georgia did not vote.&nbsp;
"Administrator Lee Zeldin has a proven track record of finding solutions to the nation's most pressing energy challenges," said American Petroleum Institute president and CEO Mike Sommers.
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/trumps-commerce-secretary-nominee-lutnick-advocates-across-the-board-tariffs-in-senate-hearing-8669715">Trump&rsquo;s commerce secretary nominee Lutnick advocates 'across-the-board' tariffs in senate hearing</a>
"We look forward to working with him to advance American energy leadership, from developing smart, effective regulations to ensuring consumers &ndash; not the government &ndash; can choose the vehicles they drive."&nbsp;
Faced with hostile Democratic questioning during his confirmation hearing, Zeldin acknowledged human-caused climate change is real, in contrast with Trump, who has derided it as a hoax.&nbsp;
But he repeatedly emphasized his commitment to "clean air" and "clean water," echoing rhetoric commonly used by conservatives who champion fossil fuels while resisting efforts to combat the worsening climate crisis, which is disrupting ecosystems and intensifying extreme weather events.
"With today's vote, Senate Republicans have installed yet another Trump loyalist to advance his agenda of environmental destruction," said Evergreen Action's Executive Director Lena Moffitt.
"Despite Lee Zeldin's repeated assurances to 'fully' follow the law, his blind loyalty to President Trump in the face of illegal, destructive executive actions makes it clear that his EPA will put polluters over people."
Also read | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-unveils-plan-to-detain-30000-migrants-at-notorious-guantanamo-bay-military-prison-criminal-illegal-aliens-us-illegal-immigrants-8669651">Donald Trump unveils plan to detain 30,000 'criminal illegal aliens' at notorious Guantanamo Bay military prison</a>
Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, warned that Zeldin's leadership should be scrutinized closely.
"Let's be clear-eyed that every other person Trump has already deployed to the EPA's pesticide, water and air divisions has a long track record of putting industry profits and polluters above our health and the environment," he said.
Zeldin's confirmation comes amid sweeping moves by Trump to reshape US environmental policy.
On his very first day in office, Trump announced he was removing the United States from the Paris climate accord for a second time, declared a "national energy emergency" to expand drilling, and signed executive orders to slow the transition to electric vehicles and halt offshore windshore farms.
Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits for grammar and punctuation. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

World | The 44-year-old's nomination was confirmed by a 56-42 vote, with Democrats John Fetterman of Pennsylvania as well as Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly of Arizona crossing the aisle to vote with their Republican colleagues. 

President Donald Trump's nominee to head the US Environmental Protection Agency was confirmed by the Senate on Wednesday, drawing cheers from the fossil fuel industry and sparking alarm among green groups. Lee Zeldin, a former US congressman from New York, has committed to Trump's campaign pledges of boosting US energy dominance and rolling back environmental regulations enacted under former president Joe Biden. The 44-year-old's nomination was confirmed by a 56-42 vote, with Democrats John Fetterman of Pennsylvania as well as Ruben Gallego and Mark Kelly of Arizona crossing the aisle to vote with their Republican colleagues. Senators Cory Booker of New Jersey and Jon Ossoff of Georgia did not vote. "Administrator Lee Zeldin has a proven track record of finding solutions to the nation's most pressing energy challenges," said American Petroleum Institute president and CEO Mike Sommers. Also read | Trump’s commerce secretary nominee Lutnick advocates 'across-the-board' tariffs in senate hearing "We look forward to working with him to advance American energy leadership, from developing smart, effective regulations to ensuring consumers – not the government – can choose the vehicles they drive." Faced with hostile Democratic questioning during his confirmation hearing, Zeldin acknowledged human-caused climate change is real, in contrast with Trump, who has derided it as a hoax. But he repeatedly emphasized his commitment to "clean air" and "clean water," echoing rhetoric commonly used by conservatives who champion fossil fuels while resisting efforts to combat the worsening climate crisis, which is disrupting ecosystems and intensifying extreme weather events. "With today's vote, Senate Republicans have installed yet another Trump loyalist to advance his agenda of environmental destruction," said Evergreen Action's Executive Director Lena Moffitt. "Despite Lee Zeldin's repeated assurances to 'fully' follow the law, his blind loyalty to President Trump in the face of illegal, destructive executive actions makes it clear that his EPA will put polluters over people." Also read | Donald Trump unveils plan to detain 30,000 'criminal illegal aliens' at notorious Guantanamo Bay military prison Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, warned that Zeldin's leadership should be scrutinized closely. "Let's be clear-eyed that every other person Trump has already deployed to the EPA's pesticide, water and air divisions has a long track record of putting industry profits and polluters above our health and the environment," he said. Zeldin's confirmation comes amid sweeping moves by Trump to reshape US environmental policy. On his very first day in office, Trump announced he was removing the United States from the Paris climate accord for a second time, declared a "national energy emergency" to expand drilling, and signed executive orders to slow the transition to electric vehicles and halt offshore windshore farms. Disclaimer: This story has been published from a news agency feed with minimal edits for grammar and punctuation. The headline may have been changed to better reflect the content of the story or to make it more suitable for WION audience.

Lee Zeldin confirmed as Trump's pick for Environmental Protection Agency

In another major blow, sharply cutting down President Joe Biden's administration's power to combat climate change the US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot issue wide limitations on greenhouse gases. Derailing Biden's plans to use the EPA to reduce emissions in order to achieve global climate targets, the court determined that the government's primary environmental agency lacked the authority to impose substantial limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants. These plants produce close to 20 per cent of the electricity used in the US. The judge concluded that while EPA had the authority to regulate specific plants, Congress had not granted it the broad authority to impose restrictions on all electricity-generating facilities.

The coal mining and coal power industries, which had been targeted for strict constraints in 2015 by the administration of then-president Barack Obama in an effort to reduce carbon emissions, gained a huge victory with the 6-3 vote.

Watch |&nbsp;U.S. Capitol Riots Hearing: Shocking revelations on Trump emerge before Senate Committee

<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/us-capitol-riots-hearing-shocking-revelations-on-trump-emerge-before-senate-committee-492850/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>

It was also a triumph for conservatives who opposed government regulation of the economy.

The three-person liberal minority, however, criticised the majority for exercising authority that they claimed the EPA actually did have.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/they-are-willing-to-let-me-die-protests-rock-us-as-abortion-ban-takes-effect-in-trigger-law-states-492386">'They are willing to let me die': Protests rock US as abortion ban takes effect in 'trigger law' states</a>

"Today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency of the power Congress gave it to respond to 'the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,'" they claimed.

A majority of the judges acknowledged that limiting carbon dioxide emissions in order to move away from the power produced by coal "may be a sensible solution" to global warming.

Also read |&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/ahead-of-un-ocean-conference-mermaids-call-for-ocean-protection-in-portugal-climate-protest-492230">Ahead of UN Ocean conference, mermaids call for ocean protection in Portugal climate protest</a>

However, they claimed that the case raised "major questions" about US law and government and that the EPA would need particular legislative authorization to exercise these powers.

"It is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme," they said.

"A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body," they added.

(With inputs from agencies)

Watch WION LIVE HERE:

<iframe allow="accelerometer; autoplay; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/live-tv/embed?autoplay=1&amp;mute=1" width="100%"></iframe>

You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us <a href="https://www.wionews.com/content-contribution-registration-form">here</a>.

In another major blow, sharply cutting down President Joe Biden's administration's power to combat climate change the US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot issue wide limitations on greenhouse gases.

In another major blow, sharply cutting down President Joe Biden's administration's power to combat climate change the US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled that Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) cannot issue wide limitations on greenhouse gases. Derailing Biden's plans to use the EPA to reduce emissions in order to achieve global climate targets, the court determined that the government's primary environmental agency lacked the authority to impose substantial limits on emissions from coal-fired power plants. These plants produce close to 20 per cent of the electricity used in the US. The judge concluded that while EPA had the authority to regulate specific plants, Congress had not granted it the broad authority to impose restrictions on all electricity-generating facilities. The coal mining and coal power industries, which had been targeted for strict constraints in 2015 by the administration of then-president Barack Obama in an effort to reduce carbon emissions, gained a huge victory with the 6-3 vote. Watch | U.S. Capitol Riots Hearing: Shocking revelations on Trump emerge before Senate Committee It was also a triumph for conservatives who opposed government regulation of the economy. The three-person liberal minority, however, criticised the majority for exercising authority that they claimed the EPA actually did have. Also read | 'They are willing to let me die': Protests rock US as abortion ban takes effect in 'trigger law' states "Today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency of the power Congress gave it to respond to 'the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,'" they claimed. A majority of the judges acknowledged that limiting carbon dioxide emissions in order to move away from the power produced by coal "may be a sensible solution" to global warming. Also read | Ahead of UN Ocean conference, mermaids call for ocean protection in Portugal climate protest However, they claimed that the case raised "major questions" about US law and government and that the EPA would need particular legislative authorization to exercise these powers. "It is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme," they said. "A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body," they added. (With inputs from agencies) Watch WION LIVE HERE: You can now write for wionews.com and be a part of the community. Share your stories and opinions with us here.

SCOTUS strikes again, limits US government powers to curb greenhouse emissions

United Nations President Joe Biden has asked the government's agency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to find out whether the deadly tornadoes were caused by the climate crisis.&nbsp;

Dozens of tornadoes ripped through at least six states (Kentucky, Arkansas, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee) late Friday and early Saturday, causing massive destruction of life and property.&nbsp;

The latest information from the US authorities confirmed that the death toll in the worst-affected state Kentucky stood at 64 on Monday (December 13). At least 14 people were killed in four other US states

Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear said, "There will be more. We believe it will certainly be above 70, maybe even 80."&nbsp;

IN PICS | <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/tornadoes-in-us-before-and-after-satellite-images-show-massive-destruction-436366#massive-destruction-436357">Tornadoes in US: Before and after satellite images show massive destruction</a>

Biden also confirmed that he will visit Kentucky on Wednesday (December 15) to survey the damage. It has been conveyed by the White House that Biden would travel to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, for a storm briefing, and Mayfield and Dawson Springs, Kentucky.&nbsp;

When the initial damages were reported, Biden had asked EPA to find whether climate crisis has played a role in the devastating tornadoes.&nbsp;

"The specific impact on these specific storms, I can't say at this point. I'm going to be asking the EPA and others to take a look at that," Biden said in a briefing.&nbsp;

He added, "But the fact is that we know everything is more intense when the climate is warming. And obviously, it has some impact here."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/gravitas-deadliest-tornado-hits-kentucky-436698/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Victor Gensini, a professor in geographic and atmospheric sciences at Northern Illinois University said that unusually high temperatures and humidity created the environment for such an extreme weather event at this time of year.&nbsp;

In recent years, analysts have been working to find out the links between an increase in global temperatures and how it is becoming a catalyst for the rising intensity of unseasonal severe weather events.&nbsp;

(With inputs from agencies)

United Nations President Joe Biden has asked the government's agency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to find out whether the deadly tornadoes were caused by the climate crisis.

United Nations President Joe Biden has asked the government's agency Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to find out whether the deadly tornadoes were caused by the climate crisis. Dozens of tornadoes ripped through at least six states (Kentucky, Arkansas, Illinois, Mississippi, Missouri and Tennessee) late Friday and early Saturday, causing massive destruction of life and property. The latest information from the US authorities confirmed that the death toll in the worst-affected state Kentucky stood at 64 on Monday (December 13). At least 14 people were killed in four other US states Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear said, "There will be more. We believe it will certainly be above 70, maybe even 80." IN PICS | Tornadoes in US: Before and after satellite images show massive destruction Biden also confirmed that he will visit Kentucky on Wednesday (December 15) to survey the damage. It has been conveyed by the White House that Biden would travel to Fort Campbell, Kentucky, for a storm briefing, and Mayfield and Dawson Springs, Kentucky. When the initial damages were reported, Biden had asked EPA to find whether climate crisis has played a role in the devastating tornadoes. "The specific impact on these specific storms, I can't say at this point. I'm going to be asking the EPA and others to take a look at that," Biden said in a briefing. He added, "But the fact is that we know everything is more intense when the climate is warming. And obviously, it has some impact here." × Victor Gensini, a professor in geographic and atmospheric sciences at Northern Illinois University said that unusually high temperatures and humidity created the environment for such an extreme weather event at this time of year. In recent years, analysts have been working to find out the links between an increase in global temperatures and how it is becoming a catalyst for the rising intensity of unseasonal severe weather events. (With inputs from agencies)

US President Joe Biden asks EPA to probe role of climate crisis in deadly tornadoes

Colonial Pipeline began to slowly restart the nation’s largest fuel pipeline network on Wednesday after a ransomware attack shut the line, triggering fuel shortages and panic buying in the southeastern United States.

It will take several days for the 5,500 mile (8,850 km) pipeline to return to normal operations, Colonial said, even as motorists in southeastern states jammed stations seeking fuel. A return to ample supplies could take two weeks, analysts said.

The cyberattack halted 2.5 million barrels per day of shipments of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel last Friday after the most disruptive cyberattack ever on U.S. energy infrastructure.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-to-restore-gasoline-flow-this-week-384190" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-to-restore-gasoline-flow-this-week-384190&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjjrJXH3cPwAhWPzDgGHfM_C1AQFjAAegQIABAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw1aWkjJTKutXl4VaEHB4ScM" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-to-restore-gasoline-flow-this-week-384190" target="_blank">Colonial pipeline&nbsp;to restore Gasoline flow this week</a>

Sources familiar with Colonial’s response said the company does not plan to pay the ransom demanded by hackers who encrypted data on the pipeline.

Colonial said it was working with cybersecurity experts to investigate the attack and had taken additional security measures before beginning the restart. The company said its control center is handling the restart of the pipeline, which stretches from refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast to consumers in Mid-Atlantic and Southeast states.

The supply crunch sparked panic buying in the US Southeast, bringing long lines and high prices at gas stations ahead of the peak summer driving season.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-hackers-stole-large-amount-of-data-says-report-383887" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-hackers-stole-large-amount-of-data-says-report-383887&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjjrJXH3cPwAhWPzDgGHfM_C1AQFjABegQIAxAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw0h-UOfPx75joBMZSmHHbQe" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-hackers-stole-large-amount-of-data-says-report-383887" target="_blank">Colonial Pipeline&nbsp;hackers stole large amount of data, says report</a>

Nearly 60% of gas stations in metro Atlanta were without gasoline, tracking firm GasBuddy said. Its survey showed 65% of stations in North Carolina and 43% in Georgia and South Carolina without fuel. Virginia also reported high outages.

“Our top priority right now is getting the fuel to the communities that need it,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told reporters.

Fuel stocks in the U.S. Northeast will likely hit five-year lows this week as the restart slowly progresses, said S&amp;P Global Platts analyst Richard Joswick. Full recovery "will take a couple of weeks at least," he added.

Rising tensions

At a Citgo station in East Atlanta, Charles Williams, 66, a local musician, filled his wife's Mini Cooper after seeing people with large jerry cans loading up.

"I wouldn't say I know they're hoarding, but I don't know if they're helping," he said.

Privately owned Colonial Pipeline opened portions of the line manually in Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey and the Carolinas. It also accepted 2 million barrels of fuel to begin efforts to "substantially" restore operations by week's end, the company has said.

The average national gasoline price rose to above $3.00 a gallon, the highest since October 2014, the American Automobile Association said.

Fuel industry representatives urged consumers to stop panic buying. They noted the country has plenty of gasoline supplies and said hoarding is creating shortages in areas not served by the pipeline.

"Retailers right now have sold several days worth of inventory within a few hours," said Rob Underwood, President of the Energy Marketers of America.

Four southeastern states - Florida, North Carolina, Virginia and Georgia - joined federal regulators in relaxing driver and fuel restrictions to speed deliveries of supplies. Georgia suspended sales tax on gasoline until Saturday.

The FBI has accused a shadowy criminal gang called DarkSide of the ransomware attack. The group, believed to be based in Russia or Eastern Europe, has not directly taken credit, but on Wednesday it claimed to have breached systems at three other companies, including an Illinois tech firm.

Russia’s embassy in the United States rejected speculation that Moscow was behind the attack. On Monday, Biden said there was no evidence so far that Russia was responsible.

Refiners, airlines react

It was not known how much money the hackers are seeking.

Gulf Coast refiners that move fuel to market on the Colonial Pipeline have cut processing. Total SE (TOTF.PA) trimmed gasoline production at its Port Arthur, Texas, refinery, and Citgo Petroleum pared back at its Lake Charles, Louisiana, plant.

Citgo said it was moving products from Lake Charles and "exploring alternate supply methods into other impacted markets." Marathon Petroleum said it was "making adjustments."

Several airlines have been transporting fuel by truck or fueling planes at destinations rather than at East Coast origins. American Airlines (AAL.O) said it would resume on Thursday non-stop service on two long-haul flights out its Charlotte, North Carolina hub.

Delta Air Lines (DAL.N) Chief Executive Ed Bastian said the airline has been told fuel supplies will be available “hopefully by the end of the week and as long as those predictions come true hopefully we’ll be OK.”

Colonial Pipeline began to slowly restart the nation’s largest fuel pipeline network on Wednesday after a ransomware attack shut the line, triggering fuel shortages and panic buying in the southeastern United States.

Colonial Pipeline began to slowly restart the nation’s largest fuel pipeline network on Wednesday after a ransomware attack shut the line, triggering fuel shortages and panic buying in the southeastern United States. It will take several days for the 5,500 mile (8,850 km) pipeline to return to normal operations, Colonial said, even as motorists in southeastern states jammed stations seeking fuel. A return to ample supplies could take two weeks, analysts said. The cyberattack halted 2.5 million barrels per day of shipments of gasoline, diesel and jet fuel last Friday after the most disruptive cyberattack ever on U.S. energy infrastructure. Also read | Colonial pipeline to restore Gasoline flow this week Sources familiar with Colonial’s response said the company does not plan to pay the ransom demanded by hackers who encrypted data on the pipeline. Colonial said it was working with cybersecurity experts to investigate the attack and had taken additional security measures before beginning the restart. The company said its control center is handling the restart of the pipeline, which stretches from refineries on the U.S. Gulf Coast to consumers in Mid-Atlantic and Southeast states. The supply crunch sparked panic buying in the US Southeast, bringing long lines and high prices at gas stations ahead of the peak summer driving season. Also read | Colonial Pipeline hackers stole large amount of data, says report Nearly 60% of gas stations in metro Atlanta were without gasoline, tracking firm GasBuddy said. Its survey showed 65% of stations in North Carolina and 43% in Georgia and South Carolina without fuel. Virginia also reported high outages. “Our top priority right now is getting the fuel to the communities that need it,” U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg told reporters. Fuel stocks in the U.S. Northeast will likely hit five-year lows this week as the restart slowly progresses, said S&P Global Platts analyst Richard Joswick. Full recovery "will take a couple of weeks at least," he added. Rising tensions At a Citgo station in East Atlanta, Charles Williams, 66, a local musician, filled his wife's Mini Cooper after seeing people with large jerry cans loading up. "I wouldn't say I know they're hoarding, but I don't know if they're helping," he said. Privately owned Colonial Pipeline opened portions of the line manually in Georgia, Maryland, New Jersey and the Carolinas. It also accepted 2 million barrels of fuel to begin efforts to "substantially" restore operations by week's end, the company has said. The average national gasoline price rose to above $3.00 a gallon, the highest since October 2014, the American Automobile Association said. Fuel industry representatives urged consumers to stop panic buying. They noted the country has plenty of gasoline supplies and said hoarding is creating shortages in areas not served by the pipeline. "Retailers right now have sold several days worth of inventory within a few hours," said Rob Underwood, President of the Energy Marketers of America. Four southeastern states - Florida, North Carolina, Virginia and Georgia - joined federal regulators in relaxing driver and fuel restrictions to speed deliveries of supplies. Georgia suspended sales tax on gasoline until Saturday. The FBI has accused a shadowy criminal gang called DarkSide of the ransomware attack. The group, believed to be based in Russia or Eastern Europe, has not directly taken credit, but on Wednesday it claimed to have breached systems at three other companies, including an Illinois tech firm. Russia’s embassy in the United States rejected speculation that Moscow was behind the attack. On Monday, Biden said there was no evidence so far that Russia was responsible. Refiners, airlines react It was not known how much money the hackers are seeking. Gulf Coast refiners that move fuel to market on the Colonial Pipeline have cut processing. Total SE (TOTF.PA) trimmed gasoline production at its Port Arthur, Texas, refinery, and Citgo Petroleum pared back at its Lake Charles, Louisiana, plant. Citgo said it was moving products from Lake Charles and "exploring alternate supply methods into other impacted markets." Marathon Petroleum said it was "making adjustments." Several airlines have been transporting fuel by truck or fueling planes at destinations rather than at East Coast origins. American Airlines (AAL.O) said it would resume on Thursday non-stop service on two long-haul flights out its Charlotte, North Carolina hub. Delta Air Lines (DAL.N) Chief Executive Ed Bastian said the airline has been told fuel supplies will be available “hopefully by the end of the week and as long as those predictions come true hopefully we’ll be OK.”

Colonial Pipeline slowly restarts as Southeast US scrambles for fuel

Fears the shutdown of a major fuel pipeline network would cause a gasoline shortage led to some panic buying and prompted US regulators on Tuesday to temporarily suspend clean fuel requirements in three eastern states and the nation's capital.

While it remained unclear the degree to which supplies would be affected, drivers lined up to fill their tanks at gas stations in the southeast, with some carrying extra containers amid fears of fuel scarcity.

A ransomware attack Friday on Colonial Pipeline forced the company to shut down its entire network, but government officials on Tuesday urged calm and said the situation is only temporary.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-to-restore-gasoline-flow-this-week-384190" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-to-restore-gasoline-flow-this-week-384190&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjjrJXH3cPwAhWPzDgGHfM_C1AQFjAAegQIABAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw1aWkjJTKutXl4VaEHB4ScM" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-to-restore-gasoline-flow-this-week-384190" target="_blank">Colonial pipeline&nbsp;to restore Gasoline flow this week</a>

The operator of the largest fuel conduit system in the United States, Colonial Pipeline sends gasoline and jet fuel from the Gulf Coast of Texas to the populous east coast through 5,500 miles (8,850 kilometers) of ducts that serve 50 million consumers.

The company said it expects to have the pipeline network fully up and running by the end of the week.

Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said some areas "may feel a supply crunch, as Colonial fully resumes."

However, "there should be no cause for hoarding gasoline, especially in the light of the fact that the pipeline should be substantially operational by the end of this week and over the weekend," she told reporters at the White House.

Also read |&nbsp;<a data-ctorig="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-hackers-stole-large-amount-of-data-says-report-383887" data-cturl="https://www.google.com/url?client=internal-element-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;q=https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-hackers-stole-large-amount-of-data-says-report-383887&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=2ahUKEwjjrJXH3cPwAhWPzDgGHfM_C1AQFjABegQIAxAC&amp;usg=AOvVaw0h-UOfPx75joBMZSmHHbQe" dir="ltr" href="https://www.wionews.com/world/colonial-pipeline-hackers-stole-large-amount-of-data-says-report-383887" target="_blank">Colonial Pipeline&nbsp;hackers stole large amount of data, says report</a>

The shutdown raised fears the shortages would cause gasoline prices to spike just ahead of the US Memorial Day holiday, the unofficial kickoff to the summer travel season.

But Granholm called on station owners to act responsibly and said, "We will have no tolerance for price gouging."

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday announced a one-week suspension of clean air rules in an effort to ease supply issues.

The waiver is meant "to address the fuel supply emergency caused by a cyberattack on Colonial Pipeline's computer networks that led to the pipeline's shutdown," EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a letter to the governors of Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia and the mayor of Washington.

Regan said the EPA and Energy Department "have been actively monitoring the supply of fuel" and found that "the unusual pipeline shutdown has affected gasoline supplies."

No gas by nightfall?

The EPA move, effective through May 18, suspends rules that require urban areas to use fuel with additives like MTBE, which makes gasoline less polluting but also more expensive.

The waiver "is necessary to take action to minimize or prevent disruption of an adequate supply of gasoline to consumers," Regan said.

That followed the weekend announcement from the Transportation Department that it was easing up on time limits for drivers of tankers carrying diesel, gasoline and jet fuel to 18 of the most affected states, and is considering easing shipping rules as well.

"Everybody's seeing the news, you know, they get fearful, then everybody rushes out and gets gas. They're filling up gas cans and everything," one gas station manager in Raleigh, North Carolina told AFP.

"We'll be out of gas before the sun goes down if it stays this way."

American Airlines said in a statement that two daily long-haul routes out of Charlotte, North Carolina, were impacted by the fuel shortage, without giving further details.

Oil industry analyst Patrick De Haan said on Twitter the national average gasoline price reached $2.97 a gallon, "matching the highest since 2018."

While he said some gasoline stations along the east coast are running out of fuel, including a little over five percent in Georgia and 7.5 percent or more in North Carolina and Virginia, he cautioned against overreacting.

"Rack prices, or the prices stations pay for gasoline, rose only by a couple of cents today throughout the southeastern US. There is no pending spike coming to (gas prices) in the area, folks. No reason to freak out," De Haan said.

Oil prices already had been on the rise as the global economy bounces back from the Covid-19 pandemic, rebounding to just over $68 a barrel on Tuesday from less than $22 in April 2020.

John Catsimatidis, CEO of United Refining Company, which processes more than 70,000 barrels per day of oil and owns more than 400 gas stations in the New York area, said on Monday that the pipeline shutdown will send prices higher, estimating an impact of "at least four cents a gallon."

Colonial said late Tuesday it was making progress in "around-the-clock efforts to return our system to service."

Fears the shutdown of a major fuel pipeline network would cause a gasoline shortage led to some panic buying and prompted US regulators on Tuesday to temporarily suspend clean fuel requirements in three eastern states and the nation's capital.

Fears the shutdown of a major fuel pipeline network would cause a gasoline shortage led to some panic buying and prompted US regulators on Tuesday to temporarily suspend clean fuel requirements in three eastern states and the nation's capital. While it remained unclear the degree to which supplies would be affected, drivers lined up to fill their tanks at gas stations in the southeast, with some carrying extra containers amid fears of fuel scarcity. A ransomware attack Friday on Colonial Pipeline forced the company to shut down its entire network, but government officials on Tuesday urged calm and said the situation is only temporary. Also read | Colonial pipeline to restore Gasoline flow this week The operator of the largest fuel conduit system in the United States, Colonial Pipeline sends gasoline and jet fuel from the Gulf Coast of Texas to the populous east coast through 5,500 miles (8,850 kilometers) of ducts that serve 50 million consumers. The company said it expects to have the pipeline network fully up and running by the end of the week. Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said some areas "may feel a supply crunch, as Colonial fully resumes." However, "there should be no cause for hoarding gasoline, especially in the light of the fact that the pipeline should be substantially operational by the end of this week and over the weekend," she told reporters at the White House. Also read | Colonial Pipeline hackers stole large amount of data, says report The shutdown raised fears the shortages would cause gasoline prices to spike just ahead of the US Memorial Day holiday, the unofficial kickoff to the summer travel season. But Granholm called on station owners to act responsibly and said, "We will have no tolerance for price gouging." The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on Tuesday announced a one-week suspension of clean air rules in an effort to ease supply issues. The waiver is meant "to address the fuel supply emergency caused by a cyberattack on Colonial Pipeline's computer networks that led to the pipeline's shutdown," EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a letter to the governors of Maryland, Pennsylvania and Virginia and the mayor of Washington. Regan said the EPA and Energy Department "have been actively monitoring the supply of fuel" and found that "the unusual pipeline shutdown has affected gasoline supplies." No gas by nightfall? The EPA move, effective through May 18, suspends rules that require urban areas to use fuel with additives like MTBE, which makes gasoline less polluting but also more expensive. The waiver "is necessary to take action to minimize or prevent disruption of an adequate supply of gasoline to consumers," Regan said. That followed the weekend announcement from the Transportation Department that it was easing up on time limits for drivers of tankers carrying diesel, gasoline and jet fuel to 18 of the most affected states, and is considering easing shipping rules as well. "Everybody's seeing the news, you know, they get fearful, then everybody rushes out and gets gas. They're filling up gas cans and everything," one gas station manager in Raleigh, North Carolina told AFP. "We'll be out of gas before the sun goes down if it stays this way." American Airlines said in a statement that two daily long-haul routes out of Charlotte, North Carolina, were impacted by the fuel shortage, without giving further details. Oil industry analyst Patrick De Haan said on Twitter the national average gasoline price reached $2.97 a gallon, "matching the highest since 2018." While he said some gasoline stations along the east coast are running out of fuel, including a little over five percent in Georgia and 7.5 percent or more in North Carolina and Virginia, he cautioned against overreacting. "Rack prices, or the prices stations pay for gasoline, rose only by a couple of cents today throughout the southeastern US. There is no pending spike coming to (gas prices) in the area, folks. No reason to freak out," De Haan said. Oil prices already had been on the rise as the global economy bounces back from the Covid-19 pandemic, rebounding to just over $68 a barrel on Tuesday from less than $22 in April 2020. John Catsimatidis, CEO of United Refining Company, which processes more than 70,000 barrels per day of oil and owns more than 400 gas stations in the New York area, said on Monday that the pipeline shutdown will send prices higher, estimating an impact of "at least four cents a gallon." Colonial said late Tuesday it was making progress in "around-the-clock efforts to return our system to service."

Pipeline shutdown sparks fear of US gasoline shortage

US President Donald Trump's administration has revoked an Obama-era waterway regulation in a move condemned by conservationists but celebrated by farmers and developers.

It is the latest move from the president to boost the economy, frequently at the expense of the environment, while fulfilling promises made to his base in the 2016 campaign.

The waterways will be governed under a previous agreement until the end of the year when the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/us-rolls-back-regulations-on-industrial-methane-leaks-246566">Environmental Protection Agency </a>(EPA) is expected to adopt rules that define far more narrowly which waterways should be protected.

Environmental groups called the decision &nbsp;announced on Thursday &nbsp;to repeal the 2015 Waters of the United States rules (WOTUS) "shameful and dangerous."

Former President Barack Obama's WOTUS made the majority of American waterways subject to federal regulation, requiring landowners to get permits before they could develop or pollute lakes or rivers and environmentalists argued protecting delicate water systems from human damage.

But EPA chief Andrew Wheeler labelled Obama's regulations "an egregious power grab" and said at a press conference in Washington his department's changes were a return to "a longstanding and familiar regulatory framework."

Environmental groups warned the repeal would threaten drinking water, increase the pollution of streams and wetlands, and limit measures that reduce flooding.

Former EPA director of science and technology Betsy Southerland told the Associated Press: "This repeal is a victory for land developers, oil and gas drillers and miners."

US President Donald Trump's administration has revoked an Obama-era waterway regulation in a move condemned by conservationists but celebrated by farmers and developers.

US President Donald Trump's administration has revoked an Obama-era waterway regulation in a move condemned by conservationists but celebrated by farmers and developers. It is the latest move from the president to boost the economy, frequently at the expense of the environment, while fulfilling promises made to his base in the 2016 campaign. The waterways will be governed under a previous agreement until the end of the year when the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is expected to adopt rules that define far more narrowly which waterways should be protected. Environmental groups called the decision announced on Thursday to repeal the 2015 Waters of the United States rules (WOTUS) "shameful and dangerous." Former President Barack Obama's WOTUS made the majority of American waterways subject to federal regulation, requiring landowners to get permits before they could develop or pollute lakes or rivers and environmentalists argued protecting delicate water systems from human damage. But EPA chief Andrew Wheeler labelled Obama's regulations "an egregious power grab" and said at a press conference in Washington his department's changes were a return to "a longstanding and familiar regulatory framework." Environmental groups warned the repeal would threaten drinking water, increase the pollution of streams and wetlands, and limit measures that reduce flooding. Former EPA director of science and technology Betsy Southerland told the Associated Press: "This repeal is a victory for land developers, oil and gas drillers and miners."

Donald Trump repeals Obama-era waterway protections

The US Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday plans to roll back regulations that limit leaks of potent <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/earth-at-risk-of-falling-into-irreversible-greenhouse-state-scientists-warn-157546">greenhouse gas</a> methane from pipelines and wells, even as some industry players opposed the move.

It is the latest in President Donald Trump's long battle against <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/climate-apartheid-between-rich-and-poor-looms-united-nation-expert-warns-230621">environmental protection </a>rules, coming weeks after his administration made fundamental changes to a widely popular wildlife protection law and re-authorized the use of "cyanide bombs" to kill animals that prey on livestock.

"EPA's proposal delivers on President Trump's executive order and removes unnecessary and duplicative regulatory burdens from the oil and gas industry," said the agency's head, Andrew Wheeler, a former fossil fuel lobbyist.

"The Trump Administration recognizes that methane is valuable, and the industry has an incentive to minimize leaks and maximize its use," he added.

The rules would likely go into effect next year after a non-binding public comment period.

The EPA said the proposed amendments would save the oil and natural gas industry $17-$19 million a year, for a total of $97-$123 million from 2019 through 2025.

But oil giants, including BP, ExxonMobil, and Royal Dutch Shell, called for the current rules, introduced by Trump's predecessor, former president Barack Obama, to be maintained.

Shell has pledged to reduce its methane leaks to less than 0.2 percent by 2025, its US president, Gretchen Watkins, said in a statement shared with media on Thursday.

"Despite the administration's proposal to no longer regulate methane, Shell's US assets will continue to contribute to that global target," she said.

Watch- G7 Summit: World leaders to talk on Climate Change

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<div class="videoWrapper trancodeVideo"><iframe allowfullscreen="" autoplay="1" class="includeVideo" frameborder="0" height="350" src="https://www.wionews.com/videos/g7-summit-world-leaders-to-talk-on-climate-change-245321/embed" style="width:100%;max-width:560px;" width="560"></iframe></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Asked about this opposition from the very sector the regulation was supposed to be benefiting, EPA official Anne Idsal said: "They're not the only ones within that particular space. You've got small and midsize companies as well.

"We don't preclude anybody from going above and beyond," she said.

Like carbon dioxide, methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to global climate change.

But its potency in trapping heat is about 84–87 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year-period, falling to 28–36 times greater over 100 years, according to United Nations figures.

The US Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday plans to roll back regulations that limit leaks of potent greenhouse gas methane from pipelines and wells, even as some industry players opposed the move.

The US Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday plans to roll back regulations that limit leaks of potent greenhouse gas methane from pipelines and wells, even as some industry players opposed the move. It is the latest in President Donald Trump's long battle against environmental protection rules, coming weeks after his administration made fundamental changes to a widely popular wildlife protection law and re-authorized the use of "cyanide bombs" to kill animals that prey on livestock. "EPA's proposal delivers on President Trump's executive order and removes unnecessary and duplicative regulatory burdens from the oil and gas industry," said the agency's head, Andrew Wheeler, a former fossil fuel lobbyist. "The Trump Administration recognizes that methane is valuable, and the industry has an incentive to minimize leaks and maximize its use," he added. The rules would likely go into effect next year after a non-binding public comment period. The EPA said the proposed amendments would save the oil and natural gas industry $17-$19 million a year, for a total of $97-$123 million from 2019 through 2025. But oil giants, including BP, ExxonMobil, and Royal Dutch Shell, called for the current rules, introduced by Trump's predecessor, former president Barack Obama, to be maintained. Shell has pledged to reduce its methane leaks to less than 0.2 percent by 2025, its US president, Gretchen Watkins, said in a statement shared with media on Thursday. "Despite the administration's proposal to no longer regulate methane, Shell's US assets will continue to contribute to that global target," she said. Watch- G7 Summit: World leaders to talk on Climate Change × Asked about this opposition from the very sector the regulation was supposed to be benefiting, EPA official Anne Idsal said: "They're not the only ones within that particular space. You've got small and midsize companies as well. "We don't preclude anybody from going above and beyond," she said. Like carbon dioxide, methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to global climate change. But its potency in trapping heat is about 84–87 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year-period, falling to 28–36 times greater over 100 years, according to United Nations figures.

US rolls back regulations on industrial methane leaks

The US Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday plans to roll back regulations that limit leaks of potent greenhouse gas methane from pipelines and wells, even as some industry players opposed the move.

It is the latest in<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/donald-trump-slams-report-that-he-wanted-to-use-nuclear-weapons-to-break-up-hurricanes-245753"> President Donald Trump</a>'s long battle against environmental protection rules, coming weeks after his administration made fundamental changes to a widely popular wildlife protection law and re-authorized the use of "cyanide bombs" to kill animals that prey on livestock.

"EPA's proposal delivers on President Trump's executive order and removes unnecessary and duplicative regulatory burdens from the oil and gas industry," said the agency's head, Andrew Wheeler, a former fossil fuel lobbyist.

"The Trump Administration recognizes that methane is valuable, and the industry has an incentive to minimize leaks and maximize its use," he added.

The rules would likely go into effect next year after a non-binding public comment period.

The EPA said the proposed amendments would save the oil and natural gas industry $17-$19 million a year, for a total of $97-$123 million from 2019 through 2025.

But oil giants, including BP, ExxonMobil, and Royal Dutch Shell, called for the current rules, introduced by Trump's predecessor, former president Barack Obama, to be maintained.

Shell has pledged to reduce its methane leaks to less than 0.2 per cent by 2025, its US president, Gretchen Watkins, said in a statement shared with media on Thursday.

"Despite the administration's proposal to no longer regulate methane, Shell's US assets will continue to contribute to that global target," she said.

Asked about this opposition from the very sector the regulation was supposed to be benefiting, EPA official Anne Idsal said: "They're not the only ones within that particular space. You've got small and midsize companies as well.

"We don't preclude anybody from going above and beyond," she said.

Like carbon dioxide, methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to global climate change.

But its potency in trapping heat is about 84–87 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year-period, falling to 28–36 times greater over 100 years, according to United Nations figures.

The US Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday plans to roll back regulations that limit leaks of potent greenhouse gas methane from pipelines and wells, even as some industry players opposed the move. It is the latest in President Donald Trump's long battle against environmental protection rules, coming weeks after his administration made fundamental changes to a widely popular wildlife protection law and re-authorized the use of "cyanide bombs" to kill animals that prey on livestock. "EPA's proposal delivers on President Trump's executive order and removes unnecessary and duplicative regulatory burdens from the oil and gas industry," said the agency's head, Andrew Wheeler, a former fossil fuel lobbyist. "The Trump Administration recognizes that methane is valuable, and the industry has an incentive to minimize leaks and maximize its use," he added. The rules would likely go into effect next year after a non-binding public comment period. The EPA said the proposed amendments would save the oil and natural gas industry $17-$19 million a year, for a total of $97-$123 million from 2019 through 2025. But oil giants, including BP, ExxonMobil, and Royal Dutch Shell, called for the current rules, introduced by Trump's predecessor, former president Barack Obama, to be maintained. Shell has pledged to reduce its methane leaks to less than 0.2 per cent by 2025, its US president, Gretchen Watkins, said in a statement shared with media on Thursday. "Despite the administration's proposal to no longer regulate methane, Shell's US assets will continue to contribute to that global target," she said. Asked about this opposition from the very sector the regulation was supposed to be benefiting, EPA official Anne Idsal said: "They're not the only ones within that particular space. You've got small and midsize companies as well. "We don't preclude anybody from going above and beyond," she said. Like carbon dioxide, methane is a greenhouse gas that contributes to global climate change. But its potency in trapping heat is about 84–87 times greater than carbon dioxide over a 20-year-period, falling to 28–36 times greater over 100 years, according to United Nations figures.

The US rolls back regulations on industrial methane leaks

US&nbsp;Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt's security detail has cost taxpayers well over $3 million so far, up sharply from his predecessor during an equivalent period, according to details released by the agency, which said Pruitt's life had been threatened.

Pruitt, who environmental groups have accused of lax enforcement and cozy ties with industry, requested 24-hour protection beginning on his first day in office. It was an unusual measure for the nation's top environmental regulator, and Pruitt and the agency have said it was justified by a high number of threats to his life.

"Administrator Pruitt has faced an unprecedented amount of death threats against him and to provide transparency EPA will post the costs of his security detail and pro-actively release these numbers on a quarterly basis," EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said in an emailed statement.

"Americans should all agree that members of the President's cabinet should be kept safe from violent threats,” he added.

Payroll for the EPA administrator's security detail cost taxpayers $3.43 million between the first quarter of 2017 through the second quarter of 2018, according to the figures, released as part of a Freedom of Information Act request. That compares with $2.48 million spent on his predecessor Gina McCarthy during the first six quarters of her tenure, which began in the middle of 2013, according to the figures.

Travel for the administrator's security detail, meanwhile, has amounted to $935,636 since the start of 2017, compared to $390,924 during the equivalent period for McCarthy, according to the figures.

Pruitt's spending on security, first-class air travel and office renovations, has been subject to intense scrutiny from lawmakers. Many Democrats and a handful of Republicans have called for his resignation over the issue.

EPA's Office of Inspector General has said Pruitt, who has been actively pursuing President Donald Trump's agenda to roll back environmental regulation and boost industry, has received many times more threats than previous EPA chiefs, a lot of them in the form of email and social media posts.

Trump has expressed support for Pruitt, saying he is doing a "fantastic" job at EPA. Some other top administration officials have resigned or been fired over spending scandals.

Scott Pruitt requested 24-hour protection beginning on his first day in office

US Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt's security detail has cost taxpayers well over $3 million so far, up sharply from his predecessor during an equivalent period, according to details released by the agency, which said Pruitt's life had been threatened. Pruitt, who environmental groups have accused of lax enforcement and cozy ties with industry, requested 24-hour protection beginning on his first day in office. It was an unusual measure for the nation's top environmental regulator, and Pruitt and the agency have said it was justified by a high number of threats to his life. "Administrator Pruitt has faced an unprecedented amount of death threats against him and to provide transparency EPA will post the costs of his security detail and pro-actively release these numbers on a quarterly basis," EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said in an emailed statement. "Americans should all agree that members of the President's cabinet should be kept safe from violent threats,” he added. Payroll for the EPA administrator's security detail cost taxpayers $3.43 million between the first quarter of 2017 through the second quarter of 2018, according to the figures, released as part of a Freedom of Information Act request. That compares with $2.48 million spent on his predecessor Gina McCarthy during the first six quarters of her tenure, which began in the middle of 2013, according to the figures. Travel for the administrator's security detail, meanwhile, has amounted to $935,636 since the start of 2017, compared to $390,924 during the equivalent period for McCarthy, according to the figures. Pruitt's spending on security, first-class air travel and office renovations, has been subject to intense scrutiny from lawmakers. Many Democrats and a handful of Republicans have called for his resignation over the issue. EPA's Office of Inspector General has said Pruitt, who has been actively pursuing President Donald Trump's agenda to roll back environmental regulation and boost industry, has received many times more threats than previous EPA chiefs, a lot of them in the form of email and social media posts. Trump has expressed support for Pruitt, saying he is doing a "fantastic" job at EPA. Some other top administration officials have resigned or been fired over spending scandals.

US EPA chief Scott Pruitt's security bill soars, agency cites death threats

By:&nbsp;Richard E. Peltier*

Not a day seems to go by without a story of an "airpocalypse," usually somewhere in a developing nation. It's hard not to empathize with the people in the smoggy images of New Delhi or Ulaanbataar or Kathmandu, often wearing masks, walking to school or work through soupy cloudiness.

Last year, a study found that more than 8 million people per year die early from air pollution exposure. This amounts to more deaths than the diarrheal disease, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS combined.

As a researcher in air pollution and its health effects, I know that even if you don't live in these places, air pollution likely still affects your quality of life. Here's what you need to know.

1. What exactly is air pollution?

Air pollution is a general term that usually describes a mixture of different chemicals that circulate in the air.

Invisible gases, like ozone or carbon monoxide, and tiny particles or droplets of liquids mix together in the atmosphere. Each molecule is impossible to see with the naked eye, but when trillions gather together, you can see them as haze.

These chemicals are almost always mixed together in varying amounts. Scientists do not yet understand how these different mixtures affect us. Each person responds differently to air pollution exposure – some people have few effects, while others, such as kids with asthma, might become very ill.

What's more, air pollution mixtures in a given location change over time. Changes can occur quickly over a few hours or gradually over months.

Short-term increases in air pollution from, for example, heavy traffic in rush hour, can make us sick. Such pollution occurs year-round. But seasonal pollutants, such as ozone, usually occur only in the warmest and sunniest parts of the year. What's more, the amount of ozone in the air also goes up and down through the day – generally highest in the afternoons and lowest in the early mornings.

These variations can make it quite difficult for environmental health scientists and epidemiologists to know precisely how air pollution can affect humans.

A calendar showing particulate matter concentration in Ulaanbataar, Mongolia in 2017. Note the highest concentrations appear in wintertime. The unusual increase in pollution in July corresponds with a Mongolian holiday.

2. Where does air pollution come from?

You might imagine air pollution as smoke pouring out of a factory chimney or the tailpipe of a car.

While these are important sources of air pollution, there are many others. Air pollution includes chemicals humans put into the atmosphere and chemicals released by natural events. For example, forest fires are a large source of air pollutants that affect many communities. Dust that's picked up by wind can also contribute to poor air quality.

Ronald Reagan famously said that "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." While this myth has been debunked, he was right in at least some ways. Trees do release certain gases, such as volatile organic carbon, that are ingredients in air pollution chemistry. This, when mixed together with emissions from cars and industry, leads to increases in other types of pollution, such as ozone.

There isn't much that scientists can, or should, do about tree emissions. Public health researchers like myself focus most on the ingredients from human activities – from burning petroleum to emissions controls on industrial facilities – because these are sources located close to where people live and work.

There are also many chemical reactions that occur in the air itself. These reactions create what are known as secondary pollutants, some of which are quite toxic.

Finally, it's important to realize that air pollution knows no boundaries. If a pollutant is emitted in one location, it very easily moves across borders – both regional and national – to different places. New Delhi, for example, experiences seasonal pollution, thanks to extensive burning of agricultural fields some 200 miles away.

New Delhi is an extreme example. But, even if you live in a less polluted environment, pollutants emitted elsewhere often travel to where other people live and work, as seen in recent wildfires in California.

3. How do we know that air pollution causes problems?

This is a tricky question, because air pollution is a hidden problem that acts as a trigger for many health problems. Plenty of people suffer from asthma and lung diseases, heart attacks and cancer, and all of these are linked to particulate matter exposure. The best evidence to date suggests that the higher the dose of air pollution, the worse our response will be.

Unfortunately, there are many other things that lead to these diseases, too: poor diet, your inherited genes, or whether you have access to high quality medical care or you smoke cigarettes, for example. This makes figuring out the cause of a specific illness attributed to air pollution exposure much more difficult.

Every health study provides a slightly different result, because each study observes a different group of people and usually different types of air pollution. Scientists usually report their results based on any change in risk of developing a disease from air pollution, or based on whether your odds of developing a certain disease might change.

For example, a study in Taiwan looked at concentrations of particulate matter averaged over two years. The researchers found that, for every 10 micrograms per cubic meter increase in particulate matter, the odds of developing high blood pressure increased by about 3 percent. This could suggest that if an increase of particulate matter concentration in any community might lead to an increase in high blood pressure.

Conversely, scientists usually assume that decreases in air pollution lead to decreases in diseases.

4. Why does this matter to you?

A typical adult takes around 20,000 breaths per day. Whether or not you become sick from air pollution depends on the amount and type of chemicals you inhale, and whether you might be susceptible to these diseases.

For someone living in polluted New Delhi, for example, those 20,000 breaths include the equivalent of around 20 grains of table salt worth of particulate matter deposited in their lungs each day. While this may not seem like much, keep in mind that this particulate matter isn’t harmless table salt – it's a mixture of chemicals that come from burning materials, unburned oils, metals and even biological material.

And this doesn’t include any of the pollutants that are gases, like ozone or carbon monoxide or oxides of nitrogen.

The U.S. and Europe have made excellent progress in reducing air pollution concentrations over the past couple of decades, largely by crafting effective air quality regulation.

However, in the U.S. today, where environmental laws are being methodically dismantled, there is a bigger worry that policymakers are simply choosing to ignore science. One new member of the Environmental Protection Agency’s science advisory board is Robert Phalen of the University of California, Irvine, who has suggested that "modern air is too clean for optimum health."

This goes against thousands of research papers and is certainly not true. While some components of air pollution have little effect on human health, this should not be used to muddy our understanding of air pollution exposure. This is a common tactic to confuse the public with unimportant statistics in order to sow confusion, presumably with an underlying intent to influence policy.

The evidence is clear: Air pollution exposure is lethal and causes death across the world. That should be important to all of us.

*Richard E. Peltier is an Associate Professor of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst

(This article was originally published on <a href="http://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a>. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/is-air-pollution-making-you-sick-4-questions-answered-91605">original article</a>.)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

A study found that more than 8 million people per year die early from air pollution exposure

By: Richard E. Peltier* Not a day seems to go by without a story of an "airpocalypse," usually somewhere in a developing nation. It's hard not to empathize with the people in the smoggy images of New Delhi or Ulaanbataar or Kathmandu, often wearing masks, walking to school or work through soupy cloudiness. Last year, a study found that more than 8 million people per year die early from air pollution exposure. This amounts to more deaths than the diarrheal disease, tuberculosis and HIV/AIDS combined. As a researcher in air pollution and its health effects, I know that even if you don't live in these places, air pollution likely still affects your quality of life. Here's what you need to know. 1. What exactly is air pollution? Air pollution is a general term that usually describes a mixture of different chemicals that circulate in the air. Invisible gases, like ozone or carbon monoxide, and tiny particles or droplets of liquids mix together in the atmosphere. Each molecule is impossible to see with the naked eye, but when trillions gather together, you can see them as haze. These chemicals are almost always mixed together in varying amounts. Scientists do not yet understand how these different mixtures affect us. Each person responds differently to air pollution exposure – some people have few effects, while others, such as kids with asthma, might become very ill. What's more, air pollution mixtures in a given location change over time. Changes can occur quickly over a few hours or gradually over months. Short-term increases in air pollution from, for example, heavy traffic in rush hour, can make us sick. Such pollution occurs year-round. But seasonal pollutants, such as ozone, usually occur only in the warmest and sunniest parts of the year. What's more, the amount of ozone in the air also goes up and down through the day – generally highest in the afternoons and lowest in the early mornings. These variations can make it quite difficult for environmental health scientists and epidemiologists to know precisely how air pollution can affect humans. A calendar showing particulate matter concentration in Ulaanbataar, Mongolia in 2017. Note the highest concentrations appear in wintertime. The unusual increase in pollution in July corresponds with a Mongolian holiday. 2. Where does air pollution come from? You might imagine air pollution as smoke pouring out of a factory chimney or the tailpipe of a car. While these are important sources of air pollution, there are many others. Air pollution includes chemicals humans put into the atmosphere and chemicals released by natural events. For example, forest fires are a large source of air pollutants that affect many communities. Dust that's picked up by wind can also contribute to poor air quality. Ronald Reagan famously said that "trees cause more pollution than automobiles do." While this myth has been debunked, he was right in at least some ways. Trees do release certain gases, such as volatile organic carbon, that are ingredients in air pollution chemistry. This, when mixed together with emissions from cars and industry, leads to increases in other types of pollution, such as ozone. There isn't much that scientists can, or should, do about tree emissions. Public health researchers like myself focus most on the ingredients from human activities – from burning petroleum to emissions controls on industrial facilities – because these are sources located close to where people live and work. There are also many chemical reactions that occur in the air itself. These reactions create what are known as secondary pollutants, some of which are quite toxic. Finally, it's important to realize that air pollution knows no boundaries. If a pollutant is emitted in one location, it very easily moves across borders – both regional and national – to different places. New Delhi, for example, experiences seasonal pollution, thanks to extensive burning of agricultural fields some 200 miles away. New Delhi is an extreme example. But, even if you live in a less polluted environment, pollutants emitted elsewhere often travel to where other people live and work, as seen in recent wildfires in California. 3. How do we know that air pollution causes problems? This is a tricky question, because air pollution is a hidden problem that acts as a trigger for many health problems. Plenty of people suffer from asthma and lung diseases, heart attacks and cancer, and all of these are linked to particulate matter exposure. The best evidence to date suggests that the higher the dose of air pollution, the worse our response will be. Unfortunately, there are many other things that lead to these diseases, too: poor diet, your inherited genes, or whether you have access to high quality medical care or you smoke cigarettes, for example. This makes figuring out the cause of a specific illness attributed to air pollution exposure much more difficult. Every health study provides a slightly different result, because each study observes a different group of people and usually different types of air pollution. Scientists usually report their results based on any change in risk of developing a disease from air pollution, or based on whether your odds of developing a certain disease might change. For example, a study in Taiwan looked at concentrations of particulate matter averaged over two years. The researchers found that, for every 10 micrograms per cubic meter increase in particulate matter, the odds of developing high blood pressure increased by about 3 percent. This could suggest that if an increase of particulate matter concentration in any community might lead to an increase in high blood pressure. Conversely, scientists usually assume that decreases in air pollution lead to decreases in diseases. 4. Why does this matter to you? A typical adult takes around 20,000 breaths per day. Whether or not you become sick from air pollution depends on the amount and type of chemicals you inhale, and whether you might be susceptible to these diseases. For someone living in polluted New Delhi, for example, those 20,000 breaths include the equivalent of around 20 grains of table salt worth of particulate matter deposited in their lungs each day. While this may not seem like much, keep in mind that this particulate matter isn’t harmless table salt – it's a mixture of chemicals that come from burning materials, unburned oils, metals and even biological material. And this doesn’t include any of the pollutants that are gases, like ozone or carbon monoxide or oxides of nitrogen. The U.S. and Europe have made excellent progress in reducing air pollution concentrations over the past couple of decades, largely by crafting effective air quality regulation. However, in the U.S. today, where environmental laws are being methodically dismantled, there is a bigger worry that policymakers are simply choosing to ignore science. One new member of the Environmental Protection Agency’s science advisory board is Robert Phalen of the University of California, Irvine, who has suggested that "modern air is too clean for optimum health." This goes against thousands of research papers and is certainly not true. While some components of air pollution have little effect on human health, this should not be used to muddy our understanding of air pollution exposure. This is a common tactic to confuse the public with unimportant statistics in order to sow confusion, presumably with an underlying intent to influence policy. The evidence is clear: Air pollution exposure is lethal and causes death across the world. That should be important to all of us. *Richard E. Peltier is an Associate Professor of Environmental Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst (This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Opinion: Is air pollution making you sick? 4 questions answered

The rapid pace of global climate change is almost certainly driven by human activity, like burning fossil fuels, according to a US government report that contradicts assertions by President Donald Trump and members of his administration.

&quot;For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence,&quot; said the report by a group of more than 50 US&nbsp;government scientists released on Friday.

The report, which is required by Congress every four years, was written by scientists from government bodies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

It reinforces the conclusions drawn by an overwhelming majority of scientists around the world in recent years that emissions from burning fossil fuels are the primary driver of global warming, leading to sea level rise, flooding, droughts, and more frequent powerful storms.

Trump has repeatedly called climate change a hoax, and in June announced that he would withdraw the United States from a global pact to combat it - calling the deal&#39;s demands for emissions cuts too costly for the US&nbsp;economy.

War-torn Syria is the only other country outside the pact.

The US&nbsp;withdrawal from the Paris Climate Deal was part of a broader White House effort to roll back what it sees as unneeded environmental protections to boost domestic oil and gas drilling and coal mining.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has also expressed doubts about the causes of climate change, at one point saying he did not believe carbon dioxide from human activity was the primary driver, and calling for further debate on the issue.

In an emailed statement, White House spokesman Raj Shah said: &quot;The Administration supports rigorous scientific analysis and debate and encourages public comment on the draft documents being released today.&quot;

Officials at the EPA declined to comment.

According to the report, global temperatures have increased by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degree Celsius) over the last 115 years, while global average sea levels have risen about 7 inches (17.78 cm) over the same period.

Sea levels are expected to rise &quot;at least several inches in the next 15 years&quot; due to rising temperatures, it added.

The rapid pace of global climate change is almost certainly driven by human activity, like burning fossil fuels, according to? US government report that contradicts assertions by President Donald Trump and members of his administration.

The rapid pace of global climate change is almost certainly driven by human activity, like burning fossil fuels, according to a US government report that contradicts assertions by President Donald Trump and members of his administration. "For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence," said the report by a group of more than 50 US government scientists released on Friday. The report, which is required by Congress every four years, was written by scientists from government bodies such as the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. It reinforces the conclusions drawn by an overwhelming majority of scientists around the world in recent years that emissions from burning fossil fuels are the primary driver of global warming, leading to sea level rise, flooding, droughts, and more frequent powerful storms. Trump has repeatedly called climate change a hoax, and in June announced that he would withdraw the United States from a global pact to combat it - calling the deal's demands for emissions cuts too costly for the US economy. War-torn Syria is the only other country outside the pact. The US withdrawal from the Paris Climate Deal was part of a broader White House effort to roll back what it sees as unneeded environmental protections to boost domestic oil and gas drilling and coal mining. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has also expressed doubts about the causes of climate change, at one point saying he did not believe carbon dioxide from human activity was the primary driver, and calling for further debate on the issue. In an emailed statement, White House spokesman Raj Shah said: "The Administration supports rigorous scientific analysis and debate and encourages public comment on the draft documents being released today." Officials at the EPA declined to comment. According to the report, global temperatures have increased by about 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit (1 degree Celsius) over the last 115 years, while global average sea levels have risen about 7 inches (17.78 cm) over the same period. Sea levels are expected to rise "at least several inches in the next 15 years" due to rising temperatures, it added.

In a clash with Trump, US report says humans cause climate change

The US Senate confirmed President Donald Trump&#39;s pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency on Friday over the objections of Democrats and environmentalists worried he will gut the agency, as the administration readies executive orders to ease regulation on drillers and miners.

Senators voted 52-46 to approve Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt. Senator John Barrasso, a Republican and the head of the chamber&#39;s environment committee, said Pruitt would improve the EPA by reforming and modernising it. 
&nbsp; 
Only one Republican, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, voted against Pruitt. Two Democrats from energy-producing states, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, voted for his confirmation.

Pruitt was to be sworn in later on Friday afternoon.

The nomination of Pruitt, who sued the EPA more than a dozen times on behalf of his oil-producing state and has doubted the science of climate change, sparked widespread concern in progressive circles, and has upset many former and current agency employees.&nbsp;

Nearly 800 former EPA staff urged the Senate to reject him in a letter this week, saying Pruitt had &quot;shown no interest in enforcing environmental laws&quot;. Earlier this month, about 30 current employees at an EPA regional office in Chicago joined a protest against Pruitt held by green groups.

Trump is likely to issue executive orders as soon as next week to reshape the EPA, sources said.

The Republican president has promised to kill former Democratic President Barack Obama&#39;s Clean Power Plan, currently held up in the courts, that aims to slash carbon emissions from coal and natural gas fired power plants.&nbsp;

Trump also wants to give states more authority over environmental issues by striking down federal regulations on drilling technologies and getting rid of an Obama rule that sought to clarify the EPA&#39;s jurisdiction over streams and rivers.

Overzealous Agency

Conservatives warmly welcomed Pruitt&#39;s confirmation.&nbsp;

&quot;For far too long the EPA has acted in an overzealous manner, ignoring the separation of powers, the role of states and the rights property owners,&quot; said Nick Loris, an economist at the Heritage Foundation.&nbsp;

Democratic Senator Ben Cardin, however, said he was concerned that if the administration does not enforce emissions cuts such as outlined in the Clean Power Plan, it would increase US pollution and harm the country&#39;s leadership in international efforts to curb climate change.&nbsp;

Opponents of Pruitt also protested his ties to the energy industry. Republicans have the majority in the Senate, but Democrats spoke through Thursday night and Friday morning on the Senate floor, trying to extend debate on Pruitt until later in February when 3,000 emails between him and energy companies will likely be revealed by a judge.&nbsp;

An Oklahoma judge ruled this week that Pruitt will have to turn over the emails between his office and energy companies by Tuesday after a watchdog group, the Center for Media and Democracy, sued for their release. The judge will review the emails before releasing them.

Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer told reporters that Majority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell had moved to &quot;strap blinders&quot; on his fellow Republicans by not waiting for the release of Pruitt`s emails.

Environmentalists decried the approval. &quot;If you don&rsquo;t believe in climate science, you don&rsquo;t belong at the EPA,&quot; said May Boeve, the head of environmentalist group 350.org.

(Reuters)

Senators voted 52-46 to approve Oklahoma attorney general Scott Pruitt

The US Senate confirmed President Donald Trump's pick to run the Environmental Protection Agency on Friday over the objections of Democrats and environmentalists worried he will gut the agency, as the administration readies executive orders to ease regulation on drillers and miners. Senators voted 52-46 to approve Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt. Senator John Barrasso, a Republican and the head of the chamber's environment committee, said Pruitt would improve the EPA by reforming and modernising it. Only one Republican, Senator Susan Collins of Maine, voted against Pruitt. Two Democrats from energy-producing states, Joe Manchin of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, voted for his confirmation. Pruitt was to be sworn in later on Friday afternoon. The nomination of Pruitt, who sued the EPA more than a dozen times on behalf of his oil-producing state and has doubted the science of climate change, sparked widespread concern in progressive circles, and has upset many former and current agency employees. Nearly 800 former EPA staff urged the Senate to reject him in a letter this week, saying Pruitt had "shown no interest in enforcing environmental laws". Earlier this month, about 30 current employees at an EPA regional office in Chicago joined a protest against Pruitt held by green groups. Trump is likely to issue executive orders as soon as next week to reshape the EPA, sources said. The Republican president has promised to kill former Democratic President Barack Obama's Clean Power Plan, currently held up in the courts, that aims to slash carbon emissions from coal and natural gas fired power plants. Trump also wants to give states more authority over environmental issues by striking down federal regulations on drilling technologies and getting rid of an Obama rule that sought to clarify the EPA's jurisdiction over streams and rivers. Overzealous Agency Conservatives warmly welcomed Pruitt's confirmation. "For far too long the EPA has acted in an overzealous manner, ignoring the separation of powers, the role of states and the rights property owners," said Nick Loris, an economist at the Heritage Foundation. Democratic Senator Ben Cardin, however, said he was concerned that if the administration does not enforce emissions cuts such as outlined in the Clean Power Plan, it would increase US pollution and harm the country's leadership in international efforts to curb climate change. Opponents of Pruitt also protested his ties to the energy industry. Republicans have the majority in the Senate, but Democrats spoke through Thursday night and Friday morning on the Senate floor, trying to extend debate on Pruitt until later in February when 3,000 emails between him and energy companies will likely be revealed by a judge. An Oklahoma judge ruled this week that Pruitt will have to turn over the emails between his office and energy companies by Tuesday after a watchdog group, the Center for Media and Democracy, sued for their release. The judge will review the emails before releasing them. Democratic Senate leader Chuck Schumer told reporters that Majority Leader Senator Mitch McConnell had moved to "strap blinders" on his fellow Republicans by not waiting for the release of Pruitt`s emails. Environmentalists decried the approval. "If you don’t believe in climate science, you don’t belong at the EPA," said May Boeve, the head of environmentalist group 350.org. (Reuters)

US Senate confirms Trump's pick for Environmental Protection Agency

A US judge extended the deadline for Volkswagen, US government regulators and owners of 2.0 litre cars&nbsp;to reach a final diesel emissions settlement until June 28. 
 
The tentative settlement announced in April includes an offer by Volkswagen to buy back nearly 500,000 polluting vehicles, as well as an environmental remediation fund to address excess emissions and a fund to promote green automotive technology. 
 
In April, US district judge Charles Breyer&nbsp;set a June-21 deadline to publicly file the final settlement, but in the Wednesday order he agreed to extend the deadline by one week to complete the complex agreement. 
 
Breyer said in a written order he was extending the deadline at the request of former FBI director Robert S&nbsp;Mueller, who has been acting as the court-appointed mediator, and &quot;given the highly technical nature of the proposed settlements in these complex proceedings.&quot; 
 
The US Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board, US Justice Department, Federal Trade Commission and lawyers representing owners have been working for weeks to hammer out the final agreements. 
 
Two sources briefed on the talks say the agreement is still on track to be finalised. 
 
Volkswagen spokeswoman Jeannine Ginivan noted that the delay was at the request of the FBI&#39;s Mueller. 
 
&quot;We thank our customers for their continued patience as the process of finalising agreements moves forward,&quot; Ginivan&nbsp;said. 
 
The settlement also will include an option to eventually get cars repaired if regulators approve a fix. Owners will get &quot;substantial monetary compensation&quot;, Breyer said in April. 
 
In April, Volkswagen said it would set aside 16.2 billion Euros ($18.2 billion) and slash its dividend to cover the costs from Dieselgate -- including nearly 8 billion Euros to cover buying back and fixing polluting vehicles. 
 
The initial settlement to be announced later this month is not expected to address about 80,000 larger Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche 3.0 litre vehicles with separate undisclosed software that allowed vehicles to emit up to nine times legally allowable pollution. Those vehicles are expected to be addressed at a later date. 
 
Another issue that would not be resolved until later is how much Volkswagen will pay in fines for admitting to violating the Clean Air Act, sources said. The EPA said in September 2015 that VW could face up to $18 billion in fines for installing the cheating software. 
 
After it is finalised, the agreement faces a public comment period and must get final judicial approval, which could come at a July 26 hearing. Judge Breyer did not delay that hearing. 
 
VW also faces an ongoing criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. 
(Reuters)

Volkswagen has offered to buy back about 500,000 polluting cars

A US judge extended the deadline for Volkswagen, US government regulators and owners of 2.0 litre cars to reach a final diesel emissions settlement until June 28. The tentative settlement announced in April includes an offer by Volkswagen to buy back nearly 500,000 polluting vehicles, as well as an environmental remediation fund to address excess emissions and a fund to promote green automotive technology. In April, US district judge Charles Breyer set a June-21 deadline to publicly file the final settlement, but in the Wednesday order he agreed to extend the deadline by one week to complete the complex agreement. Breyer said in a written order he was extending the deadline at the request of former FBI director Robert S Mueller, who has been acting as the court-appointed mediator, and "given the highly technical nature of the proposed settlements in these complex proceedings." The US Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board, US Justice Department, Federal Trade Commission and lawyers representing owners have been working for weeks to hammer out the final agreements. Two sources briefed on the talks say the agreement is still on track to be finalised. Volkswagen spokeswoman Jeannine Ginivan noted that the delay was at the request of the FBI's Mueller. "We thank our customers for their continued patience as the process of finalising agreements moves forward," Ginivan said. The settlement also will include an option to eventually get cars repaired if regulators approve a fix. Owners will get "substantial monetary compensation", Breyer said in April. In April, Volkswagen said it would set aside 16.2 billion Euros ($18.2 billion) and slash its dividend to cover the costs from Dieselgate -- including nearly 8 billion Euros to cover buying back and fixing polluting vehicles. The initial settlement to be announced later this month is not expected to address about 80,000 larger Volkswagen, Audi and Porsche 3.0 litre vehicles with separate undisclosed software that allowed vehicles to emit up to nine times legally allowable pollution. Those vehicles are expected to be addressed at a later date. Another issue that would not be resolved until later is how much Volkswagen will pay in fines for admitting to violating the Clean Air Act, sources said. The EPA said in September 2015 that VW could face up to $18 billion in fines for installing the cheating software. After it is finalised, the agreement faces a public comment period and must get final judicial approval, which could come at a July 26 hearing. Judge Breyer did not delay that hearing. VW also faces an ongoing criminal investigation by the U.S. Justice Department. (Reuters)

US judge extends VW diesel emissions settlement deadline