EWG staffers put our heads together to come up with this list of bad news environmental stories of the last decade that people might have missed. But there were plenty of big stories that hardly anyone could have missed, such as climate change. What's on your list of the biggest environmental stories of the last 10 years?

1. Secret Gas Drilling Chemical Almost Kills Colorado Nurse
Doctors ran into a medical mystery -- and a stone wall from industry -- when they tried to find what was in a gas drilling chemical that nearly killed a Colorado nurse. Aren't you glad that Congress exempted these "fracking" chemicals from regulation under the Safe Water Drinking Act?

2. Intersex Fish Turn Up All Over
Are you a boy or are you a girl? That's the question that scientists are asking as they study the organs of supposedly male fish from coast to coast and find eggs in many of them. The chief suspects: endocrine-disrupting pollutants that even in tiny amounts can mimic hormones and affect sexual development.

3. Prescription Drugs in Your Drinking Water
Take a swallow and call me in the morning. Antibiotics, anti-convulsants, mood stabilizers and sex hormones - they've all turned up in tests of drinking water around the country. Could there be health risks from decades of drinking water laced with combinations of potent drugs?

4. And Rocket Fuel, Too
Perchlorate -- the stuff is used in rocket fuel and explosives and turns up not just in water but also in milk, lettuce, other foods - and in our bodies. It's been linked to thyroid problems in pregnant women, newborns and infants. The EPA is reconsidering its earlier decision not to regulate it in water. Stand by.

5. Ethanol -- Not Just Bad Energy Policy
There are a lot of reasons to question the drive for biofuels, especially corn-based ethanol, but there has been much less attention paid to what it means for air pollution and health. For people who like to breathe clean air, the balance doesn't look promising.

6. Non-stick, No-Stain and No-Good
They were the miracle products that were supposed to make life easier - keeping spills from staining our couches and making it easy to clean our pots without scrubbing -- until it all went sour. Chemicals in the original Teflon and now off-the-market Scotchgard were linked to cancer and developmental problems. They have a way of polluting everything and they refuse to go away.

7. Monsanto Owns Corn (and also soybeans)
80% of the corn and 95% percent of the soybeans grown in America contain genes inserted by Monsanto scientists, and the company writes tough - and secret - licensing agreements to maintain control and lock out competitors. Now the Justice Department and some states are thinking these practices might violate anti-trust laws. Turnips, anyone?

8. Occupational Hazard: Microwave Popcorn
This fun food turned to be no fun for people who make it. A strange lung malady that sickened workers in plants that make microwave popcorn was traced to a widely used butter flavoring. And one popcorn-crazy consumer was felled, too. It took a while, but OSHA finally took a look, and the stuff is being phased out.

9. Dead (Zone) on Arrival
In the Gulf of Mexico, Chesapeake Bay and elsewhere, vast expanses of ocean have been turned into biological deserts as fertilizer runoff from farms washes downstream and nourish runaway algae growth, which deplete most of the oxygen when the tiny organisms die and decompose. The Gulf dead zone has more than doubled in size since the 1980s - accelerated by the boom in crops grown to make biofuels. In 2009, it was smaller than predicted, but more intense, in 2009.

10. The (Not So) Great Pacific Trash Gyre
It's hard to spot from the water or even from space, but an estimated 3.5 million tons of mostly plastic trash from all over the world floats just below the surface of the Pacific, swirling slowly around in an area of circular currents twice the size of Texas. It's devastating to birds and sea creatures that think the plastic bits are food. It's time to stop adding to the mess - and then see if there's any way to clean it up.

What stories top your list of the decade's biggest environmental news??

Special to Enviroblog by Dr. Anila Jacob

In a new report for Worldwatch Institute, Dr. Samuel Myers outlines the impacts of global environmental change on human health in compelling detail, from the increases in certain infectious diseases to food and water scarcity among vulnerable populations. Humans are changing the environment, both locally and globally, in unprecedented ways and the consequences of these changes are already being felt in many communities across the planet.

Call to action for wealthier nations
The health impacts of these environmental changes are especially severe for the poorest people on our planet; this point is especially poignant, given the fact that they contribute the least to these changes. One of Dr. Myers' main points in this report is that those of us who live in richer nations have a moral obligation to assist those in resource poor areas to adjust to global environmental changes that further worsen the divide between the rich and poor. At the same time, we must work diligently to decrease our sizable contribution to environmental degradation. In essence, this report is a call to action for definitive and committed action on the part of governments and individuals from wealthier nations.

Not just the environment -- it's our health, too
As I read this, I was struck by how unaware most Americans are about the public health implications of global environmental issues such as climate change and biodiversity loss. For too long, these issues have been viewed only as environmental issues when they are really public health issues as well.

While acknowledging the serious threat that global warming poses to wildlife such as polar bears, we can engage more of the public if we also increase awareness about the risks to people. For example, we should start to talk about global warming in the context of lung disease -- as temperatures get warmer, higher levels of ground level ozone and air pollutants such as sulfur dioxide form, leading to increased exacerbations of chronic lung diseases including asthma and emphysema. Chronic lung diseases currently affect 30 million Americans, including nearly 10% of children; engaging even a small proportion of this population in the fight against climate change can be very powerful.

We all must collaborate for action
If we are to tackle global environmental change in a meaningful way, we must involve and recruit as many people as possible to address these challenges. To do this, we have to increase awareness about the full nature of the threats posed by environmental degradation.

Discussing environmental issues in the context of public health will allow us to engage diverse groups of people, including physicians, public health advocates, parents, and health-affected communities who may not currently be engaged on environmental issues. This is the only way in which we can affect the dramatic actions necessary to address global environmental changes with the commitment and urgency they require.

Thanks Flickr and davidgsteadman for the photo!

Not enough bad news in last few days? Read on.

A recent report by the United Nations Environment Program(UNEP) predicts that food production worldwide may fall 25 percent by 2050. At the same time, the prices will rise up to 30 -50 percent, and the population will increase by millions.

The loss is due to climate change, land degradation, water scarcity and degradation, among other things. The global economic downturn is not helping either, as well as our general mentality of not working with the nature but against it.

The reports calls for price regulations of commodities, as well as safety nets for those most at risk from hunger. According to UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director Achim Steinerm, we need "a Green revolution in a Green Economy but one with a capital G". He adds that "simply ratcheting up the fertilizer and pesticide-led production methods of the 20th Century is unlikely to address the challenge. It will increasingly undermine the critical natural inputs and nature-based services for agriculture such as healthy and productive soils, the water and nutrient recycling of forests, and pollinators such as bees and bats."

To read the report, check out UNEP web site

Our new year's resolution: build on the accomplishments of 2008 to make 2009 the year we turn the corner on crucial environmental issues facing our society. We scored breakthroughs on a range of problems last year. Among them:

Advancing the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act.
EWG's work on toxic chemicals spurred the reintroduction of the Kid-Safe Chemicals Act and its requirement of mandatory biomonitoring of industrial chemicals in people. EWG briefed Congressional staff members on the legislation, that aims to replace the weak Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976. In the next Congress, EWG plans to organize briefings and push for hearings and passage of the bill.

Progressing toward a ban of toxic plastic chemical BPA.
On October 31, the Science Board of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued a stinging rebuke to the agency and embraced EWG arguments that bisphenol-A (BPA), a synthetic estrogen used to make polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resin may be a threat to human health. The panel forced FDA to retreat from its stance that trace levels of BPA are safe in food packaging, including infant formula cans and baby bottles. EWG scientists testified, wrote comments and served on the expert panel for the Science Board.

In September, the National Institutes of Health's National Toxicology Program (NTP)declared that BPA, shown in laboratory tests to disrupt the endocrine system, may alter brain development, cause behavioral problems and damage the prostate glands in fetuses, infants and young children.

In 2009, EWG will work with Congressional leaders and the Obama administration to press for a federal ban of BPA in food packaging and other products that expose children and pregnant women to the chemical.

With strong advocacy by EWG's California office, the California assembly office came close to passing the first state-level BPA ban. In 2009, 13 state legislatures are expected to consider similar measures.

Blowing the whistle on FDA plan to push mercury-laced seafood.
On December 12, the Environmental Working Group made public internal government documents disclosing the Food and Drug Administration's secret plans to reverse federal warnings that pregnant women and children limit their fish intake to avoid mercury, a neurotoxin especially dangerous to the fetus and infants. EWG obtained both the FDA plan, stamped "CLOSE HOLD," and memos by senior Environmental Protection Agency scientists attacking FDA's rationale. The Washington Post broke the story, and other national stories followed.

Reaction from Capitol Hill was swift and sharp. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., denounced FDA: "Now, in the administration's 11th hour, they are quietly trying to water down advisories for women and children about the dangers of mercury in fish, disregarding sound science on this issue....This backroom bouquet for special interests should be stopped in its tracks. If they slip this through, I will work with the incoming Obama Administration to restore science-based decisions on mercury."

European bees are dying. Just in last two years, Italy has lost almost half its bees. There are many reasons for this trend -- climate change, pesticide use in agriculture, changing diets and genetically modified crops are just some of them.

In an effort to counter this grave situation, the European parliament is moving to create "recovery zones" for bees across Europe. The zones will be protected areas where pesticides are banned and there will be plenty of plants with nectar and pollen.

You know, like fields used to be.

I am a big fan of modern technology and innovation. My late grandfather, a professor in the faculty of agriculture at the University of Belgrade, where I grew up, was a major inventor of farm machinery. His inventions helped Serbian agriculture develop and flourish and benefited countless people.

But I can't help but wonder, where does progress stop and environmental destruction begin?! Also, if bees are suffering so much, what short and long-term effects do advances in large-scale agriculture have on humans?

The Christian Science Monitor recently reported that three-fourths of food produced in Europe depends on bees and that European farmers have already lost $1.25 billion because of the bee crisis. Italy, the Monitor said, is particularly hard hit, with $100 million in agriculture sector losses to date.

This is not a problem confined to Europe. Bees are disappearing worldwide. The world's agriculture practices have been unsustainable for the bees and to the land. Since 80 percent of our food relies on pollination at some point, according to the book Fruitless Fall, it is past time to for our farming practices to become sustainable, organic and local.

Sacramento's not such a bad place: The summer heat and lousy air quality are balanced by the outdoor recreational opportunities and an unpretentious, small-town feel. But if you're a international movie star used to the bright lights of Hollywood and you somehow get yourself elected governor of California, surely you can't be expected to actually live there.

The first governor to fit that description, Ronald Reagan, had nothing against Sacramento per se, but Nancy found the historic governor's mansion near the Capitol a dump. The state built a new residence in the suburbs that became a white elephant after Jerry Brown decided he preferred a mattress on the floor of a studio apartment. Today we have Arnold Schwarzenegger, who at first toyed with the idea of buying a home and moving his family to Sacramento, then took up residence in a hotel penthouse across the street from his office. But he missed his kids in Brentwood, and he already had a private jet at his disposal, so of late he's been flying home at night and back in the morning. It's a three-hour round trip, not that extreme a commute in California today.

The governor pays for his jet-set commute from his own pocket -- more than half-a-million dollars a year. But wait? Isn't this the same Arnold Schwarzenegger who last year was featured on magazine covers as an environmental hero? The same one who flexed his muscles to lead California's fight against global warming? The one who must be aware of the vast amount of global-warming gases and air pollution his jet is spewing?

Yep, same guy. The Los Angeles Times' Evan Halper and Michael Rothfield broke the story last week:

The governor's Gulfstream jet does nearly as much damage to the environment in one hour as a small car does in a year, according to figures compiled by the Helium Report, an online publication for buyers of luxury items.

Administration officials say Schwarzenegger is well aware of this and makes amends by purchasing pollution credits for the carbon dioxide his jet releases. The credits fund efforts worldwide to reduce greenhouse gases, such as projects that harness energy from wind, landfill gas and farm waste, although they don't eliminate the pollution from Schwarzenegger's plane.

Flying the Gulfstream and other jets the governor uses costs as much as $10,000 an hour. Some conservationists say Schwarzenegger is essentially attempting to buy a clean conscience with the carbon offsets, which cost about $43 an hour.

"He has been very bold on all these [environmental] initiatives, so it is sad to see him undercut that," said Denis Hayes, president of the Bullitt Foundation, a philanthropy that funds conservation efforts in Western states. "If you are going to be talking about an issue, you should be living the reality you are trying to embrace."

Don't get me started on pollution credits, but it's better than doing nothing. To be fair, Arnold shouldn't be singled out as the only climate hypocrite in government. Even the greenest members of Congress fly back to their home districts every weekend, and some members of the Legislature who live as far from Sacramento as the Bay Area drive back and forth every day, in state-supplied vehicles. As someone who lived in the Big Tomato for a few years, back when it was hard to find an espresso, I know about the lure of I-80 or Southwest Airlines on Friday afternoon. If you've got your own jet, why not every day?

Here's why not: This governor has gone out on a limb to promote himself as a global warming warrior. It's a laudable stance that has genuinely helped move America toward a greener politics. This latest flap is a rare PR slipup for a master of the game, but it could make some Californians – like, all of us who don't own a jet – think twice about how well his walk matches his talk.

We all know that rich and poor are differently affected by things in life. That fact is no different when we talk about the climate change, an issue that affects all of us. In fact, not only are they more affected then rich, but the world's poor might even need insurance to deal with their needs rising from the climate change.

The number of natural catastrophes is increasing and they are becoming more frequent and costly each year. It is becoming clear that demands for humanitarian assistance from consequences of the natural disasters will outgrow demands for war and conflicts assistance.

Migration will become another issue that will result from global warming. Not only animals and plants are moving away from the rising temperatures, humans have started doing the same. It is still early to have accurate projections, but some studies say that up to 50 million people could move from their homes because of climate change within near future.

While being the most affected and vulnerable from it, the poor are also least responsible for the causes. And we all know that governments usually don't pay much attention to them either.