Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Heat exposure, cloudy water, and bad air: The data gap of toxic prisons

News Feed
Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Since she began studying mechanical engineering as an undergraduate at Stanford University, Ufuoma Ovienmhada had little desire to build “tech for tech’s sake.” The university’s sustainability lab offered one route to the applied side of engineering that appealed to her. One summer, she worked with the lab’s researchers on a project in Ivory Coast, in West Africa, where she considered how engineering could be employed for sustainable development. Undergirding Ovienmhada’s academic work was a burgeoning political consciousness shaped by the police murders of unarmed Black people. In her recollection, her college tenure, between 2014 and 2018, was “the Black Lives Matter era of police violence being broadcast on social media every other week.” She regularly attended protests and participated in Black campus organizations where she and her peers frequently discussed police brutality. While researching policing protocols at Stanford, Ovienmhada remembers being told by a campus officer that someone walking down the street in a hoodie would automatically be considered suspicious. “You’re telling me that racism is embedded in how you operate,” she remembers thinking. Ovienmhada went on to enroll in a master’s program at the MIT Media Lab, where she studied the use of satellite imagery analysis to manage invasive species in the Republic of Benin. She was in school during yet another period of time punctuated by police murders — this time of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd. The unprecedented nationwide protests against police brutality in the summer of 2020 encouraged Ovienmhada to pivot from international development work to the domestic issues of policing and mass incarceration. She wanted to figure out how she could apply her skills as an engineer and programmer to address the problems that concerned her most deeply. As young people across the country took the streets to demand an end to racist and violent policing, Ovienmhada learned about the nascent field of prison ecology, which focuses on the environmental hazards within and around carceral facilities (prisons, jails, and immigrant detention centers) and how they affect incarcerated people and surrounding communities.  At the time, academic writings in prison ecology were limited to a handful of journal articles in the social sciences. It seemed to her that few were considering how to apply quantitative methods to uncover the environmental issues affecting incarcerated populations. There was a gap in the data, and she felt called to help fill it.  A mock prison cell, intended to simulate the heat inside Texas prisons, sits outside the Texas State Capitol building in Austin, Texas in July, 2023. SERGIO FLORES/AFP via Getty Images Though the world of academia was only beginning to wake up to the study of prison ecology, organizers working against mass incarceration had already spent years drawing connections between environmental justice issues and the conditions in prisons. Members of the national grassroots organization Fight Toxic Prisons, or FTP, which uses advocacy and direct action to challenge the prison system, were well aware of not only the litany of environmental hazards that incarcerated people in the U.S. face, but also the value of quantitative research and, in particular, geospatial analysis in shaping the work of the decarceration movement.  “There is so much about this issue that is very geographical,” said Mei Azaad, an organizer with the Fight Toxic Prisons, adding that so many of the environmental hazards in prisons come from their proximity to oil and gas infrastructure or to Superfund sites. The lack of data to inform them where specific environmental hazards were concentrated was “something we kept running up against,” she said. By 2020, FTP had been doing disaster response work for a few years, and they knew how useful it would be to have a flood risk map overlaid on top of a map of U.S. carceral facilities, something they could refer to when determining how to prioritize their advocacy efforts. Meanwhile, in the course of her own research, Ovienmhada realized that she could apply her knowledge of remote sensing, which enables practitioners to map a range of environmental indicators such as flood risk, air quality, and heat exposure to wide geographic areas, to contribute better applications of geospatial analysis. From her apartment in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Ovienmhada had been keeping up with FTP’s work. On social media, they often posted data and mapping-oriented information about prisons. She was initially hesitant to reach out to the group and offer her help — aware of the hesitation that community organizers often have toward academics. But, coincidentally, a friend who worked on FTP’s disaster response team heard about Ovienmhada’s satellite imagery-based approach to studying prison ecology, and offered to make the connection.  Ovienmhada joined FTP’s rapid response team in 2022, the year the Category 4 Hurricane Ian barreled through central Florida, taking out power in wide areas of the state, killing 149 people, and causing over $100 billion in damage. As the storm approached the Florida coast, she made a map showing that several of the state’s carceral facilities were in mandatory evacuation zones, but were not being evacuated. After a phone banking campaign in which they informed Tampa’s Hillsborough County Jail of the map they’d made, the facility decided to evacuate its incarcerated residents. “We can’t say that they did this because of FTP but it was cool to see this kind of map used to mobilize,” Ovienmhada said. The Toxic Mapping Project allows users to explore a range of environmental hazards in prisons. Over the past several years, a growing body of academic work has established that prisons expose incarcerated people to a long list of severe environmental hazards. A 2022 report from the American Journal of Public Health found that nearly half of the country’s prisons rely on water from sources contaminated with “forever chemicals,” toxic compounds that do not break down easily in the body and have been linked to serious health effects like cancer and kidney disease. Earlier this year, a group of researchers examined heat exposure for all 4,078 operational carceral facilities in the continental U.S. between the years 1982-2020, and found that prison populations are highly vulnerable to extreme heat exposure, a problem that is only increasing with the climate crisis. Though these kinds of research projects offer valuable insights into environmental conditions afflicting prisoners, Ovienmhada said, they do not often respond to the needs of groups like FTP that want to use satellite data to take immediate action against specific prisons and, ultimately, to advance decarceration.  Ovienmhada found that she enjoyed using the skills she’d developed to aid FTP’s organizing work. But the technical abilities to design maps and build models weren’t the only hurdles that the practical applications of prison ecology had to overcome. The programs and server space to build the maps can cost thousands. They needed money, which is often more readily available to research a problem than to do something about it.  Ovienmhada’s connection with FTP coincided with the Biden Administration’s big push for environmental justice, a span of several years that saw the formation of White House advisory committees on the issue and the dispersal of millions of federal dollars to research projects illuminating the disproportionate impacts of environmental stressors on communities of color across the country. For the first time, federal agencies were under a federal directive to support environmental justice initiatives. In April 2023, President Biden passed Executive order 14096, which directs the federal government to strengthen its commitment to environmental justice by funding scientific research and data collection initiatives, in addition to engaging with local communities. Ovienmhada was just starting her PhD in aerospace engineering when she noticed that NASA had published a solicitation for proposals from academics to use the agency’s satellite imagery to study environmental injustices. The highest tier of funding — $250,000 — was to be awarded to projects that developed a geospatial tool for integrating satellite data and other socioeconomic information around an environmental justice issue. It was the opportunity Ovienmhada and FTP had been waiting for. They quickly put together an application, in which they proposed a different approach to data gathering. Rather than just visualizing environmental-hazard data on top of a map of U.S. carceral facilities, they wanted to incorporate the voices of people held in those same facilities. This qualitative approach, they reasoned, would fill in gaps in their knowledge, illuminating problems that couldn’t be picked up by an infrared camera hovering in space. Several months after they submitted the application, they were informed that they’d won.  They saw the tool they wanted to develop as an intervention into the proliferation of data-driven mapping tools that government agencies and academics have built over the past four years, which illuminate disparities in environmental harm across the country but do little to compel suitable solutions. The federal Council on Environmental Quality, for instance, released the Climate & Economic Justice Screening Tool, an interface that explores the concentration of climate risk in low income communities. The Environmental Protection Agency also published a mapping tool called EJScreen, which allows users to track the geographic distribution of a range of environmental hazards and see how they’re concentrated in communities of color. Though developed as part of federal initiatives to advance environmental justice, Ovienmhada said, these resources do not adequately engage the communities most impacted by environmental hazards, thus limiting their efficacy in affecting tangible, grassroots change. “Just making stuff visible is not environmental justice,” Ovienmhada said. Read Next How schools, hospitals, and prisons in 15 states profit from land and resources on 79 tribal nations Anna V. Smith & Maria Parazo Rose One man who they interviewed for their project (all the interviewees were paid) was formerly incarcerated at the Texas based prison farm Clemens Unit. He said the facility had air conditioned rooms where inmates could sit and cool off on sweltering summer days. But the prison guards were “sadistic human beings,” he said. ”You could be on the verge of a heatstroke and [they’re] not going to open your cell and escort you to respite.”  What this shows, Oviemhada argues, is that a solution that may seem obvious when viewing the data through a normative lens (the establishment of “cooling” rooms) won’t necessarily keep incarcerated people safe if other, experiential aspects of life in prisons are not accounted for (the guards’ behavior). Accounting for the guards’ behavior, she said, requires a reckoning with the wider system of mass incarceration, which punishes people “through neglect, violence, retaliation, slavery, environmental harm, and forced or cheap labor.”  It took about two years for Oviemhada, Azaad, and the rest of the FTP team to collect the data and interviews and build the web-based platform, called the Toxic Prisons Mapping Project, which launches today. Listening to the voices of former prisoners and their loved ones describe the state of the air, water, and land in and around U.S. prisons, users can get a sense of the material realities behind the numbers. Several people, for instance, described laying in pools of water or soaking their clothes to stay cool in the summertime. Others recalled inhaling thick wildfire smoke and not being provided protective equipment or other resources to keep themselves safe. Multiple people interviewed for the project described off-colored smelly tap water that, being behind bars, they had no choice but to drink.  Ovienmhada and Azaad told Grist that they intend for the Project to be a source of education, broadening the public’s knowledge of environmental hazards in prisons. Additionally, they hope that the families of incarcerated people will use the tool to learn more about the facilities where their loved ones are being kept, and to advocate for measures that will improve their conditions. Members of other organizations that conduct disaster-response efforts at carceral facilities can also use the tool to inform and direct their organizing efforts. But even something like a successful evacuation strategy during a storm is just a short term victory, and not what organizers like Azaad are ultimately fighting for. She and others who worked on the tool don’t just want to see less toxic prisons; their ultimate goal is to see no prisons.  In the long term, Azaad continued, they are working toward “a world where both people and land are not seen as disposable.” The way she sees it, industries treat land like a disposable resource to degrade and pollute in the same way that the state incarcerates people it deems unworthy or unable to participate in society. “The same logic that allows a Superfund site to exist allows a prison to exist,” Azaad said. That’s why, she concluded, the environmental movement should see itself not as distinct from, but as a partner to, the fight against prisons.  “If we want a world without prisons, we also need to heal the land,” she said. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Heat exposure, cloudy water, and bad air: The data gap of toxic prisons on Sep 18, 2024.

There’s been a proliferation of data-driven mapping tools that illuminate disparities in environmental harm, but they do little to compel suitable solutions — especially for incarcerated people.

Since she began studying mechanical engineering as an undergraduate at Stanford University, Ufuoma Ovienmhada had little desire to build “tech for tech’s sake.” The university’s sustainability lab offered one route to the applied side of engineering that appealed to her. One summer, she worked with the lab’s researchers on a project in Ivory Coast, in West Africa, where she considered how engineering could be employed for sustainable development.

Undergirding Ovienmhada’s academic work was a burgeoning political consciousness shaped by the police murders of unarmed Black people. In her recollection, her college tenure, between 2014 and 2018, was “the Black Lives Matter era of police violence being broadcast on social media every other week.” She regularly attended protests and participated in Black campus organizations where she and her peers frequently discussed police brutality. While researching policing protocols at Stanford, Ovienmhada remembers being told by a campus officer that someone walking down the street in a hoodie would automatically be considered suspicious. “You’re telling me that racism is embedded in how you operate,” she remembers thinking.

Ovienmhada went on to enroll in a master’s program at the MIT Media Lab, where she studied the use of satellite imagery analysis to manage invasive species in the Republic of Benin. She was in school during yet another period of time punctuated by police murders — this time of Breonna Taylor and George Floyd. The unprecedented nationwide protests against police brutality in the summer of 2020 encouraged Ovienmhada to pivot from international development work to the domestic issues of policing and mass incarceration. She wanted to figure out how she could apply her skills as an engineer and programmer to address the problems that concerned her most deeply. As young people across the country took the streets to demand an end to racist and violent policing, Ovienmhada learned about the nascent field of prison ecology, which focuses on the environmental hazards within and around carceral facilities (prisons, jails, and immigrant detention centers) and how they affect incarcerated people and surrounding communities. 

At the time, academic writings in prison ecology were limited to a handful of journal articles in the social sciences. It seemed to her that few were considering how to apply quantitative methods to uncover the environmental issues affecting incarcerated populations. There was a gap in the data, and she felt called to help fill it. 

A mock prison cell, intended to simulate the heat inside Texas prisons, sits outside the Texas State Capitol building in Austin, Texas in July, 2023. SERGIO FLORES/AFP via Getty Images

Though the world of academia was only beginning to wake up to the study of prison ecology, organizers working against mass incarceration had already spent years drawing connections between environmental justice issues and the conditions in prisons. Members of the national grassroots organization Fight Toxic Prisons, or FTP, which uses advocacy and direct action to challenge the prison system, were well aware of not only the litany of environmental hazards that incarcerated people in the U.S. face, but also the value of quantitative research and, in particular, geospatial analysis in shaping the work of the decarceration movement. 

“There is so much about this issue that is very geographical,” said Mei Azaad, an organizer with the Fight Toxic Prisons, adding that so many of the environmental hazards in prisons come from their proximity to oil and gas infrastructure or to Superfund sites. The lack of data to inform them where specific environmental hazards were concentrated was “something we kept running up against,” she said. By 2020, FTP had been doing disaster response work for a few years, and they knew how useful it would be to have a flood risk map overlaid on top of a map of U.S. carceral facilities, something they could refer to when determining how to prioritize their advocacy efforts. Meanwhile, in the course of her own research, Ovienmhada realized that she could apply her knowledge of remote sensing, which enables practitioners to map a range of environmental indicators such as flood risk, air quality, and heat exposure to wide geographic areas, to contribute better applications of geospatial analysis.

From her apartment in Cambridge, Massachusetts, Ovienmhada had been keeping up with FTP’s work. On social media, they often posted data and mapping-oriented information about prisons. She was initially hesitant to reach out to the group and offer her help — aware of the hesitation that community organizers often have toward academics. But, coincidentally, a friend who worked on FTP’s disaster response team heard about Ovienmhada’s satellite imagery-based approach to studying prison ecology, and offered to make the connection. 

Ovienmhada joined FTP’s rapid response team in 2022, the year the Category 4 Hurricane Ian barreled through central Florida, taking out power in wide areas of the state, killing 149 people, and causing over $100 billion in damage. As the storm approached the Florida coast, she made a map showing that several of the state’s carceral facilities were in mandatory evacuation zones, but were not being evacuated. After a phone banking campaign in which they informed Tampa’s Hillsborough County Jail of the map they’d made, the facility decided to evacuate its incarcerated residents.

“We can’t say that they did this because of FTP but it was cool to see this kind of map used to mobilize,” Ovienmhada said.

The Toxic Mapping Project allows users to explore a range of environmental hazards in prisons.

Over the past several years, a growing body of academic work has established that prisons expose incarcerated people to a long list of severe environmental hazards. A 2022 report from the American Journal of Public Health found that nearly half of the country’s prisons rely on water from sources contaminated with “forever chemicals,” toxic compounds that do not break down easily in the body and have been linked to serious health effects like cancer and kidney disease. Earlier this year, a group of researchers examined heat exposure for all 4,078 operational carceral facilities in the continental U.S. between the years 1982-2020, and found that prison populations are highly vulnerable to extreme heat exposure, a problem that is only increasing with the climate crisis. Though these kinds of research projects offer valuable insights into environmental conditions afflicting prisoners, Ovienmhada said, they do not often respond to the needs of groups like FTP that want to use satellite data to take immediate action against specific prisons and, ultimately, to advance decarceration. 

Ovienmhada found that she enjoyed using the skills she’d developed to aid FTP’s organizing work. But the technical abilities to design maps and build models weren’t the only hurdles that the practical applications of prison ecology had to overcome. The programs and server space to build the maps can cost thousands. They needed money, which is often more readily available to research a problem than to do something about it. 

Ovienmhada’s connection with FTP coincided with the Biden Administration’s big push for environmental justice, a span of several years that saw the formation of White House advisory committees on the issue and the dispersal of millions of federal dollars to research projects illuminating the disproportionate impacts of environmental stressors on communities of color across the country. For the first time, federal agencies were under a federal directive to support environmental justice initiatives. In April 2023, President Biden passed Executive order 14096, which directs the federal government to strengthen its commitment to environmental justice by funding scientific research and data collection initiatives, in addition to engaging with local communities.

Ovienmhada was just starting her PhD in aerospace engineering when she noticed that NASA had published a solicitation for proposals from academics to use the agency’s satellite imagery to study environmental injustices. The highest tier of funding — $250,000 — was to be awarded to projects that developed a geospatial tool for integrating satellite data and other socioeconomic information around an environmental justice issue. It was the opportunity Ovienmhada and FTP had been waiting for. They quickly put together an application, in which they proposed a different approach to data gathering. Rather than just visualizing environmental-hazard data on top of a map of U.S. carceral facilities, they wanted to incorporate the voices of people held in those same facilities. This qualitative approach, they reasoned, would fill in gaps in their knowledge, illuminating problems that couldn’t be picked up by an infrared camera hovering in space. Several months after they submitted the application, they were informed that they’d won. 

They saw the tool they wanted to develop as an intervention into the proliferation of data-driven mapping tools that government agencies and academics have built over the past four years, which illuminate disparities in environmental harm across the country but do little to compel suitable solutions. The federal Council on Environmental Quality, for instance, released the Climate & Economic Justice Screening Tool, an interface that explores the concentration of climate risk in low income communities. The Environmental Protection Agency also published a mapping tool called EJScreen, which allows users to track the geographic distribution of a range of environmental hazards and see how they’re concentrated in communities of color. Though developed as part of federal initiatives to advance environmental justice, Ovienmhada said, these resources do not adequately engage the communities most impacted by environmental hazards, thus limiting their efficacy in affecting tangible, grassroots change.

“Just making stuff visible is not environmental justice,” Ovienmhada said.

One man who they interviewed for their project (all the interviewees were paid) was formerly incarcerated at the Texas based prison farm Clemens Unit. He said the facility had air conditioned rooms where inmates could sit and cool off on sweltering summer days. But the prison guards were “sadistic human beings,” he said. ”You could be on the verge of a heatstroke and [they’re] not going to open your cell and escort you to respite.” 

What this shows, Oviemhada argues, is that a solution that may seem obvious when viewing the data through a normative lens (the establishment of “cooling” rooms) won’t necessarily keep incarcerated people safe if other, experiential aspects of life in prisons are not accounted for (the guards’ behavior). Accounting for the guards’ behavior, she said, requires a reckoning with the wider system of mass incarceration, which punishes people “through neglect, violence, retaliation, slavery, environmental harm, and forced or cheap labor.” 

It took about two years for Oviemhada, Azaad, and the rest of the FTP team to collect the data and interviews and build the web-based platform, called the Toxic Prisons Mapping Project, which launches today. Listening to the voices of former prisoners and their loved ones describe the state of the air, water, and land in and around U.S. prisons, users can get a sense of the material realities behind the numbers. Several people, for instance, described laying in pools of water or soaking their clothes to stay cool in the summertime. Others recalled inhaling thick wildfire smoke and not being provided protective equipment or other resources to keep themselves safe. Multiple people interviewed for the project described off-colored smelly tap water that, being behind bars, they had no choice but to drink. 

Ovienmhada and Azaad told Grist that they intend for the Project to be a source of education, broadening the public’s knowledge of environmental hazards in prisons. Additionally, they hope that the families of incarcerated people will use the tool to learn more about the facilities where their loved ones are being kept, and to advocate for measures that will improve their conditions. Members of other organizations that conduct disaster-response efforts at carceral facilities can also use the tool to inform and direct their organizing efforts. But even something like a successful evacuation strategy during a storm is just a short term victory, and not what organizers like Azaad are ultimately fighting for. She and others who worked on the tool don’t just want to see less toxic prisons; their ultimate goal is to see no prisons. 

In the long term, Azaad continued, they are working toward “a world where both people and land are not seen as disposable.” The way she sees it, industries treat land like a disposable resource to degrade and pollute in the same way that the state incarcerates people it deems unworthy or unable to participate in society. “The same logic that allows a Superfund site to exist allows a prison to exist,” Azaad said. That’s why, she concluded, the environmental movement should see itself not as distinct from, but as a partner to, the fight against prisons. 

“If we want a world without prisons, we also need to heal the land,” she said.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Heat exposure, cloudy water, and bad air: The data gap of toxic prisons on Sep 18, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

‘Environmental catastrophe’ fears as millions of plastic beads wash up on Camber Sands

Southern Water is being investigated amid concerns the spill could have dire impact on rare sea lifeSouthern Water is investigating after millions of contaminated plastic beads washed up on Camber Sands beach, risking an “environmental catastrophe”.The biobeads could have a dire impact on marine life, the local MP has said, with fears rare sea life, including seabirds, porpoises and seals, could ingest them and die. Continue reading...

Southern Water is investigating after millions of contaminated plastic beads washed up on Camber Sands beach, risking an “environmental catastrophe”.The biobeads could have a dire impact on marine life, the local MP has said, with fears rare sea life, including seabirds, porpoises and seals, could ingest them and die.Helena Dollimore, the MP for Hastings and Rye, suspects the beads may have been spilled by a local water treatment centre and has written to the Southern Water chief executive, Lawrence Gosden, demanding an explanation.Camber Sands, in East Sussex, is one of England’s most beloved beaches, with rare dune habitat and vast stretches of golden sand.Volunteers have been racing against time to clear the beads, filling dozens of bags with the plastic waste, but the scale of the pollution spill is vast and it is unlikely they will be able to remove all of them.Andy Dinsdale, from the plastic pollution campaign group Strandliners, said on Saturday: “This is the worst pollution event I have ever seen. It is contaminated plastic. Marine animals will ingest small plastic items once they are in the sea, they will attract algae, they will smell like food, effectively.“Once they’ve eaten it, that’s it: they can’t get it out. They will float on the surface. It will create a slick which attracts plunging seabirds.”He said the clean-up efforts have been exhausting. “Yesterday I was out there cleaning it up. We are trying to really piece together the timeline and the story for this horrendous event. It’s terrible.Camber residents joined the giant hoovering machine, Rother district council, Rother coastal officers and Strandliners for the cleanup effort. Photograph: Strandliners“They are so small that from a very long way off, the beach looks normal. But as soon as you get close up you see there are millions of black pellets, nestled under seaweed. It’s an impossible task – volunteers have been raking for days, and they will continue to rake, but we won’t be able to get rid of them all. It is the worst I have ever seen of a polluted beach.”Dollimore, the Labour and Co-operative MP who joined the clean-up efforts, said: “The huge number of plastic beads that have washed up here risks an environmental catastrophe. These biobeads are deadly to marine life and wildlife, and we are already seeing more dead seals, fish and porpoises on the beach.“Local residents are working tirelessly to remove as many beads as possible, but it’s a race against time. Southern Water must urgently establish if their local wastewater plants could be the source of these biobeads, and I’ve asked them to dedicate all available resources to supporting the clean-up operation in the meantime.”The beads are also dangerous to dogs as they contain a high number of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, which are known to have carcinogenic properties, and they often contain toxins including lead, antimony and bromine.A Southern Water spokesperson said: “We are working closely with the Environment Agency and Rother district council to investigate the source of plastic beads which have washed up on Camber Beach. This investigation work is ongoing.“Rother district council is leading the clean-up of the beach, using specialists with a vehicle with suction equipment to remove the beads. We are also supporting with the clean-up.“We’ve conducted water-quality sampling on the beach, which has shown no impact to environmental water quality. This data has been shared with Rother district council and the Environment Agency.”The Environment Agency has been contacted for comment.

Cruz, Cornyn push new retaliatory legislation that blocks U.S. water from going to Mexico

The bill is the latest effort from the Texas delegation that demands the U.S. get tougher with Mexico for failing to honor a 1944 treaty that in part governs Rio Grande water.

Subscribe to The Y’all — a weekly dispatch about the people, places and policies defining Texas, produced by Texas Tribune journalists living in communities across the state. Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback. McALLEN — U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz and John Cornyn want to limit the U.S.’s engagement with Mexico after the country failed to deliver water to Texas under a 1944 international water treaty. The Texas senators filed legislation Thursday that would limit the U.S. from sending Mexico future deliveries of water and would allow the U.S. president to stop engaging with Mexico in certain business sectors that benefit from U.S. water. The treaty requires the U.S. to deliver 1,500,000 acre-feet of water from the Colorado River to Mexico every year. In exchange, Mexico is required to deliver 1,750,000 acre-feet of water to the U.S. every five years, or 350,000 acre-feet per year, from six tributaries. The delay in water continues to frustrate local farmers and ranchers who depend on water for their irrigation needs. Water received from Mexico is typically stored at two international reservoirs. When water is released, it feeds into the Rio Grande. However, combined levels at the reservoirs reached a record low last year and continue to be in limited supply due, in part, to lack of rainfall. When reservoir water is in short supply, irrigation water for farmers is the first to be cut off. This has had a devastating impact on the Rio Grande Valley’s agricultural community, prompting the shutdown of Texas’ last sugar mill in Santa Rosa, though investors announced they plan to revive it. “The Mexican government exploits the structure of the treaty to defer and delay its deliveries in each individual year until it becomes impossible for it to meet its overall obligations, and it continues to fail to meet its obligation to deliver water to the United States under the 1944 Water Treaty,” Cruz said in a statement. “These failures are catastrophic for Texas farmers and ranchers, who rely on regular and complete deliveries by Mexico under the treaty and are on the front lines of this crisis, facing water shortages that threaten agriculture and livestock.” Mexico has struggled to meet its obligations. When the most recent five-year cycle came to an end on Oct. 24, Mexico still owed 865,136 acre-feet of water. Because of drought conditions, Mexico has the next five years to pay back its debt. The bill would try to compel Mexico to make minimum annual deliveries instead of allowing Mexico to pay what it owes at the end of the five years. It also requires the U.S. secretary of state to submit a report to Congress on the status of Mexico’s water deliveries within 180 days of the bill’s enactment. The report would determine whether Mexico had delivered at least 350,000 acre-feet of water the previous year. The report would also assess whether Mexico is capable of delivering the full 1,750,000 acre-feet of water by the end of the five-year cycle, and would identify economic sectors and activities in Mexico that benefit from the water it receives from the U.S. and from water from the six tributaries managed by the treaty. If Mexico fails to deliver at least 350,000 acre-feet in the previous year, the bill would require the president to deny all emergency requests from Mexico for the delivery of water under any amendments to the treaty. However, exceptions would be made if the water were used exclusively for an ongoing ecological, environmental, or humanitarian emergency or if fulfilling the request is vital to U.S. national interests. The president may also limit or terminate engagement with Mexico related to those sectors or activities that benefit from the water it gets from the U.S. or from the six tributaries. Exceptions would be made for engagement that relates to countering the flow of fentanyl and other synthetic drugs. Hoping to enact consequences for failing to comply with the water treaty, the Valley’s congressional delegation — including U.S. Reps. Monica De La Cruz, a Republican from Edinburg, Henry Cuellar, a Laredo Democrat, and Cornyn — said they favored including the water treaty in trade talks next year when the U.S.-Mexico-Canada agreement is up for review. “Mexico has repeatedly failed to uphold the 1944 Water Treaty, including last month when they missed the five-year deadline to deliver the 1.75 million acre-feet of water owed to the United States,” Cornyn said. “I am proud to cosponsor this legislation alongside Senator Cruz, which will put added pressure on Mexico to live up to its obligations under the Treaty, ensure the South Texas agriculture community has the water it needs, and impose harsher penalties on Mexico should they choose to continue withholding the water we’re owed.” The bill could potentially work faster to add an enforcement mechanism to the treaty if it is passed. “Without stronger congressional pressure and oversight, Mexico will continue to fail to meet its obligations,” Cruz said. Reporting in the Rio Grande Valley is supported in part by the Methodist Healthcare Ministries of South Texas, Inc.

Will Texas actually run out of water? Your questions about the state’s water supply answered.

You asked our AI chatbot about Texas’ water supply. We answered some of the questions that it couldn’t.

Subscribe to The Y’all — a weekly dispatch about the people, places and policies defining Texas, produced by Texas Tribune journalists living in communities across the state. Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback. For most of this year, Texas Tribune reporters have aggressively reported on the state’s water supply crisis. As part of our special report, Running Out, we created a chatbot that we trained to answer your questions based on our reporting. Y’all asked a lot of questions! And in some instances, the bot could not answer those questions. Technology! Can’t live with it, can’t live without it. Those queries were sent to us. We read each one and began saw some themes. Many of you had specific questions about your own region. If you still do, you can use this tool to look up the water situation in your county. Many of you wanted to know when the state was going to run out of water, who is in charge, and how much we should worry about climate change. We identified the six most commonly asked questions and answered them below. Texas voters this week once again voted overwhelmingly to fund water projects for the next 20 years. As the Tribune reported, the money will help. And yet, the $20 billion sum falls far short of what might be needed. Our reporting on the state’s water supply and the looming crisis will not end, even as this year comes to a close. Keep the questions and story ideas coming. Will Texas actually run out of water? There are some scary estimates out there. The Texas Water Development Board projects in the state’s 2022 water plan that towns and cities could be on a path toward a severe shortage of water by 2030. This means everything, from drinking water to wastewater, and water for agricultural uses, could run low in the next few years. However, there are several factors that go into that, including if there is a recurring, record-breaking drought across the state and if water entities and state leaders fail to put key strategies in place to secure water supplies. Those strategies range from creating new sources of water supply — think desalination, conservation, and aquifer storage and recovery — to fixing the failing infrastructure that causes water lines to break and gush water out all around the state. Other estimates give us a little more time, but don’t look much better. The state water plan projects that groundwater availability, which is found underground in aquifers, makes up half of the state’s water supply, will drop by 25% by 2070. Our total water supply — groundwater paired with surface water — is estimated to decline by 18% by the same year, in part because of how many people are expected to live in Texas by then. This is why advocates say the dedicated funding approved by voters this year was so critical. That money goes toward repairing aging infrastructure and projects that create the new sources of water supply that the future of the state will rely on. What are the most affected regions in Texas by water shortages and why? Texas has 16 regions for water planning. Each faces unique challenges and are tasked with managing their own water supply. Generally, East Texas is more lush and water-rich, while West Texas is much dried. South Texas, especially the Rio Grande Valley, has been plagued by an ongoing drought. A binational tussle over water with Mexico, also isn’t helping the region. All of Texas water supply is impacted by a combination of the following: limited supplies, population growth, and climate pressures. In their planning, regional leaders are supposed to project their water supply and water demand for the following years to come. Since water supply varies by region, the Texas Tribune created an address-search tool based on that data. This tool shows where your local water supply comes from and what supply and demand projections look like for the future. You can find it here. What role does the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality play in protecting the state’s water supply? Surface water — the stuff in lakes and rivers — in Texas is owned by the state. The TCEQ, the state’s environmental regulator, oversees those rights. Since 1967, the TCEQ has issued permits granting farmers, ranchers, cities, industries, and businesses the right to use it. These permits are issued on a “first come, first served” basis, with each one assigned a priority date that determines seniority. During droughts, permit holders with the earliest dates have the right to get water before those with newer dates. Each permit also specifies the volume of water the holder may use each year. In addition to managing surface water rights, the agency enforces laws by the federal government meant to keep water quality safe enough to drink and protect ecosystems. Agency staff also respond to any contamination events that could threaten the state’s water supply. The TCEQ is different from the Texas Water Development Board, which serves as a bank that funds water projects and is responsible for long-term water supply planning. How does the state gauge how much groundwater is available? The Texas Legislature passed in 1949 the Texas Groundwater Act, which authorized the formation of groundwater districts, but it wasn’t until close to 50 years later that the state explicitly recognized groundwater districts as the state’s preferred method for managing groundwater resources in Texas. Today, 98 Texas groundwater districts cover nearly 70% of the state’s land area. These districts implement various management strategies, including developing and enforcing rules and balancing property rights with preservation goals. A key aspect of this is using groundwater modeling, monitoring wells and data to make decisions about groundwater quantity and quality. Each groundwater district sets goals that describe how much water can be pumped without depleting aquifers for future generations. These “desired future conditions” are key for understanding and managing groundwater availability long-term. To set such goals, districts monitor wells and get water level measurements to track changes and trends in aquifers, a body of rock or sediment underground that holds groundwater. Districts also model how much water they anticipate will get extracted across certain periods. This data and predictions are submitted to a regional groundwater management area and are run through groundwater availability models to project aquifer conditions if these extractions occur as planned. The districts then review model results and set their goals. The Texas Water Development Board independently reviews the models to ensure the projected extractions are feasible and will achieve the goals as well. The water board then calculates the amount of water that can be pumped annually while staying within the goals set by the districts. How will reservoirs be affected by climate change? Climate change will have a significant impact on reservoirs in Texas, and it could get ugly fast. One report studied the effect climate change has on water quality in Texas reservoirs. The researchers expect the weather pattern shifts will lead to increased water temperatures, sulfate and chloride. At the same time, it will cause decreasing levels of oxygen and pH, meaning water in reservoirs could become more acidic. Not only would this combination affect the ecosystems in the reservoirs, but it will affect the quality of water for Texans, both for consumption and recreation. A 2022 Texas Tribune analysis found that the hotter Texas gets, water levels in the reservoirs will also drop. That year, which holds the record for the hottest July recorded, led to a devastating drought and pushed municipalities to call for mandatory water restrictions. It’s a domino effect — higher temperatures cause soil to dry more quickly, which then causes less rain to flow into Texas’ rivers and streams. The longer and more intense hot temperatures continue, climate change also accelerates water evaporation from Texas’ reservoirs. Since surface water, which is mainly stored in Texas’ rivers and reservoirs, accounts for about half of the state’s water supply, climate change makes it less and less reliable. Which region or city has the highest quality of water supply? Water quality varies throughout the state. However, a 2024 statewide competition crowned Dallas for having the best drinking water in Texas. There were 23 water providers in the competition who provided unlabeled water samples for the judges, and it was judged by the taste and smell of the water. The runner-up was Denton, so by this competition alone, it could be North Texas that has the highest quality of water. That’s not to say water in the region doesn’t have problems. According to the North Texas Municipal Water District, taste, odor and hard water can still occur from naturally occurring minerals present in the lakes across the region. They are one of many water districts in the region that has rigorous monitoring of water conditions and test samples on a regular basis to ensure water meets or exceeds standards set by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the Safe Drinking Water Act.

Texas set to make $20 billion investment in water after voters approve Proposition 4

Texas will use $1 billion in sales tax a year for the next two decades to help secure the state’s water supply.

Subscribe to The Y’all — a weekly dispatch about the people, places and policies defining Texas, produced by Texas Tribune journalists living in communities across the state. Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback. Texas is poised to make the largest investment in its water supply in the state’s 180-year history as voters on Tuesday are on track to approve Proposition 4, which authorizes $20 billion to be spent on water projects over the next two decades.  The vote comes at a time when communities are scrambling to find new water supplies to meet the needs of their growing population, all the while deteriorating infrastructure, and a warming climate threatens the state’s water supply.   Throughout Texas’ history, ensuring water supply has rarely been a partisan issue. Many see it as a precious resource essential to both survival and the prosperity of the state’s economy. However, this year proved that water is personal and deeply emotional too. Proposed reservoirs and groundwater exports in East Texas have outraged many in the water-rich region, desalination projects along the Coastal Bend region have sparked political debate amid a water crisis, and data centers expanding across arid West Texas have locals worried about their dwindling groundwater supply. These challenges and others pushed lawmakers to make big investments in water at the Capitol this year. “Prop 4 is the culmination of almost 30 years of bipartisan work to create reliable and predictable funding for Texas water,” said Sarah Rountree Schlessinger, CEO of Texas Water Foundation, a nonprofit that educates Texans on water issues.  “We are thrilled that Texans showed up, asked deep questions, and that they chose to prioritize water infrastructure needs across the state. That tells you a lot about the state of Texas water.” A portion of existing state sales tax revenue — up to $1 billion annually — would be deposited into the Texas Water Fund each year, starting in 2027 to help fund water, wastewater and flood infrastructure projects.  The funding comes from existing revenue, meaning no new taxes would be created. However, the money would only be transferred to the fund when sales tax collections exceed $46.5 billion in a given year. The past two fiscal years have surpassed that amount. Assuming the state’s growth continues, there will be enough money available to dedicate the $1 billion to the fund.  The $20 billion is far short of what the state needs to maintain its water infrastructure. According to one estimate, Texas communities need nearly $154 billion over the next 50 years for projects. Both rural and urban communities will be able to tap the fund to address their existing infrastructure needs. The money will be managed by the Texas Water Development Board, the state agency that oversees the state’s water supply. Funding would be divided into two categories: water supply projects, and other existing water programs.  Water supply projects would expand the overall volume of water available in Texas. Projects that could be paid for include desalination, which cleans salty water for drinking and agricultural use, fixing leaking pipes, water reuse, which includes treating wastewater and  produced water from the oil and gas industry, conservation strategies and constructing permitted reservoirs. Existing water programs include improving flood control infrastructure and flood mitigation, ensuring clean drinking water, and agricultural water conservation.  While oil and gas, and big statewide water groups in Texas supported the proposition, some environmental groups were concerned that certain projects, like reservoirs, will be prioritized as a form of new water supply and take the land of farmers and residents who live in areas where they plan to be built.  Other organizations feared it will help fund mega projects like desalination, which they believe will help industry expansion in their communities, and that local communities will be cut out of water decisions. Some conservative groups argued that spending should not be written into the Texas Constitution.   The proposition does not greenlight projects, but rather provides a way to finance projects. Any particular project that receives funds from the Water Development Board will go through a regular application process. The Texas Water Foundation said that the proposition prohibits the transfer of groundwater. The fund also comes with some oversight. Lawmakers have created a special committee to oversee the water board’s administration of the funding. The water board will be required to report on how the money is being distributed and the impact they are having in meeting state needs and the public will have a chance to give input.  Disclosure: Texas Water Foundation has been a financial supporter of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Ofwat letting water firms charge twice to tackle sewage, court to hear

River Action bringing legal action against water regulator over who should foot bill for firms’ past failures to investOfwat is unlawfully allowing water companies to charge customers twice to fund more than £100bn of investment to reduce sewage pollution, campaigners will allege in court on Tuesday.Lawyers for River Action say the bill increases being allowed by Ofwat – which amount to an average of £123 a year per household – mean customers will be paying again for improvements to achieve environmental compliance that should have been funded from their previous bills. Continue reading...

Ofwat is unlawfully allowing water companies to charge customers twice to fund more than £100bn of investment to reduce sewage pollution, campaigners will allege in court on Tuesday.Lawyers for River Action say the bill increases being allowed by Ofwat – which amount to an average of £123 a year per household – mean customers will be paying again for improvements to achieve environmental compliance that should have been funded from their previous bills.Ofwat has approved a £104bn injection of cash by water companies to the end of the decade, in what is referred to as its PR24 decision, to tackle record sewage pollution into rivers as a result of underinvestment over many years.Customers of some of the worst-performing companies are facing huge bill rises. Thames Water customers are being charged 35% more, raising average bills from £436 to £588, and Southern Water customers are being charged 53% more, increasing from £420 to £642 a year on average. United Utilities is raising bills by 32% to an average of £535 a year.Lawyers are using the case of Windermere as an example to argue that customers are being unlawfully charged twice. They argue that any investment to repair historic under-investment in infrastructure should be paid for by shareholders, not customers. According to Ofwat rules, customers must only pay for new infrastructure investment, not investment to bring a company into compliance with environmental legislation.Emma Dearnaley, the head of legal at River Action, said: “It is fundamental that the public should not be made to pay twice for water companies’ past failures to invest in improvements to stop sewage pollution. But River Action is concerned that Ofwat’s approach means customers could be paying again. Meanwhile, degraded infrastructure keeps spewing pollution into rivers and lakes across the country that should have been clean decades ago.”The case argues that Ofwat must ensure the billions it approves results in legal compliance by water companies and that customers are charged fairly from now on.Ricardo Gama, of Leigh Day, who is representing River Action at the hearing in Manchester, said: “Our client believes that this case shows that Ofwat has failed to make sure that water bills are used for infrastructure upgrades.“River Action will argue that the money that could and should have been used to make essential infrastructure improvements is now gone, and customers are being asked to foot the bill for those improvements a second time over.”The hearing takes place at Manchester civil justice centre on Tuesday and Wednesday.An Ofwat spokesperson said: “We reject River Action’s claims. The PR24 process carefully scrutinised business plans to ensure that customers were getting fair value and investment was justified.“We stated that customers should not pay twice for companies to regain compliance with environmental permits, and have included appropriate safeguards in our PR24 determinations to monitor this, which we will monitor closely, taking action if required. We cannot comment further at this time due to the ongoing hearing.”

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.