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.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Lawsuit claims Gore-Tex poisoned drinking water near Maryland facilities

News Feed
Thursday, April 3, 2025

The makers of Gore-Tex, a popular product commonly used to waterproof clothing by companies such as the North Face and Mountain Hardware, poisoned drinking water and sickened residents around their facilities in rural Maryland, two lawsuits allege.The facilities, about 90 miles north-east of Baltimore, polluted drinking water with levels up to 700 times above federal limits with some kinds of Pfas, a group of toxins known as “forever chemicals” due to their environmental longevity. The tainted water caused high rates of cancers and other diseases linked to Pfas exposure in the area, a class action suit alleges.Meanwhile, Maryland is suing WL Gore and Associates, Gore-Tex’s parent company, over alleged environmental violations. Each suit claims Gore knew about its products’ dangers as early as the 1980s, but continued to put Pfas into local waters, which drain into the Chesapeake Bay, and emit the substances from smokestacks.The company has said it only learned about PFOA, a common type of Pfas compound, in nearby groundwater two years ago, and has suggested it is not responsible for at least some of the pollution.Philip Federico, an attorney for the plaintiffs, dismissed the idea, noting the chemicals in the water match what Gore used. “They’re really not in a position to say it’s not their Pfas – they know it is, and everyone else knows it,” Federico said.Pfas are a class of about 15,000 chemicals typically used to make products that resist water, stains and heat. They can accumulate in humans and the environment, and are linked to cancer, kidney disease, liver problems, immune disorders, birth defects and other serious health problems.The EPA in 2023 found virtually no level of exposure to PFOA in drinking water is safe. PFOA was used in Gore’s production process, the suit alleges. The chemicals that were emitted from the smokestacks probably landed on the nearby ground and percolated into groundwater that contaminated wells and poisoned agricultural soil. Similar issues have been reported around other Pfas facilities.Gore, a company with an estimated value of nearly $5bn, used PFOA to produce PTFE, a type of Pfas, applied to clothing, carpets, furniture, food packaging and more. The company set up a webpage defending its record, noting it has conducted some investigations. It has said it is working with state regulators, as well as providing drinking water or filtration systems to some residents.“Gore denies the allegations in the various lawsuits that have been recently filed. We have been and will remain committed to the health and safety of our Associates, our community, and the environment,” says a statement on the website.It added: “Working with our suppliers, we eliminated PFOA, the substance cited in the lawsuit, from our supply chain many years ago. We will defend ourselves against the meritless allegations through the legal process with facts and science.”The suit details how the Pfas industry knew throughout the 1970s that the substances were dangerous, and a Gore executive knew by 1990 at the latest. Still, the company’s Pfas waste grew as operations expanded, and the company told employees the substance was harmless even as staff got sick and some died of Pfas-linked disease.The suit alleges Gore effectively lied to regulators about Pfas air pollution beginning in 1995 and the company also later destroyed documents detailing its pollution, the suit alleges.“Gore had actual knowledge, knew and fully understood the toxicity and danger to human life caused by APFO/PFOA at all times by its production and dispersion activities,” the complaint reads.About 4,000 people are part of the class action suit. It and the state of Maryland demands the company cover cleanup costs, pay for medical costs, pay for upgrades to water utilities and provide clean water to residents, among other actions.

Firm makes product used to waterproof clothing and allegedly polluted water with some kinds of PfasThe makers of Gore-Tex, a popular product commonly used to waterproof clothing by companies such as the North Face and Mountain Hardware, poisoned drinking water and sickened residents around their facilities in rural Maryland, two lawsuits allege.The facilities, about 90 miles north-east of Baltimore, polluted drinking water with levels up to 700 times above federal limits with some kinds of Pfas, a group of toxins known as “forever chemicals” due to their environmental longevity. The tainted water caused high rates of cancers and other diseases linked to Pfas exposure in the area, a class action suit alleges. Continue reading...

The makers of Gore-Tex, a popular product commonly used to waterproof clothing by companies such as the North Face and Mountain Hardware, poisoned drinking water and sickened residents around their facilities in rural Maryland, two lawsuits allege.

The facilities, about 90 miles north-east of Baltimore, polluted drinking water with levels up to 700 times above federal limits with some kinds of Pfas, a group of toxins known as “forever chemicals” due to their environmental longevity. The tainted water caused high rates of cancers and other diseases linked to Pfas exposure in the area, a class action suit alleges.

Meanwhile, Maryland is suing WL Gore and Associates, Gore-Tex’s parent company, over alleged environmental violations. Each suit claims Gore knew about its products’ dangers as early as the 1980s, but continued to put Pfas into local waters, which drain into the Chesapeake Bay, and emit the substances from smokestacks.

The company has said it only learned about PFOA, a common type of Pfas compound, in nearby groundwater two years ago, and has suggested it is not responsible for at least some of the pollution.

Philip Federico, an attorney for the plaintiffs, dismissed the idea, noting the chemicals in the water match what Gore used. “They’re really not in a position to say it’s not their Pfas – they know it is, and everyone else knows it,” Federico said.

Pfas are a class of about 15,000 chemicals typically used to make products that resist water, stains and heat. They can accumulate in humans and the environment, and are linked to cancer, kidney disease, liver problems, immune disorders, birth defects and other serious health problems.

The EPA in 2023 found virtually no level of exposure to PFOA in drinking water is safe. PFOA was used in Gore’s production process, the suit alleges. The chemicals that were emitted from the smokestacks probably landed on the nearby ground and percolated into groundwater that contaminated wells and poisoned agricultural soil. Similar issues have been reported around other Pfas facilities.

Gore, a company with an estimated value of nearly $5bn, used PFOA to produce PTFE, a type of Pfas, applied to clothing, carpets, furniture, food packaging and more. The company set up a webpage defending its record, noting it has conducted some investigations. It has said it is working with state regulators, as well as providing drinking water or filtration systems to some residents.

“Gore denies the allegations in the various lawsuits that have been recently filed. We have been and will remain committed to the health and safety of our Associates, our community, and the environment,” says a statement on the website.

It added: “Working with our suppliers, we eliminated PFOA, the substance cited in the lawsuit, from our supply chain many years ago. We will defend ourselves against the meritless allegations through the legal process with facts and science.”

The suit details how the Pfas industry knew throughout the 1970s that the substances were dangerous, and a Gore executive knew by 1990 at the latest. Still, the company’s Pfas waste grew as operations expanded, and the company told employees the substance was harmless even as staff got sick and some died of Pfas-linked disease.

The suit alleges Gore effectively lied to regulators about Pfas air pollution beginning in 1995 and the company also later destroyed documents detailing its pollution, the suit alleges.

“Gore had actual knowledge, knew and fully understood the toxicity and danger to human life caused by APFO/PFOA at all times by its production and dispersion activities,” the complaint reads.

About 4,000 people are part of the class action suit. It and the state of Maryland demands the company cover cleanup costs, pay for medical costs, pay for upgrades to water utilities and provide clean water to residents, among other actions.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Environment watchdog confirms Sydney’s mystery beach balls likely came from sewage treatment plants

NSW EPA investigation finds debris that washed up on Sydney beaches in 2024 ‘consistent with a land-based sewage source’Get our afternoon election email, free app or daily news podcastAuthorities investigating mystery balls of debris that closed New South Wales beaches in recent months have determined the they likely originated from Sydney sewage treatment plants.On Friday, the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) revealed its investigation into the source of debris balls that closed beaches in Sydney and the south coast of the state found that they likely originated from Sydney Water’s land-based sewage treatment network. Continue reading...

Authorities investigating mystery balls of debris that closed New South Wales beaches in recent months have determined the they likely originated from Sydney sewage treatment plants.On Friday, the NSW Environmental Protection Authority (EPA) revealed its investigation into the source of debris balls that closed beaches in Sydney and the south coast of the state found that they likely originated from Sydney Water’s land-based sewage treatment network.“The development comes after a comprehensive scientific and technical investigation found similarities between the make-up of the debris balls and samples taken from several of Sydney Water’s major waste-water treatment plants, including those at Malabar and Bondi,” the EPA said in a statement.In November, Sydney Water had said “there have been no issues with the normal operations of the Bondi or Malabar wastewater treatment plants”.EPA director of operations, Adam Gilligan, said it was “a significant step forward in our investigation but there is still work to do”.“While we are yet to determine exactly what caused the pollution incidents to occur when they did, we can say the composition and the characteristics of the debris balls are consistent with a land-based sewage source,” Gilligan said.The EPA issued an investigation notice to Sydney Water, requiring it to undertake oceanographic modelling of the dispersion of the debris balls; complete a sampling and analysis program at its sewage treatment plants; and assess its deep ocean outfall systems and sewerage pipe network to identify where in its systems the debris balls originated to prevent a recurrence.Sydney Water’s acting executive general manager of water and environment services, Louise Beer, said in a Friday statement that an internal review had been implemented.“It is important to note, all coastal treatment facilities are operating normally, and we are compliant with regulatory standards,” Beer said in a statement.“As we could not find any faults with our system, we conducted widespread sampling and analysis of the debris balls at Sydney Water’s laboratories and appointed an independent oceanographer to determine the potential geographic origin of the debris balls.”The investigation indicated the debris balls may have formed due to an increased load of fats, oils, and greases in the wastewater system over time, with unique oceanographic factors and weather conditions playing a role in why the debris balls appeared on beaches this summer, Sydney Water said.It urged the city’s residents to keep fats, oils and greases out of drains.More details soon …

Water
Pollution
Waste

More water recycling could help fix Colorado River shortfall. California has a ways to go, report says

UCLA researchers say California and other states aren't recycling enough water. They recommend reusing much more to ease water shortages along the Colorado River.

California isn’t recycling nearly enough water, according to a new report by UCLA researchers, who say the state should treat and reuse more wastewater to help address the Colorado River’s chronic shortages.Analyzing data for large sewage treatment plants in seven states that rely on Colorado River water, the researchers found California is recycling only 22% of its treated wastewater. That’s far behind the country’s driest two states: Nevada, which is recycling 85% of its wastewater, and Arizona, which is reusing 52%.The report, based on 2022 data, found other states in the Colorado River Basin are trailing, with New Mexico recycling 18%, Colorado 3.6%, Wyoming 3.3% and Utah less than 1%.The researchers said that California and other states, with support from the federal government, should scale up investments in water recycling facilities to help as the region faces demands to dramatically reduce water use in order to prevent the river’s reservoirs from falling to critically low levels. They said the Southwest needs to prioritize water recycling to adapt as droughts grow more intense and long-lasting with global warming.“We’re facing a hotter, drier future and we need to pursue water recycling aggressively if we’re going to ensure a sustainable, resilient water supply,” said Noah Garrison, a water researcher at UCLA’s Institute of the Environment and Sustainability.“There is huge opportunity here,” Garrison said. “We need to create these new and resilient, reliable sources of water.”The study shows that across the seven states, an average of 26% of municipal wastewater is being recycled.If California and other states were to pursue targets of recycling 40% or 50% of their wastewater, the researchers said, that would go a long way toward addressing the river’s gap between supply and demand. If every state achieved even 30%, they calculated, that would generate more than 450,000 acre-feet of water annually — almost as much as the total annual usage of Los Angeles.“These modest gains in water reuse could make an enormous difference on the Colorado,” said co-author Mark Gold, a UCLA adjunct professor and director of water scarcity solutions at the Natural Resources Defense Council.The biggest potential lies in California, which uses more Colorado River water than any other state. The water flows in aqueducts and canals to desert farmlands and cities from Palm Springs to San Diego.Some of Southern California’s urban wastewater is treated and reused to irrigate golf courses and parks, while Orange County has a system that purifies wastewater and puts it into the groundwater basin for use as drinking water.Other treated effluent is discharged into rivers or the ocean. Penstocks at the Gene Pumping Plant, near Lake Havasu, transport Colorado River water to Southern California. (Brian van der Brug / Los Angeles Times) The researchers compiled statewide data for all seven states in the Colorado River Basin, including areas that rely on the river as well as other areas that do not.In coastal Southern California, from Ventura County to San Diego County, 29% of wastewater is currently recycled, the researchers said. According to state data, building three large planned water recycling projects would enable the region to reuse more than 56%.Once fully built, these three facilities, planned by San Diego, Los Angeles and the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, would dramatically increase local water supplies. The total cost for the three projects and new water distribution systems could exceed $25 billion, the report said.Although the costs will be substantial, building these projects should be viewed as vital infrastructure improvements, Gold said.“We’re clearly not managing water in a sustainable manner, and recycled water is just so critical as a way to do that,” Gold said.The researchers said that major state and federal investments will be necessary for the work, and that it should be undertaken with urgency.The Colorado River provides water for cities from Denver to Los Angeles, 30 Native tribes and farming communities from the Rocky Mountains to northern Mexico.The river has long been overused, and its reservoirs have declined dramatically amid persistent dry conditions since 2000. The average flow of the river has shrunk about 20% since 2000, and scientists have estimated that roughly half of that decline has been caused by global warming driven by the burning of fossil fuels.The decline in flow is projected to worsen as temperatures rise. The All-American Canal delivers Colorado River water into California’s Imperial County. (Carolyn Cole / Los Angeles Times) “We can’t afford not to move forward with water recycling because of the importance of reliability and climate resilience,” Gold said.The river’s average difference between supply and demand has been estimated to be between 2 million acre-feet and 4 million acre-feet annually, Gold said. A large portion of this could be offset by recycling more water.“But this can’t happen without major federal and state investments,” Gold said.The researchers called for the federal Environmental Protection Agency to develop water reuse goals, and for state governments to commit to targets — such as 30%, 40% or 50% — and work with other agencies to secure funding. They also said states need to collect better data on water recycling.Several states lacked that basic information, and researchers had to call treatment plants one by one to learn how much water is being treated and reused.“The lack of adequate data is a significant barrier,” Garrison said. “The fact that most of the states have little idea what’s happening is a real and growing problem.”The researchers said California has the nation’s most comprehensive regulations on recycled water and also leads other states in tracking data on reuse. They said the state adopted ambitious water recycling goals in 2009 but those targets were effectively abandoned under a state strategy adopted in 2022.“The real problem is that in 15 years, we’ve made almost no progress,” Garrison said. “It’s really time for California to start investing much more heavily in this as a solution, particularly given the uncertainty around Colorado River Basin water.”Over the last few years, the State Water Resources Control Board has provided $1.4 billion for projects that will produce an additional 125,000 acre-feet of recycled water annually, said E. Joaquin Esquivel, the board’s chair.“Increasing recycled water use is a top priority for the state and a key part of Gov. Newsom’s strategy to buffer the anticipated loss of 10% of our water supplies by 2040 due to hotter, drier conditions,” Esquivel said in an email.He said that although there has been tremendous progress by the state and Southern California agencies in recent years, “continued investment and planning is critical to leverage the full potential of recycled water and simultaneously reduce reliance on the Colorado River.”

Water
Climate
Mountains

Houston water bill rates to increase by average of 6% starting in April

The increase is part of a series of rate hikes approved in 2021 as part of the City of Houston’s consent decree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of Texas following multiple sewage spills that violated the federal Clean Water Act.

City of Houston The increase is part of a series of rate hikes approved in 2021 as part of the City of Houston’s consent decree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of Texas following multiple sewage spills that violated the federal Clean Water Act. Dominic Anthony Walsh/Houston Public MediaA motorist navigates a water leak at the intersection of Main and Elgin streets in Houston on Feb. 25, 2025.Houston residents can expect to see increases on their water bills starting in April as part of the city's five-year plan to fund its sewer system repairs. According to Houston Public Works, customers can expect an average increase of 6%, but the exact rate will vary from customer to customer. "This does not mean all customers are receiving a 6% increase on their bill," a Houston Public Works spokesperson told Houston Public Media. "The new percentage for each customer is calculated by customer category and consumption." This increase is the second-to-last in a series of five rate hikes approved in 2021 as part of the City of Houston's consent decree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the State of Texas. The consent decree came after years of negotiation between the city and the EPA over Houston's multiple sewage spills that violated the federal Clean Water Act. However, the agreement was only finalized after the environmental advocacy group Bayou City Waterkeeper filed a lawsuit in the summer of 2018, claiming the city had more than 9,000 violations over five years. The five years of rate increases are expected to raise approximately $2 billion, which will be spent over the next 15 years on sewer improvements to stop overflows. "These rate adjustments are necessary to pay increases in the cost of operating, maintaining and repairing the combined water and wastewater utility system; debt service on the utility system's bonds and other obligations of the utility system; protect the financial integrity of the utility system; and comply with certain bond covenants and all other applicable law[s]," Houston Public Works said in a statement. In 2023, residents across Houston reported inflated water bills after new meter-reading devices were installed. A year later, newly elected Mayor John Whitmire introduced his Water Bill Improvement Plan that temporarily charged some customers a fixed amount. The temporary rate fixes went into place on April 1, 2024. At the time, the city said it was working to replace about 125,000 faulty remote reading devices. As of December, it reported that more than 100,000 had been successfully replaced. Last August, Houston Public Works announced that the city's water system lost an estimated 31.8 billion gallons of water in 2023 due to leaks. In comparison, the San Antonio Water System lost around 19.5 billion gallons and the City of Austin Water & Wastewater lost 7.1 billion gallons during the same period. The main cause of the water leaks is the city's stagnation on water line maintenance. To correct this, the city planned to increase its rate of pipe replacement from 0.06% per year in 2023 to 6% per year. According to Houston Water, a replacement rate of at least 2% is required to maintain a 50-year lifespan. Despite Houston’s population being around 2.3 million, Houston Water serves approximately 5.3 million customers in the region, according to Houston Water. The last rate increase approved as part of the consent degree will go into effect on April 1, 2026.

Water
Waste

Judge Blocks Imports of Some Chilean Sea Bass From Antarctica in Fishing Feud at Bottom of the World

A federal judge in Florida has blocked the imports of a high-priced Chilean sea bass from protected waters near Antarctica

MIAMI (AP) — A federal judge in Florida has blocked the imports of a high-priced fish from protected waters near Antarctica, siding with U.S. regulators who argued they were required to block imports amid a diplomatic feud triggered by Russia's obstruction of longstanding conservation efforts at the bottom of the world.Judge David Leibowitz, in a ruling Monday, dismissed a lawsuit filed in 2022 by Texas-based Southern Cross Seafoods that alleged it had suffered undue economic harm by what it argued was the U.S. government's arbitrary decision to bar imports of Chilean sea bass. Every year for four decades, 26 governments banded together in the Commission on the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources, or CCAMLR, to set catch limits for Patagonia toothfish, as Chilean sea bass is also known, based on the recommendations of a committee of international scientists.But in 2021, and ever since, Russian representatives to the treaty organization have refused to sign off on the catch limits in what many see as a part of a broader push by President Vladimir Putin's government to stymie international cooperation on a range of issues. Russia's refusal was an effective veto because the commission works by consensus, meaning any single government can hold up action.The U.K.’s response to Russia's gambit was to unilaterally set its own catch limit for Chilean sea bass — lower than the never-adopted recommendation of the scientific commission — and issue its own licenses to fish off the coast of South Georgia, an uninhabited island it controls in the South Atlantic. That drew fire from environmentalists as well as U.S. officials, who fear it could encourage even worse abuse, undermining international fisheries management.Leibowitz in his ruling sided with the U.S. government's interpretation of its treaty obligations, warning that the U.K.'s eschewing of the procedures established by CCAMLR risked overfishing in a sensitive part of the South Atlantic and undermining the very essence of the treaty. “Unlimited fishing would by no means further the goals of CCAMLR to protect the Antarctic ecosystem,” he wrote. “Allowing one nation to refuse to agree on a catch limit for a particular fish only to then be able to harvest that fish in unlimited quantities would contravene the expressed purposes of CCAMLR.”The ruling effectively extends an existing ban on imports from all U.K.-licensed fishing vessels operating near South Georgia, which is also claimed by Argentina. However, the fish is still available in the U.S. from suppliers authorized by Australia, France and other countries in areas where Russia did not object to the proposed catch limits. Chilean sea bass from South Georgia was for years some of the highest-priced seafood at U.S. supermarkets and for decades the fishery was a poster child for international cooperation, bringing together global powers like Russia, China and the U.S. to protect the chilly, crystal blue southern ocean from the sort of fishing free-for-all seen elsewhere on the high seas.Southern Cross originally filed it lawsuit in the U.S. Court of International Trade but it was moved last year to federal court in Ft. Lauderdale, where the company received two shipments of seabass from a British-Norwegian fishing company in 2022.An attorney for Southern Cross, which doesn't have a website and lists as its address a waterfront home in a Houston suburb, didn't immediately respond to a request seeking comment.Environmental groups praised the ruling.“Allowing any country to sidestep agreed limits and fish freely undermines decades of hard-won international cooperation and threatens one of the last intact marine ecosystems on the planet,” said Andrea Kavanagh, who directs Antarctic and Southern Ocean work for Pew Bertarelli Ocean Legacy.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Water
Conservation
Government

Store, Harvest, Fix: How Texas Can Save Its Water Supply

Texas lawmakers are poised to devote billions to save the state’s water supply, but there's debate over which strategies to invest in

Bad news: Texas is running out of water.Good news: There are several solutions local and state leaders can take to make sure we don’t.The state’s water supply is threatened by a changing climate, rapid population growth, and outdated infrastructure, which loses billions of gallons of water each year. Texas’ water demand is growing. By 2070, the state is projected to need an additional 7.7 millionacre-feet of water per year to meet the needs of residents, farmers, and industries if strategies are not implemented.The answers to our water crisis range from the traditional (think reservoirs) to the innovative (think desalination).The Texas Water Development Board has recommended more than 2,400 water management strategy projects to increase water supply. The cost to implement those strategies is estimated to be $80 billion (in 2018 dollars) by 2070, not including inflation. No single solution can meet all of Texas’ water needs. And it will not be cheap. Water experts say policymakers must invest wisely, ensuring the most cost-effective and sustainable solutions are prioritized.Here’s a look at some of the solutions and their pitfalls.Many water experts say that conservation is the first line of defense. Cyrus Reed, a longtime environmental lobbyist at the Texas Capitol and conservation director for the state’s Sierra Club, called conservation “the most conservative and lowest cost approach” to meet our water needs.Conservation means using less water and using it more efficiently. That could look like reducing household and business water consumption through incentives, leak detection, and water-efficient appliances, improving irrigation techniques to minimize water loss, or encouraging industries to recycle water and reduce overall use.One example is in El Paso. Since the 1990s, the city has had a toilet rebate program that has helped residents conserve water and save money on monthly water bills. The program offers a $50 rebate for customers who purchase water-efficient toilets that use 1.28 gallons per flush, as opposed to older toilets that use as much as six gallons per flush.So far, they’ve given 54,000 rebates to their 220,000 customers, which includes homes, businesses and government agencies.“Conservation is often underutilized due to the need for behavior change and the lack of regulatory enforcement,” said Temple McKinnon, a director of water supply planning at the water board. Fixing old infrastructure One of the obvious solutions — at least to water experts — is to fix the state’s aging water infrastructure. Leaking pipes and deteriorating treatment plants have led to billions of water being lost. In 2023 alone, 88 billion gallons of water were lost in Texas’ most populous cities, according to self-reported water loss audits submitted to the Texas Water Development Board.“The most efficient water source that we have is the water that we already have,” said John Dupnik, a deputy executive administrator at the Texas Water Development Board.Jennifer Walker, director for the Texas Coast and Water program with the National Wildlife Federation, said that fixing the infrastructure creates new water supplies because it’s water that wouldn’t be delivered to Texans otherwise.“Anything that we can do to reduce waste is new water,” Walker said.The Texas section of the American Society of Civil Engineers released their infrastructure report card last month. Texas received a D+ for drinking water, with the report emphasizing the role of aging infrastructure and the need for funding for infrastructure operation and maintenance.One reason why the state’s water systems have fallen behind is costs. Most water systems are run by cities or local agencies, which have tried to keep water rates and other local taxes low. This is particularly true in rural Texas communities that have smaller populations and tax bases. Texas 2036 has estimated the state’s water agencies need nearly $154 billion by 2050 for water infrastructure.State Sen. Charles Perry, R-Lubbock, has proposed a bill that could dedicate millions for new water projects. His emphasis is on what water experts call “new water supplies.” One example is removing salt from seawater or brackish groundwater through a process called desalination, which makes water drinkable.Most communities need to increase their water supply, especially as existing supply may be dwindling or face uncertainty, said Shane Walker, a professor at Texas Tech University who serves as the director of the Water and the Environment Research Center.Desalination is one of the most promising solutions, Walker said. Texas is rich in both seawater along the Gulf Coast, and brackish groundwater, with underground reserves of salty water.He said cities and towns shouldn’t wait to tap into desalination until there are no options. “Start now before you’re in a jam,” Walker said.Coastal cities like Corpus Christi are turning to seawater desalination as a drought-proof water source. While desalination plants are expensive to build and operate, the gulf region provides a large supply of water. By 2030, Texas is recommended to produce 179,000 acre-feet of desalinated seawater annually, increasing to 192,000 acre-feet by 2070, according to the latest state water plan. That’s enough water to support about 1.1 million Texans for one year.Texas also has vast reserves of brackish water underground, and cities like El Paso have already pioneered its use. The Kay Bailey Hutchison Desalination Plant is the largest inland desalination plant in the world. At max capacity, it can produce 27.5 million gallons of drinking water daily from brackish groundwater in the Hueco Bolson Aquifer. It also produces 3 million gallons of concentrate, which is the leftover water containing all the salt and impurities that was filtered out. A pipeline sends the concentrate more than 20 miles from the plant where it is injected underground.However, desalination comes with challenges: First, the process requires large amounts of energy to push water through membranes that separate salt and impurities, which is expensive. Then there’s the disposal of concentrated brine, a highly salty liquid that’s a byproduct of desalination. It must be carefully managed to avoid harming marine ecosystems or the environment.“It’ll always come back to the concentrate disposal,” said Art Ruiz, chief plant manager for El Paso Water and the former manager of the city’s desalination plant. “No matter how small or how big (the plant), you’re going to create a byproduct.Recycling every drop of water is another solution. Water reuse allows treated wastewater to be reclaimed for various purposes, from irrigation to industrial cooling.One way of reusing water is direct potable reuse, which involves treating wastewater to drinking-water standards and either reintroducing it directly into the water supply or blending it with other sources before further treatment. Indirect potable reuse follows a similar process, but first releases treated water into a natural reservoir or aquifer before being re-extracted for use.Lubbock has recently started this practice with Leprino Foods, the world’s largest mozzarella cheese producer. The company opened an 850,000-square-foot facility in January and will produce 1.5 million pounds of cheese a day. In return for the water the company uses, Leprino will return around 2 million gallons of clean water to Lubbock every day. This accounts for about 6.25% of Lubbock’s daily water use.Leprino said they installed substantial capacity for water storage so the company could recover and store more water from the manufacturing process before it is cleaned.“In Lubbock, we’ve designed and constructed the facility with water stewardship in mind from day one,” Leprino said in a statement.El Paso is leading the way with its Pure Water Center Facility, which recently started construction. It will purify already treated wastewater for people to drink and deliver 10 million gallons daily. When it’s operating in 2028, it will be the first direct-to-distribution reuse facility in the country. While the concept, “toilet-to-tap” might seem unappealing at first, water utility experts say the advanced treatment process ensures the water is clean and safe.San Antonio has embraced reuse for non-drinking water, sending treated wastewater from the city’s Steven M. Clouse Water Recycling Center back into the city and its rivers. Purple-marked pipes carry recycled water to irrigate golf courses, cool industrial towers, and sustain the downtown River Walk. Some is diverted to an energy plant, while the rest flows to the gulf. In dry times, this steady outflow keeps the San Antonio River running. Aquifer storage and recovery Aquifer storage and recovery is exactly what it sounds like. A water utility can store excess water underground during wet periods, allowing it to be withdrawn during droughts.El Paso has a program that injects treated water into the Hueco Bolson aquifer for future use. San Antonio stores excess Edwards Aquifer water in a certain site within the Carrizo Aquifer during wet periods, then recovers it during droughts. This method reduces evaporation losses compared to above-ground reservoirs and provides a reliable emergency water supply.However, this process requires specific geological conditions to be effective, and not all areas of Texas have suitable aquifers for storage. In some cases, it can also take a long time to move water through all the levels underground to reach the aquifer.One method being explored is creating and using playa lakes to recharge aquifers. Playas are shallow lakes that form in arid, flat regions and catch rainwater runoff. They are dry more often than wet, which is how they function — the water seeps through cracks in the dry soil of the playa’s basin.“Every time a playa dries out and we get a rain event, that’s when recharge happens,” said Heather Johnson with Texas Parks and Wildlife in Lubbock. “You’ll get about three inches of rainwater infiltration into the playa basin annually.”Johnson said for every four acres of playa basin, approximately one acre-foot of water is recharged — about 326,000 gallons of water. That’s enough water to cover a football field with nine inches of water.Ducks Unlimited, a nonprofit national organization that manages wetlands and habitat conservations, is working with Texas Parks and Wildlife in the High Plains to recharge the Ogallala Aquifer. Tavin Dotson, the first regional biologist in the region for Ducks Unlimited, said playa lakes store a seed bank and when playas fill, plants begin to grow. This creates a grassy buffer around the playa — which acts as a natural filter to wash out contaminants before water reaches the playa basin and aquifers.Most of the Ducks Unlimited work in Texas is in the coastal areas. However, Dotson said there is a push to get the practice going even more in the High Plains, where the Ogallala Aquifer is facing declining levels.One of the practices involves filling pits and ditches that disrupt how playas function. Filling the pits allows playas to properly retain and filter water. Johnson said the High Plains contains more than 23,000 playa basins.Rain harvesting — capturing and storing rainwater for later use — is another way of conserving. This technique provides a decentralized water source for irrigation and livestock. While rainwater harvesting is an effective conservation tool, it is limited by Texas’ variable rainfall patterns. It rains more in East Texas as opposed to the West. Still, some Texas groundwater districts actively promote rainwater harvesting to reduce reliance on municipal supplies.High Plains Underground Water Conservation District in Lubbock — the first groundwater district created in Texas — monitors water use and levels in the Ogallala, Edwards-Trinity and Dockum/Santa Rosa Aquifers. The organization also encourages ways to conserve water, including rainwater harvesting. In recent years, the water district has helped raise awareness of the practice in the region. The district gave away ten rain barrels and 12 rain chains in 2023.“They are constructed in the landscape to help mitigate some of the runoff that was occurring at the arboretum,” Coleman said. “They’re nicely constructed. There’s cobblestones and other nice features to make it a nice looking part of the landscape.”Historically, Texas has relied on reservoirs to store and manage water — a solution that boomed after a devastating drought that lasted seven years in the 1950s.There are more than 180 across the state. However, building new reservoirs has become increasingly difficult due to land constraints, environmental concerns, and the high costs of construction.Despite these challenges, regional water planning groups proposed 23 new major reservoirs in the 2022 state water plan. However, new laws now require realistic development timelines and feasibility studies, meaning that reservoirs may not be seen as the go-to solution they once were.Matt Phillips, the deputy general manager for the Brazos River Authority, told lawmakers during a House committee meeting that the population for the basin will double by 2080. The river authority serves Waco, Georgetown, Round Rock, College Station and other cities. Phillips said they would need an additional 500,000 acre-feet of water to meet those demands.“All the cheap water is gone,” Phillips said. “Every drop of water we develop from here on is going to be exponentially more expensive than anything we’ve seen in the past, so we’re going to need help to get there.”State Rep. Cody Harris, R-Palestine, filed legislation that would promote reservoir projects. Perry’s Senate bill mirrors the proposal for reservoirs. In both, the water development board would be able to use money from the Texas Water Fund to encourage regional and interregional project developments. This includes the construction of reservoirs and stormwater retention basins for water supply, flood protection and groundwater recharge.This story was originally published by The Texas Tribune and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Water
Business
Conservation

Suggested Viewing

8 Billions: We Are All Responsible

Ailton Krenak, indigenous leader and thinker, talks about the pain of the Watú (or Rio Doce in the Krenak language). Sick with the biggest environmental disaster in Brazilian history, the Mariana Dam disaster, the river asks for help. From the impacts on his village on the banks of the river, he makes an overview of the current Anthropocene period and invites all human beings to a journey of reflection and self-criticism, aiming at urgent but necessary paradigm shifts.

Water
Indigenous

Waters of the U.S.

The current administration is rolling back crucial protections for streams and wetlands across the country in a direct assault on the Clean Water Act. This incredibly beautiful film tells the story of the rivers, streams, and wetlands of Alabama to illustrate the dangers of the proposed regulation. By doing so, it shows the economic benefits, ecological health, and cultural way of life that hang in the balance. The director hails from Miami, Florida, with a strong passion for environmental advocacy. With a degree in Editing, Writing & Media from Florida State University and a background in environmental journalism, he intends to make documentaries to inspire protection wildlife and our natural resources.

Government
Water
Pollution

Wastewater: A Tale of Two Cities

The other tale of two cities - both plagued by decades of lack of investment and racial discrimination in their wastewater infrastructure and facing further challenges amidst climate change - told by community members, advocates, utility operators, and elected officials. As the nation grapples with how to fund long overdue infrastructure needs, this film brings to light the need for urgency and equity in these decisions.

Social Justice
Waste
Water

Destitute Living

Two friends live in the Qubaibah village Northwest of Al-Quds (Jerusalem).Those young men are forced to leave their daily life concerns after the water was cut off from their area two weeks ago by the Israeli occupation closing the feeding line.Those two characters go on a dangerous journey to an area close to their village to try to reach the water spring captured by the Israeli military occupation as they took over the land, sky, and air in Palestine. On their journey, some things happen that change the course of events with an unexpected end.

Culture
Water
Fiction

Salted Earth

"Salted Earth" plunges us into the heart of an invisible and creeping crisis that's transforming the Mid-Atlantic – the inexorable rise of sea levels. This hard-hitting, yet tenderly woven 20-minute documentary paints a vivid picture of an escalating environmental catastrophe, where the threat is not just the swelling sea, but the encroaching salt that kills forests and decimates arable land, but could also signal a return to the natural order of the Atlantic Coast. Our journey navigates the brackish waters of climate change alongside an intrepid team of scientists. Through their tireless work, they seek to unravel the intricacies of how salty water infiltrates groundwater and soils, with consequences as far-reaching as they are devastating. Their research is more than academic; it's a desperate quest for solutions that may help vulnerable communities adapt and even survive. "Salted Earth" is not only a saga of scientific discovery. It's also a story of human resilience and ingenuity. We venture into the heart of communities, the lifeblood of the Mid-Atlantic, whose existence is at stake. We see firsthand the farmers struggling to preserve their livelihoods, community leaders forging ahead with audacious resilience strategies, and everyday individuals battling the rising tide. Through intimate interviews with scientists, farmers, and community leaders, "Salted Earth" provides a sobering, yet inspiring look at the very real and present challenge of sea-level rise. It asks a question that affects us all: Can our strategy against the rising sea succeed, or are we fighting an unwinnable war? The answer may unsettle you, but the journey is one you cannot afford to miss. Watch "Salted Earth" and see the future of our world through a salt-streaked lens.

Water
Land Use
Science

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.