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

PFAS Found in Nearly Half of Americans’ Drinking Water

News Feed
Friday, March 28, 2025

Nearly Half of People in the U.S. Have Toxic PFAS in Their Drinking WaterNew data released by the EPA show that nearly half of people in the U.S. have drinking water contaminated by toxic “forever chemicals,” or PFASBy Andrea Thompson edited by Dean VisserJacob Wackerhausen/Getty ImagesNew data recently released by the Environmental Protection Agency indicate that more than 158 million people across the U.S. have drinking water contaminated by toxic “forever chemicals,” scientifically known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).“Drinking water is a major source of PFAS exposure. The sheer number of contaminated sites shows that these chemicals are likely present in most of the U.S. water supply,” said David Andrews, deputy director of investigations and a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit advocacy organization, in a recent press release.What Are PFAS?On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.There are more than 9,000 known PFAS compounds, and more than 600 of them are used in a wide range of common products, from cookware to cosmetics to pesticides.These compounds have a very strong carbon-fluorine bond, which means they are extremely stable and are useful for repelling grease and water. But the strength of that bond is also part of what makes them a dangerous pollutant.Why Are PFAS Dangerous?The stability of PFAS molecules means they do not readily biodegrade in the environment and can linger and build up over years and decades—hence the moniker “forever chemicals.”Several PFAS compounds have been linked to a significant variety of health issues, including several cancers, reproductive disorders, thyroid disease and a weakened immune system. Testing by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates that 99 percent of people in the U.S., including newborn babies, have PFAS in their bloodstream.Where Did the EPA Find PFAS?The EPA is requiring U.S. water utilities to test for 29 PFAS compounds. The latest results from that work show that 15 million more U.S. residents are exposed to these compounds in their drinking water than had been reported in the previous update. More data are expected to be released in the coming months because only 57 percent of water systems had reported full test results by March.The currently available results bring the known number of people in the U.S. exposed to PFAS through drinking water to 158 million, which is nearly half of the nation’s total population of about 340 million. PFAS contamination has been found in drinking water in locations in all 50 states, Washington, D.C., and four U.S. territories.How Do PFAS Get in the Environment?PFAS can enter the environment from pollutants discharged into rivers and lakes by industrial facilities, as well as firefighting foam that seeps into the ground. Experts are also concerned that pesticides containing PFAS are a growing contributor to the problem.Does the EPA Regulate PFAS?In 2024 the EPA finalized a rule to set limits for six PFAS compounds in drinking water as part of a PFAS Strategic Roadmap laid out under the Biden-Harris administration. The rules provide for three years of testing and two years to remove PFAS from drinking water. “This action will prevent thousands of deaths and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses,” said then EPA administrator Michael Regan during a call with reporters when the rules were announced last April.In another rule, two of the most harmful PFAS, PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid), were labeled “hazardous substances.” This designation has allowed the agency to use Superfund money to clean up contaminated sites.It is unclear whether the current Trump administration might try to rescind or weaken those rules as part of a broader deregulatory campaign at the EPA. Some states had PFAS regulations prior to the limits that the EPA implemented that would still be in place if the agency’s standards were rescinded. But the testing underway shows that 53 million people in states without PFAS regulations would be exposed to levels above current EPA limits.How to Avoid PFASSome utilities already treat water for PFAS by using filters that contain granulated activated charcoal or reverse osmosis membranes. Some home filters are also designed to reduce PFAS levels, but regular filter replacement is key, the EWG, which has tested several filters, says.

New data released by the EPA show that nearly half of people in the U.S. have drinking water contaminated by toxic “forever chemicals,” or PFAS

Nearly Half of People in the U.S. Have Toxic PFAS in Their Drinking Water

New data released by the EPA show that nearly half of people in the U.S. have drinking water contaminated by toxic “forever chemicals,” or PFAS

By Andrea Thompson edited by Dean Visser

Woman drinking from a glass of water

Jacob Wackerhausen/Getty Images

New data recently released by the Environmental Protection Agency indicate that more than 158 million people across the U.S. have drinking water contaminated by toxic “forever chemicals,” scientifically known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).

“Drinking water is a major source of PFAS exposure. The sheer number of contaminated sites shows that these chemicals are likely present in most of the U.S. water supply,” said David Andrews, deputy director of investigations and a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group (EWG), a nonprofit advocacy organization, in a recent press release.

What Are PFAS?

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

There are more than 9,000 known PFAS compounds, and more than 600 of them are used in a wide range of common products, from cookware to cosmetics to pesticides.

These compounds have a very strong carbon-fluorine bond, which means they are extremely stable and are useful for repelling grease and water. But the strength of that bond is also part of what makes them a dangerous pollutant.

Why Are PFAS Dangerous?

The stability of PFAS molecules means they do not readily biodegrade in the environment and can linger and build up over years and decades—hence the moniker “forever chemicals.”

Several PFAS compounds have been linked to a significant variety of health issues, including several cancers, reproductive disorders, thyroid disease and a weakened immune system. Testing by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention indicates that 99 percent of people in the U.S., including newborn babies, have PFAS in their bloodstream.

Where Did the EPA Find PFAS?

The EPA is requiring U.S. water utilities to test for 29 PFAS compounds. The latest results from that work show that 15 million more U.S. residents are exposed to these compounds in their drinking water than had been reported in the previous update. More data are expected to be released in the coming months because only 57 percent of water systems had reported full test results by March.

The currently available results bring the known number of people in the U.S. exposed to PFAS through drinking water to 158 million, which is nearly half of the nation’s total population of about 340 million. PFAS contamination has been found in drinking water in locations in all 50 states, Washington, D.C., and four U.S. territories.

How Do PFAS Get in the Environment?

PFAS can enter the environment from pollutants discharged into rivers and lakes by industrial facilities, as well as firefighting foam that seeps into the ground. Experts are also concerned that pesticides containing PFAS are a growing contributor to the problem.

Does the EPA Regulate PFAS?

In 2024 the EPA finalized a rule to set limits for six PFAS compounds in drinking water as part of a PFAS Strategic Roadmap laid out under the Biden-Harris administration. The rules provide for three years of testing and two years to remove PFAS from drinking water. “This action will prevent thousands of deaths and reduce tens of thousands of serious illnesses,” said then EPA administrator Michael Regan during a call with reporters when the rules were announced last April.

In another rule, two of the most harmful PFAS, PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) and PFOS (perfluorooctanesulfonic acid), were labeled “hazardous substances.” This designation has allowed the agency to use Superfund money to clean up contaminated sites.

It is unclear whether the current Trump administration might try to rescind or weaken those rules as part of a broader deregulatory campaign at the EPA. Some states had PFAS regulations prior to the limits that the EPA implemented that would still be in place if the agency’s standards were rescinded. But the testing underway shows that 53 million people in states without PFAS regulations would be exposed to levels above current EPA limits.

How to Avoid PFAS

Some utilities already treat water for PFAS by using filters that contain granulated activated charcoal or reverse osmosis membranes. Some home filters are also designed to reduce PFAS levels, but regular filter replacement is key, the EWG, which has tested several filters, says.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

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

Store, harvest, fix: How Texas can save its water supply

State lawmakers are poised to devote billions to save the state’s water supply. These are some of the ways the state could spend the money.

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. This article is part of Running Out, an occasional series about Texas’ water crisis. Read more stories about the threats facing Texas’ water supply here. 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 million acre-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). Texas lawmakers are expected to pledge billions of dollars to the state’s water supply this spring. However, there is a big debate on which strategies to invest in. Do we invest more into creating new water supplies or repairing old, leaking pipes statewide? Related Story March 13, 2025 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. High Sierra Bar and Grill in Terlingua has taken a variety of steps to conserve water usage including reducing the flow of faucets and toilets, using sanitizing wash basins to clean glasses and only providing water to customers upon request. Credit: Eli Hartman/The Texas Tribune Conservation 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. Related Story March 13, 2025 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. Each of Texas’ 16 regional water plans includes conservation strategies. City of Odessa Water Distribution employees work through the night as they attempt to repair a broken water main in 2022. Credit: Eli Hartman for The Texas Tribune 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. Hector Sepúlveda pours a sample of the final concentrate water in the desalination process in the Kay Bailey Desalination Plant in El Paso on March 4. Credit: Justin Hamel for The Texas Tribune Desalination 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. The Archimedes screw pump moves water and sludge to a higher elevation at a San Antonio Water System wastewater treatment facility in 2024. Credit: Chris Stokes for The Texas Tribune Water reuse 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. Filters at El Paso's Kay Bailey Hutchison Desalination Plant remove salt from the Hueco Bolson aquifer and purify the water to drinking quality on March 4. Credit: Justin Hamel 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. A Bastrop County home designed with a rain collection system. Credit: Callie Richmond for The Texas Tribune Rainwater harvesting 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. Most recently, the district sponsored several rainwater harvesting projects at the Lubbock Memorial Arboretum. Jason Coleman, general manager for the water district, said there are swales, or shallow areas, that catch rainwater. “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.” The American Dam diverts water in the Rio Grande between the U.S. and Mexico in El Paso on March 6. Credit: Justin Hamel Reservoirs 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. Disclosure: Ducks Unlimited, Texas 2036 and Texas Tech University have been financial supporters 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. We can’t wait to welcome you to the 15th annual Texas Tribune Festival, Texas’ breakout ideas and politics event happening Nov. 13–15 in downtown Austin. Step inside the conversations shaping the future of education, the economy, health care, energy, technology, public safety, culture, the arts and so much more. Hear from our CEO, Sonal Shah, on TribFest 2025. TribFest 2025 is presented by JPMorganChase.

Water
Business
Conservation

Are we ready for an underwater power line in the Columbia River?

Permitting for the Cascade Renewable Transmission Project has hit a snag. Developers say it’s a minor hitch

Imagine a six-inch-thick, high-voltage electricity transmission line running underwater on the bottom of the Columbia River, from just east of The Dalles, Ore., to Portland. The line carries mostly wind and solar power from eastern Washington and Oregon, Idaho and Montana, the windiest, sunniest places in the Pacific Northwest.Now ask yourself, really? Could it be done? Is it necessary?The answer to each of these questions is yes, yes and depends on your perspective.As wild as it seems, a (mostly) underwater power transmission line beneath the Columbia River could help lower overall electricity prices, preserve tens of thousands of acres from the visual despoilment of wind turbines and solar panels and provide a needed boost to the region’s electricity transmission supply.Why do it? Because the Columbia River Basin doesn’t have the capacity to transmit the oncoming avalanche of electricity demand needed to power data centers and high-tech businesses, while also meeting carbon-free power requirements enshrined in law in Oregon and Washington.To address the problem, a pair of companies proposed the underwater cable back in 2020. Called the Cascade Renewable Transmission Project, it promises to deliver renewable energy to densely developed areas west of the Cascade Range.The companies making the proposal are Sun2Go Partners, a renewable resource developer based in Connecticut and New York; and PowerBridge, a developer of high-voltage transmission based in Connecticut.“The only places you can site solar and wind at scale are, for the most part, east of the Cascades. But the demand, the need for the electricity, is in Portland and Seattle, on the west side,” Corey Kupersmith, the New York-based renewable energy developer who cofounded Sun2o and dreamed up the cable scheme, told the Associated Press in 2021.How it’ll be builtThe Washington Energy Facilities Siting Council describes the Cascades Renewable Transmission Project as a 320,000-volt or 400,000-volt direct current cable or cables carrying roughly 1,100-megawatts of power.The line would traverse Clark, Skamania and Klickitat counties in Washington before connecting with the existing Bonneville Power Administration Big Eddy, 500,000-volt alternating current substation located near The Dalles (the eastern Interconnection), and the existing Portland General Electric Harborton 230,000-volt alternating current substation located in Northwest Portland (the western Interconnection).In all, the project would span about 100 miles.The majority of the line would be installed in the bed of the Columbia River using a Hydro Jet Cable Burial Machine, or “hydroplow.”The hydroplow—built by the Milan, Italy-based company Prysmian—temporarily emulsifies or “fluidizes” sediment in an approximately 18-inch-wide trench, places the cable in a trench and allows the sediment to settle back over the cable.In the Columbia River, the power cable would be buried at a depth of 10 feet (deeper in some places) in the riverbed.Where the cable cannot be buried, a concrete mattress or a rock berm would be used to keep the cable weighted down and protected from damage.An approximately 7.5-mile segment of the line would be buried in lands adjacent to the river near Stevenson, Wash., to avoid Bonneville Dam.From the interconnections, the cables would also be buried underground in Oregon to the edge of the Columbia River on each end, and in the bed of the Columbia River in Oregon and Washington.The visible structures, such as converter stations and short segments of overhead transmission, would be located in Oregon.The overland component of the project in Washington would be located in public rights-of-way along Washington Highway 14, Ash Lake Road and Fort Cascades Drive.Proponents of the project say environmental impacts would be short-term and outweighed by environmental gains, including reductions in air and water pollution from burning natural gas, petroleum fuels and coal in thermal power plants.Environmental concernsNot surprisingly, the idea of digging a trench through the bottom of the Columbia River, right down the middle of the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area, has created uneasiness about environmental impacts.Opponents of the idea include environmental groups and the Confederated Tribes of the Warm Springs and the Confederated Tribes and Bands of the Yakama Nation, which have historic fishing rights in that stretch of the river.Yakama Nation Rock Creek Band member Elaine Harvey sees the Cascade Renewable Transmission Project as yet another industrial enterprise that’s brought harm to her people.As Harvey and Rock Creek Band Chief Bronsco Jim Jr. wrote in a Columbia Riverkeeper newsletter in 2021: “Ours is a living culture, and we are being cheated by progress—an unrelenting cultural extinction in the name of energy development.”Columbia Riverkeeper, itself, is taking a wait-and-see approach to the proposal.“Columbia Riverkeeper is not yet opposed to the project, but there are many remaining questions with very little information,” Teryn Yazdani, Columbia Riverkeeper staff attorney, told Columbia Insight. “We have major concerns about the short-term and long-term environmental impacts of dredging a giant trench through the river and how it will affect aquatic species and water quality.“We have a laundry list of concerns. Impacts to salmon and other aquatic species. Concerns about the 40- to 50-year lifespan of the project without any clarity around project decommissioning, maintenance and repairs, especially maintenance or repairs in sensitive areas for species. Concerns about how the project will be impacted by potential seismic events or vessel strikes.”Yazdani and others have also raised questions about how water quality might be impaired from heat generated by the cable and how that would exacerbate existing heat pollution concerns in the river, which threaten salmon and other species that need cold water for survival.“We are also very concerned about the precedent that this project would set for making the Columbia River a utility corridor, allowing anyone to drop a transmission line in the bottom of the river,” says Yazdani. “At this point, without more extensive, site-specific studies, it’s hard to be convinced that the impacts of this project would be minimal.”Asked about some of these concerns, PowerBridge Senior Vice President and Chief Development Officer Chris Hocker told Columbia Insight that modeling shows that heat coming off of the cable will be “totally dissipated” by surrounding sediment by the time it hits the water column.“The decommissioning choice would be up to the agencies, whether the cable should be removed or de-energized and simply left in place,” said Hocker. “The cable itself doesn’t require periodic inspections. You don’t have to go down and do anything with it.”Permitting delays, project timelineFilings for construction permits with the federal government, as well as Oregon and Washington state energy facility siting councils, had been expected toward the end of this month.However, last week, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers said part of its required permit application had been withdrawn due to lack of information.“USACE withdrew the Section 10 and Section 404 permit application for The Cascade Renewable Transmission Project on March 10, 2025,” USACE spokesperson Jeffrey Henon told Columbia Insight this week. “We requested additional information from the permit applicant but haven’t received a response from them. We cannot provide a timeline because further review is dependent on the applicant submitting this additional information. The Section 408 review is proceeding.”Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 requires authorization from the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Corps of Engineers, for the construction of any structure in or over any navigable water of the United States.Section 404 of the Clean Water Act requires authorization from the Secretary of the Army, acting through the Corps of Engineers, for the discharge of dredged or fill material into all waters of the United States, including wetlands.In an interview with Columbia Insight, PowerBridge’s Hocker brushed off the holdup, characterizing the delay as a simple administrative issue on the Corps’ end.“It has no impact on our process going forward,” said Hocker. “We’re going to be completing the studies and providing the information. … The idea is to have the studies complete by the end of the second quarter [of 2025], at which point unless we have significantly changed the application, then basically the Corps picks up where we left off.”The company also needs to have permits approved by both the states of Oregon and Washington. Hocker said that, “moving in parallel paths with Washington, Oregon and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,” PowerBridge hopes to have all permitting complete by the end of 2027.“From there would be a three- to four-year time period for construction, all of that driven by everything going on globally in this industry,” he said.Hocker said the power line could be operational some time in 2030 or, more probably, 2031.Company experienceRandall Hardy, administrator of the Bonneville Power Administration (the region’s largest electricity and high-voltage transmission provider) from October 1991 to September 1997, and now an energy consultant in Seattle, has been advising the project proponents for about four years.“They have mapped the riverbed very precisely and have a good idea of the terrain,” said Hardy, referring to Sun2Go Partners and PowerBridge. “They have situated the line to avoid most if not all environmental issues, such as avoiding mussel beds, and spawning areas for salmon that spawn in or near the shoreline.“They have been working with the Corps of Engineers to locate as close to the center of the river as possible, and they have been sensitive to protect indigenous cultural sites, which are mostly along the shoreline.”PowerBridge has been involved in the construction of underwater, high-voltage cables that carry power from New Jersey to New York, one from the Hudson River beneath New York Harbor and terminating in Manhattan, the other from New Jersey’s Raritan River to the south shore of Long Island.PowerBridge’s Hocker said that while the technology that will be used in the Columbia River “is very well established,” the company has identified unique aspects of the Cascades Renewable Transmission Project.“There’s an aspect of this project that requires coming out of the river to bypass the Bonneville Dam then going back into the river. We didn’t have to do anything like that for our projects [on the East Coast],” he says. “And in the Columbia River there is, of course, a lot of attention due to the impact on salmon and other resources. So, we expect that our project here will be much more heavily scrutinized.”TradeoffsThe proposed power line would carry about 1,100 megawatts, enough to power approximately 780,000 homes if all of it were dedicated to residential use, which it would not be.Hardy says the alternative is an aboveground line or lines, which would rise about 100 feet above the ground and be strung between equally tall steel towers. That alternative would likely be more expensive and difficult to construct.“You know how controversial siting transmission lines can be and, importantly, they can get the underwater cable done by 2030, at least five years sooner than building above ground,” said Hardy, adding that the underwater project would likely come with far less litigation.“Often the answer we give is, compared to what?” said Hocker, when asked about opposition to the project. “Compared to not having renewable energy, and repealing the legislation in Oregon and Washington? Compared to offshore wind or overland transmission lines? Some sort of tradeoffs may be necessary. We think this is the least impactful way of getting the states to where they want to go.”“The bottom line is that new transmission is needed to meet Bonneville’s queue for new transmission service,” said Hardy. “This is a really viable project that is needed to bring east-of-the-Cascades renewables to the west side where it is strongly needed.”Waiting list for powerAccording to a November 2024 analysis by the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, the region’s energy planners are grappling with bottlenecks in key areas like Portland-Hillsboro and Puget Sound.Expanding the transmission system to accommodate new energy development would require lengthy planning and construction times—sometimes spanning a decade or more.The Bonneville Power Administration faces a growing high-voltage transmission dilemma.The federal agency owns about 15,000 miles of high-voltage transmission in the Pacific Northwest, accounting for about 80% of the regional total. For scale, the Western Interconnection, which covers 11 western states, the Canadian provinces of British Columbia and Alberta and part of Baja California, Mexico, includes roughly 136,000 miles of transmission.Prospective energy developers send Bonneville requests to hook up to their transmission system queue.This queue has grown substantially in recent years. The agency reports having 272 projects capable of transmitting some 186,000 megawatts eligible for an upcoming transmission study, although many requests will be speculative and only a portion of these projects will ultimately reach construction, according to the Council.Longtime energy reporter John Harrison had been at work on this story when he passed away in February. Work on his final story was completed by Columbia Insight staff. —EditorJohn Harrison worked for 31 years as information officer at the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, a Portland-based regional energy and fish/wildlife planning agency. Before that he was a reporter and copy editor at several Pacific Northwest newspapers.##Columbia Insight, based in Hood River, Oregon, is a nonprofit news site focused on environmental issues of the Columbia River Basin and the Pacific Northwest.

Water
Business
Culture

Canadian Company Seeks US Permission to Start Deep-Sea Mining as Outcry Ensues

An abrupt announcement has rattled members of a little-known U.N. agency based in Jamaica that has protected deep international waters for more than 30 years

SAN JUAN, Puerto Rico (AP) — An abrupt announcement rattled members of a little-known U.N. agency based in Jamaica that has protected international deep-sea waters for more than 30 years.The Metals Company in Vancouver, Canada said late Thursday that it is seeking permission from the U.S. government to start deep-sea mining in international waters, potentially bypassing the International Seabed Authority, which has the power to authorize exploitation permits but has yet to do so.“It would be a major breach of international law…if the U.S. were to grant it,” said Duncan Currie, an international and environmental lawyer and legal adviser to the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, a Netherlands-based alliance of environmental groups.The Metals Company seeks seafloor minerals like cobalt, copper, nickel and manganese used in electric car batteries and other green technology.The announcement was made just hours before the 36-member council of the International Seabed Authority met in Jamaica on Friday, the last day of a two-week conference focused on how and if to allow deep-sea mining, a years-long debate.The authority was scheduled to talk Friday about the company’s commercial mining application.“The scale of the threat…has been taken incredibly seriously here,” said Louisa Casson, a campaigner at Greenpeace who attended Friday's meeting. “There are questions and a lack of clarity of what they actually plan on doing.”She said one question is whether the company plans to request a permit anyway from the authority even as it continues talks with the U.S. government.Currie said the timing of The Metals Company’s announcement was “insulting to the ISA.”“It’s an extremely irresponsible threat. It’s basically holding a gun to the international community,” he said.The International Seabed Authority was created in 1994 by the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which is ratified by more than 165 nations — but not the United States.The Metals Company argued that the United States’ seabed mining code would allow it to start operations in international waters since it's not a member of the authority and therefore not bound by its rules.The company said it was already in discussions with the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, among others.“We have met with numerous officials in the White House as well as U.S. Congress regarding their support for this industry,” the company said in a statement.NOAA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.The Metals Company criticized what it said was “slow progress” by the International Seabed Authority on a proposed mining code that has yet to be finalized.The authority has issued more than 30 exploration licenses but no provisional licenses.Most of the current exploration is happening in the Clarion-Clipperton Fracture Zone, which covers 1.7 million square miles (4.5 million square kilometers) between Hawaii and Mexico. It is occurring at depths ranging from 13,000 to 19,000 feet (4,000 to 6,000 meters).More than 30 countries including Canada have called for a ban, pause or moratorium on deep-sea mining, and companies including Volvo, BMW, Volkswagen, Google and Samsung have pledged not to use seafloor minerals.“The international seabed is the common heritage of humankind, and no state should take unilateral action to exploit it,” Greenpeace said in a statement.Scientists have warned that minerals in the ocean’s bowels take millions of years to form, and that mining could unleash noise, light and suffocating dust storms.“The deep ocean is one of the last truly wild places on Earth, home to life we’re only beginning to understand. Letting deep-sea mining go forward now would be like starting a fire in a library of books nobody’s even read yet," said Emily Jeffers, a senior attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity. However, companies have argued that deep-sea mining is cheaper and has less of an impact than land mining.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
Technology

Suggested Viewing

Inside The Grand Canyon

This guerrilla style documentary film captures a Colorado River rafting expedition through the Grand Canyon. Exhilarating and sometimes dangerous expeditions like this are not often considered when discussing global climate change but could be helpful to enlighten more folks about the changes to our planet. This rafting trip will soon be a thing of the past with record draughts continuing due to ongoing global climate change caused largely by humans. This is just a tiny slice of natures many warning signs of things to come. We find ourselves in a world of ongoing disbelief and hesitation in lieu of planning for the clear and present dangers from climate change. The Colorado River has already reached devastating levels for communities that depend on the water and electrical power resource. Government study in 2022 showed that Lake Powell could reach ""dead pool"" by 2023. There is no plan to mitigate the catastrophe that will leave over a million and a half people with no electricity.

Water
Climate
Sustainable

Still River, Silent Jungle

When a novel dam proposal threatens indigenous communities in the Bolivian Amazon, an Uchupiamona woman named Ruth Alipaz Cuqui must step into the unknown and become a spokesperson for her people. To the Uchupiamona people, the river has its own life and personality, just as a woman does. Returning to her land for guidance, Ruth and her people explore an alternative future for their rivers based on adventure tourism and whitewater rafting. While opposing powers much bigger than her, she must come to terms with how much she is willing to risk to protect her river and her people.

Water
Indigenous
Activism

WindShipped

What started as one man's Quixotic dream has turned to reality. For the past three years the 65-foot"Schooner Apollonia" has been delivering goods up and down the Hudson River by sail -- sans fossil fuels -- a throwback to a day when there were 1,200 such boats on the river each day. It turns out buyers prefer the non-polluting, anti-Amazon way of making deliveries.

Water
Transportation

The Fellowship of the Springs

Florida’s artesian springs are a natural wonder of the world. As unique as the geysers of Yellowstone and as mesmerizing as Vernal Falls in Yosemite, these blue jewels surrounding the north Florida landscape are considered a treasure by many who see them. The state contains the largest and highest concentration of fresh water springs on earth. But today, the future of Florida’s springs is uncertain. With flow levels declining and nitrate pollution on the rise, the springs today bear the scars of a profound struggle. Florida's own government continues to approve permits for large companies that want to pump water from the springs and their springsheds, for nominal permit fees that often cost less than a day pass to Disney World. The Fellowship of the Springs takes viewers behind the scenes of the fight to save Florida's springs, from the halls of the state capitol in Tallahassee to deep caves of Ichetucknee spring.

Water
Government
Business

Daaham Thirst

Water is a precious resource which humanity should use responsibly. Our relationship with Nature should always be guided by reciprocity. Nature protects us all and we in turn should protect natural resources and be sympathetic to the needs of fellow human beings.

Water
Culture
Fiction

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.