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.

These are the proposals lawmakers hope will save Texas’ water supply. Track them here.

News Feed
Monday, March 17, 2025

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. It will also be updated through the legislative session as bills advance. Texas’ water supply is full of uncertainties. Leaking water pipes and deteriorating infrastructure plague the state’s water systems. Prolonged droughts and record-setting heat waves are depleting the state’s rivers. And a growing population is adding more stress to the system every day. One state figure estimates there could be a severe shortage of municipal water by 2030 if there is recurring, record-breaking drought conditions across the state, and if water entities and state leaders fail to put in place key strategies to secure water supplies. State lawmakers have proposed several possible solutions. Their proposals range from committing to annual funding for water projects to tapping into new sources, like oil and gas wastewater that comes from the ground during extraction, and making sure the quality of drinking water is safer. There are a number of steps to the legislative process, however, and they all have to take place before a bill can go into law. There are 10 bills the Tribune is tracking — some of them have moved quickly in the legislature, while others have failed to pick up steam. Here are the steps of the process we are tracking: Related Story March 13, 2025 Bill has been filed: This is the very first step in the process. A bill is written and introduced in one of the two legislative chambers, the Texas House or state Senate. In the works: Bills are assigned to committees where a panel of lawmakers vet the bill and take testimony from the public. Bills must be approved by at least one committee before the full chamber votes on it. Both chambers have to approve a bill for it to become law. A bill may also go to a conference committee to reconcile any differences between the chambers on the bill before it’s passed. Passed the House: The bill received a majority vote of approval by state representatives. If it is a House bill, it must go to the Senate next for approval. If it has already passed by the Senate, then it is sent to Gov. Greg Abbott. Passed the Senate: The bill received a majority vote of approval by state senators. If the bill starts in the Senate, it will go to the House for approval. If it’s already been passed by the House, then it is sent to Abbott. Signed into Law: Bills signed by Abbott become law. If there is a bill left unsigned but was not vetoed by Abbott, then it automatically becomes law. Vetoed or failed: A legislative proposal failed by missing a key deadline or did not make it out of the original committee for a floor vote. Abbott could also veto any bills sent to him. Here are the bills to follow: Senate Bill 7 — A priority bill that establishes an administrative framework for how water projects — including building of infrastructure that would transport water across the state and fixing leaking pipes — would be funded under the Texas Water Development Board. The bill would also establish the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee for oversight and the Office of Water Supply Conveyance Coordination to improve regional and statewide water infrastructure connectivity. Bill has been filed. Senate Joint Resolution 66 — A constitutional amendment to dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 16 years beginning in 2027. The annual stream of state tax dollars and insurance premium taxes would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. It calls for 80% of the appropriated money to go to the New Water Supply for Texas Fund — prioritizing desalination projects and pipelines transporting water from the water-rich regions of Texas to arid, drought-stricken areas. The other 20% would go to fixing aging infrastructure. The bill would expire in 2043. In the works. Bill has been referred to a Senate committee on finance. House Bill 16 — A sweeping priority bill that touches on water funds, flood plans, and the development of infrastructure to transport water into a water supply system. The bill would also create the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee to oversee operations on each fund and report to the Texas Water Development Board. In the works. Bill has been referred to a House committee on natural resources. House Joint Resolution 7 — A constitutional amendment to dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 10 years. The annual stream of state tax dollars would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. It gives the Texas Water Development Board full discretion over the $1 billion, allowing it to distribute the money as it sees fit. In the works. Bill has been scheduled for a public hearing. House Bill 1501 — Directs the Texas State University Meadows Center for Water and the Environment to study how Texas can develop seawater desalination plants along the Gulf Coast. Desalination is the process of removing salt from seawater or salty groundwater so it can be used for drinking water, irrigation and industrial uses. The study will examine international desalination plants in Israel and Australia to identify best practices and challenges, including financial barriers and explore ways to dispose of brine — highly salty and concentrated liquid — including its potential use in nuclear energy production. The findings must be reported by Jan. 1, 2027. In the works. Bill has been referred to a House committee on natural resources. House Bill 310 — A bill that directs the Texas Water Development Board, the state agency that oversees water supplies and projects, on how to allocate money from the Texas Water Fund. The board would ensure a portion of the money is used for water infrastructure projects and prioritized by risk or need. It would go to rural areas with less than 20,000 people, and areas with at least 20,000 residents but no more than 150,000. It also calls for money to be spent on a statewide public awareness campaign about water. In the works: Bill is pending in a House committee on natural resources. Senate Bill 1145 — Authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to issue permits for land application of produced water — wastewater that comes out of the ground during the extraction of oil and gas production — and develop standards that prevent pollution of surface and groundwater. Passed the Senate: The House has received the bill for review. House Bill 2080 — A bill that calls for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to appoint a panel to review the duties of a groundwater conservation district. This would happen if someone files a petition with the TCEQ requesting an inquiry about a conservation district. If the petition is not dismissed, the commission would appoint a review panel of five members. Bill has been filed. House Bill 2114 — This bill aims to prevent conflicts of interest by barring engineering firms involved in state or regional water planning from also constructing reservoirs. It specifically applies to feasibility reviews assessing costs, timelines, land acquisition, and economic impacts. One example of a case is the $7 billion Marvin Nichols Reservoir, which groups estimate would flood over 66,000 acres of northeast Texas forest. A feasibility review released last year found no major obstacles to the project. The firm that conducted the review, Freese and Nichols Inc., is also set to build the reservoir. Bill has been filed. House Bill 1400 — Creates a new fund to support scientific research that will expand knowledge about the quality, quantity and threats to the state’s groundwater resources. It will be administered by the Texas Water Development Board. In the works. Bill has been scheduled for a public hearing. 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.

Most lawmakers — as well as Gov. Greg Abbott and Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick — want to invest big in water. Here are the proposals that would do it.

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. It will also be updated through the legislative session as bills advance.

Texas’ water supply is full of uncertainties.

Leaking water pipes and deteriorating infrastructure plague the state’s water systems. Prolonged droughts and record-setting heat waves are depleting the state’s rivers. And a growing population is adding more stress to the system every day.

One state figure estimates there could be a severe shortage of municipal water by 2030 if there is recurring, record-breaking drought conditions across the state, and if water entities and state leaders fail to put in place key strategies to secure water supplies.

State lawmakers have proposed several possible solutions. Their proposals range from committing to annual funding for water projects to tapping into new sources, like oil and gas wastewater that comes from the ground during extraction, and making sure the quality of drinking water is safer.

There are a number of steps to the legislative process, however, and they all have to take place before a bill can go into law. There are 10 bills the Tribune is tracking — some of them have moved quickly in the legislature, while others have failed to pick up steam. Here are the steps of the process we are tracking:

Related Story

Bill has been filed: This is the very first step in the process. A bill is written and introduced in one of the two legislative chambers, the Texas House or state Senate.

In the works: Bills are assigned to committees where a panel of lawmakers vet the bill and take testimony from the public. Bills must be approved by at least one committee before the full chamber votes on it. Both chambers have to approve a bill for it to become law. A bill may also go to a conference committee to reconcile any differences between the chambers on the bill before it’s passed.

Passed the House: The bill received a majority vote of approval by state representatives. If it is a House bill, it must go to the Senate next for approval. If it has already passed by the Senate, then it is sent to Gov. Greg Abbott.

Passed the Senate: The bill received a majority vote of approval by state senators. If the bill starts in the Senate, it will go to the House for approval. If it’s already been passed by the House, then it is sent to Abbott.

Signed into Law: Bills signed by Abbott become law. If there is a bill left unsigned but was not vetoed by Abbott, then it automatically becomes law.

Vetoed or failed: A legislative proposal failed by missing a key deadline or did not make it out of the original committee for a floor vote. Abbott could also veto any bills sent to him.

Here are the bills to follow:

Senate Bill 7 — A priority bill that establishes an administrative framework for how water projects — including building of infrastructure that would transport water across the state and fixing leaking pipes — would be funded under the Texas Water Development Board. The bill would also establish the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee for oversight and the Office of Water Supply Conveyance Coordination to improve regional and statewide water infrastructure connectivity.

Bill has been filed.

Senate Joint Resolution 66 — A constitutional amendment to dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 16 years beginning in 2027. The annual stream of state tax dollars and insurance premium taxes would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. It calls for 80% of the appropriated money to go to the New Water Supply for Texas Fund — prioritizing desalination projects and pipelines transporting water from the water-rich regions of Texas to arid, drought-stricken areas. The other 20% would go to fixing aging infrastructure. The bill would expire in 2043.

In the works. Bill has been referred to a Senate committee on finance.

House Bill 16 — A sweeping priority bill that touches on water funds, flood plans, and the development of infrastructure to transport water into a water supply system. The bill would also create the Texas Water Fund Advisory Committee to oversee operations on each fund and report to the Texas Water Development Board.

In the works. Bill has been referred to a House committee on natural resources.

House Joint Resolution 7 — A constitutional amendment to dedicate $1 billion to the Texas Water Fund for up to 10 years. The annual stream of state tax dollars would help cities and local water agencies buy more water and repair aging infrastructure. It gives the Texas Water Development Board full discretion over the $1 billion, allowing it to distribute the money as it sees fit.

In the works. Bill has been scheduled for a public hearing.

House Bill 1501 — Directs the Texas State University Meadows Center for Water and the Environment to study how Texas can develop seawater desalination plants along the Gulf Coast. Desalination is the process of removing salt from seawater or salty groundwater so it can be used for drinking water, irrigation and industrial uses. The study will examine international desalination plants in Israel and Australia to identify best practices and challenges, including financial barriers and explore ways to dispose of brine — highly salty and concentrated liquid — including its potential use in nuclear energy production. The findings must be reported by Jan. 1, 2027.

In the works. Bill has been referred to a House committee on natural resources.

House Bill 310 — A bill that directs the Texas Water Development Board, the state agency that oversees water supplies and projects, on how to allocate money from the Texas Water Fund. The board would ensure a portion of the money is used for water infrastructure projects and prioritized by risk or need. It would go to rural areas with less than 20,000 people, and areas with at least 20,000 residents but no more than 150,000. It also calls for money to be spent on a statewide public awareness campaign about water.

In the works: Bill is pending in a House committee on natural resources.

Senate Bill 1145 — Authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to issue permits for land application of produced water — wastewater that comes out of the ground during the extraction of oil and gas production — and develop standards that prevent pollution of surface and groundwater.

Passed the Senate: The House has received the bill for review.

House Bill 2080 — A bill that calls for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality to appoint a panel to review the duties of a groundwater conservation district. This would happen if someone files a petition with the TCEQ requesting an inquiry about a conservation district. If the petition is not dismissed, the commission would appoint a review panel of five members.

Bill has been filed.

House Bill 2114 — This bill aims to prevent conflicts of interest by barring engineering firms involved in state or regional water planning from also constructing reservoirs. It specifically applies to feasibility reviews assessing costs, timelines, land acquisition, and economic impacts. One example of a case is the $7 billion Marvin Nichols Reservoir, which groups estimate would flood over 66,000 acres of northeast Texas forest. A feasibility review released last year found no major obstacles to the project. The firm that conducted the review, Freese and Nichols Inc., is also set to build the reservoir.

Bill has been filed.

House Bill 1400 — Creates a new fund to support scientific research that will expand knowledge about the quality, quantity and threats to the state’s groundwater resources. It will be administered by the Texas Water Development Board.

In the works. Bill has been scheduled for a public hearing.


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.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

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

PFAS Found in Nearly Half of Americans’ 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

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.

Canadian company in negotiations with Trump to mine seabed

Environmentalists call bid to skirt UN treaty ‘reckless’ amid fears that mining will cause irreversible biodiversity lossA Canadian deep-sea mining firm has revealed it has been negotiating with the Trump administration to bypass a UN treaty and potentially gain authorisation from the US to mine in international waters.The revelation has stunned environmentalists, who condemned the move as “reckless” and a “slap in the face for multilateralism”. Continue reading...

A Canadian deep-sea mining firm has revealed it has been negotiating with the Trump administration to bypass a UN treaty and potentially gain authorisation from the US to mine in international waters.The revelation has stunned environmentalists, who condemned the move as “reckless” and a “slap in the face for multilateralism”.It comes at a time when calls for a pause in deep-sea mining are intensifying. More than 30 governments are calling for a moratorium, arguing that there is not enough data for exploitation of the seabed to go ahead, and scientists have warned industrial mining could cause irreversible loss of biodiversity.In a statement on its website on Thursday, Gerard Barron, chief executive of The Metals Company (TMC), said: “We believe we have sufficient knowledge to get started and prove we can manage environmental risks.The International Seabed Authority talks in Kingston, Jamaica. Photograph: IISD“What we need is a regulator with a robust regulatory regime, and who is willing to give our application a fair hearing. That’s why we’ve formally initiated the process of applying for licences and permits under the existing US seabed mining code.”Countries have been meeting in Jamaica this week at the UN-affiliated International Seabed Authority (ISA) to decide rules governing the extraction of metals such as copper and cobalt from the seabed.They also discussed actions to take if a mining application was submitted before regulations were set. The ISA council has said no application should be considered before its rules are finalised, which is a long way off.The Metals Company said it had initiated a process under the US Department of Commerce to apply for exploration and permits to extract minerals from the ocean floor. It plans to apply under the 1980 Deep Seabed Hard Mineral Resources Act instead of the ISA, and is moving forward “with urgency”.TMC has already carried out extensive exploratory work in the Clarion-Clipperton Zone, an area of the Pacific Ocean seabed between Mexico and Hawaii that is rich in polymetallic nodules but also a wealth of newly discovered species.The ISA, established in 1994 under a treaty ratified by 169 member states plus the EU, has jurisdiction over mining in international waters and decides how extraction should proceed. However, the US has never ratified the treaty.Louisa Casson, a campaigner for Greenpeace International, said: “This announcement is a slap in the face to international cooperation,” adding that it was “an insult to multilateralism”.Duncan Currie, legal adviser for the Deep Sea Conservation Coalition, said: “TMC appears to want to pivot from seabed mining without regulations to seabed mining entirely outside of all international frameworks. A moratorium is needed to prevent this kind of international conflict, discord and chaos.”Georgina María Guillén Grillo, a representative from Costa Rica at the ISA talks, told the New York Times: “This seems a totally improper move by the Metals Company.”

Earth’s Storage of Water in Soil, Lakes and Rivers Is Dwindling. and It’s Especially Bad for Farming

New research finds that global warming has significantly reduced the amount of water that’s being stored around the world in soil, lakes, rivers, snow and other places on land

University of Melbourne hydrology professor Dongryeol Ryu and his collaborator Ki-Weon Seo were on a train to visit Ryu's family when they found something startling. Stopped at a station for technical issues, Seo had pulled out his computer to pass the time with some work when a result popped up in their data that Ryu could hardly believe: It suggested a “remarkable” amount of Earth's water stored on land had been depleted.“At first we thought, ‘That’s an error in the model,’” Ryu said. After a year of checking, they determined it wasn't.Their paper, published Thursday in the journal Science, finds that global warming has notably reduced the amount of water that’s being stored around the world in soil, lakes, rivers, snow and other places, with potentially irreversible impacts on agriculture and sea level rise. The researchers say the significant shift of water from land to the ocean is particularly worrisome for farming, and hope their work will strengthen efforts to reduce water overuse.Earth's soil moisture dropped by over 2,000 gigatons in roughly the last 20 years, the study says. For context, that's more than twice Greenland's ice loss from 2002 to 2006, the researchers noted. Meanwhile, the frequency of once-in-a-decade agricultural and ecological droughts has increased, global sea levels have risen and the Earth's pole has shifted.Ryu and his colleagues used three different data sources to verify that Earth storing less water on land than it once did. He also said their results reveal a deeper truth about the land, one farmers have to contend with frequently: When a big, dramatic rainfall event comes after a drought, sometimes leading to huge floods, that doesn't mean the water stored underground has recovered.“It seems that lands lost their elasticity to recover the previous level,” he said.Whether that elasticity ever returns will depend on whether humans take action on climate change and significantly change water use, the researchers say. The increasing heat stress on plants means they need more water. Agriculture, particularly irrigated agriculture, continues to draw up more water than it can afford. And humans are continuing to emit greenhouse gases without a strong effort to reverse course."There are long-term climate changes that have happened in the past and presumably could occur in the future that could reverse the trend described, but probably not in our lifetimes,” said Katharine Jacobs, a University of Arizona professor of environmental science who wasn't involved in the study. “Because greenhouse gases will continue to cause global warming well into the future, the rate of evaporation and transpiration is not likely to reduce any time soon.”The study also confirms an explanation for a slight wobble in the rotation of the Earth — it’s being driven by the changing moisture levels of the planet. “When I read this thing, I was very excited,” said Luis Samaniego, a professor of hydrology and data science at the University of Potsdam who wrote an overview commentary discussing the findings in Science. “It's a fascinating puzzle of all disciplines that came at the right moment to verify something that was not possible before.”But Samaniego stressed that the finding isn't only fascinating; it's a wake-up call. Imagine the planet's wobble like an electrocardiogram for the Earth, he said. Seeing this result is like detecting an arrhythmia. Choosing not to listen to the doctor — “that's what we are playing around with at the moment,” he said.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Fears 19th Century canal could start to run dry in days

The operators of a 225-year-old canal warn of an "urgent" water shortage without imminent rainfall.

Fears historic canal could start to run dry in daysSteffan MessengerEnvironment correspondent, BBC Wales NewsGareth BryerBBC Wales NewsBeacon Park Boats / As You See It MediaThe Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal is set to mark its 225th anniversary this yearThe Welsh government has been urged to intervene over fears one of the country's most popular canals could start to dry up within a week.Operators of the 225-year-old Monmouthshire and Brecon Canal have warned of an "urgent" water shortage without the prospect of imminent rainfall.It comes amid debate over how the historic attraction should secure its water supply in future after limits were placed on taking water from the environmentally-sensitive River Usk.The Welsh government said any arrangement between the Canal & River Trust and Welsh Water would be a commercial decision in which it should play no role.The 35-mile (56 km) waterway weaves its way through the Bannau Brycheiniog National Park - formerly known as the Brecon Beacons National Park - and the Blaenavon industrial landscape World Heritage Site, attracting an estimated 3 million visitors a year for boating, walking and cycling."Everything the canal supports is at threat - we risk losing the jewel in the crown of south Wales," said Tracey Leake-Jones, who runs the Bridge 46 to Five Locks canal group.Made up of volunteers, the group runs events along the canal and has fundraised to install planters, benches and signs.The prospect of it having to close due to water shortages was "utterly devastating", she said."There has to be a solution found, and my view is that the Welsh government and its leaders are the only people who can bring all the main players together."She pointed to new housing estates being built along the canal with the waterway used as a marketing tool, and said the local council hoped to be able to open up further stretches down to Cwmbran, describing the economic benefits as "unimaginable"."Should we have problems with water supply then what's going to happen to those plans for restoration that we've all been working on for the past three years?"Tracey Leake-Jones says the canal is of vital importance for the local communityNews broke of the difficulties facing the canal in a letter sent to local businesses by Glandŵr Cymru, the Canal and River Trust in Wales, in February.It explained the canal, which once transported iron and coal to Newport docks, had relied on funnelling water from the River Usk and its tributaries which accounted for 80-90% of its water supply.Recent changes in legislation, designed in part to protect rivers in the face of climate change, means licenses are now required, restricting the amount of water that can be taken.Last year, Glandŵr Cymru lost an appeal against some of the conditions stipulated by environmental regulator Natural Resources Wales (NRW).The River Usk is a designated special area of conservation protected by law due to its importance for rare wildlife including the Atlantic salmon, which is threatened with extinction from Wales."The canal took around 30% of the total flow of the river in 2022 - which was the last dry year period," said Gail Davies-Walsh, chief executive of Afonydd Cymru which represents river groups across Wales.Limits on abstraction were needed to ensure the species and habitats had sufficient water to survive "particularly during dry summers and low flow periods," she said.New licenses restrict the amount of water that can be taken from the River Usk at times when the river's own levels are lowMark Evans, director of Glandŵr Cymru, said the trust accepted it could no longer continue to abstract water from the Usk at the same level as it had in the past.But recent dry weather highlighted the urgency of finding an alternative supply, he said."The amount of water we can take is starting to really concern us," he explained."It's urgent today, looking at the forecast for the next week."At some point we'll have to stop the boats from using the locks," he warned, adding that both the canal's users and its wildlife would be impacted as levels fell.Discussions have been taking place in recent weeks with Welsh Water over whether it could help to support the canal during periods of prolonged dry weather.But this would come with "financial implications" and the potential of having to pay commercial rates for the water, resulting in a considerable bill the charity could not afford, he claimed.Alasdair Kirkpatrick employs 30 people, hiring out boats he designs and builds himselfAlasdair Kirkpatrick, owner of Beacon Park Boats, said he had already received phone calls from customers who had booked boat trips asking about the impact on them."I never saw this one coming," he said, "it has really shocked us all.""All my customers nip down to the local pubs and restaurants, 25% of them fly in from overseas from places like America and Australia, using local taxis and train services and spending a fortune locally," he added.He urged the Welsh government "to fund Welsh Water to continue to maintain water levels and keep all the operators of this canal in business - it cannot be lost".PADespite being a special area of conservation, rare wildlife in the River Usk is struggling - with salmon among the species facing steep declines Gavin Bown from Natural Resources Wales said regulating water abstraction was "a complex, evidence-based process that carefully balances environmental needs with those of local communities"."Our priority is to protect the integrity of the River Usk and the Severn Estuary, both designated as special areas of conservation," he explained, adding the regulator would continue to work collaboratively with the Canal and River Trust.A Welsh Water spokesman said the River Usk was "one of the primary sources of drinking water to around 250,000 customers across south east Wales".But it remained "one of our least drought resilient supply areas", with limited water resources to deal with the impacts of climate change and population growth."We have proposed in the driest of years to supply some customers with water from the River Tawe through an emergency pumping station and use this spare capacity in abstraction from the River Usk to support the canal," he explained.However this would come at a cost, with discussions ongoing over whether this would be affordable to the trust."To provide this free of charge or risk the future supply of drinking water to our customers, isn't an option for us," he said.The Welsh government said "protecting and enhancing our environment and natural resources is key to addressing the climate and nature emergencies"."The limits placed on the licences were in line with the amounts applied for by the Canal & River Trust," a spokesperson said.They added any arrangement between the canal and Welsh Water would be a commercial contractual decision in which the Welsh government should play no role.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

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

CONTACT US

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

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