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.

Cleaning up the Poop-Polluted Seine for the Paris Olympics

News Feed
Friday, July 19, 2024

Rachel Feltman: One week from today the 2024 Olympics in Paris will begin with a parade—not in a stadium but on a river. Thousands of athletes from more than 200 territories will float on boats down the Seine. City officials and event organizers have placed a big bet on this beloved river: that the infamously polluted waters will be safe for Olympic swimmers to compete in.But their efforts have been met with—well, we’ll say skepticism, to say the least. Back in June, when the mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, was set to swim in the Seine to show her confidence in the cleanup efforts, a trending hashtag encouraged folks to poop in the river in—protest? Unclear. Hidalgo did successfully take a dip this past Wednesday and gave the experience rave reviews.[CLIP: Cheering and clapping]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.Feltman: But that doesn’t mean the Olympic events will go quite as swimmingly. You know what they say about stepping into the same river twice: those things are always changing and always flowing. And the Seine’s bacterial levels are still fluctuating from day to day.For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Today I’m joined by associate news editor Allison Parshall, who investigated this high-profile cleanup attempt for us.So, Allison tell me: Are Olympians going to swim in the river or not?Allison Parshall: I would love to be able to tell you—I would peer into my crystal ball—but I think until there are bodies in the water, I’m not going to be able to say one way or the other [laughs]. And that’s mostly because they’ve basically done all that they can at this point from the perspective of, you know, cleaning up the river. The main problem right now is bacteria, and some of the things that could cause bacteria levels to be higher are kind of just at the whims of the weather: It’s if it’s too rainy, bacteria counts can be too high. If it’s not sunny enough, because sun can kill the bacteria—the bacteria counts can be too high.So throughout June, basically, the bacteria counts were much higher than, I think, anyone expected or wanted. And that’s because the—Western Europe, in general, had an unseasonably wet summer, at least in the beginning.So basically, after a very wet June, the organizers, who had been very proudly saying, “There is no backup plan. We’re all in on this end. There is no backup plan. There’s no plan B,” announced a backup plan.So the backup plan for the marathon swimming events, at least, which is one of the ones that would be in the Seine, is this nautical stadium outside of the city. It’s this very fancy facility inaugurated in 2019. It’s already hosting the Olympic and Paralympic canoe, kayak and rowing events, so there’s that.Feltman: Yeah, well, it’s good that they have that backup.From above, this facility definitely looks like that kind of freaky ocean arena from The Hunger Games, but ...Parshall: Hate it.Feltman: [Laughs] I’m, I’m sure it’s lovely, though. I’m sure it’s a lovely place to be and definitely better than a river full of poop, in any case.Parshall: It’s probably hard not to be better than a river full of poop.Feltman: [Laughs]Parshall: But basically this nautical stadium, it’s already hosting those boating events, but the triathlon wouldn’t be able to be relocated there—so that’s the other event that would be swimming in the Seine. So that they would just have to postpone that and hope the bacteria levels go down. Or if they don’t, it could just get downgraded from a triathlon to a duathlon, which I feel like is a different sport.Feltman: Yeah, I think if I had trained for years to specifically be in the triathlon in the Olympics, and swimming got cut, and that was, like, my main strength, I’d be pretty ticked off. It makes you wonder why Paris, like, took such a chance on the Seine in the first place.Parshall: This river is such an important part of their city’s history and culture, and they’ve been trying to clean it for a long time, and so it might be one of the only cities right now where we’re seeing them place such a big bet in the international spotlight on being able to clean this up, especially when it’s kind of at the whims of the weather.But they’re definitely not the only city facing this problem with its urban waterways. Industrialized cities across the world are reaching this kind of new phase of their river cleanup, at least for these rivers that were once so polluted by industry. And it’s possible that after, you know, decades, centuries of being very unsightly waste dumps, we might get to swim in a lot of urban waterways again.So I’ve got kind of, like, a personal touchstone with this. I grew up in Ohio. My Seine, as I like to say, was the Cuyahoga River ...Feltman: Oh, wow.Parshall: Have you heard of the Cuyahoga River?Feltman: I have in the context of it being, like, a river so gross that it inspired us to create the Environmental Protection Agency [laughs], which is ...Parshall: [Laughs] Yeah, when I was a kid ...Feltman: Such a legacy.Parshall: When I was a kid it was just, like, the place that we would go as a family on the weekends. We would walk and bike the towpath, and then there was this farmers’ market where we would get ice cream and corn on the cob; it was very Ohio. But I didn’t realize until I grew up that most of the people like you that knew of the Cuyahoga knew of it because they’d seen pictures of it on fire—like, the surface of the river burning, or at least ...Feltman: Yeah, yeah.Parshall: The industrial waste ...Feltman: It’s striking [laughs].Parshall: Yeah, yeah—that picture in particular. There’s this one particular photo, and it shows these firefighters spewing water onto the surface of the river to, you know, try to put out the fire, and it looks so preposterous because a river’s not supposed to be on fire.So when I picture these urban waterways that have just been so polluted but have since been relatively cleaned up, I picture this infamous image of the Cuyahoga on fire and then what I know it as today, which is kind of a muddy, lazy river but definitely not on fire.And I actually talked to a hydrologist about this—her name’s Anne Jefferson. She researches urban waterways at the University of Vermont, but she spent 10 years of her career at Kent State University, studying the nearby Cuyahoga.Anne Jefferson: The Cuyahoga River didn’t just catch fire once; it caught fire [a] dozen-plus times. It was oil. It was paint byproducts. It was all sorts of industrial byproducts. It—also sewage—the sewage is not the part that’s gonna catch fire, but it’s, you know, if you fell into the Cuyahoga, or if you fell into the Thames in London, the advice was that you take yourself to the hospital immediately.Parshall: I can’t say that I really want to swim in the Cuyahoga River, even these days—like, it generally looks pretty muddy—but it’s no longer a flaming health hazard, so there’s that. And its misfortunes really helped galvanize support for new regulation: that’s the Clean Water Act of ’72.Paris’s river may not have caught fire, but it kind of has a similar story, as do many other urban rivers. After the industrial revolution they just become this dumping ground that carries all of our waste, both of our bodies and of our factories, out and away from cities. And in Paris, this killed what was a really important part of the city’s culture at the time, which is bathing in the Seine.Feltman: That’s so wild. Like, I, I can know intellectually that before cities were super polluted, their rivers were nice places to be, but I still have trouble picturing people, like, you know, bathing in the Seine.Parshall: Yeah, I don’t know that this was all—the case with every industrialized city, but it was definitely the case with Paris. I mean, a lot of cities, you know, they kind of grew up around the industrial revolution. But with Paris there are several very famous paintings by Monet, Renoir, Seurat that depict these riverside scenes, and there’s these famous floating bathhouses that were filled with untreated water from the city—like, basically barges.And swimming in the river was largely banned in 1867. But that was just in the city, and then in the suburbs it was banned in 1923, but some people kept swimming in it. Like, Paris did hold the 1900 Olympics swimming events in the Seine. So this would be—if they do swim, it’ll be upholding this 124-year-old tradition. But by the 1960s the river was just well and truly disgusting, and it had been declared biologically dead.Feltman: I mean, first of all, continuing to swim in it—extremely French. Second of all, what does it, what does it actually mean for a river to be biologically dead?Parshall: Yeah, I asked Anne Jefferson that question because I also had never found a definition. She has never found a definition, so it might be kind of, like, an advocacy phrase.Feltman: A vibe.Parshall: People say it a lot—a vibe. It—basically it means, roughly, there’s no fish, or there’s no “desirable species,” quote, unquote ...Feltman: Fair enough.Parshall: But the bacteria, as undesirable as they may be—or some of them, at least—those were thriving, definitely, in the 1960s. And later—in ’85, I think, was the low point—it was measured—the Seine was measured to have 500,000 colony-forming units of E. coli per 100 milliliters of water. That’s, like, 500 times the current European standard for bathing.Yeah, we’re—I mean, I’m picturing sludge. I imagine it would not be sludge—like, it would still be water consistency—but I’m just picturing a lot of bacteria. But I have to say, the Cuyahoga, during a dry summer around the same time, I think in, like, ’82, the E. coli counts ranged up to 2 million. So not that it’s a competition, but I think we won—or lost.And I mean, it was only a few years later—so in 1988—that the mayor of Paris at the time, Jacques Chirac, he promised to swim in the Seine within three years’ time. Would you like to guess if he kept the promise?Feltman: [Laughs] I’m gonna guess he did not do that [laughs].Parshall: That is correct. He did not do that.Feltman: That just makes me think of the Mary-Kate and Ashley movie Passport to Paris. Do you remember the scene where they’re visiting their, I think, grandfather is, like, the French ambassador or something, and he’s trying to get the French to accept this, like, clean water proposal, and they’re like, “No! We don’t need your stinky, American, clean water.”Parshall: “No!”Feltman: Yeah. And then they surprise the, I guess, president or prime minister at a dinner party with a glass of tap water that’s untreated, and it’s like—it looks like chocolate milk. It’s, like, so disgusting. And I’m sure they took a lot of liberties with crafting the, the untreated Parisian water. But it was a real—I think I saw a TikTok recently that was like, “This full-on Erin Brockovich moment from Mary-Kate and Ashley.” Very formative for me [laughs].Parshall: I somehow missed this movie, but I think I absolutely would have loved it. And, like, I guess to be clear, the French government is not saying that the river needs to be clean enough to drink. That would be a whole other thing entirely.But the, the river is definitely in a better shape now than it was when, you know, Jacques Chirac promised to swim in it. Last summer, actually, the part where the Olympic races are supposed to start from, of the Seine, it was swimmable seven days out of 10, on average, so it’s not that bad. Like, like, people are making it sound like it’s literally, like, a flaming—you know, like the Cuyahoga or something. But in reality it, it’s more variable than that. And the fact that it’s possible at all for any, you know, somewhat safe swimming in rivers like the Seine right now is because of those regulations like the one from Mary-Kate and Ashley movie Passport to Paris or whatever. It’s because of those regulations that targeted the obvious and easy places where waste was being dumped into our water—so like the pipes just dumping industrial waste straight into the water. That’s what Jefferson called the “low-hanging fruit.”Jefferson: So once you’ve taken care of, like, the paint and the oil and stuff going into the river from the factories, what you’re left with is this harder problem that we call nonpoint source pollution. It’s the pollution that’s coming from a million different little places, right?In the air it’s the stuff coming out of the tailpipes of our cars. For water it’s stormwater runoff: it’s all the water coming off the rooftops and pavements, being carried by thousands of pipes, coming into every small stream, every river, you know, from every neighborhood.Parshall: So that stormwater that’s coming from all those pipes, it’s a problem because it’s carrying things like fertilizer, pesticides, bacteria—basically all sorts of stuff that you just don’t want in the water. And even worse, in many cities like Paris—also kind of, like, 60 percent of New York—when it enters stormwater drains, it gets funneled into the same pipes that carry the raw sewage to our wastewater plants, and when it rains too much, you get a bit of a backup.Jefferson: In order to keep this sewage-stormwater mix from backing up into people’s houses, you have what are called combined sewer overflows, so sort of like the safety pressure release valves on the system where now water is being diverted out of the sewage network and directly into streams, rivers and lakes. And this was one of those “it seemed like a good idea at the time” legacies that constrain what we do now.Parshall: And the reason it’s so constraining is because it’s so expensive to fix. Basically what you’d have to do is dig up all of those combined pipes and replace them with two sets: one for sewage, one for stormwater. And some cities like Minneapolis have tried to do that, but probably the more common option is to just find somewhere to store all of that mixed sewer-stormwater stuff until the treatment plant is ready to take care of it, so I reached out to Bruno Pigott, the acting assistant administrator for water at the EPA, and he mentioned some ways that cities are going about doing this.Bruno Pigott: In Indianapolis, for example, they put in a 28-mile tunnel [system] underground that captures all this combined sewage before it gets to a water body, stores it and then sends it to a wastewater treatment plant for cleanup.Parshall: So he actually told me a bit about this time that he got to visit the site of that project. He was working for the state of Indiana at the time, in, like, the 2010s. And this project is still under construction—and it cost $2 billion.Feltman: Wow.Pigott: I went down as they were building the tunnel and went into it—so the sewage that eventually will be in that tunnel was not, luckily, there when I was in it. But it looks very much like a tunnel that you would see in a subway. I mean, it’s that big. It’s tremendously large. You could drive a truck down this tunnel. It is, it’s so deep that it stores millions of gallons of sewage so that the treatment plants can actually treat it and send it out in a clean form back to the river.Parshall: So that’s not too different from Paris’ main solution ahead of the Olympic Games. They also just built this very big basin to hold all of that raw sewage-stormwater mix.Feltman: Oh, yeah ...Parshall: Yeah.Feltman: “The shove it all under the bed” method—tried and true [laughs].Parshall: [Laughs] Well, it’s more like “shove it under the bed, and then take a little bit out of it every day for the next few months until you can finally take care of it all” ...Feltman: Oh, great ...Parshall: So, yeah, yeah ...Feltman: That’s actually really nice.Parshall: So it’s not like—it’s not gonna sit in there forever. It’s actually kind of the logical solution because the whole problem in the first place is just the system does not have enough capacity to deal with all of this water. Their backup plan is dump it in rivers, which is not all that logical—it’s just, like Anne Jefferson said, seemed like a good idea at the time.This is probably just as logical of a solution, besides, you know, replacing all the pipes or scaling up the wastewater treatment’s capacity. But basically this basin, even though it sounds like it would be maybe the cheaper option, is still pretty expensive: they spent €90 million on it; that’s about $97 million. And that reservoir holds 50,000 cubic meters of liquid, so that is 20 Olympic-size swimming pools’ worth of raw sewage mélange that might otherwise get dumped into the river for the actual Olympic swimmers.Feltman: Incredible.Parshall: So that basin was completed in May, and bacteria levels in the water, which is the main concern for the swimming events, were still measuring too high throughout June, and that’s partially just because it’s been so unseasonably rainy, causing a lot more of those combined sewer overflows.For what it’s worth, the Olympics president said that he remains confident that the weather will be fine and the river will be fine come the end of July, so, you know, there’s that. But I did get to speak with someone who actually had the opportunity to swim in the Seine. Her name is Sibylle van der Walt. She’s the president of a clean water advocacy organization based in France.Sibylle van der Walt: It does mean a little bit of courage to, to, to swim in the Seine, firstly because the water is dark. It’s, it’s not transparent, and that is not a good sign.Feltman: How murky are we talking about here?Parshall: She told me that she couldn’t see much further down than about a foot [roughly 0.3 meters], so most of her body was totally obscured by the water.Feltman: Ugh, that’s—yeah, ew [laughs].Van der Walt: But it didn’t smell bad, that I can say, and I didn’t have a problem afterwards, so I was perhaps just lucky, and first you think, “Oh, what is—what am I doing here?” and so, but then you get used to it, and then it was actually very pleasant. It’s, it’s fun.Parshall: So Van der Walt got involved in the movement for swimmable urban rivers when she moved to France after living in Germany and Switzerland, and those are two countries where swimming in rivers is far more common.Van der Walt: I used to work at the University of Bern, where you have a river called Aare, and there even the president of the parliament goes for a swim during the lunch break, and it’s really, like, everyone walks around in a swimming costume and walks up the river, jumps in and comes back.Parshall: Apparently some people in Bern actually use the river to commute one way to work during the summers ...Feltman: What?Parshall: Like, they, like, pack up their belongings in floating, waterproof bags and just go for a dip, and I guess just coast home.Feltman: Oh, my gosh, I—so I assumed you meant, like, boating, but, no, we’re talking about people swimming ...Parshall: No, yeah—in the water.Feltman: Briefcase bobbing along behind them—incredible [laughs].Parshall: [Laughs] I literally did not believe this. I thought that it was one of those Internet stories, made up, and it doesn’t seem like this is something that people do really often, but I did email the Swiss Lifesaving Society—it’s a lifeguard association—to confirm because it sounded so far-fetched, and they warned me that the current in the river that goes through Bern is no joke, and they actually don’t recommend swimming in it right now, but some people appear to actually do this. And this kind of river-swimming culture seems like a total dream to me, that’s something totally unattainable in Paris and definitely in New York City, where we both live, and ...Feltman: Yeah.Parshall: Like, sure, these rivers are no longer full of stinky industrial waste, and cities are turning back toward them by building waterfront parks and business districts, but swimming in them? It feels harder ...Feltman: Yeah, yeah, a river doesn’t have to be on fire for me to not wanna swim in it. There’s, there’s a spectrum, really, from “on fire” to, to “swimmable,” and I don’t really feel like the Hudson is there yet.Parshall: Yeah, apparently they do the triathlon in—the New York City Triathlon—the swimming part is in the Hudson, so, you know, I’m not tempted to do that.Feltman: [Laughs] Yeah, I think I briefly, in, like, a moment of complete delusion a few years ago, I was like, “Maybe I’m gonna try to get into triathlons.” And I honestly don’t remember if the part about the triathlon being in the Hudson River was, like, a selling point to me, or if that was the moment when I was like, “Wait, I’ve suddenly remembered I absolutely don’t want to do a triathlon under any circumstances.”Parshall: I mean, I did go to the beach for the first time since moving to New York last weekend, and I was shocked at how pleasant it was. I think I forgot how much it’s enjoyable ...Feltman: Oh, yeah.Parshall: To swim in, like, natural waters.I mean, they’re installing a pool in the East River now in New York. They call it a, quote, “giant strainer” dropped into the river. So relatively soon you should be able to do that.Feltman: Yeah, I remember when the renderings for that first went around, and I, like, I would totally do it, but I kind of feel like tourists and, like, wannabe influencers are gonna make it terrible even if there isn’t tons of pathogenic bacteria in it. So, yeah, fingers crossed, but I, I have to say, I’m not optimistic.So, yeah, I’m getting the impression that, like, unless a city makes a big effort to make swimming safe, and that that’s been confirmed by outside testing, like, you probably don’t want to go do laps in an urban river. Would you say that’s true?Parshall: I don’t know if it totally needs a big effort in every city—some of them are just not as bad. Like, Sibylle Van der Walt told me about a couple cities in France where the quality is kind of fine already.But basically, if you’re looking at swimming in pretty much any urban waterway, you’re gonna wanna take precautions. And that includes checking the recent bacterial accounts for the water, if that information is available—a lot of cities do make it available. And just, when in doubt, do not swim after heavy rains, especially if the city has combined sewer and stormwater systems.Feltman: Sure, makes sense.Parshall: Yeah, also—whether or not the Olympians are actually able to swim in the Seine, at this point, you know, it’s a little bit of an act of God, but Paris’ mayor, Anne Hidalgo, and other Siene cleanup proponents, they really emphasize that this project will benefit Parisians beyond the Olympics, regardless of whether or not the Olympians are able to swim.So the government of Paris has said that there will be three public swimming sites that will be open for the summer of 2025. That’s next summer.Feltman: Yeah, no, that’s a really good point. And, you know, so much Olympics infrastructure, like, ends up not being useful to cities, you know, kind of infamously, after the fact, but it’s true that a clean, swimmable river is something that is gonna be really impactful.Parshall: Yeah, there’s a lot of kind of schadenfreude surrounding this whole situation, I think, just because the Olympics can be so fraught: There’s so much money involved. There’s livelihoods involved. There’s—France is in the midst of a difficult political time. It makes sense that people are so—have so—focused in on this as kind of a, a symbol of the success of the Olympics.But putting all of that aside, it, it seems like an uncomplicated good to me to be able to say, “Hey, this river is swimmable now,” or at least it’s a lot closer to swimmable, or even if it isn’t swimmable, there is, you know, 50 Olympic swimming pool worth of raw sewage that is, in the worst-case scenario …Feltman: No longer in the river.Parshall: Not being dumped into the river.I think, you know, if, if the Olympics has to be the excuse for them to spend €90 million on it—which, again, like, in comparison, Indianapolis spent $2 billion—so it, it can be, it can be a really fraught topic, but at the same time, hey, clean water—seems like a good thing.Feltman: [Laughs] It’s true. We all love our water to not be full of poop.So, listeners, what’s your take: Would you go swimming in the Seine? Let us know at ScienceQuickly@sciam.com. While you’re there, feel free to share any feedback you have for us or any suggestions you have for topics we should cover. And if you have a second, it would also be great if you could give us a quick rating and review wherever you are listening to this podcast right now.Science Quickly is produced by me, Rachel Feltman, along with Fonda Mwangi, Kelso Harper, Madison Goldberg and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was reported and co-hosted by Allison Parshall. Madison Goldberg and Anaissa Ruiz Tejada edit our show, with fact-checking from Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith. Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news.For Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Have a great weekend!

The Seine will be the stage for the Paris 2024 Olympics’ Opening Ceremony—and for its marathon swimming events. But this urban waterway is challenging to keep clean.

Rachel Feltman: One week from today the 2024 Olympics in Paris will begin with a parade—not in a stadium but on a river. Thousands of athletes from more than 200 territories will float on boats down the Seine. City officials and event organizers have placed a big bet on this beloved river: that the infamously polluted waters will be safe for Olympic swimmers to compete in.

But their efforts have been met with—well, we’ll say skepticism, to say the least. Back in June, when the mayor of Paris, Anne Hidalgo, was set to swim in the Seine to show her confidence in the cleanup efforts, a trending hashtag encouraged folks to poop in the river in—protest? Unclear. Hidalgo did successfully take a dip this past Wednesday and gave the experience rave reviews.

[CLIP: Cheering and clapping]


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.


Feltman: But that doesn’t mean the Olympic events will go quite as swimmingly. You know what they say about stepping into the same river twice: those things are always changing and always flowing. And the Seine’s bacterial levels are still fluctuating from day to day.

For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Today I’m joined by associate news editor Allison Parshall, who investigated this high-profile cleanup attempt for us.

So, Allison tell me: Are Olympians going to swim in the river or not?

Allison Parshall: I would love to be able to tell you—I would peer into my crystal ball—but I think until there are bodies in the water, I’m not going to be able to say one way or the other [laughs]. And that’s mostly because they’ve basically done all that they can at this point from the perspective of, you know, cleaning up the river. The main problem right now is bacteria, and some of the things that could cause bacteria levels to be higher are kind of just at the whims of the weather: It’s if it’s too rainy, bacteria counts can be too high. If it’s not sunny enough, because sun can kill the bacteria—the bacteria counts can be too high.

So throughout June, basically, the bacteria counts were much higher than, I think, anyone expected or wanted. And that’s because the—Western Europe, in general, had an unseasonably wet summer, at least in the beginning.

So basically, after a very wet June, the organizers, who had been very proudly saying, “There is no backup plan. We’re all in on this end. There is no backup plan. There’s no plan B,” announced a backup plan.

So the backup plan for the marathon swimming events, at least, which is one of the ones that would be in the Seine, is this nautical stadium outside of the city. It’s this very fancy facility inaugurated in 2019. It’s already hosting the Olympic and Paralympic canoe, kayak and rowing events, so there’s that.

Feltman: Yeah, well, it’s good that they have that backup.

From above, this facility definitely looks like that kind of freaky ocean arena from The Hunger Games, but ...

Parshall: Hate it.

Feltman: [Laughs] I’m, I’m sure it’s lovely, though. I’m sure it’s a lovely place to be and definitely better than a river full of poop, in any case.

Parshall: It’s probably hard not to be better than a river full of poop.

Feltman: [Laughs]

Parshall: But basically this nautical stadium, it’s already hosting those boating events, but the triathlon wouldn’t be able to be relocated there—so that’s the other event that would be swimming in the Seine. So that they would just have to postpone that and hope the bacteria levels go down. Or if they don’t, it could just get downgraded from a triathlon to a duathlon, which I feel like is a different sport.

Feltman: Yeah, I think if I had trained for years to specifically be in the triathlon in the Olympics, and swimming got cut, and that was, like, my main strength, I’d be pretty ticked off. It makes you wonder why Paris, like, took such a chance on the Seine in the first place.

Parshall: This river is such an important part of their city’s history and culture, and they’ve been trying to clean it for a long time, and so it might be one of the only cities right now where we’re seeing them place such a big bet in the international spotlight on being able to clean this up, especially when it’s kind of at the whims of the weather.

But they’re definitely not the only city facing this problem with its urban waterways. Industrialized cities across the world are reaching this kind of new phase of their river cleanup, at least for these rivers that were once so polluted by industry. And it’s possible that after, you know, decades, centuries of being very unsightly waste dumps, we might get to swim in a lot of urban waterways again.

So I’ve got kind of, like, a personal touchstone with this. I grew up in Ohio. My Seine, as I like to say, was the Cuyahoga River ...

Feltman: Oh, wow.

Parshall: Have you heard of the Cuyahoga River?

Feltman: I have in the context of it being, like, a river so gross that it inspired us to create the Environmental Protection Agency [laughs], which is ...

Parshall: [Laughs] Yeah, when I was a kid ...

Feltman: Such a legacy.

Parshall: When I was a kid it was just, like, the place that we would go as a family on the weekends. We would walk and bike the towpath, and then there was this farmers’ market where we would get ice cream and corn on the cob; it was very Ohio. But I didn’t realize until I grew up that most of the people like you that knew of the Cuyahoga knew of it because they’d seen pictures of it on fire—like, the surface of the river burning, or at least ...

Feltman: Yeah, yeah.

Parshall: The industrial waste ...

Feltman: It’s striking [laughs].

Parshall: Yeah, yeah—that picture in particular. There’s this one particular photo, and it shows these firefighters spewing water onto the surface of the river to, you know, try to put out the fire, and it looks so preposterous because a river’s not supposed to be on fire.

So when I picture these urban waterways that have just been so polluted but have since been relatively cleaned up, I picture this infamous image of the Cuyahoga on fire and then what I know it as today, which is kind of a muddy, lazy river but definitely not on fire.

And I actually talked to a hydrologist about this—her name’s Anne Jefferson. She researches urban waterways at the University of Vermont, but she spent 10 years of her career at Kent State University, studying the nearby Cuyahoga.

Anne Jefferson: The Cuyahoga River didn’t just catch fire once; it caught fire [a] dozen-plus times. It was oil. It was paint byproducts. It was all sorts of industrial byproducts. It—also sewage—the sewage is not the part that’s gonna catch fire, but it’s, you know, if you fell into the Cuyahoga, or if you fell into the Thames in London, the advice was that you take yourself to the hospital immediately.

Parshall: I can’t say that I really want to swim in the Cuyahoga River, even these days—like, it generally looks pretty muddy—but it’s no longer a flaming health hazard, so there’s that. And its misfortunes really helped galvanize support for new regulation: that’s the Clean Water Act of ’72.

Paris’s river may not have caught fire, but it kind of has a similar story, as do many other urban rivers. After the industrial revolution they just become this dumping ground that carries all of our waste, both of our bodies and of our factories, out and away from cities. And in Paris, this killed what was a really important part of the city’s culture at the time, which is bathing in the Seine.

Feltman: That’s so wild. Like, I, I can know intellectually that before cities were super polluted, their rivers were nice places to be, but I still have trouble picturing people, like, you know, bathing in the Seine.

Parshall: Yeah, I don’t know that this was all—the case with every industrialized city, but it was definitely the case with Paris. I mean, a lot of cities, you know, they kind of grew up around the industrial revolution. But with Paris there are several very famous paintings by Monet, Renoir, Seurat that depict these riverside scenes, and there’s these famous floating bathhouses that were filled with untreated water from the city—like, basically barges.

And swimming in the river was largely banned in 1867. But that was just in the city, and then in the suburbs it was banned in 1923, but some people kept swimming in it. Like, Paris did hold the 1900 Olympics swimming events in the Seine. So this would be—if they do swim, it’ll be upholding this 124-year-old tradition. But by the 1960s the river was just well and truly disgusting, and it had been declared biologically dead.

Feltman: I mean, first of all, continuing to swim in it—extremely French. Second of all, what does it, what does it actually mean for a river to be biologically dead?

Parshall: Yeah, I asked Anne Jefferson that question because I also had never found a definition. She has never found a definition, so it might be kind of, like, an advocacy phrase.

Feltman: A vibe.

Parshall: People say it a lot—a vibe. It—basically it means, roughly, there’s no fish, or there’s no “desirable species,” quote, unquote ...

Feltman: Fair enough.

Parshall: But the bacteria, as undesirable as they may be—or some of them, at least—those were thriving, definitely, in the 1960s. And later—in ’85, I think, was the low point—it was measured—the Seine was measured to have 500,000 colony-forming units of E. coli per 100 milliliters of water. That’s, like, 500 times the current European standard for bathing.

Yeah, we’re—I mean, I’m picturing sludge. I imagine it would not be sludge—like, it would still be water consistency—but I’m just picturing a lot of bacteria. But I have to say, the Cuyahoga, during a dry summer around the same time, I think in, like, ’82, the E. coli counts ranged up to 2 million. So not that it’s a competition, but I think we won—or lost.

And I mean, it was only a few years later—so in 1988—that the mayor of Paris at the time, Jacques Chirac, he promised to swim in the Seine within three years’ time. Would you like to guess if he kept the promise?

Feltman: [Laughs] I’m gonna guess he did not do that [laughs].

Parshall: That is correct. He did not do that.

Feltman: That just makes me think of the Mary-Kate and Ashley movie Passport to Paris. Do you remember the scene where they’re visiting their, I think, grandfather is, like, the French ambassador or something, and he’s trying to get the French to accept this, like, clean water proposal, and they’re like, “No! We don’t need your stinky, American, clean water.”

Parshall: “No!”

Feltman: Yeah. And then they surprise the, I guess, president or prime minister at a dinner party with a glass of tap water that’s untreated, and it’s like—it looks like chocolate milk. It’s, like, so disgusting. And I’m sure they took a lot of liberties with crafting the, the untreated Parisian water. But it was a real—I think I saw a TikTok recently that was like, “This full-on Erin Brockovich moment from Mary-Kate and Ashley.” Very formative for me [laughs].

Parshall: I somehow missed this movie, but I think I absolutely would have loved it. And, like, I guess to be clear, the French government is not saying that the river needs to be clean enough to drink. That would be a whole other thing entirely.

But the, the river is definitely in a better shape now than it was when, you know, Jacques Chirac promised to swim in it. Last summer, actually, the part where the Olympic races are supposed to start from, of the Seine, it was swimmable seven days out of 10, on average, so it’s not that bad. Like, like, people are making it sound like it’s literally, like, a flaming—you know, like the Cuyahoga or something. But in reality it, it’s more variable than that. And the fact that it’s possible at all for any, you know, somewhat safe swimming in rivers like the Seine right now is because of those regulations like the one from Mary-Kate and Ashley movie Passport to Paris or whatever. It’s because of those regulations that targeted the obvious and easy places where waste was being dumped into our water—so like the pipes just dumping industrial waste straight into the water. That’s what Jefferson called the “low-hanging fruit.”

Jefferson: So once you’ve taken care of, like, the paint and the oil and stuff going into the river from the factories, what you’re left with is this harder problem that we call nonpoint source pollution. It’s the pollution that’s coming from a million different little places, right?

In the air it’s the stuff coming out of the tailpipes of our cars. For water it’s stormwater runoff: it’s all the water coming off the rooftops and pavements, being carried by thousands of pipes, coming into every small stream, every river, you know, from every neighborhood.

Parshall: So that stormwater that’s coming from all those pipes, it’s a problem because it’s carrying things like fertilizer, pesticides, bacteria—basically all sorts of stuff that you just don’t want in the water. And even worse, in many cities like Paris—also kind of, like, 60 percent of New York—when it enters stormwater drains, it gets funneled into the same pipes that carry the raw sewage to our wastewater plants, and when it rains too much, you get a bit of a backup.

Jefferson: In order to keep this sewage-stormwater mix from backing up into people’s houses, you have what are called combined sewer overflows, so sort of like the safety pressure release valves on the system where now water is being diverted out of the sewage network and directly into streams, rivers and lakes. And this was one of those “it seemed like a good idea at the time” legacies that constrain what we do now.

Parshall: And the reason it’s so constraining is because it’s so expensive to fix. Basically what you’d have to do is dig up all of those combined pipes and replace them with two sets: one for sewage, one for stormwater. And some cities like Minneapolis have tried to do that, but probably the more common option is to just find somewhere to store all of that mixed sewer-stormwater stuff until the treatment plant is ready to take care of it, so I reached out to Bruno Pigott, the acting assistant administrator for water at the EPA, and he mentioned some ways that cities are going about doing this.

Bruno Pigott: In Indianapolis, for example, they put in a 28-mile tunnel [system] underground that captures all this combined sewage before it gets to a water body, stores it and then sends it to a wastewater treatment plant for cleanup.

Parshall: So he actually told me a bit about this time that he got to visit the site of that project. He was working for the state of Indiana at the time, in, like, the 2010s. And this project is still under construction—and it cost $2 billion.

Feltman: Wow.

Pigott: I went down as they were building the tunnel and went into it—so the sewage that eventually will be in that tunnel was not, luckily, there when I was in it. But it looks very much like a tunnel that you would see in a subway. I mean, it’s that big. It’s tremendously large. You could drive a truck down this tunnel. It is, it’s so deep that it stores millions of gallons of sewage so that the treatment plants can actually treat it and send it out in a clean form back to the river.

Parshall: So that’s not too different from Paris’ main solution ahead of the Olympic Games. They also just built this very big basin to hold all of that raw sewage-stormwater mix.

Feltman: Oh, yeah ...

Parshall: Yeah.

Feltman: “The shove it all under the bed” method—tried and true [laughs].

Parshall: [Laughs] Well, it’s more like “shove it under the bed, and then take a little bit out of it every day for the next few months until you can finally take care of it all” ...

Feltman: Oh, great ...

Parshall: So, yeah, yeah ...

Feltman: That’s actually really nice.

Parshall: So it’s not like—it’s not gonna sit in there forever. It’s actually kind of the logical solution because the whole problem in the first place is just the system does not have enough capacity to deal with all of this water. Their backup plan is dump it in rivers, which is not all that logical—it’s just, like Anne Jefferson said, seemed like a good idea at the time.

This is probably just as logical of a solution, besides, you know, replacing all the pipes or scaling up the wastewater treatment’s capacity. But basically this basin, even though it sounds like it would be maybe the cheaper option, is still pretty expensive: they spent €90 million on it; that’s about $97 million. And that reservoir holds 50,000 cubic meters of liquid, so that is 20 Olympic-size swimming pools’ worth of raw sewage mélange that might otherwise get dumped into the river for the actual Olympic swimmers.

Feltman: Incredible.

Parshall: So that basin was completed in May, and bacteria levels in the water, which is the main concern for the swimming events, were still measuring too high throughout June, and that’s partially just because it’s been so unseasonably rainy, causing a lot more of those combined sewer overflows.

For what it’s worth, the Olympics president said that he remains confident that the weather will be fine and the river will be fine come the end of July, so, you know, there’s that. But I did get to speak with someone who actually had the opportunity to swim in the Seine. Her name is Sibylle van der Walt. She’s the president of a clean water advocacy organization based in France.

Sibylle van der Walt: It does mean a little bit of courage to, to, to swim in the Seine, firstly because the water is dark. It’s, it’s not transparent, and that is not a good sign.

Feltman: How murky are we talking about here?

Parshall: She told me that she couldn’t see much further down than about a foot [roughly 0.3 meters], so most of her body was totally obscured by the water.

Feltman: Ugh, that’s—yeah, ew [laughs].

Van der Walt: But it didn’t smell bad, that I can say, and I didn’t have a problem afterwards, so I was perhaps just lucky, and first you think, “Oh, what is—what am I doing here?” and so, but then you get used to it, and then it was actually very pleasant. It’s, it’s fun.

Parshall: So Van der Walt got involved in the movement for swimmable urban rivers when she moved to France after living in Germany and Switzerland, and those are two countries where swimming in rivers is far more common.

Van der Walt: I used to work at the University of Bern, where you have a river called Aare, and there even the president of the parliament goes for a swim during the lunch break, and it’s really, like, everyone walks around in a swimming costume and walks up the river, jumps in and comes back.

Parshall: Apparently some people in Bern actually use the river to commute one way to work during the summers ...

Feltman: What?

Parshall: Like, they, like, pack up their belongings in floating, waterproof bags and just go for a dip, and I guess just coast home.

Feltman: Oh, my gosh, I—so I assumed you meant, like, boating, but, no, we’re talking about people swimming ...

Parshall: No, yeah—in the water.

Feltman: Briefcase bobbing along behind them—incredible [laughs].

Parshall: [Laughs] I literally did not believe this. I thought that it was one of those Internet stories, made up, and it doesn’t seem like this is something that people do really often, but I did email the Swiss Lifesaving Society—it’s a lifeguard association—to confirm because it sounded so far-fetched, and they warned me that the current in the river that goes through Bern is no joke, and they actually don’t recommend swimming in it right now, but some people appear to actually do this. And this kind of river-swimming culture seems like a total dream to me, that’s something totally unattainable in Paris and definitely in New York City, where we both live, and ...

Feltman: Yeah.

Parshall: Like, sure, these rivers are no longer full of stinky industrial waste, and cities are turning back toward them by building waterfront parks and business districts, but swimming in them? It feels harder ...

Feltman: Yeah, yeah, a river doesn’t have to be on fire for me to not wanna swim in it. There’s, there’s a spectrum, really, from “on fire” to, to “swimmable,” and I don’t really feel like the Hudson is there yet.

Parshall: Yeah, apparently they do the triathlon in—the New York City Triathlon—the swimming part is in the Hudson, so, you know, I’m not tempted to do that.

Feltman: [Laughs] Yeah, I think I briefly, in, like, a moment of complete delusion a few years ago, I was like, “Maybe I’m gonna try to get into triathlons.” And I honestly don’t remember if the part about the triathlon being in the Hudson River was, like, a selling point to me, or if that was the moment when I was like, “Wait, I’ve suddenly remembered I absolutely don’t want to do a triathlon under any circumstances.”

Parshall: I mean, I did go to the beach for the first time since moving to New York last weekend, and I was shocked at how pleasant it was. I think I forgot how much it’s enjoyable ...

Feltman: Oh, yeah.

Parshall: To swim in, like, natural waters.

I mean, they’re installing a pool in the East River now in New York. They call it a, quote, “giant strainer” dropped into the river. So relatively soon you should be able to do that.

Feltman: Yeah, I remember when the renderings for that first went around, and I, like, I would totally do it, but I kind of feel like tourists and, like, wannabe influencers are gonna make it terrible even if there isn’t tons of pathogenic bacteria in it. So, yeah, fingers crossed, but I, I have to say, I’m not optimistic.

So, yeah, I’m getting the impression that, like, unless a city makes a big effort to make swimming safe, and that that’s been confirmed by outside testing, like, you probably don’t want to go do laps in an urban river. Would you say that’s true?

Parshall: I don’t know if it totally needs a big effort in every city—some of them are just not as bad. Like, Sibylle Van der Walt told me about a couple cities in France where the quality is kind of fine already.

But basically, if you’re looking at swimming in pretty much any urban waterway, you’re gonna wanna take precautions. And that includes checking the recent bacterial accounts for the water, if that information is available—a lot of cities do make it available. And just, when in doubt, do not swim after heavy rains, especially if the city has combined sewer and stormwater systems.

Feltman: Sure, makes sense.

Parshall: Yeah, also—whether or not the Olympians are actually able to swim in the Seine, at this point, you know, it’s a little bit of an act of God, but Paris’ mayor, Anne Hidalgo, and other Siene cleanup proponents, they really emphasize that this project will benefit Parisians beyond the Olympics, regardless of whether or not the Olympians are able to swim.

So the government of Paris has said that there will be three public swimming sites that will be open for the summer of 2025. That’s next summer.

Feltman: Yeah, no, that’s a really good point. And, you know, so much Olympics infrastructure, like, ends up not being useful to cities, you know, kind of infamously, after the fact, but it’s true that a clean, swimmable river is something that is gonna be really impactful.

Parshall: Yeah, there’s a lot of kind of schadenfreude surrounding this whole situation, I think, just because the Olympics can be so fraught: There’s so much money involved. There’s livelihoods involved. There’s—France is in the midst of a difficult political time. It makes sense that people are so—have so—focused in on this as kind of a, a symbol of the success of the Olympics.

But putting all of that aside, it, it seems like an uncomplicated good to me to be able to say, “Hey, this river is swimmable now,” or at least it’s a lot closer to swimmable, or even if it isn’t swimmable, there is, you know, 50 Olympic swimming pool worth of raw sewage that is, in the worst-case scenario …

Feltman: No longer in the river.

Parshall: Not being dumped into the river.

I think, you know, if, if the Olympics has to be the excuse for them to spend €90 million on it—which, again, like, in comparison, Indianapolis spent $2 billion—so it, it can be, it can be a really fraught topic, but at the same time, hey, clean water—seems like a good thing.

Feltman: [Laughs] It’s true. We all love our water to not be full of poop.

So, listeners, what’s your take: Would you go swimming in the Seine? Let us know at ScienceQuickly@sciam.com. While you’re there, feel free to share any feedback you have for us or any suggestions you have for topics we should cover. And if you have a second, it would also be great if you could give us a quick rating and review wherever you are listening to this podcast right now.

Science Quickly is produced by me, Rachel Feltman, along with Fonda Mwangi, Kelso Harper, Madison Goldberg and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was reported and co-hosted by Allison Parshall. Madison Goldberg and Anaissa Ruiz Tejada edit our show, with fact-checking from Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith. Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news.

For Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Have a great weekend!

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

‘Mad fishing’: the super-size fleet of squid catchers plundering the high seas

Every year a Chinese-dominated flotilla big enough to be seen from space pillages the rich marine life on Mile 201, a largely ungoverned part of the South Atlantic off ArgentinaIn a monitoring room in Buenos Aires, a dozen members of the Argentinian coast guard watch giant industrial-fishing ships moving in real time across a set of screens. “Every year, for five or six months, the foreign fleet comes from across the Indian Ocean, from Asian countries, and from the North Atlantic,” says Cdr Mauricio López, of the monitoring department. “It’s creating a serious environmental problem.”Just beyond Argentina’s maritime frontier, hundreds of foreign vessels – known as the distant-water fishing fleet – are descending on Mile 201, a largely ungoverned strip of the high seas in the South Atlantic, to plunder its rich marine life. The fleet regularly becomes so big it can be seen from space, looking like a city floating on the sea. Continue reading...

In a monitoring room in Buenos Aires, a dozen members of the Argentinian coast guard watch giant industrial-fishing ships moving in real time across a set of screens. “Every year, for five or six months, the foreign fleet comes from across the Indian Ocean, from Asian countries, and from the North Atlantic,” says Cdr Mauricio López, of the monitoring department. “It’s creating a serious environmental problem.”Just beyond Argentina’s maritime frontier, hundreds of foreign vessels – known as the distant-water fishing fleet – are descending on Mile 201, a largely ungoverned strip of the high seas in the South Atlantic, to plunder its rich marine life. The fleet regularly becomes so big it can be seen from space, looking like a city floating on the sea.The distant-water fishing fleet, seen from space, off the coast of Argentina. Photograph: AlamyThe charity Environmental Justice Foundation (EJF) has described it as one of the largest unregulated squid fisheries in the world, warning that the scale of activities could destabilise an entire ecosystem.“With so many ships constantly fishing without any form of oversight, the squid’s short, one-year life cycle simply is not being respected,” says Lt Magalí Bobinac, a marine biologist with the Argentinian coast guard.There are no internationally agreed catch limits in the region covering squid, and distant-water fleets take advantage of this regulatory vacuum.Steve Trent, founder of the EJF, describes the fishery as a “free for all” and says squid could eventually disappear from the area as a result of “this mad fishing effort”.The consequences extend far beyond squid. Whales, dolphins, seals, sea birds and commercially important fish species such as hake and tuna depend on the cephalopod. A collapse in the squid population could trigger a cascade of ecological disruption, with profound social and economic costs for coastal communities and key markets such as Spain, experts warn.“If this species is affected, the whole ecosystem is affected,” Bobinac says. “It is the food for other species. It has a huge impact on the ecosystem and biodiversity.”She says the “vulnerable marine ecosystems” beneath the fleet, such as deep-sea corals, are also at risk of physical damage and pollution.An Argentinian coast guard ship on patrol. ‘Outside our exclusive economic zone, we cannot do anything – we cannot board them, we cannot survey, nor inspect,’ says an officer. Photograph: EJFThree-quarters of squid jigging vessels (which jerk barbless lures up and down to imitate prey) that are operating on the high seas are from China, according to the EJF, with fleets from Taiwan and South Korea also accounting for a significant share.Activity on Mile 201 has surged over recent years, with total fishing hours increasing by 65% between 2019 and 2024 – a jump driven almost entirely by the Chinese fleet, which increased its activities by 85% in the same period, according to an investigation by the charity.The lack of oversight in Mile 201 has enabled something darker too. Interviews conducted by the EJF suggest widespread cruelty towards marine wildlife in the area. Crew reported the deliberate capture and killing of seals – sometimes in their hundreds – on more than 40% of Chinese squid vessels and a fifth of Taiwanese vessels.Other testimonies detailed the hunting of marine megafauna for body parts, including seal teeth. The EJF shared photos and videos with the Guardian of seals hanging on hooks and penguins trapped on decks.One of the huge squid-jigging ships. They also hunt seals, the EJF found. Photograph: EJFLt Luciana De Santis, a lawyer for the coast guard, says: “Outside our exclusive economic zone [EEZ], we cannot do anything – we cannot board them, we cannot survey, nor inspect.”An EEZ is a maritime area extending up to 200 nautical miles from a nation’s coast, with the rules that govern it set by that nation. The Argentinian coast guard says it has “total control” of this space, unlike the area just beyond this limit: Mile 201.But López says “a significant percentage of ships turn their identification systems off” when fishing in the area beyond this, otherwise known as “going dark” to evade detection.Crews working on the squid fleet are also extremely vulnerable. The EJF’s investigation uncovered serious human rights and labour abuses in Mile 201. Workers on the ships described physical violence, including hitting or strangulation, wage deductions, intimidation and debt bondage – a system that in effect traps them at sea. Many reported working excessive hours with little rest.Much of the squid caught under these conditions still enters major global markets in the European Union, UK and North America, the EJF warns – meaning consumers may be unknowingly buying seafood linked to animal cruelty, environmental destruction and human rights abuse.The charity is calling for a ban on imports linked to illegal or abusive fishing practices and a global transparency regime that makes it possible to see who is fishing where, when and how, by mandating an international charter to govern fishing beyond national waters.Cdr Mauricio López says many of the industrial fishing ships the Argentinian coastguard monitors turn off their tracking systems when they are in the area. Photograph: Harriet Barber“The Chinese distant-water fleet is the big beast in this,” says Trent. “Beijing must know this is happening, so why are they not acting? Without urgent action, we are heading for disaster.”The Chinese embassies in Britain and Argentina did not respond to requests for comment.

EPA Says It Will Propose Drinking Water Limit for Perchlorate, but Only Because Court Ordered It

The Environmental Protection Agency says it will propose a drinking water limit for perchlorate, a chemical in certain explosives

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Monday said it would propose a drinking water limit for perchlorate, a harmful chemical in rockets and other explosives, but also said doing so wouldn't significantly benefit public health and that it was acting only because a court ordered it.The agency said it will seek input on how strict the limit should be for perchlorate, which is particularly dangerous for infants, and require utilities to test. The agency’s move is the latest in a more than decade-long battle over whether to regulate perchlorate. The EPA said that the public benefit of the regulation did not justify its expected cost.“Due to infrequent perchlorate levels of health concern, the vast majority of the approximately 66,000 water systems that would be subject to the rule will incur substantial administrative and monitoring costs with limited or no corresponding public health benefits as a whole,” the agency wrote in its proposal.Perchlorate is used to make rockets, fireworks and other explosives, although it can also occur naturally. At some defense, aerospace and manufacturing sites, it seeped into nearby groundwater where it could spread, a problem that has been concentrated in the Southwest and along sections of the East Coast.Perchlorate is a concern because it affects the function of the thyroid, which can be particularly detrimental for the development of young children, lowering IQ scores and increasing rates of behavioral problems.Based on estimates that perchlorate could be in the drinking water of roughly 16 million people, the EPA determined in 2011 that it was a sufficient threat to public health that it needed to be regulated. Under the Safe Drinking Water Act, this determination required the EPA to propose and then finalize regulations by strict deadlines, with a proposal due in two years.It didn’t happen. First, the agency updated the science to better estimate perchlorate’s risks, but that took time. By 2016, the nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council sued to force action.During the first Trump administration, the EPA proposed a never-implemented standard that the NRDC said was less restrictive than any state limit and would lead to IQ point loss in children. It reversed itself in 2020, saying no standard was necessary because a new analysis had found the chemical was less dangerous and its appearance in drinking water less common than previously thought. That's still the agency's position. It said Monday that its data shows perchlorate is not widespread in drinking water.“We anticipate that fewer than one‑tenth of 1% of regulated water systems are likely to find perchlorate above the proposed limits,” the agency said. A limit will help the small number of places with a problem, but burden the vast majority with costs they don't need, officials said.The NRDC challenged that reversal and a federal appeals court said the EPA must propose a regulation for perchlorate, arguing that it still is a significant and widespread public health threat. The agency will solicit public comment on limits of 20, 40 and 80 parts per billion, as well as other elements of the proposal.“Members of the public deserve to know whether there’s rocket fuel in their tap water. We’re pleased to see that, however reluctantly, EPA is moving one step closer to providing the public with that information,” said Sarah Fort, a senior attorney with NRDC.EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has sought massive rollbacks of environmental rules and promoted oil and gas development. But on drinking water, the agency’s actions have been more moderate. The agency said it would keep the Biden administration's strict limits on two of the most common types of harmful “forever chemicals” in drinking water, while giving utilities more time to comply, and would scrap limits on other types of PFAS.The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

New Navy Report Gauges Training Disruption of Hawaii's Marine Mammals

Over the next seven years, the U.S. Navy estimates its ships will injure or kill just two whales in collisions as it tests and trains in Hawaiian waters

Over the next seven years, the U.S. Navy estimates its ships will injure or kill just two whales in collisions as it tests and trains in Hawaiian waters, and it concluded those exercises won’t significantly harm local marine mammal populations, many of which are endangered.However, the Navy also estimates the readiness exercises, which include sonar testing and underwater explosions, will cause more than 3 million instances of disrupted behavior, hearing loss or injury to whale and dolphin species plus monk seals in Hawaii alone.That has local conservation groups worried that the Navy’s California-Training-and-Testing-EIS-OEIS/Final-EIS-OEIS/">detailed report on its latest multi-year training plan is downplaying the true impacts on vulnerable marine mammals that already face growing extinction threats in Pacific training areas off of Hawaii and California.“If whales are getting hammered by sonar and it’s during an important breeding or feeding season, it could ultimately affect their ability to have enough energy to feed their young or find food,” said Kylie Wager Cruz, a senior attorney with the environmental legal advocacy nonprofit Earthjustice. “There’s a major lack of consideration,” she added,” of how those types of behavioral impacts could ultimately have a greater impact beyond just vessel strikes.”The Navy, Cruz said, didn’t consider how its training exercises add to the harm caused by other factors, most notably collisions with major shipping vessels that kill dozens of endangered whales in the eastern Pacific each year. Environmental law requires the Navy to do that, she said, but “they’re only looking at their own take,” or harm.The Navy, in a statement earlier this month, said it “committed to the maximum level of mitigation measures” that it practically could to curb environmental damage while maintaining its military readiness in the years ahead. The plan also covers some Coast Guard operations.Federal fishery officials recently approved the plan, granting the Navy the necessary exemptions under the Marine Mammal Protection Act to proceed despite the harms. It’s at least the third time that the Navy has had to complete an environmental impact report and seek those exemptions to test and train off Hawaii and California.In a statement Monday, a U.S. Pacific Fleet spokesperson said the Navy and fishery officials did consider “reasonably foreseeable cumulative effects” — the Navy’s exercises plus unrelated harmful impacts — to the extent it was required to do so under federal environmental law.Fishery officials didn’t weigh those unrelated impacts, the statement said, in determining that the Navy’s activities would have a negligible impact on marine mammals and other animals.The report covers the impacts to some 39 marine mammal species, including eight that are endangered, plus a host of other birds, turtles and other species that inhabit those waters.The Navy says it will limit use of some of its most intense sonar equipment in designated “mitigation areas” around Hawaii island and Maui Nui to better protect humpback whales and other species from exposure. Specifically, it says it won’t use its more intense ship-mounted sonar in those areas during the whales’ Nov. 15 to April 15 breeding season, and it won’t use those systems there for more than 300 hours a year.However, outside of those mitigation zones the Navy report lists 11 additional areas that are biologically important to other marine mammals species, including spinner and bottle-nosed dolphins, false killer whales, short-finned pilot whales and dwarf sperm whales.Those biologically important areas encompass all the waters around the main Hawaiian islands, and based on the Navy’s report they won’t benefit from the same sonar limits. For the Hawaii bottle-nosed dolphins, the Navy estimates its acoustic and explosives exercises will disrupt that species’ feeding, breeding and other behaviors more than 310,000 times, plus muffle their hearing nearly 39,000 times and cause as many as three deaths. The report says the other species will see similar disruptions.In its statement Monday, U.S. Pacific Fleet said the Navy considered the extent to which marine mammals would be affected while still allowing crews to train effectively in setting those mitigation zones.Exactly how the Navy’s numbers compare to previous cycles are difficult to say, Wager Cruz and others said, because the ocean area and total years covered by each report have changed.Nonetheless, the instances in which its Pacific training might harm or kill a marine mammal appear to be climbing.In 2018, for instance, a press release from the nonprofit Center For Biological Diversity stated that the Navy’s Pacific training in Hawaii and Southern California would harm marine mammals an estimated 12.5 million times over a five-year period.This month, the center put out a similar release stating that the Navy’s training would harm marine mammals across Hawaii plus Northern and Southern California an estimated 35 million times over a seven-year period.“There’s large swaths of area that don’t get any mitigation,” Wager Cruz said. “I don’t think we’re asking for, like, everywhere is a prohibited area by any means, but I think that the military should take a harder look and see if they can do more.”The Navy should also consider slowing its vessels to 10 knots during training exercises to help avoid the collisions that often kill endangered whales off the California Coast, Cruz said. In its response, U.S. Pacific Fleet said the Navy “seriously considered” whether it could slow its ships down but concluded those suggestions were impracticable, largely due to the impacts on its mission.Hawaii-based Matson two years ago joined the other major companies who’ve pledged to slow their vessels to those speeds during whale season in the shipping lanes where dozens of endangered blue, fin and humpback whales are estimated to be killed each year.Those numbers have to be significantly reduced, researchers say, if the species are to make a comeback.“There are ways to minimize harm,” Center for Biological Diversity Hawaii and Pacific Islands Director Maxx Phillips added in a statement, “and protect our natural heritage and national security at the same time.”This story was originally published by Honolulu Civil Beat 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 – December 2025

Hungary's 'Water Guardian' Farmers Fight Back Against Desertification

Southern Hungary landowner Oszkár Nagyapáti has been battling severe drought on his land

KISKUNMAJSA, Hungary (AP) — Oszkár Nagyapáti climbed to the bottom of a sandy pit on his land on the Great Hungarian Plain and dug into the soil with his hand, looking for a sign of groundwater that in recent years has been in accelerating retreat. “It’s much worse, and it’s getting worse year after year,” he said as cloudy liquid slowly seeped into the hole. ”Where did so much water go? It’s unbelievable.”Nagyapáti has watched with distress as the region in southern Hungary, once an important site for agriculture, has become increasingly parched and dry. Where a variety of crops and grasses once filled the fields, today there are wide cracks in the soil and growing sand dunes more reminiscent of the Sahara Desert than Central Europe. The region, known as the Homokhátság, has been described by some studies as semiarid — a distinction more common in parts of Africa, the American Southwest or Australian Outback — and is characterized by very little rain, dried-out wells and a water table plunging ever deeper underground. In a 2017 paper in European Countryside, a scientific journal, researchers cited “the combined effect of climatic changes, improper land use and inappropriate environmental management” as causes for the Homokhátság's aridification, a phenomenon the paper called unique in this part of the continent.Fields that in previous centuries would be regularly flooded by the Danube and Tisza Rivers have, through a combination of climate change-related droughts and poor water retention practices, become nearly unsuitable for crops and wildlife. Now a group of farmers and other volunteers, led by Nagyapáti, are trying to save the region and their lands from total desiccation using a resource for which Hungary is famous: thermal water. “I was thinking about what could be done, how could we bring the water back or somehow create water in the landscape," Nagyapáti told The Associated Press. "There was a point when I felt that enough is enough. We really have to put an end to this. And that's where we started our project to flood some areas to keep the water in the plain.”Along with the group of volunteer “water guardians,” Nagyapáti began negotiating with authorities and a local thermal spa last year, hoping to redirect the spa's overflow water — which would usually pour unused into a canal — onto their lands. The thermal water is drawn from very deep underground. Mimicking natural flooding According to the water guardians' plan, the water, cooled and purified, would be used to flood a 2½-hectare (6-acre) low-lying field — a way of mimicking the natural cycle of flooding that channelizing the rivers had ended.“When the flooding is complete and the water recedes, there will be 2½ hectares of water surface in this area," Nagyapáti said. "This will be quite a shocking sight in our dry region.”A 2024 study by Hungary’s Eötvös Loránd University showed that unusually dry layers of surface-level air in the region had prevented any arriving storm fronts from producing precipitation. Instead, the fronts would pass through without rain, and result in high winds that dried out the topsoil even further. Creation of a microclimate The water guardians hoped that by artificially flooding certain areas, they wouldn't only raise the groundwater level but also create a microclimate through surface evaporation that could increase humidity, reduce temperatures and dust and have a positive impact on nearby vegetation. Tamás Tóth, a meteorologist in Hungary, said that because of the potential impact such wetlands can have on the surrounding climate, water retention “is simply the key issue in the coming years and for generations to come, because climate change does not seem to stop.”"The atmosphere continues to warm up, and with it the distribution of precipitation, both seasonal and annual, has become very hectic, and is expected to become even more hectic in the future,” he said. Following another hot, dry summer this year, the water guardians blocked a series of sluices along a canal, and the repurposed water from the spa began slowly gathering in the low-lying field. After a couple of months, the field had nearly been filled. Standing beside the area in early December, Nagyapáti said that the shallow marsh that had formed "may seem very small to look at it, but it brings us immense happiness here in the desert.”He said the added water will have a “huge impact” within a roughly 4-kilometer (2½-mile) radius, "not only on the vegetation, but also on the water balance of the soil. We hope that the groundwater level will also rise.”Persistent droughts in the Great Hungarian Plain have threatened desertification, a process where vegetation recedes because of high heat and low rainfall. Weather-damaged crops have dealt significant blows to the country’s overall gross domestic product, prompting Prime Minister Viktor Orbán to announce this year the creation of a “drought task force” to deal with the problem.After the water guardians' first attempt to mitigate the growing problem in their area, they said they experienced noticeable improvements in the groundwater level, as well as an increase of flora and fauna near the flood site. The group, which has grown to more than 30 volunteers, would like to expand the project to include another flooded field, and hopes their efforts could inspire similar action by others to conserve the most precious resource. “This initiative can serve as an example for everyone, we need more and more efforts like this," Nagyapáti said. "We retained water from the spa, but retaining any kind of water, whether in a village or a town, is a tremendous opportunity for water replenishment.”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 – December 2025

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.