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.

EPA chief urges Mexico to help deliver '100% solution' to clean up polluted Tijuana River

News Feed
Wednesday, April 23, 2025

U.S. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin on Tuesday called for Mexico and the U.S. to develop a “100% solution” to stop the flow of raw sewage from Tijuana that has polluted the Tijuana River and left communities near the border coping with foul odors and beaches that are often closed because of high bacteria levels.“Americans on our side of the border who have been dealing with this for decades are out of patience,” Zeldin said during a news conference in San Diego. “They want action and they’re right.”Zeldin visited the river north of the border and met with Mexican government officials as well as local officials in San Diego County. He said the Trump administration is seeking “max collaboration and extreme urgency to end a crisis that should have ended a long time ago.”The Tijuana River has been plagued with untreated sewage and industrial waste from Tijuana for decades. The city’s growth has far outpaced the existing sewage treatment plants, and inadequate and broken facilities spew waste into the river, polluting the water and air in Imperial Beach and other communities near the border.Zeldin met for about 90 minutes on Monday night with Mexican Environment Secretary Alicia Bárcena and other Mexican officials, who he said indicated that Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and her administration are “fully committed to doing their part to resolving this issue.” Bárcena said in a post on social media that it was a “very productive meeting.”“We agreed to reinforce our joint actions,” Bárcena said, “to accelerate the projects to address the sanitation of Rio Tijuana for the well-being of our communities.”Zeldin said Mexico still needs to provide $88 million that it previously pledged in a 2022 agreement. He said that U.S. and Mexican officials soon plan to draw up a “specific statement from both countries” outlining actions the Mexican government will take to help address the problems.“We all need to be on the same page on the 100% solution from the U.S. side that if all of these things on that list get done, this crisis is over,” Zeldin said.He didn’t discuss costs or a timetable, but said the goal should be to “to get every project done as fast as humanly possible.”The environmental group American Rivers last week ranked the Tijuana River No. 2 on its annual list of the nation’s most endangered rivers, up from No. 9 on the list last year. The group said it elevated the river on the list to bring greater attention to the waterway’s chronic pollution problems and the lack of action to clean it up.Environmental advocates have urged the U.S. government to prioritize fixing and expanding the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant north of the border, which handles sewage from Tijuana and is in disrepair.Zeldin toured the South Bay plant, where he met with Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre and other officials. With him were members of Congress including Reps. Darrell Issa (R-Vista) and Mike Levin (D-San Juan Capistrano).Levin said the U.S. government has appropriated $653 million for fixing and expanding the South Bay wastewater plant — an amount that steadily increased after an initial $300 million was committed in 2020.“We’ve got to get those shovels in the ground,” Levin said. “We’ve got to get the South Bay plant up and running, doubled in capacity, as quickly as possible.”Zeldin also said he was meeting with Navy SEALs who train in the area and have suffered illnesses because of the polluted water.In a recent report, the Department of Defense said about 1,100 cases of illness were reported among Navy SEALS and other service members who were exposed to high levels of bacteria when they trained in and around the ocean near the border.“This has been a problem for decades. It hasn’t been corrected. It’s only gotten worse,” said Dan’l Steward, a retired Navy captain and former SEAL who lives in Coronado but did not attend Tuesday’s events.Decades ago, Steward got sick after basic underwater SEAL training and had to take antibiotics to recover. Steward said he has heard similar stories from SEALs and candidates who undergo training along the beaches in Coronado. “It’s a national security issue,” Steward said. For Navy personnel in the area, he said, “it’s limiting them in their ability to properly train, and it’s endangering their lives for the ones that are going through basic training in particular.”Others affected, he said, include Marines, Coast Guard service members and Border Patrol agents. Steward said his daughter, while surfing nearby, became sick with an infection from a type of bacteria called MRSA, which is resistant to many antibiotics.“The United States has a role to help improve the situation, even though their plants are south of the border,” Steward said. “We all have a role to play here. And I also feel that’s the only way to solve the problem.”Ramon Chairez, director of environmental advocacy for the Encinitas-based nonprofit group Un Mar de Colores, said he’d like to see various actions taken on the U.S. side of the border, including working to dismantle culverts where polluted water cascades down and sends polluted water vapor and gases into the air.Chairez said he thought Zeldin’s focus on collaboration between Mexico and the U.S. made sense.“Overall, I think the general tone is pointing more towards holding Mexico accountable, although there’s some acknowledgment that it’s going to be a collaborative effort on both sides of the border,” Chairez said.One topic that wasn’t discussed but has contributed to the problems, he said, is that many U.S.-based companies have set up factories on the Mexican side of the border.“I didn’t hear a word about maquiladoras and factories and industries on the Mexican side and holding them accountable,” he said. “There’s American and California-based corporations operating all along the border, and especially in Tijuana, and they’re polluting the river just as much.”Matthew Tejada, senior vice president of environmental health for the Natural Resources Defense Fund, said the commitments from U.S. officials sound good, but he also said delivering on those pledges will be more complicated because of cuts in budget and staffing. He noted that Zeldin has said he wants to eliminate 65% of the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget.“It will be an interesting trick for EPA to achieve exactly those sorts of outcomes while they are internally tearing down the very staff and systems they need to actually make those changes happen,” Tejada said.He said the Trump administration’s recent actions, including cutting funding and rolling back environmental protection measures, are “making it that much harder for this country to actually have clean air, clean land and clean water.”

EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin visited the polluted Tijuana River on the U.S.-Mexico border, calling for a '100% solution' to clean up raw sewage that has fouled the waterway for years.

U.S. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin on Tuesday called for Mexico and the U.S. to develop a “100% solution” to stop the flow of raw sewage from Tijuana that has polluted the Tijuana River and left communities near the border coping with foul odors and beaches that are often closed because of high bacteria levels.

“Americans on our side of the border who have been dealing with this for decades are out of patience,” Zeldin said during a news conference in San Diego. “They want action and they’re right.”

Zeldin visited the river north of the border and met with Mexican government officials as well as local officials in San Diego County. He said the Trump administration is seeking “max collaboration and extreme urgency to end a crisis that should have ended a long time ago.”

The Tijuana River has been plagued with untreated sewage and industrial waste from Tijuana for decades. The city’s growth has far outpaced the existing sewage treatment plants, and inadequate and broken facilities spew waste into the river, polluting the water and air in Imperial Beach and other communities near the border.

Zeldin met for about 90 minutes on Monday night with Mexican Environment Secretary Alicia Bárcena and other Mexican officials, who he said indicated that Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum and her administration are “fully committed to doing their part to resolving this issue.”

Bárcena said in a post on social media that it was a “very productive meeting.”

“We agreed to reinforce our joint actions,” Bárcena said, “to accelerate the projects to address the sanitation of Rio Tijuana for the well-being of our communities.”

Zeldin said Mexico still needs to provide $88 million that it previously pledged in a 2022 agreement. He said that U.S. and Mexican officials soon plan to draw up a “specific statement from both countries” outlining actions the Mexican government will take to help address the problems.

“We all need to be on the same page on the 100% solution from the U.S. side that if all of these things on that list get done, this crisis is over,” Zeldin said.

He didn’t discuss costs or a timetable, but said the goal should be to “to get every project done as fast as humanly possible.”

The environmental group American Rivers last week ranked the Tijuana River No. 2 on its annual list of the nation’s most endangered rivers, up from No. 9 on the list last year. The group said it elevated the river on the list to bring greater attention to the waterway’s chronic pollution problems and the lack of action to clean it up.

Environmental advocates have urged the U.S. government to prioritize fixing and expanding the South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant north of the border, which handles sewage from Tijuana and is in disrepair.

Zeldin toured the South Bay plant, where he met with Imperial Beach Mayor Paloma Aguirre and other officials. With him were members of Congress including Reps. Darrell Issa (R-Vista) and Mike Levin (D-San Juan Capistrano).

Levin said the U.S. government has appropriated $653 million for fixing and expanding the South Bay wastewater plant — an amount that steadily increased after an initial $300 million was committed in 2020.

“We’ve got to get those shovels in the ground,” Levin said. “We’ve got to get the South Bay plant up and running, doubled in capacity, as quickly as possible.”

Zeldin also said he was meeting with Navy SEALs who train in the area and have suffered illnesses because of the polluted water.

In a recent report, the Department of Defense said about 1,100 cases of illness were reported among Navy SEALS and other service members who were exposed to high levels of bacteria when they trained in and around the ocean near the border.

“This has been a problem for decades. It hasn’t been corrected. It’s only gotten worse,” said Dan’l Steward, a retired Navy captain and former SEAL who lives in Coronado but did not attend Tuesday’s events.

Decades ago, Steward got sick after basic underwater SEAL training and had to take antibiotics to recover. Steward said he has heard similar stories from SEALs and candidates who undergo training along the beaches in Coronado.

“It’s a national security issue,” Steward said. For Navy personnel in the area, he said, “it’s limiting them in their ability to properly train, and it’s endangering their lives for the ones that are going through basic training in particular.”

Others affected, he said, include Marines, Coast Guard service members and Border Patrol agents. Steward said his daughter, while surfing nearby, became sick with an infection from a type of bacteria called MRSA, which is resistant to many antibiotics.

“The United States has a role to help improve the situation, even though their plants are south of the border,” Steward said. “We all have a role to play here. And I also feel that’s the only way to solve the problem.”

Ramon Chairez, director of environmental advocacy for the Encinitas-based nonprofit group Un Mar de Colores, said he’d like to see various actions taken on the U.S. side of the border, including working to dismantle culverts where polluted water cascades down and sends polluted water vapor and gases into the air.

Chairez said he thought Zeldin’s focus on collaboration between Mexico and the U.S. made sense.

“Overall, I think the general tone is pointing more towards holding Mexico accountable, although there’s some acknowledgment that it’s going to be a collaborative effort on both sides of the border,” Chairez said.

One topic that wasn’t discussed but has contributed to the problems, he said, is that many U.S.-based companies have set up factories on the Mexican side of the border.

“I didn’t hear a word about maquiladoras and factories and industries on the Mexican side and holding them accountable,” he said. “There’s American and California-based corporations operating all along the border, and especially in Tijuana, and they’re polluting the river just as much.”

Matthew Tejada, senior vice president of environmental health for the Natural Resources Defense Fund, said the commitments from U.S. officials sound good, but he also said delivering on those pledges will be more complicated because of cuts in budget and staffing. He noted that Zeldin has said he wants to eliminate 65% of the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget.

“It will be an interesting trick for EPA to achieve exactly those sorts of outcomes while they are internally tearing down the very staff and systems they need to actually make those changes happen,” Tejada said.

He said the Trump administration’s recent actions, including cutting funding and rolling back environmental protection measures, are “making it that much harder for this country to actually have clean air, clean land and clean water.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

When lithium mining starts, who benefits, and who’s at risk? Inside this Salton Sea case.

Two non-profits filed arguments with the Fourth District Court of Appeal last week, asking the court to reconsider a claim they filed in 2024 that the environmental impact report for the Hell’s Kitchen lithium mine near the Salton Sea neglects potential problems with air quality, water use, hazardous materials and tribal cultural resources.

In summary Two non-profits filed arguments with the Fourth District Court of Appeal last week, asking the court to reconsider a claim they filed in 2024 that the environmental impact report for the Hell’s Kitchen lithium mine near the Salton Sea neglects potential problems with air quality, water use, hazardous materials and tribal cultural resources. Critics of a proposed lithium mine near the Salton Sea entered round two of their fight to force stricter environmental review of the project. It’s the latest stage in a legal impasse over the massive lithium project. Environmental groups are trying to make sure nearby residents get the benefits of lithium production, while guarding against harmful impacts. The company says critics are using court challenges to stall an important energy project. The nonprofits Comite Civico del Valle and Earthworks filed arguments with the Fourth District Court of Appeal last week, asking the court to reconsider a claim they filed in 2024, which a superior court judge dismissed earlier this year. READ MORE >>> Geologically rich but economically poor, Salton Sea communities want a say in their lithium future In their appeal filed Sept. 11, the groups argue that the environmental impact report for the Hell’s Kitchen lithium mine neglects potential problems with air quality, water use, hazardous materials and tribal cultural resources. “The project would create a high-water demand in an arid desert environment where the drying out of the Salton Sea worsens severe air pollution impacts,” the brief stated. Lauren Rose, a spokesperson for Controlled Thermal Resources, the parent company of Hell’s Kitchen, denounced what she called a “frivolous legal appeal.” “This group’s ongoing actions are a clear abuse of the original intentions of (the California Environmental Quality Act) and only serve to delay progress on clean energy projects that are essential to the community, California, and the nation,” she said in a statement to CalMatters. Hell’s Kitchen promises to unearth thousands of kilotons of lithium, a mineral essential to electric car batteries, cellphones and other electronics.  Officials with the nonprofits say they’re in favor of lithium production, but want to ensure it doesn’t compromise the health and environment of surrounding communities. “We make the case that the project must be corrected to meet the standards that protect our community and our environment,” Luis Olmedo, executive director of Comite Civico del Valle, told CalMatters. “The lawsuit isn’t about stopping clean energy. We are for clean energy.” The groups also released a report summarizing their call for heightened scrutiny of the project’s impacts. And they laid out demands that included creating a Lithium Valley joint powers authority with a local advisory commission, dedicating more of the state’s lithium extraction excise tax to areas closest to the project, and enacting an additional environmental mitigation fee on lithium produced there.  Under the existing formula, Bombay Beach, a small hamlet on the Salton Sea near the project, would get $8,631 to offset impacts of the project, while larger areas such as El Centro, Calexico and Imperial would get six-figure payments. READ MORE >>> The rotten egg smell at the Salton Sea isn’t just a nuisance. It can make people sick. Bari Bean, deputy CEO of natural resources for Imperial County, said in a statement to CalMatters that the lithium tax formula is “a practical and balanced framework that considers both population size and geographic proximity to the lithium resource.”  Bean said a joint powers authority would duplicate existing systems for community input. Imperial County wouldn’t support additional lithium fees, she said, since California already has stricter environmental protections than other states, “making development in California more challenging and often less cost competitive.” State and federal officials have predicted that the area around the Salton Sea that they call  “Lithium Valley” could become one of the world’s biggest sources of the “white gold,” freeing the U.S. from dependence on other countries for the critical mineral. Imperial County Supervisor Ryan E. Kelley said the project will advance both regional economic growth and U.S. energy goals. “This initiative will position Imperial County as a leader in clean energy, contribute to California’s sustainability goals, and strengthen the United States’ critical mineral supply chain,” Kelley said in a statement to CalMatters.  However, Rose said the ongoing court challenge has halted that momentum, and risks stalling lithium production in California. “Just a few short years ago, Imperial County was leading the charge for clean energy and sustainable critical minerals development in the United States,” she said. “Now, billions of investment dollars have flowed to other states, including Nevada, Utah, Texas, and Arkansas, leaving California in the dust.” Olmedo said his group has never called for injunctions against the project, but wants safeguards on its operations. Hell’s Kitchen would extract lithium and other critical minerals from super-heated brine in the Salton Sea aquifer and then reinject the brine into the earth, in what the company calls a closed loop system that’s cleaner than other lithium mining systems. Cal Poly Pomona Professor James Blair, an advisor to Comite Del Civico and member of Imperial County’s Lithium Valley Academic Taskforce, said the environmental review doesn’t prove that claim. Blair said direct lithium extraction is framed as a “cleaner, greener method of lithium extraction compared to open mine or brine ponds,” but research on similar systems show that they use lots of fresh water. If that’s the case at Hell’s Kitchen it could worsen the decline of the shrinking Salton Sea. “Novel technologies bring unknown results,” Blair said. “We don’t really know how much water is needed.”

Tens of Thousands Protest Dundee's Ecuador Mine Project Near Key Water Reserve

QUITO (Reuters) -Tens of thousands of residents and local leaders in Ecuador's central Azuay province took to the streets on Tuesday to demand the...

QUITO (Reuters) -Tens of thousands of residents and local leaders in Ecuador's central Azuay province took to the streets on Tuesday to demand the suspension of a mining project by Canada's Dundee Precious Metals, which they say will affect a vital water reserve.The government of President Daniel Noboa had granted Dundee an environmental license to start building the Loma Larga gold mine there, but as community pressure mounted, the country's energy minister in August suspended the start of construction work until Dundee provides an environmental management plan. Provincial authorities reject the project, saying it will affect the region's 3,200-hectare Quimsacocha reserve and its surrounding paramos - highland moors that act as giant sponges and supply the bulk of drinking water to major cities there.Authorities estimated that over 90,000 people marched in the provincial capital of Cuenca on Tuesday, chanting "Hands off Quimsacocha!" and "Water is worth more than anything!""We want the national government to revoke the environmental license," Cuenca Mayor Cristian Zamora said. "The streets of Cuenca are roaring ... and they will have to listen to us."Dundee declined to comment on the protesters' demands.Despite Ecuador's significant gold and copper reserves, just two mines are operating in the country - projects owned by Canada's Lundin Gold and EcuaCorriente, which is held by a Chinese mining consortium.Noboa, meanwhile, stepped back from the project, saying responsibility for what happens next lies with the local authorities."The municipality and prefecture must take responsibility," he said in a radio interview on Friday, saying if Dundee takes them to an arbitration court that would have to go. "There is a very high probability (the project will not go ahead), but there is also a probability that there will be problems in the future."Strong community opposition, environmental concerns and legal uncertainty in Ecuador have contributed to a relative lack of mining projects. In Azuay, residents have rejected mining projects at the ballot box and courts have ruled in their favor to block mining projects in the area.(Reporting by Alexandra Valencia; Writing by Sarah Morland; Editing by Richard Chang)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Santa Monica's waves have turned a bright pink. How can the dye job improve water quality?

Monday's pink, fluorescent dye drop in Santa Monica Bay is part of a project to study how water circulation could be driving poor water quality.

Over the next two weeks, surfers and beachgoers in Santa Monica may spot waves that have a pink, fluorescent hue — but officials say not to worry.The luminous, pink color spreading across the Santa Monica Bay is from a temporary, nontoxic dye that researchers are using to study how ocean circulation might contribute to the bay’s poor water quality. The project kicked off Monday morning, as UCLA and Heal the Bay researchers discharged the first of four batches of the pink dye near the Santa Monica Pier. “By following where the dye goes, we will better understand how the breakwater changes the environment around it, providing insight into Santa Monica beach’s poor water quality,” Isabella Arzeno-Soltero, an assistant professor of civil and environmental engineering at UCLA and a researcher on the project, said in a statement. Although the pink dye on Monday didn’t appear to create many “bright pink waves,” as researchers warned might be the case, additional bouts of the dye — or the fluorescent rhodamine water tracer dye — will be released later this month. But the fact that the dye seemed to dissipate quickly Monday didn’t mean the first phase won’t lead to important data, said Gabriela Carr, a researcher in the project and doctoral student at UCLA’s Samueli School of Engineering. “It was a big success today,” Carr said. “The dye is pink but it’s also fluorescent, so that’s kind of our main tracker.” A boat with “finely tuned fluorescent monitors” would remain in the bay for 24 hours, Carr said, and at least 10 additional trackers will remain attached to buoys through the end of the month, when additional dye drops will occur. The study is intended to help researchers understand how the man-made breakwater that was built in the 1930s in Santa Monica Bay, often visible during low tide, might hurt water circulation and, therefore, water quality. Santa Monica Pier routinely tops the yearly list of the state’s dirtiest beaches by environmental nonprofit Heal the Bay, which tests waters up and down the California coast for fecal bacteria, which can harm beachgoers. The break in the Santa Monica Bay was constructed to create a marina, but storms and time damaged it beyond effectiveness, though remnants of the rocky break still affect the water flow, researchers said.“It still substantially impacts the coastal hydrodynamics and surrounding environment,” Timu Gallien, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at UCLA and a lead researcher in the study, said in a statement. “For example, the breakwater protects the beach from large waves, keeping the beach wider than it would naturally be.”Santa Monica Mayor Lana Negrete watched the first deployment Monday morning and said she was hopeful this research could help her city finally get off the list of “beach bummers.” The city has partnered with the UCLA Samueli School of Engineering and the Bay Foundation on the project. “We’re trying to see if the circulation of the water is so poor that that’s creating the concentrated pollution 100 yards north and south of the pier,” Negrete said. “We don’t want to keep ending up on the beach bummer list — it’s a bummer!”She said this is one of many projects to help researchers understand and combat water quality issues, including a relatively new advanced water treatment facility and a sand dune restoration project. “This is all working in tandem,” Negrete said. “The whole ecosystem is important.”The researchers did not include in their announcement what remedies might be recommended if the breakwaters are determined to be responsible for, or a factor in, the poor water quality. That would probably be a multifaceted decision involving city and environmental leaders. Although this is the first time the dye has been used in the Santa Monica Bay, UCLA researchers said the coloring has been used for many years in other waterways, explaining that it disperses naturally and poses no risk to people, animals or vegetation.Carr said there may be more pink visible next week when the team performs another surface-level drop of the dye, but probably not as much when they do two deep-water drops later this month. Still, the pinkifying of the bay might not be much of a spectacle despite signs that were plastered all around the Santa Monica Pier area that scream: “Why is the water pink?” Carr said the team wanted to be sure the public did not become alarmed if the pink color was spotted. The next surface-level dye deployment will occur sometime Sept. 22–24, and the last underwater deployment will be Sept. 30, Carr said.

Exclusive-In Australia, a Data Centre Boom Is Built on Vague Water Plans

By Byron KayeSYDNEY (Reuters) -Authorities in Sydney approved construction of data centres without requiring measurable plans to cut water use,...

SYDNEY (Reuters) -Authorities in Sydney approved construction of data centres without requiring measurable plans to cut water use, raising concerns the sector's rapid growth will leave residents competing for the resource.The New South Wales state government, which presides over Australia's biggest city, green-lit all 10 data centre applications it has ruled on since expanding its planning powers in 2021, from owners like Microsoft, Amazon and Blackstone's AirTrunk, documents reviewed by Reuters show.The centres would bring in a total A$6.6 billion ($4.35 billion) of construction spending, but would ultimately use up to 9.6 gigalitres a year of clean water, or nearly 2% of Sydney's maximum supply, the documents show.Fewer than half the approved applications gave projections of how much water they would save using alternative sources. State planning law says data centre developers must "demonstrate how the development minimises ... consumption of energy, water ... and material resources" but does not require projections on water usage or savings. Developers need to disclose what alternative water supplies they will use but not how much.The findings show authorities are approving projects with major expected impact on public water demand based on developers' general and non-measurable assurances as they seek a slice of the $200 billion global data centre boom.The state planning department confirmed the 10 approved data centres collectively projected annual water consumption of 9.6 gigalitres but noted five of those outlined how they expect to cut demand over time. The department did not identify the projects or comment on whether their water reduction plans were measurable."In all cases, Sydney Water provided advice to the Department that it was capable of supplying the data centre with the required water," a department spokesperson told Reuters in an email.Data centres could account for up to a quarter of Sydney's available water by 2035, or 135 gigalitres, according to Sydney Water projections shared with Reuters. Those projections assume centres achieve goals of using less water to cool the servers, but did not specify what those targets were.Sydney's drinking water is limited to one dam and a desalination plant, making supply increasingly tight as the population and temperatures rise. In 2019, its 5.3 million residents were banned from watering gardens or washing cars with a hose as drought and bushfires ravaged the country."There is already a shortfall between supply and demand," said Ian Wright, a former scientist for Sydney Water who is now an associate professor of environmental science at Western Sydney University.    As more data centres are built, "their growing thirst in drought times will be very problematic," he added.The number of data centres, which store computing infrastructure, is growing exponentially as the world increasingly uses AI and cloud computing. But their vast water needs for cooling have prompted the U.S., Europe and others to introduce new rules on water usage.New South Wales enforces no water usage rules for data centres other than the government being "satisfied that the development contains measures designed to minimise the consumption of potable water," according to the documents.Just three of the 10 approved data centre applications gave a projection of how much the developer hoped to cut reliance on public water using alternative sources like rainwater. The biggest centre cleared for construction, a 320-megawatt AirTrunk facility, was approved after saying it would harvest enough rainwater to cut its potable water consumption by 0.4%, the documents show.An AirTrunk spokesperson said early planning documents referred to peak demand but "subsequent modelling recently tabled to Sydney Water has determined actual usage will be significantly lower".The company was "working with Sydney Water to transition the site to be nearly entirely serviced by recycled water", the spokesperson added.The most ambitious commitment to cut reliance on town water was 15%, for one of two data centres approved on land held by Amazon, planning documents show.The two centres would collectively need 195.2 megawatts of electricity and take up to 92 megalitres a year of Sydney's drinking water before rainwater harvesting, say the documents, which give a projected reduction in water use for one project but not the other.Amazon declined to comment on individual properties but said its Australian data centres avoid using water for cooling for 95.5% of the year because their temperature controls rely more on fans than evaporative cooling.Microsoft gave a 12% projected water use reduction for one of the two Sydney data centres it has had approved. Microsoft declined to comment.Sydney's suburban councils, meanwhile, want to slow what they see as competition for limited water supply, especially when the state wants 377,000 new homes by 2029 to ease a housing shortage.    "A lot of them have been built without much discussion," said Damien Atkins, a member of Blacktown council where state-approved centres owned by AirTrunk, Amazon and Microsoft are being built.    "There should be more pushback and I'm just starting to ask those questions now."    In the city's north, Lane Cove council asked the state to return approval powers to local government, citing water usage and other concerns.    Neighbouring Ryde council has five centres and another six in various stages of planning. It said those 11 would take nearly 3% of its water supply and has called for a moratorium on approvals.    On a small vegetable farm near where Amazon, Microsoft, AirTrunk and others are building centres, Meg Sun said her family's business had to turn off the sprinklers in the 2019 drought but still bought enough water from Sydney Water to drip-feed the crops.She worries what might happen if water demand is worsened by data centres' needs in the next drought."We can't even run the business then, because we do rely on water," she said.($1 = 1.5161 Australian dollars)(Reporting by Byron Kaye, with additional reporting by Stella Qiu; Editing by Sam Holmes)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Toxic Pfas above proposed safety limits in almost all English waters tested

Exclusive: 110 of 117 bodies of water tested by Environment Agency would fail standards, with levels in fish 322 times the planned limitNearly all rivers, lakes and ponds in England tested for a range of Pfas, known as “forever chemicals”, exceed proposed new safety limits and 85% contain levels at least five times higher, analysis of official data reveals.Out of 117 water bodies tested by the Environment Agency for multiple types of Pfas, 110 would fail the safety standard, according to analysis by Wildlife and Countryside Link and the Rivers Trust. Continue reading...

Nearly all rivers, lakes and ponds in England tested for a range of Pfas, known as “forever chemicals”, exceed proposed new safety limits and 85% contain levels at least five times higher, analysis of official data reveals.Out of 117 water bodies tested by the Environment Agency for multiple types of Pfas, 110 would fail the safety standard, according to analysis by Wildlife and Countryside Link and the Rivers Trust.They also found levels of Pfos – a banned carcinogenic Pfas – in fish were on average 322 times higher than planned limits for wildlife. If just one portion of such freshwater fish was eaten each month this would exceed the safe threshold of Pfos for people to consume over a year, according to the NGOs.Pfas, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a group of thousands of human-made chemicals used in industrial processes and products such as non-stick pans, clothing and firefighting foams. They do not break down in the environment and some are linked to diseases, including cancers and hormone disruption.Pfas pollution is widespread, prompting the EU to propose a new water quality standard that limits the combined toxicity of 24 Pfas to 4.4 nanograms per litre of water, calculated as PFOA-equivalents – a method that weights each substance according to its toxicity relative to PFOA, a particularly hazardous and well-studied carcinogen that is now banned.The EU is also planning to regulate about 10,000 Pfas as one class as there are too many to assess on a case-by-case basis and because none break down in the environment, but the UK has no plans to follow suit.Last week, environment groups, led by the Marine Conservation Society, wrote to ministers, urging a ban on all Pfas in consumer products and a timeline for phasing them out in all other uses. Now, public health and nature groups have joined forces to propose urgent measures to rein in pollution.“Scientists continue to identify Pfas as one of the biggest threats of our time, yet the UK is falling behind other countries in restricting them,” said Hannah Evans of the environmental charity Fidra. “Every day of inaction locks in decades of pollution and environmental harm … we’re asking the UK government to turn off the tap of these persistent forever chemicals.”They say the UK should align with the EU’s group-based Pfas restrictions and ban the substances in food packaging, clothing, cosmetics, toys and firefighting foams, following examples from Denmark, France and the EU. They want better monitoring, tougher water and soil standards and to make polluters cover the cost of Pfas clean-up.Emma Adler, the director of impact at Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “Pfas are linked to an explosion of impacts for wildlife and public health, from cancers to immune issues. These new figures underline just how widespread Pfas pollution is and that Pfas regulation must be a much clearer priority in government missions to clean up UK rivers and improve the nation’s health.”Thalie Martini, the chief executive officer at Breast Cancer UK, said: “Evidence points to the potential for some Pfas to be related to health issues, including increasing breast cancer risk … millions of families affected by this disease will want the government to do everything they can to deliver tougher Pfas rules to protect our health.”Last year, 59 Pfas experts urged the government to follow the science and regulate all Pfas as a single class, warning their extreme persistence – regardless of toxicity – posed a serious environmental threat.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“Countries like France and Denmark, the EU as a whole and many US states have taken strong action against Pfas pollution,” said Dr Francesca Ginley from the Marine Conservation Society. “The time is now for the UK to take a stand and show the leadership we need on Pfas pollution from source to sea.”Dr Shubhi Sharma of the charity Chem Trust said: “Too often with hazardous chemicals the world has ignored early warnings of harm and learned lessons far too late. Costs to tackle Pfas in the environment and address health impacts have a multi-billion pound economic price tag … the government must not delay.”An Environment Agency spokesperson said the science on Pfas was moving quickly and that it was running a multi-year programme to improve understanding of Pfas pollution sources in England. They added: “We are screening sites to identify potential sources of Pfas pollution and prioritise further investigations, whilst assessing how additional control measures could reduce the risks of Pfas in the environment.”A spokesperson for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said: “The government is committed to protecting human health and the environment from the risks posed by Pfas. That’s why we are working at pace together with regulators to assess levels of Pfas in the environment, their sources and potential risks to inform our approach to policy and regulation.”

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.