Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Government has broken the law on sewage - watchdog

News Feed
Tuesday, December 17, 2024

The government and regulators have broken the law by being too lenient on water companies that spill sewage, the UK's environment watchdog has found.The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) said sewage releases should only be allowed in exceptional circumstances, such as during unusually heavy rainfall, but that "this has not always been the case".It acknowledged that regulator Ofwat had now taken steps to change the way it implemented the law. The government and the Environment Agency are carefully "considering the allegations" but failure to accept them could result in legal action.Campaigners welcomed the findings but called it a "bittersweet moment". Public anger has increased in recent years over the level of sewage spills which were found to have doubled in 2023. "The OEP's findings offer yet another devastating verdict of the total failure of environmental regulation in our country," said chair and founder of River Action Charles Watson. "It is nothing short of scandalous."Sewage sometimes needs to be released when it is raining to prevent a build-up of wastewater in the system and sewage flowing back into people's homes.But two years ago the wildlife charity WildFish complained to the OEP that the Conservative government, and the regulators - Ofwat and the Environment Agency (EA) - were allowing excessive releases. It argued that according to the law sewage should only be released under "exceptional circumstances", such as unusually heavy rain, rather than any wet weather. Untreated sewage contains chemicals which can be harmful to aquatic life and can lead to a build-up of algae which starves local wildlife of oxygen and produces toxins that are potentially fatal to pets and dangerous to people. And the less rainfall there is to dilute the sewage the more harmful it could potentially be.Nick Measham, CEO at WildFish, told the BBC following the announcement: "We are absolutely delighted and relieved. It actually means we can end this problem of sewage going into rivers."But it is a bittersweet moment. It's frustrating when the government and the regulators don't actually do their job in the way you'd hope."The OEP has acknowledged that Ofwat has now taken steps to change the way it implements the law, and in August Ofwat announced record fines for three water companies.But the government's environment department, Defra, and the Environment Agency are currently consulting on any changes, and have said they would "carefully consider" the OEP's allegations.A Defra spokesperson said: "For too long, water companies have pumped record levels of sewage into our rivers, lakes and seas. In just five months, this government has acted decisively to refresh outdated guidance to make extremely clear our expectations around storm overflows."On Tuesday Defra also announced that it would be double compensation for customers for service failures such as water outages and pollution.If Defra and the EA decide to accept the finding in full - which they must do by March - it could result in changes to thousands of environmental permits.There would also be a question as to whether water companies' new five-year investment plans - which are due to be announced on Thursday - would be sufficient to upgrade infrastructure to meet these requirements.A spokesperson for WaterUK, the industry body, told the BBC: "While regulators argue among themselves about what they think the rules are, water companies plan to deliver the world's biggest ever programme to end sewage entering rivers. "We await Ofwat's decision on Thursday and hope they give us the green light so we can get on with it."However, if there is any dispute over what the OEP has found then it has said it could apply to the High Court for urgent judicial review.

The OEP has ruled that it allowed excessive sewage into England's rivers and seas.

The government and regulators have broken the law by being too lenient on water companies that spill sewage, the UK's environment watchdog has found.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) said sewage releases should only be allowed in exceptional circumstances, such as during unusually heavy rainfall, but that "this has not always been the case".

It acknowledged that regulator Ofwat had now taken steps to change the way it implemented the law. The government and the Environment Agency are carefully "considering the allegations" but failure to accept them could result in legal action.

Campaigners welcomed the findings but called it a "bittersweet moment".

Public anger has increased in recent years over the level of sewage spills which were found to have doubled in 2023.

"The OEP's findings offer yet another devastating verdict of the total failure of environmental regulation in our country," said chair and founder of River Action Charles Watson. "It is nothing short of scandalous."

Sewage sometimes needs to be released when it is raining to prevent a build-up of wastewater in the system and sewage flowing back into people's homes.

But two years ago the wildlife charity WildFish complained to the OEP that the Conservative government, and the regulators - Ofwat and the Environment Agency (EA) - were allowing excessive releases. It argued that according to the law sewage should only be released under "exceptional circumstances", such as unusually heavy rain, rather than any wet weather.

Untreated sewage contains chemicals which can be harmful to aquatic life and can lead to a build-up of algae which starves local wildlife of oxygen and produces toxins that are potentially fatal to pets and dangerous to people.

And the less rainfall there is to dilute the sewage the more harmful it could potentially be.

Nick Measham, CEO at WildFish, told the BBC following the announcement: "We are absolutely delighted and relieved. It actually means we can end this problem of sewage going into rivers.

"But it is a bittersweet moment. It's frustrating when the government and the regulators don't actually do their job in the way you'd hope."

The OEP has acknowledged that Ofwat has now taken steps to change the way it implements the law, and in August Ofwat announced record fines for three water companies.

But the government's environment department, Defra, and the Environment Agency are currently consulting on any changes, and have said they would "carefully consider" the OEP's allegations.

A Defra spokesperson said: "For too long, water companies have pumped record levels of sewage into our rivers, lakes and seas. In just five months, this government has acted decisively to refresh outdated guidance to make extremely clear our expectations around storm overflows."

On Tuesday Defra also announced that it would be double compensation for customers for service failures such as water outages and pollution.

If Defra and the EA decide to accept the finding in full - which they must do by March - it could result in changes to thousands of environmental permits.

There would also be a question as to whether water companies' new five-year investment plans - which are due to be announced on Thursday - would be sufficient to upgrade infrastructure to meet these requirements.

A spokesperson for WaterUK, the industry body, told the BBC: "While regulators argue among themselves about what they think the rules are, water companies plan to deliver the world's biggest ever programme to end sewage entering rivers.

"We await Ofwat's decision on Thursday and hope they give us the green light so we can get on with it."

However, if there is any dispute over what the OEP has found then it has said it could apply to the High Court for urgent judicial review.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Guggenheim scraps Basque Country expansion plan after local protests

Campaigners celebrate defeat of proposal to extend Bilbao institution into areas including nature reserveEnvironmental groups and local campaigners in the Basque Country have welcomed the scrapping of a project to build an outpost of Bilbao’s Guggenheim Museum on a Unesco biosphere reserve that is a vital habitat for local wildlife and migrating birds.The scheme’s backers, which include the Guggenheim Foundation, the Basque government and local and regional authorities, had claimed the museum’s twin sites – one in the Basque town of Guernica and one in the nearby Urdaibai reserve – would help revitalise the area, attract investment and create jobs. Continue reading...

Environmental groups and local campaigners in the Basque Country have welcomed the scrapping of a controversial project that would have seen an outpost of Bilbao’s Guggenheim Museum built on a Unesco biosphere reserve that is a vital habitat for local wildlife and migrating birds.The scheme’s backers, who include the Guggenheim Foundation, the Basque government and local and regional authorities, had claimed the new museum’s twin sites – one in the Basque town of Guernica and one in the nearby Urdaibai reserve – would help revitalise the area, attract investment and create jobs.But opponents said the scheme was being pushed through without proper consultation and would wreck Urdaibai, a 22,068-hectare site that was declared a biosphere reserve by Unesco in 1984.In a statement earlier this week, the foundation announced that the project had been abandoned “in light of the territorial, urban planning and environmental constraints and limitations”.It added: “New alternatives will be explored in order to face the challenge of elaborating a proposal that responds to the museum’s objective of growing in order to remain a leading cultural institution internationally and a driving force in the Basque Country’s cultural, economic and social scene.”The Bilbao Museum, which opened in 1997 despite considerable opposition, is credited with helping to reverse the city’s post-industrial decline and put it on the tourist map. But local people and ecologists argued that Urdaibai’s cliffs and estuarine salt marshes were hardly comparable with the polluted, urban site on which the Guggenheim was built.Campaign groups and environmental NGOs such as Greenpeace, WWF, Ecologists in Action, Friends of the Earth and SEO/BirdLife, had all called for the project to be scrapped. News of the foundation’s decision was received enthusiastically.Guggenheim Urdaibai Stop platform said in a statement: “The authorities told us unanimously that they were going to build this museum ‘no matter what’.“They didn’t care about the opinion of society; they didn’t care about the debate generated among citizens. Now, however, we are here celebrating the decision that these same leaders and institutions have had to make, unable to ignore a reality revealed by science, the law, and society.”SEO/BirdLife said “citizen mobilisation” had been key to saving “this threatened natural heritage”, while Greenpeace Spain said: “Social mobilisation works and, together with countless local groups, we have managed to stop the extension of the Guggenheim Museum that threatened to destroy this unique natural space. Urdaibai is already a monument and it will continue to be one.”

Government
Science

Trump DEI crackdown expands to national park gift shops

The Trump administration’s efforts to purge diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from the federal government is hitting gift shops at national parks. In a memo last month, acting National Park Service director Jessica Bowron called for a review of the items available for purchase in park gift shops. The memo says that items should be...

The Trump administration’s efforts to purge diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) from the federal government is hitting gift shops at national parks. In a memo last month, acting National Park Service director Jessica Bowron called for a review of the items available for purchase in park gift shops. The memo says that items should be reviewed for compliance with an order from Interior Secretary Doug Burgum to cease activities related to DEI, accessibility or “environmental justice.” Like the order before it, the memo does not appear to define DEI.  Asked whether this means that any product related to people who are minorities would be impacted, a spokesperson for the Interior Department replied, “As you saw the memo, then you know that is not what it says.” Instead, said the spokesperson, Burgum’s order “directs federal agencies to ensure that government-affiliated retail spaces remain neutral and do not promote specific viewpoints.” “To comply with this order, the National Park Service is conducting a review of retail items to ensure our gift shops remain neutral spaces that serve all visitors,” added the spokesperson, who did not sign their name in the response. “The goal is to keep National Parks focused on their core mission: preserving natural and cultural resources for the benefit of all Americans.” The review’s deadline is next Friday. The memo does not appear to lay out specific criteria for the review. The memo was made public this week by the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy organization. “Banning history books from park stores and cracking down on park T-shirts and keychains is not what national park visitors want from their Park Service,” said Alan Spears, the group’s senior director for cultural resources, in a written statement.  “The National Parks Conservation Association opposes this latest move from the administration because we, like the majority of Americans, support telling the full American story at our parks. That means acknowledging hard truths about slavery, climate change, and other topics that challenge us as a nation,” he added. The memo comes as part of a broader Trump administration push to reshape the portrayal of history at national parks and beyond. Earlier this year, the administration directed National Park Service units to review all public-facing content for messaging that disparages Americans or that “emphasizes matters unrelated to the beauty, abundance, or grandeur” of natural features. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Government
Climate
Conservation

Government reveals taxpayer-funded deal to keep Australia’s largest aluminium smelter open. How long we will pay?

The federal government has done a deal - underwritten by the taxpayer - to keep Australia’s largest aluminum smelter open. What’s the exit strategy if it doesn’t go to plan?

It seemed inevitable – politically at least – that the federal government would step in to save Tomago Aluminium in New South Wales, Australia’s largest aluminium smelter. Rio Tinto, the owners of Tomago, has enjoyed attractively priced electricity for a long time, most recently with AGL. But this contract ends in 2028. Unable to find a replacement at a price it could accept, Rio Tinto warned that Tomago was facing closure. Tomago produces more than one-third of Australia’s aluminium and accounts for 12% of NSW’s energy consumption. On Friday, Prime Minister Anthony Albanese announced a Commonwealth-led deal for electricity supply beyond 2028. This deal will provide the smelter with billions of dollars in subsidised power from the Commonwealth-owned Snowy Hydro through a portfolio of renewables, backed by storage and gas. This follows months of negotiation to avoid the smelter closing and sacking its roughly 1,000 workers. The government has provided funding to support other struggling manufacturers such as the Whyalla steelworks and the Mount Isa copper smelter, and wants to see aluminium production continue in Australia. About 30–40% of the cost of making aluminium is the energy, so it’s a huge input. Electricity from the market would have been considerably more expensive, so the government is subsidising the commercial price. The deal may have been a necessary and immediate solution to a political problem with local economic and social impacts. However, it raises several important questions about the risks involved and the longevity of the plant. Risks and benefits First, to what risk is the federal government exposed? Commodity markets such as aluminium are prone to difficult cycles, and there’s a chance Tomago might not survive at all, in which case the government is off the hook. Not only are we looking to subsidise Tomago’s electricity, but we are looking for Snowy Hydro to invest in renewable energy projects and build more renewable energy in NSW. The history of building renewable energy and its support transmission infrastructure suggests that both cost and time constraints become problematic. The NSW government may have a role in supporting this side of the deal. The Commonwealth’s case for making this deal is presumably underpinned by its Future made in Australia policy. This says we should be supporting industries where there’s a national interest in a low-emissions world. So if, for example, we can see a future where subsidising Tomago’s electricity for five or ten years would mean it can produce low-emission aluminium the world wants to buy, that would be a success. But what happens if, after five or ten years, the world hasn’t sufficiently changed to provide enough renewable energy to make our electricity cost less? What if the rest of the world wants green, low-emissions aluminium, but that’s not what Australia produces? If the risks the government is underwriting crystallise in a bad way, does the government have an exit strategy? We’ve been here before In 1984, under the leadership of John Cain, the Labor government signed a joint venture agreement with Alcoa to build an aluminium smelter at Portland, including a deal to subsidise electricity until 2016. Forty years later, we’re still pay for it. With Tomago, we don’t want Australian taxpayers exposed to something over which we have no control – the global price of aluminium. If the price of aluminium collapses, or Snowy Hydro is permanently uncompetitive or China dominates the world market, the hypothesis that Tomago can be competitive in the long term collapses. Interestingly, this deal is very different to the one the Commonwealth and Queensland governments have done to support Rio Tinto’ Boyne smelter in Gladstone. In October, Rio Tinto announced plans to possibly bring forward the closure of Gladstone Power Station to 2029, six years ahead of the current schedule, and supply the smelter with predominantly renewable electricity. The move was welcomed by environmental groups, as Gladstone is Queensland’s oldest and largest coal-fired station. But some commentators have said closing the plant in four years’ time is unrealistic, and a staged phase-out would be better. The announcement this week, welcomed by the business and its workers, is probably unsurprising. But we haven’t seen the detail. The government may very well have a case for this deal, but the future of the plant and its power supply remain unknowable. The risks with taxpayer funds may have been worth taking, but they should be clearly explained and justified. Tony Wood does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Government
Business
Energy

Israel Publishes Draft Law Seeking to Boost State Revenues From Dead Sea Minerals

By Steven ScheerJERUSALEM, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Israel on Wednesday published a draft law that aims to boost state revenues from a concession for...

JERUSALEM, Dec 3 (Reuters) - Israel on Wednesday published a draft law that aims to boost state revenues from a concession for extracting minerals from the Dead Sea as well as tackling its environmental consequences.The Finance Ministry said the proposed law intends to redefine the concession to ensure the public and the state get their rightful share, while ensuring the preservation of nature and environmental values."The law serves as the basis for allocating the concession and the terms of the future tender for resource extraction from the Dead Sea, with an emphasis on promoting optimal competition, lowering entry barriers, and attracting leading international players," it said.Fertiliser maker ICL Group has held the concession, giving it exclusive rights to minerals from the Dead Sea site, for five decades, but its permit is set to expire in 2030.Last month, ICL gave up right of first refusal for its Dead Sea concession under a government plan to open it up for tender, although it would receive some $3 billion if it loses the permit when it expires.ICL, one of the world's largest potash producers, has previously said its Dead Sea assets were worth $6 billion. ICL extracts mainly potash and magnesium from the concession.Under the draft law, which still needs preliminary approval from lawmakers, the state's share of concession profits would ultimately rise to an average of 50% from 35% currently, partly through royalties, the ministry said.The law also aims to tackle negative impacts of resource extraction activities in the Dead Sea, which continues to shrink.ICL plans to participate in the future tender and has said it believes it is the most suitable candidate to operate the future concession.Accountant General Yali Rothenberg said the law places emphasis on fair, efficient, and responsible use of one of Israel’s most important natural resources. It "will ensure that the state maximizes economic value for the public, promotes optimal competition, and protects the unique environment of the Dead Sea region for future generations," he said.(Reporting by Steven Scheer. Editing by Jane Merriman)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Government
Nature
Resources

Trump administration puts Fema workers back on administrative leave

Fourteen workers who signed a petition that warned cuts put the US at risk were initially suspended in AugustThe Trump administration is reversing the reinstatement of workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) who were placed on administrative leave after writing an open letter of dissent.Fema in August suspended 14 workers who signed a petition warning that cuts to the agency were putting the nation at risk of repeating the mistakes made during the botched response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans. Continue reading...

The Trump administration is reversing the reinstatement of workers at the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Fema) who were placed on administrative leave after writing an open letter of dissent.Fema in August suspended 14 workers who signed a petition warning that cuts to the agency were putting the nation at risk of repeating the mistakes made during the botched response to 2005’s Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans.Last Wednesday, those 14 workers received notices that they were being reinstated at the beginning of this week. But within hours, Trump officials moved to re-suspend the staffers, after CNN broke the news of their return to work.“When they went in at 8.30 in the morning, the employees’ email accounts were restored and they were given new entry cards,” said David Seide, a lawyer at the non-profit group Government Accountability Project, which helped the Fema employees file complaints challenging their suspensions. “But around midday … they stopped working and then after that, they began to receive notices saying: ‘You’re back on administrative leave again.’”Jeremy Edwards, former deputy of public affairs at Fema who signed the August petition, said the reversal “represents the type of dysfunction and inefficiency that has plagued Fema under this administration”.“Not only have these staffers not been provided any legal justification for being placed on administrative leave, they are being paid their full-time, taxpayer-funded salaries to sit at home and do nothing, when all they want to do is their jobs,” Edwards said.The Department of Homeland Security, which oversees Fema, confirmed the reversal. “CNN reporting revealed that 14 Fema employees previously placed on leave for misconduct were wrongly and without authorization reinstated by bureaucrats acting outside of their authority,” a department spokesperson said.“Once alerted, the unauthorized reinstatement was swiftly corrected by senior leadership. The 14 employees who signed the Katrina declaration have been returned to administrative leave,” the spokesperson continued. “This Administration will not tolerate rogue conduct, unauthorized actions or entrenched bureaucrats resisting change. Federal employees are expected to follow lawful direction, uphold agency standards and serve the American people.”Seide called the reversal “unbelievable” and “appalling”.“I’ve never seen this happen in government operations like this, ever, and I’ve been around 40 years,” Seide said.He said the employees’ suspension was illegal, violating protections for government employees and particularly for whistleblowers.“You can’t retaliate people just because they signed a petition,” he said.Fema’s decision to reinstate the employees seemed to reinforce that argument. “Although the [Report of Investigation] substantiated the employee’s involvement with the so-called Katrina Declaration, FEMA’s legal counsel has advised that the employee’s actions are protected under the Whistleblower Protection Act (5 USC 2302(b)(8)) and the First Amendment of the US Constitution,” said a Fema email to the 14 staffers.“Political appointees reversed that,” said Seide.Called the Katrina declaration, the August petition from workers criticized the Trump administration’s sweeping overhaul of Fema and stated a desire to shift the responsibility for disaster response and preparedness to states. Sent days before the 20th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, it was signed by more than 180 current and former Fema employees, some of whom remained anonymous.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionOne day after the missive was sent, the 14 employees who used their names were informed that they were being placed on indefinite leave, Seide said. One of those 14 workers was then fired in mid-November, but she successfully challenged her termination, he said.Fema staffers coordinated the petition with Stand Up for Science, a non-profit protesting the Trump administration’s attacks on federally funded science research. The group also helped organize a separate June letter from Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) workers, which accused the Trump administration of violating the agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment. After receiving that petition, the EPA placed 139 employees on leave, then terminated seven of them.Before it was walked back, Seide’s group celebrated Fema’s decision to reinstate the 14 employees placed on leave, saying it could help build the case for EPA workers to similarly be reinstated.“It would have seemed that reasonable judgments were made and should be followed,” said Seide. “But now I think the message is just the opposite.”The Trump administration has terminated, suspended and pushed out thousands of federal employees since re-entering the White House in January. Fema has been the subject of particularly scrutiny, with the president even floating plans to scrap the agency altogether.A review council set up by Trump is soon expected to issue recommended changes to the agency.

Government
Health
Science

Suggested Viewing

The Green Amendment: New Mexico, Part One

Join Maya van Rossum, Founder of Green Amendments For The Generations, in her exploration of New Mexico’s biggest environmental issues and the role a NM Green Amendment could play in the fight for environmental justice with: Senator Antoinette Sedillo Lopez, legislative sponsor of the New Mexico Green Amendment; Emma Rose Cohen, CEO/Founder of the sustainable business Final; Beata Tsosie-Peña, Environmental Health and Justice Program Coordinator for Tewa Women United; Artemisio Romero y Carver, founding member of Youth United for Climate Crisis Action (YUCCA); and Dee George and Penny Aucoin, fracking waste accident victims impacted residents of Otis, NM.

Government
Activism
Documentary

THE SPRAYER

In the land occupied with the sprayers army, no one has the right to grow any kind of plants either in public or private. So many of the people and soldiers do not even know how a plant grows or looks like, until one day one of the soldiers finds a seed buried deep down in the dust and his curiosity is just the beginning of something extraordinary, something big, something revolutionary.

Plants
CO2
Animation

Descended: The Fight for Harris Neck

The documentary film “Descended: The Fight for Harris Neck” explores an ongoing land battle in Harris Neck, Georgia. In 1942 the U.S. war department seized 2,687 acres of land from a self-reliant community of seventy-five African American families. Since 1962 the land has been a national wildlife refuge. The film seeks to answer the pivotal question: How has a community been shaped by its common goal to reclaim their land?

Social Justice
Government
Nature

Waters of the U.S.

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

Government
Water
Pollution

Sounding the Alarm ~ America's Climate Crisis

"It's really hard being a fire family. Every day it's getting worse." -Brett, wife of Marin County Battalion Chief in California.Every day, Americans who live close to the land and sea face the dangers of climate change—from a firefighter in California, to a beekeeper in Arizona, to a climate refugee losing her home in Florida. The changing climate affects our food systems, water and way of life. These American families are in the trenches sacrificing everything while facing depression, PTSD, and suicide—collateral damage of a crisis unchecked. Award-winning filmmaker, Peter Goetz, captures America's faces and voices, shot in 2020 leading up to the presidential election. Goetz and the Biden campaign made history, producing the first national climate spot to run during a presidential election. But this film dives deeper into the American climate crisis to explore the lives of the people who are sounding the alarm, worried about their grandchildren’s future, asking, "If not us, then who?" This is a story of the resilience, perseverance, and ingenuity of the American people. Ever hopeful, they collectively take on a common enemy. As the young, Navajo solar visionary Brett Issac insists, "We've got to turn this train around before it's too late."

Climate
Crisis
Government

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.