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.

How to best filter your L.A. tap water based on your ZIP Code

News Feed
Monday, July 22, 2024

Nearly a year ago, I scribbled “Replace Brita filter” on my to-do list. But the errand perpetually fell by the wayside. There were so many more pressing tasks to complete. “Oh, it’s fine,” I thought. “How bad can it be?” Let’s just say that a day into reporting this story, I ran out to the market and bought a three-pack.We reach for our water taps more than almost any other object in our homes — to brush our teeth, wash our faces, make coffee or tea in the morning. To cook meals, rinse dishes and wipe countertops. To water the plants, do laundry and fill our pets’ bowls. To shower and shave. And most often for a drink. In L.A., water rules everything around us. Drink up, cool off and dive into our stories about hydrating and recreating in the city. But how much do you really know about what’s in your tap water? And if you filter it, are you using the right technology? Many of us may not be fully aware of where our water even comes from. That’s because the water that flows into our homes in the L.A. area can be surprisingly different, ZIP Code to ZIP Code. The level of arsenic found in Compton’s tap water may differ wildly from that found in Glendale. Malibu’s tap water may have more hexavalent chromium while Pasadena’s doesn’t have any. One tap does not fit all. “Where you are, the location, it really makes a difference in your water quality,” said Tasha Stoiber, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit research and advocacy group focusing on environmental health. We went to the source, so to speak — experts in the realms of science, academia and water filtration — to help you navigate the often complicated, ever-fluid world of residential tap water, so that you can make smarter and more informed choices about how to purify your H20. L.A.’s water sources | Federal and state protections | Determining your water quality | How to test | How to filter | The bare minimumL.A.’s water sources Like most major cities, the Greater Los Angeles area is served by a dizzying number of community water systems. In California, there are 2,913 of them to serve about 39.025 million people — and those are just the larger ones that operate year-round, according to the EWG’s Tap Water Database. Each utility company treats the water in its assigned municipality differently before it flows through consumers’ faucets. That’s because each draws from different water sources. One area’s tap may be coming from rivers and lakes (otherwise categorized as “surface water”) while another’s could be pumped from wells from beneath layers of rock and sediment (categorized as “groundwater”). Depending on where the water travels, it may pick up different undesirable contaminants. Surface water, for example, could have runoff that includes nitrate used to fertilize land in agricultural areas. Groundwater could have naturally occurring chemical elements, such as arsenic, that come from bedrock. More often than not, L.A. area tap water comes from a mix of these sources. Our utility companies draw from different aqueducts, those large, often concrete ditches or canals that extend from the source to the water treatment plant. From there it flows through pipes, underground, to your home.In 2023, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power — which serves about 4 million people throughout the city of Los Angeles — sourced its tap water from the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the California Aqueduct and the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as from local groundwater, according to its most recent drinking water quality report.The specific geographic location of a water source also determines what ends up in your tap water. A lake near a highly industrial area risks containing more pollutants than water coming from a lake in the High Sierras.Another reason the water might be different between ZIP Codes: Utility companies have different resources at their disposal.“The size of the drinking water system can be an indicator of the drinking water quality,” Stoiber said. “It’s based on economy of scale. The larger ones have more resources for treatment. Smaller systems can be at a bit more of an economic disadvantage.”Federal and state water protections There are federal regulations that require utility companies to stay below maximum contaminant levels for more than 90 pollutants in drinking water. They’re also required to publish an annual consumer confidence report with information about contaminant levels and water sources. “But many of our drinking water regulations were set in the ’70s and ’80 and are not as protective as they should be,” Stoiber said. “There are contaminants in your drinking water that don’t have regulations around them.” How harmful these contaminants are, and how much you’d have to ingest over time to affect your health, is contested. But in general, however many pollutants you might find in L.A.’s tap water, there are not enough to make you seriously ill in one gulp. Some good news: In April, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized new regulations around a family of about 15,000 chemicals known as PFAS. They’re often referred to as the “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down in the environment. California also voted in April to finalize a limit for hexavalent chromium, or “Chrome 6,” which many people know as the carcinogenic chemical that the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. contaminated residents’ groundwater with, from 1952 to 1966, in Hinkley, Calif. — the legal upshot of which was depicted in the film “Erin Brockovich.” But those changes won’t be immediate. “Upgrading water treatment plants is expensive and takes years,” said USC’s Daniel McCurry, who researches water supply and treatment. “Most smaller utilities, especially, just won’t have the money to make the upgrades in the initial time frame.” 2027, McCurry notes, is the deadline for utilities to complete their “initial monitoring” before the new regulations for PFAS go into effect in 2029. (Henry Hargreaves / For The Times) How to determine your water quality So where to start? It’s easier than it might seem. First, search for your consumer confidence report on your utility company’s website. You can then cross-reference that information with EWG’s free Tap Water Database, which allows you to type in your ZIP Code (look for the prompt “Is your water safe?”). It then will populate your water utility company and the number of people it serves. From there, you can click on “View Utility” to produce an easy-to-decipher report listing the source of your water and contaminants detected in it. When I typed my own Silver Lake ZIP Code in for a water quality analysis, the results did not put me at ease. It listed nine contaminants detected in my water, among them bromate and uranium. Some of these were found at levels that far exceeded the standards of the EWG but were still below the legal limit. I called the LADWP to make sense of what I’ve found. “There’s no health concern,” LADWP’s director of water quality, Jonathan Leung, said of my findings, stressing that the contaminants were far below the federally mandated legal limit. “That’s where, collectively, all the toxicologists and water quality specialists and scientists have worked together to set national standards. As a water quality utility, that’s what we set our sights on. The public should take confidence that the legal limits are protective of public health — and we strive to do better than that.” McCurry added that the EWG and EPA have different standards for the amount of contaminants found in water. “When the EPA sets a water contaminant limit, it’s a balance between protecting public health while staying realistic about the treatment technology we have and how much it costs,” McCurry said. “Everyone’s perception or tolerance of risk is different, but for me, personally, I drink water straight from the tap and don’t worry about it. It’s very unlikely you’ll get sick from tap water, assuming the tap water meets federal regulations.” How to test your water at home Whatever your personal tolerance level, you can improve both the quality and taste of your tap water by choosing the right filter, experts say. But, given the array of filtration products and techniques on the market, that’s easier said than done. Choosing from options like “ion-exchange demineralization,” “ultraviolet sterilization” and “chemical feed pumps” can be intimidating.Take a breath. Then step back. Filtering should be a tailored approach, said Brian Campbell, founder of Water Filter Guru, which lab-tests and reports on residential water treatment methods and products. “There’s no such thing as a one-size-fits-all water treatment solution,” Campbell said.He added that even after reading utility consumer reports and nonprofit chemical analyses, you still may need to know more.“[Those reports] will give you a general sense but not the whole picture, Campbell said. “Because water can be recontaminated after it leaves the treatment plant — like if your home has old plumbing with lead piping. But it’s a start.”You can test your home’s water quality yourself using fairly affordable water test strips, available for about $15 in stores such as Home Depot. These, Campbell said, will “give you an indication of a handful of the most common 12 to 15 contaminants like lead, arsenic, chromium, nitrate possibly.” However it will only give you a range of those aforementioned contaminants, not the exact concentration in your water. If you want specific information about the chemical levels, you can run a more in-depth test. The best way to do that, Campbell said, is through a certified lab, where the cost ranges from roughly $100 to more than $1,000 depending on how comprehensive you want to get. How to choose a filter Once you know what’s in your water, you’ll be able to choose the right filter technology to treat it, Campbell said. Here’s what he suggests using for some of the most common issues.PFAS. This is the family of about 15,000 chemicals used for their water repellent and oil repellent properties, such as in nonstick pans or fast food packaging. “The most studied filtration method for this is activated carbon adsorption,” Campbell said. “It’s the most common technology used in pitcher filtration. Even the most simple water pitcher filters should theoretically reduce PFAS.” Reverse osmosis filtration systems also will address PFAS — it’s one of the most thorough techniques and includes activated carbon as one of its stages. Historically, these pricy systems were installed directly into sink pipes, but countertop versions now are available for renters. Microplastics. “They get into the environment and break down into smaller and smaller pieces — so small you’d need a microscope to see them,” Campbell said. The best technique to address those — because they are suspended particles, floating in the water and not dissolved — is mechanical filtration, he said. The technology removes suspended particles, like pipe rust or sand and grit coming from a hot water heater. Reverse osmosis also would work. Distillation would be effective as well and is, per Campbell, one of the best to get rid of nearly all common contaminants. But, Campbell warned, “It requires a massive amount of energy and time to treat and distill a relatively small volume of water — so not the most practical.” Disinfection byproducts. This is a group of chemicals created when common water disinfectants — typically chlorine — interact with organic matter (such as dirt or rust) that’s already present in the pipes that run from the distribution plant to your home or office, Campbell said. “Activated carbon adsorption is the best way to deal with this. Reverse osmosis will also deal with them because a component of that [technique] is activated carbon.”Pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer. “This is more of an issue in agricultural areas,” Campbell said. Typically, he added, they can be treated using activated carbon and reverse osmosis.Fluoride. Tap water is fluoridated in many areas because of its dental health benefits. But recent research suggests that prenatal exposure to fluoride may be linked to increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in children at age 3. “Reverse osmosis would be the best treatment for this, but there are a few adsorption media that can reduce fluoride, like a filter using bone char carbon (activated carbon that comes from animal bones) or a filter using activated alumina media, another adsorption media,” said Campbell.Heavy metals. Lead is obviously the most infamous heavy metal water contaminant, but consumers also should watch out for arsenic (primarily from groundwater) and chromium 6 (which comes from industrial manufacturing). “Typically, for metals, reverse osmosis is the best option,” said Campbell. “Activated carbon works for chromium 6 but not for arsenic. Distillation, again, gets rid of everything but it’s not practical.”Hard water. Hard water is caused by mineral buildup, which isn’t bad for your health but can create limescale on appliances like your water heater. It also can affect your beauty routine. “Soap doesn’t lather as well with hard water,” said Campbell. “Your hair might feel brittle and it can irritate skin issues like eczema.” He recommends treating the issue at the water point of entry to the home with cation exchange resin, a type of ion exchange. The best way to know if a product is actually capable of doing what it claims to do, Campbell said, is to look up its performance certifications. “You can do that in databases through the Water Quality Assn., the National Sanitation Foundation and the International Assn. of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials.”The bare minimum If nothing else, Stoiber urged consumers to peruse the EWG’s guide to countertop filters — and to purchase one. Though McCurry is content drinking from the tap, he agreed it couldn’t hurt. “If you have reason to believe there are, say, PFAS above the future regulation target, then yeah, get a Brita filter,” he said.Needless to say, that task is no longer on my to-do list.

We spoke to experts in the realms of science, academia and water filtration to help you navigate the often complicated, ever-fluid world of residential tap water, so that you can make smarter and more informed choices about how to purify your drinking water.

Nearly a year ago, I scribbled “Replace Brita filter” on my to-do list. But the errand perpetually fell by the wayside. There were so many more pressing tasks to complete.

“Oh, it’s fine,” I thought. “How bad can it be?”

Let’s just say that a day into reporting this story, I ran out to the market and bought a three-pack.

We reach for our water taps more than almost any other object in our homes — to brush our teeth, wash our faces, make coffee or tea in the morning. To cook meals, rinse dishes and wipe countertops. To water the plants, do laundry and fill our pets’ bowls. To shower and shave. And most often for a drink.

In L.A., water rules everything around us. Drink up, cool off and dive into our stories about hydrating and recreating in the city.

But how much do you really know about what’s in your tap water? And if you filter it, are you using the right technology? Many of us may not be fully aware of where our water even comes from.

That’s because the water that flows into our homes in the L.A. area can be surprisingly different, ZIP Code to ZIP Code. The level of arsenic found in Compton’s tap water may differ wildly from that found in Glendale. Malibu’s tap water may have more hexavalent chromium while Pasadena’s doesn’t have any. One tap does not fit all.

“Where you are, the location, it really makes a difference in your water quality,” said Tasha Stoiber, a senior scientist at the Environmental Working Group, a nonprofit research and advocacy group focusing on environmental health.

We went to the source, so to speak — experts in the realms of science, academia and water filtration — to help you navigate the often complicated, ever-fluid world of residential tap water, so that you can make smarter and more informed choices about how to purify your H20.

L.A.’s water sources | Federal and state protections | Determining your water quality | How to test | How to filter | The bare minimum

L.A.’s water sources

Like most major cities, the Greater Los Angeles area is served by a dizzying number of community water systems. In California, there are 2,913 of them to serve about 39.025 million people — and those are just the larger ones that operate year-round, according to the EWG’s Tap Water Database.

Each utility company treats the water in its assigned municipality differently before it flows through consumers’ faucets. That’s because each draws from different water sources. One area’s tap may be coming from rivers and lakes (otherwise categorized as “surface water”) while another’s could be pumped from wells from beneath layers of rock and sediment (categorized as “groundwater”).

Depending on where the water travels, it may pick up different undesirable contaminants. Surface water, for example, could have runoff that includes nitrate used to fertilize land in agricultural areas. Groundwater could have naturally occurring chemical elements, such as arsenic, that come from bedrock.

More often than not, L.A. area tap water comes from a mix of these sources. Our utility companies draw from different aqueducts, those large, often concrete ditches or canals that extend from the source to the water treatment plant. From there it flows through pipes, underground, to your home.

In 2023, the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power — which serves about 4 million people throughout the city of Los Angeles — sourced its tap water from the Los Angeles Aqueduct, the California Aqueduct and the Colorado River Aqueduct as well as from local groundwater, according to its most recent drinking water quality report.

The specific geographic location of a water source also determines what ends up in your tap water. A lake near a highly industrial area risks containing more pollutants than water coming from a lake in the High Sierras.

Another reason the water might be different between ZIP Codes: Utility companies have different resources at their disposal.

“The size of the drinking water system can be an indicator of the drinking water quality,” Stoiber said. “It’s based on economy of scale. The larger ones have more resources for treatment. Smaller systems can be at a bit more of an economic disadvantage.”

Federal and state water protections

There are federal regulations that require utility companies to stay below maximum contaminant levels for more than 90 pollutants in drinking water. They’re also required to publish an annual consumer confidence report with information about contaminant levels and water sources.

“But many of our drinking water regulations were set in the ’70s and ’80 and are not as protective as they should be,” Stoiber said. “There are contaminants in your drinking water that don’t have regulations around them.”

How harmful these contaminants are, and how much you’d have to ingest over time to affect your health, is contested. But in general, however many pollutants you might find in L.A.’s tap water, there are not enough to make you seriously ill in one gulp.

Some good news: In April, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized new regulations around a family of about 15,000 chemicals known as PFAS. They’re often referred to as the “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down in the environment. California also voted in April to finalize a limit for hexavalent chromium, or “Chrome 6,” which many people know as the carcinogenic chemical that the Pacific Gas and Electric Co. contaminated residents’ groundwater with, from 1952 to 1966, in Hinkley, Calif. — the legal upshot of which was depicted in the film “Erin Brockovich.” But those changes won’t be immediate.

“Upgrading water treatment plants is expensive and takes years,” said USC’s Daniel McCurry, who researches water supply and treatment. “Most smaller utilities, especially, just won’t have the money to make the upgrades in the initial time frame.”

2027, McCurry notes, is the deadline for utilities to complete their “initial monitoring” before the new regulations for PFAS go into effect in 2029.

Photo illustration of a hose faucet on a blue background pouring water on the right, with dirt, grass and rocks on the left.

(Henry Hargreaves / For The Times)

How to determine your water quality

So where to start? It’s easier than it might seem. First, search for your consumer confidence report on your utility company’s website. You can then cross-reference that information with EWG’s free Tap Water Database, which allows you to type in your ZIP Code (look for the prompt “Is your water safe?”). It then will populate your water utility company and the number of people it serves. From there, you can click on “View Utility” to produce an easy-to-decipher report listing the source of your water and contaminants detected in it.

When I typed my own Silver Lake ZIP Code in for a water quality analysis, the results did not put me at ease. It listed nine contaminants detected in my water, among them bromate and uranium. Some of these were found at levels that far exceeded the standards of the EWG but were still below the legal limit.

I called the LADWP to make sense of what I’ve found.

“There’s no health concern,” LADWP’s director of water quality, Jonathan Leung, said of my findings, stressing that the contaminants were far below the federally mandated legal limit. “That’s where, collectively, all the toxicologists and water quality specialists and scientists have worked together to set national standards. As a water quality utility, that’s what we set our sights on. The public should take confidence that the legal limits are protective of public health — and we strive to do better than that.”

McCurry added that the EWG and EPA have different standards for the amount of contaminants found in water.

“When the EPA sets a water contaminant limit, it’s a balance between protecting public health while staying realistic about the treatment technology we have and how much it costs,” McCurry said. “Everyone’s perception or tolerance of risk is different, but for me, personally, I drink water straight from the tap and don’t worry about it. It’s very unlikely you’ll get sick from tap water, assuming the tap water meets federal regulations.”

How to test your water at home

Whatever your personal tolerance level, you can improve both the quality and taste of your tap water by choosing the right filter, experts say.

But, given the array of filtration products and techniques on the market, that’s easier said than done. Choosing from options like “ion-exchange demineralization,” “ultraviolet sterilization” and “chemical feed pumps” can be intimidating.

Take a breath. Then step back. Filtering should be a tailored approach, said Brian Campbell, founder of Water Filter Guru, which lab-tests and reports on residential water treatment methods and products.

“There’s no such thing as a one-size-fits-all water treatment solution,” Campbell said.

He added that even after reading utility consumer reports and nonprofit chemical analyses, you still may need to know more.

“[Those reports] will give you a general sense but not the whole picture, Campbell said. “Because water can be recontaminated after it leaves the treatment plant — like if your home has old plumbing with lead piping. But it’s a start.”

You can test your home’s water quality yourself using fairly affordable water test strips, available for about $15 in stores such as Home Depot. These, Campbell said, will “give you an indication of a handful of the most common 12 to 15 contaminants like lead, arsenic, chromium, nitrate possibly.” However it will only give you a range of those aforementioned contaminants, not the exact concentration in your water.

If you want specific information about the chemical levels, you can run a more in-depth test. The best way to do that, Campbell said, is through a certified lab, where the cost ranges from roughly $100 to more than $1,000 depending on how comprehensive you want to get.

How to choose a filter

Once you know what’s in your water, you’ll be able to choose the right filter technology to treat it, Campbell said. Here’s what he suggests using for some of the most common issues.

PFAS. This is the family of about 15,000 chemicals used for their water repellent and oil repellent properties, such as in nonstick pans or fast food packaging. “The most studied filtration method for this is activated carbon adsorption,” Campbell said. “It’s the most common technology used in pitcher filtration. Even the most simple water pitcher filters should theoretically reduce PFAS.” Reverse osmosis filtration systems also will address PFAS — it’s one of the most thorough techniques and includes activated carbon as one of its stages. Historically, these pricy systems were installed directly into sink pipes, but countertop versions now are available for renters.

Microplastics. “They get into the environment and break down into smaller and smaller pieces — so small you’d need a microscope to see them,” Campbell said. The best technique to address those — because they are suspended particles, floating in the water and not dissolved — is mechanical filtration, he said. The technology removes suspended particles, like pipe rust or sand and grit coming from a hot water heater. Reverse osmosis also would work. Distillation would be effective as well and is, per Campbell, one of the best to get rid of nearly all common contaminants. But, Campbell warned, “It requires a massive amount of energy and time to treat and distill a relatively small volume of water — so not the most practical.”

Disinfection byproducts. This is a group of chemicals created when common water disinfectants — typically chlorine — interact with organic matter (such as dirt or rust) that’s already present in the pipes that run from the distribution plant to your home or office, Campbell said. “Activated carbon adsorption is the best way to deal with this. Reverse osmosis will also deal with them because a component of that [technique] is activated carbon.”

Pesticides, herbicides and fertilizer. “This is more of an issue in agricultural areas,” Campbell said. Typically, he added, they can be treated using activated carbon and reverse osmosis.

Fluoride. Tap water is fluoridated in many areas because of its dental health benefits. But recent research suggests that prenatal exposure to fluoride may be linked to increased risk of neurobehavioral problems in children at age 3. “Reverse osmosis would be the best treatment for this, but there are a few adsorption media that can reduce fluoride, like a filter using bone char carbon (activated carbon that comes from animal bones) or a filter using activated alumina media, another adsorption media,” said Campbell.

Heavy metals. Lead is obviously the most infamous heavy metal water contaminant, but consumers also should watch out for arsenic (primarily from groundwater) and chromium 6 (which comes from industrial manufacturing). “Typically, for metals, reverse osmosis is the best option,” said Campbell. “Activated carbon works for chromium 6 but not for arsenic. Distillation, again, gets rid of everything but it’s not practical.”

Hard water. Hard water is caused by mineral buildup, which isn’t bad for your health but can create limescale on appliances like your water heater. It also can affect your beauty routine. “Soap doesn’t lather as well with hard water,” said Campbell. “Your hair might feel brittle and it can irritate skin issues like eczema.” He recommends treating the issue at the water point of entry to the home with cation exchange resin, a type of ion exchange.

The best way to know if a product is actually capable of doing what it claims to do, Campbell said, is to look up its performance certifications. “You can do that in databases through the Water Quality Assn., the National Sanitation Foundation and the International Assn. of Plumbing and Mechanical Officials.”

The bare minimum

If nothing else, Stoiber urged consumers to peruse the EWG’s guide to countertop filters — and to purchase one.

Though McCurry is content drinking from the tap, he agreed it couldn’t hurt. “If you have reason to believe there are, say, PFAS above the future regulation target, then yeah, get a Brita filter,” he said.

Needless to say, that task is no longer on my to-do list.

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.