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

Markey, Grijalva urge pause on deepwater oil terminal approvals

News Feed
Friday, August 9, 2024

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Az.) on Friday called on the Biden administration to pause approvals for deepwater oil export terminals. In a letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD), Markey and Grijalva called for the approval criteria for deepwater terminals to be expanded to factor in criteria like public health, environmental justice and impact on climate change. The criteria currently requires MARAD to determine whether such ports “will be in the national interest and consistent with national security and other national policy goals and objectives, including energy sufficiency and environmental quality.” In its most recent approval, MARAD cleared the Sea Port Oil Terminal (SPOT) off the coast of Texas in November 2022, although applications are still pending for three further terminals. Only one further terminal is currently online. If the SPOT facility were to come online, it would have the capacity to move 2 million barrels daily, the largest U.S. expert terminal, for an estimated 232 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in total, according to MARAD. Grijalva and Markey noted that MARAD has never denied an export facility approval and took issue with the determination that allowing such facilities to come online is in keeping with the national interest. They further pointed to an executive order President Biden issued in 2021 that requires federal agencies to suspend operations that do not comport with the administration’s public health and environmental goals. “Broadening MARAD’s interpretation of national interest — which already requires an assessment of the impact on energy sufficiency and environmental quality — to more fully include environmental justice, climate, and public health considerations would be consistent with President Biden’s directive. Such a step would also recognize that the anticipated emissions from these oil export facility projects would counteract the benefits of the historic climate investments in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).” The Hill has reached out to the Transportation Department for comment.

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Az.) on Friday called on the Biden administration to pause approvals for deepwater oil export terminals. In a letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD), Markey and Grijalva called for the approval criteria for deepwater terminals to be expanded to factor in criteria like...

Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-Az.) on Friday called on the Biden administration to pause approvals for deepwater oil export terminals.

In a letter to the U.S. Department of Transportation Maritime Administration (MARAD), Markey and Grijalva called for the approval criteria for deepwater terminals to be expanded to factor in criteria like public health, environmental justice and impact on climate change.

The criteria currently requires MARAD to determine whether such ports “will be in the national interest and consistent with national security and other national policy goals and objectives, including energy sufficiency and environmental quality.”

In its most recent approval, MARAD cleared the Sea Port Oil Terminal (SPOT) off the coast of Texas in November 2022, although applications are still pending for three further terminals. Only one further terminal is currently online.

If the SPOT facility were to come online, it would have the capacity to move 2 million barrels daily, the largest U.S. expert terminal, for an estimated 232 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in total, according to MARAD.

Grijalva and Markey noted that MARAD has never denied an export facility approval and took issue with the determination that allowing such facilities to come online is in keeping with the national interest. They further pointed to an executive order President Biden issued in 2021 that requires federal agencies to suspend operations that do not comport with the administration’s public health and environmental goals.

“Broadening MARAD’s interpretation of national interest — which already requires an assessment of the impact on energy sufficiency and environmental quality — to more fully include environmental justice, climate, and public health considerations would be consistent with President Biden’s directive. Such a step would also recognize that the anticipated emissions from these oil export facility projects would counteract the benefits of the historic climate investments in the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).”

The Hill has reached out to the Transportation Department for comment.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Texas still needs a plan for its growing water supply issues, experts say

Panelists at The Texas Tribune Festival shared their opinions on what the state should do after voters approved a historic investment in water infrastructure.

Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback. Voters just approved $20 billion to be spent on water supply, infrastructure and education over the next 20 years. That funding is just the beginning, however, and it will only go so far, panelists said during the “Running Out” session at The Texas Tribune Festival.  And in a state where water wars have been brewing, and will continue to do so, the next legislature to take over the Capitol in 2027 will need to come with ideas.  Proposition 4, which will allocate $20 billion to bolster the state’s water supply, was historic and incredible, said Vanessa Puig-Williams, senior director of climate resilient water systems at the Environmental Defense Fund. She wants to see the state support the science and data surrounding how groundwater works and implement best management practices.  “Despite the fact that it is this critical to Texas we don’t invest in managing it well and we don’t invest in understanding it very much at all,” Puig-Williams said. “We have good things some local groundwater districts are doing but I’m talking about the state of Texas.” That lack of understanding was highlighted when East Texans raised the alarm about a proposed groundwater project that would pump billions of gallons from the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer.  The plan proposed by a Dallas-area businessman is completely legal, but it is based on laws established when Texans still relied on horses and buggies, state Rep. Gary VanDeaver, R-New Boston said in the panel. In most counties, the person with the biggest and fastest pump can pull as much water from an aquifer as they want, as long as it’s not done with malicious intent. Texas is at a point where it needs to seriously consider how to update the rule of capture because society has modernized, he added. People are no longer pulling water from the aquifers with a hand pump and two inch pipes.  “Modern technology and modern needs have outpaced the regulations that we have in place, the safeguards we have in place for that groundwater,” VanDeaver said. “In some ways we, in the legislature, are a little behind the times here and we’re having to catch up.” The best solutions to Texas’ water woes may not even be found below ground, said panelist Robert Mace, the executive director of the Meadows Center for Water and Environment. Conservation, reuse and desalination can go a long way. In Austin, for example, some buildings collect rainwater and air conditioning condensate. The city also has a project to collect water used in bathrooms, treat it and use it again in toilets and urinals. Texas could also be a leader in the space for desalination plants, which separate salt from water to make it drinkable, Mace said. These plants are expensive, but rainwater harvesting is too. And so is fixing leaky water infrastructure that wastes tens of billions of gallons each year.  “There is water that’s more expensive than that. It’s called no water,” Mace said. “And if you look at the economic benefit of water it is much greater than that cost.” Disclosure: Environmental Defense Fund and Meadows Center for Water & the Environment have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

Water
Business
Conservation

Montana Sued Over Law That Allows Water Wells for Low-Density, Rural Subdivisions Without Permits

A coalition of cities, agricultural interests and environmental groups is suing Montana over a decades-old law that housing developers have relied on to supply water to low-density residential subdivisions not connected to public water supplies

A broad coalition is suing the state of Montana over its interpretation of a decades-old law that housing developers have long relied on to supply water to low-density residential subdivisions outside public water supplies.At the center of the conflict are “exempt wells,” which earned that moniker shortly after Montana legislators passed a law in 1973 allowing just about anyone to drill a well and pump up to 10 acre-feet of groundwater from it per year without first demonstrating that nearby water users won’t see a decrease in their water supplies. An acre-foot of water is enough to serve two to three households for a year.According to a lawsuit filed Wednesday, approximately 141,000 wells have been drilled using the exempt well law since 1973. More than two-thirds of those wells were drilled to supply homes with drinking water or to water lawns or gardens.The six nonprofit groups and three individual water users argue that the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, which administers water rights, has authorized “unregulated groundwater development.” Reliable water supplies for those with the oldest water rights and “the integrity of Montana’s water resources” are at stake, the plaintiffs contend.The plaintiffs are asking the Lewis and Clark County District Court to block the state from continuing its “unabated” authorization of exempt wells, which have become developers’ preferred tool to facilitate development on large, rural lots. According to the lawsuit’s analysis of data compiled by Headwaters Economics, more than half of the residential development that happened in Montana between 2000 and 2021 occurred outside of incorporated municipalities.Efforts to revise the exempt well statute have fueled a series of “knock-down, drag-out” fights at the Montana Capitol, including a heated debate earlier this year on a proposal developed by a working group convened by the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation that hit an insurmountable groundswell of opposition before it could clear its first chamber.Housing developers argue the existing loophole offers builders a faster alternative to the state’s lengthy and uncertain permitting process. Developers and other permitting reform advocates say a smoother regulatory process to access what they deem is a small amount of water increases the pace and scale of construction, thereby easing Montana’s housing supply and affordability strains in a state where housing costs have skyrocketed. Opponents counter that hundreds of billions of gallons of water have been unconstitutionally appropriated using exempt wells, and the proliferation of new straws into Montana’s aquifers, paired with the septic systems that frequently accompany them, are drawing down critical water supplies and overloading them with nutrient pollution.The Montana League of Cities and Towns, which represents municipalities that rely on surface water or underground aquifers to meet the needs of homes and businesses served by public water supplies, is the lead plaintiff in the litigation. Other parties to the lawsuit include the Association of Gallatin Agricultural Irrigators, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation, Clark Fork Coalition, Montana Environmental Information Center and Trout Unlimited.In an emailed statement about the lawsuit, Clark Fork Coalition legal director Andrew Gorder argued that the state needs to change its permitting practices to uphold the 1972 Montana Constitution, which “recognized and confirmed” all of the “existing rights to the use of any waters.”“From rapid growth to ongoing drought, Montana’s water resources and water users are facing unprecedented challenges,” Gorder wrote. “The cumulative impact of over one hundred thousand exempt groundwater wells can no longer be ignored. We’re asking the court to conserve our limited water resources and ensure that the constitutional protections afforded to senior water rights, including instream flow rights, are preserved.”Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, along with groups like Clark Fork Coalition and Trout Unlimited, hold or lease instream flow rights to sustain sensitive fisheries during periods of drought like the ongoing one dropping many western Montana rivers to record-low levels.Plaintiff Kevin Chandler, a hydrogeologist who ranches outside of Absarokee, juxtaposed the process he and his wife, Katrin, went through to obtain and protect the water they use on their ranch with the process afforded to nearby developers of the 67-lot Crow Chief Meadows subdivision.“We did everything the law asked of us to protect our water and our neighbors’ water – collecting data, hiring experts, and working hand-in-hand with the state,” Chandler wrote in the statement. “It’s frustrating to see a subdivision using dozens of exempt wells get approved, when the same development proposing a single shared community well would have been denied. Those community systems are more efficient and safer, and their use can be measured and monitored. The current policy promotes poorly planned development and passes the hidden costs to future homeowners, counties and towns.”A spokesperson for the DNRC declined to comment on the lawsuit.The lawsuit presents four claims for relief, beginning with recognizing the constitutional protections afforded to senior water users and concluding with a constitutional provision protecting Montanans’ right to know what their government is doing and their right to participate in the operation of its agencies. The plaintiffs note that an interim legislative committee has been tasked with digging into the exempt well statute once again. But they don’t appear optimistic that the Legislature will reach a different result when it next convenes in 2027. Despite nearly two decades of studies identifying the consequences of exempt well development and repeated efforts to revise state laws, no meaningful change has occurred, according to the lawsuit.Four of the lawsuit’s plaintiffs — the Montana League of Cities and Towns, Clark Fork Coalition, Montana Farm Bureau Federation and Trout Unlimited — participated in the group that developed Senate Bill 358, which sought to close some of the state’s fastest-growing valleys to additional exempt wells but allow for increased groundwater development across the rest of the state as part of a compromise package. In April, the Montana Senate overwhelmingly rejected the measure.Kelly Lynch, executive director of the Montana League of Cities and Towns, said SB 358’s failure spurred her organization’s decision to move forward with the lawsuit.“We put our hearts and souls into that bill,” she said. “The fact that it failed — it was like, ‘OK, it’s time.’”Lynch added that other Western states have experienced similar pressures on their groundwater supplies and have responded by narrowing the groundwater withdrawal loophole. In those states, she said, the exempt well law is “extremely limited to those situations in which an exemption is truly necessary — not a development pattern that is subsidized by the exemption.”In that lawsuit, District Court Judge Michael McMahon sided with Upper Missouri Waterkeeper and a handful of landowners opposed to the 442-acre Horse Creek Hills subdivision. In his 2024 ruling, McMahon chastised the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation for “torturously misreading its own rules and ignoring Supreme Court precedent” on the cumulative impacts of exempt wells.Asked to respond to this round of litigation, Upper Missouri Waterkeeper Executive Director Guy Alsentzer wrote in an email to Montana Free Press that it’s an encouraging development that builds on the Horse Creek Hills litigation.“The pressure to develop land is unrelenting, and recent history demonstrates the Montana Legislature is plainly incapable of a constitutionally-sound approach to adequately regulating Montana’s water resources,” Alsentzer wrote. “Ideally, this case finishes the battle at-stake in Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. Broadwater County (aka Horse Creek Hills), and before that in Clark Fork Coalition v. Tubbs: there is no free water for sprawl subdivision development in closed Montana river basins.”This story was originally published by Montana Free Press 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 – Oct. 2025

Water
Business
Government

Michigan environmental groups want EPA to test for microplastics in drinking water

Several Michigan environmental organizations are calling on Governor Gretchen Whitmer to sign a petition urging the EPA to begin nationwide monitoring of drinking water for microplastics, citing growing concern over their presence in the Great Lakes and potential risks to human health.

Several Michigan environmental organizations are calling on Governor Gretchen Whitmer to sign a petition urging the EPA to begin nationwide monitoring of drinking water for microplastics, citing growing concern over their presence in the Great Lakes and potential risks to human health.

Water
Health

Western US states fail to agree on plan to manage Colorado River before federal deadline

Stakeholders have spent months ironing out disagreements over how to distribute water from the sprawling basinState negotiators embroiled in an impasse over how to manage the imperiled Colorado River were unable to agree on a plan before a federally set deadline on Tuesday, thrusting deliberations deeper into uncertain territory.Stakeholders have spent months working to iron out contentious disagreements over how to distribute water from this sprawling basin – which supplies roughly 40 million people in seven states, 5.5m acres of farmland, dozens of tribes and parts of Mexico – as the resources grow increasingly scarce. Continue reading...

State negotiators embroiled in an impasse over how to manage the imperiled Colorado River were unable to agree on a plan before a federally set deadline on Tuesday, thrusting deliberations deeper into uncertain territory.Stakeholders have spent months working to iron out contentious disagreements over how to distribute water from this sprawling basin – which supplies roughly 40 million people in seven states, 5.5m acres of farmland, dozens of tribes and parts of Mexico – as the resources grow increasingly scarce.Long-term overuse and the rising toll from the climate crisis have served as a one-two punch that’s left the system in crisis.Enough progress was made to warrant an extension, according to a joint statement issued by federal officials and representatives from the seven western states. But the discussions – and the deadline set for them – were set to an urgent timeline; current guidelines are expiring and a new finalized agreement must be put in place by October 2026, the start of the 2027 water year.Time is running short to schedule several steps required to implement a plan, including public engagement and environmental analysis. Final details are due by February 2026.“There are external factors that make this deadline real,” said Anne Castle, a water policy expert and a former chair of the Upper Colorado River Commission. “It’s unfortunate for all the water users in the Colorado River Basin that the states have been unable to come to an agreement on the next set of operating guidelines for the river.”It’s unclear whether a new deadline has been set or how discussions will proceed. If negotiators are unable to create a plan, it’s still possible the federal government will step in, an outcome experts say could lead to litigation and more delays.“The urgency for the seven Colorado River Basin states to reach a consensus agreement has never been clearer,” said Scott Cameron, the Department of the Interior’s acting assistant secretary for water and science, in a statement issued in August, along with a 24-month federal study that highlighted the dire impacts left by unprecedented drought in the basin.“The health of the Colorado River system and the livelihoods that depend on it are relying on our ability to collaborate effectively and craft forward-thinking solutions that prioritize conservation, efficiency, and resilience,” he added.But since they were tasked by federal officials in June to come up with a broad plan by 11 November, the closed-door discussions have been wrought with tension. Key questions, including specifics on the terms of a new agreement, how to measure shortages and conservation efforts, and who would bear the brunt of the badly needed cuts, have stymied consensus. Upper basin states – Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, and New Mexico, were pinned against the lower basin – California, Arizona, and Nevada.“They had to reach an agreement that almost by definition is going to result in hardship to some of those water users,” said Castle. “That was the crux of the problem.”Water from the mighty 1,450-mile river that snakes through the western US has been used to raise thriving cities like Los Angeles, Phoenix and Las Vegas and turn arid desert landscapes into lush breadbaskets. Its flows grow thirsty crops, like alfalfa and hay, used as feed for livestock. Roughly 80% of the supply goes to agriculture.Overuse has totalled roughly 3.5m acre-ft a year – an amount equal to more than a quarter of the river’s annual average flow. One acre-foot, a unit of measurement denoting the amount that can cover a football field in one foot depth and is used for large quantities of water, equals roughly 326,000 gallons – enough to supply roughly three families for a year.The ecosystems on the banks of the river have paid a heavy price. Fourteen native fish species are endangered or threatened. The once-lush wetlands in Mexico’s river delta have been dry for decades. California’s Salton Sea, a saline lake fed by the river, has turned toxic by the drought.Meanwhile, spiking temperatures have baked moisture out of the basin. Shrinking mountain snowpacks offer less melt year after year as increased evaporation takes a greater share. The river has lost more than 10tn gallons of water in the last two decades alone. The two largest reservoirs are projected to reach historic lows in the next two years.“There’s not enough water to supply all the uses we have been making of it.” Castle said. She added that even without an agreement, users will still be forced to take cuts. “We know water use has to be reduced – and reduced substantially. The issue is how.”If it comes down to letting the Bureau of Reclamation decide – or worse, a judge, should the issues be litigated – Castle said the outcome will be worse for everybody. A compromise – one that comes quickly – is paramount.“They all have to hold hands to jump in the pool together.”

Water
Agriculture
Conservation

Strong Winds Can Bring Gale Warnings to Communities Near Water. Here's What That Means

The strong storms and declining temperatures that come with winter can cause significant winds

Winter weather in the U.S. frequently includes storms and steeply declining temperatures. Those drastic weather changes can come with high winds, sometimes strong enough to capsize a boat, or send a rogue tree branch flying. Such conditions can translate into safety risks for people who go outside and hazardous situations that make it more dangerous to operate a boat or a car. A gale warning alert means there are high sustained winds or frequent gusts over a body of water, so they're reserved for communities near oceans, sounds or lakes.More specifically, meteorologist Patrick Saunders with the National Weather Service said the U.S. agency typically issues gale warnings whenever wind speeds are faster than 35 knots, or about 40 mph (64 km/h).Jason Furtado, associate professor of meteorology at the University of Oklahoma, said the recipe for a gale warning can also bring windy conditions miles from water, too.“Over land, the National Weather Service typically translates that to high wind warnings,” he said.Since a gale warning is a maritime alert, Saunders said the main recommendation from the National Weather Service is for most people to stay away from the water.“Strong winds cause larger waves, which have the potential to capsize or damage vessels, especially smaller boats,” he said.Gale warnings can lead to hazardous conditions ashore, too.“It can affect trees, tree branches. Particularly in some areas, if the winds get really strong, that can affect roofs, power lines,” Furtado said. “You might see stories about trampolines going flying out of people’s backyards.”It also makes driving more dangerous because large trucks are more likely to tip over and sudden gusts can add to the challenge of navigating storm hazards such as slippery or icy roads. If there is snow on the ground, high winds can kick it up and make it more difficult to see. Wind makes the cold colder Low temperatures plus high winds translate into wind chill.“It tends to feel colder because your body creates heat, and then as the wind blows, it blows that heat away,” said Saunders.That extra chill can become dangerous to human health. Furtado said once windchill temperatures drop into negative numbers, frostbite becomes a risk.Gale warnings and high wind warnings are also dangerous because people are less likely to take them seriously than they do other types of weather. “Some people may not react as they would with a winter storm warning or a blizzard warning,” he said. “People need to pay attention to high wind warnings, and take appropriate action.”He recommends dressing warmly, securing outside decorations or plants and taking extra precautions if you have to drive.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 – Oct. 2025

Water
Climate
Health

Suggested Viewing

Chicas al Agua

You can count the number of female paddlers in Futaleufú, Chile on one hand... and they want to change that. After many riverside matés and floating conversations, the idea to create a kayak course for local teenage girls was hatched. Thanks to a committed group of women from around the globe, what started as a dream is now an inspirational contribution to the local community.

Water
Youth
Inspirational

The Human Side Of Plastic: Babacar Thiaw

Babacar Thiaw, a visionary Senegalese surfer, entrepreneur, and environmental activist, is on a mission to tackle his country’s escalating plastic pollution crisis and preserve its coastline for future generations. Deeply connected to the ocean through his family’s history and inspired by his father’s teachings, Babacar channels this passion into innovative, community-driven solutions. He founded Senegal’s first zero-waste restaurant, setting a groundbreaking example of sustainability that has since inspired a growing movement across the country. This film follows Babacar’s journey as he champions the power of local action to combat global environmental challenges. Through his story, we witness how one person’s commitment can ignite widespread change, offering a hopeful message for a world in need of solutions. Babacar’s legacy is a call to action, reminding us all that safeguarding the future begins with the choices we make today.

Water
Pollution
Inspirational

From Land to River: The Journey of Resources

In this film, we’ve created a snapshot of the work of the Subalusky Lab at the University of Florida, showcasing the research team’s insights on animals and their greater impacts on various ecosystems. Ultimately, the film calls on viewers to consider the broader implications of environmental research and conservation, and how they can support or contribute to the cause even if it just means adopting a new perspective. We aim to inspire, inform, and ignite a commitment to environmental stewardship among our viewers.

Water
Conservation
Science

Wastewater: A Tale of Two Cities

The other tale of two cities - both plagued by decades of lack of investment and racial discrimination in their wastewater infrastructure and facing further challenges amidst climate change - told by community members, advocates, utility operators, and elected officials. As the nation grapples with how to fund long overdue infrastructure needs, this film brings to light the need for urgency and equity in these decisions.

Social Justice
Waste
Water

Sacred Waters: The Okefenokee in Peril

Sacred Waters: The Okefenokee in Peril takes viewers into the heart of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge, showcasing its mystical natural beauty, cultural importance, and incredible ecological value. But, as the title of the film sets forth, the sacred waters of the Okefenokee are in peril. The threat of a proposed mineral mine near the edge of the Okefenokee looms large, putting the natural integrity of the Swamp at risk. As Sacred Waters brings us deeper into the Okefenokee, we understand how great this threat truly is.

Water
Land Use
Inspirational

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.