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.

Radioactive pollution still haunts Hunters Point in San Francisco

News Feed
Friday, November 7, 2025

San Francisco — More than a half century after the U.S. ignited 67 atomic weapons in the the central Pacific Ocean, a former Navy base in the Bay Area continues to carry that nuclear legacy.Last week, residents were informed by the San Francisco Department of Health that a test taken in November 2024 at the former site of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard showed radiation levels of airborne Plutonium-239 had exceeded the Navy’s “action level,” requiring the military to further investigate. The city and the residents were not informed until 11 months after that initial reading. Hunters Point, a 500-acre peninsula jutting out into San Francisco Bay, served as a military laboratory to study the effects of nuclear weapons from 1946-69 following World War II. Although the research largely focused on how to decontaminate U.S. warships and equipment targeted with atomic bombs, the experimentation left much of the shipyard laced with radioactive contaminants and toxic chemicals.For the last 30 years, the Navy has sought to clean up the area — now a U.S. Superfund site — with the long-term goal of redeveloping it into new housing and parkland. But some Bay Area community leaders say haphazard remediation work and lackluster public outreach have endangered the health and safety of residents of the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood that sits beside the former shipyard. And they point to the Navy’s nearly year-long delay in informing them of the elevated Plutonium-239 reading, taken in November 2024, as just the latest example.Plutonium-239 is a radioactive isotope and byproduct of nuclear bomb explosions. The elevated readings from November 2024 came from a 78-acre tract of land on the northeast portion of the shipyard, known as Parcel C.“The City and County of San Francisco is deeply concerned by both the magnitude of this exceedance and the failure to provide timely notification,” wrote San Francisco Health Officer Susan Philip in an Oct. 30 letter to Navy officials. “Such a delay undermines our ability to safeguard public health and maintain transparency. Immediate notification is a regulatory requirement and is critical for ensuring community trust and safety.”Navy officials and some health experts insist the radiation levels detected at the site, while above the Navy’s action level, did not pose an imminent or substantial threat to public health. Exposure to this level of Plutonium-239 every day for one year would be less than one-tenth the dose of radiation from a chest X-ray, according to a Navy spokesperson. “The San Francisco Department of Public Health’s letter references a single outlier air sample that detected Plutonium-239 above the regulatory action level,” a Navy spokesperson said in a statement to The Times. “Regulatory action levels are deliberately and conservatively established below levels of health concern, and a single detection of Pu-239 at this level does not pose a risk to human health or public safety.”The Navy said it has collected more than 200 ambient air monitoring samples from Parcel C since it began performing fieldwork there in 2023. The November 2024 sample was the only reading with elevated Plutonium-239, the Navy spokesperson told The Times. Plutonium isotopes emit alpha radiation that is relatively benign outside the body, because it cannot travel through solid objects. However, if these radioactive particles are inhaled, they can damage the lungs and increase the long-term risk of developing certain cancers, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “What we generally are concerned about for alpha emitters is if you get them into your body, and either through inhalation, ingestion, inadvertent injection — like somebody gets a cut and it gets into their body,” said Kathryn Higley, a professor of nuclear science at Oregon State University. But it’s the lack of transparency and the 11-month delay in reporting the reading that has fomented community mistrust and raised questions regarding the military’s competency to safely clean up the polluted shipyard. In 2000, the EPA admonished naval officials for neglecting to inform residents that a fire had broken out at a hazardous landfill at Hunters Point. In 2017, two employees of the consulting firm Tetra Tech, who were hired by the Navy to assess radiation levels at Hunters Point, pleaded guilty to falsifying data in an effort to avoid having to perform additional cleanup on some areas of the shipyard. The presence of radioactive air contaminants — at any level — compounds the health risks of the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood, which already faces high exposure to toxic diesel particles from big rigs traveling on nearby freeways and cargo ships visiting the Port of San Francisco. Hunters Point Biomonitoring Foundation, a local nonprofit, has found concerning levels of toxic substances in urine screenings it has provided to several residents of the neighborhood, especially among older individuals and those living closer to the former Naval shipyard.“Now, you’re talking about adding one of the most devastating radionuclides known to the human cardiopulmonary system to the chemical burden,” said Dr. Ahmisa Porter Sumchai, the foundation’s medical director and principal investigator. “The particulate load is enough to kill people,” Sumchai added. “But you add ... a little Plutonium-239, and it’s a recipe for death.” Philip, the San Francisco health officer, said in a statement that she met with Navy officials Oct. 31 and received assurances that air and dust monitoring is “ongoing” and that the military agency is “reviewing their duct control methods to ensure they are fully protective of public health.”As a result, “no immediate action is required from a public health safety standpoint,” she said, adding that her office will continue to closely monitor the situation.Other experts argued the situation was overblown. Phil Rutherford, a radiological risk expert and corporate consultant, called the delayed notification “unacceptable” but said the San Francisco health department’s letter was “a storm in a teacup” considering the low levels of radioactive material.Higley, the Oregon State professor, said the site’s long history of delays and scandals likely added to backlash from community members. “I understand [residents’] frustration that they want to see this place cleaned up so that they can safely use it,” Higley said. “And there’s been a lot of reasons for why this process takes so long. But, from a radiological perspective, the actual residual radioactivity at the site is pretty modest.”In November 2024, a Navy contractor was grinding asphalt on the site — a construction project that, while unrelated to the site’s historical contamination, triggered the Navy to monitor for any air quality issues. One of its air samplers, in Parcel C — collected 8.16 times 10‐15 picocuries per milliliter of Plutonium-239 — twice the established action level — according to a Navy spokesperson. Navy officials sent the sample to a lab for analysis, and the initial results came back in March 2025, showing high radiation levels. In April, they ordered the lab to reanalyze the sample. In the follow-up analysis, radiation levels of Plutonium-239 were below action levels.Between May and September, the Navy “further investigated the test results and conducted a methodical review of the laboratory’s procedures and practices to ensure they complied with standards,” according to the Navy spokesperson. “A third party also conducted an analysis of the lab’s performance.”Later that September, the Navy told the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and several California state agencies about the elevated airborne radiation from Plutonium-239, in preparation for an upcoming community meeting. That information later trickled down to the San Francisco health department. At some point, the Navy published some air quality data for Parcel C gathered between October and December 2024 on a website where it curates several environmental monitoring reports. That report only showed the lower Plutonium-239 radiation levels from the reanalysis were below the action level.A Navy spokesperson told The Times that it was “mistakenly uploaded.”“As soon as the Navy realized an incomplete report was uploaded, it was removed from the website,” the spokesperson said, while the Navy worked to verify the results. All that has contributed to the confusion and concern among locals and advocates alike. Navy officials are expected to attend a Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting on Nov. 17. When fieldwork is occurring at the shipyard, the Navy monitors for Plutonium-239 and several other radioactive elements that may have resulted from historic fallout from atomic weapons testing. Acquired by the Navy in 1940, Hunters Point was initially a base where ships were built, repaired and maintained during World War II. After the war ended, it became home to the Navy Radiological Defense Laboratory, a military research facility dedicated to investigating the effects of nuclear weapons and radiological safety.The Navy bombarded a fleet of U.S. warships with nuclear weapons as a part of atomic testing in the Marshall Islands. The irradiated vessels were towed to Hunters Point, and used as the material and hardware upon which scientists tested decontamination methods. In 1974, the shipyard was deactivated. Hazardous chemicals and low-level radiological contamination were identified, prompting the U.S. EPA to place the site on its Superfund list in 1989. The Navy has led cleanup efforts, excavating contaminated soil and demolishing buildings. A largely residential parcel of the base, Parcel A, was turned over to San Francisco and has been redeveloped with new town houses and condos. A collective of 300 artists live and work in former naval buildings. But dangers continue to emerge during ongoing remediation work. In recent years, the Navy has recovered radioactive objects, including dials and deck markers coated with paint containing Radium isotopes to provide a glow-in-the-dark effect. Sumchai, medical director of the biomonitoring foundation, said she has observed large stockpiles of contaminated soil held in areas without any protective fencing to prevent contaminants from spreading off site. “I view this as a local public health emergency,” Sumchai said. “I think that everything should be done to contain it and to remove people safely, if necessary, from documented areas of exposure.”But to the casual observer the site looks unremarkable.Hunters Point juts out into the San Francisco Bay just north of where Candlestick Park, the former home of the San Francisco 49ers, used to stand. Beyond the abandoned barracks and drydocks, the site is now mostly an empty expanse of grass and reeds, with an unobstructed view of the bay. The cleanup sites, including Parcel C, are still fenced off, and only those with authorized credentials are allowed onto the property.On a recent weekday afternoon, ravens flew and cawed over the long-vacant shipyard buildings, while construction crews and trucks ferried building equipment up and down Hill Drive — a steep road leading to brand new homes standing sentinel over the former shipyard.And beyond waiting for a new batch of Navy reports, there was no way of knowing what’s in the air.

Last week, residents were informed by the San Francisco Department of Health that a test taken in November 2024 at the former site of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard showed radiation levels of airborne Plutonium 239 had exceeded the Navy's "action level."

San Francisco — More than a half century after the U.S. ignited 67 atomic weapons in the the central Pacific Ocean, a former Navy base in the Bay Area continues to carry that nuclear legacy.

Last week, residents were informed by the San Francisco Department of Health that a test taken in November 2024 at the former site of Hunters Point Naval Shipyard showed radiation levels of airborne Plutonium-239 had exceeded the Navy’s “action level,” requiring the military to further investigate.

The city and the residents were not informed until 11 months after that initial reading.

Hunters Point, a 500-acre peninsula jutting out into San Francisco Bay, served as a military laboratory to study the effects of nuclear weapons from 1946-69 following World War II. Although the research largely focused on how to decontaminate U.S. warships and equipment targeted with atomic bombs, the experimentation left much of the shipyard laced with radioactive contaminants and toxic chemicals.

For the last 30 years, the Navy has sought to clean up the area — now a U.S. Superfund site — with the long-term goal of redeveloping it into new housing and parkland.

But some Bay Area community leaders say haphazard remediation work and lackluster public outreach have endangered the health and safety of residents of the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood that sits beside the former shipyard. And they point to the Navy’s nearly year-long delay in informing them of the elevated Plutonium-239 reading, taken in November 2024, as just the latest example.

Plutonium-239 is a radioactive isotope and byproduct of nuclear bomb explosions. The elevated readings from November 2024 came from a 78-acre tract of land on the northeast portion of the shipyard, known as Parcel C.

“The City and County of San Francisco is deeply concerned by both the magnitude of this exceedance and the failure to provide timely notification,” wrote San Francisco Health Officer Susan Philip in an Oct. 30 letter to Navy officials. “Such a delay undermines our ability to safeguard public health and maintain transparency. Immediate notification is a regulatory requirement and is critical for ensuring community trust and safety.”

Navy officials and some health experts insist the radiation levels detected at the site, while above the Navy’s action level, did not pose an imminent or substantial threat to public health. Exposure to this level of Plutonium-239 every day for one year would be less than one-tenth the dose of radiation from a chest X-ray, according to a Navy spokesperson.

“The San Francisco Department of Public Health’s letter references a single outlier air sample that detected Plutonium-239 above the regulatory action level,” a Navy spokesperson said in a statement to The Times. “Regulatory action levels are deliberately and conservatively established below levels of health concern, and a single detection of Pu-239 at this level does not pose a risk to human health or public safety.”

The Navy said it has collected more than 200 ambient air monitoring samples from Parcel C since it began performing fieldwork there in 2023. The November 2024 sample was the only reading with elevated Plutonium-239, the Navy spokesperson told The Times.

Plutonium isotopes emit alpha radiation that is relatively benign outside the body, because it cannot travel through solid objects. However, if these radioactive particles are inhaled, they can damage the lungs and increase the long-term risk of developing certain cancers, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

“What we generally are concerned about for alpha emitters is if you get them into your body, and either through inhalation, ingestion, inadvertent injection — like somebody gets a cut and it gets into their body,” said Kathryn Higley, a professor of nuclear science at Oregon State University.

But it’s the lack of transparency and the 11-month delay in reporting the reading that has fomented community mistrust and raised questions regarding the military’s competency to safely clean up the polluted shipyard. In 2000, the EPA admonished naval officials for neglecting to inform residents that a fire had broken out at a hazardous landfill at Hunters Point. In 2017, two employees of the consulting firm Tetra Tech, who were hired by the Navy to assess radiation levels at Hunters Point, pleaded guilty to falsifying data in an effort to avoid having to perform additional cleanup on some areas of the shipyard.

The presence of radioactive air contaminants — at any level — compounds the health risks of the Bayview-Hunters Point neighborhood, which already faces high exposure to toxic diesel particles from big rigs traveling on nearby freeways and cargo ships visiting the Port of San Francisco.

Hunters Point Biomonitoring Foundation, a local nonprofit, has found concerning levels of toxic substances in urine screenings it has provided to several residents of the neighborhood, especially among older individuals and those living closer to the former Naval shipyard.

“Now, you’re talking about adding one of the most devastating radionuclides known to the human cardiopulmonary system to the chemical burden,” said Dr. Ahmisa Porter Sumchai, the foundation’s medical director and principal investigator.

“The particulate load is enough to kill people,” Sumchai added. “But you add ... a little Plutonium-239, and it’s a recipe for death.”

Philip, the San Francisco health officer, said in a statement that she met with Navy officials Oct. 31 and received assurances that air and dust monitoring is “ongoing” and that the military agency is “reviewing their duct control methods to ensure they are fully protective of public health.”

As a result, “no immediate action is required from a public health safety standpoint,” she said, adding that her office will continue to closely monitor the situation.

Other experts argued the situation was overblown. Phil Rutherford, a radiological risk expert and corporate consultant, called the delayed notification “unacceptable” but said the San Francisco health department’s letter was “a storm in a teacup” considering the low levels of radioactive material.

Higley, the Oregon State professor, said the site’s long history of delays and scandals likely added to backlash from community members. “I understand [residents’] frustration that they want to see this place cleaned up so that they can safely use it,” Higley said. “And there’s been a lot of reasons for why this process takes so long. But, from a radiological perspective, the actual residual radioactivity at the site is pretty modest.”

In November 2024, a Navy contractor was grinding asphalt on the site — a construction project that, while unrelated to the site’s historical contamination, triggered the Navy to monitor for any air quality issues. One of its air samplers, in Parcel C — collected 8.16 times 10‐15 picocuries per milliliter of Plutonium-239 — twice the established action level — according to a Navy spokesperson.

Navy officials sent the sample to a lab for analysis, and the initial results came back in March 2025, showing high radiation levels. In April, they ordered the lab to reanalyze the sample. In the follow-up analysis, radiation levels of Plutonium-239 were below action levels.

Between May and September, the Navy “further investigated the test results and conducted a methodical review of the laboratory’s procedures and practices to ensure they complied with standards,” according to the Navy spokesperson. “A third party also conducted an analysis of the lab’s performance.”

Later that September, the Navy told the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and several California state agencies about the elevated airborne radiation from Plutonium-239, in preparation for an upcoming community meeting. That information later trickled down to the San Francisco health department.

At some point, the Navy published some air quality data for Parcel C gathered between October and December 2024 on a website where it curates several environmental monitoring reports. That report only showed the lower Plutonium-239 radiation levels from the reanalysis were below the action level.

A Navy spokesperson told The Times that it was “mistakenly uploaded.”

“As soon as the Navy realized an incomplete report was uploaded, it was removed from the website,” the spokesperson said, while the Navy worked to verify the results.

All that has contributed to the confusion and concern among locals and advocates alike. Navy officials are expected to attend a Hunters Point Shipyard Citizens Advisory Committee Meeting on Nov. 17.


When fieldwork is occurring at the shipyard, the Navy monitors for Plutonium-239 and several other radioactive elements that may have resulted from historic fallout from atomic weapons testing.

Acquired by the Navy in 1940, Hunters Point was initially a base where ships were built, repaired and maintained during World War II. After the war ended, it became home to the Navy Radiological Defense Laboratory, a military research facility dedicated to investigating the effects of nuclear weapons and radiological safety.

The Navy bombarded a fleet of U.S. warships with nuclear weapons as a part of atomic testing in the Marshall Islands. The irradiated vessels were towed to Hunters Point, and used as the material and hardware upon which scientists tested decontamination methods.

In 1974, the shipyard was deactivated. Hazardous chemicals and low-level radiological contamination were identified, prompting the U.S. EPA to place the site on its Superfund list in 1989.

The Navy has led cleanup efforts, excavating contaminated soil and demolishing buildings. A largely residential parcel of the base, Parcel A, was turned over to San Francisco and has been redeveloped with new town houses and condos. A collective of 300 artists live and work in former naval buildings.

But dangers continue to emerge during ongoing remediation work.

In recent years, the Navy has recovered radioactive objects, including dials and deck markers coated with paint containing Radium isotopes to provide a glow-in-the-dark effect. Sumchai, medical director of the biomonitoring foundation, said she has observed large stockpiles of contaminated soil held in areas without any protective fencing to prevent contaminants from spreading off site.

“I view this as a local public health emergency,” Sumchai said. “I think that everything should be done to contain it and to remove people safely, if necessary, from documented areas of exposure.”

But to the casual observer the site looks unremarkable.

Hunters Point juts out into the San Francisco Bay just north of where Candlestick Park, the former home of the San Francisco 49ers, used to stand. Beyond the abandoned barracks and drydocks, the site is now mostly an empty expanse of grass and reeds, with an unobstructed view of the bay.

The cleanup sites, including Parcel C, are still fenced off, and only those with authorized credentials are allowed onto the property.

On a recent weekday afternoon, ravens flew and cawed over the long-vacant shipyard buildings, while construction crews and trucks ferried building equipment up and down Hill Drive — a steep road leading to brand new homes standing sentinel over the former shipyard.

And beyond waiting for a new batch of Navy reports, there was no way of knowing what’s in the air.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

How eating oysters could help restore South Australia’s algal-bloom ravaged coast

South Australians are heartbroken about the state’s unprecedented algal bloom. But eating oysters, donating shells and restoring lost reefs will boost ocean health.

South Australians are suddenly hearing a lot about oyster reefs — from government, on the news and in conversations, both online and in person. It’s not accidental. Their state is grappling with an unprecedented and harmful algal bloom. The crisis has drawn attention to another, long-forgotten environmental disaster beneath the waves: the historical destruction of native shellfish reefs. Reefs formed by native oysters, mussels and other aquatic mollusks carpeted more than 1,500 kilometres of the state’s coastline, until 200 years ago. In fact, they went well beyond the state border, existing in sheltered waters of bays and estuaries from the southern Great Barrier Reef to Tasmania and all the way around to Perth. These vast communities of bivalves, which feed by drawing water over their gills, would have helped clean the ocean gulfs and supported a smorgasbord of marine life. Their destruction by colonial dredge fisheries — to feed the growing colony and supply lime for construction — has left our contemporary coastlines more vulnerable to events like this algal bloom. And their recovery is now a central part of South Australia’s algal bloom response. Dominic Mcafee snorkels over a restored oyster reef at Coffin Bay. Stefan Andrews, CC BY-ND Rebuilding reefs South Australia’s A$20.6 million plan aims to restore various marine ecosystems, with two approaches to restore shellfish reefs. The first is building large reefs with limestone boulders. These have been constructed over the past decade with some positive results. Four have been built in Gulf St Vincent near Adelaide. Boulder reefs provide hard, stable substrate for baby oysters to settle and grow on. When built at the right time in early summer, when oyster babies are abundant and searching for a home, oyster larvae can settle on them and begin growing. But these are large infrastructure projects – think cranes, barges and boulders – and therefore take years to plan and execute. So alongside these large reef builds, the public will have the chance to help construct 25 smaller community-based reefs over the next three years. From Kangaroo Island to the Eyre Peninsula, these reefs will use recycled shells collected from aquaculture farms, restaurants and households using dedicated shell recycling bins. There will soon be a dedicated website for the project. The donated shells will be cleaned, sterilised by months in the sun, and packaged into biodegradable mesh bags and degradable cages to provide many thousands of “reef units”. From these smaller units, big reefs can grow. This combined approach — industrial-scale reefs and grassroots restoration — reflects both the scale of the ecological problem and the appetite for public participation. A 3D model of a community-based reef underwater with panels to monitor oyster settlement. Manny Katz, EyreLab, CC BY-ND What about the algal bloom? Little can be done to disperse an algal bloom of this magnitude once it has taken root. Feeling like powerless witnesses to the disaster, the ecological grief and dismay among coastal communities is palpable. Naturally, attention turns to recovery – what can be done to repair the damage? This is where oysters come in. They cannot stop this bloom. And their restoration is not a silver bullet for addressing the many stressors facing the marine environment. But healthy ecosystems recover faster and are more resilient to future environmental shocks. For shellfish reefs, South Australia already has some impressive runs on the board. Over nearly a decade we have undertaken some of the largest shellfish restorations in the Southern Hemisphere. Millions of oysters have found a home on our extant reefs, providing filtration benefits and supporting diverse marine life. And although the algal bloom has decimated many bivalve communities, thankfully native oysters have been found to have a level of resilience. During a dive last week we witnessed new baby oysters that had recently settled on the reefs, seeding its recovery. In the past decade we have built a scientific evidence base, practical knowledge, and community enthusiasm for reef restorations that benefits the broader marine ecosystem. This is why shellfish reefs feature so prominently in the algal bloom response plan. A site of oyster reef restoration in South Australia. Stefan Andrews, CC BY-ND Where will these new reefs go? We need time to identify the best sites for big boulder reefs. For now, the priority is monitoring the ecological impacts and resilience to the ongoing algal bloom. But work on community-based reef projects has already begun . These reefs will broaden our scientific understanding of how underwater animals and plants find them. Sites will be chosen based on ecological knowledge and community interest in ongoing marine stewardship. There are many ways communities can take part. Community involvement and education is a cornerstone of the work, and individuals can recycle their oyster, scallop and mussel shells. The public can also volunteer time to join shell bagging and caging events, and even get involved building the reefs. In time, there will opportunities for the community to help with monitoring and counting the oysters and other critters settled on the recycled shell. A native oyster reef in Coffin Bay, South Australia. Stefan Andrews, CC BY-ND Future built from the past The impact of this harmful algal bloom is real and ongoing. But in responding to it, South Australians are rediscovering a forgotten marine ecosystem. Rebuilding shellfish reefs won’t fix it — but alongside catchment management, seagrass restoration, fisheries management and improved monitoring and climate action, it is a powerful tool. With the help of communities, reefs that were once broken, forgotten and functionally extinct, can be returned. It will take time for these reefs to support cleaner waters and richer marine life. But these community initiatives can show people that we all have a role to play in caring for coastlines. Dominic McAfee receives funding from the South Australian Department for Environment and Water. Sean Connell receives funding from The Australian Research Council and South Australian Department for Environment and Water. He is a Director of AusOcean, a non-profit organisation in South Australia that develops and deploys open-source, low-cost marine technology to help solve ocean science and conservation challenges.

Tijuana River sewage still pollutes the San Diego Coast. She’s fighting to clean it up

The Tijuana River’s sewage contamination continues to sicken communities in southern San Diego County. San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre has become a leading force in pushing for binational fixes and emergency funding to protect public health.

In summary The Tijuana River’s sewage contamination continues to sicken communities in southern San Diego County. San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre has become a leading force in pushing for binational fixes and emergency funding to protect public health. Hours after a November storm, the Tijuana River flooded a grove of trees in Imperial Beach, gushed through a row of calverts and exploded into mounds of fetid foam.  This is ground zero for the contaminated river, which sickens thousands of people in southern San Diego County. “The Tijuana River is one of, if not the most polluted, river in the entire United States,” said San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre, who viewed the overflowing river wearing black rain boots and a hot pink respirator mask. “The river is carrying dangerous chemicals, pollutants, pathogens and toxic gases that are impacting South San Diego communities.” The site, known as the Saturn Boulevard hot spot, is part of a system of polluted waterways and failed sewage treatment plants in the cross-border region. In the ocean, the contamination leaves swimmers and surfers with breathing problems, digestive illness and rashes. Unsafe conditions have closed parts of the Imperial Beach shoreline for three years. Last year, researchers discovered that the pollution is airborne as well. Foul-smelling hydrogen sulfide emissions near the river sometimes rise hundreds of times higher than the state’s odor threshold. At those levels the gas triggers headaches, nausea, eye irritation and respiratory distress. And there are other chemicals, viruses and bacteria in the mix.  For children, the effects are worse, said Tom Csanadi, an Imperial Beach physician who has been active in the issue. Their lung surface area to body size is higher, which means they absorb more toxins. Children breathe faster than adults and they’re still growing, so it can affect their body tissues more severely. There are 11 schools within three kilometers of the hot spot. “It could lower IQ, stunt cognitive development,” Csanadi said. As a surfer, activist and elected leader, Aguirre has spent two decades tackling this problem, which she considers one of the worst environmental crises in the country. “She’s been at the forefront of the advocacy side of this for a long, long time, before her political career even started,” said Falk Feddersen, an oceanographer with Scripps Institution of Oceanography who has mapped sewage flows up the coast from Mexico. A cocktail of chemicals While storm water seeped across the road at the hot spot, a swiftwater rescue truck drove through puddles, scanning for stranded motorists. The culverts under the crossing were installed to keep flooding under control, but they also churn the water, spewing noxious gas and other pollutants.  “The unintended consequence is that it’s exacerbating the release of all the molecules and aerosols into the air,” Aguirre said. “It’s literally rocketing them into the environment.” Hydrogen sulfide, with its distinctive rotten egg odor, is an indicator of that toxic brew, said Kim Prather, an atmospheric chemist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. She raised the alarm about airborne pollution from the Tijuana River last year. Flooding caused by the Tijuana River covers a section of Saturn Boulevard after a rainy day in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Layers of foam caused by sewage and chemicals bubble up along a section of the Tijuana River after a rainy day in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Layers of foam caused by sewage and chemicals bubble up along a section of the Tijuana River after a rainy day in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters “That’s one in a cocktail of thousands of compounds,” she said. “It’s a blessing that it smells. I know it sounds strange, but it tells you to get away.” Aguirre described her own struggles with Tijuana River pollution, including migraines, chest pain, shortness of breath, and waking in the middle of the night to an odor she likened to a “porta potty.” Recent improvements to wastewater treatment plants in the U.S. and Mexico have reduced water pollution by keeping tens of millions of gallons of sewage out of the ocean each day. Aguirre and others celebrate that news, but note the river still contaminates surrounding areas. More big upgrades are in the works on both sides of the border, but fixing the Saturn Boulevard hot spot quickly could offer immediate relief, Aguirre said. “This is a very specific and low hanging fruit that will at least begin to mitigate the amount of gases being released into the air and benefit tens of thousands of people that live here,” she said. Waves of pollution Tijuana River pollution dates back to at least the 1930s, when the U.S. and Mexican governments built the first cross-border sewage plants. As Tijuana’s population soared with its booming industry, the city’s waste outstripped its treatment systems. Plant failures and sewage spills became common in the early 2000s, along with frequent beach closures along the south San Diego coast. That’s when Aguirre encountered cross-border pollution in the surf at Imperial Beach. Growing up in Puerto Vallarta Mexico, she was used to surfing in muddy water after rains, so the discolored waves didn’t seem worrisome.  “I remember going out here in Imperial Beach while the water was chocolate brown, not knowing that it’s nothing like what I was used to, because that was sewage,” she said. She was the only one at the beach that day, except for a man posting signs stating “Clean water now.” He was Serge Dedina, executive director of the environmental group WildCoast, and he enlisted her in the fight against sewage pollution. Aguirre first volunteered for the organization and soon joined its staff. She worked there for more than a decade, while earning a master’s degree in marine biodiversity and conservation at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. At WildCoast she organized a citizens’ group, advocated for improved water testing using DNA analysis, and served on working groups for a binational agreement on cross-border pollution, called Minute 320. When Dedina was elected mayor of Imperial Beach in 2014, Aguirre saw a path to solving the sewage problem. “I thought, well, if he can do it I can do it,” she said. “And I built on the momentum that he was able to create on this issue.” San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre wears a respiratory filter mask while standing near a section of the Tijuana River in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters A warning sign about sewage and chemical contamination is posted along the shore of Imperial Beach on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Aguirre won a seat on the Imperial Beach City Council in 2018 and was elected mayor in 2022, when Dedina left office. With a bigger platform, she called on California and the federal government to declare a state of emergency over the border pollution problem and lobbied to classify the area as a Superfund site. Those efforts haven’t gained traction, but other angles yielded results. Imperial Beach sued the International Boundary and Water Commission with the city of Chula Vista and Port of San Diego in 2018, alleging that it violated the Clean Water Act and other federal laws by failing to control coastal sewage pollution. They settled the lawsuit in 2023 with a promise of more resources and binational cooperation.  “My tenure as mayor of IB really focused on advocating and working in a bipartisan fashion to secure the additional funding that was needed,” to fix cross-border pollution, she said. A person walks their dog near the Imperial Beach Pier in Imperial Beach on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Aguirre led delegations of local officials to Washington, D.C. to drum up money for costly infrastructure upgrades needed to get the sewage problem under control. She met with White House officials in both the Biden and Trump administrations, and with lawmakers who had served as Navy SEALS and had experienced the pollution problem at BUD/S, the Navy SEAL training program in Coronado. In July, Aguirre won a special election for an open San Diego County Board of Supervisors seat. She immediately led county plans to study the health effects of cross-border pollution and asked the state for $50 million to fix the Saturn Boulevard hot spot.  “She’s moved a problem that has been stuck, when other people could not,” Prather, the Scripps atmospheric chemist, said. Sewage spills prompt quick fixes The long-standing pollution problem came under new scrutiny in 2017, when a spill from a damaged line in Mexico dumped an estimated 143 million gallons of wastewater into the Tijuana River, sending foul odors wafting through the region. That accident revealed just how dilapidated the aging infrastructure had become. “That’s one of the reasons why things are so horrific, because they’re playing catch up on fixing these things when they have catastrophic failures,” said Feddersen, the Scripps oceanographer. In early 2022, another major spill released hundreds of millions of gallons of sewage-tainted water across the border for two and a half weeks.  That summer, San Diego congress members freed up more than $300 million that had been authorized for wastewater treatment upgrades through the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Mexico committed $144 million to replace failing sewage treatment facilities in Tijuana, with an updated treaty between the two countries known as Minute 328. In 2024, the lawmakers persuaded the Biden administration to add another $370 million to repair the aging South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant near the border, Rep. Scott Peters said. After decades of deterioration, major improvements came online this year. The South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant, which was barely operable, is now fully functioning and expanded its capacity from 25 million to 35 million gallons of wastewater per day. The project was expected to take two years, but was completed in 100 days, according to the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission. An aerial view shows a treated wastewater river heading to the Pacific Ocean near Real Del Mar in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico on Aug. 12, 2025. Photo by Guillermo Arias, AFP via Getty Images By the end of next year that will climb to 50 million gallons per day, with higher capacity for peak wastewater surges. The commission, which manages the wastewater systems, has spent $122 million on the first series fixes, and the full project will cost $650 million. Although the Trump administration has clawed back federal funding for many projects, it has doubled down on the cross-border sewage problem, Aguirre said. In July U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin met with his Mexican counterpart to seal the environmental deal. In April Mexico repaired its Punta Bandera plant, located on the coast about six miles south of the border. The plant had failed completely in 2020 and was dumping raw sewage into the ocean. It now handles 18 million gallons of wastewater per day. That’s a big boost for beach safety, said Feddersen, whose research tracked the flow of sewage in ocean currents and modeled scenarios for reducing it. “The best bang for the buck, the greatest reduction in beach closure and reduction in human illness, was fixing Punta Bandera,” he said. Yet, the Tijuana River still threatens residents in its watershed with untreated sewage and industrial chemicals from maquiladoras in Tijuana. That includes solvents, heavy metals and toxins known as PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” Prather said. “The river right now is a wastewater treatment plant without any processing,” she said. Removing the culverts would eliminate the turbulence that sprays out hydrogen sulfide and other toxins. The county plans to finish a feasibility study on the project by January. That project would keep contaminants out of the air, but not out of the water. Aguirre also wants new infrastructure to clean up the Tijuana River on the U.S. side. The recent binational Treaty, Minute 328, includes that option, and the International Boundary and Water Commission is exploring what it would take to divert and treat the river flows. There’s no funding for the project yet, but Aguirre says it’s on her agenda. “Rivers are diverted up and down,” she said.  “It’s doable. Is it expensive? Yes. Are our lives in South San Diego worth it? Yes.”

Germophobes Can Breathe Easy On Airplanes, In Hospitals, Experts Say

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Dec. 5, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Germophobes can breathe a little easier when visiting a hospital...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Dec. 5, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Germophobes can breathe a little easier when visiting a hospital or taking an airplane trip, a new study says.The ambient air on planes and in hospitals mostly contains harmless microbes typically associated with human skin, researchers reported Dec. 4 in the journal Microbiome.The cutting-edge study analyzed germ samples captured on the outer surface of face masks worn by air travelers and health care workers, researchers said.“We realized that we could use face masks as a cheap, easy air-sampling device for personal exposures and general exposures,” senior researcher Erica Hartmann, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, said in a news release.“We extracted DNA from those masks and examined the types of bacteria found there,” Hartmann said.Overall, the team analyzed germs drawn from masks worn by 10 air travelers and 12 health care professionals. Travelers turned in their masks following a flight, hospital workers following a shift.Researchers also analyzed germs captured by an aircraft cabin filter that had been used for more than 8,000 hours.Overall, the team found 407 distinct species of microbes.“Somewhat unsurprisingly, the bacteria were the types that we would typically associate with indoor air,” Hartmann said. “Indoor air looks like indoor air, which also looks like human skin.”A few potentially disease-causing germs did show up, but they were in extremely low amounts and without signs of active infection, researchers said.Hartmann’s team came up with the study idea in January 2022, amid the COVID pandemic.“At the time, there was a serious concern about COVID transmission on planes,” Hartmann said. “HEPA filters on planes filter the air with incredibly high efficiency, so we thought it would be a great way to capture everything in the air.”“But these filters are not like the filters in our cars or homes,” Hartmann added. “They cost thousands of dollars and, in order to remove them, workers have to pull the airplane out of service for maintenance. This obviously costs an incredible amount of money, and that was eye opening.”To beef up their project, the team turned to a much cheaper alternative: face masks.They also decided to include hospitals as another study locale.“As a comparison group, we thought about another population of people who were likely wearing masks anyway,” Hartmann said. “We landed on health care providers.”The results indicate that people themselves are the main source of airborne microbes in enclosed settings, and that most of the germs come from people’s skin rather than from any illnesses, researchers said.Although the results show indoor air is relatively safe, researchers noted that infectious germs also spread through other routes — most importantly, touch.“For this study, we solely looked at what’s in the air,” Hartmann said. “Hand hygiene remains an effective way to prevent diseases transmission from surfaces. We were interested in what people are exposed to via air, even if they are washing their hands.”SOURCES: Northwestern University, news release, Dec. 3, 2025; Microbiome, Dec. 4, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

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.