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.

Satellite Images and Documents Indicate China Working on Nuclear Propulsion for New Aircraft Carrier

News Feed
Monday, November 11, 2024

BANGKOK (AP) — China has built a land-based prototype nuclear reactor for a large surface warship, in the clearest sign yet Beijing is advancing toward producing its first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, according to a new analysis of satellite imagery and Chinese government documents provided to The Associated Press.China’s navy is already the world’s largest numerically, and it has been rapidly modernizing. Adding nuclear-powered carriers to its fleet would be a major step in realizing its ambitions for a true "blue-water” force capable of operating in seas far from China in a growing global challenge to the United States.“Nuclear-powered carriers would place China in the exclusive ranks of first-class naval powers, a group currently limited to the United States and France,” said Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. “For China’s leadership, such a development would symbolize national prestige, fueling domestic nationalism and elevating the country’s global image as a leading power.”Researchers at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in California said they made the finding while investigating a mountain site outside the city of Leshan in the southwest Chinese province of Sichuan, where they suspected China was building a reactor to produce plutonium or tritium for weapons. Instead they concluded that China was building a prototype reactor for a large warship. The project at Leshan is dubbed the Longwei, or Dragon Might, Project and is also referred to as the Nuclear Power Development Project in documents.Neither China’s Defense Ministry nor Foreign Affairs Ministry responded to requests for comment. Satellite images and public documents helped identify likely carrier project There have long been rumors that China is planning to build a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, but the research by the Middlebury team is the first to confirm that China is working on a nuclear-powered propulsion system for a carrier-sized surface warship.“The reactor prototype at Leshan is the first solid evidence that China is, in fact, developing a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier," said Jeffrey Lewis, a professor at Middlebury and one of the researchers on the project. "Operating a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier is an exclusive club, one that China looks set to join.”Drawing on satellite images and public documents including project tenders, personnel files, environmental impact studies — and even a citizen’s complaint about noisy construction and excessive dust — they concluded a prototype reactor for naval propulsion was being built in the mountains of Mucheng township, some 70 miles (112 kilometers) southwest of Sichuan's provincial capital Chengdu.The reactor, which procurement documents indicate will soon be operational, is housed in a new facility built at the site known as Base 909, which houses six other reactors that are operational, decommissioned or under construction, according to the analysis. The site is under the control of the Nuclear Power Institute of China, a subsidiary of the China National Nuclear Corporation, which is tasked with reactor engineering research and testing.Documents indicating that China’s 701 Institute, formally known as China Ship Research and Design Center, which is responsible for aircraft carrier development, procured reactor equipment “intended for installation on a large surface warship” under the Nuclear Power Development Project as well as the project’s “national defense designation” helped lead to the conclusion the sizable reactor is a prototype for a next-generation aircraft carrier.Satellite mages from 2020 to 2023 have shown the demolition of homes and the construction of water intake infrastructure connected to the reactor site. Contracts for steam generators and turbine pumps indicate the project involves a pressurized water reactor with a secondary circuit — a profile that is consistent with naval propulsion reactors, the researchers say.An environmental impact report calls the Longwei Project a “national defense-related construction project” that is classified “secret.”“Unless China is developing nuclear-powered cruisers, which were pursued only by the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, then the Nuclear Power Development Project most certainly refers to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier development effort,” researchers wrote in a detailed 19-page report on their findings shared exclusively with the AP.Jamie Withorne, an analyst at the Oslo Nuclear Project who was not involved in the research and reviewed the findings, said Middlebury's team made a “convincing argument.”“From the identifying reports, co-location with other naval reactor facilities, and correlating construction activity, I think it can be said that it is likely the Longwei Project is housed at Base 909, and it could potentially be located at the identified building,” she said.The research does not, however, provide clues as to when a Chinese nuclear-powered carrier could be built and become operational, she said.Sarah Laderman, a senior analyst with Open Nuclear Network, a program of the U.S.-based NGO PAX sapiens foundation, said the findings were “carefully conducted and thoroughly researched.”“Given the evidence presented here, I see a compelling case made that China seems to be working towards building a nuclear propulsion system for its naval surface ships (likely aircraft carriers) at this location,” said Laderman, who is based in Vienna and was not involved in Middlebury’s research. Pursuit of a nuclear-powered carrier China’s first carrier, commissioned in 2012, was a repurposed Soviet ship, and its second was built in China but based upon the Soviet design. Both ships — named the Liaoning and the Shandong — employ a so-called “ski-jump” type launch method, with a ramp at the end of a short runway to help planes take off.The Type 003 Fujian, launched in 2022, was the country's third carrier and its first to be indigenously designed and built. It employs an electromagnetic-type launch system like those developed and used by the U.S. Navy. All three carriers are conventionally powered.Sea trials hadn’t even started for the Fujian in March when Yuan Huazhi, political commissar for China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy, confirmed the construction of a fourth carrier. Asked if it would be nuclear-powered, he said at the time that would “soon be announced,” but so far it has not been.There has been speculation that China may begin producing two new carriers at once — one Type 003 like the Fujian and one nuclear-powered Type 004 — something that it has not attempted before but that its shipyards have the capacity to do.Matthew Funaiole, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ China Power Project, said he doubts China's next carrier will be nuclear-powered. Instead, he said, he would expect the People's Liberation Army Navy's fourth carrier to focus on optimizing the existing design of the Fujian carrier with “incremental improvements.”Nick Childs, senior fellow for naval forces and maritime security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the Chinese “have taken an incremental approach to their carrier development with a number of ambitions that will evolve over time.” “For now, their deployments have been relatively cautious, remaining largely within range of shore support, but projecting influence and to some extent coercion within their near waters.”Eventually, however, “larger carriers more akin to their U.S. counterparts will give them more options to project power,” Childs said. It takes several years to build a carrier and bring it into operation, but developing nuclear propulsion for its next generation of warships would eventually give China more power to run advanced systems, such as electromagnetic launchers, radars and new technology weapons, Childs said.“As well as obviating the need for the ship to refuel regularly and therefore giving it much greater range, nuclear power means that without the need to carry fuel oil for the ship there will be room aboard for fuel and weapons for its aircraft, extending their capabilities,” Childs said.“Much will depend on what overall size the next carrier is, but the addition of nuclear power will represent a significant step further in China’s carrier development with a vessel more comparable to the U.S. Navy’s carriers.”Zhao, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said nuclear-powered carriers would provide the Chinese military “with greater flexibility and endurance to operate around strategic hotspots, especially along the First Island Chain, where most territories disputed by China are located,” said Zhao. The First Island Chain includes the self-governed island of Taiwan, which China claims as its own and vows to annex it by force if necessary. The U.S. is obligated by a domestic law to supply Taiwan with sufficient weapons to deter invasion, and it could provide assistance to the island from its bases in the Pacific in the event of an invasion or blockade. Tensions also have risen in the South China Sea between China and neighboring nations over territorial disputes and maritime claims.“These carriers could also extend Chinese operations deeper into the Western Pacific, further challenging the U.S. military’s ability to ‘intervene’ in regional matters that China views as best resolved by countries from the region only,” Zhao said.Chinese President Xi Jinping has tasked defense officials with building a “first-class” navy and becoming a maritime power as part of his blueprint for the country’s rejuvenation.The country’s most recent white paper on national defense, dated 2019, said the Chinese navy was adjusting to strategic requirements by “speeding up the transition of its tasks from defense on the near seas to protection missions on the far seas.”The People's Liberation Army Navy is already the world’s largest navy with more than 370 ships and submarines. The country also boasts powerful shipbuilding capabilities: China’s shipyards are building many hundreds of vessels each year, whereas the U.S. is building five or fewer, according to a U.S. congressional report late last year.However, the Chinese navy lags behind the U.S. Navy in many respects. Among other advantages, the U.S. currently has 11 carriers, all nuclear powered, allowing it to keep multiple strike groups deployed around the world at all times, including in the Indo-Pacific.But the Pentagon is growingly increasingly concerned about China’s rapid modernization of its fleet, including the design and construction of new carriers.That aligns with China's “growing emphasis on the maritime domain and increasing demands" for its navy "to operate at greater distances from mainland China,” the Defense Department said in its most recent report to Congress on China's military.And China's “growing force of aircraft carriers extend air defense coverage of deployed task groups beyond the range of land-based defenses, enabling operations farther from China’s shore,” the report said.Tang reported from Washington D.C.Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

For the first time, a group of U.S. researchers has concluded that China has built a land-based prototype nuclear reactor to power future aircraft carriers

BANGKOK (AP) — China has built a land-based prototype nuclear reactor for a large surface warship, in the clearest sign yet Beijing is advancing toward producing its first nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, according to a new analysis of satellite imagery and Chinese government documents provided to The Associated Press.

China’s navy is already the world’s largest numerically, and it has been rapidly modernizing. Adding nuclear-powered carriers to its fleet would be a major step in realizing its ambitions for a true "blue-water” force capable of operating in seas far from China in a growing global challenge to the United States.

“Nuclear-powered carriers would place China in the exclusive ranks of first-class naval powers, a group currently limited to the United States and France,” said Tong Zhao, a senior fellow at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, D.C. “For China’s leadership, such a development would symbolize national prestige, fueling domestic nationalism and elevating the country’s global image as a leading power.”

Researchers at the Middlebury Institute of International Studies in California said they made the finding while investigating a mountain site outside the city of Leshan in the southwest Chinese province of Sichuan, where they suspected China was building a reactor to produce plutonium or tritium for weapons.

Instead they concluded that China was building a prototype reactor for a large warship. The project at Leshan is dubbed the Longwei, or Dragon Might, Project and is also referred to as the Nuclear Power Development Project in documents.

Neither China’s Defense Ministry nor Foreign Affairs Ministry responded to requests for comment.

Satellite images and public documents helped identify likely carrier project

There have long been rumors that China is planning to build a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, but the research by the Middlebury team is the first to confirm that China is working on a nuclear-powered propulsion system for a carrier-sized surface warship.

“The reactor prototype at Leshan is the first solid evidence that China is, in fact, developing a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier," said Jeffrey Lewis, a professor at Middlebury and one of the researchers on the project. "Operating a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier is an exclusive club, one that China looks set to join.”

Drawing on satellite images and public documents including project tenders, personnel files, environmental impact studies — and even a citizen’s complaint about noisy construction and excessive dust — they concluded a prototype reactor for naval propulsion was being built in the mountains of Mucheng township, some 70 miles (112 kilometers) southwest of Sichuan's provincial capital Chengdu.

The reactor, which procurement documents indicate will soon be operational, is housed in a new facility built at the site known as Base 909, which houses six other reactors that are operational, decommissioned or under construction, according to the analysis. The site is under the control of the Nuclear Power Institute of China, a subsidiary of the China National Nuclear Corporation, which is tasked with reactor engineering research and testing.

Documents indicating that China’s 701 Institute, formally known as China Ship Research and Design Center, which is responsible for aircraft carrier development, procured reactor equipment “intended for installation on a large surface warship” under the Nuclear Power Development Project as well as the project’s “national defense designation” helped lead to the conclusion the sizable reactor is a prototype for a next-generation aircraft carrier.

Satellite mages from 2020 to 2023 have shown the demolition of homes and the construction of water intake infrastructure connected to the reactor site. Contracts for steam generators and turbine pumps indicate the project involves a pressurized water reactor with a secondary circuit — a profile that is consistent with naval propulsion reactors, the researchers say.

An environmental impact report calls the Longwei Project a “national defense-related construction project” that is classified “secret.”

“Unless China is developing nuclear-powered cruisers, which were pursued only by the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, then the Nuclear Power Development Project most certainly refers to a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier development effort,” researchers wrote in a detailed 19-page report on their findings shared exclusively with the AP.

Jamie Withorne, an analyst at the Oslo Nuclear Project who was not involved in the research and reviewed the findings, said Middlebury's team made a “convincing argument.”

“From the identifying reports, co-location with other naval reactor facilities, and correlating construction activity, I think it can be said that it is likely the Longwei Project is housed at Base 909, and it could potentially be located at the identified building,” she said.

The research does not, however, provide clues as to when a Chinese nuclear-powered carrier could be built and become operational, she said.

Sarah Laderman, a senior analyst with Open Nuclear Network, a program of the U.S.-based NGO PAX sapiens foundation, said the findings were “carefully conducted and thoroughly researched.”

“Given the evidence presented here, I see a compelling case made that China seems to be working towards building a nuclear propulsion system for its naval surface ships (likely aircraft carriers) at this location,” said Laderman, who is based in Vienna and was not involved in Middlebury’s research.

Pursuit of a nuclear-powered carrier

China’s first carrier, commissioned in 2012, was a repurposed Soviet ship, and its second was built in China but based upon the Soviet design. Both ships — named the Liaoning and the Shandong — employ a so-called “ski-jump” type launch method, with a ramp at the end of a short runway to help planes take off.

The Type 003 Fujian, launched in 2022, was the country's third carrier and its first to be indigenously designed and built. It employs an electromagnetic-type launch system like those developed and used by the U.S. Navy. All three carriers are conventionally powered.

Sea trials hadn’t even started for the Fujian in March when Yuan Huazhi, political commissar for China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy, confirmed the construction of a fourth carrier. Asked if it would be nuclear-powered, he said at the time that would “soon be announced,” but so far it has not been.

There has been speculation that China may begin producing two new carriers at once — one Type 003 like the Fujian and one nuclear-powered Type 004 — something that it has not attempted before but that its shipyards have the capacity to do.

Matthew Funaiole, senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies’ China Power Project, said he doubts China's next carrier will be nuclear-powered. Instead, he said, he would expect the People's Liberation Army Navy's fourth carrier to focus on optimizing the existing design of the Fujian carrier with “incremental improvements.”

Nick Childs, senior fellow for naval forces and maritime security at the International Institute for Strategic Studies, said the Chinese “have taken an incremental approach to their carrier development with a number of ambitions that will evolve over time.”

“For now, their deployments have been relatively cautious, remaining largely within range of shore support, but projecting influence and to some extent coercion within their near waters.”

Eventually, however, “larger carriers more akin to their U.S. counterparts will give them more options to project power,” Childs said.

It takes several years to build a carrier and bring it into operation, but developing nuclear propulsion for its next generation of warships would eventually give China more power to run advanced systems, such as electromagnetic launchers, radars and new technology weapons, Childs said.

“As well as obviating the need for the ship to refuel regularly and therefore giving it much greater range, nuclear power means that without the need to carry fuel oil for the ship there will be room aboard for fuel and weapons for its aircraft, extending their capabilities,” Childs said.

“Much will depend on what overall size the next carrier is, but the addition of nuclear power will represent a significant step further in China’s carrier development with a vessel more comparable to the U.S. Navy’s carriers.”

Zhao, of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said nuclear-powered carriers would provide the Chinese military “with greater flexibility and endurance to operate around strategic hotspots, especially along the First Island Chain, where most territories disputed by China are located,” said Zhao.

The First Island Chain includes the self-governed island of Taiwan, which China claims as its own and vows to annex it by force if necessary.

The U.S. is obligated by a domestic law to supply Taiwan with sufficient weapons to deter invasion, and it could provide assistance to the island from its bases in the Pacific in the event of an invasion or blockade. Tensions also have risen in the South China Sea between China and neighboring nations over territorial disputes and maritime claims.

“These carriers could also extend Chinese operations deeper into the Western Pacific, further challenging the U.S. military’s ability to ‘intervene’ in regional matters that China views as best resolved by countries from the region only,” Zhao said.

Chinese President Xi Jinping has tasked defense officials with building a “first-class” navy and becoming a maritime power as part of his blueprint for the country’s rejuvenation.

The country’s most recent white paper on national defense, dated 2019, said the Chinese navy was adjusting to strategic requirements by “speeding up the transition of its tasks from defense on the near seas to protection missions on the far seas.”

The People's Liberation Army Navy is already the world’s largest navy with more than 370 ships and submarines. The country also boasts powerful shipbuilding capabilities: China’s shipyards are building many hundreds of vessels each year, whereas the U.S. is building five or fewer, according to a U.S. congressional report late last year.

However, the Chinese navy lags behind the U.S. Navy in many respects. Among other advantages, the U.S. currently has 11 carriers, all nuclear powered, allowing it to keep multiple strike groups deployed around the world at all times, including in the Indo-Pacific.

But the Pentagon is growingly increasingly concerned about China’s rapid modernization of its fleet, including the design and construction of new carriers.

That aligns with China's “growing emphasis on the maritime domain and increasing demands" for its navy "to operate at greater distances from mainland China,” the Defense Department said in its most recent report to Congress on China's military.

And China's “growing force of aircraft carriers extend air defense coverage of deployed task groups beyond the range of land-based defenses, enabling operations farther from China’s shore,” the report said.

Tang reported from Washington D.C.

Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Roads can become more dangerous on hot days – especially for pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists

We tend to adapt quickly to rain. But a growing body of research shows we also need to be more careful when it comes to travel and commuting during extreme heat.

Munbaik Cycling Clothing/UnsplashDuring heatwaves, everyday life tends to feel more difficult than on an average day. Travel and daily movement are no exception. But while most of us know rain, fog and storms can make driving conditions challenging, not many people realise heat also changes transport risk. In particular, research evidence consistently suggests roads, trips and daily commutes can become more dangerous on very hot days compared with an average day. The key questions are how much more dangerous, who is most affected, whether the risk is short-lived or lingers and how this information can be used to better manage road safety during extreme heat. Who is most at risk? The clearest picture comes from a recent multi-city study in tropical and subtropical Taiwan. Using injury data across six large cities, researchers examined how road injury risk changes as temperatures rise, and how this differs by mode of travel. The results show what researchers call a sharp, non-linear increase in risk on very hot days. It’s non-linear because road injury risk rises much more steeply once temperatures move into the 30–40°C range. It is also within this range that different travel modes begin to clearly separate in terms of their susceptibility to heat-related risk. This Taiwan study found injury risk for pedestrians more than doubled during extreme heat. Cyclist injuries soared by around 80%, and motorcyclist injuries by about 50%. In contrast, the increase for car drivers is much smaller. The pattern is clear: the more exposed the road user, the bigger the heat-related risk. The pattern is also not exclusive to a single geographical region and has been observed in other countries too. A long-running national study from Spain drew on two decades of crash data covering nearly 2 million incidents and showed crash risk increases steadily as temperatures rise. At very high temperatures, overall crash risk is about 15% higher than on cool days. Importantly, the increase is even larger for crashes linked to driver fatigue, distraction or illness. A nationwide study in the United States found a 3.4% increase in fatal traffic crashes on heatwave days versus non-heatwave days. The increase is not evenly distributed. Fatal crash risk rises more strongly: on rural roads among middle-aged and older drivers, and on hot, dry days with high UV radiation. This shows extreme heat does not just increase crash likelihood, but also the chance that crashes result in death. That’s particularly true in settings with higher speeds and less forgiving road environments. Taken together, the international evidence base is consistent: the likelihood of crashes, injury risk and fatal outcomes all increase during hot days. Why heat increases road risk, and why the effects can linger Across the three studies, the evidence points to a combination of exposure and human performance effects. The Taiwan study shows that risk increases most sharply for pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists. These are groups that are physically exposed to ambient heat and, in some cases, exertion. In contrast, occupants of enclosed vehicles show smaller increases in risk. This suggests that direct exposure to heat plays a role in shaping who is most affected. The Spanish study suggests that the largest heat-related increases occur in crashes involving driver fatigue, distraction, sleepiness or illness. This indicates that heat affects road safety not only through environmental conditions, but through changes in human performance that make errors more likely. Importantly, the Spanish data also show that these effects are not always confined to the hottest day itself. They can persist for several days following extreme heat, consistent with cumulative impacts such as sleep disruption and prolonged fatigue. High solar radiation refers to days with intense, direct sunlight and little cloud cover. In the US study, heat-related increases in fatal crashes were strongest under these conditions. Although visibility was not directly examined, these are also conditions associated with greater glare, which may make things even less safe. How can the extra risk be managed? The empirical evidence does not point to a single solution, but it does indicate where risk is elevated and where things become less safe. That knowledge alone can be used to manage risk. First, reducing exposure matters. Fewer trips mean less risk, and flexible work arrangements during heatwaves can indirectly reduce road exposure altogether. Second, risk awareness matters. Simply recognising that heatwaves are higher-risk travel days can help us be more cautious, especially for those travelling without the protection of an enclosed vehicle. We tend to adapt quickly to rain. As soon as the first drops hit the windscreen, we reduce speed almost subconsciously and increase distance to other vehicles. This, in fact, is a key reason traffic jams often start to develop shortly after roads become wet. But a growing body of research shows we also need to be more careful when it comes to travel and commuting during extreme heat. Milad Haghani receives funding from the Australian government (the Office of Road Safety).Zahra Shahhoseini does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

West Virginia Program That Helped Communities Tackle Abandoned Buildings Is Running Out of Money

A West Virginia program that helped communities demolish abandoned buildings is running out of money, and state lawmakers haven't proposed any new solutions

From their home on Charleston’s, West Virginia's West Side, Tina and Matt Glaspey watched the house on the corner of First Avenue and Fitzgerald Street go downhill fast. A family with a young daughter left because they didn’t feel safe. The next owner died. After that, the police were responding regularly as people broke into the vacant home. The Glaspeys say that in just two years, the small brick house went from occupied to condemned, left without power or water, repeatedly entered by squatters. “One day, we noticed a bright orange sticker on the door saying the building was not safe for habitation,” Tina said. “It shows how quickly things can turn, in just two years, when nothing is done to deal with these properties.” City officials say the house is following the same path as hundreds of other vacant properties across Charleston, which slowly deteriorate until they become unsafe and are added to the city’s priority demolition list, typically including about 30 buildings at a time. Until this year, a state program helped communities tear these buildings down, preventing them from becoming safety hazards for neighborhoods and harming property values. But that money is now depleted. There is no statewide demolition program left, no replacement funding, and no legislation to keep it running, leaving municipalities on their own to absorb the costs or leave vacant buildings standing. Across West Virginia, vacant properties increase while a state program designed to help runs out of money The state’s Demolition Landfill Assistance Program was established in 2021 and was funded a year later with federal COVID-19 recovery funds. Administered through the Department of Environmental Protection, the fund reimbursed local governments for the demolition of abandoned buildings that they couldn’t afford on their own. The state survey was the first step in the program to determine the scope of the need and assess local government capacity to address it. It was distributed to all 55 counties and more than 180 municipalities. However, the need is far greater. Carrie Staton, director of the West Virginia Brownfields Assistance Center, has worked with communities on abandoned buildings for about 14 years. She said most counties don’t have the resources, funding or staffing to manage dilapidated housing on their own. “We’re just so rural and so universally rural. Other states have at least a couple of major metro areas that can support this work,” she said. “We don’t. It just takes longer to do everything.” Charleston has spent millions demolishing hundreds of vacant buildings As the state’s largest city, Charleston has more tools than most local governments, including access to federal funds that smaller communities don’t have. That has allowed the city to spend more than $12 million over the past seven years demolishing over 700 unsafe and dilapidated structures.But John Butterworth, a planner for the city, said Charleston still relied on state demolition funding to help cover those costs, which averaged about $10,000 per property, including any environmental cleanup. “It’s a real cost,” he said. “It’s a necessary one to keep neighbors safe, but it is very expensive.”He said the city received $500,000 from the state program during its last round of funding to help tear down properties that drew repeated complaints from neighbors. “I think people are really relieved when we can say that the house that’s been boarded up for a year or more is coming down,” he said. “Where the concern often comes from neighbors is, what comes next?”One vacant home on Grant Street had fallen into disrepair before being demolished in May of last year. Cracks filled the walls. Dirt and moldy debris were caked on the floors. Broken glass and boarded-up windows littered the property as plants overtook the roof and yard. Eventually, the city was able to get the owner to donate the property, which was then given to Habitat for Humanity as part of its home-building program. Now, the property is being rebuilt from scratch. Construction crews have already built the foundation, porch and frame, and it is expected to be finished within the year after its groundbreaking last October. Andrew Blackwood, executive director of Habitat for Humanity of Kanawha and Putnam counties, said the property stood for at least five years, deteriorating. The home had signs of vandalism and water damage and was completely unsalvageable. He said that of the 190 homes the organization has built in both counties, nearly 90% of them have been complete rebuilds after the previous structure was demolished. A statewide problem without a statewide plan Lawmakers have said they recognize the scale of the problem, but none have proposed other ways for tearing down dangerous structures. Fayette County used state demolition money as it was intended, which was to tear down unsafe buildings that had become public safety hazards to nearby residents. With help from the state program, the county tore down 75 dilapidated structures, officials said, removing some of the most dangerous properties while continuing to track the progress of others through a countywide system. County leaders hoped to expand their demolition efforts on their own this year, but those plans have been put on hold. The county had to take over operations of a local humane society after it faced closure and will need to fundraise, said John Breneman, president of the Fayette County Commission. Former Sen. Chandler Swope, R-Mercer, said that kind of budget pressure is exactly why he pushed for state involvement in demolition funding. Swope, who helped create the state fund for the demolition of dilapidated buildings in 2021, said the idea grew from what he saw in places where population loss left empty homes, which local governments had no way to tear down.“They didn’t have any money to tear down the dilapidated properties, so I decided that that should be a state obligation because the state has more flexibility and more access to funding,” he said.Swope said he’d always viewed the need as ongoing, even as state budgets shift from year to year.“I visualized it as a permanent need. I didn’t think you would ever get to the point where it was done,” he said. “I felt like the success of the program would carry its own priority.” But four years later, that funding is gone, and lawmakers haven’t found a replacement. Other states, meanwhile, have created long-term funding for demolition and redevelopment.Ohio, for example, operates a statewide program that provides counties with annual demolition funding. Funds are appropriated from the state budget by lawmakers. Staton said West Virginia’s lack of a plan leaves communities stuck.“Abandoned buildings are in every community, and every legislator has constituents who are dealing with this,” she said. “They know it’s just a matter of finding the funding.”And back on the West Side, the Glaspeys are left staring at boarded windows and an overgrown yard across the street. Matt said, “Sometimes you think, what’s the point of fixing up your own place if everything around you is collapsing?” This story was originally published by Mountain State Spotlight and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.Copyright 2026 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Webinar: Cell Tower Risks 101 - What You Need To Know To Protect Your Community

Featuring Theodora Scarato, MSW, Director of the Wireless & EMF Program at Environmental Health SciencesCell towers near homes and schools bring many health, safety and liability risks. From fire, to the fall zone, property value drops and increased RF radiation exposure, Theodora Scarato will cover the key issues that communities need to understand when a cell tower is proposed in their neighborhood.With the federal government proposing unprecedented rulemakings that would dismantle existing local government safeguards, it’s more critical than ever to understand what’s at stake for local communities and families.Webinar Date: January 7th, 2026 at 3 pm ET // 12 pm PTRegister to join this webinar HERETheodora Scarato is a leading expert in environmental health policy related to cell towers and non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. She has co-authored several scientific papers, including a foundational paper in Frontiers in Public Health entitled “U.S. policy on wireless technologies and public health protection: regulatory gaps and proposed reforms.” She will highlight key findings and policy recommendations from this publication during the webinar.To learn more about the health and safety risks of cell towers, visit the EHS Wireless & EMF Program website: Top 10 Health, Safety, and Liability Risks of Cell Towers Near Schools and HomesCell Towers Drop Property ValuesThe FCC’s Plan to Fast Track Cell TowersOfficial Letters Opposing FCC Cell Tower Fast-Track RulesWatch our previous webinar: FCC and Congressional Proposals To Strip Local Control Over Cell Towers Webinar - YouTube youtu.be

Featuring Theodora Scarato, MSW, Director of the Wireless & EMF Program at Environmental Health SciencesCell towers near homes and schools bring many health, safety and liability risks. From fire, to the fall zone, property value drops and increased RF radiation exposure, Theodora Scarato will cover the key issues that communities need to understand when a cell tower is proposed in their neighborhood.With the federal government proposing unprecedented rulemakings that would dismantle existing local government safeguards, it’s more critical than ever to understand what’s at stake for local communities and families.Webinar Date: January 7th, 2026 at 3 pm ET // 12 pm PTRegister to join this webinar HERETheodora Scarato is a leading expert in environmental health policy related to cell towers and non-ionizing electromagnetic fields. She has co-authored several scientific papers, including a foundational paper in Frontiers in Public Health entitled “U.S. policy on wireless technologies and public health protection: regulatory gaps and proposed reforms.” She will highlight key findings and policy recommendations from this publication during the webinar.To learn more about the health and safety risks of cell towers, visit the EHS Wireless & EMF Program website: Top 10 Health, Safety, and Liability Risks of Cell Towers Near Schools and HomesCell Towers Drop Property ValuesThe FCC’s Plan to Fast Track Cell TowersOfficial Letters Opposing FCC Cell Tower Fast-Track RulesWatch our previous webinar: FCC and Congressional Proposals To Strip Local Control Over Cell Towers Webinar - YouTube youtu.be

Funding bill excludes controversial pesticide provision hated by MAHA

A government funding bill released Monday excludes a controversial pesticides provision, marking a win for the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement for at least the time being. The provision in question is a wonky one: It would seek to prevent pesticides from carrying warnings on their label of health effects beyond those recognized by the Environmental...

A government funding bill released Monday excludes a controversial pesticides provision, marking a win for the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement for at least the time being. The provision in question is a wonky one: It would seek to prevent pesticides from carrying warnings on their label of health effects beyond those recognized by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Known as Section 453 for its position in a House bill released earlier this year, it has drawn significant ire from MAHA-aligned activists. Opponents of the provision argue that it can be a liability shield for major chemical corporations, preventing them from facing failure-to-warn lawsuits by not disclosing health effects of their products. MAHA figures celebrated the provision’s exclusion from the legislation. “MAHA WE DID IT! Section 453 granting pesticide companies immunity from harm has been removed from the upcoming House spending bill!” MAHA Action, a political action committee affiliated with the movement, wrote on X. The issue is one that has divided Republicans, a party that has traditionally allied itself with big business.  “The language ensures that we do not have a patchwork of state labeling requirements. It ensures that one state is not establishing the label for the rest of the states,” Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said earlier this year.  However, the growing MAHA movement has been critical of the chemical industry. The legislation is part of a bicameral deal reached to fund the departments of the Interior, Justice, Commerce, and Energy, as well as the EPA. And while the provision’s exclusion represents a win for the MAHA movement for the moment, the issue is far from settled. Alexandra Muñoz, a toxicologist and activist who is working with the MAHA movement said she’s “happy to see” that the provision was not included in the funding bill. However, she said, “we still have fronts that we’re fighting on because it’s still potentially going to be added in the Farm Bill.” She also noted that similar fights are ongoing at the Supreme Court and state level. The Supreme Court is currently weighing whether to take up a case about whether federal law preempts state pesticide labeling requirements and failure-to-warn lawsuits. The Trump administration said the court should side with the chemical industry. Meanwhile, a similar measure also appeared in a 2024 version of the Farm Bill. —Emily Brooks contributed. Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

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.