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.

The California Beach Town Awash in Poop

News Feed
Saturday, August 10, 2024

One day in March 2017, Mitch McKay and his wife, Suzanne, took a walk on the sand near Imperial Beach, a small surf town south of San Diego where they’d raised their children. Suzanne liked to collect sea glass, and they often brought a spare grocery bag to pick up any trash they found amid the seaweed and driftwood. “It was our ritual,” Mitch said. Back home, Suzanne started to suffer from splitting headaches that seemed to emanate from the back of her neck, near the base of her skull. The headaches soon got bad enough that she went to the emergency room, where doctors performed a spinal tap. She had, they determined, spinal meningitis.Suzanne spent 12 days in the hospital, taking antibiotics and slowly regaining strength as doctors tried to deduce how she’d gotten sick. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent a representative from Los Angeles to review her case. Ultimately, only one coherent explanation materialized: Bacteria living in fecal matter in seawater had entered her body through a small open blister on her foot. “That was my first slap in the face in terms of what’s going on down here,” Mitch recalled. “People can die from this.”The McKays’ fateful walk came at the end of a wet winter. That January, just over the U.S.-Mexico border, workers from Tijuana’s water utility had been called to an industrial stretch of the city, where a rapidly growing sinkhole claimed a bus shelter, then the sidewalk beside it, and soon threatened traffic along a major thoroughfare. The cause, foretold by the smell, was a break in an even more important artery: a sewage pipeline five feet in diameter carrying the feces and dishwater of hundreds of thousands of people.Residents of imperial beach smelled the change within days, as a plume of turgid, foamy sewage pushed out to sea. For many, the spill was a signal event, dividing life into “before” and “after.”This flow ordinarily made its way across the border and into California underground, to a treatment plant owned by the U.S. arm of the International Boundary and Water Commission, or IBWC, an agency that administers bilateral agreements for watersheds shared by both countries. After the pipeline broke, workers used an inflatable plug to stop the sewage and redirect it. But when repairs got underway, the pumps weren’t capable of sending the backed-up sewage to the plant by another route. Instead, the waste began to empty into the Tijuana River, which heads north through a concrete flood channel and crosses into California six miles from the Pacific Ocean. Residents of Imperial Beach smelled the change within days, as a plume of turgid, foamy sewage pushed out to sea. By the time the spill stopped, at the end of February, up to 256 million gallons had flowed through a protected estuary and out to the ocean, leaving a dark residue in the sand that technical reports refer to vaguely as “organic material.”For the McKays and many of their neighbors in Imperial Beach, including Serge Dedina, the mayor at the time, the spill was a signal event, dividing life in the town into “before” and “after.” For more than a week, Dedina tried to reach federal officials in the United States and Mexico to learn what was going on. Nobody answered his calls. “Like, literally, there was no response,” he said.Sewage overflow and beach closures are a long-standing problem on this part of the border—U.S. officials barred the sale of vegetables grown in the Tijuana River Valley as far back as the 1930s, fearing sewage contamination in the water there—but the 2017 spill heralded an era of cascading failures. Repairs to one section of the pipeline revealed more damage elsewhere. Pumps and valves failed. More pipes broke. Tijuana’s largest sewage treatment plant, five miles south of the border, was eventually degraded beyond repair, and soon began sending 40 million gallons a day of essentially untreated sewage straight out to sea. From there, it was carried north on summer swells to Imperial Beach and Coronado, one of the wealthiest communities in California—perhaps best-known for the iconic Hotel del Coronado, made famous by Marilyn Monroe in the film Some Like It Hot.Though a few bold surfers disregard the warnings, sections of Imperial Beach have been closed to swimmers for more than 900 consecutive days. Bars and restaurants have seen business dry up; lifeguards keep leaving for towns where they don’t have to tell people to get out of the water. A recent City Council meeting featured a debate on whether to cancel a popular summer sand-castle competition. Citing sales data on comparable housing elsewhere in coastal San Diego County, Norm Miller, an emeritus professor of real estate at the University of San Diego, estimated that homes in Imperial Beach are discounted by as much as 50 percent.For Dedina, the whole thing can feel like an exercise in futility. A lifelong surfer and geographer by training, Dedina runs the nonprofit Wildcoast, which works on coastal conservation on both sides of the border. He ran for mayor to put in sidewalks and pave alleyways, only to find himself suing the federal government under the Clean Water Act and “leading an international coalition to fix a sewer system,” he said. Why, he wondered, did it fall to “a small city with no money” to press for change?By some measures, Dedina’s lawsuit was a success, providing leverage that helped members of Congress secure $300 million in federal funding to address sewage pollution as part of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the successor to the North American Free Trade Agreement. It also helped spur a review by the Environmental Protection Agency, outlining a range of projects on both sides of the border needed to provide a more durable solution. Unfortunately, no one thinks $300 million, or even the additional $156 million secured earlier this year, will come close to resolving the issue.Earth is home to hundreds of border-spanning watersheds, and versions of this struggle exist all over the planet: where the Ganges carries untreated effluent and industrial runoff from India into the lowland farms and coastal swamps of Bangladesh; along the Zambezi, the Mekong, the Danube. One merciful quality of the Tijuana River is that it’s not longer, limiting the scope of the conflict to two metro areas in two countries, as opposed to, say, the 11 nations whose disputes span the 4,000-mile course of the Nile.At the heart of the sewage crisis in Tijuana is the question of who bears responsibility for keeping up with the city’s growth. As Carlos de la Parra, an environmental planner from the city, put it, “We have no business being this large, except for the fact that we border California, and that Mexico and the U.S. signed the North American Free Trade Agreement 30 years ago.”Parts of NAFTA anticipated this dynamic; the agreement included a provision to set aside $100 million a year for environmental infrastructure along the border. As time went on, though, Congress lost its appetite for funding public health upgrades in Mexican cities. How about building a wall and making Mexico pay for it?That’s the kind of solution that appeals to the American political psyche, but it suffers from a basic misunderstanding. You can draw the border as a line on a map, but you still have to deal with the world on the other side. A sewage crisis in Mexico can’t be solved with pipes in California any more than a migration crisis that spans the hemisphere can be solved with a wall across Texas and Arizona.Extreme cases like Suzanne McKay’s haunt Imperial Beach: the surfer with the lung abscess, the Border Patrol agent with a flesh-eating bacterial infection. But no one quite knows how many people get sick from the water south of San Diego.Kimberly Dickson and her husband, Matt, both doctors, moved to town in 2011 to open an urgent care clinic. Over the years, they estimated that ailments associated with sewage made up 10 to 15 percent of their business, the way a clinic in a popular hiking area might see more than its share of scrapes and sprains. But they hadn’t tracked patterns in the data until August 2023, when Tropical Storm Hilary lashed the Pacific Coast with torrential rains from the tip of the Baja Peninsula as far north as Los Angeles.Suddenly, instead of seeing five or six cases of diarrhea in a week, they counted 34. “We just started noticing, ‘Gosh, we have just a full clinic in the middle of summer with people with vomiting and diarrhea and abdominal cramping.’ And the thing is, none of these people were going in the water,” Matt recalled. “That was the really startling thing for us … where are they getting this?”One answer lay at the south end of town, where sewage overflowed along Hollister Street, leaving a layer of foul-smelling mud to dry into dust on the roadway. “Kids go to school on that sidewalk,” Matt explained. “They walk into class, maybe they touch their feet, and then they eat lunch. Now they’re sick. Or, you know, you drive through it and you drive into your garage. Well, now you’ve tracked sewage into your garage.”It wasn’t only diarrhea. People complained of skin infections, sinusitis, sore throats, headaches, asthma flare-ups, and general cloudiness, all of which the Dicksons associated with what Kimberly called the “whiff test”—as in, “If you open your window and you smell, there’s your whiff test.” Many ailments seemed to track the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District’s measurements of hydrogen sulfide, the rotten-egg smell released when organic material breaks down with insufficient oxygen—say, during a sewage spill. The Dicksons are now collaborating with the epidemiology unit of the county health department to evaluate both routes of infection: water and air.In 2021, Falk Feddersen, an oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, led a study funded by the EPA to model the path of sewage plumes along the coast in order to evaluate which infrastructure upgrades would deliver the most benefit. Nestled among the findings was a startling estimate: Based on the prevalence of norovirus in the waters off Imperial Beach, nearly one out of every 25 swimmers could be getting sick—potentially thousands of people a year. Heather Buonomo, who leads the unit responsible for water testing at the County Department of Environmental Health and Quality, declined to comment directly on that projection, because, she said, the county was not involved in the research. But she suggested that the system of closures and health advisories triggered by evidence of sewage spills has been an effective deterrent: “People aren’t going in the water,” she said. “So the work that we’re doing to protect public health is working.”The Dicksons aren’t so sure. “We’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” Kimberly said. “There’s probably more out there, and it’s flying under the radar because it’s not reportable.” The real worry, Matt said, comes if Tijuana experiences a more virulent disease that sheds into sewage flows that cross the border: cholera, for instance, or shigella, a leading cause of diarrhea globally. (Though both pathogens are rare in Mexico, they are often spread through untreated water and can cause fatal illness.) “That’s where we’re gonna have a big problem,” he said. “It all depends on what’s coming across in that water.”One afternoon in April, I accompanied Rosario Norzagaray, who works with Dedina at Wildcoast, to visit Los Laureles, a neighborhood where a small share of the sewage that makes its way to the Tijuana River—and, ultimately, Imperial Beach—begins its journey. Norzagaray took a circuitous route through steep ravines along Tijuana’s western flank, bringing us to a ramshackle neighborhood in the headlands of a canyon whose waters drain into the United States above the river’s floodplain. She waved her arm at the sweep of pastel-colored homes clinging to the eroded slopes above us. “All this is invasion,” she said, explaining that the so-called colonias were settled by people who built homes without title to the land. Then again, she added, chuckling, “half of Tijuana is an invasion.”Tijuana’s population has followed a path of near exponential growth over the last century, ballooning from a community of 21,000 in 1940 to nearly two million at last count. The city’s first sewer infrastructure, a septic tank for 500 people, was built in 1928; within a decade, it served 10 times that number. U.S. officials made their first effort to stop untreated sewage fouling the coast in the 1930s, with an underwater pipe, or “outfall,” that discharged around 140 feet offshore. By then, Tijuana had built another, larger tank, to serve 5,000, but it was quickly oversubscribed to the point of obsolescence. It wasn’t until 1983 that another tank was built; at that time, Tijuana’s population was passing half a million, with dozens of maquiladoras, or foreign-owned manufacturing plants, attracting new transplants each year. By the late 1980s, Tijuana had become the world capital of television manufacturing, producing 30 million TVs a year. The passage of NAFTA in 1994 only accelerated the city’s growth.“Tijuana is a stop, not a destination,” Norzagaray said. “People don’t come to Tijuana thinking they’ll stay; they come thinking they’ll go find their American dream, but when they can’t get there, they come back here.”Though some houses in Los Laureles were built half a century ago, the neighborhood today reminded me of a packed open-air concert, where each group of new arrivals crowding onto the grass forces those who came earlier to rearrange their picnic blankets. Unpermitted homes, built and expanded in stages, jam the hillsides. We got out of the truck at the entrance to a concrete flood control structure. A trash boom, installed in 2021, stretched across the ravine like an oversize necklace made of corrugated plastic piping and steel. When it rains, the boom floats up with the floodwaters, skimming off piles of plastic bags, milk bottles, and Styrofoam as the runoff continues downstream. This is the linchpin of Wildcoast’s work in the area, a community recycling program that has removed more than 100,000 pounds of plastic waste in the last four years. But plastic is only the most tractable part of the equation. The other major components of runoff—sediment and sewage—require more than a trash boom.All around us were signs of development that had outpaced the infrastructure to support it. A garden hose snaked along 50 yards of concrete wall, splitting a single paid water connection among several houses. Raw sewage trickled into the street from exposed, broken drainage pipes that zigzagged down from homes high above us. Narrow stairways and retaining walls made of used tires ran up the slopes. “They’re trying to control all this with tires; but the water takes it,” Norzagaray explained about the eroding hillside. “And this situation is replicated in every canyon in Tijuana. Wherever there’s not supposed to be construction and there is—there are problems with sewage.” She pointed out an empty expanse on the slope above us where 20 homes had stood until 2015, when they were damaged during a landslide brought on by heavy rains.Over the years, the government has extended services to Tijuana’s colonias piecemeal. But many residents have no choice but to make do with latrines and DIY septic tanks: Though they’d be willing to pay the connection fee, they aren’t eligible for a new sewer line without title to the land. Maria del Pilar Márquez Gómez and her husband, Manuel López Paz, live in a modest white and blue cement house on a shared lot that backs up against the flood control channel. Each moved to the city during the boom years of the 1990s. Pilar Márquez Gómez came to Tijuana on a lark, and stayed when she found steady work cleaning beachfront apartments owned by wealthy Mexicans and American expats. A mason, López Paz recalled construction foremen driving trucks around the city and calling out for workers from their windows. His brother was the first to settle in Los Laureles, and he gradually brought in new families to share a 5,000-square-meter lot. “When I got here, all this didn’t exist,” López Paz said, looking up at the homes around us. “It was only farms.”Though none of the occupants had formal title, the arrangement came to feel settled, even sanctioned by the city. When the government announced plans to channelize the arroyo out back, the family lost most of their backyard, but the authorities didn’t touch the houses. Not long afterward, they returned from an extended trip to visit family in Guanajuato to see that their street was being paved, and their neighbors’ homes had been connected to water and sewer service as construction proceeded up the canyon. It turned out to be something like a onetime amnesty. Thirteen years later, they are still trying to get the right paperwork through City Hall to acquire title, and still using their septic tank. “We missed our chance,” Pilar Márquez Gómez said.In this instance, however, it’s not clear whether a sewer connection would make much difference. A mile uphill, the pavement stopped and the concrete channel gave way to an overgrown ditch lined with trash, a canyon in miniature etched by a small stream that ran downhill. Two children in pigtails skipped home across a makeshift bridge made of shipping pallets. Nearby, the stream’s “headwaters” spouted from a manhole cover atop a sewer main, where a persistent blockage sent raw sewage bubbling over in a man-made waterfall, destined for the beaches of California.Even as Dedina saw his view of the sewage crisis vindicated through his lawsuit—the federal judge in the case went so far as to visit the Tijuana River estuary to smell the stench in person—the underlying conditions were growing more dire. In late 2019, another major pipeline broke in Tijuana; nine million gallons of sewage crossed into California in two days. As the pandemic set in and the border was closed to nonessential travel, the combination of wet weather and failing infrastructure, Dedina said, seemed to create a new baseline. “It’s just polluted every day. The river’s going to flow, and there doesn’t have to be a response or timeline to fix it.”In the summer of 2020, Dedina sparked a minor diplomatic spat by saying, in an interview with a Mexican television station, “Tijuana’s sewage is killing us.” Jaime Bonilla, then governor of Baja, shot back, blaming the problem on foreign investors: “The vast amount of this contamination comes from American companies operating in Tijuana discharging their waste into the river; that’s where he needs to focus his attention.” As Dedina sees it, the pandemic broke down key bilateral relationships at all levels of government just as U.S. ties with Mexico were strained by other concerns. “All of a sudden, things just fell apart,” Dedina told me. “Fentanyl, migrants, the whole crisis in the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico—that’s taking all of Ken Salazar’s time,” he said, referring to the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. “This is not something the U.S. is willing to push on.”The modern Tijuana River is a hybrid, part natural waterway and part man-made infrastructure, whose flow is what ecologists call “urban drool.” What was once an intermittent, seasonal stream has been replaced, since the 1970s, by a steady flow of used tap water imported across 90 miles of open desert. The concrete flood channel that sheaths the river all the way through Tijuana ends just past the border. On the southern bank, the rusty bollards of the border fence climb a steep hillside at the city’s edge, flanked by shops and apartments all the way to the sea. On the north side, the enclosed tunnel of the pedestrian crossing follows the river right up to California, then turns 90 degrees and descends to U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement, a filter separating the people heading north from everything else.As the water slows down and spreads out across the floodplain, solids drop out of the current. Plovers and godwits peck at the mud among empty water jugs and motor oil containers, toys and soccer balls, sneakers, couch cushions, spaghetti knots of hardened caulking. Coke bottles urge “Recíclame.”Standing on an embankment 200 yards downstream, Chris Helmer, the director of environmental and natural resources for Imperial Beach, gazed out at a profusion of wild mustard and garland daisies sprouting from deposits that accumulate in the riverbed like layers of rock each spring.A few weeks earlier, Helmer explained, and the view would not have been obstructed by so much vegetation. “It’s highly nutrient rich water: What do you think is going to grow in here?” he said. Where water or bulldozers had cut into the banks, the structure that remained looked like a tall layer cake. “It’s almost like tree rings. Every single season you can see a new layer of sediment and trash, sediment, trash.”Clearing the debris is a Sisyphean undertaking, with each season’s work reset by the next rains, and in recent years the U.S. government hasn’t come close to keeping up. There are now something like 100,000 truckloads of material that will need to be moved to prevent flooding in the adjoining neighborhoods in San Ysidro and Tijuana.But Customs and Border Protection is also in the process of making the work much harder. Just upstream, construction had begun on a project announced abruptly in 2020: a bridge for Border Patrol agents to cross the flood channel as it enters the United States, combined with a fence, built along the upstream side, consisting of dozens of moving panels, or liftgates, that will have to be raised during heavy rains to allow the river’s flow to continue downstream. As a border security measure, the project is exempt from federal environmental review, but other agencies met the CBP’s proposal with pointed skepticism. California’s Environmental Protection Agency, CalEPA, warned that fortifying this area might simply create security issues near some of the other places where tributaries crossed the border, like Los Laureles. But the larger worry is that the liftgates will fail, or that CBP may not respond in time to raise them before a rainstorm, or debris will accumulate in back-to-back storms, and the fence, which is supposed to let water through, will act as a dam instead, leading to catastrophic flooding in a densely populated part of Tijuana. (CBP did not respond to interview requests for this story.)“All the debris and trash is going to back up in Mexico, so you rely on Mexico to maintain and clean this,” Helmer said—maintenance and cleaning the United States already fails to do. He called the project “utterly insane.”It’s expected to be completed by the end of the year.Residents of Imperial Beach sometimes seemed at a loss about where political pressure can be usefully applied. “When you’re in Washington, what is the federal government even saying about this happening to us?” one man asked at a recent city workshop on the sewage problem. After 16 years of going to public meetings about sewage, he wanted to know if there was a time frame for a solution. Other residents have compared spills to a “dirty bomb” dropped on the city. There were suggestions that the United States close the border to all travel north during sewage flows or cut off Tijuana’s access to Colorado River water.If residents don’t know how to pressure the feds, the feds often don’t seem to know how to pressure Mexico. The commissioner of the U.S. arm of the International Boundary and Water Commission, Maria-Elena Giner, has been frank about the challenges of treating sewage that originates in another country. “We cannot fine them for not treating their wastewater; we can’t fine them for discharging water,” Giner told me. What the IBWC can do is conduct meetings, collect evidence, write stern letters, appeal for more funding from Congress. The sewage that reaches the IBWC plant would be anomalous anywhere else in California. “You get rags, you get a lot of sediment, and it tears up the pumps, it tears up the concrete,” Giner said.Rags and sediment do a number on the sewer infrastructure in Tijuana, too. But the root of the problem isn’t technical so much as financial: The Comisión Estatal de Servicios Públicos de Tijuana, or CESPT, which provides water and sewer services to the city, gets most of its revenue from ratepayers, but loses money on nearly 80 percent of the water that flows through its pipes.In the spring, I met with CESPT’s director, Jesús García Castro, and deputies responsible for finance and operations, around a coffee table spread with chocolate-covered nuts and cut fruit. García Castro had been on the job only a few months, but it turned out to be an auspicious moment to take over: A few weeks after he began, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or AMLO, as he’s known, announced that the city’s largest treatment plant, which hasn’t operated effectively in five years, would be rebuilt by a unit of the Secretaría de Defensa Nacional, or SEDENA, comparable to the Army Corps of Engineers. Salazar, the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, traveled to Tijuana to attend the groundbreaking: Finally, it seemed, sewage had risen up the list of issues competing for political oxygen in the U.S.-Mexico relationship. The new treatment plant “will reduce the flows of untreated sewage to the Pacific Ocean by 90 percent,” García Castro said confidently. “So that’s a big part of the solution.”Under AMLO, the military has become something like Mexico’s contractor of first resort, with the ability to bypass environmental review and typical procurement processes. Keeping with SEDENA’s style, the construction schedule announced at the groundbreaking was ambitious, condensing what would ordinarily be a multiyear project into nine months. U.S. officials received the news with wary optimism. “SEDENA works fast,” one federal official told me in a text message. “Not necessarily a good thing as they tend to build BEFORE design.” Still, the Mexican government had ultimately scuttled a series of earlier initiatives to rebuild the plant with private funding, as far back as 2011, and there was a sense that if it wasn’t built by SEDENA, it might not be built at all.Before the existing plant at San Antonio de los Buenos went offline, it limped along well past its useful life, hobbled by a lack of maintenance. Sludge accumulated in treatment lagoons that were rarely dredged. Eventually, they stopped functioning altogether. A 2019 review by an independent consultant found that there was no backup power system and “no preventive maintenance program,” noting that CESPT typically received just a third of the operating budget it asked for.After years of delay, García Castro was adamant that the utility was making up for lost time. “We’ll have results this year,” he said. “Next year, already, we’ll be able to have clean beaches.” The reality is that most directors don’t stick around at CESPT long enough to see such promises through. When I asked how many people had held García Castro’s job before he got there, his deputies, both longtime employees, began counting on their fingers, seeming to flip through a mental catalog of past bosses like baseball fans trying to name bench players on favorite childhood teams. Eventually, they came up with a figure. “Thirteen in 10 years,” García Castro said.The IBWC’s South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant may be the easiest place on the entire border to cross legally between the United States and Mexico. Here, flatbed trucks bearing CESPT’s blue logo make daily return trips to a loading bay beneath an elevated conveyor belt carrying trash extracted from Tijuana sewage.In the spring, Morgan Rogers, who oversees the plant’s operations, watched through wraparound shades as a stream of refuse fell from a chute in the ceiling into a waiting dumpster. “Mexico hauls that off when it gets full,” he explained. “They own the trash, they own the sludge, they own the sediment”—he paused—“and they actually own the water. But we throw the water off the coast because they can’t do anything with it.”“But they can do stuff with the trash and sludge and sediment?” I asked.“Well, we make them take that.”Rogers nodded in the direction of the border wall, just on the other side of the building, its tall, rusted slats climbing to the horizon in either direction. “We have a gate out back here,” he said. The IBWC plant was built in the years after NAFTA was passed, partly out of a conviction that the Mexican government couldn’t be relied on to treat sewage to standards that would keep California beaches swimmable. It’s meant to handle about a third of Tijuana’s wastewater, along with dry weather flows from the Tijuana River and runoff from neighborhoods like Los Laureles. But as Tijuana has continued to grow, the plant has been broken down by the combined effects of storm events and infrastructure failures.In July 2022, Rogers explained, two critical pipelines, serving a pump station that allowed CESPT to divert sewage flows several miles south of the border, failed one after the other. That December, a series of atmospheric rivers also worsened damage to a valve controlling how much sewage the IBWC plant lets in. As a result, Rogers said, “Whatever flows come from Mexico, we take.”The consequences have been disastrous. During rainstorms, as much as 80 million gallons a day poured into a plant designed to handle 25 million, carrying trash and sediment that clogged critical equipment. By the end of 2023, all five of the plant’s primary treatment tanks were inoperable, filled to the brim with sludge.Tropical Storm Hilary made things even worse, destroying all but one of the pumps that moved sewage into the treatment tanks. Rogers leaned over a concrete wall where backed-up trash formed a dam during the storm, and he peered down at the pumps below. “There was eight feet of water down there,” he said. “We were on the edge: If you lost that pump, we’d have been out of business.”As it was, the plant was still recovering, with new pumps waiting on the grass to be installed, and waist-high weeds sprouting from treatment tanks, which were still being emptied and overhauled one at a time. Rogers credited Tropical Storm Hilary with spurring a new sense of urgency somewhere above his pay grade. “Hilary, really as much damage [as] it did, it kind of woke us up”—he paused, looking at his counterpart from IBWC’s political side, Sally Spener, following along in a pink button-down and maroon cowboy boots. “Not us, but it woke—Who would you say it woke up?” Spener didn’t answer.Throughout the tour, Spener countered Rogers’s blunt assessments of the plant’s condition with steadfast diplomacy: the broken valve (“But the contract has been awarded to fix it, right?”); the failing pump stations (“That’s all part of that rehab that’s envisioned.”); the oversize pipeline that sent the plant’s treated water three miles off the coast (“the award-winning ocean outfall!”). The dynamic captured the unwieldiness of the agency’s mission: to operate a utility whose “customers” live in another country, and to manage a spiraling set of technical problems enmeshed in a much larger diplomatic relationship.In June, Mexico elected its first woman president, Claudia Sheinbaum, a former professor of engineering from AMLO’s Morena party. The alignment between the levers of power in Baja state and Mexico City increases the chances that the leadership team at CESPT will keep their jobs long enough to make a dent in the priorities they’ve outlined.But the shift that may ultimately force the city into a different relationship with wastewater is climate change. As in urban areas across the U.S. Southwest, Tijuana’s water supply is dominated by the dwindling Colorado River. In 2023, CESPT was forced to shut off supply to nearly half the city and get emergency allocation from a cross-border connection with California to avoid prolonged water outages. Water, then, is the limiting factor on Tijuana’s growth: CESPT is now pursuing a long-postponed plan to reuse a portion of Tijuana’s treated water for agriculture, a signal that sewage is finally seen as a commodity worth capturing. “Mexico owns the water rights to this,” Chris Helmer told me as we watched Tijuana’s stream of urban drool meander past us into the estuary. “It’s written in the treaties. At some point, Mexico is going to want to use this water.”Straddling one of the busiest land crossings in the world, the Tijuana River reminds us that both sides of the border constitute a single place. Once the poop is in the water, no amount of barbed wire can get it out.When plans for a U.S. plant to treat Mexican sewage were first proposed, in the 1970s, they called for a facility big enough to handle 100 percent of Tijuana’s wastewater. Gradually, the plant-to-be was whittled down to a quarter of that size and simplified so that it could be built more cheaply, with the idea that upgrades would be made over time. David Gibson, an executive officer of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, said the IBWC plant was already outdated by the time it was completed, in 1997. “Design decisions that were made in the 1990s for that treatment plant, we’re paying for even now,” Gibson said. Without ratepayers to cover maintenance costs, the plant has also fallen victim to the Darwinian logic of the federal budget, receiving just $4 million for maintenance, cumulatively, from 2010 to 2020, a period when billions of additional dollars were allocated to border security. “This is like buying a nice Corolla in 1997 or a nice Ford, but you never change the tires, you never change the oil,” Gibson said. The plan now is to make overdue repairs and double its capacity. But the current funding, Gibson said, is “barely half” what’s needed “for the economy model.” He worries the region is on track to reprise nearly 100 years of sewage history, “outgrowing the infrastructure only a decade or so after it’s installed.”Still, Gibson echoed the point of view I heard from nearly every American official I spoke to—that the only reliable solution to Tijuana’s sewage problem is building the infrastructure on the U.S. side. In this, sewage treatment for Tijuana seems destined to operate as something like an extension of the border wall, a constant, churning intervention made at the river’s mouth, rather than its source, whatever the price. “I don’t think Mexico in general has sufficient resources to attend to their problems,” Giner, the IBWC commissioner, told me. “How are we going to ensure this moves forward with sufficient resources after all of this is built?” she asked, referring to upgrades on the U.S. side. “Let’s say we’ve caught up. Once we catch up, we will have to answer that question.”Nearly wherever you look, border politics in the United States is animated by a persistent myth: that with enough money and willpower, you could eventually seal off the countries from one another, like apartments that share a 1,954-mile wall. One way to describe decades of militarization on the border is that it serves to make Mexico invisible to residents of the United States. The same might be said of cross-border industrial development: porous to money and airplane parts, hardened to everything else. Straddling one of the busiest land crossings in the world, the Tijuana River offers a stubborn rebuttal, a reminder that both sides of the border constitute a single place. Once the poop is in the water, no amount of barbed wire can get it out.

One day in March 2017, Mitch McKay and his wife, Suzanne, took a walk on the sand near Imperial Beach, a small surf town south of San Diego where they’d raised their children. Suzanne liked to collect sea glass, and they often brought a spare grocery bag to pick up any trash they found amid the seaweed and driftwood. “It was our ritual,” Mitch said. Back home, Suzanne started to suffer from splitting headaches that seemed to emanate from the back of her neck, near the base of her skull. The headaches soon got bad enough that she went to the emergency room, where doctors performed a spinal tap. She had, they determined, spinal meningitis.Suzanne spent 12 days in the hospital, taking antibiotics and slowly regaining strength as doctors tried to deduce how she’d gotten sick. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent a representative from Los Angeles to review her case. Ultimately, only one coherent explanation materialized: Bacteria living in fecal matter in seawater had entered her body through a small open blister on her foot. “That was my first slap in the face in terms of what’s going on down here,” Mitch recalled. “People can die from this.”The McKays’ fateful walk came at the end of a wet winter. That January, just over the U.S.-Mexico border, workers from Tijuana’s water utility had been called to an industrial stretch of the city, where a rapidly growing sinkhole claimed a bus shelter, then the sidewalk beside it, and soon threatened traffic along a major thoroughfare. The cause, foretold by the smell, was a break in an even more important artery: a sewage pipeline five feet in diameter carrying the feces and dishwater of hundreds of thousands of people.Residents of imperial beach smelled the change within days, as a plume of turgid, foamy sewage pushed out to sea. For many, the spill was a signal event, dividing life into “before” and “after.”This flow ordinarily made its way across the border and into California underground, to a treatment plant owned by the U.S. arm of the International Boundary and Water Commission, or IBWC, an agency that administers bilateral agreements for watersheds shared by both countries. After the pipeline broke, workers used an inflatable plug to stop the sewage and redirect it. But when repairs got underway, the pumps weren’t capable of sending the backed-up sewage to the plant by another route. Instead, the waste began to empty into the Tijuana River, which heads north through a concrete flood channel and crosses into California six miles from the Pacific Ocean. Residents of Imperial Beach smelled the change within days, as a plume of turgid, foamy sewage pushed out to sea. By the time the spill stopped, at the end of February, up to 256 million gallons had flowed through a protected estuary and out to the ocean, leaving a dark residue in the sand that technical reports refer to vaguely as “organic material.”For the McKays and many of their neighbors in Imperial Beach, including Serge Dedina, the mayor at the time, the spill was a signal event, dividing life in the town into “before” and “after.” For more than a week, Dedina tried to reach federal officials in the United States and Mexico to learn what was going on. Nobody answered his calls. “Like, literally, there was no response,” he said.Sewage overflow and beach closures are a long-standing problem on this part of the border—U.S. officials barred the sale of vegetables grown in the Tijuana River Valley as far back as the 1930s, fearing sewage contamination in the water there—but the 2017 spill heralded an era of cascading failures. Repairs to one section of the pipeline revealed more damage elsewhere. Pumps and valves failed. More pipes broke. Tijuana’s largest sewage treatment plant, five miles south of the border, was eventually degraded beyond repair, and soon began sending 40 million gallons a day of essentially untreated sewage straight out to sea. From there, it was carried north on summer swells to Imperial Beach and Coronado, one of the wealthiest communities in California—perhaps best-known for the iconic Hotel del Coronado, made famous by Marilyn Monroe in the film Some Like It Hot.Though a few bold surfers disregard the warnings, sections of Imperial Beach have been closed to swimmers for more than 900 consecutive days. Bars and restaurants have seen business dry up; lifeguards keep leaving for towns where they don’t have to tell people to get out of the water. A recent City Council meeting featured a debate on whether to cancel a popular summer sand-castle competition. Citing sales data on comparable housing elsewhere in coastal San Diego County, Norm Miller, an emeritus professor of real estate at the University of San Diego, estimated that homes in Imperial Beach are discounted by as much as 50 percent.For Dedina, the whole thing can feel like an exercise in futility. A lifelong surfer and geographer by training, Dedina runs the nonprofit Wildcoast, which works on coastal conservation on both sides of the border. He ran for mayor to put in sidewalks and pave alleyways, only to find himself suing the federal government under the Clean Water Act and “leading an international coalition to fix a sewer system,” he said. Why, he wondered, did it fall to “a small city with no money” to press for change?By some measures, Dedina’s lawsuit was a success, providing leverage that helped members of Congress secure $300 million in federal funding to address sewage pollution as part of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the successor to the North American Free Trade Agreement. It also helped spur a review by the Environmental Protection Agency, outlining a range of projects on both sides of the border needed to provide a more durable solution. Unfortunately, no one thinks $300 million, or even the additional $156 million secured earlier this year, will come close to resolving the issue.Earth is home to hundreds of border-spanning watersheds, and versions of this struggle exist all over the planet: where the Ganges carries untreated effluent and industrial runoff from India into the lowland farms and coastal swamps of Bangladesh; along the Zambezi, the Mekong, the Danube. One merciful quality of the Tijuana River is that it’s not longer, limiting the scope of the conflict to two metro areas in two countries, as opposed to, say, the 11 nations whose disputes span the 4,000-mile course of the Nile.At the heart of the sewage crisis in Tijuana is the question of who bears responsibility for keeping up with the city’s growth. As Carlos de la Parra, an environmental planner from the city, put it, “We have no business being this large, except for the fact that we border California, and that Mexico and the U.S. signed the North American Free Trade Agreement 30 years ago.”Parts of NAFTA anticipated this dynamic; the agreement included a provision to set aside $100 million a year for environmental infrastructure along the border. As time went on, though, Congress lost its appetite for funding public health upgrades in Mexican cities. How about building a wall and making Mexico pay for it?That’s the kind of solution that appeals to the American political psyche, but it suffers from a basic misunderstanding. You can draw the border as a line on a map, but you still have to deal with the world on the other side. A sewage crisis in Mexico can’t be solved with pipes in California any more than a migration crisis that spans the hemisphere can be solved with a wall across Texas and Arizona.Extreme cases like Suzanne McKay’s haunt Imperial Beach: the surfer with the lung abscess, the Border Patrol agent with a flesh-eating bacterial infection. But no one quite knows how many people get sick from the water south of San Diego.Kimberly Dickson and her husband, Matt, both doctors, moved to town in 2011 to open an urgent care clinic. Over the years, they estimated that ailments associated with sewage made up 10 to 15 percent of their business, the way a clinic in a popular hiking area might see more than its share of scrapes and sprains. But they hadn’t tracked patterns in the data until August 2023, when Tropical Storm Hilary lashed the Pacific Coast with torrential rains from the tip of the Baja Peninsula as far north as Los Angeles.Suddenly, instead of seeing five or six cases of diarrhea in a week, they counted 34. “We just started noticing, ‘Gosh, we have just a full clinic in the middle of summer with people with vomiting and diarrhea and abdominal cramping.’ And the thing is, none of these people were going in the water,” Matt recalled. “That was the really startling thing for us … where are they getting this?”One answer lay at the south end of town, where sewage overflowed along Hollister Street, leaving a layer of foul-smelling mud to dry into dust on the roadway. “Kids go to school on that sidewalk,” Matt explained. “They walk into class, maybe they touch their feet, and then they eat lunch. Now they’re sick. Or, you know, you drive through it and you drive into your garage. Well, now you’ve tracked sewage into your garage.”It wasn’t only diarrhea. People complained of skin infections, sinusitis, sore throats, headaches, asthma flare-ups, and general cloudiness, all of which the Dicksons associated with what Kimberly called the “whiff test”—as in, “If you open your window and you smell, there’s your whiff test.” Many ailments seemed to track the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District’s measurements of hydrogen sulfide, the rotten-egg smell released when organic material breaks down with insufficient oxygen—say, during a sewage spill. The Dicksons are now collaborating with the epidemiology unit of the county health department to evaluate both routes of infection: water and air.In 2021, Falk Feddersen, an oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, led a study funded by the EPA to model the path of sewage plumes along the coast in order to evaluate which infrastructure upgrades would deliver the most benefit. Nestled among the findings was a startling estimate: Based on the prevalence of norovirus in the waters off Imperial Beach, nearly one out of every 25 swimmers could be getting sick—potentially thousands of people a year. Heather Buonomo, who leads the unit responsible for water testing at the County Department of Environmental Health and Quality, declined to comment directly on that projection, because, she said, the county was not involved in the research. But she suggested that the system of closures and health advisories triggered by evidence of sewage spills has been an effective deterrent: “People aren’t going in the water,” she said. “So the work that we’re doing to protect public health is working.”The Dicksons aren’t so sure. “We’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” Kimberly said. “There’s probably more out there, and it’s flying under the radar because it’s not reportable.” The real worry, Matt said, comes if Tijuana experiences a more virulent disease that sheds into sewage flows that cross the border: cholera, for instance, or shigella, a leading cause of diarrhea globally. (Though both pathogens are rare in Mexico, they are often spread through untreated water and can cause fatal illness.) “That’s where we’re gonna have a big problem,” he said. “It all depends on what’s coming across in that water.”One afternoon in April, I accompanied Rosario Norzagaray, who works with Dedina at Wildcoast, to visit Los Laureles, a neighborhood where a small share of the sewage that makes its way to the Tijuana River—and, ultimately, Imperial Beach—begins its journey. Norzagaray took a circuitous route through steep ravines along Tijuana’s western flank, bringing us to a ramshackle neighborhood in the headlands of a canyon whose waters drain into the United States above the river’s floodplain. She waved her arm at the sweep of pastel-colored homes clinging to the eroded slopes above us. “All this is invasion,” she said, explaining that the so-called colonias were settled by people who built homes without title to the land. Then again, she added, chuckling, “half of Tijuana is an invasion.”Tijuana’s population has followed a path of near exponential growth over the last century, ballooning from a community of 21,000 in 1940 to nearly two million at last count. The city’s first sewer infrastructure, a septic tank for 500 people, was built in 1928; within a decade, it served 10 times that number. U.S. officials made their first effort to stop untreated sewage fouling the coast in the 1930s, with an underwater pipe, or “outfall,” that discharged around 140 feet offshore. By then, Tijuana had built another, larger tank, to serve 5,000, but it was quickly oversubscribed to the point of obsolescence. It wasn’t until 1983 that another tank was built; at that time, Tijuana’s population was passing half a million, with dozens of maquiladoras, or foreign-owned manufacturing plants, attracting new transplants each year. By the late 1980s, Tijuana had become the world capital of television manufacturing, producing 30 million TVs a year. The passage of NAFTA in 1994 only accelerated the city’s growth.“Tijuana is a stop, not a destination,” Norzagaray said. “People don’t come to Tijuana thinking they’ll stay; they come thinking they’ll go find their American dream, but when they can’t get there, they come back here.”Though some houses in Los Laureles were built half a century ago, the neighborhood today reminded me of a packed open-air concert, where each group of new arrivals crowding onto the grass forces those who came earlier to rearrange their picnic blankets. Unpermitted homes, built and expanded in stages, jam the hillsides. We got out of the truck at the entrance to a concrete flood control structure. A trash boom, installed in 2021, stretched across the ravine like an oversize necklace made of corrugated plastic piping and steel. When it rains, the boom floats up with the floodwaters, skimming off piles of plastic bags, milk bottles, and Styrofoam as the runoff continues downstream. This is the linchpin of Wildcoast’s work in the area, a community recycling program that has removed more than 100,000 pounds of plastic waste in the last four years. But plastic is only the most tractable part of the equation. The other major components of runoff—sediment and sewage—require more than a trash boom.All around us were signs of development that had outpaced the infrastructure to support it. A garden hose snaked along 50 yards of concrete wall, splitting a single paid water connection among several houses. Raw sewage trickled into the street from exposed, broken drainage pipes that zigzagged down from homes high above us. Narrow stairways and retaining walls made of used tires ran up the slopes. “They’re trying to control all this with tires; but the water takes it,” Norzagaray explained about the eroding hillside. “And this situation is replicated in every canyon in Tijuana. Wherever there’s not supposed to be construction and there is—there are problems with sewage.” She pointed out an empty expanse on the slope above us where 20 homes had stood until 2015, when they were damaged during a landslide brought on by heavy rains.Over the years, the government has extended services to Tijuana’s colonias piecemeal. But many residents have no choice but to make do with latrines and DIY septic tanks: Though they’d be willing to pay the connection fee, they aren’t eligible for a new sewer line without title to the land. Maria del Pilar Márquez Gómez and her husband, Manuel López Paz, live in a modest white and blue cement house on a shared lot that backs up against the flood control channel. Each moved to the city during the boom years of the 1990s. Pilar Márquez Gómez came to Tijuana on a lark, and stayed when she found steady work cleaning beachfront apartments owned by wealthy Mexicans and American expats. A mason, López Paz recalled construction foremen driving trucks around the city and calling out for workers from their windows. His brother was the first to settle in Los Laureles, and he gradually brought in new families to share a 5,000-square-meter lot. “When I got here, all this didn’t exist,” López Paz said, looking up at the homes around us. “It was only farms.”Though none of the occupants had formal title, the arrangement came to feel settled, even sanctioned by the city. When the government announced plans to channelize the arroyo out back, the family lost most of their backyard, but the authorities didn’t touch the houses. Not long afterward, they returned from an extended trip to visit family in Guanajuato to see that their street was being paved, and their neighbors’ homes had been connected to water and sewer service as construction proceeded up the canyon. It turned out to be something like a onetime amnesty. Thirteen years later, they are still trying to get the right paperwork through City Hall to acquire title, and still using their septic tank. “We missed our chance,” Pilar Márquez Gómez said.In this instance, however, it’s not clear whether a sewer connection would make much difference. A mile uphill, the pavement stopped and the concrete channel gave way to an overgrown ditch lined with trash, a canyon in miniature etched by a small stream that ran downhill. Two children in pigtails skipped home across a makeshift bridge made of shipping pallets. Nearby, the stream’s “headwaters” spouted from a manhole cover atop a sewer main, where a persistent blockage sent raw sewage bubbling over in a man-made waterfall, destined for the beaches of California.Even as Dedina saw his view of the sewage crisis vindicated through his lawsuit—the federal judge in the case went so far as to visit the Tijuana River estuary to smell the stench in person—the underlying conditions were growing more dire. In late 2019, another major pipeline broke in Tijuana; nine million gallons of sewage crossed into California in two days. As the pandemic set in and the border was closed to nonessential travel, the combination of wet weather and failing infrastructure, Dedina said, seemed to create a new baseline. “It’s just polluted every day. The river’s going to flow, and there doesn’t have to be a response or timeline to fix it.”In the summer of 2020, Dedina sparked a minor diplomatic spat by saying, in an interview with a Mexican television station, “Tijuana’s sewage is killing us.” Jaime Bonilla, then governor of Baja, shot back, blaming the problem on foreign investors: “The vast amount of this contamination comes from American companies operating in Tijuana discharging their waste into the river; that’s where he needs to focus his attention.” As Dedina sees it, the pandemic broke down key bilateral relationships at all levels of government just as U.S. ties with Mexico were strained by other concerns. “All of a sudden, things just fell apart,” Dedina told me. “Fentanyl, migrants, the whole crisis in the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico—that’s taking all of Ken Salazar’s time,” he said, referring to the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. “This is not something the U.S. is willing to push on.”The modern Tijuana River is a hybrid, part natural waterway and part man-made infrastructure, whose flow is what ecologists call “urban drool.” What was once an intermittent, seasonal stream has been replaced, since the 1970s, by a steady flow of used tap water imported across 90 miles of open desert. The concrete flood channel that sheaths the river all the way through Tijuana ends just past the border. On the southern bank, the rusty bollards of the border fence climb a steep hillside at the city’s edge, flanked by shops and apartments all the way to the sea. On the north side, the enclosed tunnel of the pedestrian crossing follows the river right up to California, then turns 90 degrees and descends to U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement, a filter separating the people heading north from everything else.As the water slows down and spreads out across the floodplain, solids drop out of the current. Plovers and godwits peck at the mud among empty water jugs and motor oil containers, toys and soccer balls, sneakers, couch cushions, spaghetti knots of hardened caulking. Coke bottles urge “Recíclame.”Standing on an embankment 200 yards downstream, Chris Helmer, the director of environmental and natural resources for Imperial Beach, gazed out at a profusion of wild mustard and garland daisies sprouting from deposits that accumulate in the riverbed like layers of rock each spring.A few weeks earlier, Helmer explained, and the view would not have been obstructed by so much vegetation. “It’s highly nutrient rich water: What do you think is going to grow in here?” he said. Where water or bulldozers had cut into the banks, the structure that remained looked like a tall layer cake. “It’s almost like tree rings. Every single season you can see a new layer of sediment and trash, sediment, trash.”Clearing the debris is a Sisyphean undertaking, with each season’s work reset by the next rains, and in recent years the U.S. government hasn’t come close to keeping up. There are now something like 100,000 truckloads of material that will need to be moved to prevent flooding in the adjoining neighborhoods in San Ysidro and Tijuana.But Customs and Border Protection is also in the process of making the work much harder. Just upstream, construction had begun on a project announced abruptly in 2020: a bridge for Border Patrol agents to cross the flood channel as it enters the United States, combined with a fence, built along the upstream side, consisting of dozens of moving panels, or liftgates, that will have to be raised during heavy rains to allow the river’s flow to continue downstream. As a border security measure, the project is exempt from federal environmental review, but other agencies met the CBP’s proposal with pointed skepticism. California’s Environmental Protection Agency, CalEPA, warned that fortifying this area might simply create security issues near some of the other places where tributaries crossed the border, like Los Laureles. But the larger worry is that the liftgates will fail, or that CBP may not respond in time to raise them before a rainstorm, or debris will accumulate in back-to-back storms, and the fence, which is supposed to let water through, will act as a dam instead, leading to catastrophic flooding in a densely populated part of Tijuana. (CBP did not respond to interview requests for this story.)“All the debris and trash is going to back up in Mexico, so you rely on Mexico to maintain and clean this,” Helmer said—maintenance and cleaning the United States already fails to do. He called the project “utterly insane.”It’s expected to be completed by the end of the year.Residents of Imperial Beach sometimes seemed at a loss about where political pressure can be usefully applied. “When you’re in Washington, what is the federal government even saying about this happening to us?” one man asked at a recent city workshop on the sewage problem. After 16 years of going to public meetings about sewage, he wanted to know if there was a time frame for a solution. Other residents have compared spills to a “dirty bomb” dropped on the city. There were suggestions that the United States close the border to all travel north during sewage flows or cut off Tijuana’s access to Colorado River water.If residents don’t know how to pressure the feds, the feds often don’t seem to know how to pressure Mexico. The commissioner of the U.S. arm of the International Boundary and Water Commission, Maria-Elena Giner, has been frank about the challenges of treating sewage that originates in another country. “We cannot fine them for not treating their wastewater; we can’t fine them for discharging water,” Giner told me. What the IBWC can do is conduct meetings, collect evidence, write stern letters, appeal for more funding from Congress. The sewage that reaches the IBWC plant would be anomalous anywhere else in California. “You get rags, you get a lot of sediment, and it tears up the pumps, it tears up the concrete,” Giner said.Rags and sediment do a number on the sewer infrastructure in Tijuana, too. But the root of the problem isn’t technical so much as financial: The Comisión Estatal de Servicios Públicos de Tijuana, or CESPT, which provides water and sewer services to the city, gets most of its revenue from ratepayers, but loses money on nearly 80 percent of the water that flows through its pipes.In the spring, I met with CESPT’s director, Jesús García Castro, and deputies responsible for finance and operations, around a coffee table spread with chocolate-covered nuts and cut fruit. García Castro had been on the job only a few months, but it turned out to be an auspicious moment to take over: A few weeks after he began, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or AMLO, as he’s known, announced that the city’s largest treatment plant, which hasn’t operated effectively in five years, would be rebuilt by a unit of the Secretaría de Defensa Nacional, or SEDENA, comparable to the Army Corps of Engineers. Salazar, the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, traveled to Tijuana to attend the groundbreaking: Finally, it seemed, sewage had risen up the list of issues competing for political oxygen in the U.S.-Mexico relationship. The new treatment plant “will reduce the flows of untreated sewage to the Pacific Ocean by 90 percent,” García Castro said confidently. “So that’s a big part of the solution.”Under AMLO, the military has become something like Mexico’s contractor of first resort, with the ability to bypass environmental review and typical procurement processes. Keeping with SEDENA’s style, the construction schedule announced at the groundbreaking was ambitious, condensing what would ordinarily be a multiyear project into nine months. U.S. officials received the news with wary optimism. “SEDENA works fast,” one federal official told me in a text message. “Not necessarily a good thing as they tend to build BEFORE design.” Still, the Mexican government had ultimately scuttled a series of earlier initiatives to rebuild the plant with private funding, as far back as 2011, and there was a sense that if it wasn’t built by SEDENA, it might not be built at all.Before the existing plant at San Antonio de los Buenos went offline, it limped along well past its useful life, hobbled by a lack of maintenance. Sludge accumulated in treatment lagoons that were rarely dredged. Eventually, they stopped functioning altogether. A 2019 review by an independent consultant found that there was no backup power system and “no preventive maintenance program,” noting that CESPT typically received just a third of the operating budget it asked for.After years of delay, García Castro was adamant that the utility was making up for lost time. “We’ll have results this year,” he said. “Next year, already, we’ll be able to have clean beaches.” The reality is that most directors don’t stick around at CESPT long enough to see such promises through. When I asked how many people had held García Castro’s job before he got there, his deputies, both longtime employees, began counting on their fingers, seeming to flip through a mental catalog of past bosses like baseball fans trying to name bench players on favorite childhood teams. Eventually, they came up with a figure. “Thirteen in 10 years,” García Castro said.The IBWC’s South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant may be the easiest place on the entire border to cross legally between the United States and Mexico. Here, flatbed trucks bearing CESPT’s blue logo make daily return trips to a loading bay beneath an elevated conveyor belt carrying trash extracted from Tijuana sewage.In the spring, Morgan Rogers, who oversees the plant’s operations, watched through wraparound shades as a stream of refuse fell from a chute in the ceiling into a waiting dumpster. “Mexico hauls that off when it gets full,” he explained. “They own the trash, they own the sludge, they own the sediment”—he paused—“and they actually own the water. But we throw the water off the coast because they can’t do anything with it.”“But they can do stuff with the trash and sludge and sediment?” I asked.“Well, we make them take that.”Rogers nodded in the direction of the border wall, just on the other side of the building, its tall, rusted slats climbing to the horizon in either direction. “We have a gate out back here,” he said. The IBWC plant was built in the years after NAFTA was passed, partly out of a conviction that the Mexican government couldn’t be relied on to treat sewage to standards that would keep California beaches swimmable. It’s meant to handle about a third of Tijuana’s wastewater, along with dry weather flows from the Tijuana River and runoff from neighborhoods like Los Laureles. But as Tijuana has continued to grow, the plant has been broken down by the combined effects of storm events and infrastructure failures.In July 2022, Rogers explained, two critical pipelines, serving a pump station that allowed CESPT to divert sewage flows several miles south of the border, failed one after the other. That December, a series of atmospheric rivers also worsened damage to a valve controlling how much sewage the IBWC plant lets in. As a result, Rogers said, “Whatever flows come from Mexico, we take.”The consequences have been disastrous. During rainstorms, as much as 80 million gallons a day poured into a plant designed to handle 25 million, carrying trash and sediment that clogged critical equipment. By the end of 2023, all five of the plant’s primary treatment tanks were inoperable, filled to the brim with sludge.Tropical Storm Hilary made things even worse, destroying all but one of the pumps that moved sewage into the treatment tanks. Rogers leaned over a concrete wall where backed-up trash formed a dam during the storm, and he peered down at the pumps below. “There was eight feet of water down there,” he said. “We were on the edge: If you lost that pump, we’d have been out of business.”As it was, the plant was still recovering, with new pumps waiting on the grass to be installed, and waist-high weeds sprouting from treatment tanks, which were still being emptied and overhauled one at a time. Rogers credited Tropical Storm Hilary with spurring a new sense of urgency somewhere above his pay grade. “Hilary, really as much damage [as] it did, it kind of woke us up”—he paused, looking at his counterpart from IBWC’s political side, Sally Spener, following along in a pink button-down and maroon cowboy boots. “Not us, but it woke—Who would you say it woke up?” Spener didn’t answer.Throughout the tour, Spener countered Rogers’s blunt assessments of the plant’s condition with steadfast diplomacy: the broken valve (“But the contract has been awarded to fix it, right?”); the failing pump stations (“That’s all part of that rehab that’s envisioned.”); the oversize pipeline that sent the plant’s treated water three miles off the coast (“the award-winning ocean outfall!”). The dynamic captured the unwieldiness of the agency’s mission: to operate a utility whose “customers” live in another country, and to manage a spiraling set of technical problems enmeshed in a much larger diplomatic relationship.In June, Mexico elected its first woman president, Claudia Sheinbaum, a former professor of engineering from AMLO’s Morena party. The alignment between the levers of power in Baja state and Mexico City increases the chances that the leadership team at CESPT will keep their jobs long enough to make a dent in the priorities they’ve outlined.But the shift that may ultimately force the city into a different relationship with wastewater is climate change. As in urban areas across the U.S. Southwest, Tijuana’s water supply is dominated by the dwindling Colorado River. In 2023, CESPT was forced to shut off supply to nearly half the city and get emergency allocation from a cross-border connection with California to avoid prolonged water outages. Water, then, is the limiting factor on Tijuana’s growth: CESPT is now pursuing a long-postponed plan to reuse a portion of Tijuana’s treated water for agriculture, a signal that sewage is finally seen as a commodity worth capturing. “Mexico owns the water rights to this,” Chris Helmer told me as we watched Tijuana’s stream of urban drool meander past us into the estuary. “It’s written in the treaties. At some point, Mexico is going to want to use this water.”Straddling one of the busiest land crossings in the world, the Tijuana River reminds us that both sides of the border constitute a single place. Once the poop is in the water, no amount of barbed wire can get it out.When plans for a U.S. plant to treat Mexican sewage were first proposed, in the 1970s, they called for a facility big enough to handle 100 percent of Tijuana’s wastewater. Gradually, the plant-to-be was whittled down to a quarter of that size and simplified so that it could be built more cheaply, with the idea that upgrades would be made over time. David Gibson, an executive officer of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, said the IBWC plant was already outdated by the time it was completed, in 1997. “Design decisions that were made in the 1990s for that treatment plant, we’re paying for even now,” Gibson said. Without ratepayers to cover maintenance costs, the plant has also fallen victim to the Darwinian logic of the federal budget, receiving just $4 million for maintenance, cumulatively, from 2010 to 2020, a period when billions of additional dollars were allocated to border security. “This is like buying a nice Corolla in 1997 or a nice Ford, but you never change the tires, you never change the oil,” Gibson said. The plan now is to make overdue repairs and double its capacity. But the current funding, Gibson said, is “barely half” what’s needed “for the economy model.” He worries the region is on track to reprise nearly 100 years of sewage history, “outgrowing the infrastructure only a decade or so after it’s installed.”Still, Gibson echoed the point of view I heard from nearly every American official I spoke to—that the only reliable solution to Tijuana’s sewage problem is building the infrastructure on the U.S. side. In this, sewage treatment for Tijuana seems destined to operate as something like an extension of the border wall, a constant, churning intervention made at the river’s mouth, rather than its source, whatever the price. “I don’t think Mexico in general has sufficient resources to attend to their problems,” Giner, the IBWC commissioner, told me. “How are we going to ensure this moves forward with sufficient resources after all of this is built?” she asked, referring to upgrades on the U.S. side. “Let’s say we’ve caught up. Once we catch up, we will have to answer that question.”Nearly wherever you look, border politics in the United States is animated by a persistent myth: that with enough money and willpower, you could eventually seal off the countries from one another, like apartments that share a 1,954-mile wall. One way to describe decades of militarization on the border is that it serves to make Mexico invisible to residents of the United States. The same might be said of cross-border industrial development: porous to money and airplane parts, hardened to everything else. Straddling one of the busiest land crossings in the world, the Tijuana River offers a stubborn rebuttal, a reminder that both sides of the border constitute a single place. Once the poop is in the water, no amount of barbed wire can get it out.

One day in March 2017, Mitch McKay and his wife, Suzanne, took a walk on the sand near Imperial Beach, a small surf town south of San Diego where they’d raised their children. Suzanne liked to collect sea glass, and they often brought a spare grocery bag to pick up any trash they found amid the seaweed and driftwood. “It was our ritual,” Mitch said. Back home, Suzanne started to suffer from splitting headaches that seemed to emanate from the back of her neck, near the base of her skull. The headaches soon got bad enough that she went to the emergency room, where doctors performed a spinal tap. She had, they determined, spinal meningitis.

Suzanne spent 12 days in the hospital, taking antibiotics and slowly regaining strength as doctors tried to deduce how she’d gotten sick. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent a representative from Los Angeles to review her case. Ultimately, only one coherent explanation materialized: Bacteria living in fecal matter in seawater had entered her body through a small open blister on her foot. “That was my first slap in the face in terms of what’s going on down here,” Mitch recalled. “People can die from this.”

The McKays’ fateful walk came at the end of a wet winter. That January, just over the U.S.-Mexico border, workers from Tijuana’s water utility had been called to an industrial stretch of the city, where a rapidly growing sinkhole claimed a bus shelter, then the sidewalk beside it, and soon threatened traffic along a major thoroughfare. The cause, foretold by the smell, was a break in an even more important artery: a sewage pipeline five feet in diameter carrying the feces and dishwater of hundreds of thousands of people.

This flow ordinarily made its way across the border and into California underground, to a treatment plant owned by the U.S. arm of the International Boundary and Water Commission, or IBWC, an agency that administers bilateral agreements for watersheds shared by both countries. After the pipeline broke, workers used an inflatable plug to stop the sewage and redirect it. But when repairs got underway, the pumps weren’t capable of sending the backed-up sewage to the plant by another route. Instead, the waste began to empty into the Tijuana River, which heads north through a concrete flood channel and crosses into California six miles from the Pacific Ocean. Residents of Imperial Beach smelled the change within days, as a plume of turgid, foamy sewage pushed out to sea. By the time the spill stopped, at the end of February, up to 256 million gallons had flowed through a protected estuary and out to the ocean, leaving a dark residue in the sand that technical reports refer to vaguely as “organic material.”

A photograph of sewage spilling onto Playa Blanca, a beach in Tijuana, in March of this year.

For the McKays and many of their neighbors in Imperial Beach, including Serge Dedina, the mayor at the time, the spill was a signal event, dividing life in the town into “before” and “after.” For more than a week, Dedina tried to reach federal officials in the United States and Mexico to learn what was going on. Nobody answered his calls. “Like, literally, there was no response,” he said.

Sewage overflow and beach closures are a long-standing problem on this part of the border—U.S. officials barred the sale of vegetables grown in the Tijuana River Valley as far back as the 1930s, fearing sewage contamination in the water there—but the 2017 spill heralded an era of cascading failures. Repairs to one section of the pipeline revealed more damage elsewhere. Pumps and valves failed. More pipes broke. Tijuana’s largest sewage treatment plant, five miles south of the border, was eventually degraded beyond repair, and soon began sending 40 million gallons a day of essentially untreated sewage straight out to sea. From there, it was carried north on summer swells to Imperial Beach and Coronado, one of the wealthiest communities in California—perhaps best-known for the iconic Hotel del Coronado, made famous by Marilyn Monroe in the film Some Like It Hot.

Though a few bold surfers disregard the warnings, sections of Imperial Beach have been closed to swimmers for more than 900 consecutive days. Bars and restaurants have seen business dry up; lifeguards keep leaving for towns where they don’t have to tell people to get out of the water. A recent City Council meeting featured a debate on whether to cancel a popular summer sand-castle competition. Citing sales data on comparable housing elsewhere in coastal San Diego County, Norm Miller, an emeritus professor of real estate at the University of San Diego, estimated that homes in Imperial Beach are discounted by as much as 50 percent.

For Dedina, the whole thing can feel like an exercise in futility. A lifelong surfer and geographer by training, Dedina runs the nonprofit Wildcoast, which works on coastal conservation on both sides of the border. He ran for mayor to put in sidewalks and pave alleyways, only to find himself suing the federal government under the Clean Water Act and “leading an international coalition to fix a sewer system,” he said. Why, he wondered, did it fall to “a small city with no money” to press for change?

By some measures, Dedina’s lawsuit was a success, providing leverage that helped members of Congress secure $300 million in federal funding to address sewage pollution as part of the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement, the successor to the North American Free Trade Agreement. It also helped spur a review by the Environmental Protection Agency, outlining a range of projects on both sides of the border needed to provide a more durable solution. Unfortunately, no one thinks $300 million, or even the additional $156 million secured earlier this year, will come close to resolving the issue.

Earth is home to hundreds of border-spanning watersheds, and versions of this struggle exist all over the planet: where the Ganges carries untreated effluent and industrial runoff from India into the lowland farms and coastal swamps of Bangladesh; along the Zambezi, the Mekong, the Danube. One merciful quality of the Tijuana River is that it’s not longer, limiting the scope of the conflict to two metro areas in two countries, as opposed to, say, the 11 nations whose disputes span the 4,000-mile course of the Nile.

At the heart of the sewage crisis in Tijuana is the question of who bears responsibility for keeping up with the city’s growth. As Carlos de la Parra, an environmental planner from the city, put it, “We have no business being this large, except for the fact that we border California, and that Mexico and the U.S. signed the North American Free Trade Agreement 30 years ago.”

Parts of NAFTA anticipated this dynamic; the agreement included a provision to set aside $100 million a year for environmental infrastructure along the border. As time went on, though, Congress lost its appetite for funding public health upgrades in Mexican cities. How about building a wall and making Mexico pay for it?

That’s the kind of solution that appeals to the American political psyche, but it suffers from a basic misunderstanding. You can draw the border as a line on a map, but you still have to deal with the world on the other side. A sewage crisis in Mexico can’t be solved with pipes in California any more than a migration crisis that spans the hemisphere can be solved with a wall across Texas and Arizona.


Extreme cases like Suzanne McKay’s haunt Imperial Beach: the surfer with the lung abscess, the Border Patrol agent with a flesh-eating bacterial infection. But no one quite knows how many people get sick from the water south of San Diego.

Kimberly Dickson and her husband, Matt, both doctors, moved to town in 2011 to open an urgent care clinic. Over the years, they estimated that ailments associated with sewage made up 10 to 15 percent of their business, the way a clinic in a popular hiking area might see more than its share of scrapes and sprains. But they hadn’t tracked patterns in the data until August 2023, when Tropical Storm Hilary lashed the Pacific Coast with torrential rains from the tip of the Baja Peninsula as far north as Los Angeles.

Suddenly, instead of seeing five or six cases of diarrhea in a week, they counted 34. “We just started noticing, ‘Gosh, we have just a full clinic in the middle of summer with people with vomiting and diarrhea and abdominal cramping.’ And the thing is, none of these people were going in the water,” Matt recalled. “That was the really startling thing for us … where are they getting this?”

One answer lay at the south end of town, where sewage overflowed along Hollister Street, leaving a layer of foul-smelling mud to dry into dust on the roadway. “Kids go to school on that sidewalk,” Matt explained. “They walk into class, maybe they touch their feet, and then they eat lunch. Now they’re sick. Or, you know, you drive through it and you drive into your garage. Well, now you’ve tracked sewage into your garage.”

It wasn’t only diarrhea. People complained of skin infections, sinusitis, sore throats, headaches, asthma flare-ups, and general cloudiness, all of which the Dicksons associated with what Kimberly called the “whiff test”—as in, “If you open your window and you smell, there’s your whiff test.” Many ailments seemed to track the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District’s measurements of hydrogen sulfide, the rotten-egg smell released when organic material breaks down with insufficient oxygen—say, during a sewage spill. The Dicksons are now collaborating with the epidemiology unit of the county health department to evaluate both routes of infection: water and air.

In 2021, Falk Feddersen, an oceanographer at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography, led a study funded by the EPA to model the path of sewage plumes along the coast in order to evaluate which infrastructure upgrades would deliver the most benefit. Nestled among the findings was a startling estimate: Based on the prevalence of norovirus in the waters off Imperial Beach, nearly one out of every 25 swimmers could be getting sick—potentially thousands of people a year. Heather Buonomo, who leads the unit responsible for water testing at the County Department of Environmental Health and Quality, declined to comment directly on that projection, because, she said, the county was not involved in the research. But she suggested that the system of closures and health advisories triggered by evidence of sewage spills has been an effective deterrent: “People aren’t going in the water,” she said. “So the work that we’re doing to protect public health is working.”

The Dicksons aren’t so sure. “We’re only seeing the tip of the iceberg,” Kimberly said. “There’s probably more out there, and it’s flying under the radar because it’s not reportable.” The real worry, Matt said, comes if Tijuana experiences a more virulent disease that sheds into sewage flows that cross the border: cholera, for instance, or shigella, a leading cause of diarrhea globally. (Though both pathogens are rare in Mexico, they are often spread through untreated water and can cause fatal illness.) “That’s where we’re gonna have a big problem,” he said. “It all depends on what’s coming across in that water.”


One afternoon in April, I accompanied Rosario Norzagaray, who works with Dedina at Wildcoast, to visit Los Laureles, a neighborhood where a small share of the sewage that makes its way to the Tijuana River—and, ultimately, Imperial Beach—begins its journey. Norzagaray took a circuitous route through steep ravines along Tijuana’s western flank, bringing us to a ramshackle neighborhood in the headlands of a canyon whose waters drain into the United States above the river’s floodplain. She waved her arm at the sweep of pastel-colored homes clinging to the eroded slopes above us. “All this is invasion,” she said, explaining that the so-called colonias were settled by people who built homes without title to the land. Then again, she added, chuckling, “half of Tijuana is an invasion.”

A panoramic view of Tijuana’s Los Laureles Canyon in 2023

Tijuana’s population has followed a path of near exponential growth over the last century, ballooning from a community of 21,000 in 1940 to nearly two million at last count. The city’s first sewer infrastructure, a septic tank for 500 people, was built in 1928; within a decade, it served 10 times that number. U.S. officials made their first effort to stop untreated sewage fouling the coast in the 1930s, with an underwater pipe, or “outfall,” that discharged around 140 feet offshore. By then, Tijuana had built another, larger tank, to serve 5,000, but it was quickly oversubscribed to the point of obsolescence. It wasn’t until 1983 that another tank was built; at that time, Tijuana’s population was passing half a million, with dozens of maquiladoras, or foreign-owned manufacturing plants, attracting new transplants each year. By the late 1980s, Tijuana had become the world capital of television manufacturing, producing 30 million TVs a year. The passage of NAFTA in 1994 only accelerated the city’s growth.

“Tijuana is a stop, not a destination,” Norzagaray said. “People don’t come to Tijuana thinking they’ll stay; they come thinking they’ll go find their American dream, but when they can’t get there, they come back here.”

Though some houses in Los Laureles were built half a century ago, the neighborhood today reminded me of a packed open-air concert, where each group of new arrivals crowding onto the grass forces those who came earlier to rearrange their picnic blankets. Unpermitted homes, built and expanded in stages, jam the hillsides. We got out of the truck at the entrance to a concrete flood control structure. A trash boom, installed in 2021, stretched across the ravine like an oversize necklace made of corrugated plastic piping and steel. When it rains, the boom floats up with the floodwaters, skimming off piles of plastic bags, milk bottles, and Styrofoam as the runoff continues downstream. This is the linchpin of Wildcoast’s work in the area, a community recycling program that has removed more than 100,000 pounds of plastic waste in the last four years. But plastic is only the most tractable part of the equation. The other major components of runoff—sediment and sewage—require more than a trash boom.

All around us were signs of development that had outpaced the infrastructure to support it. A garden hose snaked along 50 yards of concrete wall, splitting a single paid water connection among several houses. Raw sewage trickled into the street from exposed, broken drainage pipes that zigzagged down from homes high above us. Narrow stairways and retaining walls made of used tires ran up the slopes. “They’re trying to control all this with tires; but the water takes it,” Norzagaray explained about the eroding hillside. “And this situation is replicated in every canyon in Tijuana. Wherever there’s not supposed to be construction and there is—there are problems with sewage.” She pointed out an empty expanse on the slope above us where 20 homes had stood until 2015, when they were damaged during a landslide brought on by heavy rains.

A photo a trash boom in Los Laureles Canyon. When it rains, the boom floats up with the floodwaters, skimming off piles of plastic bags, milk bottles, and Styrofoam.

Over the years, the government has extended services to Tijuana’s colonias piecemeal. But many residents have no choice but to make do with latrines and DIY septic tanks: Though they’d be willing to pay the connection fee, they aren’t eligible for a new sewer line without title to the land. Maria del Pilar Márquez Gómez and her husband, Manuel López Paz, live in a modest white and blue cement house on a shared lot that backs up against the flood control channel. Each moved to the city during the boom years of the 1990s. Pilar Márquez Gómez came to Tijuana on a lark, and stayed when she found steady work cleaning beachfront apartments owned by wealthy Mexicans and American expats. A mason, López Paz recalled construction foremen driving trucks around the city and calling out for workers from their windows. His brother was the first to settle in Los Laureles, and he gradually brought in new families to share a 5,000-square-meter lot. “When I got here, all this didn’t exist,” López Paz said, looking up at the homes around us. “It was only farms.”

Though none of the occupants had formal title, the arrangement came to feel settled, even sanctioned by the city. When the government announced plans to channelize the arroyo out back, the family lost most of their backyard, but the authorities didn’t touch the houses. Not long afterward, they returned from an extended trip to visit family in Guanajuato to see that their street was being paved, and their neighbors’ homes had been connected to water and sewer service as construction proceeded up the canyon. It turned out to be something like a onetime amnesty. Thirteen years later, they are still trying to get the right paperwork through City Hall to acquire title, and still using their septic tank. “We missed our chance,” Pilar Márquez Gómez said.

In this instance, however, it’s not clear whether a sewer connection would make much difference. A mile uphill, the pavement stopped and the concrete channel gave way to an overgrown ditch lined with trash, a canyon in miniature etched by a small stream that ran downhill. Two children in pigtails skipped home across a makeshift bridge made of shipping pallets. Nearby, the stream’s “headwaters” spouted from a manhole cover atop a sewer main, where a persistent blockage sent raw sewage bubbling over in a man-made waterfall, destined for the beaches of California.


Even as Dedina saw his view of the sewage crisis vindicated through his lawsuit—the federal judge in the case went so far as to visit the Tijuana River estuary to smell the stench in person—the underlying conditions were growing more dire. In late 2019, another major pipeline broke in Tijuana; nine million gallons of sewage crossed into California in two days. As the pandemic set in and the border was closed to nonessential travel, the combination of wet weather and failing infrastructure, Dedina said, seemed to create a new baseline. “It’s just polluted every day. The river’s going to flow, and there doesn’t have to be a response or timeline to fix it.”

In the summer of 2020, Dedina sparked a minor diplomatic spat by saying, in an interview with a Mexican television station, “Tijuana’s sewage is killing us.” Jaime Bonilla, then governor of Baja, shot back, blaming the problem on foreign investors: “The vast amount of this contamination comes from American companies operating in Tijuana discharging their waste into the river; that’s where he needs to focus his attention.” As Dedina sees it, the pandemic broke down key bilateral relationships at all levels of government just as U.S. ties with Mexico were strained by other concerns. “All of a sudden, things just fell apart,” Dedina told me. “Fentanyl, migrants, the whole crisis in the relationship between the U.S. and Mexico—that’s taking all of Ken Salazar’s time,” he said, referring to the U.S. ambassador to Mexico. “This is not something the U.S. is willing to push on.”

The modern Tijuana River is a hybrid, part natural waterway and part man-made infrastructure, whose flow is what ecologists call “urban drool.” What was once an intermittent, seasonal stream has been replaced, since the 1970s, by a steady flow of used tap water imported across 90 miles of open desert. The concrete flood channel that sheaths the river all the way through Tijuana ends just past the border. On the southern bank, the rusty bollards of the border fence climb a steep hillside at the city’s edge, flanked by shops and apartments all the way to the sea. On the north side, the enclosed tunnel of the pedestrian crossing follows the river right up to California, then turns 90 degrees and descends to U.S. Customs and Immigration Enforcement, a filter separating the people heading north from everything else.

As the water slows down and spreads out across the floodplain, solids drop out of the current. Plovers and godwits peck at the mud among empty water jugs and motor oil containers, toys and soccer balls, sneakers, couch cushions, spaghetti knots of hardened caulking. Coke bottles urge “Recíclame.”

A photo of a Mexican worker in Tijuana’s Matadero Canyon examining a sewage pipeline. During seasonal rains, water from numerous canyons in Tijuana, including nearby Los Laureles, drains into the United States.

Standing on an embankment 200 yards downstream, Chris Helmer, the director of environmental and natural resources for Imperial Beach, gazed out at a profusion of wild mustard and garland daisies sprouting from deposits that accumulate in the riverbed like layers of rock each spring.

A few weeks earlier, Helmer explained, and the view would not have been obstructed by so much vegetation. “It’s highly nutrient rich water: What do you think is going to grow in here?” he said. Where water or bulldozers had cut into the banks, the structure that remained looked like a tall layer cake. “It’s almost like tree rings. Every single season you can see a new layer of sediment and trash, sediment, trash.”

Clearing the debris is a Sisyphean undertaking, with each season’s work reset by the next rains, and in recent years the U.S. government hasn’t come close to keeping up. There are now something like 100,000 truckloads of material that will need to be moved to prevent flooding in the adjoining neighborhoods in San Ysidro and Tijuana.

But Customs and Border Protection is also in the process of making the work much harder. Just upstream, construction had begun on a project announced abruptly in 2020: a bridge for Border Patrol agents to cross the flood channel as it enters the United States, combined with a fence, built along the upstream side, consisting of dozens of moving panels, or liftgates, that will have to be raised during heavy rains to allow the river’s flow to continue downstream. As a border security measure, the project is exempt from federal environmental review, but other agencies met the CBP’s proposal with pointed skepticism. California’s Environmental Protection Agency, CalEPA, warned that fortifying this area might simply create security issues near some of the other places where tributaries crossed the border, like Los Laureles. But the larger worry is that the liftgates will fail, or that CBP may not respond in time to raise them before a rainstorm, or debris will accumulate in back-to-back storms, and the fence, which is supposed to let water through, will act as a dam instead, leading to catastrophic flooding in a densely populated part of Tijuana. (CBP did not respond to interview requests for this story.)

“All the debris and trash is going to back up in Mexico, so you rely on Mexico to maintain and clean this,” Helmer said—maintenance and cleaning the United States already fails to do. He called the project “utterly insane.”

It’s expected to be completed by the end of the year.


Residents of Imperial Beach sometimes seemed at a loss about where political pressure can be usefully applied. “When you’re in Washington, what is the federal government even saying about this happening to us?” one man asked at a recent city workshop on the sewage problem. After 16 years of going to public meetings about sewage, he wanted to know if there was a time frame for a solution. Other residents have compared spills to a “dirty bomb” dropped on the city. There were suggestions that the United States close the border to all travel north during sewage flows or cut off Tijuana’s access to Colorado River water.

If residents don’t know how to pressure the feds, the feds often don’t seem to know how to pressure Mexico. The commissioner of the U.S. arm of the International Boundary and Water Commission, Maria-Elena Giner, has been frank about the challenges of treating sewage that originates in another country. “We cannot fine them for not treating their wastewater; we can’t fine them for discharging water,” Giner told me. What the IBWC can do is conduct meetings, collect evidence, write stern letters, appeal for more funding from Congress. The sewage that reaches the IBWC plant would be anomalous anywhere else in California. “You get rags, you get a lot of sediment, and it tears up the pumps, it tears up the concrete,” Giner said.

Rags and sediment do a number on the sewer infrastructure in Tijuana, too. But the root of the problem isn’t technical so much as financial: The Comisión Estatal de Servicios Públicos de Tijuana, or CESPT, which provides water and sewer services to the city, gets most of its revenue from ratepayers, but loses money on nearly 80 percent of the water that flows through its pipes.

In the spring, I met with CESPT’s director, Jesús García Castro, and deputies responsible for finance and operations, around a coffee table spread with chocolate-covered nuts and cut fruit. García Castro had been on the job only a few months, but it turned out to be an auspicious moment to take over: A few weeks after he began, Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador, or AMLO, as he’s known, announced that the city’s largest treatment plant, which hasn’t operated effectively in five years, would be rebuilt by a unit of the Secretaría de Defensa Nacional, or SEDENA, comparable to the Army Corps of Engineers. Salazar, the U.S. ambassador to Mexico, traveled to Tijuana to attend the groundbreaking: Finally, it seemed, sewage had risen up the list of issues competing for political oxygen in the U.S.-Mexico relationship. The new treatment plant “will reduce the flows of untreated sewage to the Pacific Ocean by 90 percent,” García Castro said confidently. “So that’s a big part of the solution.”

Under AMLO, the military has become something like Mexico’s contractor of first resort, with the ability to bypass environmental review and typical procurement processes. Keeping with SEDENA’s style, the construction schedule announced at the groundbreaking was ambitious, condensing what would ordinarily be a multiyear project into nine months. U.S. officials received the news with wary optimism. “SEDENA works fast,” one federal official told me in a text message. “Not necessarily a good thing as they tend to build BEFORE design.” Still, the Mexican government had ultimately scuttled a series of earlier initiatives to rebuild the plant with private funding, as far back as 2011, and there was a sense that if it wasn’t built by SEDENA, it might not be built at all.

Before the existing plant at San Antonio de los Buenos went offline, it limped along well past its useful life, hobbled by a lack of maintenance. Sludge accumulated in treatment lagoons that were rarely dredged. Eventually, they stopped functioning altogether. A 2019 review by an independent consultant found that there was no backup power system and “no preventive maintenance program,” noting that CESPT typically received just a third of the operating budget it asked for.

After years of delay, García Castro was adamant that the utility was making up for lost time. “We’ll have results this year,” he said. “Next year, already, we’ll be able to have clean beaches.” The reality is that most directors don’t stick around at CESPT long enough to see such promises through. When I asked how many people had held García Castro’s job before he got there, his deputies, both longtime employees, began counting on their fingers, seeming to flip through a mental catalog of past bosses like baseball fans trying to name bench players on favorite childhood teams. Eventually, they came up with a figure. “Thirteen in 10 years,” García Castro said.


The IBWC’s South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant may be the easiest place on the entire border to cross legally between the United States and Mexico. Here, flatbed trucks bearing CESPT’s blue logo make daily return trips to a loading bay beneath an elevated conveyor belt carrying trash extracted from Tijuana sewage.

In the spring, Morgan Rogers, who oversees the plant’s operations, watched through wraparound shades as a stream of refuse fell from a chute in the ceiling into a waiting dumpster. “Mexico hauls that off when it gets full,” he explained. “They own the trash, they own the sludge, they own the sediment”—he paused—“and they actually own the water. But we throw the water off the coast because they can’t do anything with it.”

“But they can do stuff with the trash and sludge and sediment?” I asked.

“Well, we make them take that.”

Rogers nodded in the direction of the border wall, just on the other side of the building, its tall, rusted slats climbing to the horizon in either direction. “We have a gate out back here,” he said. The IBWC plant was built in the years after NAFTA was passed, partly out of a conviction that the Mexican government couldn’t be relied on to treat sewage to standards that would keep California beaches swimmable. It’s meant to handle about a third of Tijuana’s wastewater, along with dry weather flows from the Tijuana River and runoff from neighborhoods like Los Laureles. But as Tijuana has continued to grow, the plant has been broken down by the combined effects of storm events and infrastructure failures.

A photograph of Mexican workers repairing broken pipelines connected to the San Antonio de los Buenos sewage treatment plant in Tijuana. Before the plant went offline, it limped along well past its useful life, hobbled by a lack of maintenance.

In July 2022, Rogers explained, two critical pipelines, serving a pump station that allowed CESPT to divert sewage flows several miles south of the border, failed one after the other. That December, a series of atmospheric rivers also worsened damage to a valve controlling how much sewage the IBWC plant lets in. As a result, Rogers said, “Whatever flows come from Mexico, we take.”

The consequences have been disastrous. During rainstorms, as much as 80 million gallons a day poured into a plant designed to handle 25 million, carrying trash and sediment that clogged critical equipment. By the end of 2023, all five of the plant’s primary treatment tanks were inoperable, filled to the brim with sludge.

Tropical Storm Hilary made things even worse, destroying all but one of the pumps that moved sewage into the treatment tanks. Rogers leaned over a concrete wall where backed-up trash formed a dam during the storm, and he peered down at the pumps below. “There was eight feet of water down there,” he said. “We were on the edge: If you lost that pump, we’d have been out of business.”

As it was, the plant was still recovering, with new pumps waiting on the grass to be installed, and waist-high weeds sprouting from treatment tanks, which were still being emptied and overhauled one at a time. Rogers credited Tropical Storm Hilary with spurring a new sense of urgency somewhere above his pay grade. “Hilary, really as much damage [as] it did, it kind of woke us up”—he paused, looking at his counterpart from IBWC’s political side, Sally Spener, following along in a pink button-down and maroon cowboy boots. “Not us, but it woke—Who would you say it woke up?” Spener didn’t answer.

Throughout the tour, Spener countered Rogers’s blunt assessments of the plant’s condition with steadfast diplomacy: the broken valve (“But the contract has been awarded to fix it, right?”); the failing pump stations (“That’s all part of that rehab that’s envisioned.”); the oversize pipeline that sent the plant’s treated water three miles off the coast (“the award-winning ocean outfall!”). The dynamic captured the unwieldiness of the agency’s mission: to operate a utility whose “customers” live in another country, and to manage a spiraling set of technical problems enmeshed in a much larger diplomatic relationship.


In June, Mexico elected its first woman president, Claudia Sheinbaum, a former professor of engineering from AMLO’s Morena party. The alignment between the levers of power in Baja state and Mexico City increases the chances that the leadership team at CESPT will keep their jobs long enough to make a dent in the priorities they’ve outlined.

But the shift that may ultimately force the city into a different relationship with wastewater is climate change. As in urban areas across the U.S. Southwest, Tijuana’s water supply is dominated by the dwindling Colorado River. In 2023, CESPT was forced to shut off supply to nearly half the city and get emergency allocation from a cross-border connection with California to avoid prolonged water outages. Water, then, is the limiting factor on Tijuana’s growth: CESPT is now pursuing a long-postponed plan to reuse a portion of Tijuana’s treated water for agriculture, a signal that sewage is finally seen as a commodity worth capturing. “Mexico owns the water rights to this,” Chris Helmer told me as we watched Tijuana’s stream of urban drool meander past us into the estuary. “It’s written in the treaties. At some point, Mexico is going to want to use this water.”

When plans for a U.S. plant to treat Mexican sewage were first proposed, in the 1970s, they called for a facility big enough to handle 100 percent of Tijuana’s wastewater. Gradually, the plant-to-be was whittled down to a quarter of that size and simplified so that it could be built more cheaply, with the idea that upgrades would be made over time. David Gibson, an executive officer of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, said the IBWC plant was already outdated by the time it was completed, in 1997. “Design decisions that were made in the 1990s for that treatment plant, we’re paying for even now,” Gibson said. Without ratepayers to cover maintenance costs, the plant has also fallen victim to the Darwinian logic of the federal budget, receiving just $4 million for maintenance, cumulatively, from 2010 to 2020, a period when billions of additional dollars were allocated to border security. “This is like buying a nice Corolla in 1997 or a nice Ford, but you never change the tires, you never change the oil,” Gibson said. The plan now is to make overdue repairs and double its capacity. But the current funding, Gibson said, is “barely half” what’s needed “for the economy model.” He worries the region is on track to reprise nearly 100 years of sewage history, “outgrowing the infrastructure only a decade or so after it’s installed.”

Still, Gibson echoed the point of view I heard from nearly every American official I spoke to—that the only reliable solution to Tijuana’s sewage problem is building the infrastructure on the U.S. side. In this, sewage treatment for Tijuana seems destined to operate as something like an extension of the border wall, a constant, churning intervention made at the river’s mouth, rather than its source, whatever the price. “I don’t think Mexico in general has sufficient resources to attend to their problems,” Giner, the IBWC commissioner, told me. “How are we going to ensure this moves forward with sufficient resources after all of this is built?” she asked, referring to upgrades on the U.S. side. “Let’s say we’ve caught up. Once we catch up, we will have to answer that question.”

Nearly wherever you look, border politics in the United States is animated by a persistent myth: that with enough money and willpower, you could eventually seal off the countries from one another, like apartments that share a 1,954-mile wall. One way to describe decades of militarization on the border is that it serves to make Mexico invisible to residents of the United States. The same might be said of cross-border industrial development: porous to money and airplane parts, hardened to everything else. Straddling one of the busiest land crossings in the world, the Tijuana River offers a stubborn rebuttal, a reminder that both sides of the border constitute a single place. Once the poop is in the water, no amount of barbed wire can get it out.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The environmental costs of corn: should the US change how it grows its dominant crop?

Amid concerns over greenhouse gas emissions, the Trump administration has abolished climate-friendly farming incentivesThis article was produced in partnership with FloodlightFor decades, corn has reigned over American agriculture. It sprawls across 90m acres – about the size of Montana – and goes into everything from livestock feed and processed foods to the ethanol blended into most of the nation’s gasoline. Continue reading...

This article was produced in partnership with FloodlightFor decades, corn has reigned over American agriculture. It sprawls across 90m acres – about the size of Montana – and goes into everything from livestock feed and processed foods to the ethanol blended into most of the nation’s gasoline.But a growing body of research reveals that the US’s obsession with corn has a steep price: the fertilizer used to grow it is warming the planet and contaminating water.Corn is essential to the rural economy and to the world’s food supply, and researchers say the problem isn’t the corn itself. It’s how we grow it.Corn farmers rely on heavy fertilizer use to sustain today’s high yields. And when the nitrogen in the fertilizer breaks down in the soil, it releases nitrous oxide, a greenhouse gas nearly 300 times more potent than carbon dioxide. Producing nitrogen fertilizer also emits large amounts of carbon dioxide, adding to its climate footprint.The corn and ethanol industries insist that rapid growth in ethanol – which now consumes 40% of the US corn crop – is a net environmental benefit, and they strongly dispute research suggesting otherwise.Industry is also pushing for ethanol-based jet fuel and higher-ethanol gasoline blends as growth in electric vehicles threatens long-term gasoline sales.Agriculture accounts for more than 10% of US greenhouse gas emissions, and corn uses more than two-thirds of all nitrogen fertilizer nationwide – making it the leading driver of agricultural nitrous oxide emissions, studies show.Since 2000, US corn production has surged almost 50%, further adding to the crop’s climate impact.The environmental costs of corn rarely make headlines or factor into political debates. Much of the dynamic traces back to federal policy – and to the powerful corn and ethanol lobby that helped shape it.The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS), passed in the mid-2000s, required that gasoline be blended with ethanol, a biofuel that in the United States comes almost entirely from corn. That mandate drove up demand and prices for corn, spurring farmers to plant more of it.Many plant corn year after year on the same land. The practice, called “continuous corn”, demands massive amounts of nitrogen fertilizer and drives especially high nitrous oxide emissions.Corn growing in front of an ethanol refinery in South Dakota. Photograph: Stephen Groves/APAt the same time, federal subsidies make it more lucrative to grow corn than to diversify. Taxpayers have covered more than $50bn in corn insurance premiums over the past 30 years, according to federal data compiled by the Environmental Working Group.Researchers say proven conservation steps – such as planting rows of trees, shrubs and grasses in cornfields – could sharply reduce these emissions. But the Trump administration has eliminated many of the incentives that helped farmers try such practices.Experts say it all raises a larger question: if the US’s most widely planted crop is worsening climate change, shouldn’t we begin growing it in a different way?How corn took over the USIn the late 1990s, the US’s corn farmers were in trouble. Prices had cratered amid a global grain glut and the Asian financial crisis. A 1999 report by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis said crop prices had hit “rock bottom”.Corn production really took off in the 2000s after federal mandates and incentives helped turn much of the US’s corn crop into ethanol.In 2001, the US Department of Agriculture launched the bioenergy program, which paid ethanol producers to increase their use of farm commodities for fuel. Then the 2002 farm bill created programs supporting ethanol and other renewable energy.Corn growers soon mounted an all-out campaign to persuade Congress to require that gasoline be blended with ethanol, arguing it cut greenhouse gasses, reduced oil dependence and revived rural economies.“I started receiving calls from Capitol Hill saying: ‘Would you have your growers stop calling us? We are with you,’” Jon Doggett, then the industry’s chief lobbyist, said in an article published by the National Corn Growers Association. “I had not seen anything like it before and haven’t seen anything like it since.”In 2005, Congress created the RFS, which requires adding ethanol to gasoline, and expanded it two years later. The amount of corn used for ethanol domestically has more than tripled in the past 20 years.When demand for corn spiked as a result of the RFS, it pushed up prices worldwide, said Tim Searchinger, a researcher at Princeton University’s School of Public and International Affairs. The result, Searchinger said, was more land cleared to grow corn. The Global Carbon Project found that nitrous oxide emissions from human activity rose 40% from 1980 to 2020.In the United States, “king corn” became a political force. Since 2010, national corn and ethanol trade groups have spent more than $55m on lobbying and millions more on political donations to Democrats and Republicans alike, according to campaign finance records analyzed by Floodlight.In 2024 alone, those trade groups spent twice as much on lobbying as the National Rifle Association. Now the sectors are pushing for the next big prize: expanding higher-ethanol gasoline blends and positioning ethanol-based jet fuel as aviation’s “low-carbon” future.Research undercuts ethanol’s clean-fuel claimsCorn and ethanol trade groups did not respond to requests for interviews. But they have long promoted corn ethanol as a climate-friendly fuel.The Renewable Fuels Association cites government and university research that finds burning ethanol reduces greenhouse gas emissions by roughly 40%-50% compared with gasoline. The ethanol industry says the climate critics have it wrong – and that most of the corn used for fuel comes from better yields and smarter farming, not from plowing up new land. The amount of fertilizer required to produce a bushel of corn has dropped sharply in recent decades, they say.“Ethanol reduces carbon emissions, removing the carbon equivalent of 12 million cars from the road each year,” according to the Renewable Fuels Association.Growth Energy, a major ethanol trade group, said in a written statement to Floodlight that US farmers and biofuel producers are “constantly finding new ways to make their operations more efficient and more environmentally beneficial”, using things like cover crops to reduce their carbon footprint. “Biofuel producers are making investments today that will make their products net-zero or even net negative in the next two decades,” the statement said.Some research tells a different story.A recent Environmental Working Group report finds that the way corn is grown in much of the midwest – with the same fields planted in corn year after year – carries a heavy climate cost.And research in 2022 by agricultural land use expert Tyler Lark and colleagues links the Renewable Fuel Standard to worsening water pollution and increased emissions, concluding the climate impact is “no less than gasoline and likely at least 24% higher”.Lark’s research has been disputed by scientists at the Argonne National Laboratory, Purdue University and the University of Illinois, who published a formal rebuttal arguing the study relied on “questionable assumptions” and faulty modeling – a charge Lark’s team has rejected.One recent study found that solar panels can generate as much energy as corn ethanol on roughly 3% of the land.“It’s just a terrible use of land,” Searchinger, the Princeton researcher, said of ethanol. “And you can’t solve climate change if you’re going to make such terrible use of land.”Nitrogen polluting rural drinking waterThe nitrogen used to grow corn and other crops is also a key source of drinking water pollution, experts say.According to a new report by Clean Wisconsin and the Alliance for the Great Lakes, more than 90% of nitrate contamination in Wisconsin’s groundwater is linked to agricultural sources – mostly synthetic fertilizer and manure.A farm in Pemberton, New Jersey, on 14 October 2025. Photograph: Bloomberg/Getty ImagesIn 2022, Tyler Frye and his wife moved into a new home in the rural village of Casco, Wisconsin, about 20 miles (32km) east of Green Bay. Testing found their well water had nitrate levels more than twice the EPA’s safe limit. “We were pretty shocked,” Frye said.He installed a reverse-osmosis system in the basement and still buys bottled water for his wife, who is breastfeeding their daughter, born in July.When he watches manure or fertilizer being spread on nearby fields, he said, one question nags him: “Where does that go?”What cleaner corn could look likeReducing corn’s climate footprint is possible – but the farmers trying to do it are swimming against the policy tide.Recent moves by the Trump administration have stripped out Biden-era incentives for climate-friendly farming practices, which the agriculture secretary Brooke Rollins dismissed as part of the “green new scam”.Research, however, shows that proven conservation practices – including planting trees, shrubs and hedgerows in corn fields – could make a measurable difference.In northern Iowa, Wendy Johnson is planting fruit and nut trees, organic grains, shrubs and other plants that need little or no nitrogen fertilizer on 130 of the 1,200 acres (485 hectares) of corn and soybeans she farms with her father. Across the rest of the farm, they enrich the soil by rotating crops and planting cover crops. They’ve also converted less productive parts of the fields into “prairie strips” – bands of prairie grass that store carbon and require no fertilizer.They were counting on $20,000 a year from the now-cancelled Climate-Smart grant program, but it never came.“It’s hard to take risks on your own,” Johnson said. “That’s where federal support really helps.”In south-east Iowa, sixth-generation farmer Levi Lyle mixes organic and conventional methods across 290 acres. He uses a three-year rotation, extensive cover crops and a technique called roller crimping: flattening rye each spring to create a mulch that suppresses weeds, feeds the soil and reduces fertilizer needs.“The roller crimping of cover crops is a huge, huge opportunity to sequester more carbon, improve soil health, save money on chemicals and still get a similar yield,” Lyle said.Despite mounting research about corn’s climate costs, industry groups are pushing for legislation to pave the way for ethanol-based jet fuel.Researchers warn that producing enough ethanol-based aviation fuel could prompt another 114m acres to be converted to corn, or 20% more corn acres than the US plants for all purposes.“The result,” said University of Iowa professor and natural resources economist Silvia Secchi, “would be essentially to enshrine this dysfunctional system that we created.”Floodlight is a non-profit newsroom that investigates the powers stalling climate action

A drying Great Salt Lake is spewing toxic dust. It could cost Utah billions

A new report lays out the case for action -- instead of waiting for more data.

Note to readers • This story is made possible through a partnership between The Salt Lake Tribune and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization. The dust blowing from the dry bed of the Great Salt Lake is creating a serious public health threat that policymakers and the scientific community are not taking seriously enough, two environmental nonprofits warn in a recent report. The Great Salt Lake hit a record-low elevation in 2022 and teetered on the brink of ecological collapse. It put millions of migrating birds at risk, along with multi-million-dollar lake-based industries such as brine shrimp harvesting, mineral extraction and tourism. The lake only recovered after a few winters with above-average snowfall, but it sits dangerously close to sinking to another record-breaking low. Around 800 square miles of lakebed sit exposed, baking and eroding into a massive threat to public health. Dust storms large and small have become a regular occurrence on the Wasatch Front, the urban region where most Utahns live. The report from the Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment and the Utah Rivers Council argues that Utah’s “baby steps” approach to address the dust fall short of what’s needed to avert a long-term public health crisis. Failing to address those concerns, they say, could saddle the state with billions of dollars in cleanup costs. “We should not wait until we have all the data before we act,” said Brian Moench, president of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, in an interview. “The overall message of this report is that the health hazard so far has been under-analyzed by the scientific community.” After reviewing the report, however, two scientists who regularly study the Great Salt Lake argued the nonprofits’ findings rely on assumptions and not documented evidence. The report warns that while much of the dust discussion and new state-funded dust monitoring network focus on coarse particulates, called PM 10, Utahns should also be concerned about tiny particulates 0.1 microns or smaller called “ultrafines.” The near-invisible pollutants can penetrate a person’s lungs, bloodstream, placenta and brain. The lake’s dust could also carry toxins like heavy metals, pesticides and PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” Moench cautioned, because of the region’s history of mining, agriculture and manufacturing. “Great Salt Lake dust is more toxic than other sources of Great Basin dust,” Moench said. “It’s almost certain that virtually everyone living on the Wasatch Front has contamination of all their critical organs with microscopic pollution particles.” If the lake persists at its record-low elevation of 4,188 feet above sea level, the report found, dust mitigation could cost between $3.4 billion and $11 billion over 20 years depending on the methods used. The nonprofits looked to Owens Lake in California to develop their estimates. Officials there used a variety of methods to control dust blowing from the dried-up lake, like planting vegetation, piping water for shallow flooding and dumping loads of gravel. Dust blows over the Great Salt Lake on Monday, May 12, 2025. Trent Nelson / The Salt Lake Tribune The Great Salt Lake needs to rise to 4,198 feet to reach a minimum healthy elevation, according to state resource managers. It currently sits at 4,191.3 feet in the south arm and 4,190.8 feet in the north arm. The lake’s decline is almost entirely human caused, as cities, farmers and industries siphon away water from its tributary rivers. Climate change is also fueling the problem by taking a toll on Utah’s snowpack and streams. Warmer summers also accelerate the lake’s rate of evaporation. The two nonprofits behind the report, Utah Physicians and the Utah Rivers Council, pushed back at recent solutions for cleaning up the toxic dust offered up by policymakers and researchers. Their report panned a proposal by the state’s Speaker of the House, Mike Schultz, a Republican, to build berms around dust hotspots so salty water can rebuild a protective crust. It also knocked a proposal to tap groundwater deep beneath the lakebed and use it to help keep the playa wet. “Costly engineered stopgaps like these appear to be the foundation of the state’s short-sighted leadership on the Great Salt Lake,” the groups wrote in their report, “which could trigger a serious exodus out of Utah among wealthier households and younger populations.” Bill Johnson, a professor of geology and geophysics at the University of Utah who led research on the aquifer below the lake, said he agreed with the report’s primary message that refilling the Great Salt Lake should be the state’s priority, rather than managing it as a long-term and expensive source of pollution. Bill Johnson’s University of Utah graduate students haul their equipment out onto the playa of the Great Salt Lake on Tuesday, June 17, 2025. Rick Egan / The Salt Lake Tribune “We don’t want this to become just about dust management, and we forget about the lake,” Johnson said. “I don’t think anybody’s proposing that at this point.” It took decades of unsustainable water consumption for the Great Salt Lake to shrink to its current state, Johnson noted, and it will likely take decades for it to refill. Kevin Perry, an atmospheric scientist at the University of Utah and one of the top researchers studying the Great Salt Lake’s dust, said Utah Physicians and Utah Rivers Council asked him to provide feedback on their report in the spring. “It’s a much more balanced version of the document than what I saw last March,” he said of the report. “It’s still alarmist.” Perry agreed with the report’s findings that many unknowns linger about what the lakebed dust contains, and what Utahns are potentially inhaling when it becomes airborne. He said he remains skeptical that ultrafine particulates are a concern with lakebed dust. Those pollutants are typically formed through high-heat combustion sources, like diesel engines. “In the report, they just threw it all at the wall and said it has to be there,” Perry said. “I kept trying to encourage them to limit their discussion to the things we have actually documented. ” The report’s chapter outlining cost estimates for dust mitigation, however, largely aligned with Perry’s own research. Fighting back dust over the long term comes with an astronomical price tag, he said, along with the risk of leaving permanent scars from gravel beds or irrigation lines on the landscape. “Yes, we can mitigate the dust using engineered solutions,” Perry said, “but we really don’t want to go down that path if we don’t have to.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A drying Great Salt Lake is spewing toxic dust. It could cost Utah billions on Dec 1, 2025.

Illinois has few remaining wetlands. A Trump administration proposal could decimate what’s left.

If the rule takes effect, more than two-thirds of Illinois’ wetlands could lose federal protections.

The Environmental Protection Agency calls wetlands “biological supermarkets” for the sheer abundance of food they supply to a broad range of species. Roughly 40 percent of all plants and animals rely on wetlands for some part of their lifecycle. These ecosystems also filter drinking water, blunt the force of flooding, and store vast amounts of carbon dioxide — functions that make them critical in efforts to combat climate change. But the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are now moving to slash federal protections for the nation’s wetlands and streams, potentially leaving millions of acres of habitat in Illinois and the Midwest vulnerable to being dug up, filled in, or paved over. At the heart of the proposal announced last week is a new, stricter definition to the long-debated legal term, “Waters of the United States,” the federal guidance that determines which bodies of water are protected under the 1972 Clean Water Act. The proposal codifies a 2023 Supreme Court decision that limits federal protection to wetlands that are so inseparable from larger, relatively permanent bodies of water like streams, rivers, and lakes that you can’t tell where one ends and the other begins. Under the proposed rule, wetlands must contain water during the “wet season” and must be connected to a major waterbody during that season. Effectively, the new definition excludes seasonal streams and wetlands, which remain dry for much of the year. “We’re looking at up to 85 percent of the country’s wetlands losing their protected status under the Clean Water Act,” said Andrew Wetzler, the Natural Resources Defense Council’s senior vice president for nature.  A 2025 analysis from the nonprofit environmental group found that approximately 70 million of the 84 million acres of wetlands across the country are at risk. Under the current regulations, developers must obtain a permit from the Army Corps of Engineers before destroying a wetland to ensure environmentally responsible practices. The new regulations will eliminate the need for a federal permit to build over wetlands, allowing developers to act with minimal environmental oversight, according to Weltzer.  EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin defended the move in a statement, arguing it “protects the nation’s navigable waters from pollution, advances cooperative federalism by empowering states, and will result in economic growth across the country.” Agricultural, chemical, and mining industry groups also celebrated the EPA’s push to curb federal water protections. “The Supreme Court clearly ruled several years ago that the government overreached in its interpretation of what fell under federal guidelines,” read a statement from Zippy Duval, the American Farm Bureau Federation’s president. “We are still reviewing the entire rule, but we are pleased that it finally addresses those concerns and takes steps to provide much-needed clarity.” When Europeans settled the area in the 1700s, Illinois was home to more than 8 million acres of wetlands. The state has since lost about 90 percent of that terrain to agriculture, development, and urbanization. Illinois’ wetlands alone provide $419 million worth of residential flood protection annually, according to the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign.  Since the Supreme Court decision gutted federal protections for wetlands, states like Colorado have passed their own laws to safeguard their endangered ecosystems. Illinois lawmakers have attempted to introduce similar legislation, but have yet to succeed.  “The vast majority of Illinois wetlands do not have federal protection,” said Robert Hirschfeld, director of water policy at the Prairie Rivers Network. “The loss of the federal Clean Water Act means it is open season on wetlands.” A recent study from the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign found that slashing the wetland protection could endanger the vast majority of the state’s dwindling wetlands. “We determined that about 72 percent of Illinois wetlands, which is about 700,000 acres, no longer meet that criteria for continuous surface connection to relatively permanent waters in Illinois,” said Chelsea Peters, a PhD candidate in wetland ecology at the University of Illinois and a lead author of the study. “So they are not protected by the Clean Water Act.” That figure could get higher depending on how regulators hash out wetness requirements. “The next best estimate is 90 percent,” she said.  The proposal still has a long road ahead before being finalized. The EPA has opened a 45-day comment period for the public to weigh in on the proposed change. The EPA will consider these public comments before finalizing rule changes as early as the first quarter of next year. This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Illinois has few remaining wetlands. A Trump administration proposal could decimate what’s left. on Nov 24, 2025.

How Much Protein Do You Need? Experts Explain

Fitness influencers promote superhigh-protein diets, but studies show there’s only so much the body can use

Snack bars, yogurts, ice cream, even bottled water: it seems like food makers have worked out ways to slip extra protein into just about anything as they seek to capitalize on a growing consumer trend.Today, protein-fortified foods and protein supplements form a market worth tens of billions of US dollars, with fitness influencers, as well as some researchers and physicians, promoting high-protein diets as the secret to strength and longevity. Protein is undeniably essential, but how much people really need is still a topic of debate.On the one hand, most official guidelines recommend a minimum of close to one gram of protein per kilogram of body weight per day, or the equivalent of about 250 grams of cooked chicken (which contains around 68 g of protein) for an adult weighing 70 kilograms. On the other hand, a growing narrative in wellness circles encourages people to eat more than double that amount. Many scientists fall somewhere in the middle and take issue with some of the advice circulating online.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.“It’s really frustrating because there isn’t evidence to support the claims that they’re making,” says Katherine Black, an exercise nutritionist at the University of Otago in Dunedin, New Zealand, referring to the super-high protein recommendations often shared on social media. What research does show is that protein needs can vary from person to person and can change throughout a lifetime. And people should think carefully about what they eat to meet those needs. “On social media, it’s like everyone’s worried about protein, putting protein powder into everything,” she says.Health authorities can help to guide people’s dietary choices on the basis of the latest research. The next Dietary Guidelines for Americans, a document that advises on what to eat for maintaining a healthy lifestyle, is due to come out by the end of this year. But its recommendations, which have tended to be broadly influential, might be changing.Calculating protein needsResearchers have been trying to estimate how much protein people need for more than a century. In 1840, chemist Justus von Liebig estimated that the average adult required 120 grams of protein a day, on the basis of a group of German workers’ diets. Later, scientists started to use nitrogen to calculate protein requirements. Protein is the only major dietary component that contains nitrogen. So, by measuring how much of it people consume and the amount they excrete, researchers could estimate how much the body uses.Since the 1940s, this nitrogen-balance method has been used to determine the Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA), a set of nutrient recommendations developed by the US National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.The latest such recommendation for protein, from 2005, establishes the RDA for both men and women at 0.8 grams per kilogram of body weight per day, which it states should be enough to meet the needs of 97–98% of healthy people. European and global-health authorities recommend similar or slightly higher levels.Although scientists recognize that RDAs are a useful reference point, many say that people could benefit from a higher amount. “The RDA is not a target; it’s simply the minimum that appears to prevent any detectable deficiency,” says Donald Layman, a researcher focusing on protein requirements at the University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign. Evidence suggests that the optimal range is between 1.2 and 1.6 grams of protein per kilogram of body weight per day, he says.That is especially true for older adults, who often experience muscle loss as they age, as well as for certain athletes and people trying to gain muscle.For example, in an observational study of 2,066 adults aged 70–79, those who reported eating the most protein — about 1.1 gram per kilogram of bodyweight — lost 40% less lean mass during the three years of follow-up than did those who ate the least — around 0.7 grams per kilogram.“For older adults, 1.2 grams per kilogram is just giving them a little extra protection,” says Nicholas Burd, a nutrition and exercise researcher also at the University of Illinois Urbana–Champaign. Furthermore, older people might experience a decline in appetite, which makes it particularly important for them to pay attention to their protein intake. It doesn’t mean that they need to take protein supplements, he says. “It’s all things we can do with just normal incorporation of high-protein foods in our lives.”For healthy adults, increasing protein can boost the effects of resistance exercise, such as weightlifting. A 2017 systematic review found that, among people engaged in this type of training, taking protein supplements enhanced muscle gain and strength. But increasing protein beyond 1.6 grams per kilogram per day provided no further benefit.Meanwhile, some fitness influencers swear by eating 2.2 grams per kilogram of body weight. For most people, that’s simply overkill, says Burd. There’s little harm, other than for people with kidney disease, but Burd adds: “You just create an inefficient system where your body gets very good at wasting food protein.”Some practitioners might recommend higher protein targets to ensure that people get enough, Burd says. But the protein craze has been driven mostly by aggressive marketing of high-protein foods and supplements, he says.“The myth of increased protein needs has seeped into popular imagination, including among health professionals, and has been conveniently reinforced by the food industry,” says Fernanda Marrocos, a researcher specializing in nutrition and food policy at the University of São Paulo in Brazil.Amino-acid goalsNot all proteins are the same, and some researchers argue for a more nuanced recommendation that takes into account the amino acids — the building blocks of proteins — that foods contain. The human body requires 20 amino acids to function properly, including 9 that are considered ‘essential’ because they can be obtained only through food.The balance of those nine in animal-based foods is exactly what other animals need, says Layman. “In plants, the essential amino acids are generally there, but they’re in proportions for the plants.” That means that some plants might be rich in certain amino acids but not in others, so meeting the amino-acid requirements with plant-based products might require a greater variety of foods.He is critical of the way that official dietary guidelines calculate the recommendations for proteins from different sources. For example, according to the US Department of Agriculture, 14 grams of almonds can substitute 28 grams of chicken breast. Research by Layman and his colleagues, which considers the amino-acid balance, suggests that it would actually take more than 115 grams of almonds to substitute 28 grams of chicken.Robert Wolfe, a researcher focusing on muscle metabolism at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences in Little Rock, says that dietary guidelines should incorporate the analysis of the quality of the protein, including the amino-acid balance and the degree to which the human body can digest them.One area for future research, Wolfe says, is understanding exactly how food processing affects protein content. Factors such as cooking temperature, for example, can influence how well the body digests protein. This can have implications for certain protein supplements and high-protein bars, which are generally highly processed.Obtaining that information requires going beyond nitrogen-balance studies. Wolfe’s team has used isotope tracers to determine the rate at which food protein is incorporated into new proteins in the body. One study of 56 young adults, for example, concluded that eating animal-based proteins resulted in a greater gain in body protein than did eating the equivalent amount of plant-based protein. But studies in this area are still small and shouldn’t be taken to mean that people must get all their protein from animal sources.The American Heart Association recommends prioritizing plant proteins, given that the saturated fat found in red meats can increase the risk of cardiovascular disease. There’s also a high environmental cost associated with meat production, which is a major source of greenhouse-gas emissions.Burd says that if a diet includes at least a portion of animal-based protein, it will probably provide all the essential amino acids for maintaining good health. And it is possible to achieve the same benefits solely from plant-based proteins. “This is where supplements could be beneficial because it’s more challenging to reach that balance from plants only,” Burd says.Specialists advising the formulation of the upcoming Dietary Guidelines for Americans say that most Americans already eat more than enough proteins. They suggest reducing protein consumption from red meat, chicken and eggs and increasing the consumption of certain vegetables. But it’s unclear what exactly will be in the guidelines: US health secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr has stated in recent months that they will emphasize the need to eat saturated fats from sources including meat and dairy, which goes against recommendations from many medical associations.Protein consumption is adequate in most parts of the world, says Marrocos. A study her team led in Brazil found that, in general, people consume well above the World Health Organization’s protein recommendation, even those with the lowest income. So there’s no need to obsess about hitting an exact protein number.“For most people, as long as they’re eating enough calories and a reasonably varied diet, they’ll get all the protein they need,” says Marrocos.This article is reproduced with permission and was first published on November 12, 2025.

This pig’s bacon was delicious. But she’s alive and well

A company called Mission Barns is cultivating pork fat in bioreactors and turning it into meatballs and other products. Honestly, they're pretty darn good.

I’m eating Dawn the Yorkshire pig and she’s quite tasty. But don’t worry. She’s doing perfectly fine, traipsing around a sanctuary in upstate New York. (Word is that she appreciates belly rubs and sunshine.) I’m in San Francisco, at an Italian joint just south of Golden Gate Park, enjoying meatballs and bacon not made of meat in the traditional sense, but of plants mixed with “cultivated” pork fat. Dawn, you see, donated a small sample of fat, which a company called Mission Barns got to proliferate in devices called bioreactors by providing nutrients like carbohydrates, amino acids, and vitamins — essentially replicating the conditions in her body. Because so much of the flavor of pork and other meats comes from the animal’s fat, Mission Barns can create products like sausages and salami with plants, but make them taste darn near like sausages and salami. I’ve been struggling to describe the experience, because cultivated meat short-circuits my brain — my mouth thinks I’m eating a real pork meatball, but my brain knows that it’s fundamentally different, and that Dawn (that’s her above) didn’t have to die for it. This is the best I’ve come up with: It’s Diet Meat. Just as Diet Coke is an approximation of the real thing, so too are cultivated meatballs. They simply taste a bit less meaty, at least to my tongue. Which is understandable, as the only animal product in this food is the bioreactor-grown fat.Cultivated pork is the newest entrant in the effort to rethink meat. For years, plant-based offerings have been mimicking burgers, chicken, and fish with ever-more convincing blends of proteins and fats. Mission Barns is one of a handful of startups taking the next step: growing real animal fat outside the animal, then marrying it with plants to create hybrids that look, cook, and taste more like what consumers have always eaten, easing the environmental and ethical costs of industrial livestock. The company says it’s starting with pork because it’s a large market and products like bacon are fat-rich, but its technology is “cell-agnostic,” meaning it could create beef and chicken, too. Matt Simon Honestly, Mission Barns’ creations taste great, in part because they’re “unstructured,” in the parlance of the industry. A pork loin is a complicated tangle of fat, muscle cells, and connective tissues that is very difficult — and expensive — to replicate, but a meatball, salami, or sausage incorporates other ingredients. That allows Mission Barns to experiment with what plant to use as a base, to which they add spices to accentuate the flavors. It’s a technology that they can iterate, basically, crafting ever-better meats by toying with ingredients in different ratios. So the bacon I ate, for instance, had a nice applewood smoke to it. The meatballs had the springiness you’d expect. During a later visit to Mission Barns’ headquarters across town, I got to try two prototypes of its salami as well — both were spiced like you’d expect, but less elastic, so they chewed a bit more easily than what you’d find on a charcuterie board. (The sensation of food in the mouth is known in the industry as “mouthfeel,” and nailing it is essential to the success of alt-meats.) The salami slices even left grease stains on the paper they were served on — Dawn’s own little mark on the world. Matt Simon I was one of the first people to purchase a cultivated pork product. While Mission Barns has so far only sold its products at that Italian restaurant and, for a limited time, at a grocery store in Berkeley — $13.99 for a pack of eight meatballs, similar to higher-end products from organic and regenerative farms — it is fixing to scale up production and sell the technology to other companies to produce more cultivated foods. (It is assessing how big the bioreactors will have to be to reach price parity with traditional meat products.) The idea is to provide an alternative to animal agriculture, which uses a whole lot of land, water, and energy to raise creatures and ship their flesh around the world. Livestock are responsible for between 10 and 20 percent of humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions — depending on who’s estimating it — and that’s to say nothing of the cruelty involved in keeping pigs and chickens and cows in unsavory, occasionally inhumane, conditions.Getting animal cells to grow outside of an animal, though, ain’t easy. For one, if cells don’t have anything to attach to, they die. So Mission Barns’ cultivator uses a sponge-like structure, full of nooks and crannies that provides lots of surface area for the cells to grow. “We have our media, which is just the nutrient solution that we give to these cells,” said Saam Shahrokhi, chief technology officer at Mission Barns. “We’re essentially recapitulating all of the environmental cues that make cells inside the body grow fat, [but] outside the body.” While Dawn’s fat is that of a Yorkshire pig, Shahrokhi said they could easily produce fat from other breeds like the Mangalitsa, known as the Kobe beef of pork. (In June, the company won approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to bring its cultivated fat to market.)Fat in hand, Mission Barns can mix it with plant proteins. If you’re familiar with Impossible Foods, it uses soy to replicate the feel and look of ground beef and adds soy leghemoglobin, which is similar to the heme that gives meat its meaty flavor. Depending on the flavor and texture it’s trying to copy, Mission Bay uses pea protein for the meatballs and sausages, wheat for the bacon, and fava beans for the salami. “The plant-based meat industry has done pretty well with texture,” said Bianca Le, head of special projects at Mission Barns. “I think what they’re really missing is flavor and juiciness, which obviously is where the fat comes in.” Matt Simon But the fat is just the beginning. Mission Barn’s offerings not only have to taste good, but also can’t have an offputting smell when they’re coming out of the package and when they’re cooking. The designers have to dial in the pH, which could degrade the proteins if not balanced. How the products behave on the stove or in the oven has to be familiar, too. “If someone has to relearn how to cook a piece of bacon or a meatball, then it’s never going to work,” said Zach Tyndall, the product development and culinary manager at Mission Barns.When I pick up that piece of salami, it has to feel like the real thing, in more ways than one. Indeed, it’s greasy in the hand and has that tang of cured meat. It’s even been through a dry-aging process to reduce its moisture. “We treat this like we would a conventional piece of salami,” Tyndall said. Cultivated meat companies may also go more unconventional. “I also love the idea of taking their pork fat and putting it in a beef burger — what would happen if you did that?” said Barb Stuckey, chief new product strategy officer at Mattson, a food developer that has worked with many cultivated meat companies. “Mixing species, it’s not something we typically do. But with this technology, we can.” Of course, in this new frontier of food, the big question is: Who exactly is this for? Would a vegetarian or vegan eat cultured pork fat if it’s divorced from the cruelty of factory farming? Would meat-eaters be willing to give up the real thing for a facsimile? Mission Barns’ market research, Le said, found that its early adopters are actually flexitarians — people who eat mostly plant-based but partake in the occasional animal product. But Le adds that their first limited sale to the public in Berkeley included some people who called themselves vegetarians and vegans.  Mission Barns There’s also the matter of quantifying how much of an environmental improvement cultivated fat might offer over industrial pork production. If scaled up, one benefit of cultivated food might be that companies can produce the stuff in more places — that is, instead of sprawling pig farms and slaughterhouses being relegated to rural areas, bioreactors could be run in cities, cutting down on the costs and emissions associated with shipping. Still, those factories would need energy to grow fat cells, though they could be run on renewable electricity. “We modeled our process at the large commercial scale, and then compared it to U.S. bacon production,” Le said. (The company would not offer specific details, saying it is in the process of patenting its technique.) “And we found that with renewable energy, we do significantly better in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.”Whether or not consumers bite, though, remains to be seen. The market for meat alternatives in the U.S. has majorly softened of late: Beyond Meat, which makes plant-based products like burgers and sausages, has seen revenues drop significantly, in part because of consumers’ turn away from processed foods. But by licensing its technology elsewhere, Mission Barns’ strategy is to break into new markets beyond the U.S.The challenges of cultivated meat go beyond the engineering once you get to the messaging and branding — telegraphing to consumers that they’re buying something that may in fact be partially meat. “When you buy chicken, you get 100 percent chicken,” Stuckey said. “I think a lot of people go into cultivated meat thinking what’s going to come onto the market is 100 percent cultivated chicken, and it’s not going to be that. It’s going to be something else.” Regardless of the trajectory of cultivated fat products, Dawn will continue mingling with llamas, soaking up the sunshine, and getting belly rubs in upstate New York — even as she makes plants taste more like pork.  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline This pig’s bacon was delicious. But she’s alive and well on Nov 20, 2025.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.