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 electrified highway that could change the future of trucking (and this polluted San Diego neighborhood)

News Feed
Tuesday, August 13, 2024

This story is the second in a series by Reckon and Next City examining how Black and Brown communities across the U.S. are working to hold corporations accountable for environmental injustices. Read the first story, on a new rail line planned in Africatown, the Alabama neighborhood founded by formerly enslaved people.For decades, San Diego’s port communities like Barrio Logan and National City have been plagued with unhealthy air quality. Residents of communities bordering the 34 miles of coastline encompassed by the Port of San Diego face a barrage of toxic pollutants and other hazardous conditions from industrial shipyards, intersecting neighborhood freeways, and even the U.S. Navy. They believe these hazardous conditions would never be tolerated in San Diego’s more affluent areas.The fight for clean air has been a long, uphill battle for these working-class, historically Mexican-American and immigrant communities. But after years of advocacy by residents and activists, the Port of San Diego has begun to take steps to offset the long history of environmental racism and injustice.In May, the Board of Port Commissioners for the San Diego Unified Port District voted unanimously to double the board’s annual contribution to the Maritime Industrial Impact Fund (MIIF) and help curb emissions by expanding the fund’s scope to include several electrification projects.“For decades, communities living next to the port marine cargo terminals have had the burden of pollution from the operations at these port terminals,” says Kyle Heiskala, Policy Co-Director for the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC), an environmental justice nonprofit that pressed the board to up its MIIF contribution. “They have not seen a ton of benefits for the local residents living near the port, and instead get a lot of the negative impacts in terms of air pollution.”Disproportionate environmental impactToday, Barrio Logan is one of the most polluted areas of San Diego County and ranks among the top 5% of California’s most polluted areas. The community is more than 85% Hispanic, and more than a quarter of residents live below the poverty line. Both Barrio Logan and neighboring National City rank in the 90th percentile for some of the highest concentrations of diesel particulate matter in all of California. The byproduct of exhaust from trucks, buses, trains, ships, and other equipment, the pollutant has been deemed carcinogenic to humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. According to the EPA, due to their proximity to the port, rail yards, and freeways, residents have an 85% to 95% higher risk of developing cancer than the rest of the U.S.Historically, outcry over the disproportionate impact of environmental hazards created by the Port have been ignored. Some have even blamed residents for living in communities that border the Port and its industries, but Heiskala notes that San Diego’s ‘Portside’ communities predate the Port and its industries.“People need to remember that the neighborhoods and communities were here first. The Port was established in 1962 – these neighborhoods are over a hundred years old,” he said. “All of the industries that we’ve seen grow over the past five decades have been introduced into these communities of color as a result of race-based land use decisions that took neighborhoods and cited them for industry.”In 2023, Barrio Logan moved forward with a new community plan, marking the first update to the neighborhood’s plan in over 40 years and a victory in residents’ long battle to add buffers between the port and neighboring communities. The most consequential update amended the city’s zoning laws banning the creation of mixed commercial/residential zones directly adjacent to residential areas.“We don’t see shipyards in La Jolla for very historically documented reasons,” Heiskala adds, pointing to a mostly-white neighborhood just 15 minutes north of Barrio Logan.Steps forwardIn 2010, the board established the MIIF to address some of these historic inequities and aid communities bordering the Port. The Port will now contribute 4% percent of its gross maritime industrial revenue – an estimated $1.55 million in fiscal year 2025. Previously, a 2% cap had been approved in June 2023.The Port’s increase to the MIIF would contribute to various methods and strategies to offset the impacts of industrial pollution. Over $500,000 has already been spent on equipment like air filters and air monitors for homes and elementary schools adjacent to the port, to help filter indoor air and monitor quality.The MIIF has funded a variety of community programs, notably the FRANC Program, a free electric shuttle system that connects multiple destinations throughout National City.Heiskala says that the board of port commissioners’ commitment is evident in the progress made towards the Maritime Clean Air Strategy goals and the Port has seen immense progress in converting cargo handling equipment to electric. The Port of San Diego now boasts the nation’s first cohort of all-electric cranes and all-electric tug boat, with a goal of zero-emission trucks and cargo handling equipment by 2030.Too little, too late?Not all residents have been impressed with the Port’s progress in meeting its emissions goals. Lydia Young, a community organizer who lives in Logan Heights, believes the Port’s actions are only a fraction of what’s needed to address a long cycle of neglect in San Diego’s portside communities.“The MIIF is a good first step that’s decades too late,” Young says, adding that the $1.55 million contribution is a mere fraction of the Port’s revenue and local impact. The Port of San Diego’s website says it had a “$9.2 billion overall economic impact in San Diego County” in 2019.“At this rate, the MIIF would support the fiscal average of one two-story house a year in San Diego,” Young says. “For an industry that makes billions from our land and labor each year at the risk of our health, this is nowhere near enough.”Dr. Vi Nguyen, a pediatrician at Kaiser Permanente San Diego and co-founder of San Diego Pediatricians For Clean Air, also believes more must be done to address the needs of children and families in portside communities.“There’s a lot more money being invested in mitigation, but the health effects on these communities span generations, and a couple of million dollars isn’t going to fix everything,” Nguyen says.Most of Dr. Nguyen’s patients and their families live in Barrio Logan, Logan Heights, and National City. And although the cost to reduce emissions at the Port is steep, Dr. Nguyen says it pales in comparison to the long-term costs of failing to do so.“Just in terms of asthma, the downstream cost to us as a healthcare system is astronomical,” Dr. Nguyen says. “Exposure to PM 2.5 during the first and second trimester of pregnancy and in the first years of life skyrockets the chance of developmental delay, lower IQ, anxiety, depression, and psychotic experiences. Having a child with autism or developmental delay is a lifetime of cost to the individual and the families and communities.”Moving toward electrificationIn addition to MIIF allocations, San Diego’s portside communities have received funding for more emissions-reduction projects.Last year, National City received an $8.5 million federal grant to create a plug-in electrification project for idling ships to tap into the city’s power grid to charge from the shore. Advocates foresee that the biggest challenge is likely the transition of the local trucking fleet from diesel to electric trucks. In March, the Port also approved a developer to build and operate a zero-emission truck stop in National City, capable of charging up to 40% of the port’s trucking fleet.But the U.S. trucking industry’s decentralized structure has complicated efforts to convert San Diego’s local trucking fleet. “When the cranes stop operating at the end of the day, it’s off and sits there on the terminal. But these trucks are driving all over the community,” Heiskala explains. Currently, federal rules make it difficult to transition from diesel to electric, and regulations dictating the number of hours a truck driver is allowed to drive before they’re required to break don’t take into account the time it takes to charge electric trucks.“The current board of Port Commissioners as a majority has recognized their responsibility to undoing those historical harms,” Hesikala said. “We have to do it because of climate change, but we also owe it to the generations of people who have been suffering and literally dying from the pollution.”Like the history of San Diego’s portside communities themselves, the path to a zero-emissions port has been complicated. The most recent victory in funding and the commitment to further electrification, however, signal a potential turning point.Though the fight against industrial pollution in San Diego’s portside communities is far from over, for the first time in decades, there is a sense of progress and hope for cleaner air and healthier communities.Roberto Camacho is a Chicano freelance multimedia journalist from San Diego, California. His reporting typically focuses on criminal justice reform, immigration, Chicano/Latino issues, hip-hop culture, and their intersections to social justice. Follow him on Twitter/IG/Threads: @rob_camacho_sd

After a long battle, San Diego’s Port has doubled its commitment to offset the impacts of industrial pollution in neighboring communities.

This story is the second in a series by Reckon and Next City examining how Black and Brown communities across the U.S. are working to hold corporations accountable for environmental injustices. Read the first story, on a new rail line planned in Africatown, the Alabama neighborhood founded by formerly enslaved people.

For decades, San Diego’s port communities like Barrio Logan and National City have been plagued with unhealthy air quality. Residents of communities bordering the 34 miles of coastline encompassed by the Port of San Diego face a barrage of toxic pollutants and other hazardous conditions from industrial shipyards, intersecting neighborhood freeways, and even the U.S. Navy. They believe these hazardous conditions would never be tolerated in San Diego’s more affluent areas.

The fight for clean air has been a long, uphill battle for these working-class, historically Mexican-American and immigrant communities. But after years of advocacy by residents and activists, the Port of San Diego has begun to take steps to offset the long history of environmental racism and injustice.

In May, the Board of Port Commissioners for the San Diego Unified Port District voted unanimously to double the board’s annual contribution to the Maritime Industrial Impact Fund (MIIF) and help curb emissions by expanding the fund’s scope to include several electrification projects.

“For decades, communities living next to the port marine cargo terminals have had the burden of pollution from the operations at these port terminals,” says Kyle Heiskala, Policy Co-Director for the Environmental Health Coalition (EHC), an environmental justice nonprofit that pressed the board to up its MIIF contribution. “They have not seen a ton of benefits for the local residents living near the port, and instead get a lot of the negative impacts in terms of air pollution.”

Disproportionate environmental impact

Today, Barrio Logan is one of the most polluted areas of San Diego County and ranks among the top 5% of California’s most polluted areas. The community is more than 85% Hispanic, and more than a quarter of residents live below the poverty line. Both Barrio Logan and neighboring National City rank in the 90th percentile for some of the highest concentrations of diesel particulate matter in all of California. The byproduct of exhaust from trucks, buses, trains, ships, and other equipment, the pollutant has been deemed carcinogenic to humans by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. According to the EPA, due to their proximity to the port, rail yards, and freeways, residents have an 85% to 95% higher risk of developing cancer than the rest of the U.S.

Historically, outcry over the disproportionate impact of environmental hazards created by the Port have been ignored. Some have even blamed residents for living in communities that border the Port and its industries, but Heiskala notes that San Diego’s ‘Portside’ communities predate the Port and its industries.

“People need to remember that the neighborhoods and communities were here first. The Port was established in 1962 – these neighborhoods are over a hundred years old,” he said. “All of the industries that we’ve seen grow over the past five decades have been introduced into these communities of color as a result of race-based land use decisions that took neighborhoods and cited them for industry.”

In 2023, Barrio Logan moved forward with a new community plan, marking the first update to the neighborhood’s plan in over 40 years and a victory in residents’ long battle to add buffers between the port and neighboring communities. The most consequential update amended the city’s zoning laws banning the creation of mixed commercial/residential zones directly adjacent to residential areas.

“We don’t see shipyards in La Jolla for very historically documented reasons,” Heiskala adds, pointing to a mostly-white neighborhood just 15 minutes north of Barrio Logan.

Steps forward

In 2010, the board established the MIIF to address some of these historic inequities and aid communities bordering the Port. The Port will now contribute 4% percent of its gross maritime industrial revenue – an estimated $1.55 million in fiscal year 2025. Previously, a 2% cap had been approved in June 2023.

The Port’s increase to the MIIF would contribute to various methods and strategies to offset the impacts of industrial pollution. Over $500,000 has already been spent on equipment like air filters and air monitors for homes and elementary schools adjacent to the port, to help filter indoor air and monitor quality.

The MIIF has funded a variety of community programs, notably the FRANC Program, a free electric shuttle system that connects multiple destinations throughout National City.

Heiskala says that the board of port commissioners’ commitment is evident in the progress made towards the Maritime Clean Air Strategy goals and the Port has seen immense progress in converting cargo handling equipment to electric. The Port of San Diego now boasts the nation’s first cohort of all-electric cranes and all-electric tug boat, with a goal of zero-emission trucks and cargo handling equipment by 2030.

Too little, too late?

Not all residents have been impressed with the Port’s progress in meeting its emissions goals. Lydia Young, a community organizer who lives in Logan Heights, believes the Port’s actions are only a fraction of what’s needed to address a long cycle of neglect in San Diego’s portside communities.

“The MIIF is a good first step that’s decades too late,” Young says, adding that the $1.55 million contribution is a mere fraction of the Port’s revenue and local impact. The Port of San Diego’s website says it had a “$9.2 billion overall economic impact in San Diego County” in 2019.

“At this rate, the MIIF would support the fiscal average of one two-story house a year in San Diego,” Young says. “For an industry that makes billions from our land and labor each year at the risk of our health, this is nowhere near enough.”

Dr. Vi Nguyen, a pediatrician at Kaiser Permanente San Diego and co-founder of San Diego Pediatricians For Clean Air, also believes more must be done to address the needs of children and families in portside communities.

“There’s a lot more money being invested in mitigation, but the health effects on these communities span generations, and a couple of million dollars isn’t going to fix everything,” Nguyen says.

Most of Dr. Nguyen’s patients and their families live in Barrio Logan, Logan Heights, and National City. And although the cost to reduce emissions at the Port is steep, Dr. Nguyen says it pales in comparison to the long-term costs of failing to do so.

“Just in terms of asthma, the downstream cost to us as a healthcare system is astronomical,” Dr. Nguyen says. “Exposure to PM 2.5 during the first and second trimester of pregnancy and in the first years of life skyrockets the chance of developmental delay, lower IQ, anxiety, depression, and psychotic experiences. Having a child with autism or developmental delay is a lifetime of cost to the individual and the families and communities.”

Moving toward electrification

In addition to MIIF allocations, San Diego’s portside communities have received funding for more emissions-reduction projects.

Last year, National City received an $8.5 million federal grant to create a plug-in electrification project for idling ships to tap into the city’s power grid to charge from the shore. Advocates foresee that the biggest challenge is likely the transition of the local trucking fleet from diesel to electric trucks. In March, the Port also approved a developer to build and operate a zero-emission truck stop in National City, capable of charging up to 40% of the port’s trucking fleet.

But the U.S. trucking industry’s decentralized structure has complicated efforts to convert San Diego’s local trucking fleet. “When the cranes stop operating at the end of the day, it’s off and sits there on the terminal. But these trucks are driving all over the community,” Heiskala explains. Currently, federal rules make it difficult to transition from diesel to electric, and regulations dictating the number of hours a truck driver is allowed to drive before they’re required to break don’t take into account the time it takes to charge electric trucks.

“The current board of Port Commissioners as a majority has recognized their responsibility to undoing those historical harms,” Hesikala said. “We have to do it because of climate change, but we also owe it to the generations of people who have been suffering and literally dying from the pollution.”

Like the history of San Diego’s portside communities themselves, the path to a zero-emissions port has been complicated. The most recent victory in funding and the commitment to further electrification, however, signal a potential turning point.

Though the fight against industrial pollution in San Diego’s portside communities is far from over, for the first time in decades, there is a sense of progress and hope for cleaner air and healthier communities.

Roberto Camacho is a Chicano freelance multimedia journalist from San Diego, California. His reporting typically focuses on criminal justice reform, immigration, Chicano/Latino issues, hip-hop culture, and their intersections to social justice. Follow him on Twitter/IG/Threads: @rob_camacho_sd

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

EPA urged to classify abortion drugs as pollutants

It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the drug.

(NewsNation) — Anti-abortion group Students for Life of America is urging the Environmental Protection Agency to add abortion drug mifepristone to its list of water contaminants. It follows 40 other anti-abortion groups and lawmakers previously calling for the EPA to assess the water pollution levels of the abortion drug. “The EPA has the regulatory authority and humane responsibility to determine the extent of abortion water pollution, caused by the reckless and negligent policies pushed by past administrations through the [Food and Drug Administration],” Kristan Hawkins, president of SFLA, said in a release. “Take the word ‘abortion’ out of it and ask, should chemically tainted blood and placenta tissue, along with human remains, be flushed by the tons into America’s waterways? And since the federal government set that up, shouldn’t we know what’s in our water?” she added. In 2025, lawmakers from seven states introduced bills, none of which passed, to either order environmental studies on the effects of mifepristone in water or to enact environmental regulations for the drug. EPA’s Office of Water leaders met with Politico in November, with its press secretary Brigit Hirsch telling the outlet it “takes the issue of pharmaceuticals in our water systems seriously and employs a rigorous, science-based approach to protect human health and the environment.” “As always, EPA encourages all stakeholders invested in clean and safe drinking water to review the proposals and submit comments,” Hirsch added. Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Trump’s EPA' in 2025: A Fossil Fuel-Friendly Approach to Deregulation

The Trump administration has reshaped the Environmental Protection Agency, reversing pollution limits and promoting fossil fuels

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration has transformed the Environmental Protection Agency in its first year, cutting federal limits on air and water pollution and promoting fossil fuels, a metamorphosis that clashes with the agency’s historic mission to protect human health and the environment.The administration says its actions will “unleash” the American economy, but environmentalists say the agency’s abrupt change in focus threatens to unravel years of progress on climate-friendly initiatives that could be hard or impossible to reverse.“It just constantly wants to pat the fossil fuel business on the back and turn back the clock to a pre-Richard Nixon era” when the agency didn’t exist, said historian Douglas Brinkley.Zeldin has argued the EPA can protect the environment and grow the economy at the same time. He announced “five pillars” to guide EPA’s work; four were economic goals, including energy dominance — Trump’s shorthand for more fossil fuels — and boosting the auto industry.Zeldin, a former New York congressman who had a record as a moderate Republican on some environmental issues, said his views on climate change have evolved. Many federal and state climate goals are unattainable in the near future — and come at huge cost, he said.“We should not be causing … extreme economic pain for an individual or a family” because of policies aimed at “saving the planet,” he told reporters at EPA headquarters in early December.But scientists and experts say the EPA's new direction comes at a cost to public health, and would lead to far more pollutants in the environment, including mercury, lead and especially tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs. They also note higher emissions of greenhouse gases will worsen atmospheric warming that is driving more frequent, costly and deadly extreme weather.Christine Todd Whitman, a Republican who led the EPA for several years under President George W. Bush, said watching Zeldin attack laws protecting air and water has been “just depressing.” “It’s tragic for our country. I worry about my grandchildren, of which I have seven. I worry about what their future is going to be if they don’t have clean air, if they don’t have clean water to drink,” she said.The EPA was launched under Nixon in 1970 with pollution disrupting American life, some cities suffocating in smog and some rivers turned into wastelands by industrial chemicals. Congress passed laws then that remain foundational for protecting water, air and endangered species.The agency's aggressiveness has always seesawed depending on who occupies the White House. Former President Joe Biden's administration boosted renewable energy and electric vehicles, tightened motor-vehicle emissions and proposed greenhouse gas limits on coal-fired power plants and oil and gas wells. Industry groups called rules overly burdensome and said the power plant rule would force many aging plants to shut down. In response, many businesses shifted resources to meet the more stringent rules that are now being undone.“While the Biden EPA repeatedly attempted to usurp the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law to impose its ‘Green New Scam,’ the Trump EPA is laser-focused on achieving results for the American people while operating within the limits of the laws passed by Congress,” EPA spokeswoman Brigit Hirsch said. Zeldin's list of targets is long Much of EPA’s new direction aligns with Project 2025, the conservative Heritage Foundation road map that argued the agency should gut staffing, cut regulations and end what it called a war on coal on other fossil fuels.“A lot of the regulations that were put on during the Biden administration were more harmful and restrictive than in any other period. So that’s why deregulating them looks like EPA is making major changes,” said Diana Furchtgott-Roth, director of Heritage's Center for Energy, Climate, and Environment.But Chris Frey, an EPA official under Biden, said the regulations Zeldin has targeted “offered benefits of avoided premature deaths, of avoided chronic illness … bad things that would not happen because of these rules.”Matthew Tejada, a former EPA official under both Trump and Biden who now works at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said of the revamped EPA: “I think it would be hard for them to make it any clearer to polluters in this country that they can go on about their business and not worry about EPA getting in their way.”Zeldin also has shrunk EPA staffing by about 20% to levels last seen in the mid-1980s. Justin Chen, president of the EPA’s largest union, called staff cuts “devastating.” He cited the dismantling of research and development offices at labs across the country and the firing of employees who signed a letter of dissent opposing EPA cuts. Relaxed enforcement and cutting staff Many of Zeldin's changes aren't in effect yet. It takes time to propose new rules, get public input and finalize rollbacks. It's much faster to cut grants and ease up on enforcement, and Trump's EPA is doing both. The number of new civil environmental actions is roughly one-fifth what it was in the first eight months of the Biden administration, according to the nonprofit Environmental Integrity Project. “You can effectively do a lot of deregulation if you just don’t do enforcement,” said Leif Fredrickson, visiting assistant professor of history at the University of Montana.Hirsch said the number of legal filings isn't the best way to judge enforcement because they require work outside of the EPA and can bog staff down with burdensome legal agreements. She said the EPA is “focused on efficiently resolving violations and achieving compliance as quickly as possible” and not making demands beyond what the law requires.EPA's cuts have been especially hard on climate change programs and environmental justice, the effort to address chronic pollution that typically is worse in minority and poor communities. Both were Biden priorities. Zeldin dismissed staff and canceled billions in grants for projects that fell under the “diversity, equity and inclusion” umbrella, a Trump administration target.He also spiked a $20 billion “green bank” set up under Biden’s landmark climate law to fund qualifying clean energy projects. Zeldin argued the fund was a scheme to funnel money to Democrat-aligned organizations with little oversight — allegations a federal judge rejected. Pat Parenteau, an environmental law expert and former director of the Environmental Law School at Vermont Law & Graduate School, said the EPA's shift under Trump left him with little optimism for what he called “the two most awful crises in the 21st century” — biodiversity loss and climate disruption.“I don’t see any hope for either one,” he said. “I really don’t. And I’ll be long gone, but I think the world is in just for absolute catastrophe.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

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

CONTACT US

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

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