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 Latinos fighting this CA toxic waste dump

News Feed
Monday, October 28, 2024

This story is part of 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. Previously, we covered fights for accountability and reparative work led by the port communities around Alabama’s Africatown and Barrio Logan near San Diego.Two decades ago, a group of children on a class field trip from Kettleman City — a small Latino community nestled between rolling golden hills and vast green agricultural fields in California’s plentiful Central Valley — stood in awe inside the grounds of a local recycling plant.As the kids clawed through the dirt, a man told them curious tales about digging for fossils and quartz and responsibly collecting garbage to save the planet.“It was also exciting for us,” says Brian Cadena, now 23, who recalled answering quiz questions to win toys — tiny treasures for the children of immigrant farmers in one of the nation’s poorest regions. “Our parents didn’t have extra money for stuff like that, so I really liked getting something.”Cadena and his classmates came prepared, shouting out the names of recyclable materials: plastic, cardboard, paper, and tin. The man tossed out key chains, bracelets, stress balls, yo-yos, and pens, all bearing the logo of Waste Management, the nation’s largest landfill operator.Just 3.8 miles from Cadena’s home, Waste Management owns the 1,600-acre Kettleman Hills Facility, a hazardous waste site permitted to hold up to 15 million tons of toxic materials. The landfill is already filled with millions of tons of harmful substances, including mercury, lead, asbestos, and banned PCBs — chemicals known to cause birth defects, developmental delays, and liver damage. Waste Management and its Kettleman Hills Facility did not respond to requests for comment.“It was a whole lot of lies and propaganda,” says Cadena, now a community organizer for the San Francisco-based environmental justice group Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice. “I had no idea what was in that dirt.”The discovery of Waste Management’s deception soon after it opened in 1979 began a five-decade battle that mirrors environmental resistance nationwide in communities with similar characteristics: non-white, non-English-speaking, high unemployment, high poverty, and often in small and unincorporated areas that leave them without government representatives to champion their cause.“I’ve worked on literally hundreds and hundreds of projects,” Greenaction co-founder Bradley Angel says of his nationwide environmental justice work. “Around 90% of them are incinerators and landfills proposed in poor, rural communities of color with permission from the state.”The latest controversies go back to June 13, 2013, when the landfill’s most recent hazardous waste permit expired. Owing to a quirk in California law, the facility has carried on as normal since.That day is coming soon. The prospect has opened old wounds between environmental advocacy groups, the landfill, state agencies, and the residents of Kettleman City, all of whom played a part in the long and drawn-out permit renewal process.“It’s how the landfill and their friends in the California Department of Toxic Substance Control keep hazardous waste coming in while they work out a way to overcome new state laws and our civil rights agreement,” says Angel, referring to a 2016 landmark civil rights agreement that aimed to reduce pollution, improve health and safety, invest in community resources, enhance regulatory compliance, and increase resident involvement in environmental decision-making.“The whole thing — all the hiding, deception, and lies — never ends.”Kettleman City is unincorporated, meaning it is governed by the county rather than a municipal government that can make decisions based solely on residents’ needs.“The county supervisors here see Kettleman as a forgotten landscape of just simple farmers and farm laborers who don’t deserve the same amenities that the county seat has,” says Miguel Alatorre, a senior community organizer at Greenaction and the third generation of environmentalists in his family to advocate against the landfill. “We have 200 registered voters. Why would anyone pay attention to places like us anywhere in the country?”DTSC published Waste Management’s draft permit renewal in April; a public comment period ended on July 19 before an administrative review. Final approval is expected in March 2025.Despite DTSC claiming that the draft permit offers dozens of new environmental protections, local environmental advocacy groups argue it ignores SB673, a 2015 California environmental justice law promising greater protections to vulnerable communities when considering permit applications from hazardous waste landfills.Under that law, DTSC must weigh cumulative sources of pollution and community vulnerabilities, including poverty, unemployment, linguistic isolation, access to health care, and other health factors such as asthma, cardiovascular illness, and poor birth outcomes.“It’s in black and white that the state must consider every form of pollution being endured by residents,” Angel says. “It simply hasn’t, and you have to ask why not.”The DTSC did not respond to questions about why it allegedly failed to follow state law.Kettleman City ranks in the 92nd percentile for environmental vulnerability, according to California’s Environmental Protection Agency mapping tool, highlighting its disproportionate pollution burden. U.S. Census data shows nearly 30% of its residents live in poverty, more than double the state average of 12%.At the same time, DTSC says that unemployment, which is difficult to gauge in small immigrant farming towns, is higher than 82% of the state. Federal records show that no one in Kettleman City holds a bachelor’s degree, and its population has dropped from 1,245 in 2021 to 660.These challenges mirror those found throughout the Central Valley, often referred to as “New Appalachia” for its deep poverty, reminiscent of the economically distressed mountain region in eastern America. The nearby Latino community of Buttonwillow faces similar struggles as Kettleman City, with a hazardous landfill that’s operated unpermitted for over 18 years.The agency said in April that a permit denial would not likely reduce or eliminate the community’s vulnerabilities, claiming that the landfill’s permitted activities do not endanger human health.The state’s mapping tool shows that threats to residents include high levels of pesticide pollution, poor drinking water, home-based lead, asthma, cardiovascular disease, poverty, unemployment, lack of formal education, and weak protections for groundwater.California’s reputation for environmental justice was created partly by the eco-friendly administration of Gov. Jerry Brown, who in 2015 passed SB673 and required the Department of Toxic Substances Control to fully implement the law by 2018. While DTSC has made some progress, such as reviewing past landfill violations and requiring hazardous waste facilities to self-assess risks, it has yet to establish rules to monitor cumulative pollution effects.Advocates argue this is not the only instance of non-compliance; in 2016, DTSC signed a civil rights agreement to settle a U.S. EPA lawsuit challenging the expansion of Kettleman City’s hazardous waste landfill by 50%.Greenaction and local community group El Pueblo Para el Aire y Agua Limpia filed an administrative civil rights complaint against DTSC. The U.S. EPA accepted the complaint, finding it met many of the agency’s nondiscrimination regulations. The EPA did not rule on the complaint before the parties signed a civil rights agreement in August 2016 after seven months of mediationThe agreement settled the complaint, requiring DTSC to comply with civil rights in its regulatory processes and implement the cumulative pollution element of SB673 no later than Jan. 1, 2018.“This is what they’re dragging their feet on, because they know that if we have those criteria in place, they’re not going to be able to permit the state’s hazardous waste landfills,” said Angel. “It would all fail.”DTSC is informally using CalEnviroScreen, an online mapping tool that combines demographic and pollution data, which can calculate a vulnerability score for any location using cumulative sources of pollution.A 2021 DTSC draft framework of how the law might work notes that a community with scores above the 60th percentile would be considered vulnerable. But DSTC has not yet established an internal policy of what would happen during the permitting process should a community exceed a certain level of vulnerability, according to the agency’s SB673 implementation plan.Kettleman City’s location at the junction of Highway 41 and Interstate 5 — the country’s busiest interstate — brings high pollution levels. Contaminated water is still a problem for the community despite some improvements in recent years. At the same time, hundreds of thousands of acres of agricultural fields have created extreme levels of pesticide pollution. There’s even a human waste compost facility and multiple shipping facilities, like FedEx and UPS.Advocates for Kettleman City have fought for decades to counter environmental threats, using lawsuits and protests to raise awareness and engage state and federal politicians. In 2007-08, 20 children in the area were born with congenital disabilities, including five with cleft lip or palate. Three children died. A state investigation found no clear cause, with a health official calling it a “statistical anomaly.” In 2012, the U.S. EPA dropped a civil rights case related to hazardous waste sites, including the Kettleman Hills Facility, after 17 years.Under Trump, the federal EPA approved Waste Management’s 50% landfill expansion in 2019, frustrating residents like Angel, who see a pattern of neglect across generations.“They are gaslighting us over and over throughout decades,” said Cadena, referring to the contrasting outcomes between Kettleman City residents and KHF. “It’s generational.”There have also been vital victories for residents. Since 2017, community advocates have secured improved air and water monitoring supported by state grants. In 2018, the town’s campaign against diesel emissions saw the state help with educational efforts and “No Diesel Idling.” The biggest victory coming out of the civil rights agreement was convincing the state to replace the town’s aging and unreliable water treatment system and water source.While these concessions are often a good way to compromise, achieving justice through civil rights laws and how they are applied across states and federal agencies can be complex.In preparation for publishing Waste Management’s draft permit, DTSC hired the prominent San Francisco-based environmental protection law firm Altshuler Berzon LLP (where CalEPA’s Deputy Secretary for Law Enforcement and General Counsel Linda Lye, was a partner from 2002 to 2010). The firm’s civil rights report analyzed whether the process and subsequent draft permit decision were consistent with EPA and California civil rights laws.“Altshuler found no direct evidence of discriminatory intent or animus against Latinos or limited English proficiency Spanish-speakers,” noted the October 2023 DTSC report summary. Altshuler also concluded that the impacts of renewing the Kettleman Hills Facility permit would unlikely be adverse enough to be unlawful,” per DTSC. The law firm did not respond to requests for comment.“Those lawyers don’t live here; they don’t see the pollution and the things people have to deal with,” said Angel. “They relied on interviews with DTSC employees and its scientific analyses, which it admitted to not independently verifying.”Angel also said Altshuler did not talk to Kettleman City residents, El Pueblo or Greenaction before completing its report. Altshuler did not respond to questions about its reporting process.The state’s mapping tool shows that threats to residents include high levels of pesticide pollution, poor drinking water, home-based lead, asthma, cardiovascular disease, poverty, unemployment, lack of formal education, and weak protections for groundwater.While Altshuler’s analysis focuses specifically on Kettleman City, a broader inspection of hazardous landfill data in California shows that around 55% of the state’s permitted hazardous waste facilities are in or near disadvantaged communities, according to a 2023 DTSC report. That bears out in independent studies.Decades of research, including the 2021 report Toxic Waste and Race in the Twenty-First Century, has drawn a direct connection between hazardous waste facilities and communities of color. Published in the Journal of Society and Environment, the study notes that over half of the residents living within labor1.86 miles of toxic waste sites in the U.S. are people of color. Supporting this, the Center for Effective Government found that these individuals are nearly twice as likely as white residents to live near industrial facilities’ fenceline zones, which bring increased air pollution, safety hazards, and health risks.Kettleman City’s landfill follows a pattern alarmingly similar to the controversial 1980s Cerrell Report, a government-funded study that advised siting hazardous waste facilities in vulnerable communities to prevent resistance. As Angel observes, this strategy persists today, targeting low-income communities of color and trying to build goodwill in the community.Some residents believe the company even employs locals to push a favorable image of the landfill on social media, suggesting that toxic waste is safe and the landfill is a good neighbor.“That’s the level of infiltration and propaganda they are capable of,” added Alatorre, who has spent most of his life trying to defy Waste Management and the government forces that enable it.While at high school, he and other kids dumped trash in front of U.S. EPA officials at an event. “This is what it’s like to be dumped on,” Alatorre told them then. “The next day during our weekly mile run, my gym teacher taunted me by repeatedly saying ‘si se puede’ as I struggled to keep up.”The phrase — meaning “yes, it can be done”— is the motto of the United Farmers Union. It has also been adopted by other labor unions and civil rights groups and used as a rallying cry at immigration protests.“This is about much more than complicated legal reports, numbers and lawsuits,” Alatorre says. “If we even have one, we can’t let this be our future.”

They've been living next to 15 million tons of toxic waste in California's ‘New Appalachia’ for decades. With little government support, the residents are fighting an uphill battle to stop a permit renewal.

This story is part of 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. Previously, we covered fights for accountability and reparative work led by the port communities around Alabama’s Africatown and Barrio Logan near San Diego.

Two decades ago, a group of children on a class field trip from Kettleman City — a small Latino community nestled between rolling golden hills and vast green agricultural fields in California’s plentiful Central Valley — stood in awe inside the grounds of a local recycling plant.

As the kids clawed through the dirt, a man told them curious tales about digging for fossils and quartz and responsibly collecting garbage to save the planet.

“It was also exciting for us,” says Brian Cadena, now 23, who recalled answering quiz questions to win toys — tiny treasures for the children of immigrant farmers in one of the nation’s poorest regions. “Our parents didn’t have extra money for stuff like that, so I really liked getting something.”

Cadena and his classmates came prepared, shouting out the names of recyclable materials: plastic, cardboard, paper, and tin. The man tossed out key chains, bracelets, stress balls, yo-yos, and pens, all bearing the logo of Waste Management, the nation’s largest landfill operator.

Just 3.8 miles from Cadena’s home, Waste Management owns the 1,600-acre Kettleman Hills Facility, a hazardous waste site permitted to hold up to 15 million tons of toxic materials. The landfill is already filled with millions of tons of harmful substances, including mercury, lead, asbestos, and banned PCBs — chemicals known to cause birth defects, developmental delays, and liver damage. Waste Management and its Kettleman Hills Facility did not respond to requests for comment.

“It was a whole lot of lies and propaganda,” says Cadena, now a community organizer for the San Francisco-based environmental justice group Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice. “I had no idea what was in that dirt.”

The discovery of Waste Management’s deception soon after it opened in 1979 began a five-decade battle that mirrors environmental resistance nationwide in communities with similar characteristics: non-white, non-English-speaking, high unemployment, high poverty, and often in small and unincorporated areas that leave them without government representatives to champion their cause.

“I’ve worked on literally hundreds and hundreds of projects,” Greenaction co-founder Bradley Angel says of his nationwide environmental justice work. “Around 90% of them are incinerators and landfills proposed in poor, rural communities of color with permission from the state.”

The latest controversies go back to June 13, 2013, when the landfill’s most recent hazardous waste permit expired. Owing to a quirk in California law, the facility has carried on as normal since.

That day is coming soon. The prospect has opened old wounds between environmental advocacy groups, the landfill, state agencies, and the residents of Kettleman City, all of whom played a part in the long and drawn-out permit renewal process.

“It’s how the landfill and their friends in the California Department of Toxic Substance Control keep hazardous waste coming in while they work out a way to overcome new state laws and our civil rights agreement,” says Angel, referring to a 2016 landmark civil rights agreement that aimed to reduce pollution, improve health and safety, invest in community resources, enhance regulatory compliance, and increase resident involvement in environmental decision-making.

“The whole thing — all the hiding, deception, and lies — never ends.”

Kettleman City is unincorporated, meaning it is governed by the county rather than a municipal government that can make decisions based solely on residents’ needs.

“The county supervisors here see Kettleman as a forgotten landscape of just simple farmers and farm laborers who don’t deserve the same amenities that the county seat has,” says Miguel Alatorre, a senior community organizer at Greenaction and the third generation of environmentalists in his family to advocate against the landfill. “We have 200 registered voters. Why would anyone pay attention to places like us anywhere in the country?”

DTSC published Waste Management’s draft permit renewal in April; a public comment period ended on July 19 before an administrative review. Final approval is expected in March 2025.

Despite DTSC claiming that the draft permit offers dozens of new environmental protections, local environmental advocacy groups argue it ignores SB673, a 2015 California environmental justice law promising greater protections to vulnerable communities when considering permit applications from hazardous waste landfills.

Under that law, DTSC must weigh cumulative sources of pollution and community vulnerabilities, including poverty, unemployment, linguistic isolation, access to health care, and other health factors such as asthma, cardiovascular illness, and poor birth outcomes.

“It’s in black and white that the state must consider every form of pollution being endured by residents,” Angel says. “It simply hasn’t, and you have to ask why not.”

The DTSC did not respond to questions about why it allegedly failed to follow state law.

Kettleman City ranks in the 92nd percentile for environmental vulnerability, according to California’s Environmental Protection Agency mapping tool, highlighting its disproportionate pollution burden. U.S. Census data shows nearly 30% of its residents live in poverty, more than double the state average of 12%.

At the same time, DTSC says that unemployment, which is difficult to gauge in small immigrant farming towns, is higher than 82% of the state. Federal records show that no one in Kettleman City holds a bachelor’s degree, and its population has dropped from 1,245 in 2021 to 660.

These challenges mirror those found throughout the Central Valley, often referred to as “New Appalachia” for its deep poverty, reminiscent of the economically distressed mountain region in eastern America. The nearby Latino community of Buttonwillow faces similar struggles as Kettleman City, with a hazardous landfill that’s operated unpermitted for over 18 years.

The agency said in April that a permit denial would not likely reduce or eliminate the community’s vulnerabilities, claiming that the landfill’s permitted activities do not endanger human health.

The state’s mapping tool shows that threats to residents include high levels of pesticide pollution, poor drinking water, home-based lead, asthma, cardiovascular disease, poverty, unemployment, lack of formal education, and weak protections for groundwater.

California’s reputation for environmental justice was created partly by the eco-friendly administration of Gov. Jerry Brown, who in 2015 passed SB673 and required the Department of Toxic Substances Control to fully implement the law by 2018. While DTSC has made some progress, such as reviewing past landfill violations and requiring hazardous waste facilities to self-assess risks, it has yet to establish rules to monitor cumulative pollution effects.

Advocates argue this is not the only instance of non-compliance; in 2016, DTSC signed a civil rights agreement to settle a U.S. EPA lawsuit challenging the expansion of Kettleman City’s hazardous waste landfill by 50%.

Greenaction and local community group El Pueblo Para el Aire y Agua Limpia filed an administrative civil rights complaint against DTSC. The U.S. EPA accepted the complaint, finding it met many of the agency’s nondiscrimination regulations. The EPA did not rule on the complaint before the parties signed a civil rights agreement in August 2016 after seven months of mediation

The agreement settled the complaint, requiring DTSC to comply with civil rights in its regulatory processes and implement the cumulative pollution element of SB673 no later than Jan. 1, 2018.

“This is what they’re dragging their feet on, because they know that if we have those criteria in place, they’re not going to be able to permit the state’s hazardous waste landfills,” said Angel. “It would all fail.”

DTSC is informally using CalEnviroScreen, an online mapping tool that combines demographic and pollution data, which can calculate a vulnerability score for any location using cumulative sources of pollution.

A 2021 DTSC draft framework of how the law might work notes that a community with scores above the 60th percentile would be considered vulnerable.

But DSTC has not yet established an internal policy of what would happen during the permitting process should a community exceed a certain level of vulnerability, according to the agency’s SB673 implementation plan.

Kettleman City’s location at the junction of Highway 41 and Interstate 5 — the country’s busiest interstate — brings high pollution levels. Contaminated water is still a problem for the community despite some improvements in recent years. At the same time, hundreds of thousands of acres of agricultural fields have created extreme levels of pesticide pollution. There’s even a human waste compost facility and multiple shipping facilities, like FedEx and UPS.

Advocates for Kettleman City have fought for decades to counter environmental threats, using lawsuits and protests to raise awareness and engage state and federal politicians. In 2007-08, 20 children in the area were born with congenital disabilities, including five with cleft lip or palate. Three children died.

A state investigation found no clear cause, with a health official calling it a “statistical anomaly.” In 2012, the U.S. EPA dropped a civil rights case related to hazardous waste sites, including the Kettleman Hills Facility, after 17 years.

Under Trump, the federal EPA approved Waste Management’s 50% landfill expansion in 2019, frustrating residents like Angel, who see a pattern of neglect across generations.

“They are gaslighting us over and over throughout decades,” said Cadena, referring to the contrasting outcomes between Kettleman City residents and KHF. “It’s generational.”

There have also been vital victories for residents. Since 2017, community advocates have secured improved air and water monitoring supported by state grants. In 2018, the town’s campaign against diesel emissions saw the state help with educational efforts and “No Diesel Idling.” The biggest victory coming out of the civil rights agreement was convincing the state to replace the town’s aging and unreliable water treatment system and water source.

While these concessions are often a good way to compromise, achieving justice through civil rights laws and how they are applied across states and federal agencies can be complex.

In preparation for publishing Waste Management’s draft permit, DTSC hired the prominent San Francisco-based environmental protection law firm Altshuler Berzon LLP (where CalEPA’s Deputy Secretary for Law Enforcement and General Counsel Linda Lye, was a partner from 2002 to 2010). The firm’s civil rights report analyzed whether the process and subsequent draft permit decision were consistent with EPA and California civil rights laws.

“Altshuler found no direct evidence of discriminatory intent or animus against Latinos or limited English proficiency Spanish-speakers,” noted the October 2023 DTSC report summary. Altshuler also concluded that the impacts of renewing the Kettleman Hills Facility permit would unlikely be adverse enough to be unlawful,” per DTSC. The law firm did not respond to requests for comment.

“Those lawyers don’t live here; they don’t see the pollution and the things people have to deal with,” said Angel. “They relied on interviews with DTSC employees and its scientific analyses, which it admitted to not independently verifying.”

Angel also said Altshuler did not talk to Kettleman City residents, El Pueblo or Greenaction before completing its report. Altshuler did not respond to questions about its reporting process.

The state’s mapping tool shows that threats to residents include high levels of pesticide pollution, poor drinking water, home-based lead, asthma, cardiovascular disease, poverty, unemployment, lack of formal education, and weak protections for groundwater.

While Altshuler’s analysis focuses specifically on Kettleman City, a broader inspection of hazardous landfill data in California shows that around 55% of the state’s permitted hazardous waste facilities are in or near disadvantaged communities, according to a 2023 DTSC report. That bears out in independent studies.

Decades of research, including the 2021 report Toxic Waste and Race in the Twenty-First Century, has drawn a direct connection between hazardous waste facilities and communities of color. Published in the Journal of Society and Environment, the study notes that over half of the residents living within labor1.86 miles of toxic waste sites in the U.S. are people of color. Supporting this, the Center for Effective Government found that these individuals are nearly twice as likely as white residents to live near industrial facilities’ fenceline zones, which bring increased air pollution, safety hazards, and health risks.

Kettleman City’s landfill follows a pattern alarmingly similar to the controversial 1980s Cerrell Report, a government-funded study that advised siting hazardous waste facilities in vulnerable communities to prevent resistance. As Angel observes, this strategy persists today, targeting low-income communities of color and trying to build goodwill in the community.

Some residents believe the company even employs locals to push a favorable image of the landfill on social media, suggesting that toxic waste is safe and the landfill is a good neighbor.

“That’s the level of infiltration and propaganda they are capable of,” added Alatorre, who has spent most of his life trying to defy Waste Management and the government forces that enable it.

While at high school, he and other kids dumped trash in front of U.S. EPA officials at an event. “This is what it’s like to be dumped on,” Alatorre told them then. “The next day during our weekly mile run, my gym teacher taunted me by repeatedly saying ‘si se puede’ as I struggled to keep up.”

The phrase — meaning “yes, it can be done”— is the motto of the United Farmers Union. It has also been adopted by other labor unions and civil rights groups and used as a rallying cry at immigration protests.

“This is about much more than complicated legal reports, numbers and lawsuits,” Alatorre says. “If we even have one, we can’t let this be our future.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Under Trump, E.P.A. Explored if Abortion Pills Could Be Detected in Wastewater

Scientists at the Environmental Protection Agency found that they could develop methods to identify traces of the medication if necessary — a practice long sought by the anti-abortion movement.

Senior officials at the Environmental Protection Agency directed a team of scientists over the summer to assess whether the government could develop methods for detecting traces of abortion pills in wastewater — a practice sought by some anti-abortion activists seeking to restrict the medication now used in over 50 percent of abortions.The highly unusual request appears to have originated from a letter sent from 25 Republican members of Congress to Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, asking the agency to investigate how the abortion drug mifepristone might be contaminating the water supply.“Are there existing E.P.A.-approved methods for detecting mifepristone and its active metabolites in water supplies?” the lawmakers asked at the end of the public letter, sent on June 18, an effort led by Senator James Lankford and Representative Josh Brecheen, both of Oklahoma. “If not, what resources are needed to develop these testing methods?”Scientists who specialize in chemical detection told the senior officials that there are currently no E.P.A.-approved methods for identifying mifepristone in wastewater — but that new methods could be developed, according to two people familiar with the events, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive information.Abortion pills have emerged as a major focus for the anti-abortion movement since the fall of Roe v. Wade, as growing numbers of women in states with abortion bans have turned to websites and underground networks that send the pills through the mail, allowing them to circumvent the laws.The widespread availability of abortion pills — which women usually take at home in the first 10 weeks of pregnancy — has inspired many anti-abortion activists to push for new approaches to curtail their use. That has included a campaign by one prominent group to raise awareness about environmental harms they say are caused when the medication and fetal remains enter the sewage system.Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

Britain missing out on potential £2bn recycling industry by exporting plastic waste

Exclusive: Government failure to close loophole allows 600,000 tonnes to be shipped abroad each yearA plastic recycling industry potentially worth £2bn and 5,000 jobs is dying in the UK because of government failure to close a loophole that allows 600,000 tonnes of plastic waste to be exported each year.The Guardian can reveal that in the past two years 21 plastic recycling and processing factories across the UK have shut down due to the scale of exports, the cheap price of virgin plastic and an influx of cheap plastic from Asia, according to data gathered by industry insiders. Continue reading...

A plastic recycling industry potentially worth £2bn and 5,000 jobs is dying in the UK because of government failure to close a loophole which allows 600,000 tonnes of plastic waste to be exported each year.The Guardian can reveal that in the past two years 21 plastic recycling and processing factories across the UK have shut down due to the scale of our exports, the cheap price of virgin plastic and an influx of cheap plastic from Asia, according to data gathered by industry insiders.Britain’s exports of plastic waste to developing countries increased by 84% in the first half of this year, in what critics say is unethical and irresponsible waste imperialism.In particular, UK exports soared to Indonesia – a country struggling with an environmental crisis from plastic pollution – amounting to more than 24,000 tonnes. The total plastic waste exports in the first half of the year came to 317,747 tonnes.Used packaging is sorted at a Lampton recycling centre in London. Across the country 21 such factories have closed in the past two years. Photograph: Peter Dazeley/Getty ImagesExporting hundreds of thousands of tonnes of plastic waste to countries without the capability to process it properly increases the chance of serious environmental pollution as well as putting the lives of waste workers at risk.James Mcleary, managing director of Biffa polymers, said the industry was facing challenges and units were closing across the country.Plastic recycling facilities that have closed in the past two years include Biffa’s Sunderland factory, which had capacity to process 39,000 tonnes each year of high-density polyethylene (HDPE) and polypropylene (PP) plastic – used in packaging – and three Viridor facilities. Vanden Recycling is also closing its plastics processing site in Whittlesey, Peterborough.Keeping the waste material collected from households within the UK to be cleaned, sorted, processed and turned into recycled products, is better environmentally, captures the carbon within the plastic, and creates jobs and growth, experts say.But policymakers have not made the key changes needed to stop incentivising plastic waste exports.I don’t want to wonder if there is a boy whose life has been wasted somewhere because of me throwing something in a binMcleary said the continued export of waste plastic should be an affront to our civilised society. He cited the deaths of 200 young people in Turkey that were exposed earlier this year by ISIG Meclisi, which carried out the first ever analysis of workplace deaths in the country’s recycling industry. The UK was the largest exporter of plastic waste to Turkey in 2023.The investigation, called Boy Wasted, revealed that two people are crushed, ripped, or burned to death in the sector every month, and that this has been the case non-stop for the past 10 years.Mcleary said there was a need for a level playing field for the UK plastic recycling industry. “I don’t like closing plants, it’s jobs and it’s people lives,” he said.“Fundamentally I believe you need to take responsibility for our waste ourselves. It is just common sense as a human being. I don’t want my rubbish to end up in Malaysia. I don’t want to wonder if there is a boy whose life has been wasted somewhere because of me throwing something in a bin outside my house.A waste worker at a landfill site near Istanbul. The UK is the biggest exporter of plastic waste to Turkey. Photograph: Sedat Suna/EPA“There are lines as a civilised society we should not cross – it is not acceptable.”Mcleary said the loophole that made it cheaper for companies to export plastic rather than keep it in the UK needed to be closed. “We are asking for a level playing field. We don’t want the market tilted towards us.”“This has been pointed out over a number of years by ourselves and others. Yet today we are in a perfect storm and factories are closing.”skip past newsletter promotionOur morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what’s happening and why it mattersPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionHe welcomed the UK’s plastic packaging tax, which is imposed on producers who fail to include at least 30% of recycled plastic in their products, as a way of driving demand to use our own stock of plastic waste in the UK. But he wants it to be more ambitious by raising the requirement for products to have a minimum recycled content to 50% by 2030 to encourage manufacturers incorporate more of it into their products and reduce the use of virgin plastic.Building a UK plastic recycling industry to keep the plastic waste thrown out by householders within the country had the potential to become a £2bn industry, hiring 2,000 people directly and 3,000 indirectly and would also restore public confidence in recycling, Mcleary said.“People in the UK should care where their plastic goes,” he added. “If they think they are recycling they should know it is being recycled, and know that it is being recycled in a responsible fashion.”Viridor has closed three plastic recycling factories in the past three years; in Avonmouth, Skelmersdale and this year its Rochester sorting plant.A UK recycling plant sorts plastic waste into bales, ready to be processed. Photograph: Teamjackson/Getty ImagesAn industry source said it was important that policymakers started seeing waste as critical infrastructure.“If we were to stop exporting plastic waste, and we were to meet our increased recycling target of a 65% recycling rate for municipal waste by 2035, we would need to build 400 new factories across the UK – 20 of them would be sorting facilities and 20 would be processing facilities turning the material back into products,” the source said.“This is a key growth area and has a carbon benefit because it stops the plastic being incinerated and used in energy for waste.“But the risk is now that we are exporting material and the investment and the jobs to other countries.”The government said it was committed to cleaning up the nation and cracking down on plastic waste.“For too long plastic waste has littered our streets, polluted Britain’s waterways, and threatened our wildlife,” a spokesperson said. “Our packaging reforms will collectively underpin £10bn worth of investment in new sorting and processing facilities, while delivering the deposit return scheme will ensure more plastic is recycled and not chucked away as litter or left to rot in landfill.”

UK plastic waste exports to developing countries rose 84% in a year, data shows

Campaigners say increase in exports mostly to Malaysia and Indonesia is ‘unethical and irresponsible waste imperialism’Britain’s exports of plastic waste to developing countries have soared by 84% in the first half of this year compared with last year, according to an analysis of trade data carried out for the Guardian.Campaigners described the rise in exports, mostly to Malaysia and Indonesia, as “unethical and irresponsible waste imperialism”. Continue reading...

Britain’s exports of plastic waste to developing countries have soared by 84% in the first half of this year compared with last year, according to an analysis of trade data carried out for the Guardian.Campaigners described the rise in exports, mostly to Malaysia and Indonesia, as “unethical and irresponsible waste imperialism”.In 2023, the EU agreed to ban exports of waste to poorer nations outside a group of mainly rich countries within the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The ban comes into force in November 2026 for two and a half years and can be extended. The UK does not have a similar ban in place.Data analysed by the The Last Beach Cleanup, a US group campaigning to halt plastic pollution, showed that the increase in UK exports in the first half of 2025 was mainly to Indonesia (24,006 tonnes in 2025, up from 525 tonnes in 2024) and Malaysia (28,667 tonnes, up from 18,872 tonnes in 2024).Total plastic waste exports remained relatively high in the first half of 2024 and 2025, at 319,407 and 317,647 tonnes respectively. The percentage of UK plastic waste going directly to non-OECD countries was 20% of total plastic waste exports in 2025, up from 11% in 2024.The Last Beach Cleanup analysed data from the UN Comtrade database to reach its findings. Jan Dell, who works for the group, accused UK ministers of “hypocrisy” by failing to ban exports to poorer nations.“The UK is hypocritically saying, ‘we’re part of the high ambition coalition’, at the plastics talks. But behind the scenes, it is refusing to set a date to stop exporting to poorer countries,” she said. “We see it is increasing exports of its own plastic waste to places like Malaysia and Indonesia.”She added: “It is unethical and irresponsible waste imperialism.”After the collapse of the UN plastic treaty talks in August, Emma Hardy, under-secretary of state at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), said she was “hugely disappointed” an agreement had not been reached but was proud of the UK’s work towards an ambitious treaty.Britain was part of a “high ambition” coalition of nations calling for the treaty to include binding obligations on reducing plastic production and consumption, she said.Campaigners are calling for the UK, one of the top three countries exporting plastic waste, at about 600,000 tonnes a year, to follow the EU and ban exports to non-OECD countries. They also want to close a loophole that makes it cheaper to export plastic waste rather than recycle it in the UK.Plastic products, such as these found in Klang, Selangor in June, are often fly-tipped from factories processing imported plastic waste in Malaysia. Photograph: Basel Action NetworkThe Conservative government said in 2023 that it intended to ban plastic waste exports to non-OECD countries – but it never happened.Wong Pui Yi, a Malaysia-based consultant for Basel Action Network, a group championing global environmental health and justice, said there were “good guys and bad guys” in the waste trade.“A lot of waste traders are looking to reduce costs,” she said. “If waste falls into the hands of the bad actors, one of the easiest ways to reduce costs is to avoid environmental controls. In developing countries, it is easier to avoid environmental controls due to weaker laws and lower enforcement capacity.”In July, the UK’s exports of plastic waste to Malaysia dropped to 2.8% (1,500 tonnes), most likely due to the country’s new import restrictions. But as one country bans or tightens imports, as happened with China in 2018, the trade shifts elsewhere.The rise in UK plastic exports to Asia is likely to be an underestimate, experts say, because a lot goes to the Netherlands and other European countries where it can be shipped on. The UK also exports plastic to Turkey.James McLeary, the managing director of Biffa Polymers, a UK recycling firm, said the UK should take responsibility for its plastic waste.“It is just common sense as a human being” he said. “I don’t want my rubbish to end up in Malaysia. I don’t want to wonder if there is a boy whose life is wasted somewhere because of me throwing something in a bin outside my house.”Earlier this month, an investigation called Boy Wasted revealed that, for the last decade, two people were crushed, ripped, or burned to death in the recycling sector in Turkey every month.Adnan Khan, a Canadian journalist whose work on refugee labour in Turkey sparked the investigation, said that while Turkey had a licence system for recycling plastic waste, “my research shows that it is pretty easy to get a licence and the oversight is low. It’s a broken system.”All EU plastic waste exports should be banned to anywhere outside the EU, he said. “I would go further and say every country should take care of its own trash.”Defra did not respond to a request for comment.

A Bay Area startup sold a plastic recycling dream. Neighbors call it just another incinerator

The Sonoma County company Resynergi says it will depart the state, just as Gov. Newsom sends CalRecycle back to the drawing board on potentially nation-leading rules governing plastic waste and plastic products.

In summary The Sonoma County company Resynergi says it will depart the state, just as Gov. Newsom sends CalRecycle back to the drawing board on potentially nation-leading rules governing plastic waste and plastic products. The plan sounded like a magic bullet from the future to solve one of the world’s most vexing environmental waste problems.  In Rohnert Park, just north of San Francisco, a startup company called Resynergi planned to use a form of “advanced recycling” to reuse plastic. Its process would chemically transform old plastic, blasting bits of it with microwaves until they turned into an oil that could then be used to make new plastic.  But the process – known as pyrolysis – was a hard sell to Sonoma County neighbors, who protested so much that the company withdrew its application and now plans to move out of state.  The fight that boiled over in Rohnert Park in recent months is a window into the tensions ahead for California as the state overhauls nation-leading regulations governing plastic pollution and packaging. (CalRecycle, formally known as the Department of Resources Recovery and Recycling, will hold a public hearing about those rules Oct. 7.)  While California is establishing some of the most forward-thinking plastic responsibility and recycling rules in the country, a dirty secret is that most plastic recycling methods are ineffective at best and illusory at worst.  Millions of tons of plastic go to the state’s landfills each year, and millions more are shipped to Southeast Asia, where plastic is rarely recycled. Instead it is illegally dumped, and often burned. Last year, Attorney General Rob Bonta brought suit against ExxonMobil for “perpetuating the myth … that you can recycle plastics, including single use plastics, and that it’s sustainable and good for the environment … It’s not true. It’s a lie.” ExxonMobil has since countersued Bonta for defamation. California’s regulators, meanwhile, are working to implement a 2022 state law that moves the state toward a circular economy for plastic – by making companies that produce packaging and single-use plastic items responsible for what happens to them after people throw them away. Those companies, along with environmental groups, have been weighing in as CalRecycle has been writing regulations, now years in the making.   Recent comments by Gov. Gavin Newsom suggest the state is aiming to strike a balance, finding a way to encourage recycling companies while hitting the state’s goals – all while avoiding more air pollution or other environmental impacts.  As for Resynergi, local and environmental advocates say that the way local, county, and regional regulators handled the company points up the challenges the state will face as it regulates plastic and defines whether and how it can be recycled.  “It does make me nervous, since it took seven years to get any enforcement on a facility that’s a two hour drive from the Capitol,” said Nick Lapis, advocacy director for Californians Against Waste.  A credible solution to plastic waste? Resynergi’s departure came as Sonoma County officials began to ask more serious questions about its operations, almost a decade after the company first arrived.  In 2017, company founder Brian Bauer chose Rohnert Park, a small, middle-class community surrounded by farmland, to develop and test his process. He set up shop in a development called SOMO Village – a 200-acre neighborhood with homes, a high school, and commercial space. Developers market it as a climate-conscious place, built to be carbon-neutral, which Bauer said was a draw for Resynergi.   In early conversations, according to Bauer, Sonoma County officials “suggested” his business could follow simpler recycling guidelines. Sheri Cardo, a spokesperson for Sonoma County’s Department of Health Services, confirmed the department had talked with Bauer about its operations as a recycling research and development site, and that his characterization was accurate.   In 2023, when Bauer sought to expand operations, he approached the city of Rohnert Park’s planning division for permits.  Officials told Bauer his facility was considered a heavy manufacturing site, and that Resynergi’s location – 600 feet from a school – demanded an environmental review, according to documents obtained by residents through a public records request. In a response late last year,  Resynergi argued that such a review could take too long, and moving quickly “could make or break substantial investment from a large strategic investor.” Within a month, planning officials had flipped and were now siding with Resynergi, granting it a more flexible, less burdensome administrative use permit. The decision avoided additional public review.  But to operate legally, Resynergi had to secure approval from county officials and the regional air district. In California, pyrolysis is classified as a type of incineration, associated with toxic and hazardous waste. Businesses must obtain a solid waste permit from local authorities, who enforce the state’s public resources code. In the past, three facilities have received permits to use pyrolysis, two for the purpose of destroying medical waste. All are now closed, according to CalRecycle. California counties issue waste permits on behalf of CalRecycle. The Bay Area Regional Air Quality Management District permits and controls pollution that microwaving plastic could produce. Resynergi’s microwave incinerator at 1200 Valley House Drive, in Rohnert Park, on Aug. 26, 2025. Photo by Chad Surmick for CalMatters County officials started looking into the company when they realized Resynergi’s plans would make the company a fully operational and “fixed component in the county’s waste system,” said Cardo, the county spokesperson.  “Although your facility might be considered a recycling facility in vernacular language, it is not under state law,” wrote Christine Sosko, Sonoma County’s director of environmental health. CalRecycle spokesman Lance Klug said in an email that Sonoma County’s response followed state standards. But environmental advocates say the way city and county officials handled Resynergi reflects regulators’ confusion about the processes for advanced recycling  – confusion fueled by the plastic industry.   Jane Williams, director of California Communities Against Toxics, argues that federal and state law make it clear that pyrolysis facilities have to follow rules as incinerators. “It’s really interesting for me to see, having worked on these incinerators for so long, how these guys pulled strings,” Williams said. “They pulled whatever out of their pockets so they could convince people this is a recycling facility.”  The American Chemistry Council, a trade group supporting the plastic industry, disagrees. And Resynergi’s Bauer said he doesn’t think his company’s process counts as incineration.  “Communities across California and the country are searching for credible solutions to plastic waste,” Bauer wrote in an open letter to the community. “This city has the chance to lead by example.”  Community fears toxic air pollution  People living in and near SOMO Village found out that Resynergi planned to burn plastic on a larger scale when the Bay Area Air Quality Management District notified the public of the company’s permit application. The community protested, filling city council rooms at each meeting and waving signs depicting polluting smoke stacks. Some parents spoke through tears to their city leaders. “Our air is not your experiment,” one poster read.  Among the local opponents of Resynergi was Stephanie Lennox. She lives about 20 minutes from Rohnert Park in rural Forestville, but her two daughters go to Credo High School right next to the facility. She wondered about emissions and the risk of an explosion.  “My Lord, don’t we need a solution to our global plastic pollution,” Lennox said. “But my daughters’ lungs are not part of your beta testing phase for your ‘world’s global plastic solution.’” Kirsten Van Nuys is hugged after addressing the city council at Rohnert Park City Hall to protest the recent operation of Resynergi’s microwave incinerator at 1200 Valley House Drive, on Aug. 26, 2025. Photo by Chad Surmick for CalMatters First: Resynergi’s microwave incinerator at 1200 Valley House Drive, in Rohnert Park. Last: Annabelle Royes, 9, stands in front of Rohnert Park City Hall to protest the operation of Resynergi’s microwave incinerator on Aug. 26, 2025. Photos by Chad Surmick for CalMatters Local organizers said they wanted city and county leaders to follow state law and the federal Clean Air Act.   When plastic is burned, additives like flame retardants or other chemicals that don’t break down can create toxic emissions, said Veena Singla, a researcher at the University of California San Francisco. Resynergi applied to the regional air district to obtain a permit for pollution control equipment in April, after the company had already begun operating their technology. In August, the air district issued three notices of violation to Resynergi for constructing and operating without a permit.  Bauer admitted to operating the equipment without a permit. The company never burned plastic in Rohnert Park he said; it did burn plastic at “prototype levels” in Santa Rosa. But, Bauer added, Resynergi was trying to follow the rules as he understood them. As a startup, he said, “you don’t even know if you will get a prototype to work. You’re also trying to figure out how the permitting process works.”  Millions spent to sway regulations Resynergi’s departure wasn’t because of a community outcry, Bauer said. The turning point, he said, was “the pull from other states; how they treated climate technologies such as ours …combined with the overall culture of accepting what we’re doing.” Plastics manufacturers and industry advocates like the American Chemistry Council have campaigned to redefine terms and loosen environmental regulations for the process Resynergi is developing. After the lobbying, 27 states have reclassified pyrolysis as manufacturing instead of solid waste operations, said Davis Allen, a researcher for the Center for Climate Integrity. That classification helps operators get around federal air requirements, he added.  Resynergi’s Bauer told CalMatters that “one of those (states) is a candidate,” and that the company will move out by the end of the year.    An analysis by the climate accountability newsletter HEATED found the chemistry council and groups aligned with it have spent as much as $30 million to promote the concept of advanced recycling as a mainstream and established one. That language aims to sway not just state laws, but federal clean air policy as well.   Between 2021 and 2022, when lawmakers were discussing plastic producer legislation, the American Chemistry Council spent more than $1.6 million on lobbying state legislators, according to publicly available data published by the Secretary of State. The American Chemistry Council’s Ross Eisenberg says that pyrolysis and other chemical recycling processes do work. These processes turn “hard-to-recycle plastics into the raw materials for high-quality products while reducing greenhouse-gas emissions and fossil energy use during production compared with virgin production,” he said.  “America’s plastic makers are investing billions of dollars to modernize and expand recycling capacity and improve efficiency,” Eisenberg said, adding that the companies are “advocating for smart policies that enhance collection and sorting so more plastics can be remade into new products.” This year, the Environmental Protection Agency said it isn’t taking further action on the matter, but industry representatives said they’ll continue to lobby at the federal level. Ambitious rules and tough realities for plastic California’s goals to reduce plastic pollution and make producers responsible for plastic waste are ambitious in size, scope, and speed. Within seven years, state law seeks to reduce plastic packaging by 25%, make single-use plastic packaging 100% recyclable or compostable, and divert most of that packaging into recycling.  Allen, from the Center for Climate Integrity, says laws like this can be a good idea – as long as regulators focus more on reducing plastics and less on recycling them.  “Almost any solution that is based on the idea that plastics can widely be recycled just isn’t really going to work,” Allen said. “There just aren’t easily available solutions to a lot of the problems that limit the effectiveness of recycling.” Single-use plastic bottles on a conveyor belt at greenwaste recycling facility in San Jose on July 29, 2019. Photo by Anne Wernikoff for CalMatters. But in March, regulations aimed at achieving the state’s goals were dealt a setback after two years of hearings. The day they were due, Gov. Newsom directed CalRecycle to start the regulatory process over.  The governor asked for changes “to minimize costs for small businesses and families – while ensuring California’s bold recycling law can achieve the critical goal of cutting plastic pollution,” said Daniel Villaseñor, a spokesperson for the governor, in an email to CalMatters. The Plastics Industry Association and the American Chemistry Council hailed the governor’s announcement as an opportunity. “We believe California’s regulations should be clear, technology-neutral, and performance-based,” said the council’s Ross Eisenberg. According to Klug, the CalRecycle spokesman, the state “remains committed to fostering business innovation that promotes a safe and clean future for all Californians.”  But environmental organizations like the Monterey Bay Aquarium and Surfrider called the decision disappointing.  Williams, the California Communities Against Toxics activist, said she’s concerned that more recent draft language may encourage pyrolysis facilities like Resynergi, which, she says, don’t belong in the state.    If California “rolls out the red carpet,” she said, “The only thing that will stop a whole new fleet of incinerators being built in California now is open, persistent community opposition.”  Resynergi also took part in CalRecycle workshops for the regulations. The company’s departure announcement praised the “innovative spirit of California … instrumental in the company’s growth.”  Brian Bauer said he’s hopeful the state plastic regulations will ease regulations for companies like his, but he plans to return to California either way.  “So it might be a couple years,” Bauer said. “We’ll be back to California in due time.”

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.