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.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Tory duty on Ofwat protects profits over reducing sewage pollution, experts say

News Feed
Wednesday, April 24, 2024

The Conservatives have pushed through a duty on the water regulator to prioritise growth, which experts have said will incentivise water companies to value their bottom lines over reducing sewage pollution.Campaigners fear this will weaken Ofwat’s ability to crack down on water companies as it may force the regulator to consider the company’s financial situation and the impact on growth if it is heavily fined for polluting.The Liberal Democrats forced a vote in parliament on Wednesday on the government’s new “growth duty” for Ofwat, which requires the regulator to “have regard to the desirability of promoting economic growth” when cracking down on water companies. They lost, as 50 MPs voted against the statutory instrument and 395 in favour.The growth duty specifically mentions fining companies as a measure that could hamper their growth: ‘‘Certain enforcement actions, and other activities of the regulator, can be particularly damaging to growth.“These include, for example, enforcement actions that limit or prevent a business from operating; financial sanctions; and publicity, in relation to a compliance failure, that harms public confidence.’’Last year, water companies were ordered to cut more than £100m from bills after repeated failures to stop sewage pollution.Campaigners fear the growth duty could cause the regulator to be less stringent with penalties because it would have to consider the commercial impact of fines on the company. The financing of some water companies is already in a precarious state; Thames Water is currently at risk of collapse.Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “The growth duty once again privileges business bottom lines over nature. Public demand and environmental need are totally clear – Ofwat should be promoting investment in nature and ensuring polluters pay.“A new duty that obliges the regulator to think twice before taking environmental action is headed entirely in the wrong direction. Parliamentarians are right to oppose this backward step.“The real economically responsible action is to protect the natural assets we depend on. Political parties should commit instead to a new green duty on regulators to ensure they take action to stop climate change and restore nature.”Labour MPs voted with the government, and it is understood this is because they did not want to be accused of being “anti-growth”.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionThe Liberal Democrat environment spokesperson, Tim Farron MP, said: “Conservative MPs have just voted to help water firms get off the hook. Ofwat will now be fighting water companies with one hand tied behind their back.“This government is all talk and no action when it comes to the sewage crisis. Time and time again Conservative MPs have voted against taking tough action on polluting firms.“It is a scandalous vote by a government which is woefully out of touch with this environmental crisis. The public will be furious to hear the industry’s enforcer has been weakened even more. Conservative MPs should hang their heads in shame.”The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been contacted for comment.

Campaigners fear growth duty will hamper water regulator’s ability to crack down on companies in poor financial stateThe Conservatives have pushed through a duty on the water regulator to prioritise growth, which experts have said will incentivise water companies to value their bottom lines over reducing sewage pollution.Campaigners fear this will weaken Ofwat’s ability to crack down on water companies as it may force the regulator to consider the company’s financial situation and the impact on growth if it is heavily fined for polluting. Continue reading...

The Conservatives have pushed through a duty on the water regulator to prioritise growth, which experts have said will incentivise water companies to value their bottom lines over reducing sewage pollution.

Campaigners fear this will weaken Ofwat’s ability to crack down on water companies as it may force the regulator to consider the company’s financial situation and the impact on growth if it is heavily fined for polluting.

The Liberal Democrats forced a vote in parliament on Wednesday on the government’s new “growth duty” for Ofwat, which requires the regulator to “have regard to the desirability of promoting economic growth” when cracking down on water companies. They lost, as 50 MPs voted against the statutory instrument and 395 in favour.

The growth duty specifically mentions fining companies as a measure that could hamper their growth: ‘‘Certain enforcement actions, and other activities of the regulator, can be particularly damaging to growth.

“These include, for example, enforcement actions that limit or prevent a business from operating; financial sanctions; and publicity, in relation to a compliance failure, that harms public confidence.’’

Last year, water companies were ordered to cut more than £100m from bills after repeated failures to stop sewage pollution.

Campaigners fear the growth duty could cause the regulator to be less stringent with penalties because it would have to consider the commercial impact of fines on the company. The financing of some water companies is already in a precarious state; Thames Water is currently at risk of collapse.

Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said: “The growth duty once again privileges business bottom lines over nature. Public demand and environmental need are totally clear – Ofwat should be promoting investment in nature and ensuring polluters pay.

“A new duty that obliges the regulator to think twice before taking environmental action is headed entirely in the wrong direction. Parliamentarians are right to oppose this backward step.

“The real economically responsible action is to protect the natural assets we depend on. Political parties should commit instead to a new green duty on regulators to ensure they take action to stop climate change and restore nature.”

Labour MPs voted with the government, and it is understood this is because they did not want to be accused of being “anti-growth”.

skip past newsletter promotion

after newsletter promotion

The Liberal Democrat environment spokesperson, Tim Farron MP, said: “Conservative MPs have just voted to help water firms get off the hook. Ofwat will now be fighting water companies with one hand tied behind their back.

“This government is all talk and no action when it comes to the sewage crisis. Time and time again Conservative MPs have voted against taking tough action on polluting firms.

“It is a scandalous vote by a government which is woefully out of touch with this environmental crisis. The public will be furious to hear the industry’s enforcer has been weakened even more. Conservative MPs should hang their heads in shame.”

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has been contacted for comment.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Gas Stove Pollution Risk Is Greatest in Smaller Homes, Study Finds

Gas-burning ranges, a significant contributor to indoor pollution, can produce and spread particularly high levels of some pollutants in smaller spaces.

For decades, scientists have worked to clean up air pollution from factories, cars and power plants. But researchers are increasingly turning their attention to the air that people breathe indoors. And one appliance has come to the fore as a source of pollutants harmful to human health: the humble gas stove.A new study from researchers at Stanford University sheds light on how much Americans may be exposed, indoors, to nitrogen dioxide, which comes from burning coal and gas and has been linked to asthma and other respiratory conditions.The researchers found that, across the country, short-term nitrogen dioxide exposure from typical gas stove use frequently exceeded benchmarks set by both the World Health Organization and the United States Environmental Protection Agency. In the longer term, using gas or propane stoves meant that the typical American could breathe in three-quarters of the nitrogen dioxide levels deemed safe by the W.H.O. within their own homes.As with outdoor pollution, disadvantaged households may be more exposed, the researchers found. Because gas more easily spreads throughout smaller spaces, people in homes smaller than 800 square feet were exposed to four times more nitrogen dioxide in the long term than people in homes larger than 3,000 square feet, the study found. Black and Latino households were exposed to 20 percent more nitrogen dioxide compared with the national average.“We’ve done a really good job in this country of reducing outdoor pollution,” said Rob Jackson, professor of earth system science at the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability and a principal investigator on the study, which was published on Friday in Science Advances. “But we’ve ignored the risks that people face indoors. And that’s the air that we’re breathing most of the time.”And though home cooks who use a gas stove are particularly exposed to nitrogen dioxide, he said, “we’re getting a better handle on the migration of pollution down the hall, to the living room and the bedroom.”Subscribe to The Times to read as many articles as you like.

Pollution
Health
Science

Court upholds EPA pollution plan for Pennsylvania coal plants

The state Department of Environmental Protection said it is reviewing the ruling.

The state Department of Environmental Protection said it is reviewing the ruling.

Pollution

Costa Rica’s River Fence Prevents Ocean Plastic Pollution

One ton of plastic waste was recovered from the Virilla River. Since the installation of the floating waste collection fence, another ton of plastic waste has been prevented from reaching the sea. It is estimated that the Virilla River captures up to 80% of the floating waste from the water bodies of the Greater Metropolitan […] The post Costa Rica’s River Fence Prevents Ocean Plastic Pollution appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

One ton of plastic waste was recovered from the Virilla River. Since the installation of the floating waste collection fence, another ton of plastic waste has been prevented from reaching the sea. It is estimated that the Virilla River captures up to 80% of the floating waste from the water bodies of the Greater Metropolitan Area. These achievements result from partnerships with actors committed to environmental conservation in their respective areas. “Plastic Free Landscapes exemplifies the implementation of Goal 17: Partnerships to achieve the objectives of the SDGs in the 2030 Agenda. This effective intervention has significantly reduced pollution in one of the country’s most contaminated rivers, thereby protecting our Pacific coast,” said José Vicente Troya Rodríguez, UNDP Resident Representative in Costa Rica. This initiative is made possible through collaboration with CRDC PEDREGAL, Canal 7, Delfino CR, OneSea, the Transition to an Urban Green Economy project, OTS, Consumo 180, and UNDP. Floating fences are strategically placed at highly polluted points in rivers to intercept significant amounts of plastic waste, with collection rates increasing during the rainy season. Designed to minimize impact on aquatic life, these barriers also enhance downstream river conditions, representing a sustainable investment that improves the health of vital waterways over time. “We’ve prevented a ton of plastic waste from reaching the sea through our fence capture. However, our commitment extends further. This waste, which could have polluted rivers or landfills, is transformed into RESIN8, a synthetic sand used in construction, offering a long-term, sustainable solution,” commented David Zamora, Commercial Director of CRDC-PEDREGAL. According to the leaders of the project, replicating these efforts at identified pollution hotspots would positively impact national ecosystems and marine well-being. The recovery of one ton of waste by the Virilla River fence serves as a call to action for industry, commerce, government institutions, local governments, academia, civil society, and the general population. “Our reality indicates that waste leaks into the environment, partly due to inadequate waste management in our homes, as well as the lack of proper infrastructure and equipment for recovery, recycling, and final disposal,” suggested Juan Carlos Piñar, coordinator of the Plastic-free Landscapes Project. The post Costa Rica’s River Fence Prevents Ocean Plastic Pollution appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Pollution
Waste
Water

Toxic gas adds to a long history of pollution in southwest Memphis

The air in this part of the city has long been considered dangerous. An oil refinery spews a steady plume of white smoke. A coal plant has leaked ash into the ground and the groundwater.

For many years, Rose Sims had no idea what was going on inside a nondescript brick building on Florida Street a couple of miles from her modest one-story home on the southwestern side of town.Like other residents, she got an unwelcome surprise in October 2022 at a public forum held by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) at the historic Monumental Baptist Church, known for its role in the civil rights movement. The EPA notified the predominantly Black community that Sterilization Services of Tennessee — which began operations in the brick building in the 1970s — had been emitting unacceptably high levels of ethylene oxide, a toxic gas commonly used to disinfect medical devices.Airborne emissions of the colorless gas can increase the risk of certain medical conditions, including breast cancer. Sims, who is 59 and Black, said she developed breast cancer in 2019, despite having no family history of it and she suspects ethylene oxide was a contributing factor.“I used to be outside a lot. I was in good health. All of a sudden, I got breast cancer,” she said.The drivers of environmental racism include the promise of tax breaks for industry to locate a facility in a heavily minority community, said Malini Ranganathan, an urban geographer at American University in Washington, D.C. The cheaper cost of land also is a factor, as is the concept of NIMBY — or “not in my backyard” — in which power brokers steer possible polluters to poorer areas of cities.A manager at Sterilization Services’ corporate office in Richmond, Virginia, declined to answer questions from KFF Health News. An attorney with Leitner, Williams, Dooley & Napolitan, a law firm that represents the company, also declined to comment. Sterilization Services, in a legal filing asking for an ethylene oxide-related lawsuit to be dismissed, said the use of the gas, which sterilizes about half the medical devices in the U.S., is highly regulated to ensure public safety.Besides southwest Memphis, there are nearly two dozen locales, mostly small cities — from Athens, Texas to Groveland, Florida and Ardmore, Oklahoma — where the EPA said in 2022 that plants sterilizing medical devices emit the gas at unusually high levels, potentially increasing a person’s risk of developing cancer.The pollution issue is so bad in southwest Memphis that even though Sterilization Services planned to close shop by April 30, local community leaders have been hesitant to celebrate. In a letter last year to a local Congress member, the company said it has always complied with federal, state and local regulations. The reason for its closure, it said, was a problem with renewing the building lease.But many residents see it as just one small win in a bigger battle over environmental safety in the neighborhood.“It’s still a cesspool of pollution,’’ said Yolonda Spinks, of the environmental advocacy organization Memphis Community Against Pollution, about a host of hazards the community faces.The air in this part of the city has long been considered dangerous. An oil refinery spews a steady plume of white smoke. A coal plant has leaked ash into the ground and the groundwater. The coal plant was replaced by a natural gas power plant, and now the Tennessee Valley Authority, which provides electricity for local power companies, plans to build a new gas plant there. A continual stream of heavy trucks chug along nearby highways and roads. Other transportation sources of air pollution include the Memphis International Airport and barge traffic on the nearby Mississippi River.Lead contamination is also a concern, not just in drinking water but in the soil from now-closed lead smelters, said Chunrong Jia, a professor of environmental health at the University of Memphis. Almost all the heavy industry in Shelby County — and the associated pollutants — are located in southwest Memphis, Jia added.Sources of pollution are often “clustered in particular communities,” said Darya Minovi, a senior analyst with the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nonprofit that advocates for environmental justice. When it comes to sterilizing facilities that emit ethylene oxide, areas inhabited largely by Black, Hispanic, low-income and non-English-speaking people are disproportionately exposed, the group has found.Four sites that the EPA labeled high-risk are in low-income areas of Puerto Rico. Seven sterilizer plants operate in that U.S. territory.The EPA, responding to public concerns and to deepened scientific understanding of the hazards of ethylene oxide, recently released rules that the agency said would greatly reduce emissions of the toxic gas from sterilizing facilities.KeShaun Pearson, who was born and raised in south Memphis and has been active in fighting environmental threats, said he is frustrated that companies with dangerous emissions are allowed to create “toxic soup” in minority communities.In the area where the sterilization plant is located, 87 percent of the residents are people of color, and, according to the Southern Environmental Law Center, life expectancy there is about 10 years lower than the average for the county and state. The population within 5 miles of the sterilizer plant is mostly low-income, according to the Union of Concerned Scientists.Pearson was part of Memphis Community Against the Pipeline, a group formed in 2020 to stop a crude oil pipeline that would have run through Boxtown, a neighborhood established by emancipated slaves and freedmen after the signing of the Emancipation Proclamation of 1863.That campaign, which received public support from former Vice President Al Gore and actress-activist Jane Fonda, succeeded. After the ethylene oxide danger surfaced in 2022, the group changed the last word of its name from “pipeline” to “pollution.”Besides breast and lymphoid cancers, animal studies have linked inhaling the gas to tumors of the brain, lungs, connective tissue, uterus and mammary glands.Last year, with the help of the Southern Environmental Law Center, the south Memphis community group urged the Shelby County Health Department to declare the ethylene oxide situation a public health emergency and shut down the sterilizing plant. But the health department said the company had complied with its existing air permit and with the EPA’s rules and regulations.A health department spokesperson, Joan Carr, said Shelby County enforces EPA regulations to ensure that companies comply with the federal Clean Air Act and that the agency has five air monitoring stations around the county to detect levels of other pollutants.When the county and the Tennessee Department of Health did a cancer cluster study in 2023, the agencies found no evidence of the clustering of high rates of leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, or breast or stomach cancer near the facility. There were “hot and cold spots” of breast cancer found but the study said it could not conclude that the clusters were linked to the facility.Scientists have criticized the study’s methodology, saying it did not follow the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recommendations for designing a cancer cluster investigation.Meanwhile, several people have sued the sterilizing company, claiming their health has been affected by the ethylene oxide emissions. In a lawsuit seeking class-action status, Reginaé Kendrick, 21, said she was diagnosed with a brain tumor at age 6. Chemotherapy and radiation have stunted her growth, destroyed her hair follicles and prevented her from going through puberty, said her mother, Robbie Kendrick.In response to proposed stricter EPA regulations, meanwhile, the Tennessee attorney general helped lead 19 other state AGs in urging the agency to “forgo or defer regulating the use of EtO by commercial sterilizers.”Sims said she’s glad her neighborhood will have one less thing to worry about once Sterilization Services departs. But her feelings about the closure remain tempered.“Hope they don’t go to another residential area,” she said.KFF Health News is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs at KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling, and journalism. This story also ran on USA Today. It can be republished for free.

Pollution
Water
Animals

UN plastics treaty inches closer to reality as lobbyists tout plastics’ ‘massive societal benefits’

A deal to stop plastic pollution is in sight, but negotiators can’t agree on whether to produce less of the stuff.

Negotiators wrapped up the fourth round of formal discussions over the United Nations’ global plastics treaty early on Tuesday morning, inching closer to a final agreement that’s intended to “end plastic pollution.”  Delegates made important progress on the treaty, the final version of which is due by the end of the year. They pared down a lengthy draft of the text and agreed on a formal agenda for “intersessional” work ahead of the next — and final — meeting, in Busan, South Korea, scheduled for November 25. That work will involve critical issues around funding the treaty’s provisions and identifying plastic-related chemicals that should be restricted. The agenda, however, doesn’t mention the elephant in the room: whether and how the treaty will limit plastic production. “Nothing happened that was particularly surprising, but this outcome is still quite demoralizing,” said Chris Dixon, an ocean campaign leader for the nonprofit Environmental Investigation Agency who attended the talks. Other groups called the outcome “disappointing” and said the negotiations had been “undermined by deep-rooted industry influence.”  Dixon and other environmental advocates have spent the past three meetings fighting for a treaty that addresses the “full life cycle” of plastics — meaning one that goes beyond waste management to limit the amount of plastic that’s made in the first place.  The world already produces more than 400 million metric tons of plastic per year, and fossil fuel companies are planning to dramatically increase that number over the next few decades. Plastics have been described as the fossil fuel industry’s “plan B” as the world pivots away from using oil and gas in transportation and electricity generation. This could have dire implications not only for plastic pollution but for the climate; according to a recent study, greenhouse gas emissions from growing plastic production could eat up one-fifth of the world’s remaining carbon budget by 2050.  Just because production limits aren’t on the agenda for ad hoc working groups, however, doesn’t mean they’re out of the treaty; it just means delegates may arrive in Busan less prepared to discuss technical concepts related to plastics manufacturing. Language about the “full life cycle” of plastics is still in the treaty’s mandate — which countries agreed on in 2022 — and throughout the draft text. Countries can also host unofficial discussions on the topic between now and November.  There’s already widespread support for addressing plastic production in the treaty. Dozens of countries supported a statement presented by Rwanda and Peru last week saying that a global plastic reduction target should be “a North Star” for the treaty. The paper suggested reducing production by 40 percent below 2025 levels by 2040. Another declaration, published on Monday and signed by 28 countries, called for the treaty to “achieve sustainable levels of production of primary plastic polymers.” Activists from Greenpeace urged treaty negotiators to place limits on plastic production. Photo by IISD/ENB – Kiara Worth Dixon said translating that support into binding treaty text is a matter of “political commitment.” On Monday, production was “the first topic to get dropped” as delegates scrambled to agree on an agenda for intersessional work, she said. They were trying to avoid a repeat of the previous conference, which ended with no agenda at all. Santos Virgilio, a delegate representing Angola, said during a panel on Monday that it is “too early to say” how his country and others will coax oil-producing states into accepting treaty provisions on plastic production. Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Qatar are among the countries most vociferously opposed to addressing plastic production as part of the treaty. Plastics industry lobbying groups also turned out in full force at the negotiating session to oppose production caps. Chris Jahn, council secretary of the International Council of Chemical Associations, said in a statement on Monday that the industry is “fully committed to a legally binding agreement all countries can join that ends plastic pollution without eliminating the massive societal benefits plastics provide for a healthier and more sustainable world.”  Industry groups used the convening as a public relations opportunity, touting the benefits of plastic in ads placed throughout Ottawa. In a hotel, one collection of ads said plastics “save lives,” “deliver water,” and “reduce food waste.” The United States has also resisted plastic production limits as part of the treaty. A State Department official told the Financial Times on Tuesday that “overly prescriptive approaches” could alienate “major producers or consumers of plastics.” Instead of cutting the supply of plastics, the U.S. wants to focus on reducing demand and improving infrastructure for recycling and reuse. Despite frustrations, several observers noted a promising shift in the tone at this week’s negotiating session, compared to the previous meeting. “There was a different energy, it was more collaborative,” said Erin Simon, the vice president and head of plastic waste and business for the environmental nonprofit WWF. Bjorn Beeler, the general manager and international coordinator for the nonprofit International Pollutants Elimination Network, said it was “very significant” that the delegates were able to move from a 70-page “zero draft” of the treaty — a laundry list of options meant to represent everybody’s viewpoints — to a more formal version that’s been vetted by negotiators.  Pro-plastic ads at an Ottawa hotel. Photo by IISD/ENB – Kiara Worth All of the most ambitious provisions of the treaty are still in the newly updated draft, Beeler said, meaning they’re still up for discussion. He also noted growing support for health-related aspects of the treaty, particularly a provision to limit potentially dangerous chemicals that are commonly added to plastics. Delegates agreed to create an expert group to focus on this topic during intersessional work. They tasked it with proposing a framework to identify the most problematic types of plastic and plastic-related chemicals, as well as product designs that increase plastic products’ recycling and reuse potential.  Although countries disagree on whether certain substances should be banned or just restricted, and which criteria should be used to identify such substances, there is more convergence on regulating chemicals than on most other issues. Even Iraq, a major oil producer, submitted a statement supporting the creation of two lists of banned and restricted plastic chemicals.  “Everyone knows there are hazardous chemicals in plastics,” Beeler said. Griffins Ochieng, the executive director of the Kenya-based Center for Environmental Justice and Development, said in a statement that a global plastics treaty that addresses chemicals in plastics “is an impetus toward eradicating plastic pollution.” One other expert group will focus on finance — where to get funding to help developing countries transition away from single-use plastics and test plastics for hazardous chemicals, among other treaty objectives, and how to distribute that money. Some countries and many environmental groups support the creation of a dedicated fund to help poor countries implement the provisions of the plastics treaty. Others say it would be simpler to use an existing mechanism like the Global Environmental Facility, a multilateral fund that provides grants to support government projects. With eight months remaining in 2024, delegates have a lot of work ahead of them if they want to wrap up a treaty by the end of the year, which is the goal countries agreed on when they decided to write a treaty in March 2022. Even if the treaty does not take its most ambitious form, it could still have a big impact. Policies to disincentivize the use of virgin plastic, for instance — like recycled content requirements — are relatively noncontroversial, and they could indirectly limit plastic production. Beeler said it’s also possible that new requirements on the measurement and disclosure of plastic production could eventually lead to production limits after the treaty is ratified.  Simon, with WWF, said she feels cautiously hopeful following this week’s meeting. The conference was “not a failure, and definitely not a win.” she said. “But it is progress.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline UN plastics treaty inches closer to reality as lobbyists tout plastics’ ‘massive societal benefits’ on May 1, 2024.

Pollution
Activism
Chemicals

Suggested Viewing

This Mortal Plastik

A personal dive into the world’s most impersonal substance: plastics. Amid the lockdown, a bereaved mother unfolds a surprising journey within and across oceans to understand the contemporary landscape of single-use synthetics. From the noble intentions behind its invention to scales of havoc it has wrought, this experimental documentary brings together art, history, science, and the everyday. Playfully crafted with hand-drawn illustrations and poetic interludes, this evocative “pause between deep time and no time” will change how you think about this ordinary “thing without thingness."

Animation
Culture
Pollution

Stalking Chernobyl: Exploration After Apocalypse

A documentary that examines the underground culture of the Chernobyl Exclusion Zone. Three decades after the world's most infamous nuclear disaster, illegal hiking adventurers (known as “stalkers”), extreme sports aficionados, artists, and tour companies have begun to explore anew the mysterious, ghostly landscape, where trees and forest animals have reclaimed land abandoned by villagers. Even as survivors continue to reckon with a dishonest government’s attempts to cover up the extent of the disaster, and as humanity faces new nuclear incidents in place like Fukushima, the Chernobyl site has turned into a bizarre tourist attraction, drawing seekers with a taste for the post-apocalyptic. (a Cultures Of Resistance film)

Crisis
Culture
Pollution

Giants of Big Sur: California Condor Stories Part 3: Born During Troubled Times

Joe shares rare archival footage of the 2008 Basin Complex fire that burned most of the Big Sur wilderness. We see Ventana Wildlife Society biologists climb a burned redwood tree to save baby condor, Phoenix. Later, we meet Iniko, who captured the world’s heart during the Dolan Fire in 2020. We learn the stories of the condors and their incredible resiliency in the face of huge adversity. Kelly Sorenson shares his vision for the future.

Conservation
Extinction
Pollution

Uncovering the Permian Climate Bomb

The fossil fuel industry is building a global threat in the oil fields of West Texas. Miguel Escoto, who has lived close to this region his whole life, witnesses the industry’s villainy for the first time by viewing oil and gas site emissions through optical gas imaging cameras, becoming a stand-in for a world that has yet to grasp the gravity of the Permian Climate Bomb.

Pollution
Activism
Climate

The Story of Plastic

A searing expose uncovering the ugly truth behind the global plastic pollution crisis. Striking footage shot over three continents illustrates the ongoing catastrophe: fields full of garbage, veritable mountains of trash; rivers and seas clogged with waste; and skies choked with poisons from plastic production and recycling processes with no end in sight. Original animations, interviews with experts and activists, and never-before-filmed scenes reveal the disastrous consequences of the plastic flood around the world – and the global movement rising up in response.

Chemicals
Pollution
Crisis

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.