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.

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

News Feed
Wednesday, October 8, 2025

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.

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 Network

The 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.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

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.”

From bombs to glass: Hanford site can now transform nuclear waste

The long-awaited development is a key step in cleaning up the nation’s most polluted nuclear waste site. Construction on the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant began in 2002.

SEATTLE — For much of the 20th century, a sprawling complex in the desert of southeastern Washington state turned out most of the plutonium used in the nation’s nuclear arsenal, from the first atomic bomb to the arms race that fueled the Cold War.Now, after decades of planning and billions of dollars of investment, the site is turning liquid nuclear and chemical waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation into a much safer substance: glass.State regulators on Wednesday issued the final permit Hanford needed for workers to remove more waste from often-leaky underground tanks, mix it in a crucible with additives, and heat it above 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. The mixture then cools in stainless steel vats and solidifies into glass — still radioactive, but far more stable to keep in storage, and less likely to seep into the soil or the nearby Columbia River.The long-awaited development is a key step in cleaning up the nation’s most polluted nuclear waste site. Construction on the Hanford Waste Treatment and Immobilization Plant began in 2002.“We are at the precipice of a really significant moment in Hanford’s history,” said Casey Sixkiller, director of the Washington State Department of Ecology, in a video interview.Hanford’s secret was a key part of the Manhattan ProjectThe roughly 600-square-mile reservation is near the confluence of two of the Pacific Northwest’s most significant rivers, the Snake and the Columbia, in an area important to Native American tribes for millennia.Wartime planners selected the area because it was isolated and had access to cold water and hydroelectric power. In early 1943, the U.S. government seized the land for a secret project, displacing roughly 2,000 residents, including farmers.Tens of thousands of workers then responded to newspaper ads around the country promising good jobs to support the Allied effort to defeat Nazi Germany and Japan in World War II, and a new company town arose in the desert.Most of the workers had no idea they were involved in building the world’s first full-scale plutonium production reactor until the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, and President Harry S. Truman announced the existence of the Manhattan Project to the world.Hanford would grow to include nine nuclear reactors churning out plutonium for the nation’s nuclear arsenal. The last of these was shut down in 1987. Two years later, Washington state, the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reached an agreement to clean up the site.FILE - Caution signs are shown at a gate on the Hanford Nuclear Reservation, Thursday, June 2, 2022, in Richland, Wash.AP Photo/Ted S. Warren, FileToday, Hanford is focused on clean-upSeven of the nine reactors have been “cocooned” to prevent contamination from escaping until radiation levels drop enough to allow for dismantling, near the end of the century.There are also 177 giant underground tanks that hold some 56 million gallons of highly radioactive and chemically hazardous waste. Those tanks are well past their projected lifespan of 25 years. More than one-third have leaked in the past, and three are currently leaking.During its years producing plutonium for nuclear weapons, Hanford dumped effluent directly into the Columbia River and into ineffective containment ponds, polluting the surrounding groundwater and contaminating the food chain of wildlife that depends on it, according to a 2013 government assessment.Now Hanford is focused on cleanup, with an annual budget of around $3 billion.Turning nuclear waste into glass is effective — but expensiveEncasing radioactive waste in glass — called “vitrification” — has been recognized since at least the 1980s as an effective method for neutralizing it. There are plans for two facilities at Hanford: the one now approved to process low-level nuclear waste after repeated delays, and an adjacent facility for the high-level waste that remains under construction.More than $30 billion has been spent on the plants so far. The U.S. Department of Energy, which oversees Hanford, has faced an Oct. 15 deadline to have turned some of its stored waste into glass, per a cleanup schedule and consent decree involving the EPA and Washington state.The first waste to be mixed with glass will include pretreated radioactive cesium and strontium, according to a statement from the Department of Energy.Washington state Democrats question Trump administration’s commitmentThe Energy Department fired Roger Jarrell, its main overseer of the Hanford cleanup, earlier this month, prompting concerns about the Trump administration’s commitment. Democratic Sen. Patty Murray said Energy Secretary Chris Wright told her by phone that he was looking to stall the vitrification operations.That prompted outrage from Washington state officials. Gov. Bob Ferguson, joined at a news conference by tribal leaders and labor representatives, threatened legal action.But Wright insisted the department had changed nothing, and on Sept. 17, a deputy signed paperwork allowing vitrification to proceed following approvals by state regulators.“Although there are challenges, we are committed to beginning operations by October 15, 2025,” Wright said in a statement last month. ”As always, we are prioritizing the health and safety of both the workforce and the community as we work to meet our nation’s need to safely and efficiently dispose of nuclear waste.”On Wednesday, with state approval issued, Ferguson urged the Energy Department to follow through.“Our state has done our part to start up the Waste Treatment Plant,” said Ferguson, in a statement. “Now the federal government needs to live up to its responsibilities and clean up what they left behind.”In a statement ahead of the government shutdown, Department of Energy said it would be able to continue all of its operations for one to five days. After that, the department’s work will cease unless operations are “related to the safety of human life and the protection of property.”--By Cedar Attansio/The Associated PressIf you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

From Bombs to Glass: Hanford Site Can Now Transform Nuclear Waste

The Hanford Nuclear Reservation in Washington state produced plutonium for most of America's nuclear arsenal through the end of the Cold War

SEATTLE (AP) — For much of the 20th century, a sprawling complex in the desert of southeastern Washington state turned out most of the plutonium used in the nation’s nuclear arsenal, from the first atomic bomb to the arms race that fueled the Cold War.Now, after decades of planning and billions of dollars of investment, the site is turning liquid nuclear and chemical waste at the Hanford Nuclear Reservation into a much safer substance: glass.State regulators on Wednesday issued the final permit Hanford needed for workers to remove more waste from often-leaky underground tanks, mix it in a crucible with additives, and heat it above 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit (1,000 Celsius). The mixture then cools in stainless steel vats and solidifies into glass — still radioactive, but far more stable to keep in storage, and less likely to seep into the soil or the nearby Columbia River.“We are at the precipice of a really significant moment in Hanford’s history,” said Casey Sixkiller, director of the Washington State Department of Ecology, in a video interview. Hanford's secret was a key part of the Manhattan Project The roughly 600-square-mile (1500-square-km) reservation is near the confluence of two of the Pacific Northwest’s most significant rivers, the Snake and the Columbia, in an area important to Native American tribes for millennia.Wartime planners selected the area because it was isolated and had access to cold water and hydroelectric power. In early 1943, the U.S. government seized the land for a secret project, displacing roughly 2,000 residents, including farmers.Tens of thousands of workers then responded to newspaper ads around the country promising good jobs to support the Allied effort to defeat Nazi Germany and Japan in World War II, and a new company town arose in the desert. Most of the workers had no idea they were involved in building the world's first full-scale plutonium production reactor until the U.S. dropped nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in August 1945, and President Harry S. Truman announced the existence of the Manhattan Project to the world.Hanford would grow to include nine nuclear reactors churning out plutonium for the nation's nuclear arsenal. The last of these was shut down in 1987. Two years later, Washington state, the U.S. Department of Energy and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reached an agreement to clean up the site. Today, Hanford is focused on clean-up Seven of the nine reactors have been “cocooned” to prevent contamination from escaping until radiation levels drop enough to allow for dismantling, near the end of the century.There are also 177 giant underground tanks that hold some 56 million gallons (212 million liters) of highly radioactive and chemically hazardous waste. Those tanks are well past their projected lifespan of 25 years. More than one-third have leaked in the past, and three are currently leaking.During its years producing plutonium for nuclear weapons, Hanford dumped effluent directly into the Columbia River and into ineffective containment ponds, polluting the surrounding groundwater and contaminating the food chain of wildlife that depends on it, according to a 2013 government assessment. Turning nuclear waste into glass is effective — but expensive Encasing radioactive waste in glass — called “vitrification” — has been recognized since at least the 1980s as an effective method for neutralizing it. There are plans for two facilities at Hanford: the one now approved to process low-level nuclear waste after repeated delays, and an adjacent facility for the high-level waste that remains under construction.More than $30 billion has been spent on the plants so far. The U.S. Department of Energy, which oversees Hanford, has faced an Oct. 15 deadline to have turned some of its stored waste into glass, per a cleanup schedule and consent decree involving the EPA and Washington state. Washington state Democrats question Trump administration's commitment The Energy Department fired Roger Jarrell, its main overseer of the Hanford cleanup, earlier this month, prompting concerns about the Trump administration's commitment. Democratic Sen. Patty Murray said Energy Secretary Chris Wright told her by phone that he was looking to stall the vitrification operations.That prompted outrage from Washington state officials. Gov. Bob Ferguson, joined at a news conference by tribal leaders and labor representatives, threatened legal action.But Wright insisted the department had changed nothing, and on Sept. 17, a deputy signed paperwork allowing vitrification to proceed following approvals by state regulators.“Although there are challenges, we are committed to beginning operations by October 15, 2025," Wright said in a statement last month. "As always, we are prioritizing the health and safety of both the workforce and the community as we work to meet our nation’s need to safely and efficiently dispose of nuclear waste.”On Wednesday, with state approval issued, Ferguson urged the Energy Department to follow through.“Our state has done our part to start up the Waste Treatment Plant,” said Ferguson, in a statement. “Now the federal government needs to live up to its responsibilities and clean up what they left behind.”In a statement ahead of the government shutdown, Department of Energy said it would be able to continue all of its operations for one to five days. After that, the department's work will cease unless operations are “related to the safety of human life and the protection of property.”Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Sept. 2025

Venezuelan Students Help Turn Plastic Waste Into School Desks

MARACAIBO (Reuters) -Piles of discarded plastic and broken school furniture are being given a second life in northwestern Venezuela, where a local...

MARACAIBO (Reuters) -Piles of discarded plastic and broken school furniture are being given a second life in northwestern Venezuela, where a local foundation is turning waste into desks for students.El Zulia Recicla, based in Zulia state's capital, Maracaibo, has refurbished 160 desks so far using plastic waste collected by students.Instead of building new furniture, the foundation repairs damaged metal frames and replaces missing parts with molded plastic panels made in its workshop."We show people that the desks they use today – with damaged wood, falling apart – can be restored," said Nicolino Bracho, the foundation's research director.At Ramon Reinoso Nunez School, where students had been sitting on the floor or using backpacks as chairs, 20 desks have already been delivered."We have many issues with desks, because of course theft and wear over time take their toll," said school director Maritza Jaimes."We hoped they could take more, but we're grateful to have 20 restored ones," she said.The initiative, partly funded by the French embassy, aims to deliver 200 desks to 10 schools in vulnerable areas and is part of the foundation's broader effort to reduce plastic pollution and raise environmental awareness in the region.(Reporting by Mariela Nava and Efrain Otero)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

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.