water. pollution
Credit: Photo by Natilyn Hicks Photography/Unsplash
Trump’s science cuts could backfire on his own energy agenda
The Trump administration’s push to shrink federal science programs could end up sabotaging its own efforts to fast-track energy and mining projects.
In short:
- Federal agencies like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Geological Survey are losing scientists due to layoffs, retirements, and budget cuts, threatening their ability to conduct the environmental reviews necessary to permit energy projects.
- Experts warn that eliminating research infrastructure not only stalls permitting but may also undermine long-term planning, like in the past when basic permafrost research saved the Alaska pipeline from disaster.
- Morale is collapsing in science agencies, graduate students are leaving the field, and efforts to clear chemical backlogs may compromise research on air, water, and “forever chemicals.”
Key quote:
“There’s nothing to permit if you don’t know what the mineral potential is, or the oil and gas potential.”
— Mary Lou Zoback, former U.S. Geological Survey senior research scientist
Why this matters:
Retirements, political pressure, and plummeting morale are emptying out the ranks of scientists responsible for everything from reviewing the risks of new drilling sites to analyzing the spread of toxic chemicals. Without them, the legally mandated environmental reviews that these projects depend on grind to a halt. It’s like trying to build a pipeline with no engineers — except in this case, it’s also the air, water, and public health at stake.
Read more:
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Justin Wilkens/Unsplash
Trump’s deregulation and FEMA cuts put Mississippi River and others at extreme risk, report warns
The Mississippi River tops this year’s list of America’s most endangered waterways, as environmental groups warn that President Trump’s sweeping deregulation and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) budget cuts are accelerating threats to rivers across the country.
In short:
- The Mississippi River, which provides the primary source of drinking water to dozens of municipalities and supports nearly 900 species, is now the most endangered U.S. river due to worsening pollution, drought, and government deregulation.
- Trump’s proposed dismantling of FEMA, which manages disaster response and flood mitigation, endangers rivers from Louisiana to Appalachia, including areas still recovering from Hurricane Helene’s catastrophic flooding.
- Data centers and fossil fuel expansion, heavily incentivized under the Trump administration, are further straining rivers in Virginia and West Virginia, where water shortages and pollution violations are already threatening ecosystems and public health.
Key quote:
“Our water wealth is one of our greatest assets as a nation. But pollution and extreme weather are putting our rivers, clean water, and public safety at risk. When our rivers are sick, our own health and prosperity suffers.”
— Tom Kiernan, president and CEO of American Rivers
Why this matters:
Rivers are lifelines for drinking water, agriculture, biodiversity, and cultural heritage, yet many are in crisis. The Mississippi River, often called the nation’s backbone, faces compounding threats from climate change and deregulation. FEMA, now facing severe cuts, has long played a key role in flood mitigation and rebuilding infrastructure after climate disasters. Without this support, communities face growing risks from flooding, contamination, and habitat loss. Simultaneously, the unchecked growth of water-intensive industries like data centers and fossil fuel operations is drying up aquifers and further polluting waterways. Ignoring the health of these rivers risks a cascading impact on ecosystems and the millions of people who rely on them.
Related: Trump considers scaling back federal disaster aid to states
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Avi Waxman/Unsplash
Big tech’s water-guzzling data centers are draining some of the world’s driest regions
Amazon, Google, and Microsoft are expanding data centers in areas already struggling with drought, raising concerns about their use of local water supplies for cooling massive server farms.
Luke Barratt and Costanza Gambarini report for The Guardian.
In short:
- The three largest cloud companies are building or operating 62 data centers in regions facing water scarcity, including in Spain, Arizona, and other drought-prone areas across five continents.
- Amazon’s new centers in Spain’s Aragon region are licensed to use enough water to irrigate hundreds of acres of farmland annually, and the company has requested a 48% increase in water for its existing sites.
- Tech firms promise to become “water positive” by 2030, but experts and even internal critics say offsetting water use elsewhere doesn’t solve shortages in the communities where centers operate.
Key quote:
“Neither people nor data can live without water. But human life is essential and data isn’t.”
— Aurora Gómez, Tu Nube Seca Mi Río
Why this matters:
Data centers are the invisible engines of the internet — processing everything from emails to AI, video calls to cloud storage — but they come with a physical footprint. That footprint includes massive energy use and a surprising dependence on fresh water to keep machines cool. In places where droughts are worsening with climate change, the demands of these centers are clashing with local needs for drinking water and agriculture. Some of these regions are already edging toward desertification, and water-intensive industries like tech may tip them further. Critics worry that promises of sustainability are greenwashing efforts that mask the environmental costs of maintaining digital infrastructure.
Read more: AI’s rising energy needs could overwhelm climate efforts without better oversight
Keep reading...Show less
Debate grows over using treated sewage to restore Louisiana’s vanishing wetlands
A scientific rift over wetland restoration methods has turned political in Louisiana, where critics and supporters of using treated sewage to combat coastal erosion are clashing in the statehouse.
Wesley Muller and Elise Plunk report for Louisiana Illuminator.
In short:
- Louisiana scientists and environmental groups are divided on whether using treated sewage in natural wetlands helps or harms the landscape, with some calling for a halt to these projects.
- At a recent legislative hearing, opponents of the South Slough Assimilation Wetland project argued the nutrient-rich wastewater weakens wetland soils and accelerates degradation, while no defenders of the project were invited to testify.
- While some sites have shown increased vegetation, critics question the reliability of using natural wetlands rather than engineered systems for wastewater disposal and wetland restoration.
Key quote:
“It’s happened twice, and it’s undemocratic. They never alert the larger scientific community that’s interested in this.”
— John Day, wetlands ecologist and founder of Comite Resources
Why this matters:
Louisiana’s wetlands are a frontline defense against hurricanes, a vital habitat for wildlife, and a globally significant carbon sink. But they’re disappearing fast, eroded by sea-level rise, levee construction, canal dredging, and climate change. One proposal to help restore them involves pumping treated sewage into degraded wetlands to rebuild soil and nourish plant growth. This practice, known as wetland assimilation, has stirred heated debate. Supporters say it’s a cost-effective way to slow erosion and make use of wastewater; critics warn that nutrient overload can backfire, weakening the very ecosystems it aims to save. As the Gulf encroaches and the Mississippi River’s sediment is locked behind levees, finding effective, science-backed restoration methods grows more urgent.
Read more: Louisiana's coastal wetlands face critical threat from rising sea levels
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Suzy Brooks/Unsplash
Trump orders sweeping rollback of environmental rules without public input
President Donald Trump issued a series of executive orders last week to repeal longstanding energy and environmental regulations, bypassing public comment and triggering legal pushback.
Niina H. Farah, Lesley Clark, and Robin Bravender report for E&E News.
In short:
- Trump’s executive orders target regulations on energy production, endangered species protections, and appliance efficiency standards, calling for many to be “sunsetted” or repealed outright.
- The orders cite Supreme Court rulings as justification for skipping the legally required public comment process, relying instead on the rarely used “good cause” exemption.
- Legal experts and former officials argue the moves are unlawful, predicting swift court challenges and calling the regulatory strategy chaotic and destabilizing.
Key quote:
“Congress enacted the notice and comment process to ensure that the public has a chance to weigh in on the decisions that the government is making. It is a legally required process and I can not imagine an end run around it will stand up in court.”
— Todd Phillips, assistant professor of law, Georgia State University
Why this matters:
As President Trump moves to dismantle major environmental protections, critics warn that the process, not just the policy, is unraveling. For decades, laws like the Clean Water Act and Endangered Species Act were designed with transparency at their core, requiring agencies to seek public input, weigh scientific evidence, and justify decisions in plain view. But the Trump administration is increasingly bypassing those steps, issuing rollbacks through executive action with little public notice or comment. What makes these changes especially destabilizing is that they’re landing in agencies already under strain. Staffing cuts, retirements, and leadership vacancies have hollowed out federal departments like the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Department of the Interior, leaving them less equipped to manage sweeping policy reversals. If these tactics are upheld by the courts, they could redefine how environmental governance works — and who gets a say in it.
Keep reading...Show less
Top Story
Credit: Bret Lowrey/Unsplash
Trump opens protected lands in Nevada and New Mexico to drilling and mining
The Trump administration has opened protected lands in Nevada’s Ruby Mountains and New Mexico’s Upper Pecos watershed to drilling and mining, reversing Biden-era rules enacted at the request of Native American communities.
In short:
- The U.S. Department of Agriculture has lifted protections on over 264,000 acres in Nevada and parts of New Mexico to promote oil, gas, geothermal, and hard-rock mineral extraction.
- The change was announced alongside an emergency order permitting logging on more than half of U.S. national forest lands, with officials calling prior regulations “burdensome.”
- State lawmakers, tribal leaders, and environmental groups oppose the decision, citing threats to recreation economies, water resources, and local self-determination.
Key quote:
“No one in this community wants any extractive industries or any threats to our watershed.”
— Ralph Vigil, organizer for the New Mexico Wilderness Alliance
Why this matters:
The Trump administration’s renewed push to open protected public lands to fossil fuel and mineral extraction has reignited tensions in environmentally sensitive regions that serve as crucial reservoirs of biodiversity, cultural heritage, and clean water. Local residents and tribal communities have long worked to fend off extractive projects that threaten to undo decades of conservation progress. Now, under the banner of energy dominance and deregulation, federal agencies are fast-tracking leases and weakening protections despite local and state opposition. Critics warn that this top-down strategy not only risks new contamination and habitat loss but also weakens the very public input mechanisms that once safeguarded these lands.
Learn more: Republican budget talks spark backlash over proposed sale of public lands
Keep reading...Show less
Credit: Woubishet Z. Taffese/Unsplash
EPA stalls civil rights enforcement as pollution complaints pile up
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's ability to investigate environmental discrimination has ground to a halt under Trump, leaving dozens of communities of color without recourse as pollution complaints sit unresolved.
In short:
- The Trump administration has quietly blocked the EPA from opening new civil rights investigations or issuing findings of discrimination, effectively sidelining Title VI of the Civil Rights Act.
- The Office of Environmental Justice was shuttered, and the civil rights division has been largely frozen, unable to act on pollution complaints from mostly Black, Indigenous, and Hispanic communities.
- This rollback coincides with a broader federal effort to defang civil rights enforcement, including staff layoffs at the Departments of Education and Homeland Security.
Key quote:
“Especially with this spate of actions targeting unexpected entities like law firms and universities, I can see a world where complaints against state agencies that are let’s say ‘friendly’ to the administration would be rejected but complaints against agencies that are ‘unfriendly’ to the administration might be allowed to go forward.”
— Former EPA staffer
Why this matters:
The erosion of civil rights enforcement at the EPA blocks a crucial tool for protecting vulnerable communities from environmental harm. What’s at stake includes everything from drinking water safety to lung disease, from childhood asthma to intergenerational harm. Communities already dealing with racism and economic disinvestment are being left exposed to toxic air, soil, and water — all while the federal agency meant to protect them stays silent.
Related coverage from EHN:
Keep reading...Show less
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
