

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Keith Rushing, Earthjustice Campaign Press Secretary, (202) 797-5236; (757) 897-2147
Tom Pelton, Director of Communications, Environmental Integrity Project, (202) 888-2703; (443) 510-2574
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency today issued long-delayed federal regulations for coal ash, but failed to fix major pollution problems from the disposal of coal ash waste, including contamination of rivers and drinking water supplies.
The Obama Administration's failure to issue strong ash disposal regulations means that environmental disasters like the Dan River coal ash spill in North Carolina in February, and the massive 2008 ash spill in Kingston, Tennessee, could happen again.
"Today's rule doesn't prevent more tragic spills like the ones we are still trying to clean up in North Carolina and Tennessee. And it won't stop the slower moving disaster that is unfolding for communities around the country, as leaky coal ash ponds and dumps poison water," said Earthjustice attorney Lisa Evans.
The new rule fails to phase out the dangerous practice of storing immense quantities of toxic waste in unlined "ponds" behind earthen dams that are often structurally unstable and prone to failure. EPA's approach effectively lets the utility industry police itself without federal or state oversight.
"While EPA's coal ash rule takes some long overdue steps to establish minimum national groundwater monitoring and cleanup standards, it relies too heavily on the industry to police itself, " said Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project. "The devil is in the details, and we will review the regulation closely for loopholes. But regardless of what the rule requires, companies like Duke Energy, First Energy, and TVA have already learned that spills and leaking ash ponds add up to billions of dollars in cleanup costs."
While the rule does require closure of some inactive ponds, like the one that failed on the Dan River in North Carolina, it only mandates closure of ponds that are located on the site of active facilities.
"This power industry has had half a century or more to clean up its act, but even in the face of huge spills and a terrible record of proven water contamination around the country, it is still dumping ash in huge unlined pits," said Evans. "These dumps aren't going away by themselves, and unfortunately under today's rule, EPA is putting the burden on citizens to get them safely closed."
The rule requires water quality monitoring and public disclosure of the results, which should help citizens to track damage from dumps and to go to court to force clean-ups. However, communities are understandably concerned that coal plant operators will not reliably identify, report and remedy water contamination and structural risks without independent oversight.
When she heard about the new regulations, Esther Calhoun, of Uniontown, Ala., who lives near a coal ash dump said: "It seems like the EPA doesn't give a damn about people. "
Calhoun lives near the Arrowhead landfill in Uniontown which received four million cubic yards of coal ash form the 2008 Kingston disaster.
"Our people have heart attacks and breathing problems. They're dealing with this big mountain of coal ash in their face. This is a civil rights issue just as much as an environmental and health one. "
Coal ash is the toxic waste formed from burning coal in power plants to make electricity. It is filled with some of the deadliest toxins known to man, including hazardous chemicals such as arsenic, lead, mercury, and hexavalent chromium. Coal ash--the second largest industrial waste stream in the United States--is linked to the four leading causes of death in the U.S.: heart disease, cancer, respiratory diseases and stroke.
Unsafe disposal of coal ash into the nation's more than 1,400 coal ash waste dumps has contaminated more than 200 rivers, lakes, streams and sources of underground drinking water in 37 states.Coal ash, when dumped in unlined lagoons and landfills, often poisons drinking water and kills fish and wildlife.
Earthjustice, and the groups that sued the EPA over its failure to regulate coal ash, are planning to keep up the fight for critical public health and environmental protection. "We had to go to court to force EPA to issue this first-ever coal ash rule, and unfortunately, we will be back in court to force coal plants to clean up their ash dumps and start disposing of their toxic waste safely," said Evans.
Coal ash regulations were proposed in 2010 following the largest toxic waste spill in U.S. history in Kingston, Tenn., when one billion gallons of coal ash sludge destroyed 300 acres and dozens of homes. But in response to pressure from the coal power industry, EPA delayed finalizing the proposed rule.
Eric Schaeffer, Executive Director of the Environmental Integrity Project, said: "EPA's coal ash rule is too little and too late. Too little because its standards are minimal, vague, and unenforceable. Too late, because damage from collapsing dikes and leaking ash dumps has accumulated in the absence of common sense rules designed to prevent those disasters."
In 2012, Earthjustice sued EPA in federal court on behalf of ten public interest groups and an Indian tribe to obtain a court-ordered deadline. The groups involved in the lawsuit include: the Moapa Band of Paiutes (NV),: Appalachian Voices (NC); Chesapeake Climate Action Network (MD); Environmental Integrity Project (D.C., PA); Kentuckians For The Commonwealth (KY); Montana Environmental Information Center (MT); Physicians for Social Responsibility (DC); Prairie Rivers Network (IL); Sierra Club (CA); Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (eight southeast states); and Western North Carolina Alliance (NC),
In 2013, a consent decree was lodged in federal court that set a deadline of December 19, 2014 for EPA's final rule.
Quotes from Partner Groups
Vickie Simmons, Moapa Band of Paiutes in Nevada
Email: simmonsvickie@ymail.com
Phone: 702-865-2910
"Our people have been harmed for decades by the toxic dust that blows from coal ash dumps at the Reid Gardner plant," says Vickie Simmons of the Moapa Band of Paiutes in Nevada. "We wanted a far stronger rule."
Amy Adams, North Carolina Campaign Coordinator, Appalachian Voices
Email: amy@appvoices.org
Phone: (252) 944-6459
"For the thousands of citizens whose groundwater is no longer safe for consumption due to leaching ponds or whose air is contaminated by fugitive dust, failing to regulate coal ash as hazardous is a slap in the face. We will continue to fight for cleanup of these toxic sites."
Traci Barkley, Water Resources Scientist, Prairie Rivers Network (she said use all or part of the quote)
Email: tbarkley@prairierivers.org
Phone: 217.344.2371
"While these rules put forward clean-up and safety standards to protect communities, the EPA is leaving oversight and enforcement almost entirely to the states.
Illinois has over 90 aging coal ash pits with coal ash pollutants found in the groundwater near every one. Communities rely on at-risk rivers and groundwater for drinking water, recreation, and business."
Barbara Gottlieb, Director for Environment & Health at Physicians for Social Responsibility
Email: bgottlieb@psr.org
Phone: (202) 587-5225
"It's high time that those communities get adequate protection from coal ash toxics like arsenic and chromium poisoning their water and their air," said Barbara Gottlieb, Director for Environment & Health at Physicians for Social Responsibility.
Mary Love, Kentuckians For The Commonwealth
Email: mbloveky@yahoo.com
Phone: 502-541-7434
"Hundreds of thousands of Kentuckians depend on the Ohio River for their drinking water. Of the 44 coal ash disposal sites nation-wide that the EPA has listed as high hazard, 19 of them sit on the Ohio River or one of its tributaries. As a result, Kentuckians are vulnerable to exposure to toxins from coal ash, especially since state officials do little to protect the public. Current Kentucky law regulates municipal garbage dumps more stringently than it regulates coal ash disposal sites. "--Mary Love, Kentuckians For The Commonwealth
Anne Hedges, Deputy Director of the Montana Environmental Information Center
Email: ahedges@meic.org
Phone: (406) 443-2520
"This rule comes far too late to protect the people who rely on groundwater in Colstrip, Montana. We can only hope that this rule will help get the toxins out of their water. Colstrip area ranchers told the state decades ago that the Colstrip ash ponds would leak but no one expected them to hemorrhage toxic water into ground and surface water for decades," said Anne Hedges, Deputy Director of the Montana Environmental Information Center.
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460A mysterious gambler raked in over $400,000 in profit from a series of bets placed shortly before the Trump administration bombed Venezuela and abducted its president.
A suspiciously timed and lucrative bet on the US abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro over the weekend has prompted speculation that the wager was placed with inside knowledge, possibly by someone within the Trump administration or its orbit.
The yet-unknown gambler placed a series of bets totaling nearly $34,000 between late December and January 3—the day of the US assault on Venezuela. All of the bets, placed on the cryptocurrency-based prediction platform Polymarket, were related to the probability of Maduro being removed from power and the US attacking Venezuela before the end of January.
The bettor, who went by username Burdensome-Mix on Polymarket, reportedly netted over $400,000 from the wagers in just 24 hours.
"Seems pretty suspicious!" wrote researcher Tyson Brody. "[US Defense Secretary] Pete Hegseth making some beer money on the side?"
NBC News reported Tuesday that the bettor "has already cashed out their Polymarket winnings in Solana, a type of cryptocurrency, through a major American exchange, with no indication they have tried to hide or launder the funds." The outlet added that "if any regulators or law enforcement went looking for the bettor, they’d likely have little difficulty locating them."
It was public knowledge that US President Donald Trump—who had said Maduro's days as the leader of Venezuela's government were "numbered"—was considering a direct attack on the South American country, and his administration had amassed a large military force in the region in recent months in preparation for such an assault.
But there was no publicly available information on the timing of any possible attack. The New York Times, which reportedly learned of the US assault and abduction operation shortly before it began, later revealed that Trump "had authorized the US military to go ahead as early as December 25, but left the precise timing to Pentagon officials and Special Operations planners to ensure that the attacking force was ready, and that conditions on the ground were optimal."
Trump gave the final go-ahead order late Friday night, according to the Times, and the attack began in the early hours of Saturday morning, Venezuela time.
Analysts have warned that the spread of prediction platforms like Polymarket—where gamblers can bet on a dizzying range of scenarios, including the timing of the second coming of Jesus Christ—could raise the likelihood of insiders trying to profit from confidential information.
It also increases the risk that people in positions of power and influence will try to push policy in a certain direction in order to cash in on their bets, said Demand Progress executive director Sean Vitka.
"And questions related to whether or not, and when, military action might be undertaken are especially vulnerable to such manipulation because the president frequently moves with discretion over the timing and (legally or not) without notice to the public or Congress," Vitka told The American Prospect.
"Our country is not something that can be annexed or taken over simply because someone wishes to do so," said Greenland Premier Orla Joelsen.
Leaders of several European nations on Tuesday released a joint statement pushing back on US President Donald Trump's threat to seize Greenland from Denmark.
The statement, which was signed by the heads of state of France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, Denmark, and the UK, emphasized that security in the Arctic region must be "achieved collectively, in conjunction with NATO allies including the United States, by upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty and the inviolability of borders."
While noting that the US is an "essential partner" in the NATO alliance, the leaders nonetheless said that "Greenland belongs to its people" and "it is for Denmark and Greenland, and them only, to decide on matters concerning Denmark and Greenland."
In a separate statement released Tuesday, Greenland Premier Orla Joelsen thanked the European leaders for speaking up in defense of his people's independence and emphasized that Greenland is not an imperial trophy to be won by the US president.
"Our country is not something that can be annexed or taken over simply because someone wishes to do so," Joelsen said. "At a time when the president of the United States has once again stated that the United States is very serious about Greenland, this support from our allies in NATO is both important and unequivocal."
Trump and his allies have been making more aggressive statements in recent days about taking Greenland, which Trump has called essential to US national security.
Top Trump aide Stephen Miller on Monday night refused to rule out using military force to take Greenland during a Monday interview with CNN, and further claimed that "the future of the free world depends on America to be able to assert ourselves and our interests without an apology."
The Trump administration's bellicose rhetoric, combined with its illegal invasion of Venezuela and abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, has reportedly convinced European leaders to take the threat of US imperialism on their territories seriously.
Danish sources who spoke with The Atlantic on Monday said that the Venezuela invasion was a wakeup call showing them that Trump is deadly serious about seizing Greenland against the will of its own people.
"Western diplomats and security officials we spoke with were apoplectic," reported The Atlantic. "One told us that Denmark and its Nordic neighbors have been taking the president’s statements seriously for a year but have remained uncertain about how to interpret them and, especially, how to respond."
Nathalie Tocci, director of the Istituto Affari Internazionali in Rome, argued in a Tuesday column for The Guardian that European leaders' refusal to condemn Trump's ouster of Maduro would only make it more likely that he would attack their territories as well in the coming months.
"Even if European leaders are being more vocal in support of Denmark, their ambiguity over Venezuela signals submission to Trump," Tocci argued. "And the more European countries act as colonies, unable and unwilling to stand up to Trump, the more they’ll be treated as such."
Trump's threats against Greenland have drawn widespread condemnation from elected Democrats, as well as from Rep. Don Bacon (R-Neb.), who wrote in a Tuesday post on X that it was "embarrassing" that he even had to address Trump's decision to menace a NATO ally.
"Denigrating our allies serves no purpose and there is no up side," he said. "It weakens us by diminishing trust between friends, and Russia and China love it. So... stop the stupid 'we want Greenland BS.'"
The White House adviser offered "a very good definition of imperialism," said Sen. Bernie Sanders.
"Belligerent" was how one Democratic lawmaker described a diatribe given by top White House adviser Stephen Miller on CNN Monday evening regarding the Trump administration's right to take over Venezuela—or any other country—if doing so is in the supposed interest of the US.
To Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), however, Miller was simply providing viewers with "a very good definition of imperialism" as he described the worldview the administration is operating under as it takes control of Venezuela and eyes other countries, including Greenland, that it believes it can and should invade.
"This is what imperialism is all about," Sanders told CNN's Jake Tapper. "And I suspect that people all over the world are saying, ‘Wow, we’re going back to where we were 100 years ago, or 50 years ago, where the big, powerful countries were exploiting poorer countries for their natural resources.'"
The senator spoke to Tapper shortly after Miller's interview, in which the news anchor asked whether President Donald Trump would support holding an election in Venezuela days after the US military bombed the country and abducted President Nicolás Maduro and his wife.
Miller refused to directly engage with the question, saying only that it would be "absurd and preposterous" for the US to install Venezuelan opposition leader María Corina Machado as the leader of the country, before asking Tapper to "give [him] the floor" and allow him to explain the White House's view on foreign policy.
"The United States is using its military to secure our interests unapologetically in our hemisphere," said Miller. "We're a superpower and under President Trump we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower. It is absurd that we would allow a nation in our backyard to become the supplier of resources to our adversaries but not to us."
Instead of "demanding that elections be held" in Venezuela, he added, "the future of the free world depends on America to be able to assert ourselves and our interests without an apology."
MILLER: The US is using its military to secure our interests unapologetically in our hemisphere. We're a superpower and under President Trump we are going to conduct ourselves as a superpower. It's absurd that we would allow a nation in our backyard to become the supplier of… pic.twitter.com/wXK2UxnqUj
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) January 5, 2026
The Trump administration has repeatedly claimed that Venezuela "stole" oil from the United States. The country is believed to have the largest oil reserves in the world, and the government nationalized its petroleum industry in 1976, including projects that had been run by US-based ExxonMobil. The last privately run oil operations were nationalized in 2007 by then-President Hugo Chavez.
Miller offered one of the most explicit explanations of the White House's view yet: that "sovereign countries don’t get sovereignty if the US wants their resources," as Rep. Seth Moulton (D-Mass.) translated in a social media post.
Moulton called Miller's tirade "genuinely unhinged" and "a disturbing window into how this administration thinks about the world."
Miller's remarks followed a similarly blunt statement at a UN Security Council emergency meeting by US Ambassador Michael Waltz.
"You cannot continue to have the largest energy reserves in the world under the control of adversaries of the United States," said Waltz.
Miller's description of the White House's current view on foreign policy followed threats from Trump against countries including Colombia, Mexico, and Greenland, and further comments suggested that the administration could soon move to take control of the latter country—even though it is part of the kingdom of Denmark, which along with the US is a founding member of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO).
"Greenland should be part of the United States," said Miller. "The president has been very clear about that, that is the formal position of the US government."
Miller: “Greenland has a population of 30,000 people. By what right does Denmark assert control over Greenland? The United States is the power of NATO. Greenland should be part of the United States.”
“Nobody is going to fight the US militarily over the future of Greenland.” pic.twitter.com/d7i2kMXFMD
— Dori Toribio (@DoriToribio) January 5, 2026
He dismissed the idea that the takeover of Greenland, home to about 56,000 people, would involve a military operation—though Trump has said he would not rule out using force—and said that "nobody's going to fight the United States militarily over the future of Greenland."
The vast island is strategically located in the Arctic Circle and has largely untapped reserves of rare-earth minerals.
Danish and Greenlandic officials have condemned Trump's latest threats this week, with Denmark's prime minister, Mette Frederiksen, warning that, in accordance with the NATO treaty, "everything would come to an end" if the US attacks another NATO country.
“The international community as we know it, democratic rules of the game, NATO, the world’s strongest defensive alliance—all of that would collapse if one NATO country chose to attack another," she told Danish news channel Live News on Monday.
The Danish government called an emergency meeting of its Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday to discuss "the kingdom's relationship with the United States."
On CNN, Sanders noted that as Trump sets his sights on controlling oil reserves in Venezuela and resources in Greenland, people across the president's own country are struggling under rising costs and financial insecurity.
"Maybe instead of trying to run Venezuela," said Sanders, "the president might try to do a better job running the United States of America."