

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.

Lisa Evans, Earthjustice, (978) 548-8645 or levans@earthjustice.org, Larissa Liebmann, Waterkeeper Alliance, (212) 747-0622 x 122 or LLiebmann@waterkeeper.org, Brian Willis, Sierra Club, (202) 895-0420 x103 or brian.willis@sierraclub.org, Michael Kelly, Clean Water Action, (202) 895-0420 x103 or mkelly@cleanwater.org, Andrew Rehn, Prairie Rivers Network, (217) 344-2371 x 208 or arehn@prairierivers.org, Tim Maloney, Hoosier Environmental Council, (812) 369-8677, Tom Pelton, Environmental Integrity Project, (443) 510-2574 or tpelton@environmentalintegrity.org, Ruth Santiago, Comite Dialogo Ambiental, Inc., (781) 312-2223 or rstgo2@gmail.com
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency signed yesterday the first rule of its two-part rulemaking to weaken the first-ever federal regulations that provide health and environmental safeguards for communities near toxic coal ash waste dumps. The rule was made public this morning.
The new rule:
All of these changes significantly weaken the protections established in 2015. Every single one of the changes is in response to an industry petition filed with the Trump administration in 2017.
Coal ash is the toxic waste left over from hundreds of coal-burning power plants throughout the United States. For decades, coal ash has been dumped into giant pits, where toxic chemicals seep into water and blow into the air. Coal ash waste is filled with some of some of the deadliest known toxic chemicals, including heavy metals like arsenic, lead, mercury and chromium. The toxics raise the risk for cancer, heart disease, and stroke, and can inflict permanent brain damage on children.
"Today's rule indicates Wheeler is continuing EPA's radical drive to remove critical health protections at the behest of industry," said Earthjustice attorney Lisa Evans. "This is the first major rule signed during Andrew Wheeler's time running the EPA, and his true colors are shining through. Wheeler is ignoring the serious health threats to hundreds of communities at risk from contaminated drinking water."
"This indefensible gutting of our nation's first-ever coal ash pollution control rule cements the shameful environmental legacy of the Trump Administration," said Lisa Hallowell, Senior Attorney with the Environmental Integrity Project. "Today's action opens the door for weakened monitoring and cleanup standards, which means - in no uncertain terms - that the public and the environment on which we all depend will be in harm's way."
In October 2015, the first-ever EPA safeguards to protect communities near coal ash dumps went into effect after Earthjustice filed a lawsuit on behalf of public interest groups and a Native American tribe, the Moapa Band of Paiutes. The EPA received more than a half-million comments from people supporting the safeguards that the EPA gutted today.
EPA is finalizing this rollback of coal ash protections just as the nation is discovering that nearly all coal ash ponds and landfills are leaking toxic pollutants to groundwater. The EPA's 2015 coal ash rule required utilities to test the water near their coal ash dumps to make sure hazardous chemicals were not leaking into drinking water sources. Coal ash contains concentrated levels of heavy metals, which are released to water when the ash is dumped into unlined pits. According to recently released industry data, about 95 percent of all the dump sites have contaminated groundwater with toxins like arsenic and boron to levels the EPA has deemed unsafe to drink.
We now know that the coal ash dumps are leaking, but EPA is looking the other way. Requirements to close these leaking dump sites and to clean up poisoned water were set to go into effect later in 2018, but the new rule weakens cleanup standards and pushes closure and cleanup dates to 2020.
"We will not stand by and allow the Trump Administration to give carte blanche to well-funded polluters that threaten the water of thousands of communities across our country with their toxic coal ash," said Dalal Aboulhosn, Sierra Club's Deputy Legislative Director for Land and Water. "We'll use every means we have to beat back this latest attempt to weaken basic clean water protections for working families, farmers, and outdoor businesses - whose lives and livelihoods are being threatened by coal ash every day. Our work will not be completed until every coal ash pit is properly secured and every local resident has access to an online monitor that confirms it."
"This administration is doing everything it can to give coal a free ride, including dismantling our bare minimum protections," said Larissa Liebmann, staff attorney at Waterkeeper Alliance. "The corporate dollars saved by weakening the CCR rule will be born by the communities living near coal ash disposal sites -- they will pay the costs of contaminated drinking water and polluted waterways."
"EPA failed for three decades to protect our water from toxic coal plants and now the Trump administration is turning back the clock, doubling down on that failure, and leaving communities in jeopardy," said Jennifer Peters, Clean Water Action's National Water Programs Director. "Trump clearly doesn't care who his administration puts at risk as long as he can give handouts to the corporate polluters who write the checks for re-election campaigns."
The EPA and Wheeler are caving to pressure from polluters who have fought hard against common-sense pollution protections for coal ash dumps. Over 1,400 coal ash waste dumps are spread across the nation, and at almost every site, the toxic waste has contaminated water sources.
"These changes aren't going to help Illinois," said Andrew Rehn of the Prairie Rivers Network. "We need professional engineers, not political appointees or polluters, making decisions about the safety and clean up of coal ash."
"Decades of regulatory inaction on coal ash disposal has left Indiana with a toxic legacy of serious groundwater contamination - with unsafe levels of arsenic, lead, boron, and radium, among other contaminants -- confirmed at fifteen disposal sites in Indiana located on the shores of the White River, the Wabash River, Kankakee River, the Ohio River and Lake Michigan," said Tim Maloney of Hoosier Environmental Council. "It is simply negligent for the EPA to roll back the long-overdue federal coal ash standards that the agency adopted in 2015, and would result in this pollution being left in place to continue contaminating our waterways and drinking water sources for many years to come."
Federal protections are critical, because the dumps are ticking time bombs. In 2008, the single-largest toxic waste spill in U.S. history happened when a billion gallons of coal ash sludge burst through a dam at the Tennessee Valley Authority Kingston plant and covered 300 acres, destroying dozens of homes. In 2014, a portion of a coal ash dump in North Carolina collapsed, fouling 80 miles of the Dan River with toxic sludge.
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.
800-584-6460"This decision is part of the decision already made by the Spanish government not to participate in or contribute to a war which was initiated unilaterally and against international law," said one Spanish minister.
Doubling down on its status as an outlier among European countries that have largely supported or avoided speaking out forcefully against the US-Israeli war on Iran, Spain is closing its airspace to US military planes that are part of the invasion, with Defense Minister Margarita Robles on Monday calling the war "profoundly illegal and profoundly unjust."
"We don’t authorize either the use of military bases or the use of airspace for actions related to the war in Iran,” Robles told reporters. “I think everyone knows Spain’s position. It’s very clear."
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez angered President Donald Trump soon after the US and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu launched their war against Iran on February 28, with one of the first attacks striking a school and killing at least 160 children and teachers.
Sánchez responded to the assault by announcing the US would not be permitted to launch attacks on Iran from Spain's military bases, prompting Trump to threaten a full trade embargo against the country in retaliation.
On Monday, Spanish Economy Minister Carlos Cuerpo appeared unfazed by a reporter's suggestion that closing the country's airspace to the US could worsen relations with the White House.
"This decision is part of the decision already made by the Spanish government not to participate in or contribute to a war which was initiated unilaterally and against international law," Cuerpo said simply in a radio interview.
International legal experts have said the war is clear violation of the United Nations Charter, which "prohibits the use of force against another State unless that use of force is authorized by the UN Security Council or is a necessary and proportionate act of individual or collective self-defense in response to an armed attack.”
Sánchez told the Spanish Congress last Wednesday that the country has "denied the United States the use of the Rota [de la Frontera] and Morón bases for this illegal war."
"All flight plans involving operations in Iran have been rejected. All of them, including those for refueling aircraft,” said Sánchez.
In the US, Progressive Mass political director Jonathan Cohn said it was "refreshing to see a European country take a hard line against the United States' illegal and immoral wars."
US aircraft can continue to use the airspace and land at the bases in emergency situations, and are still able to provide logistics support to 80,000 US forces stationed across Europe.
But as The Guardian reported Monday, 15 US refueling planes were diverted from the Morón de la Frontera and Rota bases to military facilities in France and Germany at the beginning of the war.
The US was also forced to find an alternative location for B-52 and B-1 bombers due to Spain's policy, with British Prime Minister Keir Starmer agreeing to allow Trump to send them to Fairford Air Base in Gloucestershire, England in the first days of the war.
The Seville Air Traffic Control Center has provided navigation support to B-2 Spirit bombers that have traveled from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri to carry out strikes in Iran, but those planes do not enter Spanish airspace, instead crossing the Strait of Gibraltar.
Sánchez has rejected Trump's criticism of Spain's policy, noting that the country has also led the way in recent years in recognizing the state of Palestine and speaking out against Israel's assault, as other European governments eventually did.
“They say that Spain is alone," the prime minister said earlier this month. "They said the same when we recognized the state of Palestine, and then others followed. We are not alone. We are the first. Those defending the indefensible will be the ones left alone.”
"Attacking civilian infrastructure, and acutely desalination plants, is a war crime," said former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt. "Will American armed forces accept orders to do so?"
US President Donald Trump on Monday threatened to destroy every desalination plant in Iran along with the country's energy infrastructure, which human rights organizations and legal experts say would be a grave violation of international law and a war crime.
In a post on his Truth Social platform, Trump warned that if Iran's government doesn't agree to a deal with his administration "shortly," the US military will "conclude our lovely 'stay' in Iran by blowing up and completely obliterating all of their Electric Generating Plants, Oil Wells, and Kharg Island (and possibly all desalinization plants!), which we have purposefully not yet 'touched.'"
Former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt wrote in response that "attacking civilian infrastructure, and acutely desalination plants, is a war crime."
"Will American armed forces accept orders to do so?" he asked.
Brian Finucane, senior adviser to the US Program at the International Crisis Group, wrote that "the categorical and retributive framing of this threat to attack Iranian infrastructure makes clear that this is a threat to commit war crimes."
Trump's Monday post marked an escalation of his previous threat to target Iran's civilian infrastructure, specifically its power plants, if the Strait of Hormuz was not fully reopened. The US president initially gave Iran 48 hours to capitulate to his demand, but he later pushed his arbitrary deadline back to April 6, claiming progress in diplomatic talks with Iran.
Iranian officials have repeatedly denied that any direct talks with the US are taking place and rejected the administration's proposed 15-point ceasefire plan.
Erika Guevara-Rosas, senior director of research, advocacy, policy, and campaigns at Amnesty International, said last week that by threatening strikes on Iran's civilian infrastructure, the Trump administration is "effectively indicating its willingness to plunge an entire country into darkness, and to potentially deprive its people of their human rights to life, water, food, healthcare and adequate standard of living, and to subject them to severe pain and suffering."
"When power plants collapse, horrific consequences cascade instantly," said Guevara-Rosas. "Water pumping stations would stop functioning, clean water would become scarce, and preventable diseases would spread. Hospitals would lose electricity and fuel, forcing surgeries to be cancelled and life-support machines to shut down. Food production and distribution networks would collapse, deepening hunger and causing widespread food scarcity. Many businesses would also shut down with devastating economic consequences, including mass unemployment."
Kenneth Roth, the former executive director of Human Rights Watch, told The New York Times that he sees "no difference between what Trump is threatening to do in Iran and what the International Criminal Court charged four Russian commanders for doing in Ukraine."
"Trump is openly threatening a war crime," said Roth.
In June 2024, ICC judges issued arrest warrants for top Russian commanders accused of "the war crime of directing attacks at civilian objects." The judges cited "a large number of strikes against numerous electric power plants and sub-stations were carried out by the Russian armed forces in multiple locations in Ukraine."
According to Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi, the US has already targeted Iran's water infrastructure, specifically "a freshwater desalination plant on Qeshm Island."
"Water supply in 30 villages has been impacted," Abbas wrote in a March 7 social media post. "Attacking Iran's infrastructure is a dangerous move with grave consequences. The US set this precedent, not Iran."
Iran is among the most water-stressed countries on the planet, and large-scale US strikes on the country's desalination and power plants would make conditions significantly worse.
While "only a small fraction of Iran’s water supply comes from desalination plants," Grist's Frida Garza wrote last week, "strikes on its power plants would indeed hamper the country’s water supply."
"Without electricity," Garza wrote, "water treatment operations could not run."
"The case for windfall taxes has never been clearer," said 350.org's chief executive.
An analysis released Monday estimates that oil and gas price spikes driven by the US-Israeli war on Iran have so far cost consumers and businesses around the world over $100 billion—money that has flowed into the coffers of some of the wealthiest, most powerful fossil fuel companies on the planet.
The new analysis by 350.org finds that, just over a month into the war, consumers and businesses have lost between $104.2 billion and $111.6 billion to rising oil and gas prices—an estimate that the environmental group acknowledges is likely conservative, given it doesn't account for "wider knock-on effects, such as rising fertiliser and food costs, declines in economic output and employment, or broader inflation driven by fossil fuel price volatility. "
The more than $100 billion, 350.org said, "has been siphoned from ordinary people to oil and gas companies."
“On top of the incalculable suffering of families and communities torn apart by the war, ordinary people around the world are paying an extraordinary price through fossil fuel-driven energy spikes," said Anne Jellema, 350.org's chief executive. "Over $100 billion has gone straight into the pockets of fossil fuel companies, while families struggle to afford energy and basic necessities."
"The case for windfall taxes," Jellema added, "has never been clearer.”

The analysis was published as global oil prices rose again following a weekend missile attack on Israel by Yemen's Houthis and Trump's threat to "take the oil in Iran," signaling another potential escalation in a war that has already killed thousands, sparked an appalling humanitarian crisis, and destabilized the global economy.
One key beneficiary of the chaos is the fossil fuel industry, which is set to reap billions in windfall profits thanks to rising oil and gas prices. Reuters reported late last week that analysts covering Chevron, Shell, and ExxonMobil have significantly raised earnings estimates for the fossil fuel giants in response to war-fueled price surges.
"US shale producers and other companies without major operations in the Middle East should gain the most, benefiting from higher prices without costs associated with shut-in production, stranded tankers, or expensive repairs to war-hit facilities," Reuters noted. "Still, executives said the big profits will probably not boost their planned capital spending on new production."
Earlier this month, Democratic lawmakers in the US Congress introduced legislation that would impose a windfall profit tax on large American oil companies and return the money to consumers in the form of quarterly rebates. The bill stands no realistic chance of getting through the Republican-controlled Congress, which is awash in Big Oil campaign cash.
“American consumers are once again getting squeezed at the gas pump as President Trump’s war of choice in Iran sends gas prices soaring and money flowing to his Big Oil donors,” said US Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the bill's lead sponsor in the Senate. “We should send any big windfall for Big Oil back to the hardworking people who paid for it at the gas pump."