Tag: Water Pollution

Protect Our Water & Safeguard Our Future!

/ activist360

Defend Clean Water Act from Project 2025 Threat

Water as a Sacred Force Across Cultures

Many cultures around the world revere water as a sacred and life-giving force, recognizing its profound symbolic and spiritual significance. In Hinduism, water is regarded as the essential sustainer of life, without which most living beings, including humans, would not be able to survive. Indigenous cultures, such as the Lakota Sioux in North America, honor water as a sacred element central to life and ceremonies, often referring to it as “Mni Wiconi,” meaning “Water is Life.” In Buddhism, water symbolizes purity, clarity, and calmness, representing a path to spiritual enlightenment. Across African traditions, water is scarce and precious, reflecting the community’s resilience. This universal reverence for water underscores its critical role in sustaining life and reinforces the need for its preservation across diverse global communities.

Protecting Our Water: The Importance of the Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act (CWA), enacted in 1972, is a landmark U.S. federal law aimed at regulating water pollution to restore and maintain the integrity of the nation’s water bodies. However, the act is under threat from initiatives like Project 2025, which proposes a conservative restructuring of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), prioritizing industrial and business interests over environmental protections. By undermining the Clean Water Act and reducing federal oversight, Project 2025 endangers access to clean water for vulnerable communities, particularly those near industrial zones.

The History Behind the Clean Water Act

The Clean Water Act was born out of a growing environmental crisis in the mid-20th century. Before its enactment, the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1948 was the first U.S. law to address water pollution, but it lacked the enforcement mechanisms to make a significant impact. During the 1960s, environmental concerns escalated, particularly following events like the 1969 fire on Ohio’s Cuyahoga River, which was so polluted it ignited when an oil slick caught fire. Public outcry, combined with the environmental movement of the time, fueled the demand for stronger water protection laws. This momentum led to the drafting of the Clean Water Act in 1972, aimed at restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the nation’s waters​.

Key Provisions of the Clean Water Act

Here are the key provisions of the Clean Water Act, designed to protect our nation’s waters from harmful pollution and ensure long-term environmental sustainability:

  • Permits and Regulation: Facilities that discharge pollutants into surface waters must obtain permits under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES). This system helps monitor and regulate pollutants from industries, municipalities, and certain agricultural activities.

  • Water Quality Standards: States are required to establish water quality standards for various bodies of water, ensuring pollution levels remain below harmful thresholds. If these standards aren’t met, more stringent pollution control measures are implemented.

  • Protection of Wetlands and Streams: Wetlands and small streams, vital ecosystems for filtering water and providing habitat, are protected under the CWA. Recent Supreme Court decisions have clarified the types of water bodies covered, emphasizing the importance of maintaining ecological balance.

  • Pollution Control: The CWA encourages the development of technology to limit pollution. Facilities must adhere to technology-based standards, ensuring that water pollutants are minimized as much as possible.

  • Non-Point Source Pollution: In addition to direct discharges, non-point source pollution, such as agricultural runoff, is a significant contributor to water pollution. The CWA provides support for research and practices aimed at reducing this type of pollution.

  • Public Participation: The CWA allows citizens to take legal action against polluters and government agencies that fail to enforce the Act. This provision ensures accountability and gives the public a role in protecting water resources.

Health Implications of Unprotected Water

If water bodies are not adequately protected, water pollution can have severe health consequences for both humans and wildlife. Contaminated water may harbor harmful substances like heavy metals, pesticides, industrial chemicals, and pathogens, leading to various health issues. Exposure to polluted water can cause cancer, gastrointestinal illnesses, reproductive problems, and neurological disorders. For instance, chemicals like lead and mercury can impair brain function and development, while certain pollutants are linked to male fertility issues. Vulnerable populations, including children, pregnant women, and the elderly, are particularly at risk. Long-term exposure to polluted water can result in chronic health problems, overwhelming public health systems and endangering future generations.

Why the Clean Water Act Matters Today

The Clean Water Act has been instrumental in improving water quality across the United States. Since its implementation, many rivers, lakes, and other bodies of water have shown significant improvement. However, challenges remain, particularly with non-point source pollution and groundwater contamination, as well as the latest and most significant threat, Project 2025.

Project 2025 envisions a conservative restructuring of the EPA that places industrial and business interests over the imperative for clean water and air, potentially endangering communities and paving the way for toxins, chemicals, and oil to enter our waterways. It undermines the EPA’s capacity to safeguard diverse communities and the human right to clean water by favoring the self-interest of corporations over environmental and public health protections. This initiative threatens to reverse the progress made by the Clean Water Act, removing standards that protected all of us across the country and creating a patchwork of state standards that leaves vulnerable populations, such as low-income and Indigenous communities, at greater risk. By limiting the EPA’s authority and diminishing legal recourse for affected individuals, Project 2025 weakens the essential safeguards that protect public health and the environment.

What You Can Do: Reject Project 2025, Reject Trump & Vote Blue

Individuals play an essential role in supporting the goals of the Clean Water Act and protecting water resources. Here are a few ways you can make a difference:

  • Learn about the threats that pollution and toxins pose to your health and the health of your loved ones.

  • Support policies and legislation aimed at strengthening water protections.

  • Participate in local clean-up efforts to protect wetlands, rivers, and other bodies of water.

The Clean Water Act has laid the foundation for a cleaner, healthier environment, and it’s up to all of us to continue building on that legacy. By staying informed and taking action, we can help safeguard water resources for future generations.

Don’t operate out of fear, operate out of hope, because with hope everything is possible.
—Mni Wiconi

Humanity subsidizing ‘our own extinction,’ warns study

/ activist360 / Leave a comment
Extinction Rebellion blockade of the OberbaumbrĂźcke. Credit: Leonhard Lenz, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons
Extinction Rebellion blockade of the OberbaumbrĂźcke. Credit: Leonhard Lenz, CC0, via Wikimedia Commons

World governments are spending $1.8 trillion annually to support fossil fuel emissions, deforestation, water pollution, and other harms to biodiversity and the planet.

By Julia Conley, Common Dreams (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Releasing a new study showing that world governments spend at least $1.8 trillion annually to subsidize activities which worsen the climate crisis, global subsidies experts on Thursday said leaders must eliminate or redirect the financial supports as part of an ambitious Global Biodiversity Framework at an upcoming summit in China.

“Reforming the $1.8 trillion a year of subsidies that are harming the environment could make an important contribution towards unlocking the over $700 billion a year needed to reverse nature loss by 2030.

The B Team and Business for Nature, two organizations that push businesses around the globe to adopt sustainable practices, supported the study, titled Financing Our Survival: Building a Nature-Positive Economy Through Subsidy Reform.

According to the authors—Doug Koplow of subsidy research firm Earth Track and Ronald Steenblik of the International Institute for Sustainable Development—a lack of transparency regarding the use of subsidies means that the amount of government money being spent on the destruction of nature could be much higher than the research shows.

Photo by Evan Nitschke from Pexels
Photo by Evan Nitschke from Pexels

“Nature is declining at an alarming rate, and we have never lived on a planet with so little biodiversity,” said Christiana Figueres, former executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) and a member of The B Team. “At least $1.8 trillion is funding the destruction of nature and changing our climate, while creating huge risks for the very businesses who are receiving the subsidies… Harmful subsidies must be redirected towards protecting the climate and nature, rather than financing our own extinction.”

The report identifies at least $640 billion in annual fossil fuel subsidies, $520 billion used by the agricultural sector, $350 billion in water management and wastewater infrastructure, and $155 billion subsidizing logging and unsustainable forest management, all of which account for the majority of annual subsidies.

The equivalent of at least 2% of the global GDP is being spent by governments to finance water pollution and air pollution, soil erosion, deforestation, biodiversity loss, planet-heating fossil fuel emissions, risks to ecosystems in oceans and waterways across the globe, and other harms to nature and humanity, the authors said.

To help finance climate crisis mitigation measures in the Global South—as wealthy nations pledged they would in 2009, promising $100 billion annually—and redirect government funds toward a transition to renewable energy and a reversal of nature loss, hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies must be eliminated or repurposed, according to the report.

A draft of the Global Biodiversity Framework calls for $500 billion per year in reformed subsidies—a target that “needs to be strengthened” in April at the U.N. Biodiversity Conference (COP 15) in Kunming, China.

“The case is clear: reforming the $1.8 trillion a year of subsidies that are harming the environment could make an important contribution towards unlocking the over $700 billion a year needed to reverse nature loss by 2030 as well as the cost of reaching net zero carbon emissions by 2050,” wrote the authors. “This needs to happen alongside aligning all private financial flows to nature-positive and increasing public and private finance to deliver innovative financial solutions that help protect, restore, and conserve nature.”

“With political determination and radical public-private sector collaboration,” they added, “we can reform these harmful subsidies and create opportunities for an equitable, nature-positive and net-zero economy. To do so, we must bring awareness, transparency, and disclosure on subsidies from both governments and business.”

Ahead of the biodiversity conference in April, said Business for Nature, negotiators must strengthen the Global Biodiversity Framework draft by including a commitment to reform “ALL harmful subsidies, including indirect and direct incentives.”

“Climate action is at a crossroads, in part because of the large scale of public money flowing to harmful industries and practices,” said Mary Robinson, former president of Ireland and member of The B Team. “We need to see thorough subsidy reform from governments and businesses, with social and environmental considerations at the heart, to ensure a just and equitable transition for all.”