soil pollution
Uranium exploration near Alaska Native village sparks public health concerns
A remote Iñupiat community in northwestern Alaska is protesting a planned uranium mining project near its land, warning it could contaminate waters central to their health, food, and way of life.
In short:
- Panther Minerals plans to begin uranium exploration this summer near the Tubuktulik River, close to Elim, an Iñupiat village that relies on the area’s fish and game for food.
- Elim residents have fought the project since 2024, citing concerns about radioactive contamination, health risks, and lack of consultation by Alaska’s Department of Natural Resources.
- The Trump administration’s push to expand domestic mining has encouraged such projects, reversing Biden-era protections and putting Alaska’s Native communities on a collision course with industry interests.
Key quote:
“If [the river] becomes contaminated, it will have an impact on the whole Bering Sea. That’s the way I see it.”
— Johnny Jemewouk, resident of Elim
Why this matters:
In the windswept tundra of western Alaska, the village of Elim finds itself at the center of a growing national debate: How far should the U.S. go to secure so-called “critical minerals,” and at what cost? Residents fear that proposed uranium exploration could scar the land in ways that echo the deep wounds left on Navajo Nation lands decades earlier, where radioactive dust settled into homes, tailings seeped into water sources, and a spike in cancer cases followed. Elim, a predominantly Iñupiat community, depends on the region’s healthy fish populations for subsistence and cultural continuity. But with uranium mines known to produce toxic runoff and long-lived radioactive waste, many worry the local fishery — and the entire ecosystem — could be jeopardized.
As President Trump’s administration pushes hard for domestic mineral production in the name of national security and economic growth, Alaskan communities like Elim are raising alarm bells about insufficient federal protections, inadequate environmental oversight, and a disregard for Indigenous consent.
Related EHN coverage: Years after mining stops, uranium's legacy lingers on Native land
China restored the world’s most eroded land—but not without challenges
China’s Loess Plateau, once considered the most eroded place on Earth, underwent a massive restoration effort that transformed barren land into thriving forests and farmland, though concerns remain over water use and long-term sustainability.
In short:
- The Chinese government launched the Grain to Green project in 1999 to combat severe erosion on the Loess Plateau, banning overgrazing, tree-cutting, and hillside farming while providing subsidies for sustainable practices.
- By 2016, China had converted over 11,500 square miles of cropland into forest or grassland, improving soil stability and biodiversity but also raising concerns about reduced water availability.
- While the project boosted local employment and reduced dust storms, some farmers resisted the changes, fearing loss of food production, and experts warn that the revegetation may now be affecting regional water balance.
Key quote:
“When the environment improved, all the birds returned. The forest has developed its ecological system naturally.”
— Yan Rufeng, forestry worker
Why this matters:
Massive land restoration efforts can reverse decades of environmental degradation, but they also present complex trade-offs. China’s success in regreening the Loess Plateau showcases the power of large-scale conservation, yet it also highlights the need for careful planning to avoid unintended consequences like water shortages. As climate change accelerates desertification and extreme weather patterns, nations worldwide are looking to similar projects as potential models. But China’s experience makes clear that land restoration must be paired with long-term water management strategies. The challenge going forward will be ensuring that these well-intentioned efforts do not come at the cost of other critical resources.
Learn more: Nations tackle worsening drought and desertification in global summit
Shell faces legal battle in London over oil pollution in Nigeria
A Nigerian king has taken oil giant Shell to court in London, arguing that decades of spills have poisoned his community’s water and land, while the company denies responsibility.
In short:
- King Godwin Bebe Okpabi, leader of the Ogale community in Nigeria’s Niger Delta, is suing Shell over chronic oil pollution, which he says has caused widespread illness and environmental destruction.
- A 2011 UN report found severe contamination in the region, including benzene levels in drinking water 900 times higher than World Health Organization guidelines, with recent tests showing even worse conditions.
- Shell argues it is not liable for spills linked to oil theft and illegal refining, while the case will be decided under Nigerian law in a full trial set for 2026.
Key quote:
“This is poison, and they are spending millions of dollars to pay the best lawyers in the world so that they will not clean my land.”
— King Godwin Bebe Okpabi
Why this matters:
The oil spills in Nigeria’s Niger Delta have left behind a trail of environmental and human suffering. For decades, leaking pipelines and blowouts have drenched the region in crude oil, poisoning waterways, farmlands, and the air itself. The health toll has been just as devastating. Cancer rates in affected communities are climbing, birth defects are on the rise, and respiratory illnesses are common. Many residents are forced to drink from polluted water sources, their options dwindling as cleanup efforts stall. Despite legal victories ordering oil giants like Shell to take responsibility, progress has been sluggish.
Now, Shell faces a landmark case that could reshape how multinational corporations are held accountable for environmental disasters. If successful, the case could pave the way for stricter enforcement and greater financial liability, but for many in the Niger Delta, the damage is already done.
Learn more: Nigeria considers restarting oil production in polluted delta region
Trump administration closes environmental offices, reshaping federal policy
The Trump administration is swiftly shutting down environmental initiatives, placing dozens of employees on leave and dismantling key offices within the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the Justice Department.
Maxine Joselow and Amudalat Ajasa report for The Washington Post.
In short:
- The EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights, which addresses pollution in marginalized communities, is being closed, with 168 employees placed on leave.
- The Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division has eliminated its environmental justice office and frozen pending litigation, raising concerns about the politicization of environmental enforcement.
- The administration’s moves align with broader efforts to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion policies, with former officials warning the closures will lead to increased pollution in vulnerable communities.
Key quote:
“Shuttering the environmental justice office will mean more toxic contaminants, dangerous air and unsafe water in communities across the nation that have been most harmed by pollution in the past.”
— Matthew Tejada, former EPA environmental justice official
Why this matters:
Eliminating environmental justice programs could mean more exposure to toxic chemicals, worsening health disparities and loss of legal safeguards for communities already bearing the brunt of industrial pollution.
Read more:
New evidence links heavy metal pollution with wildfire retardants
“The chemical black box” that blankets wildfire-impacted areas is increasingly under scrutiny.
Wildfire retardants, the hot-pink mix of water and chemicals sprayed from airplanes by the U.S Forest service to combat wildfires, are under scrutiny after a recent study found they’re a serious source of heavy metal pollution in the U.S.
The research, conducted by a team from the University of Southern California and published in Environmental Science & Technology Letters, found that between 2009 and 2021, wildfire retardant application in the U.S. released at least 380,000 kg (more than 400 tons) of at least four toxic metals into the environment. Toxic metals — like cadmium, chromium and vanadium — accumulate in ecosystems and organisms and are linked to organ damage, cancer and neurological disorders.
“The heavy metals report from [the University of Southern California] has been a catalyst. It has created internal discussions about using these retardants,” Andy Stahl, the executive director of the nonprofit watchdog group Forest Service Employees for Environmental Ethics (FSEEE), who was not involved with the study, told EHN.
Wildfire retardant is composed of about 85% water, 10% fertilizers and a mix of other undisclosed ingredients that sticks to plants and depletes the fire of oxygen. This study cracks open the “chemical black box” of the proprietary, undisclosed ingredients in wildfire retardants, according to Stahl.
Between 2009 and 2021, over 440 million gallons of fire retardant were sprayed from airplanes onto federal, state and private land, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Most of it was applied in the western U.S., where the area burned by wildfires has increased by eight-fold over the past four decades.
The new research comes as the Forest Service stretches its capacity to put out multiple fires in the Los Angeles area, two of them ranked among the most destructive and deadly blazes in California’s history. Since January 7, the fires have destroyed at least 15,000 structures and killed 28 people. On Wednesday, January 22, a new fire broke out near Castaic, north of Los Angeles.
Firefighters have argued that retardants are an important tool for protecting communities and slowing down fire. “Without aerially applied fire retardant to slow the growth of more isolated fires, potential exists for some of these fires to grow larger before firefighters can safely fight the fires,” a Forest Service report from 2011 reads.
Application of long-term fire retardants to the western United States between 2000 and 2011 (A) and 2012 and 2019 (B).From the study, "Metals in Wildfire Suppressants"
However, a series of lawsuits brought by FSEEE that date back to 2004 have called into question the chemicals’ potential impacts on wildlife and water pollution. In 2008, a federal judge ordered the Forest Service to conduct a study of wildfire retardants’ environmental impacts. In 2011 the study was published, finding that aerial retardant posed a risk to amphibians, rodents, insects and species whose habitat is limited to small geographic areas. As a result, the Forest Service enacted "exclusion zones" where retardant would not be used and established a 300-foot buffer when applying retardant around surface water by plane.
“That fiction lasted until they realized they missed a lot of times,” Stahl said.
The Forest Service data shows the agency has violated its own restrictions 457 times on National Forest System lands since 2012. Of those, 213 intrusions have landed partially in water, either “to protect human life or public safety” (23 intrusions) or by accident (190 intrusions). These intrusions, the FSEEE argued in a 2022 lawsuit, violated the Clean Water Act.
A year later, a US District judge partially agreed with the employees, ordering the Forest Service to apply for a permit from the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate the spraying. The permitting process might take years, so the judge also ordered the Forest Service to report back every six months about the state of the permit. “They’re one-sentence reports, ‘we have asked the EPA for a permit.’ That’s the report,” Stahl said.
In fire-devastated areas, damaged pipes can suck in smoke, and plastic pipes can melt and release harmful chemicals into water, causing spikes in concentrations of harmful chemicals like benzene and other carcinogens. The evidence of heavy metals’ presence in wildfire retardants, Stahl argued, adds to the burden these chemicals might be posing to water treatment systems.
Heavy metals precipitate to the bottom of the cleaning ponds of these systems, concentrating in a sludge that is often sold to farmers across the country to spray on farmland. Other harmful chemicals, like PFAS or “forever chemicals”, which have been associated with birth defects, cancer and developmental delays, have also been found in sewage sludge. “Now [we realize] it may have heavy metals at superfund levels,” Stahl said.
“The challenge for the Forest Service is they’ve done such a good job marketing this magic red elixir, that it's hard for them to back away from it and say, ‘oh, it turns out that the stuff we've been pouring all over your forests and your backyards and your residential areas is actually poisonous,’” Stahl said.
Agroecology empowers farmers in northern Ghana
Erratic rainfall and rising temperatures are driving Ghanaian farmers toward agroforestry and mixed farming to restore soil, retain water and secure livelihoods in a changing climate.
In short:
- Agroforestry techniques like alley cropping integrate trees with crops, helping retain moisture, reduce erosion and enrich soil naturally, while also providing income from tree products like baobab leaves.
- Mixed farming combines crops and livestock, creating balanced ecosystems where livestock manure enriches the soil and grazing reduces waste, while birds and bats naturally control pests.
- These practices offer a scalable model for drought-prone regions, improving biodiversity, stabilizing incomes and reducing dependency on synthetic fertilizers.
Key quote:
“Agroforestry not only restores soil fertility but also improves water retention, provides shade and attracts pollinators.”
— Irene Egyir, agricultural economist, University of Ghana
Why this matters:
As climate change disrupts traditional farming in northern Ghana, agroecological methods provide a lifeline. Paired with mixed farming systems—where livestock help fertilize the land and pest-eating birds handle crop threats—this approach turns farming into a harmonious, self-sustaining loop. It’s farming for a future that doesn’t just survive climate change but fosters resilience in its wake. Read more: Climate, justice, and the deep roots of regenerative farming.
Disasters expose hidden chemical threats while laws keep communities in the dark
Hurricanes like Helene reveal toxic secrets as outdated laws and industry lobbying leave communities vulnerable to chemical dangers.
In short:
- Hurricane Helene devastated Asheville, North Carolina, leaving residents exposed to potentially toxic sludge with limited knowledge of its source due to federal disclosure loopholes.
- Laws like the 1986 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act are outdated, and high reporting thresholds prevent residents from accessing full information on hazardous materials in nearby industrial facilities.
- Lobbying by chemical industry groups has stymied EPA efforts to increase transparency, with corporations actively pushing back on proposed reforms aimed at protecting public health.
Key quote:
“If we were serious about protecting communities from toxic chemicals, we would really update these statutes. We would make them actually reflect what we know about the hazards that these chemicals pose.”
— Eve Gartner, toxics expert, Earthjustice
Why this matters:
Industry-backed lobbying has stymied the EPA’s attempts at reform, leaving Asheville residents—and communities nationwide—on uncertain ground. For families and healthcare providers on the frontlines of post-storm health fallout, the hidden threat of toxics in their backyard adds a troubling twist to an already challenging recovery. Read more: Hurricane season spurs hog waste worries in North Carolina.