EarthBlog

One year ago, hundreds of Xinka People gathered in Guatemala City’s central park to announce their decision to deny consent for Pan American Silver’s Escobal mine in their territory. 

The announcement was the culmination of a more than eight-year long consultation process ordered by Guatemala’s Supreme Court in 2017. The consultation has been led by the Guatemalan Ministry of Energy and Mines, and according to the company’s website, the company “fully respect(s) this process.” 

While administrative aspects of the consultation are still ongoing, the Xinka People’s decision marked an important milestone in the process, making it impossible for Pan American Silver to re-open the mine and respect its commitments to human rights and Indigenous People’s rights. 

Silence from Pan American Silver

Pan American Silver has still not publicly recognized or adequately disclosed the Xinka Peoples’ decision to deny consent. It has not explained how the decision will impact its investment or the financial costs of adequately closing the Escobal mine. 

Saying One Thing, Doing Another

That silence is inconsistent with the company’s Global Human Rights Policy, which states that it will “recognize and respect cultural values, beliefs and traditions of people in the countries and communities in which we operate and the rights of indigenous peoples.” 

The Xinka People’s May 2025 decision is the culmination of a rigorous process that included in-depth information gathering and analysis of the environmental and cultural impacts of the mine by Xinka authorities with the support of technical experts. 

The company’s Global Human Rights Policy also includes a commitment to “act with transparency and avoid knowingly being complicit in activities that cause, or are likely to cause, adverse human rights impacts.” This is important given the Escobal mine has been marred in controversy and marked by violence. The mine was the subject of a civil suit filed in British Columbia by shooting victims against the previous mine owner. 

Throughout the consultation process, Xinka and other community leaders have pointed to Pan American’s community engagement programs and communication efforts, like mine visits and social media campaigns, as a problem. They said these public relations efforts spread misinformation and undermined the possibility of a good faith process. And yet the company persists with these types of community relations activities. 

Strong Opposition to the Mine

The widespread opposition to this mine since 2011 is well documented. On more than 16 occasions in the last 15 years, Xinka people and other local residents have voted overwhelmingly against the mine in municipal and community level referendums. 

There is also an around-the-clock encampment that has remained in the town of Casillas, 15 km from the mine, for nearly nine years to monitor mine-related traffic. This enables the community to make sure the company did not resume mining.

Bringing the Message Home to Pan American Silver

Xinka leaders and allies have brought the message to Pan American Silver’s home country of Canada. On May 4, Canadian Member of Parliament and Green Party leader, Elizabeth May,  formally tabled a petition in the House of Commons demanding respect for the Xinka People’s decision. With over 700 signatures from 12 provinces across the country, the petition urges the Government of Canada to reaffirm the Xinka People’s right to free, prior and informed consent and self-determination, and to support the safety and security of Xinka defenders. 

The Canadian government has 45 days from the tabling of the petition to respond. The petition also urges Pan American Silver and Guatemalan authorities to respect the results of the consultation. In November 2025, concerned citizens in Vancouver delivered another petition with over 6,000 signatures to Pan American Silver’s office, demanding respect for Xinka People’s self-determination. This petition was the culmination of the second visit of Xinka leaders to Canada in 2025, to demand the company respect their decision in the consultation process. 

Standing in Solidarity

Earthworks is proud to amplify the decision of the Xinka People, to reinforce their efforts, and to stand in solidarity with the larger movement in Guatemala that is defending land, water and the right to a clean and healthy environment. 

Like Indigenous Peoples everywhere, the Xinka People have a right to decide their own future. They have a right to say yes, yes with conditions, or no to mining. Now that the Xinka People have formally denied consent for the Escobal Mine, we continue to join partners in Canada, Guatemala, and around the globe who are lifting up their urgent message.

We know Pan American Silver can hear us. The question is — will they take action? 

The post One Year Later, We’re Still Waiting for Pan American Silver to Acknowledge the Xinka People’s Decision appeared first on Earthworks.

In a stunning victory last week, a Federal District Court in South Dakota ordered a graphite mining company to immediately halt an exploration project before destroying a sacred site in the Black Hills National Forest. 

Ming threatens a sacred site

In late April 2026, a mining company started drilling at Pe’ Sla. This landscape has a high mountain meadow, grasslands, and forests sacred to many Lakota, Dakota, and Nakota peoples. In 2016, the US Government recognized this sacred area.  It dedicated more than 2,000 acres into trust for four Tribes: the Rosebud Sioux, Shakapee Mdewakanton Sioux Community, Standing Rock Sioux, and Crow Creek Sioux. In 2024, the US Government agreed to protect a two-mile radius surrounding a portion of Pe’Sla. Despite this, a mining company staked claims within the protected area. And, in February 2026, the US Forest Service unlawfully allowed mine exploration. 

Legal action and protests

During the Spring season, for thousands of years, Native peoples gather at Pe’Sla to perform ceremonies.  When members of the NDN Collective discovered new roads, drilling, and blasting activities near Pe’Sla, they filed a lawsuit. Earthworks, Black Hills Clean Water Alliance, and nine federally recognized Great Sioux Nation Tribes joined in the suit. This kicked off a week-long occupation at Pe’Sla by many Tribal leaders and youth, led by NDN Collective.  

On May 5, the Court granted an injunction to temporarily stop building and drilling activities until the lawsuit concluded. Two days later, the mining company packed up, withdrew their plans, and pledged not to mine there again. On May 18, the Court issued an order ending mining activities but allowing the operator to clean up and restore the lands to their previous condition.   

Mining affects Indigenous Peoples’ rights

Graphite, along with minerals like nickel and lithium, is used for batteries for electric vehicles, cleaner energy projects, and military technology. Pressure to mine more, especially for these minerals, has driven rushed mining. In the US, this rush is happening with support from the Trump administration. 

Mining often happens on Indigenous Peoples’ land, and the United States is no exception. Impacts on people and the environment happen everywhere mining occurs, but these mines can also permanently change sacred and culturally significant places. 

A just transition to sustainable energy demands solutions that honor Indigenous Peoples’ sovereignty and stewardship. Projects like the exploration at Pe’Sla do the opposite.

Better laws could protect sacred places

What happened at Pe’Sla isn’t an isolated incident. It reveals the weakness of the 1872 Mining law, the statute that still governs almost all public lands mining, including in the sacred Black Hills. Under this law, any person may claim public lands as their own for a small fee. They can begin drilling, blasting, construction, and other exploration, sometimes without even asking permission.  

To remedy this, Congress should pass durable reforms to the 1872 Mining law to protect Pe’ Sla and all sacred landscapes from mining without public notice nor meaningful consultation with affected Tribes. Senator Lujan’s Mining Waste, Fraud, and Abuse Prevention Act will do just that. 

Here, the Tribes and nongovernment organizations won because the Forest Service unlawfully excluded the mine project from environmental review and public and Tribal input.  The leadership and organizing from the Tribes and NDN Collective ultimately helped secure this victory. 

But asking a judge to step in every time a mine threatens Pe’Sla or any other sacred place is not a good system. Congress should pass meaningful mining reform and provide a better way.

The post Victory at Pe’Sla  appeared first on Earthworks.

Read in English here.

Amenazas a defensores del territorio indígenas en Bolivia han llamado la atención de las Naciones Unidas. Los defensores denuncian la contaminación del agua y del suelo provocada por varias minas de la zona y documentada por el gobierno estatal.

Líderes de Seque Jahuira han logrado organizarse, manifestarse e incluso conseguir la aprobación de una ley para denunciar los efectos de la minería en la zona. Han sido objeto de amenazas y hostilidad, lo que les ha llevado a temer por la seguridad de sus familias.

Por desgracia, no son los únicos que viven esta situación. Los pueblos indígenas y líderes de comunidades afectadas por la minería suelen sufrir intimidación y violencia, a pesar de que los pueblos indígenas tienen el derecho a rechazar la minería o a establecer condiciones para un proyecto.

Las protestas dan lugar a una legislación contra la contaminación minera

El 1 de septiembre de 2025, el pueblo de Seque Jahuira, en Bolivia, junto con otras comunidades de la región, organizaron una protesta masiva contra la presencia de múltiples operaciones mineras en su territorio. Los manifestantes marcharon hasta la alcaldía y tomaron el edificio.

Llevaban consigo documentos de la oficina del gobernador de La Paz, la capital del país. Los documentos indicaban que, en 2023, al menos nueve empresas operando en la región, tanto de forma legal como ilegal, eran responsables por el vertido de residuos mineros tóxicos y el drenaje ácido de minas, afectando a la salud del agua y del suelo en una zona que depende principalmente de la agricultura y la ganadería para su sustento.

Tras las protestas, la Defensoría del Pueblo también sacó un comunicado afirmando que, «Tras múltiples gestiones y seguimientos a las denuncias de contaminación del agua con cianuro… no obtuvieron respuestas efectivas de las instancias competentes». A pesar de la existencia de documentación y conocimiento del problema por parte del gobierno, Seque Jahuira y las comunidades vecinas seguían sufriendo los efectos de la contaminación minera para su salud y el medio ambiente.

Esa tarde, el alcalde del municipio de Viacha, donde se encuentran estas comunidades, firmó la ley municipal 042/2025. Esta ley declaró al municipio un territorio libre de la contaminación minera con el fin de proteger el derecho a un medio ambiente limpio y saludable. La ley permite inspecciones y sanciones para cualquier operación minera que no cumpliera con la normativa, y compromete al gobierno local a «la mitigación de todo tipo de contaminación debiendo iniciarse las acciones jurisdiccionales para la reparación y resarcimiento de daños ocasionados a las comunidades afectadas».

Los líderes indígenas de Seque Jahuira, organizaciones aliadas como el colectivo nacional de los derechos de los pueblos indígenas, Qhana Pukara Kurmi, y otras comunidades de Viacha celebraron este importante logro, ya que se ordenó a más de 15 empresas mineras a suspender sus operaciones en el municipio.

Los líderes se enfrentan a amenazas y hostilidad

Sin embargo, al día siguiente Qhana Pukara Kurmi y algunos líderes comunitarios comenzaron a recibir llamadas anónimas amenazándolos por su participación en las protestas y su apoyo a la aplicación de la nueva ley. A raíz de las amenazas, Qhana Pukara Kurmi retiró los señalamientos de su oficina en La Paz y se vieron obligados a abandonar las instalaciones durante unas semanas hasta que se sentían seguros para volver a trabajar allí.

La semana después de que Qhana Pukara Kurmi abandonara su oficina, dos líderes indígenas se vieron obligados a salir de Viacha con sus familias, lo que también supuso que uno de ellos tuviera que cerrar su tienda de materiales de construcción. Mientras las amenazas continuaban, los miembros de Qhana Pukara Kurmi y los líderes de Viacha fueron objeto de una campaña de desprestigio en la cual se difundieron vídeos y mensajes en redes sociales que intentaban socavar su labor y cuestionaban su independencia, acusándolos de ser financiados por organizaciones y actores internacionales.

Más adelante ese mes, miembros de Qhana Pukara Kurmi se reunieron con la Defensoría del Pueblo para hablar sobre las continuas amenazas y el ambiente hostil que enfrentaban. Unos días después, la Defensoría del Pueblo confirmó que solo seis empresas mineras contaban con licencias ambientales vigentes, y que 21 de las 23 empresas operando en Viacha lo hacían de forma ilegal, sin los permisos necesarios.

Aunque algunos organismos gubernamentales, como la Defensoría del Pueblo, se han pronunciado sobre la situación en Viacha, los líderes indígenas siguen preocupados por las amenazas que reciben ellos y sus familias por sus denuncias de los impactos de la minería en su territorio.

La ONU y organismos gubernamentales expresan su preocupación

En octubre de 2025, los Relatores Especiales de la ONU sobre los defensores de los derechos humanos, sobre la libertad de reunión pacífica y asociación, y sobre los derechos de los pueblos indígenas enviaron una carta conjunta al Gobierno boliviano exigiendo una respuesta a los hechos dirigidos contra los defensores del territorio indígenas y toda la información disponible sobre las medidas implementadas para garantizar su protección. La carta denunciaba el incendio provocado en la casa de un líder, ataques violentos, el ataque del hijo de un líder, intimidación y amenazas.

El Gobierno boliviano envió un acuse de recibido y solicitó más tiempo para responder. Hasta la fecha de publicación, no ha habido ninguna otra respuesta por parte del Gobierno.

Mientras tanto, la situación en Seque Jahuira y Viacha se ha agravado desde la protesta, ya que las empresas siguen operando sin atender las preocupaciones de las comunidades respecto al impacto ambiental de sus actividades.

Ya es hora de que el Gobierno boliviano adopte medidas para remediar la contaminación ambiental y del agua en Viacha, regule mejor a las empresas mineras que operan en Viacha y garantice la seguridad de los líderes indígenas que defienden el derecho a la salud y la seguridad de sus comunidades y territorios.

The post Persisten los riesgos para defensores del territorio indígenas en Bolivia appeared first on Earthworks.

En español aqui.

Threats to Indigenous land defenders in Bolivia have drawn attention from the United Nations. The land defenders are speaking out against water and soil contamination, documented by the state government, from multiple mines in the area.

Leaders from Seque Jahuira have successfully organized, protested, and even passed legislation to address the effects of mining in the area. They have encountered threats and hostility causing leaders to fear for their families’ safety.

Unfortunately, they are not alone in their experience. Indigenous People and leaders from communities affected by mines often experience intimidation and violence, even though Indigenous Peoples have a right to say no to mining or to set conditions for a project.

Protest leads to legislation addressing mining pollution

On September 1st, 2025, the town of Seque Jahuira in Bolivia, together with other communities in the region, held a mass protest against the presence of multiple mining operations on their territory. Protestors marched to the mayor’s office and took the local municipal building. 

With them, they carried documentation emitted by the office of the Governor of La Paz, the country’s capital. The documents stated that, in 2023, at least nine companies operating in the region legally and illegally were responsible for dumping toxic mine waste and generating acid mine drainage, affecting the health of waterways and soil in an area that relies predominantly on agriculture and raising livestock for their livelihood. 

After the protests, the National Ombudsman Office also put out a statement claiming that, “Despite multiple attempts to follow up on complaints of cyanide contamination in the water, they did not receive a response from the responsible agencies.” Despite the existence of government documentation and knowledge of the problem, residents of Seque Jahuira and neighboring towns were still living with the effects of mine contamination on their health and the environment.

By that afternoon, the mayor for the municipality of Viacha, where these communities are located, had signed municipal law 042/2025. This law declared the municipality a territory free of pollution from mining in order to uphold the right to a clean and healthy environment. The law allowed for inspections and sanctions for any mining operation not in compliance, and committed the local government to “mitigate all types of contamination and to take judicial actions for remediation and compensation for any harms caused to impacted communities.” 

Indigenous leaders in Seque Jahuira, allied organizations like the national Indigenous Peoples’ rights collective, Qhana Pukara Kurmi, and communities across Viacha celebrated this important step as more than 15 mining companies were ordered to suspend their operations in the municipality.

Leaders encounter threats and hostility

But the next day, Qhana Pukara Kurmi and prominent community leaders began receiving anonymous calls threatening them for their involvement in the protests and support for the implementation of the new law. Due to the threats, Qhana Pukara Kurmi took down the signage at their office in La Paz and were forced to abandon the office for a few weeks until they felt they could safely return to work there. 

The week following Qhana Pukara Kurmi’s departure from their office, two Indigenous leaders were forced to leave Viacha with their families, a move that also meant one of them had to close his construction supply store. As the threats continued, members of Qhana Pukara Kurmi and the leaders from Viacha were targets of a smear campaign, where videos and messages on social media tried to undermine their work and questioned their independence by accusing them of being funded by international organizations and actors. 

Later that month, members of Qhana Pukara Kurmi met with the Ombudsman’s Office to talk about the ongoing threats and hostile environment they were facing. A few days later, the Ombudsman’s Office confirmed that only six mining companies had active environmental licenses, and that 21 companies of the 23 operating in Viacha were operating illegally without the needed permits. 

While some government agencies, such as the National Ombudsman’s Office have spoken up about the situation in Viacha, Indigenous leaders still worry about threats to them and their families for their role in speaking out about the impacts of mining in their territory.

The UN and government agencies express concern

In October 2025, the UN Special Rapporteurs on Human Rights Defenders, on Freedom of  Peaceful Assembly and Association, and of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples sent a joint letter to the Bolivian Government asking them to respond to the events targeting Indigenous land defenders and to provide any information available on measures taken to ensure their protection. The letter cited allegations of arson at a leader’s house, violent attacks, the beating of a leader’s son, intimidation, and threats.

The Bolivian Government replied, stating that they had received the letter and needed more time to respond. Up to the date of publication, there has been no further response from the Government. 

Meanwhile, the situation in Seque Jahuira and Viacha has only intensified since the protest as companies continue operating without addressing communities’ concerns about the environmental impacts of their operations.

It is past time for the Bolivian Government to implement measures to remediate the environmental and water contamination in Viacha, to better regulate the mining companies operating in Viacha, and to guarantee the safety of Indigenous leaders defending the right to health and safety of their communities and territories.

The post Risks Remain for Indigenous Land Defenders in Bolivia appeared first on Earthworks.

Updates to the Global Methane Tracker 2026 confirm what Earthworks has been saying for more than a decade – the oil and gas methane problem is worse than companies are willing to admit. 

Despite Big Oil’s rhetoric about efforts to reduce methane emissions, the world is still far off track to stave off the worst effects of the climate crisis. Industry’s words may have changed (from climate denial to promises that industry is the solution), but our work in the oil and gas field still shows that actions haven’t. Or as the IEA, more neutrally, puts it: “transparency and reporting on abatement plans still lag the industry’s stated ambitions.”

Here are some big takeaways from the 2026 IEA Global Methane Tracker: 

Estimates are estimates…which involve little to no actual measurement

For over a decade Earthworks thermographers have been documenting pollution throughout the upstream and midstream sector at an alarming rate – often this pollution is going unreported until we discover it. Over the years it has become clear to us that pollution estimates are just that…estimates, which contain little to no actual measurements. We are happy to see that the IEA has developed new methodologies that incorporate actual measurements to supplement and reconcile company reported estimates and claims. 

Detection has improved, yet industry still refuses to act

The IEA Global Methane Tracker also points to another major issue we have been sounding the alarm on for years – even when problems are identified companies rarely take action. 

The IEA (via information from the Methane Alert and Response System (MARS)) looked at satellite based methane emissions detections and alerts at both the global and country level and found that globally only 12% of methane detection alerts were responded to in 2025. In the United States, the issue is far worse. According to the Global Methane Tracker, “Since 2022, the Methane Alert and Response System (MARS) has tracked 1,300 super-emitting oil and gas-related events in the United States – about 10% of the global total.” – that makes the United States one of the super-emitting countries. However, according to a 2025 report by the UNEP (the administrators of the MARS system) the United States has one of the lowest response rates at an abysmal 2%. 

In other words, US oil and gas companies are massive methane polluters. They claim to have the tools to stop the pollution (just read the methane reductions section of any oil and gas company’s annual climate report – here is TotalEnergies for example). They just don’t seem to take action to actually stop the pollution. What is most puzzling is that the IEA also finds that “around 30% of methane emissions from fossil fuel operations could be reduced at no cost.”

Integrity & Transparency Concerns on Gas Certification Schemes 

Furthermore, “actions” that the industry have taken are shrouded in questions. For instance, gas certification efforts from companies like Project Canary, which claim to certify companies’ methane emissions, often don’t hold up under independent scrutiny. Through our field work we even discovered that some of these efforts are little more than greenwashing. The IEA report references our effort (with OCI and the GasLeaks Project) to encourage Senator Markey (D-MA), a member of the Senate Committee on Consumer Protection, Technology, and Data Privacy (which oversees the FTC) to address certification schemes within the FTC.

Although certification typically involves independent third-party verification of emissions (enhancing buyers’ trust in reported emissions), it also faces its own unique challenges. Measurement-based quantification is not always required, raising the risk that methane emissions could be underestimated. Although volumes of certified natural gas reached 320 bcm in 2024 (roughly 7.5% of global output), certification remains concentrated in the North American upstream natural gas sector, with limited uptake outside this segment. Questions have also been raised about the integrity and transparency of some schemes, casting doubt on the reliability of emissions reported under them.

Raising the Bar: Data to Action at Earthworks

Optical gas image of pollution at Shell Plastics Plant in Beaver, County, Pennsylvania. Taken 16 February 2026.

Methane detection tools are expanding and improving. Data is becoming more available, often at no cost. Earthworks is expanding its use of satellite technology to guide and strengthen our existing ground-truthing of oil & gas pollution harms using our optical gas imaging cameras. Yet, as the IEA report shows, what was true of industry and pollution before remains true today: without proper accountability, polluters will continue to pollute.

This is especially true now with The the U.S. Trump Administration’s pay-to-play EPA stopped enforcing oil and gas methane regulations on March 12, 2025 and recently reaffirmed its intention to roll back methane standards for new and existing sources as outlined in the 2024 EPA Methane Rule. That rule is one of the best levers that everyday people across the country have currently to hold fossil fuel companies accountable for methane pollution.

We believe the narrative must change to reflect the objective truth about polluters. The obvious discrepancy between industry rhetoric and data must translate into public skepticism of every oil & gas climate claim. The facts must translate into known truth so that the well-earned pressure from the public demands industry actually take action to stop polluting the air we breathe and the climate we depend on.

We believe accountability must be universal and enforced by government policies that put people before polluters.

We believe this industry must be phased out. Detection and significant reductions in methane pollution are essential, but only as a bandaid fix. Cuts to pollution facility-by-facility only buy us time to enact other energy solutions to the climate crisis. But not even those work if the number of facilities continue to expand and total methane emissions increase.

Earthworks Data 2 Action To Date

•  Polluter of the Month series with partner Gas Leaks to shine a light on the biggest inconsistencies between the words and actions of the biggest polluters in the US.
• Report on Appalachian Super-emitters found nearly 100 oil and gas emission events in the Appalachian Basin, unknowingly exposing nearby communities to harmful carcinogens.
• Our work has always been covered in a Financial Times article that identified as repeat polluters several companies who advertise themselves as less polluting companies.

Earthworks Email List Sign-up for more! First Name Last Name Email* Join Us

Thank You for Signing Up!

There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Join Us -->

The post Big Oil’s Big Methane is still a Big Problem appeared first on Earthworks.

A tank battery on the Range Resources Bier Albert well pad is located directly behind a daycare in Washington County, PA

Have you ever read the children’s story, If You Give a Mouse a Cookie? It’s a tale that shows how one event can lead to another before escalating into an uncontrollable chain of events – all starting with a single cookie. 

Unfortunately, this principle doesn’t just apply to mice, cookies, and milk. It’s also at work when governments allow polluting infrastructure into communities. And, it’s one of the many reasons Earthworks opposes the permitting of well pads close to homes, schools, and other vulnerable locations.

Each new piece of equipment on the pad lowers air quality and can worsen health.

Last month, Earthworks submitted comments to the Allegheny County Board of Health in Pennsylvania. The comments opposed an air quality permit for adding yet another piece of equipment to a fracked well pad that is already polluting backyards in West Deer Township. The well pad, called Leto, is located just 650 feet from homes – a few minutes walk from families’ front porches. 

The Leto pad already included polluting equipment when initially approved. Now, Leto’s operator, EQT, is asking the county to approve the addition of a new piece of equipment on the pad: a tri-ethylene glycol dehydration unit.

While the name is complex, the concept is simple: a dehydration unit has the potential to add tons of additional pollution into the air of the surrounding community. Nearly 70 tons, to be exact. 

This includes about 40 tons of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), more than 18 tons of carbon monoxide, around 8 tons of nitrogen oxides, almost 4 tons of hazardous air pollutants, and just over 1 ton of particulate matter. Breathing in this toxic pollution can increase cancer, heart disease, respiratory illness, birth defects, and other serious health impacts. 

Signage for the Leto Well Pad and Leto Compressor Station stands at the facility entrance in Allegheny County, PA.

Neighbors in West Deer have been breathing in pollution from the Leto well pad since drilling began last year. They have already been exposed to noxious fumes from an unreported chemical spill in the fall. And the impacts add up – each new piece of equipment on the pad lowers air quality and can worsen health. And other wells built nearby have a combined effect. 

Unfortunately, Pennslylvania treats polluting infrastructure in isolation.

PennEnviroScreen data shows that the Leto well pad is located in a community that is already in the 90th percentile for cancer diagnoses and the 78th percentile for heart disease diagnoses in the state of Pennsylvania. It is also home to a large population of seniors, at the 98th percentile for residents age 65 and older. This is a vulnerable population that is already breathing in toxic air emissions (72nd percentile), but the combined effects of air pollution are not considered in Pennsylvania’s laws.

That’s why Earthworks has been fighting for years to increase setback distances, or “protective buffers” – the minimum distance required between well pads, compressor stations, and other equipment, and homes, schools, hospitals, and other vulnerable locations. It’s why we support policies that take into account cumulative impacts, or the combined effects of pollution from the total of all facilities that lower air quality in a community. 

Other states, like Colorado, have adopted a 2,000 foot setback distance; and just a few weeks ago, regulators there acknowledged that this distance may not even be enough. In Pennsylvania, the minimum setback distance is just 500 feet – the length of a football field. And even that distance can be easily waived – meaning wells are built even closer to homes.

A plume of partially combusted emissions from the EQT Caton well pad moves in the direction of a house directly next to the site in Washington County, PA.

As part of Protective Buffers PA, we are pushing for a 1km distance between fracked well pads and homes, and greater distances for schools, hospitals, and other vulnerable locations. 

Back in December, Pennsylvania’s Environmental Quality Board voted for our coalition’s petition to advance to the next stage in Pennsylvania’s regulatory process, requiring the Department of Environmental Protection to produce a report studying the petition. Thousands of Pennsylvania residents have signed petitions and sent postcards to the Shapiro administration asking the Governor to take action to increase setbacks based on his own 2020 Grand Jury Report recommendations. Understandably, many residents feel they have waited long enough.

Tired of waiting, some townships are taking action on their own. 

Communities like Cecil Township in Washington County are standing up and creating their own rules, enacting a 2500-foot setback ordinance to protect their residents. Others, like West Deer in Allegheny County, are pushing back – well pad by well pad and dehydrator by dehydrator – until setback distances are increased. And Earthworks is standing with them.

Because we’ve seen how the industry works. First, it’s one well pad; then, a request for more polluting equipment; then another pad, and another, and more permits for more equipment. Without guardrails, an entire community can be overrun with polluting oil and gas infrastructure. 

So we’ll keep submitting comments, permit by permit, and keep pushing for policy change at the township and state level. Because we know that if you give a polluter a well pad, they’ll want more. And we think communities like West Deer have already experienced enough.

The post Lessons from a Children’s Story: If You Give the Oil and Gas Industry a Wellpad appeared first on Earthworks.

Heavy Rainfall and Dam Failures Top of Mind for Vale’s Investors and Impacted Communities 

Leia este post em português.

Communities impacted by mining in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais and their allies in civil society raising the alarm about the risks posed by climate change to Brazilian mining giant Vale’s operations. Climate change is leading to more frequent heavy rainfall in Brazil. That rainfall is putting additional stress on the storage facilities that Vale uses to manage toxic mine waste. The concerns have also risen to the level of the company’s investors.

Mining creates huge amounts of toxic waste, or tailings. This waste remains toxic forever, so storing it safely is an important part of any mining operation. Tailings storage facilities must be able to withstand changing climate conditions in order to protect people and the environment, including future generations. When they fail, polluted water or toxic mud can endanger lives, drinking water, and ecosystems downstream.

Courts suspend Vale’s mining license due to climate concerns

Based on climate change concerns, in December of 2025, a federal court ordered the suspension of the environmental license for an expansion of the Germano complex at the Samarco mine, a joint venture between Vale and BHP, in the municipality of Mariana. 

Mariana was the site of the tailing dam failure that is considered to be the worst ecological disaster the country has ever seen. On November 3, 2015, a 40 million cubic meter avalanche of mine waste killed 19 people and contaminated 668 km of rivers and watersheds before finally reaching the Atlantic Ocean. The waste spread across 39 municipalities, displaced 500 families and ultimately affected 3 million people living in the contaminated watersheds. 

Vale and BHP have proposed expanding mining operations at the site, which would include new tailings dams. A class action lawsuit filed by residents of the community of Bento Rodrigues, one of the towns destroyed in the 2015 failure, alleged the mining company did not adequately consider the likelihood that future rainfall will exceed historical levels due to climate change.  The Instituto Cordilheira, a Brazilian organization working with communities impacted by mining, claims this is the first time that a legal decision has suspended mining activity in the state of Minas Gerais on the basis of the lack of information about climate change. 

The Samarco mine’s expansion license was revoked because of concerns around climate change. Two Vale mine facilities overflow

Concerns around the impacts of climate change on Vale’s operations escalated in January of 2026 when two mining structures overflowed and flooded at Vale’s Mina de Fábrica and Mina de Viga in the municipalities of Congonhas and Ouro Preto. This flooding started exactly six years to the day after the catastrophic tailings dam failure at Vale’s mine in Brumadinho, which killed 272 people. In Congonhas, 262,000 cubic meters of sediment and water flowed into the surrounding area. These overflows flooded another mine downstream owned by CSN, and ran into rivers and streams. The company was fined by the state government of Minas Gerais and the municipal government of Congonhas.

A sign in front of a ruined building in Bento Rodrigues reads “So you’ll never forget.” Experts and investors question safety as rainfall increases

Organizations monitoring Vale’s operations are worried that Vale is not prepared for climate events associated with increased rainfall. Daniela Campolina from the research group Grupo de Ensino, Pesquisa e Extensão: Educação, Mineração e Território (EduMiTe), said “It is crucial that Vale S.A. review its tailings dams in light of climate change and strictly adhere to dam classification legislation—a basic requirement for risk management and transparency. The events of January 25, 2026 occurred without extreme rainfall, which indicates inadequate safety measures and heightens the sense of insecurity in the affected areas. Many of the tailings dams in the state are old, built before national environmental and dam safety policies were established. Poor safety standards create risks for long stretches of rivers that are critical for densely populated regions of Minas Gerais and Brazil.” EduMiTe has catalogued the number of tailings dams and their associated risks in the State of Minas Gerais. 

Climate change resilience is also a serious concern for Vale’s investors. The Local Area Pension Fund (LAPFF), a UK based investor group representing local governments whose members’ assets exceed £425bn, has questioned Vale’s preparedness to address the impacts of unpredictable weather patterns resulting from climate change on their mining operations.  

According to Cllr. Doug McMurdo, LAPFF Chair, “The January 2026 water overflows at Vale’s Fábrica and Viga sites in Minas Gerais, which authorities said caused environmental damage after reaching the Maranhão River, were deeply concerning. The timing, coinciding with the anniversary of the 2019 Brumadinho disaster, was particularly difficult. Alongside recent legal and regulatory scrutiny of proposed expansion at Samarco’s Germano Complex in the Mariana region, these events raise serious questions about how climate adaptation and physical risk are being governed and managed across Vale’s operations. As long‑term investors, LAPFF expects Vale to clearly demonstrate how it is strengthening the climate resilience of its assets and infrastructure, embedding weather and water‑related risks into project approvals and expansion decisions, and ensuring these risks, and importantly their implications for communities, the environment, and human rights, are subject to robust, transparent, and accountable Board‑level oversight.”

Vale’s mines create ongoing risk and contribute to climate change

A report published by Earthworks in 2025 highlighted ongoing risks to the environment, communities and workers associated with Vale’s operations in Minas Gerais. It also pointed out that Vale’s operations contribute to worsening climate change. Vale S.A. is on the list of the 20 largest greenhouse gas emitting companies in the world, according to the MSCI Sustainability Institute Net-Zero Tracker — the only Brazilian company on the list.

The post Climate Change and Increased Risk from Vale’s Mines  appeared first on Earthworks.

Chuvas intensas e rompimentos de barragens são as principais preocupações dos investidores e das comunidades atingidas pela Vale S.A.

Read this post in English.

As comunidades atingidas pela mineração no estado brasileiro de Minas Gerais e seus aliados da sociedade civil alertam sobre os riscos que as mudanças climáticas representam para as operações da gigante mineradora do Brasil, VALE S.A. As mudanças climáticas estão causando chuvas intensas cada vez mais frequentes no Brasil. Essas chuvas sobrecarregam ainda mais as instalações de contenção que a VALE S.A utiliza para gerenciar resíduos tóxicos da mineração. As preocupações também alcançaram os investidores da empresa.

A mineração gera enormes quantidades de resíduos tóxicos, ou rejeitos. Esses resíduos tóxicos permanecem no sítio para sempre; portanto, sua contenção segura é uma parte importante de qualquer operação de mineração. As instalações de contenção de rejeitos devem ser capazes de resistir às mudanças nas condições climáticas, a fim de proteger as comunidades e o meio ambiente, incluindo as gerações futuras. Quando essas instalações falham, a água poluída ou a lama tóxica podem colocar em risco vidas, o abastecimento de água potável e os ecossistemas a jusante.

Tribunal suspende licença de mineração da VALE S.A. devido a preocupações climáticas

Com base em preocupações relacionadas às mudanças climáticas, em dezembro de 2025, um tribunal federal determinou a suspensão da licença ambiental para a ampliação do complexo Germano na mina da Samarco, uma joint venture entre a VALE S.A. e a BHP, no município de Mariana, Minas Gerais.

Mariana foi o local do rompimento da barragem de rejeitos, considerada o pior desastre ecológico registrado no país. Em 3 de novembro de 2015, uma onda de 40 milhões de metros cúbicos de rejeitos de mineração matou 19 pessoas e contaminou 668 km de rios e bacias hidrográficas antes de finalmente chegar ao Oceano Atlântico. Os rejeitos se espalharam por 39 municípios, desalojaram 500 famílias e, no total, afetaram 3 milhões de pessoas que viviam nas bacias hidrográficas que foram contaminadas.

A VALE S.A e a BHP propuseram a expansão das operações de mineração no local, o que incluiria novas barragens de rejeitos. Uma ação popular movida por moradores da comunidade de Bento Rodrígues, uma das cidades destruídas pelo rompimento de 2015, alegou que a empresa de mineração não levou em consideração de forma adequada a probabilidade de que chuvas futuras excedam os níveis históricos devido às mudanças climáticas. O Instituto Cordilheira, uma organização brasileira que trabalha com comunidades impactadas pela mineração, afirma que esta é a primeira vez que uma decisão judicial suspende atividades de mineração no estado de Minas Gerais com base na falta de estudos a respeito das mudanças climáticas.

A licença de expansão da mina da Samarco foi revogada devido a preocupações relacionadas às mudanças climáticas. Duas instalações de mineração da VALE S.A. sofrem vazamentos

As preocupações em torno dos impactos das mudanças climáticas nas operações da VALE S.A. se intensificaram em janeiro de 2026, quando duas estruturas de mineração vazaram e inundaram a Mina de Fábrica e a Mina de Viga da VALE S.A., nos municípios de Congonhas e Ouro Preto, Minas Gerais. Essa enchente começou exatamente seis anos depois da catastrófica ruptura da barragem de rejeitos na mina da VALE S.A. em Brumadinho (MG), que matou 272 pessoas. Em Congonhas (MG), 262,000 metros cúbicos de sedimentos e água fluíram para a área ao redor. Esses vazamentos inundaram outra mina, propriedade da CSN, a jusante e se espalharam por rios e córregos. A empresa foi multada pelo governo estadual de Minas Gerais e pela prefeitura de Congonhas.

Prédio destruído em Bento Rodrigues Especialistas e investidores questionam a segurança à medida que as chuvas aumentam

Organizações que monitoram as operações da VALE S.A. têm receio de que a empresa não esteja preparada para eventos climáticos associados ao aumento das chuvas. Daniela Campolina, do Grupo de Ensino, Pesquisa e Extensão: Educação, Mineração e Território (EduMiTe), afirmou “É imprescindível que a VALE S.A. revise suas estruturas de contenção de rejeitos considerando as mudanças climáticas e cumpra rigorosamente a legislação de enquadramento— condição básica para a gestão de riscos e a transparência. Os eventos de 25 de janeiro de 2026  ocorreram mesmo sem a caracterização de chuvas extremas, o que indica uma insuficiência dos parâmetros de segurança adotados e amplia a sensação de insegurança nos territórios. Muitas das barragens são antigas, construídas antes mesmo de políticas nacionais de meio ambiente e de segurança de barragens. Padrões de segurança deficientes geram riscos para longas extensões de rios estratégicos para regiões densamente povoadas de Minas Gerais e do Brasil.” O EduMiTe catalogou o número de barragens de rejeitos e os riscos associados a elas no Estado de Minas Gerais.

A resiliência às mudanças climáticas também é uma grande preocupação para os investidores da VALE S.A. O Local Area Pension Fund (LAPFF), um grupo de investidores sediado no Reino Unido que representa governos locais e cujos membros possuem ativos que ultrapassam 425 bilhões de libra esterlinas, questionou a preparação da VALE S.A. para lidar com os impactos dos padrões climáticos imprevisíveis decorrentes das mudanças climáticas em suas operações de mineração. 

Segundo o vereador Doug McMurdo, presidente da LAPFF, “Os vazamentos de água ocorridos em janeiro de 2026 nas instalações da VALE S.A. em Fábrica e Viga, em Minas Gerais, que de acordo com as autoridades causaram danos ambientais após atingirem o rio Maranhão, foram motivo de grande preocupação. O momento, que coincidiu com o aniversário do desastre de Brumadinho em 2019, foi particularmente difícil. Além do recente escrutínio jurídico e regulatório sobre a proposta de expansão do Complexo Germano da Samarco na região de Mariana (MG), esses eventos levantam sérias questões sobre como a adaptação climática e os riscos físicos estão sendo governados e gerenciados nas operações da VALE S.A. Como investidores de longo prazo, o LAPFF espera que a VALE S.A. demonstre claramente como está fortalecendo a resiliência climática de seus ativos e infraestrutura, incorporando riscos relacionados ao clima e à água nas aprovações de projetos e decisões de expansão, e garantindo que esses riscos — e, principalmente, suas implicações para as comunidades, o meio ambiente e os direitos humanos — sejam sujeitos a uma supervisão robusta, transparente e responsável por parte do Conselho de Administração.”

As minas da VALE S.A representam um risco contínuo e contribuem às mudanças climáticas

Um relatório publicado pela Earthworks em 2025 destacou os riscos contínuos para o meio ambiente, as comunidades e os trabalhadores associados às operações da VALE S.A. em Minas Gerais. O relatório também apontou que as operações da VALE S.A. contribuem para agravar as mudanças climáticas. A VALE S.A. está na lista das 20 maiores empresas emissoras de gases de efeito estufa do mundo, de acordo com o MSCI Sustainability Institute Net-Zero Tracker — a única empresa brasileira na lista.

The post Mudanças climáticas e riscos aumentados nas minas da VALE S.A. appeared first on Earthworks.

This is part two of a two-part series on the Trump Administration’s mineral trade deals. Read part one here.

New mineral trade “deals” that the Trump administration is pushing are extortion, not foreign policy. A deal being considered between Zambia and the United States that would make lifesaving medical aid contingent on access to minerals is just the latest in a series of these exploitative deals, including between the U.S. and Indonesia and the U.S., Rwanda, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC).

Holding a sustainable future hostage

The minerals that the Administration demands, often called critical minerals, are used for renewable energy and military technologies. Mining and processing minerals has severe negative impacts on communities, Indigenous Peoples, ecosystems, the climate, and water. Making sure a renewable energy future is truly just and sustainable means cutting back on the need for newly mined minerals wherever possible, and investing in recycling, reuse, and other circular economy solutions. But the Trump administration seems more interested in profits for mining companies and a limitless supply of minerals for war.

Exploiting a war in Rwanda and the DRC

Earthworks and allies in civil society voiced our concerns in a letter to an administration forcing critical minerals deals upon other countries. Like the Zambian proposal, many of these “deals” more resemble extortion than equitable trade policy, much less how one would treat a partner nation. 

For example, the Strategic Partnership Agreement between the DRC, Rwanda, and the United States tries to leverage a peace deal in the recent war between Rwanda and the DRC as a means to secure exclusive rights for mining companies to access DRC’s minerals–namely cobalt. The war has killed at least 7,000 people and displaced at least 600,000 (as of March 2026).

According to Public Citizen, the core purpose of this Agreement is to make sure mining companies access the DRC’s minerals the United States government wants for war, energy, and other applications. The Agreement is arguably unconstitutional in both countries, and the process is deeply undemocratic. It creates a shopping list of mine sites where the United States subsidizes companies and investors to choose, or refuse, DRC’s minerals. The deal worsens the DRC’s economic reliance on industrial-scale mining, without suitably consulting the artisanal miner collectives who would most stand to benefit from high labor, environmental, and human rights safeguards that could be implemented as part of a truly equitable trade deal.

Exploitation disguised as trade agreements

Before the Supreme Court struck down the Trump administration’s so-called reciprocal tariffs, the Administration signed Agreements on Reciprocal Trade (ARTs) with many nations. These deals generally insisted on several commitments that tend to benefit various pharmaceutical, tech, mining, and oil companies. 

For minerals, the most recent ART with Indonesia removes any trade restrictions for U.S. imports and compels Indonesia to “facilitate U.S. investment in its territory to mine, extract, refine, process, transport, distribute, and export critical minerals.” Unlike the DRC SPA, the Indonesia deal did not give U.S. companies the right of first refusal to Indonesia’s nickel. Yet, the deal clearly encourages U.S. companies to invest in more Indonesian nickel. As of this writing, Indonesia has neither ratified nor annulled their ART. 

Increasing Indonesian nickel production also increases risks to communities. Earthworks recently released research on the risks to communities, workers and the environment of mine waste from nickel processing. Multiple tailings failures at nickel industrial parks have resulted in flooding and multiple worker deaths. We are calling for a moratorium on permitting new tailings facilities until the Indonesian government can hold operators accountable and achieve proper oversight. Nickel production in Indonesia has also been connected with displacement, deforestation, and water contamination.

Building off centuries of inequality

Trade between countries in the Global North and Global South has been unequal for centuries. Even though many Asian, African, and Latin American countries won their independence from colonial governments, the economies designed to extract resources from some countries while making profits for others remain. The result is that residents of our trading partners live with mining impacts while mining companies make a profit and the U.S. sells weapons to its military and others’.  

A future built on something better

Equitable and sustainable trade policy requires acknowledging that the US government, historically and regularly, prioritizes companies that take advantage of extraction-affected communities, including in Global North countries. The status quo remains fundamentally unjust. In building a better system, governments must, among other things, prioritize Free, Prior, and Informed Consent for Indigenous Peoples; community consultation; best available technologies; low- and zero-waste plans; and enforceable high labor, environmental, and governance standards. We must demand reparations for chattel slavery, colonialism, and the climate crisis, and ensure newly-generated wealth stays within the communities and countries with whom the U.S. trades. 

People in the DRC, Indonesia, and everywhere else have the right to healthy, dignified lives. They have the right to governments responsive to their interests. Advocates in the Global North must commit to solidarity with mining-affected communities and their organizations, like those in the DRC, Indonesia, and elsewhere are fighting for that future and standing up to irresponsible mining that threatens their homes and families. As the Trump administration intensifies that threat, people and organizations in the United States must speak up for our shared future too.

The post Trump’s deals extort trade partners for mining company profits. There is a better way. appeared first on Earthworks.

This is part one of a two-part series on the Trump administration’s mineral trade deals. Read part two here.

A trade deal proposed by the United States could end life-saving humanitarian aid to Zambia unless the United States gets access to minerals, which are useful for renewable energy, military technology, and more. Like the other so-called critical minerals “deals” that the Trump administration is signing, this agreement would be extortion, not foreign policy. 

On 16 March, The New York Times broke the story that the Trump administration was considering withholding foreign aid–specifically HIV treatment and tuberculosis and malaria medications. More than 1 million Zambians rely on these medications. According to a draft U.S. State Department memo, the administration is considering cutting off decades of life-saving medical aid unless the Zambian government gives the United States more access to their minerals. 

An economy dependent on mining

Zambia, a country of about 20 million people located in south-central Africa, is largely dependent on mining as an economic driver dating back to the beginning of British colonial rule. Reliance on a destructive and dirty extraction-based economy is common in formerly colonized countries, which also often rely on humanitarian aid due to the inequality established by centuries of imperialism.

Now, Zambia is seeking to capitalize on the increased demand for mining linked to minerals for the renewable energy transition. Currently, Zambia produces 3% of the global copper supply and it aims to triple that by 2031. It is also investing in and expanding production of other key minerals for the renewable energy transition, including cobalt manganese, nickel, lithium, and graphite extraction.

Cutting a lifeline for millions

The threat to cut lifesaving medical aid programs is devastating and dangerous. The U.S. President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief (PEPFAR), which was founded by George W. Bush, has saved more than 26 million lives and prevented 8 million babies from being born with HIV. Access to medicine, driven by grassroots advocates around the world, has changed HIV from a death sentence to a treatable condition. Medications are expensive, but reliable treatment can transform lives and stop the spread of the virus.

In Zambia, more than 1.2 million people have received lifesaving medications through PEPFAR. Cutting that lifeline would be in line with previous Trump administration policy: DOGE’s cuts to USAID could needlessly result in death for more than 14 million people by 2031. 

Threatening the lives of millions of people in a foreign country is not a trade deal. Reducing PEPFAR and other aid would guarantee worsening poverty and mass death in Zambia and surrounding areas. These cuts would have disastrous consequences not only for Zambia, but for other African countries, and U.S. interests in the region for decades. 

Pushback from global civil society

On March 26, more than ninety public health, environmental, development, and faith organizations, including Earthworks, signed onto a letter criticizing the Zambia “proposal” and arguing that any critical minerals policy should prioritize job creation and environmental and sustainable development for both countries. Four days later, the State Department responded in a predictably antisemetic and condescending way, saying we are “a predictable roster of woke advocacy groups, George Soros–backed organizations.” 

Denial and insults from the Trump Administration

Shortly after The New York Times broke the story, the State Department’s Bureau of African Affairs, called it “fake news.” The State Department went on to say, “unequivocally, we are not seeking anything at Zambia’s expense” only to later demand that “the Government of Zambia must make accountability reforms and take steps to modernize its key industries, including mining. Otherwise, private sector investment in Zambia will not happen.” This condescending tone is unsurprising from an administration that regularly insults Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color, and Global South (particularly African) countries. 

On 20 April PEPFAR’s chief science officer Mike Reid resigned from his post in protest of the extortion proposal. Reid explained his reasoning in a Substack post. He wrote, “When access to treatment or prevention becomes entangled with access to critical minerals or geopolitical positioning, the work is no longer what it claims to be…It is a different model. And I do not believe that model is consistent with the purpose of global health. I do not believe it serves patients, or countries, or ultimately even the long-term interests of the United States.”

And on 5 May the foreign minister of Zambia, Mulambo Haimbe, criticized the U.S. for the proposed deal. Zambia, he said, “takes the view, first and foremost, that Zambians must have a say on how her critical minerals are used.”

A call for solidarity

People in Zambia, like people everywhere, have the right to healthy, dignified lives. They have a right to a sovereign government that can respond to their needs. Communities on the frontlines of mining in Zambia are standing up for a more sustainable future built on respect for human rights and the environment. As the Trump administration’s actions intensify the threat of increased harms from mining, people and organizations in the United States must add our voices.

The post Demanding minerals in exchange for lives in Zambia appeared first on Earthworks.

Earlier this year, environmental advocates in New Mexico waited patiently for the outcome of a battle they’ve now relived three times in less than a year.

Victory

On February 7, 2026 after a nearly 5-hour long hearing, by a 5-4 vote, the State House Agriculture, Acequias And Water Resources Committee decided to table a bill that would have forced New Mexico to adopt rules and permit the use of oil and gas wastewater for a variety of purposes outside of the oil fields. 

Oil and gas wastewater, or produced water as the industry terms it, contains varying amounts of salts, heavy metals, hydrocarbons, carcinogens, and radioactive materials. This wastewater is part rock and salt water from underground and part chemicals and additives from the drilling and fracking processes. As a result, any use outside of the oil field can pose dangerous risks of contamination to New Mexico’s waters.

HB207, as originally introduced, required the Water Quality Control Commission (WQCC), the state’s water pollution control agency, to authorize the discharge of treated oil and gas wastewater to New Mexico’s rivers and streams along with a variety of uses outside of the oil field, including road spreading. Roadspreading is the dumping of the wastewater on roads for use as a dust suppressant. This practice, in particular, has come under heavy scrutiny recently as studies of wastewater show it to be both less effective at dust control than commercial alternatives and potentially pose risks to human health and the environment.

Just last year, the WQCC decided these were not risks worth taking. 

A through process: prohibiting wastewater discharge

In May 2025, the Commission completed a thorough rulemaking process to prohibit discharges of produced water to surface waters and groundwater (see Earthworks and partners’ comment supporting the draft rule prohibiting discharge). The rulemaking lasted 18 months and included thousands of pages of evidence and testimony from experts, scientists, and non-profits. Based on all of the available evidence at the time, the commission decided to prohibit reuse of oil and gas outside the oil field finding, “insufficient evidence exists at this time to ensure that discharges of untreated or treated produced water are protective of human health or the environment.”

The rule adopted last year did, however, allow for certain pilot projects to proceed. 

These non-discharging pilot projects allow the Commission to compile additional evidence and fill in needed data gaps to more conclusively decide whether treatment is adequate to prevent contamination. The rule also sunsets after 5 years, meaning the potential for reuse could be revisited in a few years after compiling more evidence from pilot studies in a way that does not risk contaminating New Mexico’s water resources. In other words, the commission declined to put the cart before the horse and decided to allow more time to answer some unsettled questions about the effectiveness of the treatment process.

The oil and gas industry demands a second-look

Before the ink could dry on this rule, an oil and gas industry-aligned group called the WATR Alliance filed a petition asking the WQCC to revisit the decision and allow the discharge of treated oil and gas wastewater. Having just finished a lengthy year and half long legal process, the WQCC was back answering the same question again. This time, though, the petition failed for a different reason. After initially agreeing to hear the petition, the WQCC reversed its decision.

The commission voted to vacate the decision to advance the petition due, in part, to “the appearance of impropriety.” This decision followed a public outcry after the Santa Fe New Mexican revealed emails between the governor’s office and commissioners, including one from a staffer in Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s office urging commissioners to get the rule “over the finish line,” which advocates argued tainted the process.

Not long after this second attempt failed, HB 207 was introduced. This represented a third attempt to loosen restrictions on the handling of oil and gas waste in less than a year. 

‘A formidable resistance’

Despite the late introduction of the bill during the short thirty-day legislative session, community members and environmental advocates quickly formed a formidable resistance. Led by groups like Amigos Bravos, Western Environmental Law Center, Citizen Caring for the Future, Wildearth Guardians and with support from Earthworks, they compiled factsheets, answered questions from legislators, packed the committee hearing, and provided impassioned public comments, which featured dozens of contributers, including Earthworks state policy manager. 

In the end the committee ultimately decided not to move forward with the bill. In the face of relentless pressure from industry and the governor’s office, a group of dedicated advocates prevailed again and again (and again). 

But the fight continues
Unfortunately, the story doesn’t end there. A couple of weeks after the 2026 legislative session ended, WATR Alliance submitted yet another petition to allow reuse of treated produced water outside of the oil field. The WQCC is expected to vote on whether to schedule a hearing on the latest petition on May 12th, and the dedicated advocates fighting to protect New Mexico’s precious water resources from contamination of oil and gas waste byproducts will have to relive this fight at least one more time.

The post ”It’s Deja Vu All Over Again”: How New Mexicans, Advocates Repeatedly Fight Back A Push to Allow Oil and Gas Waste in New Mexico Waters appeared first on Earthworks.

Photo by Diné CARE’s Ali Tsosie-Harvey

The Air is Shared 

What happens at an oil and gas site doesn’t stay there. It moves. Out here there aren’t many barriers separating well sites from homes or schools. Emissions travel with the wind, across dirt roads, and into spaces where families live, breathe, and recreate. Wells and equipment are not tucked far away. They exist alongside homes and near schools. That close proximity means exposure is not limited to workers at a well site. It also means exposure to children in classrooms, families in their homes, and to anyone moving through the area. 

Rural communities across the country face similar conditions: limited oversight, fewer basic resources, and less access to information about what they are being exposed to. Exposure doesn’t stop at the fence line of a well site. Exposure exists in and outside the well sites. When emissions are invisible, it becomes easier to overlook them.  

Photo by Diné CARE’s Ali Tsosie-Harvey

March 2026

In March, we visited 18 total oil and gas well sites across the Eastern Navajo Agency of which 14 were observed emitting either consistently or intermittently. Six complaints were filed with the New Mexico Environmental Department. That means we saw harmful pollution coming from over 75% of oil and gas sites we visited in just one day. These emissions were commonly found coming from equipment such as storage tanks. 

April 2026

On April 16, 2026, community members gathered in Lybrook, New Mexico for a Toxic Tour led by Earthworks and Dine CARÉ to better understand oil and gas impacts in the Lybrook area. Using a FLIR camera, participants were able to see otherwise invisible emissions from oil and gas well sites located near Lybrook Elementary School and residential areas. Attendees noted strong odors near active sites, reinforcing ongoing community concerns about air quality and health. Residents shared experiences of headaches, nausea, and frequent exposure to harmful smells while living near industry activity. As a direct result of the tour, 6 complaints were filed with the New Mexico Environment Department. The Navajo Nation Environmental Protection Agency was also notified. 

Photo by Diné CARE’s Ali Tsosie-Harvey

Using a FLIR camera, participants observed emissions from well sites near schools, including Hanaadli Community School and Dzith-na-o-dith-le Community School. At one site, faint black smoke rose from an enclosed flare. At another, the smell of gas was noticeable. For many in the Counselor area, this confirmed lived experiences. Community members shared experiences of headaches, nausea, and persistent odors. 

Why Toxic Tours?

Community toxic tours are important because they give community members the opportunity to see oil and gas operations up close and better understand how these sites may impact air quality, health, and safety. The tours also create space for people to share their own experiences and observations living near the development. Through these tours, we hope to increase awareness, strengthen community knowledge, and encourage ongoing conversations about health, safety, and protecting the land for future generations.  

Photo by Diné CARE’s Ali Tsosie-Harvey

As someone who lives and works here as a certified thermographer, I see the importance of documenting emissions. The FLIR camera helps map areas that are not receiving consistent inspections. Responsibility is complex across federal, state, tribal, allotment, and private lands and oversight is inconsistent. That’s why Earthworks uses a tool like the FLIR camera to help communities see what they’ve been feeling for years and have the ability to push for greater accountability in Indigenous communities.

Take action by contacting representatives, learning more about how oil and gas infrastructure harms the public health and safety of communities, and engage in processes like showing up to give public comments when new rules and regulations are under consideration.

The post Seeing What We’ve Been Breathing: What I’ve Witnessed in 2026 So Far appeared first on Earthworks.