Mining Ban in Minnesota is In or Out Based on Politics: Copper, Nickel, Cobalt, and Platinum Minerals: Twin Metals Project is Now Back On as 20-Year Ban is Lifted

     The U.S. needs critical minerals in order to lessen dependence on China and other countries. Some mineral deposits in the U.S. have been identified but have not been developed due to environmental concerns. This is the case in Minnesota’s mining region.

     Bloomberg reports:

“The Senate voted 50-49 to repeal a 2023 federal order that prohibited mining in an area spanning more than 200,000 acres known as Boundary Waters Canoe Area Wilderness. The proposal, passed by the House in January, now heads to President Donald Trump, who is expected to sign it.”

     The Obama administration enacted a 20-year mining ban in the region, which the first Trump administration reversed, but the ban was reinstated by the Biden administration. The Twin Metals project has long been pursued by Duluth Metals Limited, which in 2010 initiated a partnership with Chilean mining giant Antofagasta to form Twin Metals Minnesota. The last underground mine in the region closed nearly 50 years ago, in 1967.

     Bloomberg notes:

“A plan submitted to regulators calls for a type of waste storage that limits water use and the risk of spills, along with water treatment systems and monitoring designed to protect surrounding wetlands.”

     Below are some of the uses of the minerals to be mined:

     The project plans to implement a mine tailings management method known as dry stacking, which dewaters tailings with the water being recovered and reused at the mine. One goal of dry stacking is to prevent the generation of acids from tailings. Dry stacking has been used successfully at mining projects in the U.S. and especially in Canada. The project will not involve tailings ponds or dams, which are potential sources of contamination, and there will be no risk of dam failures. Dry stacking is considered to be the best available technology (BAT) for preventing and mitigating environmental damage from mine tailings.  

     Minnesota has the world’s largest known undeveloped copper-nickel deposits. It also has some of the strictest environmental standards among U.S. states. Why would we not want to develop such a deposit? Because it is near a “wilderness area”? I would think that having a mine in an area away from people would make it less likely to impact people. While impacts on nature are important. I would think that they can be mitigated, especially as best available technologies are implemented.

     The proposed mine plans to develop a part of the Duluth Complex in Northeastern Minnesota known as the Maturi Deposit. 

     The company explains the uniqueness of the Maturi Deposit below:

“Because of the way it was formed, the minerals are more condensed in a narrow band. This allows us to mine underground and surgically extract the ore. In fact, about 80% of mining will occur below 1500 ft and about 40% will occur below 2700 ft. The Maturi deposit that we’ll mine is a contact-style mafic copper-nickel deposit. That’s different than many of the world’s copper deposits, called porphyry deposits, which represent about 90% of the world’s copper deposits and require open-pit mining.”

“Another point of difference: our continuing studies show that the tailings produced (the leftover sandy material once the metals are extracted and shipped to customers) will be non-acid generating. This is due to the geology itself and our mining method. Also, independent research confirms these findings.”

     It will be an underground mine instead of an open-pit mine. Most of the world’s copper is mined via open pits. This underground mine will have a much smaller surface footprint, 85% smaller than an open-pit mine. This deposit has been studied and pursued for over two decades. I believe it is time to develop it. It is expected to create 750 jobs in the region, with another 1500 spinoff jobs. I don’t know why the Democrats want to ban every mine and drilling project. I understand the desire to prevent environmental destruction, but not developing such projects often leads to sourcing those same in-demand minerals from sources with much lower environmental standards, essentially outsourcing environmental impact to other countries at a higher cost.

     The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and U.S Forest Service (UFS) have opposed the project, and UFS reiterated that opposition in 2023, noting the following:

“The record for the 2016 lease consent determination and 2023 withdrawal application demonstrate that development of these mineral resources presented an unacceptable, inherent risk of serious and irreparable harm to the BWCAW natural resources,” states the Dec. 18 letter, signed by Regional Forester Antoine Dixon. “It has been thoroughly documented that the proposed mineral leasing is not a compatible use within the watershed in such proximity to the wilderness and that the forest service’s withholding of consent to the issuance of leases…would be inconsistent with the record.”

Dixon continued: “Mineral leasing could cause changes to terrestrial or aquatic habitat function due to surface destruction, noise/light/air pollution, and modification of streams, lakes, or wetlands… Changes to water quality could potentially result in adverse changes to the biological integrity of aquatic communities and to sensitive species. This in turn could adversely affect the wilderness character of the BWCAW, public use and enjoyment of water and aquatic resources, and the ability of tribes to exercise treaty rights.”

     It will likely take years before minerals are actually produced, as further regulatory hurdles are negotiated, and it remains a concern that future political administrations will reverse approvals or add requirements. However, the U.S. would do well to produce its domestic minerals.

 

 

References:

 

US Senate lifts mining ban in win for Chile billionaire clan. Marcelo Rochabrun and James Attwood. Bloomberg. April 16, 2026. US Senate lifts mining ban in win for Chile billionaire clan

Twin Metals Minnesota. Twin Metals Minnesota

Dry Stack Tailings Management. https___www.twin-metals.com_wp-content_uploads_2021_02_TMM-Dry-Stack-Fact-Sheet_FINAL_2.22.21.pdf

USFS reiterates its opposition to planned Twin Metals mine Dec. 18 letter comes in response to ongoing litigation over canceled leases. Marshall Helmberger. The Timberjay. January 9, 2026. USFS reiterates its opposition to planned Twin Metals mine - The Timberjay

Decoy Molecules Mimic Fatty Acids, Tricking Enzymes to Degrade Soil Pollutants Like Dioxin and Benzene: Potential New Soil Bioremediation Method

     A new method of utilizing decoy molecules instead of genetic engineering, which is often restricted, can degrade persistent pollutants without alteration of the degrading agent (genetic modification). Researchers at Nagoya University in Japan developed the technique, which can be effective for degrading stable aromatic compounds such as dioxin and benzene, both very dangerous to health and the ecosystem. The researchers utilized cytochrome P450, a widely distributed group of enzymes that degrade and convert substances in living organisms. The graphic below shows the general hydroxylation reaction.

     According to Phys.org:

“Cytochrome P450BM3, derived from the soil bacterium Priestia megaterium, naturally hydroxylates fatty acids but does not interact with pollutants such as dioxins. This substrate selectivity arises from the lock-and-key mechanism, which allows only molecules with a specific shape to bind to the enzyme.”

     As explained below, the target molecules are hydroxylated, but the enzyme agents are not hydroxylated, which means they can be reused, or rather continuously used in reactions:

“Decoy molecules bind to enzymes in a manner similar to fatty acids; however, their shorter chain length prevents them from reaching the active site. This configuration creates a confined reaction space that allows molecules to enter and undergo hydroxylation. Because decoy molecules are not themselves hydroxylated, they maintain their function and continue to facilitate the enzymatic reaction.”

     The researchers evaluated the biochemical effects of ten different strains of soil bacteria. The decoy molecules were found to successfully hydroxylate other toxic aromatic compounds, including benzene, toluene, xylene (BTX), and naphthalene.

“The results showed that benzene hydroxylation occurred only with particular strain-decoy combinations. The tested strains included P. megaterium, which contains cytochrome P450BM3, as well as other common soil bacteria, such as Bacillus subtilis, which possess closely related enzymes.”

     It is explained below that the method proved especially successful at degrading dioxin molecules and could be used in the bioremediation of soils contaminated with dioxin.

“Surprisingly, in the presence of decoy molecules, B. subtilis completely degraded dioxin model compounds within two hours at 45 degrees Celsius. Computational simulations demonstrated that cytochrome P450 in B. subtilis has sufficient binding capacity to accommodate both a decoy molecule and dioxin, which is a larger pollutant than benzene.”

“The findings indicate that the decoy molecule-induced hydroxylation activity in these bacteria increases the solubility of pollutants and facilitates their degradation. This mechanism could accelerate the removal of soil pollutants by supporting faster and more efficient microbial degradation.”

     The results suggest that the method could be used with many different soil bacterial strains and can be widely utilized for different pollutants after the best combinations are found.

Shoji concluded, "Our study provides a generalizable chemical strategy to unlock latent catalytic potential in ubiquitous environmental microbes, establishing a new paradigm for scalable, regulation-compatible bioremediation technologies."

     The result is that these decoy molecules can act as biocatalysts in induced biodegradation chemical reactions with contaminants via hydroxylation.

     According to the paper published in the Journal of Materials Chemistry A:

“Future studies should evaluate the environmental stability, bioavailability, and practical deployability of decoy molecules in real soil matrices, as well as their environmental fate during field applications, to determine whether this strategy can be safely implemented in contaminated environments.”

References:

 

Decoy molecules trick soil bacteria into attacking persistent pollutants without genetic engineering. Science X staff. Phys.org. April 9, 2026. Decoy molecules trick soil bacteria into attacking persistent pollutants without genetic engineering

Chemical activation of native cytochrome P450s in soil-derived bacteria by external molecules enables biodegradation of aromatic pollutants. Fumiya Ito, Masayuki Karasawa, and  Osami Shoji. Journal of Materials Chemistry A. Issue 21, 2026. Chemical activation of native cytochrome P450s in soil-derived bacteria by external molecules enables biodegradation of aromatic pollutants - Journal of Materials Chemistry A (RSC Publishing)

Mexico’s Sheinbaum Administration Finally Ready to Pursue Shale Gas and Oil via Hydraulic Fracturing

      For well over a decade, Mexico has resisted tapping its shale gas and oil resources. The Eagle Ford trend in South Texas likely extends into Mexico as the Burgos Basin extension of the Western Gulf Coast Basin and can be developed. Recently, Mexican President Gloria Sheinbaum has expressed a desire to develop those resources. One reason to do it is to wean Mexico off of U.S. natural gas, which powers Mexican power plants and industry. Former President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO) was adamantly against allowing Mexico to engage in hydraulic fracturing for energy production. Mexico now imports far more than half of its natural gas, pipelining it in from the U.S. The supply is close and abundant, so the costs to purchase American natural gas are low.

     No concrete plans have been made public yet, and it will take time for them to be formulated and the process begun. Mexico’s state energy company PEMEX is notoriously inefficient and not likely to compete with the U.S. on well and infrastructure costs. Mexico would be wise to allow American companies in to accelerate development, but that is not seen as likely. 

     According to Morning Overview's Everett Sloan, the next steps may be as follows:

     The Burgos Basin was opened for development by private companies in 2017 but by 2019 AMLO decided against allowing hydraulic fracturing in the country. The EIA noted in 2017 that there are 3500 natural gas wells in the Burgos Basin producing from non-shale reservoirs. Those reservoirs typically have low permeability and high decline rates. Burgos Basin gas production was at a peak in 2012 at 1.2 BCF/day but by 2016 it had dropped to 0.87 BCF/day.

     Realistically, it will take years, probably several years, maybe a decade, before Mexican shale production makes an impact and reduces imports from the U.S. Demand may grow as well. This means that the U.S. gas export sales are quite safe for now and in the near-term.

     PEMEX estimates that Mexico holds more oil & gas reserves in unconventional resources like shale than in conventional resources. Proven conventional gas reserves stand at about 83 TCF, while non-conventional resources are estimated at more than 140 TCF. Mexico consumes roughly 9 BCF of natural gas per day, but produces just 2.3 BCF domestically. About 75% to 80% comes from the U.S., mainly from Texas.

     According to OilPrice.com’s Julianne Geiger:

“Sheinbaum said a scientific committee will be formed to evaluate available technologies, including the use of less harmful chemicals and recycled water. The group is expected to deliver recommendations within two months.”

“Pemex expects to increase domestic production to just over 4 billion cubic feet per day by 2030, with a longer-term target of 8.6 billion cubic feet over the next decade. That outlook includes potential contributions from non-conventional sources.”

     Mexico continues to build new combined-cycle natural gas plants, with seven currently under construction or ready to come online and five more planned.

     As the graph below shows, Mexico’s prices for pipelined U.S. gas have mostly remained under $3 per MCF and sometimes closer to $2. It has been a good deal for Mexico and the U.S. and will likely remain so for years to come.

     The Burgos Basin is thought to contain the largest unconventional reserves in the country. The Burgos Basin butts right up against EOG’s Dorado Play in Webb County, Texas, announced in 2020, which produces from the Eagle Ford Shale and the Austin Chalk.

 

References:

 

Sheinbaum backs Mexico energy shift to cut reliance on US natural gas. Everett Sloane. Morning Overview. April 10, 2026. Sheinbaum backs Mexico energy shift to cut reliance on US natural gas

Mexico’s shale-rich Burgos Basin opens to private investment for the first time. Energy Information Administration. August 22, 2017. Mexico’s shale-rich Burgos Basin opens to private investment for the first time - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Mexico’s Sheinbaum Weighs Fracking Return to Cut U.S. Gas Dependence. Julianne Geiger. OilPrice.com. April 9, 2026. Mexico’s Sheinbaum Weighs Fracking Return to Cut U.S. Gas Dependence | OilPrice.com

End of Fracking Freeze? Mexico Eyes 141 Tcf in Unconventional Resources to Slash U.S. Imports. Christopher Lenton. Natural Gas Intelligence. April 9, 2026. End of Fracking Freeze? Mexico Eyes 141 Tcf in Unconventional Resources to Slash U.S. Imports

Mexico Basins Overview. 12 Mexico Gas Summit. 2026. Mexico Shale Summit Burgos Sabinas Picachos Burros Basin

Ireland is Struggling with Fuel Affordability in Light of Strait of Hormuz Disruptions and Taxation

    

      While the U.S. is fairly well insulated from suffering huge cost increases resulting from the disruption of oil, refined fuel, fertilizer, and other commerce due to the situation with the Strait of Hormuz, countries in Africa, Asia, and Europe have been strongly affected. Fuel cost increases in Europe are concerning. In Ireland, fuel costs have skyrocketed. Fuel oil has increased by 67.5 %. Fuel oil is used by about 25% of homes in the country for heat. If this had happened in mid-winter, the situation could have been far worse.  

“A 1,000-litre oil tank now costs €1,740 to fill, almost double the €935 price in early February and the highest on record.”

     That is quite expensive. It is the highest cost on record for fuel oil in the country. 

     Inflation is also rising in the country, as is the price of diesel (up 18.1%) and gasoline, or petrol (up 7.7%).

     One thing people are complaining about is the high government taxes on fuel, which means the government is profiting from the fuel price increases.

     On April 8, a fuel price protest began. Protestors are calling for the carbon tax on green diesel to be removed and the price of fuel to be capped.

John Dallon, a protest leader in Dublin, told the outlet: “Government is going to have to listen because this protest is escalating. The people of Ireland, of the island of Ireland, have had enough, and what I’m hearing all around here is we need to bring the government down or at least bring them to their senses, and we need to take some of that power back off of government.”

     Apparently, protests have caused Ireland’s only oil refinery to close due to trucks blocking roads in support of the protest. Gas pumps are running dry, and transportation in the country has been hampered. Over 500 of the country’s 1500 gas stations have run out of gas.

“Government officials, who had already introduced measures to ease the burden of price rises, have been baffled over the rationale behind the protests because the global price spike is due to the war in the Middle East that has restricted oil exports.”

“Irish Prime Minister Micheál Martin said on Friday that the country was on the brink of turning tankers away at ports during a global shortage and was in jeopardy of losing its oil supply.”

"It is unconscionable, it's illogical, it is difficult to comprehend," Martin told national broadcaster RTE.

     Irish police are arresting protestors and removing the roadblocks, but it sounds like the government needs to do something to relieve the tension. Talks are ongoing. According to AP:

“Two weeks ago, the government approved a range of measures to cut fuel prices, including a temporary reduction in excise taxes on motor fuels, expansion of a rebate for truckers and bus operators that use diesel fuel, and the extension of a program that helps low-income people with their heating costs.”

“But those reductions were quickly overtaken as international prices continued to rise.”

     RTE reports that the Irish government has extended its assistance:

“The big move by Government is the further 10c cut in excise on both petrol and diesel to the end of July.”

“There will also be a new reduction of 2.4c on green diesel.”

“The carbon tax increases have been delayed until the Budget in October.”

“The size of the package announced is around €505 million - and it comes on top of €250 million worth of measures announced almost three weeks ago.”

     Further measures have been announced for truckers and farmers, some backdated to March 1.

     Social Democrats leader Holly Cairns noted the effects of inflation in the country:

"These protests are a manifestation of how desperate many people feel as costs continue to soar - not just for fuel, but for everything in this country," she said.

"People are increasingly struggling to pay for the basics - food, energy and housing - and the Government is just not listening to them. They are out of touch and out of ideas.”

     While some in the country have called for increased electrification and an acceleration of the transition to renewable energy, that is likely not going to be a cheaper alternative. However, it could insulate the country a bit from future geopolitical fossil fuel price shocks.

 

 

References:

 

'People just can't afford it' – Heating oil at its highest price ever. Christian McCashin. Extra.ie. April 10, 2026. 'People just can't afford it' – Heating oil at its highest price ever

Irish protesters threaten to "close the country down" as roads blockaded. Kate Plummer. Newsweek. April 10, 2026. Irish protesters threaten to "close the country down" as roads blockaded

Fuel protests in Ireland continue as pumps run dry, prices rise amid war in Middle East: Police arrested protesters on Saturday calling for Ireland's only oil refinery to reopen. AP. April 12, 2026. Fuel protests in Ireland continue as pumps run dry, prices rise amid war in Middle East | CBC News

New fuel supports announced after days of protests. Maggie Doyle  Mícheál Lehane. RTE. Updated April 13, 2026. New fuel supports announced after days of protests

 

EIA Provides Update on U.S. Coal Plant Retirement Delays: They Will Likely Continue for a Few Years

 

      The EIA first notes that just 2.6 GW of coal capacity was retired in 2026, the least since 2010. I should point out that most of the plants scheduled to retire are likely operating at reduced capacity, or utilization, for various reasons, often related to the plan to retire them. They are often older, less efficient plants. For 2026, the original plan was to retire 8.5 GW of capacity, of which 4.8 GW capacity was delayed, and 1.1 GW (two plants) was cancelled. An additional 1.2 GW scheduled to retire in 2027 has been cancelled as well.

     The biggest coal plant retirement in 2026 was the 1.8 GW Intermountain Power Project in Utah, which has been replaced by a 1.017 GW combined cycle natural gas plant, which became operational in late 2025.

     Below is a list of the five plants, representing the 4.8 GW of planned retirement that were delayed by emergency orders from the U.S. Dept of Energy. All plants subject to delays are shown on the map below.

     Most of those plants are still scheduled to retire in 2026, but the DOE could issue emergency orders for further delays as it did with the J.H. Campbell plant in Michigan. 2.2 GW of planned retirements were delayed, not by the DOE, but by the operators in Wisconsin, Colorado, and Maryland, with one expected to convert to natural gas by 2028.

     Current plans call for retiring 6.4 GW of coal capacity (4% of the U.S. coal-fired fleet) in 2026, but those plans could change, especially if more emergency orders are issued.

  

References:

 

U.S. coal-fired generating capacity retired in 2025 was the least in 15 years. Energy Information Administration. April 13, 2026. U.S. coal-fired generating capacity retired in 2025 was the least in 15 years - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

 

 

Studies Show Some Correlation Between Cancer Incidence and Living Near Nuclear Power Plants; However, No Causation Has Been Established

  

     I will first state that I have always been skeptical of these sorts of epidemiological studies that seek to establish correlations between health outcomes and nearness to potential sources of contamination. Several studies like these that studied those who live near oil & gas sites had very slight, probably statistically insignificant, poor health outcomes, failed to show any real connection or causation, although the headlines often seek to imply that causation. I believe the same is true of these studies. For fossil fuel contamination exposure, there is often a real possible exposure pathway. In the case of oil & gas sites, that exposure pathway is mainly increased burning of diesel fuel at the sites where emissions are temporarily accelerated during certain operations. There are often no continuous high emissions found. In the case of nuclear power plants, if such a study is to be considered valid, there needs to be some kind of quantification of local radiation elevated above normal in the areas evaluated. Without such data, these studies are even less valid. I would question the headline by The Cool Down: Study: Living near nuclear power plants increases risk of certain cancers as likely not accurate. While there may be a correlation, there is no proof that it is specifically living near those plants that increases the risk of certain cancers, only that there are increases in those cancers among those who do. Of course, correlation is not causation, but the headline clearly implies that somehow the plants are the cause.

     I will look briefly at three studies here: one for people living near nuclear power plants in Massachusetts, another from the entire U.S. by the same authors, and one from South Korea. 

     The abstract to the first one included the following statement, which does not include a caveat that the connection may not involve causation.

“Residential proximity to nuclear plants in Massachusetts is associated with elevated cancer risks, particularly among older adults, underscoring the need for continued epidemiologic monitoring amid renewed interest in nuclear energy.”

     The abstract of the national study did, however, include that important caveat:

“While our findings cannot establish causality, they highlight the need for further research into potential exposure pathways, latency effects, and cancer-specific risks, emphasizing the importance of addressing these potentially substantial but overlooked risks to public health.”

     The Korean study showed some increase in certain types of cancer incidence, but the types varied by facility, and there was no widespread correlation. The statement below from the paper’s conclusions highlights the uncertainty and the lack of exposure characterization.

“While the role of ionizing radiation remains uncertain, our findings highlight geographic patterns that warrant cautious interpretation and may inform future studies incorporating more detailed exposure characterization and individual-level data on residential history, occupation, and health behaviors.”

  These sorts of studies would be more convincing if there were established exposure pathways enabled by verified increases in ionizing radiation above backgrounds, but this is not the case. These are merely attempts to show correlation.

     The article in The Cool Down notes the following about the Massachusetts study:

“The researchers found that approximately 3.3% (around 20,600) of the cancer cases considered in the study "were attributable to living near [a nuclear power plant], with risk declining sharply beyond roughly 30 kilometers from a facility," according to a press release from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health.”

     The obvious question would be: “How are these cancer cases "attributable” to living in proximity to these plants?” That question is not answered, and without it being answered, there can be no meaning to such “attributions.”

     The study’s authors, however, did have some useful suggestions that could both move closer to actual causation (which is not at all certain) and decrease the likelihood of exposures:

"Strengthening emission controls, improving environmental monitoring, and prioritizing research and surveillance within approximately 25-30 km of nuclear plants will be essential for advancing evidence-based protection of nearby communities."

References:

 

Study: Living near nuclear power plants increases risk of certain cancers. Misty Layne. The Cool Down. April 9, 2026. Study: Living near nuclear power plants increases risk of certain cancers

Residential proximity to nuclear power plants and cancer incidence in Massachusetts, USA (2000–2018). Yazan Alwadi, John S. Evans, Joel Schwartz, Carolina L. Zilli Vieira, David C. Christiani, Brent A. Coull & Petros Koutrakis. Environmental Health. Volume 24, article number 92, (December 18, 2025). Residential proximity to nuclear power plants and cancer incidence in Massachusetts, USA (2000–2018) | Environmental Health | Springer Nature Link

National analysis of cancer mortality and proximity to nuclear power plants in the United States. Yazan Alwadi, Barrak Alahmad, Carolina L. Zilli Vieira, Philip J. Landrigan, David C. Christiani, Eric Garshick, Marco Kaltofen, Brent Coull, Joel Schwartz, John S. Evans & Petros Koutrakis. Nature Communications. Volume 17, article number 1560, (February 2026). National analysis of cancer mortality and proximity to nuclear power plants in the United States | Nature Communications | Springer Nature Link

Cancer incidence near nuclear facilities in Korea (2005–2022): implications of regional socioeconomic status and industrial context. Ga Bin Lee, Kyungsik Kim, Eun-Shil Cha, Soojin Park, Dalnim Lee, Minsu Cho, Sue K. Park & Songwon Seo. BMC Public Health. Volume 26, article number 1012, (February 19, 2026). Cancer incidence near nuclear facilities in Korea (2005–2022): implications of regional socioeconomic status and industrial context | BMC Public Health | Springer Nature Link

New Paper Assesses Groundwater Quantity and Water Table Levels in the U.S.

     I recently posted about a series of studies by researchers at UC Santa Barbara regarding water table levels around the world, the problem of groundwater depletion, and possible solutions. Another recent study maps water table levels in the U.S. In this study, researchers at Princeton University and the University of Arizona took data from about 800,000 wells and applied a machine-learning model to estimate the depth of the water table nationwide. They estimated aquifer freshwater levels down to 1300 feet, much deeper than most groundwater wells.

     One of the problem areas in the U.S. where groundwater is depleting fastest is the Central Valley area, which is our country’s agricultural powerhouse. It is noted that in some areas, like the desert Southwest, the groundwater is considered “fossil water,” and if depleted, it will take years to be recharged without severe interventions. There, when groundwater depletes, it often dries up connections to surface water, such as wetlands and small tributaries.

     According to an article in the LA Times:

“The total quantity of water underground is still immense. The scientists found nationwide there is roughly 250 billion acre-feet, or 13 times the volume of the Great Lakes.”

“Data compiled by lead author Yueling Ma show the Colorado River watershed has about as much groundwater as the volume of the Great Lakes, while California has about 70% of that.”

     The map below shows that the uncertainty level, as exemplified by the inter-quartile range (IQR), is generally lower in the eastern U.S. and higher in the western U.S. 

     The database for California showed 6000 water wells that have dried up since 2013. However, only 13 ran dry in 2025, so the rate has likely slowed.

     The new study utilized a machine learning approach. It emphasizes the need for higher local spatial resolution in order to get a better estimate of groundwater quantities. Therefore, the study utilized a high-resolution (approximately 30 m) approach to calculate groundwater storage. Other studies often utilize a much lower 1 sq. km resolution. 

     One known finding confirmed by the study is that groundwater has large spatial variability, which poses challenges for management. They show that wow resolution estimates systematically underestimate accessible groundwater. This is why higher spatial resolution is important to get accurate estimates. The first graphic below shows the mismatch between the spatial scale resolutions of common remote sensing methods and modeling. The second graphic below shows the loss of detail when the spatial resolution is too low.

     According to the paper:

“Groundwater systems are not a uniform reservoir and have significant spatial variability across multiple scales. Water table depth is often portrayed as a subdued replica of topography, however, groundwater recharging at higher elevations can travel great distances laterally underground to topographic lows, also known as groundwater convergence. Groundwater can maintain shallow water table depth in areas of local convergence during dry conditions, the same way that baseflow supports streamflow. These groundwater-land surface connections are of great importance to both watershed dynamics and ecosystem function often helping to sustain vegetation through drought.”

     The authors note that machine learning sidesteps computational barriers to bridge scales.

“We combine our water table depth product (Fig. 2) with spatially variable estimates of porosity from previous literature to calculate total groundwater storage (see SI S1.3 and Table S1). We estimate a total groundwater storage of 306,500 km3, with an uncertainty range of 291, 850 km3 to 316, 720 km3. This estimate includes all groundwater above a depth of 392 m (this depth is the deepest depth for which we have reliable porosity data, and roughly the limit of active circulation in the hydrologic cycle.”

     The authors conclude that their higher-resolution estimates can help with local -scale groundwater management strategies:

“Despite the groundwater challenges we currently face and the anticipation of future challenges, large-scale estimates of the quantity of groundwater can be connected to the local-scale water table depth to provide additional information critical in water management. The accessibility of groundwater under agricultural regions demonstrates the uncertainty in the national water supply used to sustain food production.”

 

    

References:

 

How much water do we have? Scientists map the water beneath our feet. Ian James. Boiling Point Newsletter. Los Angeles Times. April 9, 2026. How much water lies underground? Scientists finally have an answer - Los Angeles Times

High resolution US water table depth estimates reveal quantity of accessible groundwater. Yueling Ma, Laura E. Condon, Julian Koch, Andrew Bennett, Amy Defnet, Danielle Tijerina-Kreuzer, Peter Melchior & Reed M. Maxwell. Communications Earth & Environment volume 7, Article number: 45 (January 2026). High resolution US water table depth estimates reveal quantity of accessible groundwater | Communications Earth & Environment