Ed Ballard

In 1972, the Clean Water Act banned the release of pollutants into the "waters of the United States" without a federal permit. Ever since, lawyers for industrial interests and environmental groups have debated exactly how watery some swamp or creek must be to qualify for protection.

Those who navigate this quagmire have an acronym for the elusive term at its center: WOTUS. Now, the Trump administration is wading in, pushing for a narrow definition. If it succeeds, the upshot would be speedier development for many energy projects, farms and other infrastructure, and less federal protection for the environment.

"We are overhauling sclerotic government overreach to remove friction from our economy," Adam Telle, assistant secretary of the Army for civil works, said in a press release unveiling the proposal last week.

The Army Corps of Engineers implements the regulation with the Environmental Protection Agency. One key change they proposed would largely restrict federal protections to bodies of water that remain year-round under normal conditions, aside from a 30-day interruption.

That "would be a dramatic departure from the customary understanding of 'waters of the United States,'" said Royal Gardner, a professor at Stetson University who has written a history of this debate. The Natural Resources Defense Council says 94% of the nation's wetlands and three-quarters of streams would lose federal oversight.

The new definition goes beyond the request of the oil industry, whose pipelines and oil wells run into Clean Water Act permitting issues. The American Petroleum Institute, in a January comment letter, suggested that waterways with a mere 90 days of flow should be entitled to federal protection.

The proposal seeks to bring the EPA into line with a crucial 2023 Supreme Court decision that crimped the agency's authority. Writing the majority opinion, Justice Samuel Alito said the EPA can legally regulate only "relatively permanent" bodies of water.

Alito left agencies to turn the ambiguous phrasing into regulation. The Trump EPA's first proposal, which was released in November and attracted 220,000 public comments, defined "relatively permanent" to mean flowing in the wet season. That was widely deemed confusing.

Looser rules could have a big impact in arid Western states. In Arizona, streams are mostly dry, and the state has many water-intensive mining projects, each with systems for draining stormwater and disposing of water used in minerals processing.

Arizona accounts for roughly 70% of U.S. copper output. The top producer, Freeport-McMoRan, which is developing more projects as copper demand soars, warned in 2022, before the Supreme Court ruling, against applying federal regulations to "arid ephemeral drainages." A spokeswoman for the company said it hasn't examined the latest proposal but supports environmental protections and state regulations.

Arizona has its own water regulations, but green groups expect mining projects to get an easier ride outside of federal jurisdiction. The proposed changes "would make it somewhat easier for mines to get permitted," predicted Curt Shannon, interim director of the Arizona Mining Reform Coalition, a nonprofit pushing for environmental oversight.

In 2022, the American Exploration & Mining Association said getting permits takes up to 10 years, undermining projects' economics and impeding the supply of clean-energy minerals.

"Time is money for these companies," said Larry Liebesman, a lawyer at Dawson & Associates, a firm that advises on environmental permitting. He said the latest definition, if approved, would spell fewer reviews under the Clean Water Act and regulations that can be triggered by it, such as the Endangered Species Act.

The wrangle still isn't over. There will be a 30-day comment period. But the waters of the United States could soon be less expansive than they used to be.

Tell me what you think: Send your feedback and suggestions to ed.ballard@wsj.com. And if somebody forwarded you this email, you can subscribe here.

This is an edition of the WSJ Climate & Energy newsletter, a weekly must-read of news, analysis and exclusive data focused on the intersection of business, money and climate, with coverage from across Dow Jones. If you're not subscribed, sign up here.

This Week's Top Stories

Nepal's hydropower bet overlooked the threat of monster floods. The Himalayan nation's hydropower capacity has quadrupled in a decade, and the 200-plus projects under construction would more than double that again. But that strategy has come into question as a warming planet destabilizes Himalayan glaciers and river systems.

Carmakers' new idea to boost EV range: gas engines. Hyundai, Ford and Stellantis are planning to introduce models pairing batteries with gas generators to solve range anxiety. The idea flips the conventional hybrid concept: Instead of supplementing a gas engine with a small battery, the gas engine would feed power to the battery.

The data center race doesn't have to be this way. The drive to power AI has resulted in sprawling, polluting, noisy, thirsty complexes reminiscent of the industrial revolution, WSJ tech columnist Christopher Mims writes. He compiled a list of ways to build data centers that people won't hate.

Google's $15 Billion Fix to the Data-Center Energy Problem: Put Them Somewhere Cold (Barron's)

SB Energy IPO Asks You to Buy AI Hype Today and Get Paid Years Later (WSJ)

A Used EV Is the Way to Get Those Luxury Wheels (Barron's)

Ford CEO Rejects Transportation Secretary's Claim of China Dependency (WSJ)

Mailbag: China's Coal

Jeff Goldman, a reader in Mesquite, Nev., got in touch about last week's column, which looked at the rapid spread of electric cars and trucks in China: "While this makes a nice headline it still doesn't address China's elephant in the room with respect to global energy-that is the use of coal in its electric power plants." Several other subscribers emailed me making the same point.

Fair enough: Unless EVs are entirely powered by and manufactured using green energy, they generate greenhouse gases. That scenario is a long way away, even if coal's share of China's power mix is shrinking.

All the evidence I can find suggests that EVs are reducing China's emissions, on balance. Still, their environmental advantage can indeed sometimes be marginal. This recent study found that, in the northern province of Heilongjiang, EVs only cut emissions by 14% compared with gasoline vehicles. The region has a coal-heavy grid and icy winters that reduce battery efficiency.

The Data Point

The price of Australian metallurgical coal, the kind used in steelmaking, is up 29% in a month, according to Dow Jones Energy. The move shows the interconnectedness of energy markets. Ukrainian attacks on Russian oil refineries led Russia to restrict exports of fuel to, among other places, Mongolia, causing an energy crisis that disrupted truck deliveries of Mongolian coal to China-boosting demand for Australian coal.

Big Picture

This Sept. 2 satellite photo shows hurricanes Lowell, Karina and Marie over the Pacific Ocean. El Niño is adding heat to oceans that were warming up anyway, creating conditions conducive to storms. Not since 2015, another El Niño year, have three hurricanes been active simultaneously in the region, NASA said.

About Us

WSJ Climate & Energy offers news, analysis and exclusive data focused on the intersection of business, money and climate. You'll find highlights from across Dow Jones, including The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, MarketWatch and Investor's Business Daily, plus data and analysis from Dow Jones Energy and its heritage brands: OPIS, McCloskey, PetroChem Wire and Chemical Market Analytics.

Today's email was written by Ed Ballard in London. Contact him at ed.ballard@wsj.com. Contact the team at climate@wsj.com.