News Feeds

Headline News:

• “The Navy Plans To Build Fifteen Trump-Class Battleships Through 2055 At $17 Billion Per Ship” • According to the Navy’s May 2026 shipbuilding blueprint, the service intends to procure fifteen Trump-class battleships through 2055. The Navy has confirmed that the proposed Trump-class battleship will be nuclear-powered. [National Security Journal]

Proposed USS Defiant (US Navy, public domain)

• “Heat Pump Sales Proliferate In Germany As Gas Boiler Sales Drop” • In Germany, heat pumps have become the best-selling heat technology, making up 48% of all new heating systems sold in the country last year. But eight countries are transitioning faster, and in the three countries farthest north, over 50% of all homes have them already. [Euronews]
• “Renewable Energy Central To Industrial Competitiveness For India: Pralhad Joshi” • In India, Union Minister for New and Renewable Energy Pralhad Joshi highlighted that renewable energy is becoming a critical determinant of competitiveness in key industrial sectors such as steel, aluminium, chemicals, automotive and textiles. [pv magazine India]
• “Qualitas Aims To Invest €10 Billion In Energy” • Qualitas Energy plans to invest over €10 billion by 2029 in renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure. The goal is centered on the Qualitas Energy Fund VI, which launched at the end of 2025 with a €3.25 billion target volume. Investment will go primarily to Spain, Germany, the UK, Poland, and Chile. [reNews]
• “Inflation Jumps To Highest Level In Three Years” • Inflation rose for a second consecutive month as the US-Israeli war with Iran kept making gasoline prices grow in April, government data showed. The inflation report matched economists’ expectations. Prices rose 3.8% in April compared to a year earlier, an increase from 3.3% in the prior month. [ABC News]

For more news, please visit geoharvey – Daily News about Energy and Climate Change.

nama Pragmatic Play menjadi salah satu yang paling sering dibicarakan oleh pemain maupun pengamat industri game digital.

Provider ini berhasil membangun reputasi kuat lewat kombinasi teknologi modern, kualitas visual, serta sistem permainan yang dinilai mampu memenuhi selera pasar global. Tidak heran jika banyak platform game online menjadikan koleksi slot mereka sebagai daya tarik utama.

Konsisten Menghadirkan Game Berkualitas

Salah satu alasan utama dominasi Pragmatic Play terletak pada konsistensi produksi game. Provider ini rutin merilis slot baru dengan tema yang beragam, mulai dari mitologi, petualangan, budaya Asia, hingga konsep futuristik.

Setiap permainan dirancang dengan detail visual yang rapi dan audio yang mendukung atmosfer permainan. Pendekatan ini membuat pemain tidak cepat bosan karena selalu ada pengalaman baru di setiap rilisan.

Beberapa judul populer seperti Gates of Olympus, Sweet Bonanza, dan Starlight Princess bahkan berhasil menciptakan komunitas pemain sendiri di berbagai negara. Popularitas game tersebut juga diperkuat oleh banyaknya konten streamer dan kreator digital yang membahas pola permainan maupun fitur bonusnya.

Teknologi yang Mendukung Pengalaman Bermain

Pragmatic Play tidak hanya fokus pada tampilan game. Mereka juga memperhatikan stabilitas sistem dan kenyamanan pengguna di berbagai perangkat.

Mayoritas slot dari provider ini sudah mendukung teknologi sehingga dapat dimainkan dengan lancar di desktop maupun smartphone. Faktor ini menjadi penting karena tren pemain mobile terus meningkat setiap tahun.

Selain itu, proses loading yang cepat dan antarmuka yang sederhana membuat pemain baru lebih mudah memahami mekanisme permainan. Pengalaman pengguna yang praktis menjadi nilai tambah besar di tengah persaingan industri game online yang sangat kompetitif.

Fitur Bonus yang Menarik Perhatian Pemain

Faktor lain yang membuat Pragmatic Play mendominasi pasar adalah keberanian mereka menghadirkan fitur bonus yang agresif namun tetap seimbang. Banyak slot mereka dikenal memiliki:

• Free spins dengan multiplier tinggi
• Fitur tumble atau cascading reels
• Buy feature untuk langsung masuk bonus round
• Jackpot dan pengganda kemenangan besar

Sistem tersebut menciptakan sensasi permainan yang lebih dinamis. Pemain merasa memiliki peluang besar untuk mendapatkan kombinasi menarik dalam waktu singkat.

Meski demikian, pemain tetap perlu memahami bahwa slot online bekerja menggunakan sistem RNG (Random Number Generator). Artinya, hasil permainan tetap bergantung pada keberuntungan dan tidak ada pola pasti yang menjamin kemenangan.

Strategi Branding yang Kuat

Dalam dunia digital, kualitas produk saja tidak cukup. Pragmatic Play memahami pentingnya membangun identitas merek yang kuat.

Mereka aktif bekerja sama dengan berbagai platform hiburan online internasional dan rutin tampil dalam pameran industri game global. Strategi pemasaran ini membuat nama Pragmatic Play semakin dikenal luas, bahkan oleh pemain yang baru mengenal slot online.

Selain itu, desain logo, tampilan promosi, hingga karakter dalam game dibuat konsisten sehingga mudah dikenali. Pendekatan branding semacam ini membantu memperkuat loyalitas pemain.

Didukung Lisensi dan Standar Keamanan

Kepercayaan menjadi faktor penting dalam industri game online. Pragmatic Play berhasil menjaga reputasi karena beroperasi di bawah pengawasan sejumlah regulator internasional.

Sistem keamanan serta audit permainan menjadi bagian penting untuk memastikan transparansi. Banyak pemain memilih provider yang memiliki rekam jejak jelas dibanding sekadar menawarkan hadiah besar.

Dengan dukungan lisensi resmi dan pengawasan sistem RNG, pemain merasa lebih nyaman saat mencoba berbagai permainan yang tersedia.

Dominasi yang Belum Terlihat Melambat

Melihat perkembangan industri saat ini, dominasi Pragmatic Play tampaknya masih akan terus berlanjut. Provider ini mampu membaca tren pasar dengan cepat dan memahami apa yang dicari pemain modern: permainan cepat, visual menarik, fitur inovatif, serta kompatibilitas mobile yang stabil.

Di tengah munculnya provider-provider baru, Pragmatic Play tetap berada di posisi kuat karena berhasil menjaga keseimbangan antara inovasi, kualitas, dan pengalaman pengguna.

Bagi banyak pemain slot online, nama Pragmatic Play kini bukan sekadar provider biasa, melainkan simbol hiburan digital yang identik dengan permainan modern dan penuh variasi.

When the NASDAQ opens on Wednesday morning, the exchange will include a new ticker symbol: FRVO. The company, Fervo Energy, is in the geothermal electricity business and aims to raise $1.8 billion. An initial public offering of that magnitude would be one of the biggest Wall Street debuts for renewable energy in U.S. history and a promising sign for clean tech’s future.

“This is a very, very big deal,” said Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia Business School. “Money speaks.”

At the simplest level, geothermal generation is the process of harnessing the heat within the earth to produce steam, which then spins turbines to generate much-needed electricity. But locating suitable geology and getting deep enough to make power on a utility-scale isn’t easy. Fervo uses horizontal drilling and fiber-optic sensing to tap previously out-of-reach sources. 

“Innovation is allowing these technologies to cover a wider variety of sites,” said Zainab Gilani, a geothermal analyst with research firm Cleantech Group. Fervo, she noted, is using some of the same techniques that the oil and gas industry uses, with the hope of cutting the price of geothermal from $7,000 to $3,000 per kilowatt as it grows. This initial public offering, or IPO, could prove a bellwether for not only that technology, but cleantech more broadly. 

“If Fervo demonstrates that there is money to be made for investors,” said Wagner, that “is going to draw a lot of attention well beyond just the narrow advanced geothermal community.” 

Fervo has successfully deployed its technology in Nevada, producing enough clean energy to power about 2,600 homes. It is building a much bigger facility, Cape Station, in Utah that would produce more than 100 times that amount of electricity and is slated to go online later this year. The prospect has attracted a slew of high-profile investors, including Bill Gates’ Breakthrough Energy Ventures, and Alphabet, the parent company of Google, which has also signed contracts with the company to supply power to its data centers. 

Now it’s the public’s turn to weigh in. 

When Fervo announced it was going public earlier this year, it said it would sell 55.6 million shares at around $21 to $24 each. Its debut comes as electricity demand is rapidly rising in the U.S. The race to build the data centers needed to sustain the artificial intelligence boom has strained grids nationwide, and has made the appetite for reliable energy seem insatiable. The Iran war has only exacerbated high energy prices, and this week Fervo boosted its target to 70 million shares, at around $25 or $26, which would value the company at $7.4 billion. The line has reportedly been out the door. 

Still, the road ahead won’t be easy, and bringing the price of geothermal down will take time. “They’re just not here yet on any large scale,” said Rob Gramlich, president of Grid Strategies, a power sector consultant. “They are great 2040 and 2050 options.”

Regardless of whether Fervo’s stock sinks or sails in the coming months or years, some see its initial offering as a promising sign for a clean energy industry that has faced political whiplash in recent years. The Inflation Reduction Act that President Joseph Biden signed in 2022 was the nation’s most ambitious climate legislation ever and included billions for solar, wind, geothermal, and other green technologies. But, since returning to office, President Donald Trump and Congress have largely dismantled that legislation, rolled back much of the nation’s wind development, and pushed fossil fuel as the answer to the country’s energy woes. 

While many major projects were canceled in the wake of those changes, Fervo has secured hundreds of millions of dollars in additional financing for Cape Station, and could be about to have a blockbuster IPO. “You’re in this situation where it is very obvious that the oil and gas sector is doing the best it can,” said Jigar Shah, a former senior official at the Department of Energy under Biden. “But the climate sector is the one that’s surging.” 

Earlier this year, Amazon-backed nuclear reactor developer X-Energy raised $1 billion with its public offering and is valued at more than $9 billion. Shah, who is a managing partner at the investment firm Multiplier, says IPOs like these bode well for clean tech. 

“There is a level of confidence coming to our sector, which I think is great,” said Shah. “For a long time, our space has acted as if we’re alternative energy. But when you’re 90 percent of everything that gets added to the grid every year, you’re no longer alternative.”

toolTips('.classtoolTips7','A powerful greenhouse gas that accounts for about 11% of global emissions, methane is the primary component of natural gas and is emitted into the atmosphere by landfills, oil and natural gas systems, agricultural activities, coal mining, and wastewater treatment, among other pathways. Over a 20-year period, it is roughly 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere.');

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Wall Street is betting big on clean energy tech on May 13, 2026.

The Irish state has encouraged a heavily capitalised, resource and energy intensive farming model, pushing farmers into a system tied to the weakest and most unstable links in the fossil fuel economy.

The post Talamh Beo: Ireland has a governance crisis, not a fuel crisis appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

All across Georgia, on the banks of the Coosa, Chattahoochee, and Ocmulgee and other rivers, sit large lagoons filled with coal ash, the toxic residue left behind after coal is burned. These massive impoundments hold millions of tons of toxic stew, and most are unlined. As a result, heavy metals in the coal ash — such as arsenic and mercury — quietly leach into the ground and nearby water bodies. 

In 2015, the Obama administration passed rules requiring utilities to clean up the ponds and implement monitoring requirements, transforming the Environmental Protection Agency into the chief regulator overseeing these sites. States were also given the opportunity to assume this regulatory role — as long as they met minimum federal requirements. 

Georgia was among the first to do so. In 2019, the EPA approved the state’s authority to oversee coal ash management. But in their first official act — a “bellwether” for future decisions — regulators at the state’s Environmental Protection Division approved a permit to leave coal ash partly submerged in groundwater at one of Georgia Power’s plants. Despite outcry from communities and a rebuke by the EPA, the agency continues to hold its regulatory authority and has approved another 20 permits for coal ash ponds at roughly a dozen coal plants across the state. 

The Trump administration is now signaling it wants to transfer coal ash oversight to even more states and roll back federal protections. Five states currently have approved coal ash programs, including Georgia, Oklahoma, Texas, North Dakota, and Wyoming. Oklahoma and Georgia were approved during Trump’s first term, Texas received approval during the Biden administration, and North Dakota and Wyoming were approved in the last year. The Trump administration is also in the process of approving Virginia for local coal ash permitting.

“The state agencies that have programs where they can issue permits, we’ve seen, unfortunately, that they’ve not been rigorous in enforcing standards,” said Nick Torrey, a senior attorney with the Southern Environmental Law Center. “We know that they are underfunded, underresourced. The utilities are often the most powerful entity in the state and call the shots.”

A spokesperson for the EPA stressed that the agency maintains “backstop authority and will use it” if states fail to meet federal standards. The agency can conduct reviews as necessary, and state programs are only approved if they are at least as protective of public health and the environment as the federal requirements, the spokesperson noted. “If state staffing or funding proves inadequate — or if implementation is otherwise deficient — EPA will address it through these reviews,” they said.

The coal ash decision is part of a broader campaign to shift environmental regulation to the states. During Trump’s first term, the EPA handed over wetlands permitting in Florida to state regulators — the first state to apply for and receive the authority in 25 years. In January, the administration began the process of accepting so-called “Good Neighbor Plans” from eight states. These plans had previously been rejected by the Biden administration for failing to prevent ozone emissions from crossing state lines. And over the past year, the administration has expanded state authority over underground carbon sequestration, giving West Virginia, Arizona, and Texas supervisory authority of carbon injection wells. 

According to the EPA, there are more than 670 coal ash ponds across the country. The lagoons range in size from a few acres to a thousand or more. Over the years, many of these ponds have repeatedly spilled coal ash into waterways. One of the worst accidents took place in 2008 when a dike at a Tennessee Valley Authority pond failed, releasing more than a billion gallons of coal ash. The flood buried homes, and residents are still reporting health issues. Similar incidents have occurred on the Dan River in North Carolina and in eastern Kentucky.

The Obama administration’s 2015 rules — the first oversight of coal ash — required utilities to monitor groundwater near coal ash ponds for contamination and for new ponds to be lined. In cases where there was evidence coal ash was leaching into water, the companies were required to close the ponds, either by draining them or excavating the ash and moving it elsewhere. 

But the rule had major loopholes and didn’t cover all coal ash disposal sites. Lagoons that weren’t actively receiving new material and located at retired coal plants weren’t covered. And crucially, dump sites — where coal ash is collected before being moved into lagoons — were not included in the rule. As a result, when testing indicated heavy metals were leaching into groundwater, utilities could point to the dump sites and claim they were to blame. 

“Utilities would point to these areas and say, ‘We don’t have to clean up our groundwater pollution because we think the pollution is coming from these exempt areas. Therefore, the pollution is exempt,’” said Torrey. 

About six years ago, the Altamaha Riverkeeper, a local nonprofit, tested groundwater near the coal-fired Plant Scherer in Monroe County, Georgia, and began notifying residents that their well water was contaminated with compounds found in coal ash. The county eventually ran water lines, but some low-income residents unable to afford water bills still rely on church waterfilling stations, said Fletcher Sams, executive director of the Altamaha Riverkeeper. “This is an area where the median household income is $30,000,” said Sams. “It’s pretty rural, and some people can’t afford to run pipe from the road and the hookup and the monthly fee for the water.”

Sara Lips, a spokesperson for the  Georgia Environmental Protection Division, said that the agency has a long history of overseeing coal ash in the state prior to the passage of the Obama-era rules. Their oversight has allowed for “timelier permitting process, quicker response to compliance issues, better understanding of community and environmental needs, and the ability for our permits to be more stringent than the federal requirements.” Lips said the agency added five staff members to help oversee coal ash permitting and that the state’s permits comply with federal regulations. “Georgia’s state rules reference and incorporate the federal rules,” she said. Lips also defended the permit at Plant Hammond, which the EPA noted was deficient, saying Georgia Power installed a cover system that “minimizes infiltration, promotes runoff, and collects precipitation to prevent future impoundment of surface water, sediment, or slurry” at the coal ash pond.  

In 2024, the Biden EPA attempted to close these loopholes by expanding coverage with a new rule that applied to all coal ash disposal sites, including so-called “legacy ponds.” But the Trump administration is now attempting to unwind these protections. In April, the EPA proposed exempting older or inactive coal ash disposal sites from the rules and granting state officials more leeway in overseeing coal ash monitoring plans. In press releases announcing these plans and the EPA’s intent to overhaul how coal ash is managed, administrator Lee Zeldin said that the agency “will advance cooperative federalism to allow states to lead the charge on local issues, with federal support. This is just one of many examples where this agency can and will work with our state partners to deliver for the American people.” 

“State environmental agencies know their communities, their geology, their utilities, and their facilities better than any federal regulator in Washington, and empowering them to run their own permit programs, under a federal floor of protection that cannot be lowered and with continuing EPA oversight, delivers stronger, faster, and more accountable results for the people and resources at stake,” the EPA spokesperson said. 

This move comes at a time when state legislatures have slashed budgets for environmental agencies. According to an analysis by the Environmental Integrity Project, a nonprofit founded by former EPA enforcement officials under both parties, more than half of states have cut funding for environmental agencies in the last 15 years. Mississippi’s budget has dropped by more than 70 percent during this time period, while South Dakota had its budget slashed by 61 percent. Three of the five states overseeing coal ash disposal — Texas, Georgia, and Wyoming — have had budget cuts of at least 20 percent over this time. Georgia has reduced its staffing by about 16 percent. 

Not all states that have applied for coal ash authority have received it. In 2024, the EPA rejected Alabama’s application to manage its coal ash ponds because it did not meet standards set in federal law. “Alabama’s permit program does not require that groundwater contamination be adequately addressed during the closure of these coal ash units,” the agency noted in its decision.

Torrey said the Trump administration appears poised to rubber stamp state requests, putting public health and the environment at risk.

“There’s a real retreat from the EPA doing the job it was created to do,” Torrey said. “When you combine that with the weakening and choking of funds for state agencies, it means that people are getting dramatically less protection from pollution.”

This story has been updated with comments from the EPA and Georgia Environmental Protection Division.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The EPA wants to shift monitoring of toxic coal ash to states on May 13, 2026.

BRUSSELS — A leaked letter signed by more than 100 food and beverage company CEOs, including Coca-Cola, Heineken, McDonald’s, Kraft Heinz and Mondelez, is calling on European Union institutions to delay and reopen key provisions of the Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR), just months before implementation is set to begin in August 2026.

On 29 April, CEOs requested EU institutions to delay key implementation timelines and revise provisions. If acted upon, requests could weaken restrictions on harmful PFAS chemicals in food packaging, and expand exemptions to keep large volumes of single-use packaging on the market, undermining the EU’s objective to reduce packaging waste at a time when waste levels remain high. Notably, a number of signatories and active sponsors of this initiative are headquartered outside the EU, raising questions about the extent to which corporate interests beyond Europe are seeking to undermine democratically agreed EU law.

A broad alliance of over 160 Break Free From Plastic members and allies, communities impacted by plastic and PFAS pollution, universities, consumer rights organisations and businesses committed to reuse, have sent a letter in response urging EU leaders to reject this lobbying push and uphold the Regulation as agreed by the European Parliament, Council and Commission.

They have warned that reopening agreed legislation at this stage risks weakening environmental protections, undermines regulatory certainty for companies already investing in compliance, and sets a precedent for corporate influence over environmental law after adoption. 

Companies have shaped the Regulation and have had years to prepare

The PPWR, one of the most heavily lobbied EU files, was adopted through the full legislative procedure, following extensive public and industry consultation. Companies have had both regulatory clarity and guidance to adapt their business models and supply chains.

Environmental and health groups argue that reopening agreed provisions would erode trust in the legislative process and deflect responsibility for democratically agreed environmental commitments back onto EU institutions. 

Public commitments contradicted by private lobbying

There is a contradiction between the voluntary sustainability commitments made by major brands and their behind-the-scenes policy positions. Several signatory companies have presented themselves as climate and circular economy leaders, yet are now seeking to weaken packaging reduction rules, delay chemical safety measures, and limit implementation of reuse systems. However, the PPWR mandatory reuse targets exist precisely because recycling alone cannot deliver the structural shift Europe needs to reduce packaging waste.

The lobbying push is creating collateral damage for businesses,  including major market players, that are genuinely committed to the success of the regulation and are already investing in the transition. Companies that have already started to adapt their supply chains around PPWR compliance are now facing unnecessary regulatory uncertainty, putting planned investments and innovation at risk. 

The power of precedent

The outcome of this lobbying effort will be closely watched across Europe and beyond as governments around the world consider similar packaging and plastics policies. If corporate lobbying succeeds in reopening a regulation weeks before it applies, it risks signalling that even landmark environmental law remains vulnerable to last-minute, covert lobbying pressure, regardless of democratic process. 

Marco Musso, Deputy Policy Manager for Circular Economy at the European Environmental Bureau, said: 

''It is disappointing to witness yet another attempt to delay and dilute a legislation designed to protect citizens and to stop the uncontrolled growth of packaging waste. Fortunately, the usual suspects behind the CEO letter do not speak for the majority of the packaging value chain. Across Europe a multitude of businesses, including major players, remain genuinely supportive of the regulation and are already investing to prepare for it. We stand with the EU institutions to preserve the integrity of the regulation and ensure effective implementation.”

Emma Priestland, Corporate Campaigns Coordinator for the Break Free From Plastic movement, said: 

“The letter sent by some of the world’s biggest users and polluters of plastic is a shocking example of corporations trying to override the democratic will of 27 countries. Their last minute attempt to derail this vital piece of legislation shows a frankly appalling disregard for the wishes, safety and wellbeing of their own customers. Companies should be focusing on ending their reliance on single-use packaging rather than influencing the law of an entire region.”

Sam Pearse, Campaigns Director from Story of Stuff, said: 

“The PPWR is a direct response to decades of fast-moving consumer goods companies shifting to disposable packaging—shedding microplastics and harmful chemicals while pushing their costs onto society. Now, some of those same companies, including U.S.-based corporations like McDonald’s, claim to support the law’s intent after pouring resources into weakening it and carving out exemptions. Their complaints ring hollow. The PPWR sets a critical global benchmark for moving away from throwaway packaging. EU leaders must hold the line — the world is watching.”

Catia De Cao, from Italian civil society network Rete Zero PFAS Italia, said: 

"I am deeply concerned about PFAS, having grown up in a region of Italy’s Veneto that has been severely affected by ‘forever chemical’ contamination. Years of exposure have left many people in my community with dangerously high levels of PFAS in their blood, increasing the risk of a multitude of serious health issues. But regardless of whether people live in pollution hotspots or not, we are all exposed to PFAS on a daily basis, as it is commonly used in food and beverage packaging. To protect people’s health - and especially the health of the youngest generations - the European Commission must go ahead with the ban of PFAS in food packaging.”

 

Notes to the editor

• Read the Break Free From Plastic and allies’ response letter here
• Read the leaked CEO letter here
• The EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation text and implementation timeline: 2025/40 

Press Contacts: 

• Bethany Spendlove Keeley, European Communications Manager Break Free From Plastic | Bethany@breakfreefromplastic.org | +49 (0)176 595 87 941
• Caroline Will, Communications Coordinator Rethink Plastic alliance | caroline@rethinkplasticalliance.org | +32 456 56 07 05

Migration and democratic decline in Central America cannot be understood separately from the intertwined impacts of US intervention, gang violence, economic instability and climate disruption. As droughts, displacement and insecurity deepen, the region faces growing pressure toward both migration and authoritarian rule.

A gathering in Paradise, California, will bring together fire-affected communities, local leaders and resilience practitioners to explore what rebuilding after catastrophe can look like beyond simply restoring the old normal.

War is a major driver of greenhouse gas emissions, yet most conflict-related emissions remain excluded from official climate accounting. Governments and international climate bodies must begin treating military emissions and the climate costs of war as central issues of accountability and justice.

Dear Friends

The Department of Water Resources has announced it will be conducting long-overdue outreach on its Community Benefits Package for the impacts caused by the Delta Conveyance Project in the form of five (5) listening sessions. We encourage community members to engage in these listening sessions, however, we also want to ensure you know your value as a resident of the Delta and the value of the Delta as a place. 

Restore the Delta and Little Manila Rising will be hosting a Community Information Session on May 21 from 5-6 pm, ahead of the first virtual listening session scheduled for May 27. Additional materials prepared by Restore the Delta and Little Manila Rising will be shared closer to the event. 

RSVP for our Community Info Session

During this Information Session We Will Share:

• Updates on the design and planning of Delta Conveyance Project
• Anticipated impacts to the Delta and our communities
• And what we know about the community benefits plan. 

Our goal is to arm you with the knowledge needed to hold DWR accountable, and advocate for your community in the upcoming listening sessions. 

The Delta and Community Value: A Virtual Community Information Session with Little Manila Rising:
 

• Date: May 21, 2026
• Time: 5:00 PM – 6:00PM
• Zoom Registration: https://us06web.zoom.us/meeting/register/f90_xMxWQMm_v4srkSixhQ

California Department of Water Resources Listening Sessions:

• Dates:
  • May 27 (virtual) at 5:30 – 7:30pm 
  • June 12 (in-person) in Stockton (location not listed)
  • June 13 (in-person) in Sacramento (location not listed)
  • July 29 (virtual) at 5:30 – 7:30pm 
  • August 12 (virtual) at 5:30 – 7:30pm 
• Registration Link: https://forms.gle/jMHEQFWZuyZGzKmg6

Restore the Delta will hold an additional Q&A session on June 9, 2026 to answer any questions leading up to the in-person listening sessions on June 12 and 13. Please stay tuned for more information to be provided.

As the Trump administration continues its push to secure critical minerals like lithium, the U.S. government and private corporations have ignored Indigenous peoples’ rights in Nevada. That’s according to a report released today by Amnesty International, which is calling for the suspension of federal permits for all lithium mines in the state. 

The Silver State has emerged as a key source of lithium, the main component in electric vehicle and other batteries. About 85 percent of the country’s known reserves are in Nevada, and several Indigenous nations and organizations, alongside environmentalists, have been fighting for years against its extraction and the environmental risks that creates, including water contamination and biodiversity loss. “This is our land,” said Fermina Stevens, a member of the Te-Moak Tribe of Western Shoshone and the executive director of the Western Shoshone Defense Project. “We should have a say in what happens. But I know that they don’t want us there because Nevada is so rich in all of these minerals.” 

The three projects Amnesty International highlights in its report are Thacker Pass Lithium Mine, Nevada North Lithium Project, and Rhyolite Ridge Lithium-Boron Project. Each is located primarily on public land that the Western Shoshone and Paiute people consider unceded territory. Thacker Pass is under construction and Rhyolite Ridge is slated to begin construction this year, while Nevada North is in the exploratory phase. 

Amnesty International’s report says all three are violating Indigenous peoples’ right to free, prior, and informed consent. That principle, known as FPIC, is an international standard that affirms Indigenous peoples’ right to approve or deny projects that impact their land and communities. Although the projects were approved by federal agencies, Amnesty International argues the review processes fell short of FPIC and the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, or UNDRIP.

“They’ve got to come down on the right side,” Mark Dummett, the organization’s head of business and human rights, said of the mining companies. “They’ve got to come down on the side of human rights, rather than getting the minerals at all costs.” He added that, regardless of domestic laws in the countries in which they operate, these firms must follow international human rights standards. The report also highlights the impact of the Trump administration’s push for deregulation, including fast-tracked permits and limited environmental review, which reduces the ability of Indigenous peoples to offer full consent. 

In a statement, a spokesperson from the U.S. Department of Interior said, “The climate crazed activists behind this report are notorious for making baseless claims, repeatedly rejected by courts, as part of their pathetic rage against energy production that is not only bipartisan, but proven to benefit the American people.” They also said that a review of lithium projects in Nevada by the federal Bureau of Land Management included extensive environmental review and opportunity for tribal engagement.

Nevada is experiencing a lithium boom that has seen more than 20,000 claims filed. The report also comes amid global resistance by Indigenous peoples to “green transition” mining that they say comes at the expense of their land and rights. Given the increasing demand for minerals like lithium, cobalt, and copper, Dummett said that mining companies around the world are taking advantage of gaps in regulation and human rights enforcement. “The way that this mining has always taken place has been incredibly damaging to the environment and people,” Dummett said. “We don’t want to see the mistakes of the past repeated.”

Stevens said that although her people have experienced a long history of land theft and abuse by the U.S. government and corporations, consultation has grown even more perfunctory amid the worldwide drive for lithium, which has surged since the war in Iran. “War and the military complex is all that they can see,” she said. “And so they’re blinded to the things that are sacred, that are more important for human survival. And I just don’t think that they care about those things.”

Lithium Americas, the owner of the Thacker Pass mine, disputed many of the report’s claims in a response submitted to Amnesty International, including inadequate consultation, environmental risks, and violation of Indigenous rights. Its reply also noted that UNDRIP is not binding in the United States, but argued that the project complies with it anyway. “The Thacker Pass Project has the potential to significantly advance America’s electrification efforts, reduce carbon emissions, and strengthen domestic supply chains for critical minerals — strengthening America’s energy future. LAC has made stakeholder engagement, including with Tribes, an important part of the development of the Project,” its response reads.  

A spokesperson for Ioneer, the owner of the Rhyolite Ridge project, said the company “respectfully but firmly disagrees with the findings released by Amnesty International,” and highlighted the company’s engagement with tribes. “We take great pride in our compliance with all U.S. legal requirements and remain committed to a transparent process that respects tribal sovereignty while delivering a reliable and secure domestic supply of critical minerals,” the spokesperson said.

Surge and Evolution, the owners of the Nevada North Lithium Project, did not respond to a request for comment, but in a response to Amnesty International, Evolution said, “We take all reasonable efforts to conduct proactive and ongoing engagement with Indigenous peoples.”

Indigenous leaders said they do not expect the mining companies to change, but will continue the fight to protect their land. “We can survive without technology, but we can’t survive without water,” Stevens said. “We can’t save the Earth through the energy transition while we’re simultaneously destroying biodiversity.”

toolTips('.classtoolTips8','A lightweight, silvery-white alkali metal with properties that allow it to store large amounts of energy. Lithium is a key component of many batteries, including those that store renewable energy and power electric vehicles.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips11','A scarce blue metal that helps battery cathodes store large amounts of energy without overheating or collapsing. It is a key component of lithium-ion batteries. ');

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Report: Nevada’s lithium boom comes at the expense of Indigenous rights on May 12, 2026.

This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections

Al Gore’s climate documentary “An Inconvenient Truth” arrived in theaters 20 years ago, in May 2006. The film had a profound effect on the public’s awareness and understanding of climate change, a number of surveys found.

I count myself among those who were dramatically influenced by “An Inconvenient Truth.”

In 2006, the topic of climate change had not yet significantly breached the public consciousness. Despite having just embarked on a career as an environmental scientist and having recently completed my graduate studies with degrees in astrophysics and physics, I had only a vague notion about the problem of climate change before seeing the documentary.

I remember thinking as I left the theater, “If the science in this film is right, how is it possible that we’re not doing anything to stop climate change?” Answering this question put me on a path to becoming a climate journalist and educator.

The film was a watershed moment for me and countless others. It also retains cultural significance to this day. In an October 2025 episode of his podcast centered on climate change contrarianism, which has over 1 million views on YouTube, Joe Rogan and his guests mentioned Al Gore and his film a dozen times. That included Rogan’s claim that “What Al Gore predicted in this stupid movie, which is so far off. He thought we were all going to be dead today, right?”

Spoiler alert: That’s not right. Gore never said we would all be dead by now; Rogan made that up.

Read: Five ways Joe Rogan misleads listeners about climate change

For its 20th anniversary, I revisited the film. I found that its scientific overview was imperfect but predominantly accurate, and that despite worsening impacts, the world has made significant progress in addressing climate change over the ensuing two decades.

‘An Inconvenient Truth’ was right on the basic science

Many climate science experts have reviewed “An Inconvenient Truth,” including University of Washington climate scientist Eric Steig, who in a 2008 paper wrote that although the film included some oversimplifications, “The portrayal of the science of climate change in ‘An Inconvenient Truth’ is largely correct.”

Gore outlined the basic science underpinning climate change the same way I explain it to college students today: By burning vast amounts of fossil fuels, humans have increased the amount of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. That pollution traps more heat in Earth’s thin lower atmosphere, warming the planet’s surface.

When the film was released, the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide had surpassed 380 parts per million, a level 36% higher than at any time in the prior 650,000 years.

To emphasize how high carbon dioxide levels could rise if fossil fuel consumption continued unabated, Gore climbed aboard a scissor lift.

“Within less than 50 years, it will be here,” he said, pointing to the top of a graph where projected concentrations reached around 500 parts per million.

Now 20 years later, carbon dioxide levels are approaching 430 parts per million, and as Gore suggested, remain on pace to reach 500 parts per million by 2056, barring successful efforts to slow their rise.

Atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration over the past 800,000 years. (Data: NOAA Antarctic ice core compilation and Mauna Loa measurements. Graphic: Dana Nuccitelli)

Because carbon dioxide is the principal control knob governing Earth’s temperature, as a team of NASA climate scientists documented in a 2010 study, the carbon dioxide levels and temperature have hewed closely throughout the planet’s history. As Gore accurately explained, abrupt and dramatic spikes in carbon dioxide invariably cause global warming by trapping more heat.

Shrinking glaciers

In perhaps the most oversimplified section of the documentary, Gore reviewed the declines of various glaciers around the world.

One of the most common critiques of the film lies in Gore’s discussion of the glaciers of Mount Kilimanjaro. It only lasted for 30 seconds, but Gore implied that global warming was to blame for their decline, asserting that “within the decade, there will be no more snows of Mount Kilimanjaro.”

In fact, several studies, including this 2004 paper, have found that a decline in local precipitation tied to changes in the Indian Ocean is the major cause of the mountain’s shrinking glaciers – of which some remnants remain today – although global warming is also a contributing factor.

Next, Gore claimed that within 15 years, Glacier National Park would become “the park formerly known as Glacier.”

One 2003 study did suggest that many of the glaciers in Glacier National Park could disappear by 2030 due to global warming, but fortunately, that has not quite borne out. Although the glaciers in the park continue to decline due to rising temperatures, a 2019 study estimated that it might take until 2100 for Glacier National Park to become glacierless.

But Gore was correct that global warming is causing the accelerating decline of many glaciers around the world, and that this shrinkage poses water security threats to the 2 billion people who rely on mountain glaciers for their water supply.

The amount of water stored in glaciers around the world, measured in meter water equivalent (m w.e.) has declined at an accelerating rate. (Source: World Glacier Monitoring Service)

Worsening extreme weather

Gore also explored the links between climate change and extreme weather, describing a deadly 2003 European heat wave. A 2016 study estimated that global warming was responsible for about half the deaths in London and Paris caused by that heat wave. He also reviewed the devastating impacts of Hurricane Katrina, whose damages an analysis last year estimated climate change worsened by 25% or more.

A little later in the film, Gore outlined the threat that the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation could collapse. This ocean conveyor belt transports warm and cool water through the Atlantic, Indian, and Southern Oceans. By moving warm water from near the equator to the North Atlantic, this ocean circulation helps keep northern Europe significantly warmer than it would otherwise be.

Gore explained that the last time this circulation collapsed, about 12,000 years ago – as a result of a flood of melting ice water at the end of the last ice age – temperatures in Europe plummeted. A study published last month found that the climate models that best match observational data are those that are the most pessimistic, suggesting that the circulation may seriously weaken this century to the point of potential collapse.

The film also included an overview of threats that sea level rise poses to coastal cities around the world. Ice melt from land-based glaciers and the polar ice sheets has increased over the ensuing two decades, causing the rate of sea level rise to accelerate since the documentary was filmed.

Gore also covered numerous other dangerous climate impacts, including the expanding range of infectious disease vectors like mosquitoes, the impact on species of shifting ecosystem ranges and the altered timing of seasons, and the bleaching of coral reefs and the threat it poses to marine ecosystems. All of these problems continue to worsen to this day.

More than 97% of studies agree: modern climate change is human-caused

The film described a memo from strategist Frank Luntz that had advised Republican politicians, “You need to continue to make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate.”

In fact, by 2006, there was a strong scientific consensus that modern climate change was human-caused. In 2004, science historian Naomi Oreskes had published the first survey of the published climate science literature. Gore pointed out that in her sample of 928 peer-reviewed study abstracts, none disagreed with the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

In a 2013 paper, my colleagues and I updated and expanded upon Oreskes’ 2004 study. We examined nearly 12,000 abstracts of peer-reviewed climate studies and invited the authors to categorize their own papers. In both cases, we found that among peer-reviewed studies that took a position on the question, over 97% agreed that humans are responsible.

Then, in 2016, we published another paper in collaboration with Oreskes and other authors of climate consensus studies, concluding that “the finding of 97% consensus in published climate research is robust and consistent with other surveys of climate scientists and peer-reviewed studies.”

More recent studies have found that the expert consensus likely exceeds 99% today, despite a few prominent figures still proclaiming it a hoax.

The results of nine climate consensus studies published between 2004 and 2021. (Source: Skeptical Science) Progress in climate policies and solutions

At times, Gore seemed discouraged by the lack of progress in addressing climate change.

“I look around and look for really meaningful signs that we’re about to really change; I don’t see it right now,” he said. But he also expressed hope, saying, “I have faith that pretty soon, enough minds are changed that we cross a threshold.”

About a decade later, 175 countries signed the Paris climate agreement. Today, every nation in the world has ratified the agreement except Yemen, Iran, and Libya – and President Donald Trump recently withdrew the United States for the second time.

The International Energy Agency estimates that since 2015, climate and clean energy policies around the world have erased a full degree from Earth’s global warming trajectory. Before the Paris agreement, countries were on a path to release enough climate pollution to cause a catastrophic 3.5-4°C global warming by 2100; today, we’re on a path toward 2.5-3°C.

Read: New report has terrific news for the climate

It’s not yet enough to meet the Paris agreement’s target of limiting global warming to “well below 2°C,” but we still have the opportunity to further reduce emissions and future warming.

In the film, Gore visited China and described the country’s coal power plant growth as “enormous.” Today, that descriptor best fits the country’s clean energy deployment. As a result, China’s climate pollution has now been flat or falling for about two years, and its clean technology exports to countries around the world are surging. In its new Global Energy Review, the International Energy Agency said that “the world has entered the Age of Electricity,” with virtually all of electricity demand growth being met by clean sources.

In short, despite a few oversimplifications, the scientific descriptions in “An Inconvenient Truth” have largely withstood the test of time, and the climate impacts outlined in the film have continued to worsen in tandem with rising global temperatures. But international agreements, domestic climate policies, and accelerating deployments of ever-cheaper clean technologies have started to bend the emissions curve downward.

I think that if Al Gore’s 2006 self were to visit 2026, although more action is still needed to meet the Paris targets, he would be encouraged by the progress humanity has made in addressing the climate crisis.

PHOENIX, AZ  – With Arizona lawmakers and the Governor negotiating the state budget for the next fiscal year, a new statewide poll delivers an unambiguous signal from voters: fund water security...

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.

A mention of a national forest probably evokes images of pristine wilderness, mountain trails, fall foliage, wildlife habitat, untouched gorges, lakes and rivers. But behind those landscapes is a...