News Feeds

The flute-like song of a Wood Thrush is one of the signature sounds of summer forests in the Northeast. But that familiar song is becoming less common as forests become increasingly fragmented and...

How Iowa’s many factory farms may be harming health and the environment Ketura Persellin July 22, 2026

If you’ve eaten sausage or ham – or any kind of pork product – there’s a good chance it came from Iowa. 

The Hawkeye State raises about a third of all hogs in the U.S. – more by a wide margin than any other state, along with some poultry and beef. 

Iowa also has a high – and rising – rate of cancer. It’s one of only three states where cancer is rising. Those two things may be related.

Manure from all that livestock may well be partly responsible, because it can end up in drinking water, exposing people to a greater risk of cancer.

 A new EWG analysis finds Iowa has over 15,000 factory farms – thousands more than state data shows. These animals produce a staggering amount of manure: 107 million tons a year.

The average human produces about 12 tons of solid waste over the course of an entire lifetime. Iowa’s factory farms annually generate more waste than the entire population of New York City, enough to fill more than 38,000 Olympic-size swimming pools.

How factory farms pollute water

To be disposed of, the manure is spread – untreated – on nearby farm fields, fulfilling two purposes – disposal and, because of the nutrients nitrogen and phosphorus, fertilizer for neighboring cropland. 

But those fields can’t always absorb all the nutrients – if the ground is frozen, for instance, or if the growing crops already have enough nitrogen or phosphorus. The excess manure or nutrients may run off fields or get into tile drains below fields, flowing into water, or leach through soil into groundwater, contaminating the drinking water supply. 

Once nitrogen enters the water, it can become nitrate, which is harmful at different levels in drinking water. 

Research links nitrate – found in manure and commercial nitrogen fertilizer – in drinking water to an increased risk of colorectal, bladder, kidney, ovarian and thyroid cancers. It’s also linked to adverse birth outcomes, including preterm birth, low birth weight and spina bifida. 

Many Iowans are affected by exposure to nitrate. Results of tests for nitrate showed that 146 Iowa community water systems – serving 1.2 million people – between 2021 and 2023 had elevated levels of the contaminant, EWG found.

Outdated nitrate limit

That means 1.2 million Iowans are being served water with elevated levels of nitrate and being exposed as a result to elevated risks of cancer and birth defects. 

Eighty-one water systems, serving almost 800,000 people, served water that tested even higher. Eight systems, serving 56,000 people, exceeded the federal nitrate legal limit.

The Environmental Protection Agency’s limit on nitrate in drinking water, set in 1962, aimed to prevent a potentially fatal condition in infants sometimes called “blue baby syndrome.”

Recent research links nitrate exposure at levels well below the legal limit to a higher risk of colorectal and other cancers, thyroid disease and birth defects. 

Iowa already has the second-highest rate of new cancer cases in the country, a trend researchers have connected to a number of environmental factors, like water contamination, although other factors are also at play.

It’s not just Iowans who are affected. Nitrate contamination travels through surface water and groundwater aquifers, and the food raised on treated land moves through the food supply. 

So anyone who eats or drinks items connected to industrial agriculture has a stake in how well this waste is managed.

Threat to the environment 

Manure contamination of water also contributes to other problems affecting public health and the environment. Phosphorus and nitrate in excess can affect aquatic ecosystems and contribute to algae blooms.

Industrial-scale meat production also contributes to climate change. Excess nitrogen can break down into nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas, trapping heat in the atmosphere. Extreme weather events, such as drought followed by heavy rain, can lead to higher nitrous oxide emissions from farming. 

The problem keeps getting worse

The number of the largest animal facilities in Iowa grew nearly 13% between 2019 and 2025, climbing to 4,444 operations, the new EWG analysis found.

But it’s not just sheer growth in the number of these operations that causes an issue. It’s also the consequences of growth. 

Large operations make up less than a third of all farms in the state, which are mostly smaller and mid-size operations. But because of the sheer quantity of animals they house, they produce 60% of the manure. 

As livestock production consolidates into bigger, more concentrated operations, the waste problem intensifies along with it, becoming more difficult to manage, whether to spread as fertilizer without triggering runoff or to transport it longer distances.

Policy failures

Federal policy failures that could control and manage industrial farms’ growth are at least partly to blame. 

For purposes of federal oversight, factory farms are defined by their size. An operation may be too small to qualify as a large farm subject to stricter permitting and planning rules, even if they  produce virtually the same amount of manure. That’s the case with over 3,200 Iowa operations, which fall under the large threshold by at most 50 animals.

Federal funding paid through farmer subsidies effectively promotes factory farm expansion rather than programs intended to promote a safer, more climate-resilient farming system. Instead of protecting water quality or the climate, taxpayers’ money supports the expansion of factory farming.

What you can do

You can’t personally fix a state’s water quality, but everyday choices add up and send a signal to the market. 

Eating less meat, or choosing meat that wasn’t raised on a factory farm, reduces demand for the kind of large-scale, concentrated production driving this problem. Consult our meat and dairy label decoder for guidance.

In the grocery store, look for labels on meat and poultry like Animal Welfare Approved, Certified Humane (paired with “grass-fed” or “pasture-raised”), or Global Animal Partnership’s more stringent standards. These labels indicate the animals were raised in better conditions, with more space and less concentration of waste than is typical of a factory farm.

Beyond the grocery store, consumer advocacy is also critical. Encourage local, state and federal officials to strengthen oversight of manure application and push for change in the priorities of federal expenditures.  

Areas of Focus Factory Farms Authors Ketura Persellin July 22, 2026

Our dear friend, colleague, and founding Board member of Global Justice Ecology Project, Njoki Njoroge Njehû, passed away peacefully at her home in Nairobi, Kenya, on Saturday, 18 July 2026. Njoki was a major figure in the global economic justice movement. She served as director of 50 Years Is Enough: U.S. Network for Global Economic Justice, a coalition of more than 200 organizations founded to challenge the policies of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. She was also one of the principal organizers of the April 16, 2000 demonstrations in Washington, D.C.—known as A16—against the IMF and World Bank. A16 brought tens of thousands of protesters into the streets surrounding the institutions and was the first major mobilization against unjust economic globalization following the shutdown of the World Trade Organization meetings in Seattle in 1999.

Fargo, North Dakota (July 22, 2026) — The National Audubon Society has surpassed 20,000 acres of grassland restoration through its North Dakota Conservation Forage Program, marking a...

Registered nurses at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, will hold a protest on Wednesday, July 22, 2026, to raise concerns about patient safety and reduced access to maternal healthcare for D.C. residents.

More than 800 electric utilities have approved GPP’s GenerLink transfer switch, which provides backup power for outlets and hardwired appliances at significantly lower cost than a standby generator, Ford says.

Rallies held from Ogden to Bluff illustrate broad support for Bears Ears and Grand Staircase in Utah

Nearly a thousand people gathered across the state of Utah on July 20 to protest President Donald Trump’s illegal attempt to slash Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments by roughly 90 percent each, stripping protection from nearly 3 million acres of public land in total. The rallies, organized by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, filled public spaces in Salt Lake City, Ogden, Provo, St. George, Moab, and Bluff.

Trump signed the orders on July 13, flanked by Utah’s congressional delegation and Gov. Spencer Cox. Protesters directed their anger at those officials, including Representative Celeste Maloy and Senator Mike Lee, who backed the rollbacks.

“I think that anybody who’s voted into office should listen to what the people want, and people don’t want this,” said Katie Panushka, a protester in Salt Lake City. “People don’t want this in Salt Lake. People don’t want this in Ogden, and people absolutely don’t want this at the Grand Staircase.”

Polling backs this up. A 2024 poll conducted on behalf of the Grand Canyon Trust found 71 percent of Utah voters support keeping Bears Ears as a national monument and 74 percent support keeping Grand Staircase-Escalante, including majorities of Republicans. Three-quarters of Utah voters support presidents’ authority to protect public lands as national monuments.

For many demonstrators, the fight is personal. “We are not protesters. We are protectors,” said Corrina Bow, a Southern Paiute elder from the Kanosh Band, one of the Grand Staircase Tribes.

Trump also disbanded the Bears Ears Commission, a five-Tribe body that worked with the federal government to develop the monument’s management plan, breaking trust with those Tribes and ending the first official government-to-government public land management relationship in the country.

Despite the anger amongst Utahns over the cuts, Scott Braden, SUWA’s executive director, framed the rallies positively: “We’re not powered by grievance,” he said. “We’re powered by love of place and just wanting to see these places protected.”

Salt Lake City

Mimi Ortega with the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance speaks to protesters during the Monumental Day of Action outside the Governor’s Mansion on Monday, July ,20, 2026 in Salt Lake City. (Kim Raff/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside the Governor’s Mansion on Monday, July, 20, 2026 in Salt Lake City. (Kim Raff/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside the Governor’s Mansion on Monday, July, 20, 2026 in Salt Lake City. (Kim Raff/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside the Governor’s Mansion on Monday, July, 20, 2026 in Salt Lake City. (Kim Raff/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Ogden

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside Representative Blake Moore’s office in Ogden on Monday, July, 20, 2026; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside Representative Blake Moore’s office in Ogden on Monday, July, 20, 2026; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside Representative Blake Moore’s office in Ogden on Monday, July, 20, 2026; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

Provo

People protest Trump’s reductions of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase on Monday, July 20, 2026 in Provo, Utah; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

People protest Trump’s reductions of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase on Monday, July 20, 2026 in Provo, Utah; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

St. George

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside Representative Celeste Maloy and Senator Mike Lee’s offices on Monday, July 20, 2026 in St. George. Photo credit: Autumn Gillard, Southern Paiute Tribal member and coordinator of the Grand Staircase-Escalante Inter-Tribal Coalition; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

A protest sign with a statue outside Representative Celeste Maloy and Senator Mike Lee’s offices on Monday, July 20, 2026 in St. George, Utah. (David Becker/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside Representative Celeste Maloy and Senator Mike Lee’s offices on Monday, July 20, 2026 in St. George, Utah. (David Becker/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside Representative Celeste Maloy and Senator Mike Lee’s offices on Monday, July 20, 2026 in St. George, Utah. (David Becker/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Moab

People protest Trump’s reductions of Bears Ears and Grand Staircase on Monday, July 20, 2026 in Moab, Utah (Niki Chan Wylie/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Davina Smith-Idjesa, the Navajo Nation representative and Co-Chair of the Bears Ears Inter-Tribal Coalition, stands with a protest sign on Monday, July 20, 2026 in Moab, Utah (Niki Chan Wylie/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Bob and Mary O’Brien protest on Monday, July 20, 2026 in Moab, Utah (Niki Chan Wylie/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

Bluff

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally at the edge of Bears Ears National Monument on Monday, July, 20, 2026 outside Bluff, Utah; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally at the edge of Bears Ears National Monument on Monday, July, 20, 2026 outside Bluff, Utah; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally at the edge of Bears Ears National Monument on Monday, July, 20, 2026 outside Bluff, Utah; CC0 (Public Domain Dedication)

Header image: Protesters participate in the Monumental Day of Action rally outside the Governor’s Mansion on Monday, July,20, 2026 in Salt Lake City. (Kim Raff/AP Content Services for The Wilderness Society)

The post “We’re powered by love”: Utahns gather across the state to show support for national monuments appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

A new map released by The Wilderness Society (TWS) shows that nearly 200 million acres of public land could be affected by the Interior department’s ongoing review of wilderness study area and wildlands policies.

The map tracks designated wilderness, wilderness study areas, and lands with wilderness characteristics—all areas that the Interior department is evaluating to determine whether management policies should be “updated, clarified or revised to improve management and use of some of America’s most treasured landscapes.”

The 200 million acres under review include 9 million within national monuments, which demonstrates a striking vulnerability given President Donald Trump’s recent proclamations virtually eliminating Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments despite their widespread support.

TWS specifically notes that the current wilderness management guidance is what helps the country’s last remaining wild places retain their special qualities. “Weakening those protections would open the door to more development, extraction and unchecked motorized use in places that Americans value for hiking, camping, hunting, fishing and quiet recreation,” said Abby Tinsley, senior vice president of conservation programs at TWS.

The review is one of the administration’s several efforts targeting public lands, including the planned rescission of the 2001 Roadless Rule, a rollback of motorized-use protections, and a reported plan to open more than 5 million acres of recommended wilderness in national forests to development.

Quick hits A new section of the billion-dollar border wall in Arizona is bent out of shape

High Country News

The refuge system is quietly falling apart

RE:PUBLIC

Protesters rally in St. George after Trump administration slashes Bears Ears, Grand Staircase monuments

St. George News

Keeping coal plants open in Colorado could cost $87M, with consumers paying the tab

Colorado Sun

Montana is selling more state trust land than it’s buying

Montana Free Press

Brownsville groups ask judge to pause SpaceX land transfer from wildlife refuge

ValleyCentral

Great Salt Lake hits lowest level in more than 3 years, but managers say conservation is paying off

KSL News Radio

The feds no longer protect endangered species habitat. States say they can’t pick up the slack

Colorado Newsline

Quote of the day

I think one thing I would like to see Utah legislators acknowledge is that they did not consult with the Tribes, and it is important to speak with us about issues that affect our ancestral homelands, particularly when they’re working with the United States federal government.”

— Autumn Gillard, coordinator for the Grand Staircase Intertribal Coalition, St. George News

Picture This @utah_voices

Trump gutted Bears Ears from 1.35 million acres down to 121,000 acres and Grand Staircase–Escalante was slashed from 1.87 million acres down to 182,000 acres. That’s about 90%.

@senmikelee @mikeleeforutah
@senjohncurtis @curtisut
@govcox @spencerjcox
@repcelestemaloy @celestemaloyut

The original protections for Bears Ears were hard-fought victories spearheaded by a coalition of Tribal Nations; the Navajo Nation, Hopi Tribe, Pueblo of Zuni, Ute Mountain Ute Tribe, and Ute Tribe. These nations have stewarded these lands since long before the colonizers came to tear apart turtle island.

#grandstaircase #bearsearsnationalmonument

 

(Featured image: Chamisa Wilderness Study Area in California. Photo by Bob Wick, BLM, Flickr)

The post 200 million acres of public land are being reviewed by Interior appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

Democracia Radical, Autonomía, Gobernanza Terrenal y Justicia Climática: un reencuentro virtual #03 - 13/07/2026 En 2025, el Tejido Global de Alternativas (TGA) y sus aliados organizaron diversos encuentros en diferentes partes del mundo. Siguiendo nuestra última reunión virtual, esta sesión virtual convoca a participantes del encuentro que celebramos en GTAGTAGTAAlternativesAlternatives

EWG applauds Senate vote on UPF disclosure bill Iris Myers July 22, 2026

WASHINGTON – Senate lawmakers today advanced a bill, led by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), that addresses the harms caused by ultra-processed food, or UPF. 

S. 5026, the Childhood Diabetes Reduction Act, would require a disclosure on front of the package of food that’s UPF. The bill cleared the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee today, advancing the bill to the full Senate. 

The following is a statement from the Environmental Working Group’s Senior Vice President for Government Affairs, Scott Faber. 

Defining UPF and requiring a front-of-package disclosure is long overdue. 

Diets high in UPF are a driver of chronic disease, linked to everything from diabetes to depression to dementia. The United States leads the world in UPF consumption, and kids now get more than 60% of their calories from these foods. 

We applaud senators for advancing legislation to help consumers identify and avoid UPF.

For more information about UPF, visit: https://www.ewg.org/areas-focus/food-water/ultra-processed-foods

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Food Ultra-Processed Foods Food Chemicals Press Contact Iris Myers iris@ewg.org (202) 939-9126 July 22, 2026

 In June, Come to the Table partnered with Dr. Sarah Bowen and Dr. Annie Hardison-Moody of N.C. State University to host a workshop on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), its history, and how communities can respond in light of recent cuts of the program.
The RAFI team led participants through a timeline of the last year as it relates to SNAP. Since October 2025, the food assistance space has taken blow after blow from significant changes and cuts to federal policy.

The post A Reflection on Food & SNAP appeared first on RAFI.

Drive into the Samburu lands of northern Kenya and you’ll see a semiarid region dotted with high-end safari lodges and sprawling community conservancies. The nearby Samburu National Reserve attracts visitors from across the world and garners international recognition. Reports from nongovernmental organizations highlight millions of dollars invested throughout the region in wildlife protection, tourism enterprises, carbon markets, peacebuilding, and community initiatives.

But on these lands, the reality is far more complicated: Despite global acclaim and revenue flows, ordinary pastoralist households often remain cut off from the wealth generated by conservation.

Globally the question of who benefits from conservation has persisted for decades. In northern Kenya that question isn’t theoretical; it’s immediate and unresolved.

Under initiatives such as the Northern Kenya Rangelands Carbon Project, participating community conservancies — locally governed areas of community-owned land set aside for wildlife conservation alongside pastoral livelihoods — have generated substantial revenues though “carbon credits” sales. Since 2013 the project has generated millions of dollars in revenue from carbon credits verified under the Verra standard. In 2022 14 conservancies each reportedly received disbursements of approximately $324,000. According to publicly available project materials, these funds were intended to support rangeland management and community projects in education, water, and health.

Yet these financial flows sit uneasily alongside everyday realities. Many pastoralist households remain economically vulnerable, shaped by recurrent drought, livestock loss, and limited livelihood diversification. Women and children still walk long distances for water. Young people depend on precarious wage labor in landscapes marketed globally as models of sustainability.

This tension points to a deeper structural problem: While conservancies generate significant conservation revenue, the mechanisms through which that value reaches ordinary households remain weak, uneven, and difficult to trace.

Tourism revenues illustrate this imbalance clearly. High-end lodges within conservancies charge between $490 and $2,000 per person per night, while even lower-end lodges charge patrons hundreds of dollars. Entry fees for foreign tourists visiting national reserves range from $70-85 per 24 hours, paid to the county government of Samburu. Conservancies also generate income through concession agreements, lease payments, bed-night fees, and landing fees at airstrips on community land.

Despite these revenue streams, broad-based household benefit remains limited. Research across Kenya’s rangelands indicates that a minority of households earn income from conservancy employment, and those earnings typically constitute a modest share of overall livelihoods. Publicly accessible information on how revenue is distributed is scarce. Without transparency, even educated observers struggle to reconcile marketed benefits with lived realities.

Ownership structures further shape these outcomes. Many lodges operating on community land are owned or managed by foreign hospitality companies, often in partnership with international investors. Communities participate primarily through lease agreements negotiated by conservancy institutions. In exchange they receive fixed payments, employment opportunities, and funding for community projects. However, they rarely hold equity or control over profit distribution.

This pattern mirrors a common dynamic across the Global South: Economic value generated from local land often leaks outward, leaving communities with a small fraction of the wealth produced on their ancestral lands.

And the issue extends beyond conservancies. Samburu National Reserve generates substantial revenue through tourism, yet the funds flow into county government accounts. Decades of conservation investment have not fundamentally altered structural poverty among communities living closest to protected areas.

Despite progressive frameworks meant to protect community land and its people, the promise often remains unrealized. In many conservancies questions around membership remain unresolved, with some community members unclear about their recognition within conservancy structures despite their birthrights on the ancestral land. This uncertainty raises deeper questions about governance, legitimacy, and who truly has a voice in decisions affecting land and community livelihoods, even as formal frameworks exist to safeguard these rights.

Research across rangeland regions in Kenya shows that benefits frequently accrue disproportionately to board members, politically connected actors, and institutional intermediaries. Women, youth, casual laborers, and land-poor households — despite bearing the costs of wildlife predation, grazing restrictions, and mobility constraints — often receive modest or irregular returns. Conservation success is routinely measured in amount of land protected, wildlife populations stabilized, and dollars mobilized, but rarely in terms of household-level well-being, despite global frameworks (such as the Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services) that advocate for doing exactly that.

Recent developments have brought these tensions into sharper focus. Legal challenges to conservancy governance, the withdrawal of key donors from conservation programs, and the suspension of major carbon credit certification in northern Kenya have exposed underlying concerns around consent, transparency, and benefit sharing. Meetings are held and “benefits announced,” but financial flows from tourism, “carbon markets,” and donors rarely reach households in meaningful ways.

Without transparency, benefit-sharing risks being symbolic rather than substantive.

Equity in benefit distribution is central to conservation legitimacy. Without clearer accountability, conservation risks reproducing extractive dynamics it claims to replace, where land and wildlife generate global value while local communities remain marginalized.

Debates over equity in conservation are not new; for decades scholars and practitioners have questioned whether community-based models genuinely redistribute benefits or just reproduce inequality. Recent global commitments at the IUCN World Conservation Congress 2025 have reinforced this principle, but implementation continues to lag.

Rethinking equity does not mean abandoning community conservancies. In the face of accelerating biodiversity loss, climate change, and constrained public funding, they remain one of the most viable conservation models. But their long-term legitimacy depends on whether they deliver not only ecological outcomes, but fair and measurable social benefits.

A more equitable approach requires concrete shifts. Conservancies and associated partners must adopt transparent, publicly accessible financial reporting that tracks how revenues translate into household-level benefits. Benefit-sharing mechanisms should extend beyond land ownership alone to include broader community members, particularly women and youth. Governance structures must ensure meaningful participation, not just formal representation. Finally, conservation planning must explicitly account for opportunity costs, including restriction on grazing and land use.

Encouragingly, emerging models in parts of Kenya have begun experimenting with more direct household payments, stronger community ownership structures, and transparent financial accountability. While still evolving, these examples demonstrate that alternative approaches are possible.

Pastoralist landscapes have sustained wildlife and cultural systems for generations. Their communities should not remain economically marginalized within conservation’s globally celebrated success stories.

Samburu pastoralists sing and dance at the base of Mount Ololokwe in Northern Kenya. Photo by Isaya Lemerketo.

A personal note: I grew up in a village of 25 households and around 150 people, located less than a mile from the main entry to Samburu National Reserve. By now I would expect to see even a single anecdote of someone’s life improving directly from conservancies. I have not. Most of these households still live in insecure housing, struggle to pay for their children’s schools fees, and endure degraded rangelands for their livestock.

If Kenya’s conservancy model is to endure, it must move beyond measuring success in amounts of land protected or dollars generated and confront the more difficult but necessary question: Who truly benefits?

 

The post Who Really Benefits from Community Conservancies? Rethinking Equity in Kenya’s Conservation Model appeared first on The Revelator.

Cutting utility returns won't lower electric bills and will leave us with a more fragile power grid, writes Scott Aaronson, former secretary of the Electricity Subsector Coordinating Council.

Integrated resource planning would give regulators a clearer long-term picture of electricity needs before major energy investments are approved, advocates say.

Last year, the acreage burned in the Brazilian Amazon reached its lowest level in at least four decades.

Read more on E360 →

Britain’s new prime minister announced in his first week that he will cut the cost of public transport and electricity, making lower-emission technologies like bus travel, electric vehicles and heat pumps more affordable for voters. But some of the funding for those policies will come from the budget for international climate finance, the government has said, raising concerns about fairness.

Former Manchester Mayor Andy Burnham took over from Keir Starmer as Labour Party leader and prime minister on Monday, appointing climate advocates Ed Miliband as foreign and development minister and Miatta Fahnbulleh as climate and energy minister.

On Tuesday, Burnham said his government would cut the value added tax (VAT) households and some small businesses pay on their electricity bills from 5% to zero from October 1, saving households £45 ($60) a year.

On Wednesday, he said the maximum fare bus companies in England can charge for a single journey will be reduced from £3 ($4) to £2 from January 1, 2027. The government said the subsidies to achieve this would be mostly funded by switching money set aside for overseas climate finance projects from grants to loans. It did not give further information in its announcement, while the UK’s transport minister told Sky News the plan was still being worked out.

Climate Home News has since learned that the money will come from a change in the form of a contribution to a new international fund to protect rainforests. The British government is expected soon to announce £400 million (about $533m) for the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) that was launched by Brazil late last year.

The UK’s finance ministry had originally planned to provide this sum as a grant, but will now offer it as a loan instead. The TFFF plans to invest its seed capital in financial markets and then reimburse wealthy donor governments while paying forest countries to keep their trees standing.

• Jul 3, 2026 News Tropical forest protection fund at risk after UK stalls on pledge The Brazil-led TFFF was launched at COP30 as an innovative financial model to keep rainforests standing, but is still short on startup cash Read more
• May 14, 2026 Finance UK halves Green Climate Fund contribution, as it spends more on security After promising £1.6 billion to the UN’s flagship climate fund in 2023, the UK government has now said it will only hand over half as much Read more
• Jun 24, 2026 News EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels Read more

The floated changes to the climate finance budget were immediately criticised by groups working on climate justice for developing countries, including Bond, the UK network for NGOs, which described the decision as “disappointing”.

“Robbing Peter to pay Paul is not the answer and pitches marginalised communities in the UK against marginalised communities in lower-income and climate-vulnerable countries,” BOND CEO Romilly Greenhill said in a statement. “Climate finance must not worsen the debt burden of countries that are already suffering the worst – and most costly – impacts of a climate crisis they did not cause.”

Hunt for money

Burnham promoted both policies as measures to combat the rising cost of living and “give people breathing space”, with climate campaigners and industry groups noting they are also likely to reduce the UK’s climate-heating emissions by encouraging bus travel and the use of electric vehicles and heating.

But the hurried policy announcements sparked thorny questions remain over how they will be paid for. The government said Tuesday’s VAT cut for electricity would be funded by scrapping the previous government’s digital ID programme, but Darren Jones, a former minister involved with that policy, said it had been “unfunded” – a statement that dominated media coverage.

A day later, the government said the new bus fare cap would cost £454 million ($606m). Transport minister Heidi Alexander told Sky News that £54 million would be taken from an under-spend in the budget of the Department for Energy Security and Net Zero (DESNZ) and £400 million would come from changing unspecified international climate finance from grants to loans. The details “still need to be worked through”, she said, adding that the government “had wanted to make an announcement today”.

Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based think-tank Power Shift Africa, said “climate finance was never meant to be a pot of money that governments raid when they need to pay for domestic spending”.

Speaking on television, minister Alexander added, “We’re not wanting to fleece anyone here, and we actually want to maximise the development potential of this money that is available.”

Mohamed Adow speaking on the official final day of COP29. (Photo: UNFCCC/Kiara Worth)

Aside from the controversy over their funding, the policies themselves were widely welcomed by climate campaigners. Jess Ralston, energy lead at the Energy and Climate Intelligence Unit (ECIU), said the tax cut on electricity bills “could help households to switch to electric heat pumps, protecting UK homes from becoming ever more exposed to the whims of Putin and Trump when turning on their gas boiler”.

The last few months have seen global momentum build behind electrification, spurred by the US-Iran war disrupting oil and gas supplies and driving up prices. The Turkish and Australian COP31 presidencies have announced a global target to boost electrification, backed by the European Union, Canada, Philippines, UK and others.

Campaigners call for lower power prices

While reaction to the VAT cut was supportive, some questioned whether £45 a year of savings per household is enough and called for more measures to cut electricity bills.

Friends of the Earth’s energy lead Imogen Dow said those on the lowest incomes should be given cheaper electricity through a “social tariff” and the Institute for Public Policy Research (IPPR) think-tank – which is close to the Labour Party – said levies on energy bills should be shifted to general taxation.

Matthew Paterson, a politics professor at Manchester University, told Climate Home News that the most effective way to reduce electricity bills is to take on the UK’s private electricity companies, while consumer-oriented measures like the VAT cut are “tinkering around the edges”.

Jarrod Birch, head of policy and public affairs for the EV charging industry association Charge UK, said that while the policy would make home-charging cheaper, people who charge their vehicles at public points will still have to pay 20% VAT. The UK’s tax authority is fighting a court ruling that ordered it to reduce the tax motorists pay on public chargers to the current household rate of 5%.

Further measures will be the responsibility of Secretary of State for Energy Security and Net Zero Miatta Fahnbulleh, who is relatively new to politics after a career at left-wing, pro-climate think tanks the IPPR and the New Economics Foundation.

Fahnbulleh and Healey leave 10 Downing Street following Prime Minister Andy Burnham’s first cabinet meeting, on July 21, 2026 in London, England. (Photo: Ben Montgomery/Getty Images)

Michael Jacobs, political economy professor at Sheffield University and former adviser to UK Labour prime minister Gordon Brown, said Fahnbulleh would be a “climate advocate” who would continue the “progressive climate agenda” of her predecessor Ed Miliband.

“She’s a very creative policy wonk so I expect there to be lots of policy innovation under her,” he said, “I think she will be looking at new ways to encourage take-up of heat pumps and domestic batteries.”

Aid budget in Miliband’s hands

Despite reports he could be made finance minister, Miliband has been appointed Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs. Miliband has attended many climate COP meetings over several decades, most recently representing the UK at COP29 and COP30, and has been targeted by the right-wing media for his support for climate action and opposition to new oil and gas drilling in the UK’s part of the North Sea.

In his new role, Miliband will be responsible for the UK’s overseas aid budget including its international climate finance, which the Starmer government had slashed to fund increases in defence spending.

UK cuts support for climate action abroad to fund military instead

Jacobs said he expected Miliband to prioritise climate and development in the UK’s foreign policy and to push Burnham and new finance minister John Healey to reverse Starmer’s aid cuts.

But there are fears Healey could try to cut the aid budget further to fund the military. Healey was a surprise pick for Chancellor of the Exchequer and grabbed headlines when he resigned as Starmer’s defence minister in June over what he saw as insufficient defence spending.

This article was updated after publication on July 24, clarifying how the UK plans to free up $400 million from its climate finance budget.

The post Will new UK PM’s green measures at home cause climate finance pain overseas? appeared first on Climate Home News.

This article is part of Food Tank’s primer series, “Food Tank Explains.” Each installment unpacks the ideas, innovations, and challenges shaping today’s food and agriculture systems, offering clear insights into complex topics. To explore more articles in the series, click here.

Organic farming intends to maintain and improve healthy soils, support ecological balance, and conserve biodiversity through a combination of cultural, biological, and mechanical farming practices.

Although organic agriculture is defined, regulated, and certified differently across countries and institutions, a core value of organic farming is working in harmony with nature. Organic standards typically prohibit or strictly limit many synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), and synthetic growth hormones.

Instead, farmers build soil fertility with practices like composting, cover cropping, and crop rotation. Healthy soils support plants that are more resistant to pest pressure and can attract populations of beneficial insects, according to the Rodale Institute.

More serious pest problems are managed with methods like applying pheromones to disturb pest mating cycles, or mechanical controls like trapping. Organic livestock standards also generally require greater access to the outdoors and practices that support animal welfare.

Because of bans or limits on artificial fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides, organic systems often require less fossil fuel-derived inputs. This means they also have a lower carbon footprint compared to conventional agriculture. In a 40-year trial, Rodale Institute found that organic farming systems used 45 percent less energy than conventional systems while maintaining crop yields.

Organic practices that foster soil health also help increase carbon sequestration. A review of 400 studies comparing thousands of farms shows that organic systems contain higher levels of stable soil organic carbon and produce lower nitrous oxide emissions than conventional agriculture. And according to Soil Association research, organic farms have on average 44 percent more soil carbon, and 50 percent more wildlife.

Yazen Al Komadi, an organic farmer based in the United Arab Emirates, likes to show the tangible benefits of organic farming systems to his farm’s visitors. “We’re not trying to use scare tactics about sustainability or chemicals,” he tells Food Tank. Instead, he encourages them to feel the difference in their soil, admire the insects living under their feet, and take in crop diversity.

Research also suggests that organic farming can make agricultural systems more resilient. By increasing organic matter in the soil, organic farming improves water infiltration by 15–20 percent, helping crops better withstand drought and heavy rainfall, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council. In the Rodale Institute’s Farming Systems Trial, organic crop yields were as much as 40 percent higher than conventional yields during drought years.

“I think that folks are realizing that what you do to the planet, you do to yourself,” Matthew Dillon, the Co-CEO of the Organic Trade Association (OTA), tells Food Tank. “I want us to think about organic not just as an investment in any given season, but an investment in the future generations.”

Organic certification requirements vary across countries, but they generally establish standards for how food is produced, processed, and labeled. In the United States, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) National Organic Program requires crops to be grown on land that has been free of prohibited substances for at least three years before harvest.

Farmers must prioritize practices such as crop rotation, cover cropping, and biological pest management, while genetic engineering, sewage sludge, and ionizing radiation are prohibited. Livestock must receive certified organic feed, year-round access to the outdoors, and preventive health care. Products bearing the USDA Organic seal must contain at least 95 percent certified organic ingredients.

As U.S. eaters become increasingly concerned about the overuse and misuse of pesticides, interest in alternative practices is growing, says Kathleen Merrigan, Executive Director of the Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems at Arizona State University. “I think [that] will cause more and more people to look at organic and I think that’s a great thing,” she tells Food Tank.

Under the European Commission Organic Farming regulations, artificial fertilizers and chemical pesticides are banned unless explicitly pre-approved by the European Commission, and crops are required to be rotated. Soil Association Certification is the United Kingdom’s leading organic certifier, certifying around 70 percent of all organic food.

Canada regulates organic claims only for products traded across provincial or international borders. Across much of Africa, organic certification remains closely tied to export markets, and national legal frameworks range from comprehensive legislation to voluntary standards that continue to evolve.

Global temperatures are rising, precipitation patterns are changing, and pest populations are developing pesticide resistance. That’s why the Rodale Institute believes now is the time to transition to organic practices.

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of Divaris Shirichena, Unsplash

The post Food Tank Explains: Organic Agriculture appeared first on Food Tank.

• July 22, 2026

Climate Blind, Weakly Regulated And Costly: SANPC Bill Is Not In Public Interest

The Green Connection recently submitted written comments to Parliament calling for the South African National Petroleum Company (SANPC) Bill to be withdrawn. The eco-justice organisation warns that the proposed legislation could deepen South Africa’s dependence on oil and gas, while simultaneously weakening public oversight and exposing taxpayers to major environmental clean up costs. The Bill would establish a single state owned oil and gas company – consolidating iGas, PetroSA and the Strategic Fuel Fund (SFF) responsible for oil and gas exploration, production, storage, transport and sales, including through new liquefied natural gas infrastructure in South Africa and abroad.

“The Bill would place an exceptionally broad range of oil and gas functions in the hands of a single state-owned entity – making strong oversight, transparency and public accountability essential. That level of power is especially concerning because the Bill is climate-blind at precisely the moment when South Africa’s laws and international commitments require climate accountability."

"It is not only shocking but very concerning that the Bill does not refer to climate change, not once, despite South Africa having recently enacted a Climate Change Act. Section 7 of the Act - which came into operation in March 2025 - requires government departments to review and if necessary revise, coordinate and harmonise their laws and policies to ensure that the risks of climate change are taken into consideration, and to give effect to the principles and objects of the Act (including climate change mitigation and adaptation). Ignoring climate change in a Bill of this magnitude is not merely an oversight because, fundamentally, it undermines the whole-of-government approach that South Africa has committed to."

"By failing to acknowledge the climate crisis, the Bill risks locking the country into long-term fossil fuel infrastructure when public policy should be accelerating a fair shift away from oil and gas." Lisa Makaula The Green Connection Advocacy and Programmes Lead

Makaula also highlights a separate but equally important concern relating to PetroSA’s substantial legacy decommissioning and rehabilitation liabilities. She says, “These obligations are estimated to cost around R10 billion, yet only about R3 billion has reportedly been set aside. And since the Bill is contradictory on whether these liabilities will transfer to the new SANPC, along with PetroSA’s valuable rights and assets, or if it will be left behind in an underfunded PetroSA severed from its revenue streams, taxpayers could eventually end up footing these very expensive bills.”

Notably, in an April 2024 media statement the then-Department of Mineral Resources and Energy (now the Department of Mineral and Petroleum Resources) indicated that to kickstart the operations of the new entity, a ‘lease and assign model’ was being proposed to ‘strategically select what is leased and assigned to the SANPC by ring-fencing or isolating PetroSA’s legacy assets such as decommissioning liability and current operating challenges of the Gas to Liquid Refinery’.

The Green Connection further cautions that future oil and gas revenues could bypass the national budget. The State is entitled to a 20% carried interest in future oil and gas projects – a direct stake in production, separate from taxes and royalties. Under the Bill, revenue from this stake would flow directly to the new company to fund its operations, instead of being paid into the National Revenue Fund where Parliament normally determines how public money is spent. The organisation recommends that any such revenues be paid into the National Revenue Fund, or into a transparent,
ring-fenced statutory fund dedicated to the just transition, decommissioning and rehabilitation.

“There are several strong reasons that Parliament should withdraw the SANPC Bill. However, if it should proceed, the Bill must be fundamentally amended to protect the public interest, strengthen oversight and ensure that any oil and gas revenues support the just transition – not further fossil fuel expansion,” Lisa Makaula The Green Connection Advocacy and Programmes Lead

Compared with an earlier 2023 version of the Bill, several oversight safeguards appear to have been removed. These include requirements for government approval of subsidiaries, foreign transactions and new funding sources, as well as stronger checks on the appointment and removal of senior executives. The Green Connection says these changes are concerning in light of South Africa’s recent experience of state capture and corruption at state-owned entities.

The submission also raises additional governance and process concerns, including the absence of dedicated board representation for affected communities or civil society, weak rules for disqualifying unsuitable board members, unclear whistle-blower protections and reduced checks on senior appointments. The Green Connection has asked Parliament to confirm whether the Bill should have been referred to the provinces because of its potential environmental and community impacts, and whether it should first have been considered by NEDLAC, given its significance for economic policy, labour, business and communities.

“Coastal communities and small-scale fishers are already living with the consequences of risky ocean and energy decisions. Any new state-owned energy company must be accountable to the people most affected by its decisions. Communities should not be left out of governance, consultation or the benefits of public resources.” Neville Van Rooy The Green Connection Outreach Ambassador

The Green Connection has requested the opportunity to make an oral submission when public hearings are held.

The Green Connection administrator September 4, 2024 Past News THE GREEN CONNECTION AND NATURAL JUSTICE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF DECISION TO PROGRESS LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES

September 4, 2024 THE GREEN CONNECTION AND NATURAL JUSTICE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF DECISION TO PROGRESS LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST

The Green Connection administrator October 30, 2024 Past News COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND ECO-JUSTICE GROUPS’ OFFSHORE DRILLING APPEAL HIGHLIGHTS THREATS TO LIVELIHOODS, MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, AND CLIMATE GOALS

October 30, 2024 COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND ECO-JUSTICE GROUPS’ OFFSHORE DRILLING APPEAL HIGHLIGHTS THREATS TO LIVELIHOODS, MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, AND CLIMATE GOALS

The Green Connection administrator November 6, 2024 Past News TO PROTECT OCEANS AND LIVELIHOODS, WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT SET TO HEAR ANOTHER CASE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES DRILLING PLANS IN SOUTH AFRICAN WATERS

November 6, 2024 TO PROTECT OCEANS AND LIVELIHOODS, WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT SET TO HEAR ANOTHER CASE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES DRILLING

The Green Connection administrator November 17, 2024 Past News WITH CLIMATE TALKS UNDERWAY, WHY MUST CIVIL SOCIETY STILL FIGHT TOTALENERGIES’ FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING IN COURT?

November 17, 2024 WITH CLIMATE TALKS UNDERWAY, WHY MUST CIVIL SOCIETY STILL FIGHT TOTALENERGIES’ FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING IN COURT? As

The Green Connection administrator January 24, 2025 Past News Eskom’s Proposed Retail Tariff Plan: The Green Connection Joins Calls For Energy Justice And Stakeholder Engagement

January 24, 2025 Eskom’s Proposed Retail Tariff Plan: The Green Connection Joins Calls For Energy Justice And Stakeholder Engagement. Photo

The Green Connection administrator February 28, 2025 Latest News Eco-Justice Organizations Reject Draft Scoping Report For Offshore Drilling On SA’S West Coast (TEEPSA DWOB South).

February 28, 2025 Eco-Justice Organizations Reject Draft Scoping Report For Offshore Drilling On SA’S West Coast (TEEPSA DWOB South). Just

The Green Connection administrator September 4, 2024 Past News THE GREEN CONNECTION AND NATURAL JUSTICE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF DECISION TO PROGRESS LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES

September 4, 2024 THE GREEN CONNECTION AND NATURAL JUSTICE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF DECISION TO PROGRESS LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST

The Green Connection administrator October 30, 2024 Past News COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND ECO-JUSTICE GROUPS’ OFFSHORE DRILLING APPEAL HIGHLIGHTS THREATS TO LIVELIHOODS, MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, AND CLIMATE GOALS

October 30, 2024 COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND ECO-JUSTICE GROUPS’ OFFSHORE DRILLING APPEAL HIGHLIGHTS THREATS TO LIVELIHOODS, MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, AND CLIMATE GOALS

The Green Connection administrator November 6, 2024 Past News TO PROTECT OCEANS AND LIVELIHOODS, WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT SET TO HEAR ANOTHER CASE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES DRILLING PLANS IN SOUTH AFRICAN WATERS

November 6, 2024 TO PROTECT OCEANS AND LIVELIHOODS, WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT SET TO HEAR ANOTHER CASE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES DRILLING

The Green Connection administrator November 17, 2024 Past News WITH CLIMATE TALKS UNDERWAY, WHY MUST CIVIL SOCIETY STILL FIGHT TOTALENERGIES’ FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING IN COURT?

November 17, 2024 WITH CLIMATE TALKS UNDERWAY, WHY MUST CIVIL SOCIETY STILL FIGHT TOTALENERGIES’ FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING IN COURT? As

The Green Connection administrator January 24, 2025 Past News Eskom’s Proposed Retail Tariff Plan: The Green Connection Joins Calls For Energy Justice And Stakeholder Engagement

January 24, 2025 Eskom’s Proposed Retail Tariff Plan: The Green Connection Joins Calls For Energy Justice And Stakeholder Engagement. Photo

The Green Connection administrator February 28, 2025 Latest News Eco-Justice Organizations Reject Draft Scoping Report For Offshore Drilling On SA’S West Coast (TEEPSA DWOB South).

February 28, 2025 Eco-Justice Organizations Reject Draft Scoping Report For Offshore Drilling On SA’S West Coast (TEEPSA DWOB South). Just

The Green Connection administrator September 4, 2024 Past News THE GREEN CONNECTION AND NATURAL JUSTICE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF DECISION TO PROGRESS LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES

September 4, 2024 THE GREEN CONNECTION AND NATURAL JUSTICE NOW HAVE THE RECORD OF DECISION TO PROGRESS LEGAL CHALLENGE AGAINST

The Green Connection administrator October 30, 2024 Past News COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND ECO-JUSTICE GROUPS’ OFFSHORE DRILLING APPEAL HIGHLIGHTS THREATS TO LIVELIHOODS, MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, AND CLIMATE GOALS

October 30, 2024 COASTAL COMMUNITIES AND ECO-JUSTICE GROUPS’ OFFSHORE DRILLING APPEAL HIGHLIGHTS THREATS TO LIVELIHOODS, MARINE ECOSYSTEMS, AND CLIMATE GOALS

The Green Connection administrator November 6, 2024 Past News TO PROTECT OCEANS AND LIVELIHOODS, WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT SET TO HEAR ANOTHER CASE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES DRILLING PLANS IN SOUTH AFRICAN WATERS

November 6, 2024 TO PROTECT OCEANS AND LIVELIHOODS, WESTERN CAPE HIGH COURT SET TO HEAR ANOTHER CASE AGAINST TOTALENERGIES DRILLING

The Green Connection administrator November 17, 2024 Past News WITH CLIMATE TALKS UNDERWAY, WHY MUST CIVIL SOCIETY STILL FIGHT TOTALENERGIES’ FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING IN COURT?

November 17, 2024 WITH CLIMATE TALKS UNDERWAY, WHY MUST CIVIL SOCIETY STILL FIGHT TOTALENERGIES’ FOSSIL FUEL DRILLING IN COURT? As

The Green Connection administrator January 24, 2025 Past News Eskom’s Proposed Retail Tariff Plan: The Green Connection Joins Calls For Energy Justice And Stakeholder Engagement

January 24, 2025 Eskom’s Proposed Retail Tariff Plan: The Green Connection Joins Calls For Energy Justice And Stakeholder Engagement. Photo

The Green Connection administrator February 28, 2025 Latest News Eco-Justice Organizations Reject Draft Scoping Report For Offshore Drilling On SA’S West Coast (TEEPSA DWOB South).

February 28, 2025 Eco-Justice Organizations Reject Draft Scoping Report For Offshore Drilling On SA’S West Coast (TEEPSA DWOB South). Just

The post Climate Blind, Weakly Regulated And Costly: SANPC Bill Is Not In Public Interest appeared first on The Green Connection.

Headline News:

• “Amazon Forest Fires Fell To All-Time Low In 2025, But Could A Super El Niño Halt Progress?” • Forest fires in the Brazilian Amazon fell to a historic low in 2025 after peaking the previous year, according to a report. MapBiomas found that 3.1 million hectares were burned last year – the smallest area since records began in 1985. [Euronews]

Brazilian Amazon forest (Ian Talmacs, Unsplash)

• “35.5%! LONGi Again Breaks World Record For Crystalline Silicon-Perovskite Tandem Solar Cell Efficiency” • LONGi has announced that its independently developed crystalline silicon-perovskite tandem solar cell achieved a conversion efficiency of 35.5%. Certified by the European Solar Test Installation, this sets a new world record. [CleanTechnica]
• “Germany Adds 1.1 GW Of Offshore Wind In H1” • Germany added 1.1 GW of offshore wind capacity in the first six months of 2026, taking its installed offshore wind fleet above the 10-GW mark to 10.8 GW, industry data showed. A total of 84 turbines with a combined capacity of 1,077 MW were commissioned between January and June. [reNews]
• “RWE Notches First Power At Nordseecluster A” • Electricity has been fed into the German grid for the first time from RWE’s 660-MW Nordseecluster A offshore wind farm, a milestone that came just weeks after installation of the first turbine. RWE said installation of Vestas 15-MW turbines is well underway. Full grid connection is scheduled for early 2027. [reNews]
• “Groups Take First Step Toward Lawsuit Against TVA Over Clean Air Act Violations” • The Southern Environmental Law Center, on behalf of Appalachian Voices and the Sierra Club, sent a notice of intent to sue to the TVA, warning it that construction of a new methane gas plant near the site of its 70-year-old coal plant violates the Clean Air Act. [CleanTechnica]

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

A majority of Utah’s residents opposed shrinking Bears Ears National Monument before President Donald Trump drastically slashed its size last week, according to multiple polls conducted over the past few years. Those findings contrast with statements from Utah’s political leaders who argued that the cuts reflected what Utahns want.

President Donald Trump signed two executive orders shrinking Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears national monuments by roughly 90 percent each. He announced the change flanked by members of Utah’s congressional delegation and Governor Spencer Cox, all of them Republicans. Trump’s proclamation said the move “will better align the use of these public lands with the public interest,” citing the region’s deposits of critical minerals such as copper, nickel, and uranium, among others. 

On Monday, hundreds gathered outside the Governor’s Mansion in Salt Lake City to protest the cuts, part of efforts organized by the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance across the state to pressure lawmakers. 

The two monuments, which totaled about 3.3 million acres in southern Utah before Trump’s executive orders, were created by Democratic presidents despite protests from Utah’s elected Republican leaders.

During the signing ceremony in the Oval Office, Utah Representative Celeste Maloy, a Republican, said that supporters of shrinking the monuments  included “the locals who are worried about losing multiple uses on these federal lands,” and said that Trump was “listening to the people of Utah” in reducing the size of both monuments.

“It was very unfair to the people of Utah,” Trump said, “and now fairness has been brought back.”

But separate polls conducted before Trump shrank the monuments show that most Utahns and residents of other Mountain West states favored keeping their existing designations.

“It is very contradictive of our findings,” said Michaelann Nelson, a professor of environmental rhetoric at the Utah State University campus in Price. “They’re kind of picking and choosing which Utahns they’re paying attention to and listening to.”

In surveys conducted in 2024 and 2025, researchers with Utah State University found that 61 percent of Utahns either supported or strongly supported preserving Bears Ears as a national monument, with just 19 percent opposed or strongly opposed. Some 53 percent of respondents opposed or strongly opposed reducing Bears Ears, while 26 percent supported the idea. The remaining 21 percent neither supported nor opposed shrinking the monument.

Utah Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, Autumn Gillard of the Piute Indian Tribe of Utah, and others join a rally to protect public lands at the Utah Capitol in January 2025.
Francisco Kjolseth / The Salt Lake Tribune

Nearly half — 46 percent — opposed Utah pursuing legal action to overturn the Bears Ears National Monument designation, which was initially created by President Barack Obama in 2016 under the Antiquities Act. It included 1.35 million acres, but has now been reduced to about 121,000 acres.

Grand Staircase-Escalante wasn’t included in the Utah State University study. President Bill Clinton designated that monument in 1996, and it eventually reached nearly 1.9 million acres after some adjustments by Congress. After Trump’s order to cut the monument last week, it now includes just over 181,500 acres.

Nelson, the lead author of the poll, said she focused her surveys on Bears Ears because it was newer and a bigger focus of Utah politicians’ ire at the time. But she expects Utahns’ sentiments toward Grand Staircase-Escalante are similar.

“In some ways, perhaps [Utahns would be] even more in favor of Grand Staircase,” Nelson said, “just because we’ve existed with it for more than 20 years.”

Jessica Schad, a professor of sociology and the director of the Utah State’s Community and Natural Resources Institute, oversaw the survey efforts. She suspects Utahns’ attitudes toward monuments haven’t shifted much in the months since researchers polled them.

“It seems like this issue has become really politicized,” Schad said, “and our politicians aren’t taking into account what residents are preferring.”

The poll included 468 respondents in Utah, and the university tapped sociologists based in rural parts of the state so the results didn’t overrepresent residents in the more urban Wasatch Front, home to Salt Lake City. “We use high-quality, really rigorous survey methods,” Schad said.

Other surveys conducted across eight Mountain West states showed similar sentiments about national monuments to the Utah State University poll. A total of 91 percent of voters in these states wanted existing national monuments kept in place as of January, compared to 88 percent last year and 80 percent in 2017, according to the annual Conservation in the West Poll conducted by Colorado College.

This year’s study included interviews with voters in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. About 24 percent of respondents lived in rural areas or small towns, 24 percent lived in cities, and the rest lived in suburbs. Politically, 36 percent identified as Republicans, including 35 percent who said they supported MAGA; another 36 percent were independent, and 28 percent were Democrats.

The survey found support for existing national monuments nationwide was strong across party affiliations, backed by 87 percent of Republicans, 92 percent of independents, and 96 percent of Democrats. The share of MAGA supporters who wanted to keep existing national monument designations in place grew from 81 percent in 2025 to 87 percent this year.

“We’ve asked about this many times over the years,” said Lori Weigel, a principal with New Bridge Strategies, a Republican public opinion research group that assists Colorado College with its annual poll. “What we have seen very consistently in the data is that people want additional protections for these public lands.”

The poll also found that voters from both parties wanted to prioritize “conservation, recreation, and renewables over fossil fuel development,” according to a statement accompanying the results. A separate December 2024 survey by New Bridge Strategies found 71 percent of Utah voters supported keeping Bears Ears protected as a national monument, and 74 percent felt the same about Grand Staircase-Escalante. Another 75 percent of Utahns surveyed backed a president’s ability to create more national monuments.

Utah’s politicians, including Cox and Senator Mike Lee, have asserted Democratic presidents went too far in designating the two monuments. The 1906 Antiquities Act allows presidents to protect sites of historic and scientific interest as national monuments, but directs presidents to preserve “the smallest area compatible with the proper care” of those lands.

“These multimillion-acre monuments that are bigger than the state of Delaware certainly do not fit that designation,” Cox said at Monday’s event with Trump.

The designations have brought more visitors to the Bears Ears and Escalante areas, a statement issued by the Utah Senate notes. That puts a strain on land management agencies and law enforcement, causing “degradation” at the sites.

When Trump downsized the two monuments during his first term in 2017, records showed mining companies had lobbied administration officials to reduce the boundaries of Bears Ears. The president’s latest orders both cite a need to mine domestic supplies of critical minerals on public lands as part of the justification for reducing Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante.

During the signing ceremony last week, Trump complained that the previous monument boundaries closed off access to recreation, too. “You can’t do anything. You can’t go hunting. You can’t go fishing. You can’t do anything. You can virtually not even walk on it,” he said.

But the fact is that hunting, fishing, driving off-road vehicles on designated trails, and other recreation are allowed in both Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante — activities that are sometimes prohibited at other national monuments. Bears Ears also had an intertribal commission that federal agencies consulted for management of the monument and protection of its resources. Trump’s order disbanded that body.

Nearly 90 percent of Utahns supported Native American tribes having a strong role in managing ancestral lands, according to the 2024 New Bridge Strategies survey, and 81 percent said that the incoming Trump administration should keep agreements with tribes in place for managing Bears Ears.

toolTips('.classtoolTips10','A conductive and heat-resistant metal that forms a key part of many battery cathodes, which allow electric charges to flow. It is used in the lithium-ion batteries that power many EVs as well as solar energy systems and wind turbine components.');

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Most Utahns want to protect their national monuments. Trump had other plans. on Jul 22, 2026.