News Feeds

We’re all ready for the holiday weekend, so let’s take a quick jaunt up to Minneapolis, which has arguably the best cycling network in America — and some lessons to teach other communities about how to create connections for people on two wheels.

And that’s coming from a channel called “Chicagoans Who Bike.” If these ultra-wide, curb-level, full-size-snow-plow-ready paths can overcome the Bears/Vikings rivalry, you know they’ve got to be good.

Or, if you need a longer getaway, head on over to the international terminal to tag along on Shifter’s trip to Shanghai, where the prolific YouTuber unpacks China’s surprising history with the bicycle.

A few decades ago, some of the country’s megacities logged cycling mode share as high as sixty-four percent, absolutely crushing the numbers from far more talked-about bike paradises like Amsterdam and Copenhagen. Today, though, cities like Beijing may still have some of the best bike “hardware” (read: infrastructure) around, but they don’t always have great “software” (read: culture) — though he argues that could change. Watch below to find out why.

• Parking mandates raise rents by 17 percent nationally, or about $204 a month, according to a UCLA study. Even worse, 71 percent of carless households are paying for a parking space they don’t use. Minimum parking requirements drive up rents not only by bundling the cost of parking, but by reducing the number of units built. (California YIMBY)
• Early suburbs were walkable and build around railways and streetcar lines, and they can still provide inspiration today. (Planetizen)
• In addition to improving fuel efficiency, California’s new tire standards will save drivers $1 billion a year in fuel or electricity costs. (Grist)
• New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Agency is adding fare gates to more subway stations after finding that they reduce fare evasion by 72 percent. (NY Times)
• High-speed rail connecting Portland, Seattle and Vancouver, British Columbia is making progress. (The Columbian; paywall)
• Plans to convert Louisville’s 9th Street from a highway to a boulevard with a bike path and linear park are almost complete. (WDRB)
• San Antonio transit agency VIA approved a $1.1 billion, five-year spending plan that will fund a second bus rapid transit line and a new transit center. (KSAT)
• Minnesota updated its statewide bicycle master plan. (BikeMN)
• Miami-Dade raised transit fares by 50 cents, the first hike in 13 years. (Florida Politics)
• Knoxville built a raised crosswalk at the site where a hit-and-run driver killed an elderly woman last year. (10 News)
• Denver scooter- and bikeshare operator Veo is paying users to stop illegally riding on the sidewalk. (Westword)

It’s almost time for Spring’s fourth annual conference, “Red October: A conference of socialist ideas in action.” Taking from place Friday, October 30 to Sunday,...

The post RESOURCES: Help us build Red October! first appeared on Spring.

Just six months after Paradise, California was laid waste by the most deadly and destructive wildfire in the state’s history — November 2018’s Camp Fire — the town’s mayor received a generous-sounding offer from a Washington, D.C.-based lobbying firm.

“Our hearts were with you as we watched the fire unfold,” wrote Kristi Moore, managing partner of strategic development at The Ferguson Group, in a letter dated May 19, 2019. “We would like to offer our services to the Town of Paradise on a pro bono basis and become an official partner as you further develop and implement your recovery plans.”

Paradise soon took The Ferguson Group (TFG) up on its offer, according to a lobbying disclosure filed with Congress dated July 15, 2019, to provide “strategic advice” and assistance with obtaining federal funds to recover from the unprecedented disaster. During the same period, TFG was also working with the National Stripper Well Association, a fossil fuel industry trade group, according to research by two climate campaign groups.

The Ferguson Group is one of nearly 230 fossil fuel lobbyists identified in a recent report by the groups, F Minus and Make Polluters Pay, that also work for clients that support climate action or — like the local government of Paradise — are seeking federal aid to cope with climate-related impacts or disasters. They have dubbed such lobbyists “climate double agents” for representing fossil fuel interests while “simultaneously lobbying on almost every aspect of the climate crisis, from climate mitigation to disaster relief to wildlife conservation.”

Subscribe to Desmog

Get the weekly intelligence you need to hold polluters accountable

Email Address Sign Up Send me intelligence from: All US/Global team UK/Europe team Sign Up --> (function($){ $('.newsletter-container .ijkidr-us').click(function() { $('.js-cm-form').attr('data-id', '2BE4EF332AA2E32596E38B640E905619D07B21962C5AFE16D3A2145673C82A3CEE9D9F1ADDABE965ACB3CE39939D42AC9012C6272FD52BFCA0790F0FB77C6442'); $('.js-cm-email-input').attr('name', 'cm-vdrirr-vdrirr'); }); $('.newsletter-container .ijkidr-uk').click(function() { $('.js-cm-form').attr('data-id', '2BE4EF332AA2E32596E38B640E905619BD43AA6813AF1B0FFE26D8282EC254E3ED0237BA72BEFBE922037EE4F1B325C6DA4918F8E044E022C7D333A43FD72429'); $('.js-cm-email-input').attr('name', 'cm-ijkidr-ijkidr'); }); })(jQuery);

The research, released in August, is also included in online database maintained by F Minus that also contains information on 1,500 state-level fossil fuel lobbyists representing more than 14,000 non-industry clients that publicly advocated action on climate change, including non-profit groups, schools, municipal governments, and hospitals.

“I think it would blow the majority of the public’s mind if they knew this was happening,” said Cassidy DiPaola, the communications director of Make Polluters Pay.

California is no stranger to wildfires, but the Camp Fire’s unprecedented scope of devastation — 85 dead, 50,000 displaced, and nearly 19,000 structures destroyed across 153,336 acres of land in 16 days — was in large part due 2018’s extremely hot and dry weather conditions in Northern California, which were intensified by climate change.

The National Stripper Well Association (NSWA) is a trade group representing over 1,000 producers, owners, and operators of crude oil and natural gas wells. Lobbying disclosure forms that TFG filed with Congress in July 2026 indicate that its work for the NSWA includes monitoring “congressional activities on methane related issues.”

The Trump administration is in the process of rolling back Biden-era mandates for oil and gas companies to cut their emissions of methane, a powerful heat-trapping gas, as Environmental Protection Agency chief Lee Zeldin confirmed to a convention of oil and gas producers in Santa Fe on October 7. 

The Ferguson Group is the “most conflicted firm on wildfire and natural disaster relief issues,” said James Browning, founder and executive director of F Minus, and one of the report’s authors, told DeSmog. “They have an appalling map of activity funding the opposition on climate.”

However, “climate-ravaged cities and countries are locked into relationships” with such lobbying firms, he said, because “they certainly don’t want to bite the hand that feeds them.”

The Ferguson Group did not respond to DeSmog’s request for comment.

Of the 228 lobbyists named in the recent report, 47 were simultaneously working with fossil fuel interests and local governments seeking climate change-related relief.

In the first quarter of 2026, TFG was engaged with 50 local governments on climate-related work, according to the report — more than any other firm mentioned — while also working with five fossil fuel-related clients: the NSWA, the Permian Basin Petroleum Association, Texas Alliance for Energy Producers, Cat Creek Energy, and Southern California Public Power Authority.

The Ferguson Group focuses on lobbying Congress and the federal government, according to its website, with client services that include developing legislative and regulatory strategies, advocacy coordination, and pursuing grants on issues related to water, infrastructure, energy, natural resources, and the environment.

Throughout 2022 and 2023, according to disclosure forms filed with Congress, TFG lobbied for Paradise to receive federal support through the 2021 American Rescue Plan Act, which approved $2 trillion in economic recovery aid during the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as FEMA hazard mitigation grants under 2023’s Hazard Eligibility and Local Projects Act. 

In February 2023, TFG also helped Paradise municipal officials draft the town’s updated “Federal Platform and Priorities,” which “documented recovery successes, immediate needs, as well as long term needs and policy considerations,” according to a Paradise Council Agenda Summary.

As recently as this summer, TFG represented Paradise’s “interests in Washington, DC [sic] with a specific focus on disaster recovery and response related to wildfires,” as well as “natural resources, clean air and water, and agriculture.”

Despite beginning its work with Paradise on a pro bono basis, Paradise has paid The Ferguson Group over $300,000 as of July 2026, according to the company’s disclosure firms filed with Congress. Paradise’s Office of Recovery and Economic Development did not respond to DeSmog’s questions on the extent of TFG’s work with the community, or the town’s awareness of its work with the fossil fuel industry.

The Ferguson Group’s relationship with the National Stripper Well Association goes back to 2017, according to disclosure forms filed with Congress. The NSWA describes itself as representing the interests of the nation’s “smallest and most economically-vulnerable oil and natural gas wells.”

TFG has lobbied on the group’s behalf for industry-favorable positions on “percentage depletion” and “pass-through deduction”— two separate tax provisions that allow eligible oil and gas operators to reduce taxable income and federal income tax burdens. The NSWA has framed these tax provisions as a way to help these smaller operators stay afloat. However, an Environmental Defense Fund analysis has shown that even though the industry likes to maintain that marginal wells are run by small businesses, nearly half of all marginal wells are owned by just 93 corporations, each of which controls more than 1,000 wells.

Shortly after The Ferguson Group began lobbying for Paradise, the firm also started working for the Permian Basin Petroleum Association (PBPA), the oldest and most active trade association representing oil and gas operators, midstream providers, and service companies across the largest oil-producing region in the United States.

Christopher Kearney, a principal and oil and gas lobbyist at TFG, was the author of strikingly parallel language used by two small oil and gas producers in their 2024 congressional testimonies against the Waste Emissions Charge, a Biden-era methane fee charged to polluters, as reported by E&E News. Kearney was the signatory on the company’s lobbying disclosure forms regarding for its work for the NSWA from 2021 to 2026, and for the PBPA from 2020 to 2024.

Although these forms do not list greenhouse gas regulatory-related activities as part of The Ferguson Group’s work with the PBPA, E&E News reported in January 2024 that Michael Oestman, an oil and gas operator and “longtime” member of the PBPA, originally got connected to Kearney “through the Permian Basin Petroleum Association, which reached out to see if [Oestman] would be willing to testify before Congress on the methane fee.”

RELATED: How the Oil Industry Is Pushing EPA to ‘Effectively Gut’ Methane Rules During Affordability and Climate Crises

Additionally, the Ferguson group’s 2024 disclosure of its work for PBPA, the most recent year available, included “monitor[ing] Congressional and Federal agency activities related to addressing COVID on the general economy and the oil and gas industry” as well as “activities regarding Endangered Species Act reform.”

The Permian Basin is home to three of the country’s most endangered species, according to the Center for Biological Diversity: the lesser prairie chicken, freshwater mussel, and dunes sagebrush lizard. The Trump administration delisted the lizard from the Endangered Species Act in June, settling a lawsuit filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton contending that the rule could “undermine energy production” and threaten “private landowners’ ability to conduct business.”

In 2024, Texas produced about 28 percent of the nation’s total natural gas, and more than two fifths of the nation’s total crude oil production, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

In addition to Paradise, Ferguson has also lobbied for Asheville, North Carolina after it was devastated by Hurricane Helene in 2024. The details of TFG’s work for Asheville included in its lobbying disclosure forms are limited, but each filing includes “work with the city in response to Hurricane Helene.” Asheville’s communications specialist declined to respond to DeSmog’s questions about the extent of TFG’s work with the community, the amount the city has paid to TFG, or its awareness of the firm’s work with fossil fuel clients.

“It almost becomes natural disaster tourism, right?” said Browning of F Minus. “They see a natural disaster and they swoop in. And now they’re making money by lobbying off it.”

A separate report from Brown University’s Climate Development Lab (CDL), published in tandem with the F Minus and Make Polluters Pay analysis, documented systemic and coordinated opposition to state-level climate superfund bills by fossil fuel and energy-intensive industries. This type of legislation, which is growing in popularity around the country, would require large fossil fuel producers and refiners to pay for state-level climate damages as well as adapting infrastruture to the new climate normal  

“To me, it’s an issue of kindergarten ethics,” said Timmons Roberts, a professor of environmental studies at Brown who a co-authored the report. “If you know you made a mess, you clean it up.”

The Brown researchers found that while support for climate superfund bills has “dominated” pubic hearings, groups lobbying in opposition to them have made more submissions during public comment periods, sometimes swaying state leaders against the legislation. The Ferguson Group was not named in the report.

The post Consulting Firm Lobbied for Town Hit by Climate Disaster and Fossil Fuel Group at the Same Time appeared first on DeSmog.

The connection with the ocean is central to the worldview for Indigenous Peoples around the world. For many Indigenous Peoples of the Pacific this profound connection is reflected in creation stories. In those stories, deities, islands, and humans emerged from the depths of the sea. It is the home of ancestors. 

The territory of voyaging Peoples of the Pacific stretches across the whole of the ocean. The territories in the sea are part of a global web of life. And that is being threatened in a race to plunder the ocean floor.

When companies mine on land, most governments require them to study the impact of their mine. It is well-accepted that companies must study and address impacts on human rights, including Indigenous Peoples’ rights, and the environment. The ocean, however, doesn’t have the same safeguards — yet. 

The rules for deep sea mining are still being written

Right now, the International Seabed Authority is writing the rules that most of the globe will follow if it mines the deep ocean. The ISA was formed by a 1994 agreement that put into effect part of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. It governs more than half of the world’s oceans, and 172 countries are members. 

(Side note: The United States is not a member, and the Trump administration has said it will permit companies to mine the deep sea without regard for international law. You can read more on the threat of unilateral mining here.)

Indigenous Peoples’ rights aren’t being respected

There’s a big problem with what’s happening at the ISA now, however: Indigenous Peoples have no formal seat at the table. Their collective rights are not being taken seriously. 

Mining companies want us to think of the ocean as a vast, isolated blank space just because no one lives on the deep ocean floor. But what non-Indigenous people describe as empty, Pacific Peoples revere as the genesis of existence and source of sustenance and livelihoods. The ocean connects and represents the shared heritage and ancestry of all Pacific Peoples.

Indigenous Peoples’ knowledge tells us that a healthy ocean is sacred, integral to all life on the planet, significant, and worth defending. For many Indigenous Peoples, it also represents a key part of how they live and sustain themselves. It is how their ancestors navigated across islands and land masses. It holds sacred and ceremonial sites. And yet, despite this, their voices and rights are being sidelined. 

The ecological data gathered and knowledge systems built over millenia of lived experience of Indigenous Peoples must inform every part of the work of the ISA. This should include any regulations for mining the deep sea, from planning and study to monitoring and economics.

International law and treaties require better

The countries who are members of the ISA must listen to Indigenous Peoples when they write new rules — not just because it’s the right thing to do, and not just because it gives our planet a better chance for a livable future. The requirement is written into treaties and into international law.

Other international bodies already have processes in place to formally recognize and consult with Indigenous Peoples. The United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity and the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change both have formal ways for Indigenous Peoples to participate in decision-making. The ISA, if guided by Indigenous Peoples, can use these models to develop its own such structures.

Indigenous Peoples’ cultural heritage is at risk

Over the past few years, the ISA has been addressing the issue of “underwater cultural heritage”. This is an issue that shows how Indigenous Peoples’ rights can deepen conversations that might otherwise be sidelined.

Underwater cultural heritage sites are required to be protected. But right now, the policy defines those sites as only encompassing human-made objects — shipwrecks, for example.

Indigenous Peoples recognize sites in the ocean as especially culturally and spiritually important. These spaces aren’t human-made, but they hold stories, traditions, and significance that cannot be replaced. Advocates from Pacific Indigenous Peoples say these sites deserve protection.

The current definition of “underwater cultural heritage” gives more protection to a 100-year-old shipwreck than it gives to a sacred site that took millions of years to form and has been a place used and respected by people for thousands of years. 

“Stonehenge, Pyramids, and the Great Wall, without their stories, are simply a collection of stones. Their meaning comes from the traditions, histories, beliefs, and relationships that have been carried from one generation to the next. The same is true beneath the ocean. Culture is not found in the artifact — it is found in the story the artifact carries.”
Statement by the Maui Nui Makai Network (Hawaiʻi)

But framing these sacred spaces through a narrow lens of “underwater cultural heritage” sets the bar far too low. Instead of debating ambiguous terms, the ISA could use the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples as a baseline. It’s a framework that would shift the discussions. Instead of limited opportunities for participation, Indigenous Peoples would have their collective rights recognized by the ISA. Those rights strengthen their ability to continue to protect cultural and spiritual relationships with the ocean, for the benefit of all.

Setting the course for our future

The ISA may be writing policies that most people on the planet will never read, but those policies cut right to some of the biggest questions that will determine our future: Whose stories matter? Whose knowledge is respected? Whose history is valued? Whose rights are defended? And how will those answers shape the Earth that future generations inherit?

The post Indigenous Peoples’ Knowledge Is Left Behind in the Rush to Mine the Seafloor appeared first on Earthworks.

In order to solve climate change, you have to do two things — stop burning fossil fuels, and build clean energy to replace them. The last few decades in the United States have witnessed a long back-and-forth over which of the two goals is more important, and over how to achieve either of them. Is it more important to pass a carbon tax, or subsidize electric vehicles? To block a new oil pipeline, or build a lot of solar and wind? 

On this question, the coalition known as the climate movement has fractured into two broad groups. On one side, there are activists, lawyers, and environmentalists, who tend to focus on blocking and reducing fossil fuel use. On the other, there are renewable energy companies and policy wonks, who tend to focus on building more clean energy.

These factions have clashed in the past, but over the past week a kind of civil war has erupted between the different elements of the climate movement. The inciting incident was the release of the Bipartisan American Affordability and Jobs Act, or BAAJA, a long-awaited Senate bill that is designed to enable the construction of more power plants, transmission lines, and gas pipelines. The bill does this by weakening some of the nation’s bedrock environmental laws, speeding up the timeline for government agencies to issue permits, and making it harder to cancel projects that have already gotten federal approval. 

For climate-conscious supporters of the bill, it’s better for the planet to build a lot of clean energy even if it means some fossil fuels get built as well, and even if they cause some damage to the environment on the way. Supporters of the effort argue that if the U.S. builds out new clean capacity, it will be easier to wean off fossil fuels, which are the primary cause of global warming and all its myriad consequences. Opponents say that’s a Faustian bargain, one that will jeopardize tribal nations, other marginalized communities, and endangered species.

“It is definitely exposing a potential fault line between the environmental community and clean energy interests,” said Representative Jared Huffman, a Democrat who represents Northern California, in an interview with Grist. 

Representative Jared Huffman, a Democrat from California, is skeptical of the Senate permitting reform bill. Andrew Harnik / Getty Images

BAAJA is the product of months of bipartisan negotiation between four members of the Senate committees focused on energy and the environment. The two Democrats in the talks were Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island and Martin Heinrich of New Mexico, who are both climate hawks and clean energy advocates. The Republicans were Mike Lee of Utah and Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, who are advocates of fossil fuels and critics of environmental regulation. Despite their ideological differences, the four senators managed to reach a compromise on a sprawling 400-page bill with hundreds of individual provisions. 

The so-called “four corners” reached a deal just before Congress left for its fall recess, and the Senate will not return to take up the bill until after the midterm elections. The bill has not even made it through committee yet, and it also faces an uncertain fate in the House of Representatives. The next few weeks will see a scramble of lobbying as supporters and opponents of the bill try to sway senators and representatives for or away from the bill.

So far, at least, the builders seem to have more influence than the blockers, at least within the climate movement. President Donald Trump has spent the last two years repealing most federal climate policy and blocking the development of new clean energy, and many climate advocates seem willing to accept an imperfect deal rather than hold out hope of fixing Trump’s damage after he leaves office.

“It’s a lot easier to prevent things from being built than to build things, and that applies both to fossil fuels and to renewables,” said Zeke Hausfather, a climate expert at the science nonprofit Berkeley Earth, who also directs climate research for the tech company Stripe. “I don’t want us to run roughshod over any community, but we also can’t give everyone a veto for an issue as important as climate change. So ultimately, we need to strike a balance there.”

The case in favor: Build more

A big challenge with building clean energy is that it takes up a lot of space. Solar farms and wind farms can cover thousands of acres of land, and the transmission lines that carry their power to cities can extend for hundreds of miles, covering far more territory than coal and natural gas plants do. This large footprint makes these projects more likely to touch federal lands or waters, which triggers a series of obligations under the National Environmental Policy Act, the foundational environmental protection law also known as NEPA, and other laws that protect endangered species and historical artifacts. Under NEPA, federal agencies must carry out an extensive analysis of a project’s environmental impacts before issuing or denying a permit for it.

That review process often inspires time-consuming litigation. Opponents can bring lawsuits against an agency even years after a review is complete, arguing the review wasn’t comprehensive enough, and they can ask courts to halt the project until the agency redoes the analysis. A 2025 study found that 64 percent of solar projects, 38 percent of wind projects, and 31 percent of transmission line projects face NEPA lawsuits.  

This litigation can come from almost anyone, and can cover almost any conceivable impact from a project. On one end of the spectrum, a coalition of tribes and environmental groups sued the developer of the SunZia transmission line. The line carries much-needed wind power to Arizona and California, but the plaintiffs wanted the developer to reroute the wires away from a holy cultural site, an effort that was ultimately unsuccessful. On the other hand, opponents of a wind project in California delayed development for years by suing on the grounds that a federal agency had failed to consider pseudoscientific theories about wind turbines creating dangerous electromagnetic fields. Both projects were ultimately completed, but years behind schedule.

A group of wind turbines generate electricity at the Block Island Wind Farm off the coast of Rhode Island. The clean energy industry has pushed for provisions that would prevent President Donald Trump from canceling future offshore wind permits.
John Moore / Getty Images

The bill would make it much harder to file this kind of lawsuit. Litigation would need to be brought within 150 days of the end of the NEPA review process, rather than six years, and the plaintiff must have already described the issue of their suit during a public comment period. Even then, a court could only order the agency to redo its analysis while a project moves forward, rather than pausing a project altogether. The agency could then only revoke the permit under limited circumstances, including a violation of law or the risk of immediate or substantial harm to “life, property, national security, or defense.”  

“This is a great bill, and it’s a huge step in the right direction,” said Ray Long, the president of ACORE, a trade group representing the solar and wind industry. “We need to really put this in reality. We need to build a ton of stuff over the next four years, or else we’re gonna have higher [electricity] prices.”

A related set of provisions makes it harder for the government itself to block projects, providing developers with “permitting certainty.” Here, both the Republicans and Democrats believe they have won — Republicans resent President Joe Biden’s decisions to block the Keystone XL oil pipeline and to pause the construction of new liquefied-natural gas terminals on the Gulf Coast, while Democrats have watched the second Trump administration use dubious executive authorities to halt the construction of solar and wind farms on federal lands and waters. One provision in the bill would help developers seek compensation if they can establish that the government has discriminated against a specific project type, like offshore wind, through delayed and canceled permits.

“This president has found ways to skirt the edges of every law that we have, and his attacks will continue,” said Kris Ohleth, executive director of Special Initiative on Offshore Wind, a pro-offshore wind nonprofit research group. “But at least if developers know they can recoup some of their development costs, as this bill might allow, it’s more appealing for them to return to the market.”

What’s arguably the most important thing in the bill doesn’t have to do with permitting per se. It’s about the massive transmission lines that carry electricity from region to region. The United States has built very few of these interstate lines in recent years. This dearth of new wires has made it infeasible for developers to build more solar and wind. 

“Historically, it didn’t matter too much where power plants were located, so we built them close to where the power was needed,” said Chirag Lala, vice president of research and chief economist at the Center for Public Enterprise, a think tank. “But we don’t have that same luxury with clean energy, which can be very location-specific. If you’re going to rely on those resources, you have to ship the power over long distances.”

High-voltage transmission lines run through the Central Valley of California. The bipartisan permitting bill would overhaul federal rules for transmission, requiring utilities to plan for more lines that move clean energy around the country. Jay L. Clendenin / Getty Images

BAAJA would force utilities and regional grid operators to plan for interregional transmission lines, and would let private developers (like the one behind SunZia) come in and build lines themselves if utilities don’t build enough. The bill would also clear away a number of procedural roadblocks that have allowed utilities to block interregional transmission. 

The Democrats who negotiated the bill and the climate experts who support it see these provisions as a sea change for clean energy. If the bill passes, it could unleash solar in Nevada and wind in the Dakotas, and then bring that power to places like Appalachia that have little solar or wind potential of their own.

The case against: Stop the damage

But while the clean energy industry has celebrated the bill’s effort to speed up permitting for new power plants, many environmental groups have condemned it. These groups argue that the changes would allow for a surge of new development near disadvantaged communities, and will leave residents with no legal recourse to stop that development. 

These groups argue, in essence, that the bill sacrifices many communities in places like the Gulf South in order to achieve an overall nationwide increase in the supply of clean energy. 

“That battle between fossil fuels and renewables is not going to necessarily go well for the people of our region, especially if you take those regular protections that we’ve relied on for years away,” said Liz Zepeda, the director of federal policy at the Southern Environmental Law Center, an environmental law group that represents six states in the Southeast. 

The permitting changes have also drawn intense criticism from Indigenous groups, who say that the narrowing of historic preservation law would deprive tribal nations of a voice in development decisions. By the time that tribes learned about a company’s plans for a new transmission line or solar farm, it could be too late for them to protect culturally important sites.

“These changes will reduce opportunities for Tribal Nations to learn that an infrastructure project is occurring or to participate before decisions are made, all but guaranteeing that construction or other activities affecting sacred places can proceed without meaningful Tribal involvement,” said Valerie Grussing, the executive director of the National Association of Tribal Historic Preservation Officers, a group representing tribal officials who advise federal agencies on protecting Indigenous historic sites during project development.

The bill would constrain litigation on behalf of endangered species and would also weaken states’ power to stop development under the Clean Water Act. This latter state power has been used in the past to take down old hydropower dams, like the ones on the Klamath River, and that would now be harder.

BAAJA would also allow mines on public lands to unload excavated rock and waste materials on adjacent land. Mining is essential for clean energy development — solar panels, wind turbines, and EV batteries all need metals and minerals — but some environmental groups worry about the impact on local ecosystems.

Indigenous youth and climate activists hold a protest against pipeline projects in Washington, D.C., in 2021. A new bipartisan permitting reform bill in the Senate would make it easier to build many pipelines.
Bill Clark / CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images

In addition to raising concerns about environmental and social impacts, opponents argue that the bill would lock in future development of fossil fuels, which could negate the climate benefit of building clean energy. Among the biggest concessions to Republicans is a broad environmental exemption for natural gas pipelines, which, along with the Clean Water Act changes, would make it much harder for states on the East Coast to block new pipelines. Hausfather, who is supportive of the bill, allows that more gas reaching the Northeast would likely cause emissions to go up, though he believes that increased clean energy development elsewhere would more than offset those increases.

The bills’ opponents are also extremely skeptical of the “permitting certainty” provisions that the offshore wind industry welcomed. The bill would prohibit the president and federal agencies from discriminating against any specific energy source, but that prohibition would apply to fossil fuels as well as renewables. It would in theory make it almost impossible for a future president to undertake an LNG pause like the one Biden pursued, or to block offshore oil development. 

“If you have a dominant industry right now, which is the fossil fuel industry, you are creating a structure that makes it possible for them to lock in their dominance forever,” said Brett Hartl, the government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, the environmental protection nonprofit that has led the opposition to the bill.

Opponents argue that by trading away their ability to stop new oil and gas production, the bill would hamstring the climate fight, no matter how much solar and wind gets built.

“Do we just ignore the political and economic power of the fossil fuel industry, and just hope and pray we can deploy renewable energy fast enough to reduce emissions?” asked Erich Pica, president of Friends of the Earth, a nonprofit environmental group. “That’s what this bill does.” 

Builders vs. blockers

BAAJA’s fate is far from guaranteed. In addition to the opposition from influential groups like the Center for Biological Diversity, there are a number of House members who have expressed uncertainty about the bill. At least one senior Republican, Brett Guthrie, has said he opposes the effort to force new transmission lines, and major utilities will likely oppose that provision as well. On the Democratic side, Huffman, the representative from California, told Grist that he thinks Democrats can likely get a better deal after the midterms.

“The idea that this is this once-in-a-lifetime great opportunity that will never come again and has to be accepted without any scrutiny or questions is pretty silly,” he told Grist. Huffman said he believes the bill is a “Trojan horse” with “giveaways” for the fossil fuel industry, and said he believes he could negotiate a bill without significant environmental rollbacks should the Democrats take control of the House. 

But even if Democrats retake the House and the Senate, they will need some Republican votes to pass a major transmission reform, so some kind of compromise is inevitable. Many supporters say they doubt that Republicans would negotiate a bill when in the minority, or that Trump would sign a Democrat-led bill.

For now, the bill seems to have split the climate movement down the middle. While hundreds of small environmental groups signed a letter urging Democratic senators not to pass the bill, most major green groups did not sign. The list of absences includes the Sierra Club, the Environmental Defense Fund, the Nature Conservancy, and the Natural Resources Defense Council, arguably the nation’s most influential climate nonprofit, whose leader said in a public statement the bill raises “hard questions” but could be “good for clean energy — really good. ” Others, like Citizen’s Climate Lobby, have offered their unequivocal support. Even the environmental opponents seem somewhat fractured — when a group of opposing nonprofits held a Zoom call to coordinate their strategy, someone leaked the transcript to Punchbowl News.

The fact that the bill has a chance of passing with some support from green groups and climate hawks like Whitehouse reflects a shift in the American climate movement. The movement took off during the fracking boom with protests against pipeline projects like Keystone XL, but efforts to phase out fossil fuels have been stymied by court decisions and administration changes. During that time, solar and wind have both experienced dramatic growth as they’ve gotten cheaper to build, but they are now hitting bottlenecks thanks to transmission constraints and environmental review. 

The fact that Whitehouse and Heinrich came to the table with Republicans, and that so many green groups aren’t fighting their compromise, may be a sign about how climate advocates have come to see fossil fuels: If you can’t beat ’em, build something that can replace ’em.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The bipartisan energy bill tearing the climate movement apart on Oct 8, 2026.

As part of the Trump administration’s ongoing push to illegally expand oil and gas drilling into long-protected Arctic public lands in Alaska, the Department of the Interior today announced a categorical exclusion that aims to exempt oil and gas exploration projects from individual review under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Under the categorical exclusion, Interior is relying on old environmental studies from different projects in ecologically distinct areas to claim that new proposed activities would have “no significant impact on the environment.”

Categorical exclusions are typically used by federal agencies only for small projects like routine road or trail maintenance, restoration work, or minor facility upgrades – when no harm is expected to the environment. An exemption for large-scale industrial activities like exploratory drilling and seismic testing across a landscape as vast, varied, and changing as the Western Arctic is a radical departure for how categorical exclusions are typically used.

The 23-million-acre National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska in the Western Arctic is the largest tract of public land in the U.S. Its diverse habitats range from tundra and wetlands to mountain foothills, grassy uplands, riparian areas, and river deltas. Using older studies that analyzed impacts of oil exploration in a specific area of the Western Arctic to forecast impacts for future projects in ecologically different locations is extremely problematic and unsupported. It would also completely cut out the public from future permitting decisions.

“In issuing this categorical exclusion, this administration is seeking to fast track large scale oil drilling and seismic exploration without any further environmental analysis or public input,” said Earthjustice Attorney Janet Bering. “It is cutting the public out of this decision and future decisions. The administration finalized this new approach with zero public input. Combined with a similar proposal that rubber stamps new oil production, this is a one-two punch. It’s bad policy, and it is unlawful.”

Exploration projects, which include seismic surveys, exploratory drilling, and related infrastructure, are known to harm wildlife, including caribou and polar bears. Seismic surveys are conducted with thumper trucks weighing tens of thousands of pounds that repeatedly strike the ground with a large plate to send seismic waves into the earth to detect oil deposits. Transporting industrial equipment and camps for seismic workers across sensitive landscapes also comes with significant risk to the environment.

Last winter, a massive drilling rig nicknamed “the beast” toppled over, caught fire and spilled diesel while it was being transported on an ice road to a new exploration site.

Today’s action follows a similar proposed rule announced by the Trump administration last month to rubber stamp new drilling production projects in the Western Arctic. The public may comment on that proposed rule, but if itis finalized, the public would be cut out of the process. The production rule aims to require Interior to approve new projects as massive as Willow within a 60-day limit of the oil company submitting its application, without any additional environmental study or public process.

Background

The 23-million-acre Reserve in the Western Arctic is one of the most biologically, ecologically, and culturally significant tracts of public land in the United States. The region is home to iconic and imperiled wildlife species like polar bears and seals that depend on sea ice. It provides globally significant habitat for millions of migratory birds and for Alaska’s unique caribou herds.

The Naval Petroleum Reserves Production Act of 1976 recognized the importance of the Western Arctic for wildlife and migratory birds including animals protected under the Endangered Species Act, and for the cultural practices and food security of Indigenous communities. The act requires the BLM to assure adequate mitigation of harm from oil and gas activities, and “maximum protection” of the fragile tundra, birds, wildlife and other unique resources within the Reserve when it allows exploration or drilling in special areas. When Congress authorized leasing and oil extraction in 1980, it again directed the federal government to assure the protection of the Western Arctic’s ecological and cultural resources.

Today, the Trump administration invited fresh controversy when it announced it will abandon environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to allow oil and gas companies to run roughshod over pristine Arctic ecosystems to search for expensive, far flung oil.

The Bureau of Land Management granted the polluters a new categorical exclusion that will allow activities including seismic surveys, construction of ice roads and airstrips, and exploratory drilling to move forward without the environmental analysis typically required under NEPA. The decision comes as the Trump administration continues its push to expand oil and gas development across Alaska's public lands, threatening sensitive Arctic wildlife and the communities that depend on them.

In response, Mike Scott, National Oil and Gas Campaign Manager, released the following statement:

“The Trump administration is handing Big Oil another free pass to exploit America's public lands, this time by gutting environmental oversight in one of the most fragile ecosystems on the planet. Oil companies have already shown the risks they pose to the Western Arctic, and now this administration wants to make it even easier for them to drill without scrutiny.”

“This isn't about lowering energy costs or helping Alaskans. It's about doing the fossil fuel industry's bidding at the expense of wildlife, Alaska Native communities, and our public lands. The Trump administration is putting corporate profits ahead of people and the planet, and the Western Arctic will pay the price."

In response to allegations that U.S. Ambassador to Greece Kimberly Guilfoyle abused her diplomatic position to advance private gas interests in the Balkans, Oil Change International’s Allie Rosenbluth said:

“Trump’s push to lock Europe into decades of U.S. gas dependence puts fossil fuel profits ahead of people’s energy bills, health, and safety [1]. Any use of diplomatic power to threaten elected governments or secure private gas deals would be an outrageous abuse of public office and must be investigated.”

Note to the editor:
[1] To read more about Europe’s increasing dependence on U.S. LNG imports: Pay, Baby, Pay: Trump’s AI and energy dominance agenda means costlier LNG for Europe.

From October 12-18, 2026, the World Bank and IMF will hold their Annual Meetings in Thailand. Assembly of the Poor will mobilize to demonstrate that their policy prescriptions have inflicted severe harm on our people from the past to the present, and threaten our future.

The post Development Without the Poor: The Footprint of the World Bank and IMF in Thailand appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Corporations that have benefited from the Trump administration’s cancellation of federal enforcement actions have given $210.5 million in contributions and pledges to MAGA Inc., and other Trump-aligned Super PACs, according to a new investigation by Public Citizen.

The finding comes as Public Citizen’s new analysis documents the Trump administration’s cancellation of 212 federal enforcement actions involving 205 corporations, including 80 investigations, 67 dismissed enforcement lawsuits and 54 canceled accountability measures involving alleged corporate misconduct.

Among the largest contributors, including corporations, executives, and investors are as follows:

• Elon Musk, whose companies Tesla and SpaceX benefited from at least eight canceled enforcement actions, pledged to spend $100 million to help elect Republicans in the 2026 midterms, largely through America PAC which he controls, and gave $5 million to MAGA Inc.. Both Tesla and SpaceX benefited from four canceled actions each.

• Crypto.com, which profited from the Securities and Exchange Commissions’ (SEC) cancellation of an investigation into allegations that the crypto platform traded unregistered securities, gave $35 million to MAGA Inc., and another $2 million to Keep America Great, both Trump-aligned Super PACs.

• Gemini, similarly profited from a dropped SEC investigation into allegations of trading unregistered securities, gave $20 million to MAGA Inc. Its co-founders, Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss, personally gave an additional $10 million each to MAGA Inc.
• Andreessen Horowitz, along with co-founders Marc Andreessen and Ben Horowitz, gave $12 million to MAGA Inc.. Nine corporations that benefit from canceled actions are a part of the firm’s investment portfolio.

“Corporations and ultra-wealthy executives with enormous financial interests before the federal government are pouring extraordinary sums into the president’s political operation,” said Robert Weissman, Public Citizen co-president. “Once the check is cashed, the administration is pulling back enforcement actions meant to punish corporate misconduct. It’s a great deal for the corporate wrongdoers – at the expense of their victims and the American people.”

“The potential is limitless when companies and the wealthy people behind them can give millions of dollars to Trump-aligned political groups,” said Rick Claypool, a research director for Public Citizen and author of the report. “The scale of these contributions raises fundamental questions about what corporations are expecting when they invest heavily in a political operation, especially when it involves the President of the United States.”

Public Citizen’s Corporate Enforcement Tracker is an online resource for watchdogging the Trump administration’s cancellation of federal enforcement actions brought against corporations prior to President Trump’s second term.

In response to the outcome of the pre-COP summit in Fiji, Oxfam Climate Policy Lead Nafkote Dabi said:

“These talks were an underwhelming precursor to the summit in Türkiye next month. The absence of leaders from the richest and most polluting countries sends a dangerous signal that the global commitment to tackling the climate crisis is wavering.

“While rich governments fail to take responsibility for climate action, the world faces an onslaught of climate disasters. Devastating heatwaves in Europe claimed thousands of lives this summer, while a lethal combination of El Niño and existing climate breakdown leaves millions of people facing hunger across the Horn of Africa and Latin America.

Leaders cannot spend another COP sidestepping their climate commitments. At COP31, rich governments must increase their climate finance commitments and hold the richest polluters accountable.”

Oxfam Australia’s Policy and Advocacy Lead Josie Lee said:

“For Australian leaders to leave the pre-COP talks without a single substantial funding pledge, merely repackaging previously committed funding, is irresponsible, and falls short of the bold leadership it promised. Australia spends ten times more on fossil fuels subsidies than it does supporting its neighbors to act on climate change.

“We cannot claim to be a responsible regional partner while continuing to prioritize support for coal oil and gas over adequate climate finance. Oxfam Australia is calling on the Government to demonstrate real solidarity with its Pacific neighbors, by putting money on the table and taking responsibility for our share of the climate crisis.”

Executive Director of Oxfam in the Pacific Eunice Wotene said:

“Our hope for hosting pre-COP in the Pacific was that leaders of historically polluting countries would see for themselves the losses and damages with which we are grappling and take decisive action. We urge leaders to take these observations onward to COP31 to ensure the richest countries, corporations and individuals are held accountable for their disproportionate role in the climate crisis.”

Social Security Works Executive Director Alex Lawson had the following response to the news that Texas Senate candidate Ken Paxton discussed cuts to Social Security in private conversations in Washington, as revealed in leaked audio published by the Texas Tribune:

“It's disgusting that Ken Paxton is laughing while planning to cut Social Security benefits for everyone in this country, including the nearly 5 million Texans who rely on Social Security and the 1.3 million Texans who Social Security keeps out of poverty.

“This is a sick man who thinks it’s a joke to push over a million Texans into poverty by stealing their hard-earned benefits. This is a man who should not be allowed anywhere near the levers of power, since clearly he thinks working people are a joke to be laughed at with the billionaire donors he works for.”

The Alliance for Food Sovereignty in Africa (AFSA) is inviting proposals from consultants or teams to examine how African seed systems are financed and strengthen the evidence on the economic benefits of farmer managed seed systems and agroecology.

Building on AFSA’s existing research, the study will map public, private and philanthropic funding, identify who benefits, and assess how finance could better support farmers. It will examine yields, production costs, household income and profitability, alongside wider outcomes for climate resilience, nutrition, biodiversity and livelihoods.

The assignment will combine desk research and remote interviews with 8–10 proposed case studies, including at least four newly documented cases developed with AFSA members and other networks. Findings will inform practical recommendations for donors, development finance institutions and philanthropic foundations, with clear recognition of evidence gaps and trade-offs.

The proposed duration is 14 weeks from contract signature. Applicants should demonstrate expertise in African agriculture, seed systems or agroecology, financial analysis and evidence synthesis, alongside strong English writing skills and capacity for French-language engagement.

To apply, submit a technical proposal, itemised budget, CVs, two relevant research or writing samples, and references from comparable assignments.

Deadline: 30 October 2026
Email: afsa@afsafrica.org
Subject line: Proposal for African seed systems and financial flows study

Read the full terms of reference.

Resistance and Unity: Defending Immigrant Communities

The protections that have allowed hundreds of thousands of people fleeing natural and sociopolitical catastrophes to build lives in the U.S. are being stripped away. 

Immigration enforcement spending has more than tripled since 2003, and Congress has now committed roughly $240 billion to ICE and the Border Patrol. Temporary Protected Status — once a lifeline for hundreds of thousands fleeing disaster and political violence — is being dismantled: refugees from Honduras, Venezuela, Syria, Yemen, South Sudan, and Haiti have all lost protections since a Supreme Court ruling this summer.

But many coworkers, congregations, and neighbors are showing up for each other. States across the country have passed laws banning ICE face-coverings and requiring agents to show visible identification. Communities are organizing to block new detention facilities before they open. In this issue, we highlight some of the organizers, researchers, and neighbors turning that refusal into action. 

Neighbors and Allies: Solidarity in a Time of Distress

This is a time of escalating fear for immigrant communities. They are being demonized and are under assault, as large-scale, heavy-handed enforcement has been unleashed on them, and our noblest traditions of welcome and inclusion are being discarded. And yet, despite these deliberate attempts to isolate and separate us, immigrants and non-immigrants alike have often been stepping up together to protect rights, build alliances, and fight for a better future for all of us. In this conversation, leading activists talk about what these movements of resistance and solidarity mean for broader efforts to protect democracy. With: Cristina Jiménez Moreta, formerly of United We Dream; Guerline Jozef of the Haitian Bridge Alliance; Shaw San Liu of the Chinese Progressive Association; and Manuel Pastor of USC’s Equity Research Institute.

Watch Now Stories, Voices, and Perspectives

The Wealth of Welcome: What Communities Across America Are Already Teaching Us (USC Equity Research Institute)
In a new brief, sociologist Manuel Pastor and researcher Thai V. Le trace how immigration enforcement spending has more than tripled since 2003 — from $9.2 billion to $29.2 billion in 2024 — with Congress committing another $240 billion combined through the 2025 One Big Beautiful Bill Act and the 2026 Secure America Act. Their findings challenge the narratives used to justify this buildup, offering a clear-eyed, evidence-based case for an approach rooted in welcome rather than enforcement.

Read Now

From Fear to Power: A Conversation with Cristina Jiménez Moreta
Silence doesn’t protect us — community does. That’s the hard-won lesson Cristina Jiménez Moreta carries from a childhood spent hiding an undocumented status, through becoming a founding member of United We Dream and helping win DACA in 2012. In this conversation, she talks about fear, strategy, and what it takes to build a movement that outlasts any one administration.

Read Now

Louisiana Residents Are Resisting Plans to Build an ICE Jail on Contaminated Site (Truthout)
In central Louisiana, ICE is moving to open a 528-bed detention facility for immigrant women, infants, and children on the site of a former Air Force base with groundwater contaminated by toxic “forever chemicals.” Mothers, pastors, veterans, and civil rights attorneys have banded together to fight it, packing board meetings and organizing in the streets. Among them: Daniel Nakamura, whose parents were both interned in WWII concentration camps as U.S. citizens, who now drives two hours each way to stand against what he calls the same trickery happening again.

Read Now What You Can Do

• Support the organizations leading this fight. United We Dream, Haitian Bridge Alliance, and the Chinese Progressive Association — all represented by the leaders featured in this issue — are on the front lines of immigrant rights work nationwide. Consider making a donation or following their campaigns to know when and how to show up.
  
• Join the fight against detention expansion, wherever you are. The Louisiana jail featured in this issue isn’t an isolated case — it’s part of a nationwide wave of new ICE facilities. Detention Watch Network’s Communities Not Cages campaign coordinates opposition to detention expansion across the country and can connect you to organizing happening near you, even if that’s not Louisiana. Sign their petition and sign up for updates.
  
• Solidarity Guide for Defending Immigrant Communities. Check out this guide from the National Immigration Law Center.

The post The Pulse – 9/25/26: Immigration Enforcement Has Tripled. Communities Are Fighting Back. appeared first on Bioneers.

This week on Talking Headways we are sharing Part 1 of our conversation with Reece Martin of The Transit Brief in Toronto at the Mpact Transit + Community Conference. We discuss China’s transit expansion, the politics and impacts of fare policy, construction costs around the globe, the US’s existential crisis and the material benefits of progress.

Avid listeners know the drill: Press play on the audio player embedded below, read an AI-generated transcript here, or digest the edited excerpt at the end of this post.

Reece Martin: The US is clearly in a civilizational struggle with China — and it’s like, hey, they’re building all this stuff, and you can’t build even highways? Even if you think that the right thing for the US to do is just build more car infrastructure, you can’t even do that.

The state is geriatric. It’s run by geriatrics. It’s an existential problem. You wanna build defense infrastructure. You wanna build transportation infrastructure, energy infrastructure — and you just can’t because of all of this proceduralism and various other problems, right?

The things that would let you build more subways, would let you build more housing, and would let you do all these other things. And I think it would make the United States a better place, a more dynamic place, right? And it’s good for the economy, right? I’m reading a fantastic book, I recommend everyone goes and reads it. It’s called Order Without Design, by Alain Bertaud.

He’s French. My French pronunciation, despite being Canadian, is horrendous. It’s great. But it’s also quite interesting because urban issues are very progressive-coded, and he’s like a total market fundamentalist, and it’s great. We impose so many constraints on ourselves, and if you actually didn’t, you would probably get better, more dynamic cities.

Cities are what creates great dynamic economies. And you look at a place like New York in the early 20th century — that’s the dream, right? They’re building a ton of infrastructure, building a ton of housing. The city was growing. It was getting denser.

It was getting more dynamic, like what Chinese cities are experiencing now, right? It’s the same thing. It’s a state-led process, whereas in the US and in London as well, this was actually run by private companies initially. And to some extent, New York subway expansion was kinda killed by the city getting involved and then kind of building all of these redundant parallel lines to the private operators.

You need to create that dynamism that lets cities grow. Look at Austin or Atlanta. They would be better cities if they had great transit systems because it would create competition. Even if you’re a driver — it’s like, well, if the roads are too busy, if they’re not improving, then I’ll just get on the train.

But because that doesn’t exist, your whole city just suffers as a result. And so I think that something that is healthy in Ontario and in Canada more broadly is that transit and transportation, while it’s still politically contentious, nobody disagrees that you need to build this stuff.

Jeff Wood: My wife’s Chinese. We’ve been going back every year. I usually spend about a month there, and it’s just eye-opening to go and see what’s happening in Shenzhen or even Hong Kong or even in northern cities.

Her city is the main city in a province, and it’s a small city compared to Beijing and Shanghai, but it has two new subway lines. And just seeing that and how the people are responding to that.

I interviewed Olivia Plotnick, who is an American from Oregon living in China. She’s been living there for the last 10 years. She’s a brand specialist, and she did this trip where she went to 30 cities in three months using high-speed rail. And I asked her: “Well, what do people think about this?” And she said, “I talked to the cab drivers, and they think it’s amazing.”

All the high-speed rail, all the infrastructure, they can see things happening. They can see more customers. And on her side, where she talks about brands and new brands, the second tier of Chinese cities, there’s a competition between these brands that are starting up because of all the infrastructure that’s happening.

And there’s a discussion about not only building the infrastructure, but about how we can make our regions better because of the infrastructure we’ve already built. How can we create better biotech investment? Well, let’s create a cluster of cities outside of Shanghai that you already connected with subways and with high-speed rail that enhance the ability of people to share information and share ideas to get more patents, those types of things.

And I feel like we’re having that discussion a little bit in the private sector. The folks that are investing in technology are doing things, but it’s not kind of the same way as thinking about how you can connect all these places so that new discussions about technology and investment and all those things can happen.

It’s really frustrating to go and see what they’ve done there and what we’re doing here, and what we’re wasting money on in the United States. And I shouldn’t say here because we’re in Canada. But in the United States, we’re still spending so much money on road expansion and the highway system, and it’s already built out.

It’s completely not valuable anymore to spend more money on it because it’s built out. You need to shift over to something else, like high-speed rail, that’s actually going to connect places and create that vitality and that collision of ideas that we really need.

Reece Martin: I think there’s two things that are pretty interesting. I’m actually a tech guy. I did computer science at university, so I’m not super-cynical about tech, even if AI is a little concerning. You have to sometimes reflect that most of the new technology developed in my life, in terms of the value extracted.

There’s a lot of good biotech. It’s great that we can cure a bunch of cancers that we previously couldn’t. So I don’t wanna be too negative. But if you look at consumer technology and software, which is a huge part of the economy, a lot of this stuff is useful, but a lot of it is actually just net-negative on people’s quality of life.

Like Instagram — the world would probably be better without it, right? There’s a lot of things like that. So you just sort of wonder. You look at China, right? They’ve spent all this money and effort building something. If you live in Portland, and you could go to Seattle for the afternoon, that is gonna make your life better in a way that Instagram is not gonna make your life better. It’s gonna let you live in the real world.

Jeff Wood: Yeah, the tourism there has exploded. People can go to different parts of the country and see some of their sights and ancient sites.

Reece Martin: And that’s good. Imagine if it were easier and cheaper to travel from California to Nevada or California to Arizona. Even politically, these things help people not be crazy because they would interact more with people with different views and from different places. And I think there’s been a real focus on this: How do we extract more money out of people for the latest iPhone? And not: How can we materially improve living standards?

I can see some of this as a Canadian because when I grew up in Vancouver, the SkyTrain system was 40 percent as big as it is today. The city looked totally different. It’s covered in high-rises now. There’s this all-new SkyTrain. There’s new highways and bridges.

The same is true in Toronto and Montréal. If you look at the population of Canada when I was born, it was probably in the high 20 millions. We’re now at 40 million. It would as if the US was at 500 million people, if it had experienced that kind of growth.

There’s housing costs, which are really difficult here. I don’t want to frame it as entirely positive. But you just recognize that positive progress is possible. When I was growing up, you couldn’t just take the train to the airport in Vancouver and then take into the city from Toronto’s airport. Now you can.

Next year it’ll be Montréal. This constant sense of progress and more options, more accessibility, more people that you can meet every year. When people don’t have that experience of living in a society that has so much forward progress and momentum, I think they underrate how valuable it is.

Even if you are a cab driver and you’re a bit worried about what you’re gonna do — well, so much is happening. I’m gonna figure it out, right? It’s a positive for all of society.

This is Volume #31 of the Leading from the Feminine newsletter, a vibrant resource in the flourishing world of leading from the heart, hands and spirit.
Subscribe to receive the newsletter straight to your inbox.

Radical Collaboration and Collective Power: Women’s Climate Leadership

Earlier this month, the UN Environment Programme’s Limiting Overshoot report acknowledged what is becoming increasingly clear: global temperatures are likely to cross the 1.5°C threshold within the next few years. How high temperatures rise, how long they remain elevated, and how quickly we can bring them back down depends on the choices we make now. 

The report gives scientific language to what we’re already witnessing in our own local landscapes and ecosystems. In the high desert stretches of Northern New Mexico, where winter was once steeped in white, snow accumulates in only the slightest of dusting. Warming temperatures cause flowers to bloom weeks ahead of historical schedules, leading to increased food shortages, starvation, and failed breeding for many pollinators, such as hummingbirds. 

As journalist Aarohi Sheth writes: “Climate touches everything and everyone.” Large and small.

Climate fatigue is real. It’s easy to feel desensitized, disengaged, and powerless as we navigate information overload and overlapping stressors from the macro to the micro. Like the hummingbird, an animal with the largest heart-to-body ratio of any species in the world, some days it seems like we’re the ones walking around with oversized hearts. So how do we stay rooted, focused, and engaged? 

The good news: we can lean into the joyous responsibility to act from where we already are and what is imminently possible. As Dilafruz Khonikboyeva, Executive Director of Home Planet Fund, puts it: “I focus on the day-to-day, like what can I do today; what can I do now; what can I do sitting in relationship.” These daily practices can be seen across the globe as women-led movements steer collaborative, culturally-informed actions on the ground from within local communities. That spirit, despite the fatigue, was visible throughout NYC’s recent Climate Week, which brought over 100,000 people together across more than 1,000 events, from global policy and finance to grassroots and community-led action.

In this issue of Leading From The Feminine, we’re listening to women who are building climate solutions through relationship — to land, water, community, culture, and one another — from the wetlands of Bolivia to the grasslands of Tanzania and the glacial watersheds of Central Asia. These are just a handful of the many women-led organizations on the frontlines of climate work, showing up not only during Climate Week, but for the other 357 days of the year.

Although they receive less than 1% of climate funding, women-led climate justice grassroots projects are generating cascading benefits, from greater gender and economic equity and less gender violence to improved biodiversity and ecosystems’ health. Simultaneously, the centrality to many Indigenous peoples’ cultures of traditional relationships to place and to honoring all of life as sacred are a tremendous resource in strengthening efforts to protect and renew biodiversity and water resources.

We invite you to listen to this excerpt of a panel conversation from the Bioneers 2026 Conference, which explores what these two vastly under-resourced constituencies have to offer in the quest to co-create regenerative landscapes and futures. With Dilafruz Khonikboyeva, Executive Director of Home Planet Fund; Osprey Orielle Lake, founder and Executive Director of Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN); and Zainab Salbi, co-founder of Daughters for Earth.

Daughters for the Earth is a fund and global movement supporting women-led solutions to restore nature. Listen to their special four-part podcast series, The Hidden Economics of Remarkable Women.

Home Planet Fund supports Indigenous People working on the frontlines of the climate and biodiversity crisis around the world. Read their 2025 Impact Report and learn how you can support their work. 

Women’s Earth and Climate Action Network is a solutions-based climate justice organization established to engage and unite women worldwide in policy advocacy, on-the-ground projects, trainings, and movement building for social and ecological justice. Join their Women For Forests campaign and make a public comment by October 6th to save the Tongass Rainforest of Alaska.

Featured Media

Listen: Eriel Tchekwie Deranger featured on For the Wild podcast

Host Ayana Young in conversation with Eriel Tchekwie Deranger (Athabasca Chippewan First Nation), President of Indigenous Climate Action, about the ongoing Indigenous Tar Sands Campaign and more.

Read: Collective Power: The struggle for protection for land and environmental defenders 

The investigative organization Global Witness reports that in 2025, at least 124 people were murdered defending lands and waters from destruction. Serious threats, intimidation, and smear campaigns also continue, according to the ALLIED network of human rights monitors. 

Watch: The Climate Emergency Mixtape

Sollisai Sistahs, Tamil Nadu’s first all-women rap crew, use hip-hop as a voice for resistance, identity and change. Their music celebrates culture, sisterhood and community while challenging social norms.

Earth Altars by Laura Loescher

The post LFF #31: Radical Collaboration and Collective Power: Women’s Climate Leadership appeared first on Bioneers.

The renewal of the mandate helps preserve a vital institutional space within the United Nations for the defence and promotion of peasants’ rights.

The post Another Victory at the UN: The Mandate of the Working Group on the Rights of Peasants Has Been Renewed by a Large Majority! appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Social movements in Catalonia are back on the streets of Barcelona to say “no” to airport expansion. Five years after a historical demonstration marked the defeat of the expansion of the El Prat airport, the project to build a new terminal and lengthen the third terminal is back on the table. But Zeroport, a platform for the degrowth of the port and the airport in Barcelona and a Stay Grounded…

Source

Researchers have given wallpapers a purpose beyond aesthetics. In a new paper published in the journal Advanced Energy Materials, a team of engineers from Binghamton University reports a wall-mounted panel that can convert humidity in indoor air into electrical power.

The concept could lead to a solution for generating electricity while controlling indoor humidity, said electrical and computer engineer Seokheun Choi in a press release. “We put a lot of energy into HVAC systems to remove moisture from the air, but if we use this concept, we could reduce or control moisture levels while also generating electricity.”

Small sensors and electronic devices abound in our modern homes and offices. These gadgets consume power ranging from microwatts to milliwatts. Instead of running them on disposable batteries that are made from fraught metals, researchers have been creating power generators that harvest energy from the ambient environment.

Many teams have made devices that harvest energy from human motion, artificial plants that tap into wind flow and raindrops, as well as wood-based generators that convert water flow into electricity. The Binghamton team considered moist-electric generators, which harvest moisture from air and turn it into electric current.

“All previous moist-electric generator devices are for outdoor humidity, because there is a lot of moisture out there that is an excellent energy resource,” Choi said. But the problem with harvesting outdoor humidity is that moisture levels change continuously because of extreme sunlight or weather, he added. So outdoor energy harvesters typically generate very small amounts of power.

 

.IRPP_ruby , .IRPP_ruby .postImageUrl , .IRPP_ruby .centered-text-area {height: auto;position: relative;}.IRPP_ruby , .IRPP_ruby:hover , .IRPP_ruby:visited , .IRPP_ruby:active {border:0!important;}.IRPP_ruby .clearfix:after {content: "";display: table;clear: both;}.IRPP_ruby {display: block;transition: background-color 250ms;webkit-transition: background-color 250ms;width: 100%;opacity: 1;transition: opacity 250ms;webkit-transition: opacity 250ms;background-color: #eaeaea;}.IRPP_ruby:active , .IRPP_ruby:hover {opacity: 1;transition: opacity 250ms;webkit-transition: opacity 250ms;background-color: inherit;}.IRPP_ruby .postImageUrl {background-position: center;background-size: cover;float: left;margin: 0;padding: 0;width: 31.59%;position: absolute;top: 0;bottom: 0;}.IRPP_ruby .centered-text-area {float: right;width: 65.65%;padding:0;margin:0;}.IRPP_ruby .centered-text {display: table;height: 130px;left: 0;top: 0;padding:0;margin:0;padding-top: 20px;padding-bottom: 20px;}.IRPP_ruby .IRPP_ruby-content {display: table-cell;margin: 0;padding: 0 74px 0 0px;position: relative;vertical-align: middle;width: 100%;}.IRPP_ruby .ctaText {border-bottom: 0 solid #fff;color: #0099cc;font-size: 14px;font-weight: bold;letter-spacing: normal;margin: 0;padding: 0;font-family:'Arial';}.IRPP_ruby .postTitle {color: #000000;font-size: 16px;font-weight: 600;letter-spacing: normal;margin: 0;padding: 0;font-family:'Arial';}.IRPP_ruby .ctaButton {background: url(https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts-pro/assets/images/next-arrow.png)no-repeat;background-color: #afb4b6;background-position: center;display: inline-block;height: 100%;width: 54px;margin-left: 10px;position: absolute;bottom:0;right: 0;top: 0;}.IRPP_ruby:after {content: "";display: block;clear: both;}Recommended Reading:Clothes that cool you, warm you—and make power as you move

 

Inside homes and buildings however, air typically maintains constant humidity levels between 30–60%. Activities like respiration, cooking and bathing generate added moisture. And, as the team writes in the paper, “wallpaper, with its large continuously exposed surface area and seamless architectural integration, is the most compelling platform to realize” indoor moist-energy generators.

Drawing on Choi’s previously work on papertronics, the researchers the researchers created a new paper-based MEG device. The system is designed to absorb moisture at the periphery and siphon it to the center, where it evaporates. This creates unidirectional moisture transport on a single paper sheet, which results in an electric current flow.

The wallpaper consists of 2 x 2 cm squares of paper. Each has glycerol at the edges to capture moisture from the air. A polymer structure in the intermediate area draws water inward through its small pores. Meanwhile, a wax-treated central region repels liquid water but allows vapor to escape through its tiny pores. All the wiring is on the back of the wallpaper.

For now, the power output is small. A 35-square array produced enough power to run a humidity sensor for about 15 minutes. A much larger 1,596-unit array can run a wireless keyboard with the help of a charge-storing device, while reducing indoor humidity from 38% to 32%, “transforming passive wall surfaces into self-powered, climate-responsive interfaces,” the team writes.

Source: Guangya Yuan, Yang Gao, Seokheun Choi. Moist-Electric Wallpaper With Engineered Unidirectional Moisture Transport for Indoor Energy Harvesting and Humidity Management. Advanced Energy Materials, 2026.

Image: ©Anthropocene Magazine