News Feeds

Global Atomic (TSX: GLO) is facing a potential lawsuit related to disclosures made by the company dating back to late 2023.

In a press release on Wednesday, the Canadian uranium developer said it has been notified of a statement of claim filed with the Ontario Superior Court of Justice threatening class action.

The statement alleges that the company and its chief executive officer Stephen Roman had made “misrepresentations” to investors in its public disclosure between Nov. 10, 2023 to Jan. 23, 2025. It did not specify the amount of damages that the plaintiffs are seeking.

The action has not yet been certified by the Court to proceed and does not have the required leave sought under Section 138.8 of Ontario’s Securities Act to begin a lawsuit, Global Atomic noted in its release.

Shares of Global Atomic traded 3.4% lower by Thursday afternoon, for a market capitalization of C$416.7 million ($304.5 million).

US loan scrutiny

The Court filing follows an investor alert issued by Toronto-based law firm Berger Montague in late January, stating that it is investigating the company and inviting shareholders to discuss potential claims.

The statement pertains to a potential $295 million debt facility with the US International Development Finance Corporation (DFC) for the company’s flagship Dasa project in Niger. Global Atomic had previously hoped to close the funding in early 2025, but a military coup in the African nation delayed the process.

Berger Montague alleges that since announcing the DFC funding interest in late 2023, the company has failed to disclose certain pre-conditions of the loan and developments that could affect the financing process, such as deteriorating US-Niger relationships.

The DFC financing, which is still being reviewed, would cover 60% of the costs to build the Dasa project, considered to be the highest-grade uranium deposit in Africa.

Global Atomic previously stated the project has “strong support” from Niger’s current regime. Since taking control in July 2023, the junta-led government has initiated an overhaul of the nation’s mining sector, resulting in the seizure of a large uranium mine operated by France’s Orano.

Western voters delivered a stern rebuke to the Trump administration when it comes to public lands this month, according to the annual Conservation in the West Poll from Colorado College.

The poll, which was released on February 18 by the Colorado College State of the Rockies Project, is in its 16th year of taking the temperature of Western voters on environmental and public lands issues. This year’s poll surveyed voters across the political spectrum in eight Western states (Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming) on public lands, water, and energy issues.

One year into the second Trump administration, voters overwhelmingly expressed widespread concern about rollbacks of protections for national public lands, with 84 percent of Western voters describing these rollbacks as a serious problem.

Upper Big Jacks Creek, BLM Idaho

When it comes to funding and staffing cuts at the agencies that steward our national public lands, 86 percent described funding cuts as a serious problem—including 75 percent of self-identified MAGA voters. Westerners are aware of, and concerned about, the specific impacts of these cuts. Significant majorities of voters are concerned about having fewer park rangers and other staff at national parks and other public lands (83 percent) and having fewer scientists caring for fish and wildlife on national public lands (82 percent). And 91 percent of voters are especially concerned about having fewer wildland firefighters and support staff working to both fight wildfires and reduce the risk of future wildfires.

Western voters also expressed negative views about other specific policies the Trump administration has enacted or is pursuing, such as removing Clean Water Act protections from smaller streams and wetlands (77 percent negative) or rolling back Endangered Species Act protections for at-risk animals and plants (70 percent negative).

Even with affordability remaining a major concern among Westerners (85 percent describe it as a very or extremely serious problem), Western voters still don’t want to see national public lands sold for housing development, a recurring proposal from the Trump administration and from lawmakers like U.S. Senator Mike Lee of Utah. Voters continue to reject this concept: 76 percent of voters opposed this idea, with 57 percent strongly opposed.

Gold Butte National Monument, BLM Nevada

Another pet proposal of the Trump administration, reducing or eliminating national monument designations, has only become more unpopular over time. Back in 2017, during the first Trump administration, 80 percent of Western voters wanted to see national monuments kept in place. In 2026, this percentage increased to 91 percent of Westerners who want to see national monuments kept in place—including 92 percent of Independent voters and 87 percent of Republicans. Among MAGA supporters, support for national monuments is similarly strong and has increased over just the past year, from 81 percent in 2025 to 87 percent in 2026 who want to see national monuments kept in place.

When it comes to energy development on national public lands, a record-high percentage of Western voters—76 percent across the West, and 62 percent even in Wyoming, a top energy-producing state—would prefer to emphasize protecting clean water, air quality, and wildlife habitat, and recreation opportunities over the Trump administration’s “energy dominance” agenda.

Again, voters are aware of specific policies and reject them across the board. Proposed or implemented policies that are unpopular with majorities of voters in every state surveyed include: fast-tracking oil, gas and mining projects by reducing environmental reviews and community input (70 percent oppose); overriding resource management plans developed with community input in order to increase oil, gas, and mining (75 percent oppose); and building industrial roads in undeveloped areas for oil, gas, mining, and timber projects (65 percent oppose).

Similarly, voters are not fooled by the administration’s stubborn efforts to force a return to reliance on coal and other fuels of the past. When asked to indicate their preferred energy source to encourage in their state, a mere seven percent of Western voters ranked coal as their first or second choice. Solar was the clear preferred choice, followed by wind. Overall, 73 percent of Western voters would rather expand renewable energy development than drill and mine for more oil, gas, and coal—a significant increase from 65 percent just three years ago.

Water supplies and water quality are perennial concerns for voters, especially in the Southwest. While states that rely on the Colorado River continue to argue over hypothetical water rights on paper, 83 percent of voters in those states want to see an agreement that requires all states to reduce their water usage to support the health of the river. These voters recognize the many factors straining Western water supplies, including population growth, aging water infrastructure, oil and gas development, mining, and data centers, with 80 percent or more of voters describing each of these as threats to water quality and supply across the West.

As the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel editorial board summarized, “Residents of the American West consistently repeat a message that a few stubborn members of Congress can’t seem to accept: They love the nation’s public lands—especially the ones that have been purposely conserved to protect cherished landscapes—and they want the federal government to provide the resources that public lands require to be well-managed into the future.”

Speaking of members of Congress, 76 percent of Western voters would prefer to see their member of Congress emphasize conservation and recreation over maximizing energy production on public lands—a record high percentage over the sixteen years of the poll. And 85 percent of Western voters say public lands, water, and wildlife issues are important in deciding whether to support a candidate for public office, an increase of ten percentage points from when the same question was asked ten years ago.

A rock glacier in Glacier National Park

“At a time of growing pressure on land and water in the West, the call to action from voters is clear and bipartisan: Westerners want funding and stewardship for public lands and natural resources,” Ian Johnson, Director of Strategic Initiatives & Sustainability at Colorado College, said in a statement.

As Axios Denver pointed out in its coverage of the poll, “Conservation isn’t a niche issue—it’s political bedrock in eight Southwest and Rocky Mountain states.” Given this, the Trump administration’s unrelenting pursuit of a public lands agenda that is the opposite of what overwhelming majorities of Western voters want to see is incomprehensible. Members of Congress who are looking to keep their jobs this November would do well to align themselves with their constituents by supporting conservation and funding for our national public lands.

The post ‘Political bedrock’: 16th annual Conservation in the West poll confirms bipartisan support for conservation among Western voters appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

Venice’s landmarks teem with tourists — so many, in fact, that the city has had to implement restrictions, like banning guides from using loudspeakers. But just outside the famous canals and resplendent architecture sits an ecosystem that teems with less obnoxious forms of life: the Venetian lagoon. For millennia, its marshes have hosted a bevy of flora and fauna, and for centuries have protected the city from invasion by its enemies.

Now, protecting this habitat, and others like it, can help protect people and the planet. Traipsing through the wetland and sampling plants, researchers identified a carbon-capturing powerhouse, known as sea lavender, of the genus Limonium. By restoring these biomes, conservationists would not only boost local biodiversity, but also ensure its ability to trap that planet-warming gas. “Salt marshes are not only sites of carbon sequestration,” said Tegan Blount, a geoscientist at Italy’s University of Padova, lead author of a new paper describing the research. “Their conservation also protects many other ecosystem services, which are vitally important from a local to global scale.”

Aboveground, sea lavender is a stunner. True to its name — though technically it isn’t lavender — it produces lovely purple flowers that attract pollinators, thus supporting biodiversity. Unlike terrestrial lavender, though, Limonium tolerates salty, water-logged conditions, allowing it to thrive in the wetlands of the Venice lagoon. “During summer, the salt marsh meadows are tinted purple by an undulating mass of sea lavender flowers, rife with bees and other insects,” Blount said.

Sea lavender’s root system holds a surprising amount of carbon. Photo courtesy of Tegan Blount

While Limonium is great to look at and all, these researchers were more interested in what’s belowground. Instead of a network of fine filaments, sea lavender’s mature rhizome system grows like a hand reaching up from the soil, with foliage sprouting from the fingertips at the surface. (That’s them in the photo.)

This impacts the Venetian marshes in several ways. With its sturdy root system and foliage, sea lavender anchors the waterlogged soil, generates organic material, and traps sediment, which reduces erosion and habitat loss in the face of pressures like sea level rise. It also can create a more stable and amenable environment for other salt-tolerant species, further boosting biodiversity. “So it can also be a stepping stone,” Blount said.

Even after it dies, this marvelous plant’s root system can persist for long periods, continuing to engineer the mud. The study found that compared to other marshy species in the area, like those in the genera Sarcocornia and Juncus, Limonium creates much more biomass below the ground than above it, and markedly enhances the organic carbon content of the sediment. In fact, sea lavender can retain 12 times as much biomass underground as you see growing topside. 

By protecting these ecosystems, sea lavender can prosper alongside other species, so conservationists wouldn’t need to constantly tend to them, Blount said. Species of Limonium grow all over the world, too, from the coasts of North America to Africa to Asia. Restoring those habitats, then, would benefit biodiversity while enhancing carbon sequestration and storage. Additionally, healthy wetlands help absorb the force of hurricane storm surges, mitigating the inundation of coastal cities.

Properly restored, coastal ecosystems can be self-sustaining. Infrastructure like sea walls, on the other hand, is expensive to construct and maintain, especially as ocean levels rise. Given enough space to creep inland, wetlands can adapt. “These systems can keep up pace with sea level rise, as long as they can migrate backwards,” said Emily Landis, global climate adaptation and resilience director at The Nature Conservancy, who wasn’t involved in the study. “That means they can still provide that essential adaptation, flood reduction benefit.”

They bring economic benefits too, when conservationists work with Indigenous communities to determine how they use these ecosystems. Subsistence fishing, for instance, can be done in a measured way that ensures piscine populations don’t crash, which would be terrible both for the ecosystem and the humans that rely on it. “They know how to take care of their coastline,” Landis said. “They know what is sustainable.”

In the Venetian lagoon, fishers have long used valli da pesca, essentially ponds that function as artificial ecosystems. This provides shelter for baby fish to grow big enough to harvest. Taking animals out of these habitats may sound counterproductive, but in a way it incentivizes protecting these areas. “So conservation is not just a matter of preserving the environment, but also to have something back,” said Alice Stocco, an ecologist at the Ca’ Foscari University of Venice, who studies the valli da pesca but wasn’t involved in the new paper.

The value of sea lavender, then, isn’t just how much carbon it captures in the Venetian lagoon, but the habitats — and therefore economic and ecological benefits — it provides. “An ecosystem — nature in general — has its own value, which is intrinsic and sometimes cannot be measured,” Stocco said. “Healthy ecosystems allow for healthy people.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The beautiful Venetian plant with a secret climate superpower on Feb 26, 2026.

This article How high school students are organizing walkouts against ICE was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

On Jan. 28, Jalysa, a 17-year-old student at William C. Overfelt High School in East San Jose, California, led a walkout during sixth period. More than half of the students in her school left class and walked 20 minutes to a local Target where people had been targeted by ICE. 

The students chanted “Si, se puede,” “La raza si, la migra no” and “Hey hey, ho ho, ICE has got to go” while waving Mexican flags. They were escorted by grassroots community groups Jalysa had reached out to, who came to show support and act as security. The walkout turned into a protest that included speeches and performances from the school’s mariachi and folklorico teams, as well as Aztec dancers.

“A lot of people, especially adults and Trump supporters, think that the youth are just gonna sit back and let this happen, but we are not for that at all,” said Jalysa, who asked that her last name not be shared due to safety and privacy concerns. “Walkouts raise awareness; it lets everybody know that youth really do care.”

The students at Overfelt High School are among thousands across the country, from California to Iowa, Texas and Maryland, who have walked out to protest ICE and show solidarity with immigrants in their communities. The walkouts began in early 2025 after Trump’s inauguration, and the tactic reemerged in January following the murders of Renee Good and Alex Pretti and the arrest of five-year-old Liam Ramos by federal immigration agents in Minnesota. Mostly led by juniors and seniors, the students organize on Instagram pages and group chats. While many of the walkouts occurred on or around the Nationwide Day of Action on Jan. 30, students have continued holding walkouts and are forming coalitions across schools to expand their reach.

#newsletter-block_fa1029d451593c84b43c80e7fce27a85 { background: #ececec; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_fa1029d451593c84b43c80e7fce27a85 #mc_embed_signup_front input#mce-EMAIL { border-color:#000000 !important; color: #000000 !important; } Sign Up for our Newsletter

We’ll send you a weekly email with the latest articles.

The Jan. 28 walkout at Overfelt High School marked the first anniversary of a walkout Jalysa organized on Instagram after Trump took office in 2025, inspired by videos of other student walkouts. Since that action, which also drew more than half the school, “I felt like my community and my school just changed so much — we all know that we have something in common now,” Jalysa said. “People actually do want to say something — they just want to see somebody starting it, and then they want to continue it and keep going. I had people come up to me after the walkout and say, ‘I want to help.’”

Prior to the walkouts, Jalysa had conversations with her school administration. Her principal said that he would support the students, and nearly every teacher in the school let Jalysa do an in-class presentation to recruit participants.

Jalysa plans to coordinate with students at other schools to plan another big action for May Day.

“My hope would be to see some change, maybe the government will actually realize that what’s going on is bad,” Jalysa said. “Like, why are you taking families apart? Why are you taking people who obey the laws, who pay taxes? I just find that so devastating. They’ve been doing the same tactics for over 100 years with the Natives, with the Japanese and now with the Latinos. It’s really heartbreaking. I just want people to wake up.”

Building to a statewide walkout

Other coalitional efforts are in the works, like California Youth Unite, a group of students from more than 30 schools around the state organizing a walkout on Feb. 27. The coalition works in collaboration with Black Lives Matter Los Angeles and advocates for an end to policing and surveillance in addition to advocating for immigrant justice. California Youth Unite co-organizer Lauryn Chew said she hopes that a mass mobilization of schools, rather than scattered walkouts, will send a message across California that the youth want ICE out of the state. 

“We were hoping that making this a statewide, coordinated but also decentralized movement would enable us to make sure that our politicians, our local governments and all of the people who are involved in ensuring that ICE operates know that we are still watching and that we didn’t just do it to skip school for one day,” said Chew, who is a high school senior in Orange County, California. “We genuinely care about the safety of our neighbors.” 

Previous Coverage

Busting the myth that Gen Z isn’t protesting

Chew and her co-organizer Cindy Chen worked with students from San Diego to Sacramento to come up with a list of demands that include the abolition of ICE and transparency in local law enforcement policies, divestment from policing and investment in communities, and protections for students’ free speech. 

She notes that many adult organizers of actions like the Jan. 30 National Shutdown have talked about not going about business as usual — and that students’ business is attending school, so it is their best way to protest.

“We’re drawing attention for disrupting the traditional process [of] going to school,” Chew said. “And I think that’s a really powerful way for us to send a message that the lessons we’re being taught in school — or are supposed to be taught in school — about standing up for justice and freedom need to actually happen. In order for us to do that, we have to take action, even if it means not coming to a class.”

Chew hopes to continue building the network of schools and youth with recurring walkouts, not just a one-time action, and by expanding to offer mutual aid in the community. She also hopes the coalition will help students stay connected to each other once they graduate and go to different schools around the state and country.

Braving repercussions

While Jalysa received support from the Overfelt High School administration for the walkouts, Jaide Kaltenthaler, a 17-year-old student at Rosamond High School in Southern California, had a different experience. When she and a handful of other students approached the administration about their plan to walk out in protest of ICE raids and murders around the country, administrators said that any senior who participated could be banned from prom and barred from the graduation trip to Disneyland without a refund. 

Kaltenthaler and her co-organizers went through with their plan. After a week of promoting it on social media daily, around 100 students had pledged to join. The organizers also arranged an in-school protest for the students who didn’t want to leave school property. 

When Kaltenthaler arrived at school on Feb. 3, the planned day of action, she went straight to the drama room carrying multiple protest signs and supplies to make more. Other organizers brought snacks, water, a first aid kit and more signs. They worked until third period making signs and passed them out during their nutrition break, reminding people that they were walking out. 

Dozens of Rosamond High School students in Southern California walked out on Feb. 3. (Instagram/@rhs.actions

When Kaltenthaler walked out of class at 12:20 p.m., dozens of students were already waiting with signs in the quad. Her co-organizer, Isabel Rojas, played Bad Bunny, Green Day and Maná on a speaker. 

The students walked out of the campus gates and down the street waving their signs and chanting “one struggle, one fight, immigrant rights are human rights” in a protest that lasted two hours.

“I thought that it was important to do the walkout and to protest against ICE because they’re killing citizens, terrorizing neighborhoods and tearing apart families,” Kaltenthaler said. “I think that it’s so disheartening and hope to show that there are people who are holding out hope for and fighting for a better future.”

After the walkout, no students faced repercussions. Rojas said many teachers were supportive and said they were proud of the students. She also said many people encouraged them to continue their organizing, and that the support has inspired them to come up with future plans.

Meanwhile, students and faculty at other schools have seen repercussions. In a Virginia high school, 303 students were suspended for participating in a walkout (they responded by walking out again), and another 100 were suspended in a high school in Oklahoma. The attorney general of Texas launched investigations in four school districts, including Dallas and San Antonio, to see if teachers or administrators facilitated the protests. In Los Angeles, a high school teacher got fired for letting students walk out. 

Standing up for the community 

At Covina High School in Southern California, a small group of students attempted to walkout on the Nationwide Day of Action on Jan. 30, but the vice principal restricted them from doing so.

After witnessing their attempt, junior Mireya Rubio was inspired to organize another walkout with more lead time to prepare and promote it. She got the administration to agree to give students a day of excused absence for the walkout.

“This was something that I saw my school wanted to do, it just needed a lot more organization,” Rubio said. “I didn’t see anyone stepping up for it, so I decided that if no one was going to do it, I would.”

#support-block_358329c883aa6aaad45c89fbe361ce72 { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

Waging Nonviolence depends on reader support. Make a donation today!

Donate

Like Jalysa and Kaltenthaler, Rubio made an Instagram page to promote the walkout. Students from her school quickly followed the page. Other nearby schools messaged her that they were also doing walkouts and asked to collaborate. They formed a coalition of seven schools and made a group chat to coordinate a walkout where they would meet in the same spot to draw more attention. They are timing their walkout for Feb. 27 to be part of California Youth Unite’s statewide action.

When Rubio learned about the East Los Angeles Walkouts of 1968 in her AP History class, she never imagined she would be leading one herself. But as the daughter of immigrants in a predominantly Latino community, she feels like it is important to stand up for immigrant justice. 

“I think that’s the big motivation for me, and why I push so hard to do good in school and organize things like this, because I feel like I want to reward my mom’s sacrifices and everything that she’s done for me and my sister,” Rubio said.

“Most of our community is made up of immigrants and Latinos, so I think people just feel connected to it due to affecting their loved ones, and then personally seeing the fear in our parents every time we go out or hear something,” she said. “I feel like that really motivates a lot of people to try to stand up for change.”

This article How high school students are organizing walkouts against ICE was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

Nigel Farage is preparing to fly more than 3,000 miles from his UK constituency to address an anti-climate U.S. think tank with close ties to Donald Trump, DeSmog can report.

For an estimated 12 hours’ work on Saturday (7 March), the Reform UK leader will collect £27,856.88 from Club for Growth, a conservative anti-tax lobby group based in Washington D.C. that has vowed “to work closely with President Trump and his team in advance of the 2026 mid-term elections”.

Farage’s latest transatlantic trip, published this week in the register of financial interests, comes days after Reform goes up against Labour and the Green Party at Thursday’s Gorton and Denton by-election, and two months ahead of UK local elections in May. 

He will be addressing a powerful U.S. group that in the 2024 election helped raise $163 million (£120 million) for Republican candidates. 

Subscribe to our newsletter

Stay up to date with DeSmog news and alerts

Email Address What content do you want to subscribe to? (check all that apply) All International UK 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 Club for Growth’s president told Fox News in November that as the country looks toward the mid-terms, his group “is very aligned with President Trump, and we’re especially in these contested races, we’re going to help him win”.

Farage has repeatedly been criticised for spending minimal time in Clacton, Essex, where he was elected as an MP in July 2024. As DeSmog has reported, he mentioned his constituency in parliament just four times during his first year in the role.

The former Brexit Party leader has also come under fire for his lucrative trips abroad — often to give speeches to right-wing groups close to Trump. DeSmog revealed last month that since his election, Farage had made at least seven trips to cheerlead for Trump or attend events associated with the U.S. president, paid for by wealthy donors.

These trips are on top of Farage’s base MP salary of £93,000. He also receives £4,000 a-month for his column with the Daily Telegraph, and more than £300,000 a year as a presenter at GB News.

“Farage’s world tour goes on and on,” said Charlene Pink, campaigns manager at legal advocacy group the Good Law Project. “If you really want to represent Clacton, shouldn’t you actually spend some time there?”

Farage and Club for Growth did not respond to DeSmog’s request for comment.

Green Party MP Siân Berry said the trip “sheds a harsh light on where Nigel Farage’s priorities truly lie”.

“Not in Clacton with his constituents facing poverty and cuts, but in Washington DC with think tanks which support tax cuts for the mega rich, and will pay him the same as many people’s yearly salary for one speech.”
 
 Farage’s Clacton constituency is one of the most deprived in England, and has one of the highest risks of flooding, which has been made worse by climate change. 

Anti-Climate Views

Farage’s latest U.S. host, Club for Growth, focuses its lobbying on promoting free-market policies, lower taxes and deregulation. 

As Reform leader, Farage has promised to cut taxes and regulation for business if elected to government, including net zero policies.

Club for Growth has previously sought to undermine climate policies, and in 2018, called on Trump to exit the Paris Climate Agreement.
 
In a 2020 letter to the editor of the Washington Post, Scott Parkinson, vice president of government affairs for the Club for Growth, argued against attempts to make the Republicans more climate-friendly.   
 
The party should not succumb to a “Green New Deal Light”, Parkinson said, but instead “continue to work with principled conservatives who reject climate alarmism and fight for energy and environmental policies based on sound economic principles”.

Last year, Club for Growth released an advert — which aired on Fox News — targeting Republican Senator Kevin Cramerafter he stated he would oppose President Trump’s “Big, Beautiful Bill” because he supported Biden era green energy subsidies. 

According to analysis, Trump’s legislation would add an extra seven billion tonnes of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere between 2025 and 2030.

Additional reporting by Geoff Dembicki

The post Nigel Farage Paid £27,000 to Speak at Pro-Trump U.S. Think Tank appeared first on DeSmog.

The local government secretary will not decide controversial plans for gas drilling and lower volume fracking at Burniston near Scarborough.

Burniston proposed gas drilling and lower-volume fracking site (in red) near Scarborough. Photo: Europa Oil & Gas environmental permit application

In a letter today, the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government, said:

“The Secretary of State has decided not to call in this application. He is content that it should be determined by the local planning authority.”

260226 Burniston call-in decisionDownload

Local campaigners have said they are disappointed at the minister’s letter (see Reaction below).

The original decision by North Yorkshire Council on the Europa Oil & Gas scheme, was postponed at the last minute in January 2026 after multiple local requests for the government to call-in the application. These included: Burniston Parish Council, the local MP Alison Hume, the campaign group Frack Free Coastal Communities and the Scarborough councillor, Rich Maw.

The government instructed North Yorkshire Council not to decide the application a day before its strategic planning committee was due to meet to consider the application.

Today’s letter withdrew that direction.

The letter said:

“The Secretary of State has carefully considered the policy on calling in planning applications, as set out in the Written Ministerial Statement dated 26 October 2012.

“The policy makes it clear that the power to call in a case will only be used very selectively. This policy also gives examples of the types of issues which may lead him to conclude, in his opinion that the application should be called in.”

More than 1,600 formal objections have been made to the Burniston application.            

North Yorkshire planners had recommended the scheme should be approved with 38 conditions.

But since then, there have been calls for external scrutiny of the way the authority has handled the application.

There had also been calls for the decision to be delayed because of proposed changes to rules on onshore oil and gas.

The government has promised to ban fracking and wants to remove a requirement in the National Planning Policy Framework for decision-makers to “give great weight” to the benefits of onshore oil and gas extraction.

Reaction

North Yorkshire Council’s assistant chief executive, legal and democratic services, Barry Khan, said:

“We have been notified by the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government that he has decided not to call in the planning application that seeks permission to construct a temporary wellsite to assess the potential for natural gas at Burniston, near Scarborough.

“He is content that we, as the local planning authority, should determine the application.

“We are working to arrange a date for our strategic planning committee to review and determine the application, which we will announce in due course.”

Chris Garforth, of Frack Free Coastal Communities, said:

“We are disappointed that the Secretary of State has decided not to exercise his power to call in Europa’s planning application. Even more disappointed that the decision letter makes no reference at all to the various reasons put forward by many individuals and organisations in support of the request for it to be called in, including the national policy context around the decline in reliance on fossil fuels and the forthcoming legislation that will see at least some fracking banned for good.

“On the other hand, the forced postponement of North Yorkshire’s Strategic Planning Committee meeting from 30th January has given us – and hopefully committee members – time to reflect on the flaws in the way that North Yorkshire’s planners have handled the application – flaws which are evident in the report that the planners have put forward to the committee in support of their recommendation to approve.

“We will redouble our efforts to present our case to the committee that the report cannot be relied on as a basis for approval. To that end, we await with interest a response to letters to the CEO of North Yorkshire Council, from FFCC as well as others, suggesting that the handling of this planning application should be subject to an external professional review.

“Let’s see if North Yorkshire will now decide on a new date for the committee meeting. If so, we will be ready to dust off the placards made for the 30th January and give the committee no room for doubt about the level of feeling about Europa’s plans to drill and frack under our feet for gas that has no place in the future energy economy of the UK.”

Tony Bosworth, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said:

“The government still has a key role to play in the fate of this planning application.

“Labour has promised to ban fracking – and this highly controversial and deeply unpopular proposal involves a low-level form of fracking called proppant squeeze.

“Ministers must ensure that proppant squeeze is included in its forthcoming ban, update national policy accordingly, and ensure communities like those in Burniston are not forced to accept damaging developments in their local area.

“Fracking blights our countryside, won’t cut UK energy bills and is deeply unpopular with local communities. This application should be rejected.”

Cllr Steve Mason, a Lib Dem member of North Yorkshire Council, said:

“Government has clearly missed the point, or is ignoring the communities. The call-in was requested due to the confusion and lack of clarity on the definition of fracking.

“First, the minister said there would be no review to close the loophole, then they said they would review the situation. Will they? Won’t they? This is simply passing the buck to North Yorkshire councillors and officers, trying to make planning policy work under misguided, narrow semantic legislation.

“We all know it’s fracking, so treat it as such. It’s banned; therefore, it should not be approved.”

Independent county councillor, Rich Maw, said he was disappointed by the minister’s decision;

“At a time when government says it will ban fracking and move away from fossil fuels, allowing new drilling under our feet sends entirely the wrong message.

“Burniston deserves a clean, sustainable future – not gas wells.

“I will continue to oppose this application and stand with residents who say – enough is enough.”

DrillOrDrop also asked Europa Oil & Gas to comment on today’s news but it declined to comment.

Gold grabbed the spotlight in 2025 after a run that saw prices hit a record more than 50 times. By end of the year, bullion was up by more than 60%, its best annual performance since 1979.

Besides gold investors, miners also came away as big winners of that rally. The world’s largest exchange traded-fund with exposure to the gold mining sector, the VanEck Gold Miners ETF (GDX), went up by over 155%, far outperforming the metal itself.

Individually, companies like top producer Newmont (NYSE, ASX: NEM) and Canada’s Agnico Eagle Mines (NYSE, TSX: AEM) all saw their profits skyrocket and valuations reach new highs in tandem with gold prices. In Canada, where most gold mining companies are listed, the gold miners absolutely dominated the top performers on the TSX.

But gold prices form only one part of the equation for these companies; many would still require operational success to deliver positive results in the long run and meet a growing demand for the metal.

To recap the memorable year for gold miners, we compiled how each of the top 10 gold mining companies fared in terms of output compared with the previous year.

#1 Newmont

Newmont (NYSE, ASX: NEM) maintains its ranking atop the global producer pyramid after what was a “record year” of cash generation for the company. During 2025, the Denver, Colorado-based miner achieved multiple operational milestones, including the commercial start of Ahafo North project in Ghana, and entered a new phase after shedding several non-core assets.

While Newmont met its annual production guidance, its output declined 14% year-on-year, and the company is forecasting a further decline in 2026.

#2 Agnico Eagle Mines

Agnico Eagle Mines (NYSE, TSX: AEM) snatched second place as the Canadian gold miner maintained strong performance across its portfolio, with production surpassing the midpoint of its 2025 guidance range. During the year, the company made several key investments, including the acquisition of O3 Mining to bolster its Canadian Malartic complex and taking equity stakes in Perpetua Resources (Nasdaq, TSX: PPTA) and several Canadian juniors.

Over the next three years, Agnico expects production to remain stable, backed by last year’s substantial growth in resources and record-high reserve totals.

#3 Barrick Mining

Barrick Mining (TSX: ABX; NYSE: B) saw a drastic decline in output due largely to setbacks in Mali, with which it had a two-year dispute. The miner started 2025 on a bad note after being forced to suspend its Loulo-Gounkoto mine complex — one of biggest producers in the world — in January, and then losing its operational control to Mali’s military government. By the end of the year, the two sides managed to settle the matter, and Barrick officially resumed the operation in December.

However, another conflict may be brewing, this time with Newmont, over issues related to their joint venture operations in Nevada.

#4 Zijin Mining Group

China’s Zijin Mining leaped into fourth place after reporting a 35% surge in year-on-year gold production, which it attributed to favourable market environments and operational efficiency. During 2025, it added two major mines to its portfolio, including the Akyem mine in Ghana acquired from Newmont. The company also bought Raygorodok gold mine in Kazakhstan as it looks to expand heavily into Central Asia.

#5 Navoi Mining and Metallurgy Company

Uzbekistan’s Navoi Mining maintained steady output growth in 2025 to cement its status as a major gold producer. The state-owned industrial giant currently has several operations across the Kyzylkum Desert region, with its primary asset being the Muruntau deposit, one of the world’s largest. The company estimates that its mining assets currently hold about 150 million oz. of gold in resources.

#6 AngloGold Ashanti

AngloGold Ashanti (NYSE: AU) became a 3-million-oz. producer after accounting for the first full-year contribution from the Sukari mine in Egypt, of which it owns 50% through its 2024 takeover of Centamin. During 2025, the company also make a strong push into the North America with its acquisition of Augusta Gold, which has assets in Nevada.

#7 Polyus

Russian gold miner Polyus projects its output to reach between 2.5 and 2.6 million oz. in 2025, a decline over the previous year due to a planned reduction at its Olimpiada mine. Like all major gold miners in Russia, the company, once a top five ranked producer, has been hit with Western sanctions, impacting some of its operations.

#8 Gold Fields

South Africa’s Gold Fields (JSE: GFI) saw an 18% jump in production last year following strong operational improvements across the portfolio. A major contributor was the Salares Norte mine in Chile, which reached commercial production in the third quarter. During the year, the company also expanded its presence in Australia with its A$3.7 billion takeover of Gold Road Resources (ASX: GOR). In the year-end results call, Gold Fields CEO Mike Fraser said the company is open to more deals.

#9 Kinross Gold

Kinross Gold (TSX: K, NYSE: KGC) once again delivered over 2 million oz. in gold-equivalent production despite a decrease in production across several sites. Two of its mines, Paracatu in Brazil and Fort Knox in Alaska, raised their output due to higher grades. This year, the Canadian miner is forecasting similar production and is expected to invest heavily into three US development projects.

#10 Northern Star Resources

For the 2025 fiscal year, Northern Star Resources (ASX: NST) achieved its production guidance, led by its KCGM operations, which hosts one of Australia’s largest open pit gold mines. During the year, the company completed its A$5 billion acquisition of developer De Grey Mining, a move it said could take its annual production to as high as 3 million oz. per year. However, its fiscal 2026 guidance was recently lowered due to what the company calls “isolated events” occurring late in 2025.

Honorable Mentions: Harmony Gold Mining Company (NYSE: HMY, JSE: HAR), which is forecasting between 1.4-1.5 million oz. of production; Freeport-McMoRan (NYSE: FCX), with 1 million oz. of gold produced from its Grasberg mine in Indonesia.

A view of the Gold Bar mine in Nevada. Credit: McEwen Inc.

Nevada has unseated Finland as the best jurisdiction for mining investment globally while two Canadian provinces – Ontario and Saskatchewan – have climbed into the top three, a new survey says.

The findings are contained in the Fraser Institute’s most recent Annual Survey of Mining Companies, which was released Thursday. The Vancouver-based think tank has been polling mining executives since 1997 to assess how mineral endowments and public policy factors such as taxation and regulation affect exploration investment.

The United States, Canada, Australia and Europe all placed two jurisdictions each in the Top 10 – a list that also includes South Australia, Arizona, Western Australia, Botswana, Norway, Sweden and Saudi Arabia, which moved up from No. 20 in 2024. Finland, Alaska, Wyoming, Newfoundland & Labrador and Guyana all exited the Top 10 in 2025.

Nevada owes its advance from No. 2 in 2024 to a combination of rich mineral endowments — particularly gold, silver and critical minerals — and a policy environment that is perceived as stable and predictable. The state received the highest policy perception index score of any jurisdiction, reflecting favourable views on permitting, taxation, regulatory clarity and overall governance. Nevada has ranked consistently in the top 10 over the last 11 surveys.

The report is based on a survey of 256 respondents working in exploration, production and consulting operations. It was distributed to 2,304 senior executives between Aug. 5 and Nov. 26, which translates to an 11% response rate. Some analysts have criticized Fraser’s ranking, saying the process lacks clear definitions of political stability, labour markets and geology.

New rules

Ontario’s emergence as Canada’s most attractive mining jurisdiction comes after the provincial government introduced rules in October designed to cut mine approval times by half – a move that Energy and Mines Minister Stephen Lecce insisted would make the province more competitive in the global race to extract critical minerals. Ontario had ranked 15th in the 2024 survey.

Saskatchewan, which moved up from No. 7, ranked 2nd globally for its potential in a district known for world-class deposits of uranium and potash.

Some Canadian jurisdictions are failing to capitalize on their strong mineral potential due to a lack of a solid policy environment that would attract investment, the Fraser Institute says. Although they rank 11th and 13th respectively for mineral potential, Yukon and Manitoba rank 47th and 39th when considering policy factors alone, the think tank says.

“Policymakers in every province and territory should understand that mineral deposits alone are not enough to attract investment,” said Elmira Aliakbari, director of the Fraser Institute’s Centre for Natural Resource Studies and co-author of the study. “A sound and predictable regulatory regime coupled with competitive fiscal policies help make a jurisdiction attractive in the eyes of mining investors.”

Investor concerns

Among other Canadian provinces, British Columbia dropped seven ranks to No. 20 largely due to investor concerns over disputed land claims and protected areas, the Fraser Institute said. Newfoundland & Labrador fell to No. 14 as miners expressed increased concern over the province’s regulatory duplication and its legal system, among others.

Quebec held steady at No. 22, with miners surveyed expressing heightened concern over the province’s trade barriers and infrastructure.

Uncertainty surrounding protected areas, land claims disputes, environmental regulations and regulatory inconsistencies are all hindering mining investment in various Canadian jurisdictions, the think tank says.

Bottom 10

When considering both policy and mineral potential in the Investment Attractiveness Index, the least attractive jurisdiction in the world for mining investment is China, followed by Burkina Faso and Egypt, the Fraser Institute says. The Philippines, Mali, Chubut, Neuquen, Bolivia, Northern Ireland and Guinea Conakry were also judged to be unattractive.

Responses from the participating executives were used to evaluate 68 jurisdictions on the Investment Attractiveness Index — a composite measure that blends geologic potential with perceptions of government policy and regulatory frameworks.

Mining executives indicate that about 40% of their investment decisions are influenced by policy factors, the think tank says. The remainder rest on mineral potential and economic parameters.

Steve Pearce, President Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Bureau of Land Management, offered contradictory stances on public land sell-off during his confirmation hearing on Wednesday morning.

During the hearing, Pearce alternately stood by his past words endorsing the sell-off of public lands while also acknowledging the law currently doesn’t allow it. Pearce specifically said that if confirmed, he would not seek to sell off “large swaths” of public lands. But when Senator Ron Wyden asked Pearce about his history of advocating for public land sell-off, Pearce said, “I’m not so sure that I’ve changed.”

Because of his deep history attempting to dispose of public lands by selling them to the highest bidder, veterans, hunters, and environmentalists have come out against his nomination. Across the West, 76 percent of voters oppose selling national public lands to private companies for housing, and 74 percent oppose selling them for oil and gas development.

Also during the hearing, Pearce dodged questions about the Trump administration’s energy policy, including whether Interior Secretary Doug Burgum has the power to unilaterally block or slow all renewable energy projects on public land.

“Most people would prepare for a job interview beforehand,” said Center for Western Priorities Deputy Director Aaron Weiss. “His ‘I know nothing’ routine should be a red flag to every senator. Based solely on his feigned ignorance of energy policy, Steve Pearce is unqualified to lead the Bureau of Land Management.”

Quick hits Trump’s BLM nominee waffles on public land sell-off stance

High Country News / Public Domain | CPR News | New York Times | Source NM | Las Cruces Sun-News | E&E News | Deseret News

Column: Why Steve Pearce is such a concerning nominee to run BLM

Wes Siler’s Newsletter

Interior department revokes environmental regulations established to protect public lands

CPR News

Wyoming files resolution for control over mineral leasing on national public land. But lawmakers want more

Cowboy State Daily

Study aims to optimize how animals cross deadly I-80

WyoFile

Opinion: It’s called the Bureau of Land Management, not the Bureau of Land Disposal

Nevada Independent

Trump strips endangered species protections for lesser prairie chicken, the dancing, booming grouse of the Southwest

Colorado Sun

Here’s what you need to know about national park reservations in 2026

Outside

Quote of the day

In all my decades of serving the state, I’ve never received such passionate and unified messages as I have on this particular topic. Idahoans do not want their public lands sold, period, full stop.”

—U.S. Senator James Risch, KUNC

Picture This @nationalparkservice

“Call Mr. Plow, that’s my name—that name again is Mr. Plow!”  – Homer Simpson

Call now for a free T-shirt! (There is no T-shirt.)

But did you know the real plow kings of winter aren’t always trucks or Mr. Plow. “When the snow starts a-fallin’, There’s a bison you should be callin.” With their huge muscular humps, massive heads, and powerful necks, they swing side to side like living snowplows, clearing deep drifts to reach buried grass below. (Fun fact: Elk dig with hooves—bison bulldoze with their heads!)

So next time you’re driving in snow country and spot a bison (or an actual snowplow) ahead, remember: give it room and stay back a safe distance. They have the right of way… and several thousand pounds of momentum.

Stay warm out there!

Images: Various bison moving snow @yellowstonenps.

 

(Featured image: Steve Pearce at his confirmation hearing on Wednesday, March 25, 2026. U.S. Senate)

The post Pearce waffles on public land sell-off stance appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

How a new House bill could gut state protections from harmful chemicals Anthony Lacey February 26, 2026

State bans on toxic chemicals – including cancer-causing formaldehyde in children’s products and the “forever chemicals” known as PFAS in clothing and other consumer products  – are under threat from a House bill.

The legislation, recently introduced by Republicans, would overhaul the nation's chemical safety law, the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA. The changes could allow federal officials to override stronger state protections by reviewing and regulating chemicals themselves. If the officials claim a chemical poses less risk than some states claim, state rules could be quashed. 

If this bill becomes law, it would effectively gut Congress’ bipartisan compromise from 2016 that strengthened TSCA to better protect families and workers from hazardous substances. In place of those reforms, undertested chemicals could then be clear to flood American homes, schools and workplaces.

These sweeping changes to TSCA would undermine federal regulation of the toxic chemicals used in consumer and industrial products and could restrict states from taking action. 

Because the Environmental Protection Agency is already moving quickly to slash chemical protections, these state protections are more important than ever.

At a time when states are leading the charge to protect communities from harmful exposures, the proposal could halt that momentum and hand the chemical industry new tools to challenge state laws.

States and the federal government share power when it comes to regulating the toxic chemicals in our products. Often states are able to move more quickly than the federal government.

Sometimes a federal law takes precedence over a state law, blocking states from enacting their own rules or even overturning existing state rules – known as preemption.

It’s true the 2016 TSCA reform law gave the EPA the power to preempt states under some circumstances. But the new proposal could make it much more likely that hard-won state chemical protections may be wiped out, because of the ways that the legislation would significantly weaken the agency’s powers.

Weakening the EPA means weakening states

The proposal would fundamentally alter how the EPA evaluates and regulates chemicals. Among other changes, it would:

• Force the EPA to quickly approve new chemicals even when safety data is missing
• Require the EPA to ignore certain risks when assessing chemical safety like the cumulative risks from exposure to multiple similar chemicals
• Make it harder for the EPA to consider all uses of a chemical when determining a safe level of exposure for people
• Make it harder for the EPA to restrict all potentially harmful uses of chemicals
• Limit the EPA’s ability to address foreseeable but unintended uses of a chemical
• Prevent the EPA from protecting workers, who often face the highest risks
• Restrict EPA authority to require companies to provide safety data
• Require the EPA to give greater weight to industry costs when choosing restrictions

Together, these provisions would weaken federal oversight of harmful chemicals. In some cases, the EPA could be obligated to declare chemicals safe, even where data gaps or ignored potential exposures suggest otherwise. That could open the door to federal actions threatening state laws targeting the same substances.

How federal action can block state laws

Under current law, certain EPA actions can prevent states from enacting or enforcing their own protections for the same chemicals and uses. The House Republican proposal does not change TSCA’s current preemption rules, but by pushing the EPA toward narrower, weaker determinations, it increases the likelihood that federal actions will block stronger state rules.

Some EPA actions that could trigger preemption include:

• Requiring companies to test a chemical’s safety
• Determining through a post-market assessment that a chemical or specific use is safe
• Issuing a rule limiting a chemical’s use after a safety assessment
• Requiring notice to the EPA before a chemical can be used in a new way

Preemption is specific to individual chemicals and their uses. But when the EPA addresses a particular use of a substance, states can be blocked from regulating that same use, even if the agency's analysis was flawed or incomplete.

Here are a few hypothetical examples of how this might play out:

PFAS in textiles

PFAS are a family of toxic forever chemicals linked to cancer, reproductive and developmental harms, and immune system harms. For decades, they have been widely used in textiles like outdoor apparel, furniture and carpets for their water-, oil-, and stain-resistant qualities. 

The EPA could decide to evaluate some PFAS used in textiles but not all the thousands of different forever chemicals that exist. As it assesses the safety of these chemicals, the EPA could ignore the cumulative risks from the other PFAS that people are likely exposed to. The EPA could also ignore potential risks from combined exposures to PFAS through food, air, water and thousands of other consumer and industrial uses. 

By looking only at a narrow set of uses of only some PFAS, the EPA may see those chemicals and uses as being safer. 

For example, if the EPA cannot show that these PFAS in textiles are “more likely than not” to cause harm – an extremely high bar for regulation created by the proposed bill – it will not be able to limit PFAS in textiles. This could lead to overturning bans on PFAS in textiles such as apparel, carpeting and furniture. California, Maine, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Washington have banned the use of PFAS in textiles.

PFAS in firefighting foam

PFAS have also been used in firefighting foam at airports and military bases for decades, despite the availability of effective alternatives. 

The EPA could choose to reevaluate PFAS use in firefighting foam and again ignore total exposures from other sources or cumulative exposures from PFAS not used in foam. 

The EPA could assume that firefighting foam will be contained after release and accept industry arguments that containing the foam limits environmental and health impacts.

Under the new bill, the EPA could ignore the “reasonably foreseeable” scenario in which the foam is not contained and leads to more exposure. After consulting with the Department of Defense, as the proposal requires, the EPA could decide the foam with PFAS is a “critical use” essential to national security and too costly to replace. 

Taking into consideration all of the above, the EPA could find the PFAS in foam do not pose an “unreasonable risk” under the law. It could then overturn state bans on PFAS in firefighting foam in Alaska, Colorado, Illinois, Hawaii, Maine, Minnesota, New Jersey, Nevada, Vermont and Washington. 

Formaldehyde in children’s products

The EPA finalized a risk evaluation on formaldehyde, a known carcinogen, in January 2025 and found the chemical posed an “unreasonable risk” for all uses considered by the agency, including textiles and home furnishings. 

But in December of the same year, the EPA updated its method for calculating risk. The new method nearly doubles the amount the agency considers safe to inhale. 

The EPA could revise its formaldehyde safety assessment under the new method. Then that combined with the proposal’s weakened scientific standards for review could lead the agency to a new understanding of this chemical’s risk. The agency could decide that some amount of formaldehyde in textiles, furniture and other children’s products is not “more likely than not” to cause harm. 

A rule based on that finding could force New York to scrap its ban on formaldehyde in children’s products, and other states would be blocked from enacting similar bans.

Emerging contaminants with missing data

Imagine the EPA evaluates a chemical used in consumer products but lacks information on reproductive or immune toxicity. The agency suspects harm based on data that similar chemicals have evidence of these harms. But it can’t prove it’s “more likely than not” that the new chemical will also contribute to these harms, therefore posing an unreasonable risk. 

Under current law, in this scenario the EPA could require the companies manufacturing the chemical to generate this data. 

Under the House Republican proposal, the EPA would not have to show the risk is more likely than not. Without the information it needs to evaluate the chemical properly, the agency determines the chemical is safe. With that decision, the EPA prevents states from restricting it.

State laws that could be at risk

States have enacted dozens of laws addressing toxic chemicals in recent years. Just some of the state laws that could be overturned include:

• A New York law banning children’s products containing heavy metals, phthalates, flame retardants, mercury, bisphenols and PFAS
• The Safer Products for Washington law, which recently banned five chemical classes in 10 product categories
• A California ban on fiberglass in children’s products, mattresses and upholstered furniture
• Laws in California, Illinois, Indiana, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York and Rhode Island banning or restricting PFAS in firefighters’ turnout gear
• A Massachusetts ban on 12 flame retardants in bedding, carpeting, children’s products, upholstered furniture and window treatments
• A Rhode Island prohibition on flame retardants in residential upholstered bedding and furniture
• A Vermont law requiring manufacturers of certain hazardous household products to implement collection plans
• A Maryland restriction on playground materials such as artificial turf that contain lead or certain PFAS
• A Colorado law restricting PFAS in carpets, rugs, oil and gas products, fabric treatments, juvenile products and furniture
• A Nevada law banning certain flame retardants in upholstered furniture, children’s products, textiles and mattresses
• Maine and Minnesota bans on non-essential uses of PFAS

If the EPA addresses the same chemical in the same uses but reaches weaker conclusions, many of these protections could be gutted or rolled back.

When states might still be able to act

Under current TSCA exemptions, state laws may avoid preemption if they:

• were enacted before April 22, 2016
• regulate uses outside the scope of the EPA’s action
• create reporting, monitoring or disclosure requirements not required by the EPA
• are adopted under another federal law, such as the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act or Occupational Safety and Health Act
• are adopted under state water, air or waste laws under certain conditions
• are identical to federal requirements

But these pathways are limited and case specific. States are also able to apply for waivers, but these can be difficult to obtain. The threat of preemption may also deter state activity, leading some states to decide not to act on chemical risks when they otherwise would. 

The bottom line

The House Republican proposal doesn’t need to rewrite TSCA’s preemption clause to undermine state authority. While states might not be preempted immediately, their laws would become much more vulnerable.

By weakening the EPA’s ability to fully assess risks, fill data gaps and impose strong restrictions, the bill could lead to federal determinations that lock in weaker protections and block states from doing more.

At a time when states are driving progress on PFAS, flame retardants, formaldehyde and other chemicals of concern, this proposal could freeze that progress in place or reverse it.

Because the EPA is already moving quickly to slash existing chemical protections, these state protections are more important than ever. 

Areas of Focus Household & Consumer Products Family Health Women's Health Children’s Health Toxic Chemicals PFAS Chemicals Authors Melanie Benesh February 26, 2026

MP Materials (NYSE: MP) has selected a 120-acre site in Northlake, Texas, as the location of its proposed billion-dollar rare earth magnet manufacturing campus.

The project — dubbed “10X” — represents a key pillar of MP’s public-private partnership with the US Department of War, which was established in July 2025 to accelerate America’s rare earth magnet independence.

The US currently relies heavily on foreign supplies of magnets, which are essential components used in the defence and EV sectors. Each year, it is estimated that the US imports around 10,000 tonnes of magnets from China, making it vulnerable to trade restrictions.

MP Materials climbed 2% to about $60 a share on the announcement, bringing its market capitalization to $10.6 billion. The stock remains about $40 off its all-time high set in mid-October.

Supply chain boost

In a press release on Thursday, MP said its Texas campus would “dramatically advance” America’s ability to produce these strategic components domestically, strengthening its supply chain independence.

The Las Vegas-based company is currently the only fully integrated producer of rare earth materials in the US, with operations centered around its Mountain Pass mine and processing facility in California and a magnet manufacturing site in Texas.

The 10X facility will “significantly expand” the company’s existing manufacturing platform, which encompasses mining and refining, metallization and alloying, sintering, finished magnet production and closed‑loop recycling, MP noted.

Once operational, the campus is expected to contribute to the company’s total production capacity of approximately 10,000 metric tons of NdFeB (neodymium-iron-boron) rare earth magnets per year.

$1.25B investment

In Thursday’s release, MP said it plans to invest $1.25 billion into the 10X project, which is expected to create more than 1,500 direct manufacturing and engineering jobs at the site. The company anticipates breaking ground soon, it said. Engineering and equipment procurement is currently underway, with commissioning targeted for 2028.

James Litinsky, founder and CEO of MP Materials, said the 10X project “is about building industrial strength at a scale” that the US has not seen in generations, and “the exceptional talent and infrastructure in North Texas make it possible.”

The campus will be located less than 10 miles from its existing magnet production plant in Fort Worth, Texas, which began production in 2024. This will cement North Texas as the center of gravity for the US rare earth magnet supply chain, MP said.

To fund the project, state and local governments have together approved a $200 million package comprising grants, abatements and exemptions for over a decade.

Apple invests $500M in Pentagon-backed MP Materials

When it announced the DoW partnership, MP had already secured a $1 billion commitment from JPMorgan Chase and Goldman Sachs for the 10X facility, as well as a $150 million Pentagon loan to expand its Mountain Pass mine, the source of raw materials for the Texas site.

Registered nurses at Carondelet St. Mary’s Hospital in Tucson, Ariz., will gather for a rally on Friday, Feb. 27, to demand that management prioritize safe patient care standards in all hospital units. The nurses have been sounding the alarm about increasingly unsafe conditions at the hospital over the past three months.

Senator Lee formally begins process to fast-track the destruction of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah – 2.26.26
Threatens to bring chaos to a crown jewel of the nation’s public lands system and upend public lands protection as we know it

Contacts:
Grant Stevens, Communications Director, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (319) 427-0260; grant@suwa.org
Keri Gilliland, Communications Manager, The Wilderness Society; (303) 386-2243; kgilliland@tws.org 
Perry Wheeler, Earthjustice, (202) 792-6211, pwheeler@earthjustice.org 
Tim Peterson, Cultural Landscapes Director, Grand Canyon Trust; (801) 550-9861; tpeterson@grandcanyontrust.org 
Andrew Scibetta, NRDC, (202) 289-2421; ascibetta@nrdc.org
Kris Deutschman, Conservation Lands Foundation, 505-498-0212; kris@conservationlands.org

Washington, DC –Anti-public-lands crusader Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) has formally begun the process to fast-track the destruction of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah by adding the Government Accountability Office (GAO) opinion regarding the Monument’s Management Plan to the Congressional Record (see page 51). Under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), once a “resolution of disapproval” is introduced (anticipated to occur any day), both chambers of Congress can expedite their votes and pass the measures by simple majority votes. If that happens and the resolution is signed into law by the President, the Monument Management Plan – which sets expectations for how the land will be managed for wildlife, outdoor access, dark night skies, grazing, and other uses – will be undone and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) will be barred from issuing another plan that is “substantially the same” in the future. 

In July 2025, Rep. Maloy (R-UT-02) requested an opinion from the Government Accountability Office (GAO) about whether Congress can overturn the current Monument Management Plan; on January 15, the GAO released an opinion that Congress can interfere this way and undo the plan. This represents a clear escalation of the use of the CRA to attack the nation’s wildest public lands and as the first CRA attack on a national monument, this action threatens to upend public land protection. Though this Congress is the first to use the CRA to overturn BLM resource management plans, using it to eliminate a national monument management plan goes much further: resource management plans cover lands that allow many different uses, but national monuments were designated to elevate conservation over extraction.

Beloved by Utahns and Americans, the Monument was established in 1996 to protect the incredible geological, ecological, cultural, and paleontological resources within its 1.9 million-acre boundaries in southern Utah. A crown jewel of the nation’s public lands system, it was the first monument managed by the BLM and was the first unit in the agency’s now-robust and expansive “National Conservation Lands” program. 

President Trump illegally shrank the Monument in 2017 and it has been reported that he is again considering eliminating protections for Grand Staircase-Escalante. Conservation groups and members of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument Inter-Tribal Coalition began sounding the alarm about this potential threat on January 22, 2026. Below are quotes and additional information.

“The Utah Delegation’s attack on the Grand Staircase-Escalante is a call to action for Americans from across the nation,” said Steve Bloch, Legal Director at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance. “This wild landscape is quintessential southern Utah redrock country with its stunning geology, irreplaceable cultural resources, unique fossils, and wide-open spaces. All of that is at risk if this attack succeeds and the monument management plan is undone. We intend to move heaven and earth to stop that from happening.”   

“The fate of our public lands, including our precious national monuments, should not be left to a handful of politicians who want to turn them over to industry,” said Tom Delehanty, senior attorney with Earthjustice’s Rocky Mountain Office. “While this may be the first CRA attack on a national monument, it will not be the last if members of Congress on both sides of the aisle don’t stand up to oppose it. Senator Lee’s use of this arcane law would allow it to throw out years of planning by local officials, Tribes, and communities, setting a dangerous precedent on public land protection. Anyone who values our public lands and national monuments should take note.”

“The Utah delegation knows that our national monuments are well-loved by Americans and protecting them is overwhelmingly popular among Utahns regardless of party affiliation,” said Tim Peterson, Cultural Landscapes Director at the Grand Canyon Trust. “The public would not stand for legislation that gets rid of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument outright, so they’re trying to eliminate the commonsense management plan that affords day-to-day protections to the monument. We can’t let that happen.”

“An attack on Grand Staircase-Escalante is an attack on our freedom to enjoy this special place today and generations from now,” said Ronni Flannery, senior staff attorney at The Wilderness Society. “This move disregards years of hard work and broad support, and, instead, attempts to hand our public lands over to the highest paying polluters. A vote to pass this bill is a vote against the people to erode a crown jewel of the American West.” 

“Using the Congressional Review Act to unravel Grand Staircase-Escalante’s management plan is an assault on a national treasure,” said Bobby McEnaney, Director of Land Conservation, NRDC. “It would wipe out years of science and public input and lay the groundwork to make additional attacks on Grand Staircase easier. Americans overwhelmingly support this monument. Congress must reject this reckless effort and honor its commitment to Tribes, local communities, and future generations.”

“No one ought to mistake this effort as isolated–it’s part of a concerted effort to destroy the Bureau of Land Management’s ability to manage public lands, so that privatizing or industrializing them are the only viable options,” said Chris Hill, CEO of the Conservation Lands Foundation. “Going after BLM’s first national monument sends the signal that the rest of the 30 monuments and all of the National Conservation Lands that BLM oversees are in the crosshairs, and we know from experience that the public will fight like never before to keep these places protected.”  

Additional quotes can be found here.

About Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument & the Monument Management Plan

Since its establishment, heightened protections for the Monument’s geology, paleontology, wildlife, plant communities, and ancestral sites have succeeded in preserving these unique values for generations to come, and local communities on the Monument’s doorstep have benefited as well. Nearly 30 years later, the numerous benefits of protecting Grand Staircase-Escalante are clear: the Monument preserves a remarkable ecosystem at the landscape level and sets the stage for future discovery about human, paleontological, and geological history on the Colorado Plateau. 

On December 4, 2017, President Trump ignored millions of public comments and unlawfully eliminated large swaths of the Monument, slashing it by 47 percent – roughly 900,000 acres. Thankfully, on October 8, 2021, President Biden signed a proclamation restoring Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument to its full, original boundaries. In 2023, BLM began developing a new management plan for the full Monument. As a part of that work, the BLM engaged in extensive outreach to Tribal Nations, the State of Utah, local governments, stakeholders (including outfitters and guides, ranchers, local utilities), and the public. During the planning process, BLM received overwhelming support from throughout Utah and the nation for a holistic, conservation-based management plan worthy of this remarkable place.

In August 2023, a Federal District Court Judge in Utah dismissed lawsuits brought by the state of Utah and others challenging President Biden’s use of the Antiquities Act to restore the boundaries of Grand Staircase-Escalante and Bears Ears National Monuments. The state and other plaintiffs quickly appealed that decision to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, which held oral argument on September 26, 2024, and may issue a decision at any time. Conservation organizations intervened on behalf of the United States to defend President Biden’s restoration of the Monuments, as have four Tribal nations.

National monuments are overwhelmingly popular. Seventy-five percent of Utah voters support the President’s ability to protect public lands as national monuments. Three in four Utah voters, including a majority of Republicans, want to keep Grand Staircase-Escalante as a national monument.

About the Congressional Review Act (CRA)

The CRA is a federal statute enacted in March 1996 that requires federal agencies to submit “rules” to Congress for a mandatory review period “before they may take effect.” If Congress votes to overturn, or “disapprove,” the rule, it “may not be reissued in substantially the same form. . . .” The BLM has long maintained that its land management plans are not “rules” subject to the CRA. Other federal land management agencies, including the U.S. Forest Service and National Park Service, have similarly not submitted their land management plans to Congress under the CRA.

However, emboldened by a series of non-binding Government Accountability Office (GAO) opinions, Republican members of Congress have embraced the novel theory that federal land management plans are in fact “rules” subject to the CRA. This year, Congress has passed six CRA resolutions overturning previously finalized land management plans or other types of public lands management decisions.  The GAO issued an opinion regarding the Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument Management Plan on January 15, 2026.

• While overturning the Grand Staircase-Escalante Monument management plan would not change the boundaries of the monument or alter President Biden’s proclamation establishing the monument, it is a serious threat with potential implications for all national monuments. 

• Monument management plans set expectations for how the land will be managed for wildlife, outdoor access, dark night skies, grazing, and other uses. The Utah delegation’s gambit threatens that certainty. Using the CRA to overturn the Grand Staircase-Escalante management plan disregards years of public input on how these lands are managed for the public, including hunters, hikers, scientists, ranchers, and others who hold permits to use public lands inside the monument.

• Congress is ignoring Tribal Nations. Multiple Native American Tribes are connected to Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. The Grand Staircase-Escalante Inter-Tribal Coalition advocates for the conservation of their ancestral lands and for the continued protection and preservation of the cultural and environmental resources found within the monument. Tribes provide deeply valuable perspectives related to the management of Monument lands and cultural resources that tell the story of their peoples, and are integral to the history of the United States, and should be consulted before any changes are made to the Monument’s management plan.

###

The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) is a nonprofit organization with members and supporters from around the country dedicated to protecting America’s redrock wilderness. From offices in Moab, Salt Lake City, and Washington, DC, our team of professionals defends the redrock, organizes support for America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act, and stewards this world-renowned landscape. Learn more at www.suwa.org.

The Wilderness Society is a national conservation organization dedicated to protecting America’s wild places since 1935. Through science, advocacy and partnerships with communities and policymakers, we champion the protection of wilderness, national parks, forests, and other public lands that provide clean air and water, wildlife habitat and the freedom to connect with nature. For more information, visit www.wilderness.org. 

Earthjustice is the premier nonprofit environmental law organization. We wield the power of law and the strength of partnership to protect people’s health, to preserve magnificent places and wildlife, to advance clean energy, and to combat climate change. We are here because the earth needs a good lawyer.

The Grand Canyon Trust is a nonprofit conservation organization dedicated to safeguarding the wonders of the Grand Canyon and the Colorado Plateau, while supporting the rights of its Native peoples. Learn more at grandcanyontrust.org  

NRDC (Natural Resources Defense Council) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 3 million members and online activists. Established in 1970, NRDC uses science, policy, law and people power to confront the climate crisis, protect public health and safeguard nature. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Beijing and Delhi (an office of NRDC India Pvt. Ltd).

Conservation Lands Foundation represents a national, nonpartisan network of community advocates who are solely focused on the public lands overseen by the Bureau of Land Management including National Conservation Lands.

 

The post Senator Lee formally begins process to fast-track the destruction of Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah – 2.26.26 appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

Congress is revisiting the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975 (EPCA), and one bill in particular, H.R. 4626, the Home Appliance Protection and Affordability Act, (previously known as the “Don’t Mess With My Home Appliances Act”) could undermine the affordability of our household appliances.

Passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in a nearly party line vote, the bill would upend years of bipartisan progress taming the energy wasted by our appliances and major HVAC equipment. Here’s why that matters, and why bad math and bad policy could cost consumers billions.

(Source: ASAP)

Why EPCA Exists and How it Works

EPCA is a cornerstone energy efficiency law that, among other things, requires the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to set, and periodically revisit, minimum efficiency targets for appliances and equipment that we use most in our everyday lives. According to the Appliance Standards Awareness Project (ASAP), standards have saved a typical household $6,000 over the past decade.

Since its establishment under a Democratic Congress and a Republican president, the Appliance and Equipment Standards Program has grown to cover more than 70 products, representing about 90% of home energy use, according to DOE.

Like compound interest, over time, those savings really add up. Standards put in place since 1987 helped save American households and businesses $105 billion on utilities in 2024 alone.

  Bad Math = Higher Utility Bills

The bill, sponsored by Rep. Rick Allen of Georgia, changes the seven-factor test DOE uses in its cost-benefit analysis when evaluating appliance standards. Under the proposal, DOE is required to account not only for the upfront purchase price of an appliance and any expected maintenance or repairs, but also for the cost of replacing that product at the end of its life.

The bill also limits the value of energy‑savings benefits to just three years, even though many appliances operate for a decade or more. This approach effectively counts the purchase cost twice and treats long‑lived appliances as if they were disposable.

Because it compresses long‑term, ongoing savings into an artificially short window while inflating upfront costs, the math does not provide a sound basis for economic justification.

Appliances Perform Better Than Ever

According to Congressional testimony from the Association of Home Appliance Manufacturers (AHAM):

• The average dishwasher manufactured today uses 50 percent less water and 37 percent less energy than models made in 1998.
• The average refrigerator made today uses nearly 58 percent less energy than refrigerators built in 1980, with nearly 32 percent greater capacity.
• Clothes washers built today use nearly 78 percent less energy than clothes washers built in 1992 and have 60 percent greater capacity.

Furthermore, while performance has improved, the cost of appliances (according to AHAM), “has been flat or has even decreased,” a real selling point for the program.

How the Bill Breaks the System

Due to unprecedented executive powers and an arbitrary timeline for cost recovery, H.R. 4626 would have dire consequences for national energy consumption and affordability.

In the Committee Report that justifies advancing the legislation, the Energy & Commerce (E&C) Committee writes that it passed the bill (along party lines) in order to:

• “Prohibit the Secretary of Energy from prescribing any new or amended energy conservation standard for a product that is not technologically feasible or economically justified.”

DOE’s Appliance and Equipment Standards Program already requires the Secretary of Energy to consider several factors when updating energy conservation standards (per CRS): “Any standard must result in significant energy conservation and be technologically feasible and economically justified.”

 

Standards are Predictable and Transparent

Today’s appliance standards are consistent, based on a multiyear rulemaking schedule. Standards are promulgated through a transparent process that encourages public participation and expert engagement. Standards already must be achievable and cost-effective (42 U.S.C. §6295(o)(3)(B)).

Currently, standards are required by law to be reviewed every six years with rulemakings every eight. The Allen bill would allow the Energy Secretary to look back every two years to judge whether technical standards require revision (or not), or whether they should be eliminated entirely (a new power) all the while maintaining federal preemption over state authority.

Along with uncertainty for manufacturers who invest heavily in supply chains and bespoke manufacturing processes, this revision would result in appliances coming across American borders that don’t live up to current requirements, which is called “backsliding” and is currently against the law.

The Allen bill would give the Secretary of Energy the unprecedented power to eliminate standards that don’t meet the re-jiggered cost-effectiveness test, allowing less efficient, appliances and equipment to be sold on U.S. retail shelves.

We have learned, time and again, that energy efficiency is the cheapest, quickest, and cleanest way to meet energy needs, and that the United States should invest in more energy efficiency, not less.

Principled, Bipartisan Reform

Amending EPCA should be a bipartisan expedition. Increasing the energy waste of 90 percent of household appliances and 70 percent of commercial building energy equipment would have a staggering effect on affordability

The Alliance to Save Energy recommends these guiding principles for bipartisan EPCA reform:

1. Transparency
2. Consistency and predictability for manufacturers
3. Fuel neutrality
4. Technological feasibility
5. Economic justification rooted in sound analysis

These are the foundations of a functional energy efficiency framework. H.R. 4626 undermines each of them.

The Alliance will continue to work with energy efficiency champions in the U.S. Senate to support EPCA and the appliance standards program, which have a 50-year track record of reducing energy waste and delivering cost savings for all Americans.  

Contact: brett@unbendablemedia.com

Washington, D.C. – Polluted water does not remain in isolation. It flows into other bodies of water, goes through the water cycle, and finds its way into places and ecosystems that impact human health such as our drinking water, and the soil where our food is grown and our children play. 

The most recent attack on clean water protections by Trump’s EPA will open the floodgates for increased water pollution in every state and Tribal Nation, putting all our public health at risk.  

This rollback focuses on eroding section 401 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), which requires that any project seeking federal permits for activities that may result in discharge into waters of the United States have to obtain a water quality certification from a State or Tribal Nation. This crucial section provides States and Tribal Nations mechanisms to enforce water quality standards, including conditionally approving or denying permits.

Climate Justice Alliance, WE ACT for Environmental Justice, and GreenLatinos submitted a joint public comment letter opposing many aspects of the EPA’s proposal and urged the EPA to preserve States and Tribal Nations’ ability to holistically evaluate projects and enforce strong water protections through the water quality certification process.

Communities across the United States rely on strong, comprehensive, and precautionary federal protections to guarantee safe water quality and defend against water pollution and contamination. The EPA cannot abandon its mission to protect public health and the environment in favor of protecting industry and corporate dollars. 

We call on the EPA to maintain a strong CWA Section 401 that protects water quality, public health and the environment, ensuring people can live, play, work, gather food, and pray in waters that are clean, protected, and preserved for future generations.

Read the full comment letter here.

 

The post CJA, WE ACT for Environmental Justice, and GreenLatinos Submit Comment Letter to Urge the EPA to Protect Water Quality, Public Health, and the Environment appeared first on Climate Justice Alliance.

The Epstein Files is one of the biggest stories in the world… and it isn’t. In our latest, we dive into the media coverage of the Epstein Files with professor…

Panama’s economy grew 4% in 2025, and business leaders say reopening First Quantum’s (TSX: FM) Cobre Panama copper mine is critical to lifting growth to as much as 6% by 2027.

The Sindicato de Industriales de Panama (SIP), one of the country’s leading business groups, reported that last year’s expansion was driven mainly by services such as transportation and hospitality, while manufacturing lagged with growth of just 0.46%. The group warned that without new growth engines, momentum could fade.

SIP projects GDP could climb to 6% in 2027 if the Cobre Panama mine reopens and major projects tied to the Panama Canal move forward. Under a negative scenario in which the mine remains closed, growth would slow to 3.7% in 2027, nearly 40% lower than in the upside case.

The mine’s shutdown weighed on economic growth, employment and efforts to reduce labour informality, the group said. Labour market gains recorded earlier in 2024 partially reversed as activity contracted following the shutdown. The loss of copper exports also left Panama more reliant on primary goods such as shrimp, fish and bananas, weakening diversification. Limited labour data has made it harder to fully measure the impact, SIP said.

The business group described a potential restart as a cornerstone of Panama’s medium-term growth strategy, complementing Canal investments, infrastructure development and efforts to attract foreign direct investment. Resuming operations would help revive the labour market and strengthen domestic demand, it said.

Looming decision

President José Raúl Mulino said in January he plans to announce by June whether the government will permit the mine to restart, a looming decision that has injected uncertainty into the global copper market.

A restart would boost both Panama’s economy and First Quantum while easing pressure in a tightening copper market. The large open-pit mine accounts for nearly 2% of global copper supply.

The government and First Quantum have agreed on a starting framework for negotiations after the Canadian miner accepted state ownership of copper resources as a condition, though how that would apply to Cobre Panama remains unclear.

The company has said it could produce about 70,000 tonnes of copper over a year if authorities approve the processing of a large ore stockpile at the site.

The International Conference on Agrarian Reform and Rural Development brings together governments, peasant movements and indigenous peoples to discuss land for whom and for what.

The post Land reform rebounds in Latin America: “Get back what they have taken from us” | ICARRD Series appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

In the fairy tale Hansel and Gretel, the children’s use breadcrumbs to lay a path back out of the woods. That might not have gone as expected, but now breadcrumbs could create a path to free the chemical industry from much of its fossil fuel use.

Researchers at the University of Edinburgh have now developed a technique to cut out fossil fuels from one of the chemical industry’s most widely used reactions. The method, which uses microbes and waste bread, is carbon negative: it removes more greenhouse gases than it produces. The process could open up new routes for bio-based manufacturing using waste feedstocks, the team writes in the journal Nature Chemistry.

The chemical industry uses hydrogenation widely to make food products, pharmaceuticals, plastics and many other everyday products. But the hydrogen needed for this chemical synthesis is currently produced by the steam reforming of coal. The process emits 15–20 kilograms of carbon dioxide equivalent per kg of hydrogen.

Efforts to make chemical hydrogenation greener in recent years have focused on splitting water by electrolysis to free hydrogen. But large-scale electrolysis reactors are energy-intensive and not very energy-efficient.

So the Edinburgh team turned to an age-old route to hydrogenation found in nature. Microbes such as bacteria produce hydrogen when they feed on sugary or waste feedstocks.

 

.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:Bread waste could be repurposed for the food industry

 

The researchers feed a common laboratory strain of E. coli bacteria with sugars extracted from waste bread. They grow the microbes in an environment that lacks oxygen. Under these conditions, the bacteria naturally feed on the bread and produce hydrogen gas.

Then, the researchers add a small amount of palladium catalyst and another chemical to the reaction flask. They found that the hydrogen generated by the microbes was enough to drive hydrogenation reactions. The process occurs at near-room temperature, and does not need any fossil fuels or added hydrogen gas.

Because the process avoids the use of fossil fuels and uses waste foodstuff—keeping it from landfill where it would release methane or from being burned and releasing carbon dioxide—it is carbon negative, the researchers’ detailed analysis shows.

“Hydrogenation is used across pharmaceuticals, fine chemicals and materials. Being able to run these reactions using microbial hydrogen opens up new possibilities for sustainable manufacturing at scale,” said lead author and professor of chemical biotechnology Stephen Wallace in a press release.

Source: Mirren F. M. White et al. Native H2 pathways enable biocompatible hydrogenation of metabolic alkenes in bacteria. Nature Chemistry, 2026.

Image: ©Anthropocene Magazine

Chile’s mining ministry will submit five new lithium contracts to the national comptroller in March, just days before President Gabriel Boric leaves office, as it pushes to expand production under the country’s national lithium strategy.

The contracts cover Salar de Ascotán, Quillagua Sur, Hilaricos, Salar de Piedra Parada and Salar de Agua Amarga. Three others — Quillagua Norte, Quillagua Este and Planta El Águila — remain under regulatory review, local outlet Emol.com reported. 

The ministry is also advancing two direct-award contracts, Ollague and Laguna Verde, separate from the tender contracts it submitted in January. Regulators blocked last month the Quillagua Norte and Quillagua Este contracts over “legal deficiencies” in how the ministry set award requirements, ruling that only the President has the authority to establish such criteria.

The dispute centres on how Special Lithium Operation Contracts, known as CEOLs by their Spanish acronym, are processed when private companies or consortia submit applications. 

That framework differs from agreements between state-owned companies such as Codelco and Enami and private partners including SQM (NYSE: SQM) and Rio Tinto (ASX: RIO).

Regaining lost ground

The new submissions signal a broader push to accelerate Chile’s 2023 national lithium strategy, which increased state involvement and reshaped project development. The country aims to lift annual lithium output from 280,000 tonnes in 2024 to about 430,000 tonnes by 2034.

Although Chile remains the world’s second-largest lithium producer, it has ceded market share to faster-growing rivals. Manuel Viera, president of the Chilean Mining Chamber, told MINING.COM the country could reclaim its position as the top producer within a decade if it repeals restrictions and adopts a more pro-investment framework.

Chile’s right-wing pivot puts mining policy under the microscope

Viera pointed to Nova Andino Litio, a joint venture between Codelco and SQM (NYSE: SQM), and Salares Altoandinos as positive developments, but said more than 40 salt flats across the country remain untapped.

He also highlighted Codelco’s Maricunga lithium partnership with Rio Tinto (ASX: RIO), which is awaiting antitrust approvals in Chile and China before the companies can sign a shareholders’ agreement.

Viera argued that Chile’s loss of lithium leadership reflects political constraints rather than geological limits, citing Mining Code provisions that reserve lithium for the state and, in his view, deter private investment despite high-quality reserves.