You are here
News Feeds
Baccarat Evolution Jadi Game Favorit Pecinta Casino Live
Transformasi dunia casino online membawa perubahan besar terhadap preferensi pemain. Jika dulu permainan berbasis RNG (Random Number Generator) mendominasi pasar, kini pemain mulai beralih ke format live casino yang menghadirkan dealer asli secara real-time.
Perubahan tersebut dipengaruhi oleh kebutuhan pemain terhadap pengalaman bermain yang lebih autentik. Dalam konteks ini, Evolution Gaming menjadi salah satu provider yang berhasil membangun standar baru melalui kualitas siaran HD, teknologi interaktif, hingga desain studio profesional yang terlihat mewah dan modern.
Baccarat Evolution menjadi salah satu produk unggulan yang paling banyak diminati karena mampu menjawab kebutuhan tersebut. Pemain tidak hanya bermain, tetapi juga merasakan atmosfer eksklusif yang biasanya hanya ditemukan di kasino fisik kelas internasional.
Mengapa Baccarat Evolution Begitu Populer?Ada beberapa faktor yang membuat Baccarat Evolution terus mendapatkan perhatian besar dari komunitas casino live.
1. Gameplay Mudah DipahamiBaccarat dikenal sebagai permainan kartu dengan aturan yang relatif sederhana. Pemain hanya perlu memilih posisi taruhan seperti Player, Banker, atau Tie. Kesederhanaan ini membuat Baccarat Evolution cocok dimainkan baik oleh pemula maupun pemain berpengalaman.
Berbeda dengan beberapa permainan casino lain yang membutuhkan strategi rumit, baccarat lebih menonjolkan ritme permainan yang cepat dan nyaman diikuti.
2. Visual dan Streaming Berkualitas TinggiSalah satu kekuatan utama Evolution terletak pada kualitas produksinya. Studio live dibuat dengan pencahayaan profesional, tampilan elegan, dan sistem streaming stabil yang memberikan pengalaman visual premium.
Detail kecil seperti interaksi dealer, animasi kartu, hingga efek suara dibuat sangat halus sehingga menciptakan suasana bermain yang lebih hidup.
3. Interaksi Real-Time yang Lebih MenarikFitur live chat menjadi elemen penting dalam pengalaman bermain Baccarat Evolution. Pemain dapat berinteraksi langsung dengan dealer maupun sesama pemain dalam satu meja permainan.
Aspek sosial ini menjadi nilai tambah yang membuat permainan terasa tidak monoton. Banyak pemain merasa pengalaman tersebut lebih menyenangkan dibanding permainan casino digital biasa.
4. Variasi Meja dan Limit TaruhanEvolution menyediakan banyak pilihan meja baccarat dengan limit taruhan berbeda-beda. Hal ini memungkinkan pemain menyesuaikan permainan dengan gaya dan budget masing-masing.
Mulai dari meja standar hingga VIP room, semua dirancang untuk memberikan pengalaman bermain yang fleksibel dan eksklusif.
Faktor Teknologi yang Mendorong PopularitasKemajuan teknologi internet juga menjadi salah satu alasan mengapa Baccarat Evolution berkembang begitu cepat. Dukungan jaringan yang lebih stabil serta perangkat mobile dengan performa tinggi membuat pemain kini dapat menikmati live casino kapan saja dan di mana saja.
Optimalisasi tampilan pada smartphone turut memperluas jangkauan pemain. Banyak pengguna kini lebih sering memainkan Baccarat Evolution melalui perangkat mobile karena dianggap praktis tanpa mengurangi kualitas pengalaman bermain.
Di sisi lain, sistem keamanan digital yang semakin baik membuat pemain merasa lebih nyaman saat mengakses platform live casino modern.
Baccarat Evolution dan Tren Hiburan Digital ModernFenomena naiknya popularitas Baccarat Evolution juga mencerminkan perubahan tren hiburan generasi digital saat ini. Pengguna internet modern cenderung mencari pengalaman yang cepat, interaktif, dan memiliki kualitas visual tinggi.
Format live casino berhasil menggabungkan unsur hiburan, teknologi streaming, dan interaksi sosial dalam satu pengalaman bermain. Kombinasi inilah yang membuat Baccarat Evolution terus bertahan sebagai salah satu game paling populer di kategori casino live.
Bahkan di komunitas pemain online, baccarat live kini sering dianggap sebagai simbol permainan premium karena menghadirkan nuansa eksklusif yang sulit ditemukan pada game casino biasa.
PenutupBaccarat Evolution berhasil membangun reputasi sebagai salah satu game casino live paling diminati berkat kombinasi gameplay sederhana, kualitas visual premium, dan pengalaman bermain real-time yang terasa autentik. Di tengah persaingan industri hiburan digital yang semakin ketat, permainan ini mampu mempertahankan daya tariknya dengan terus mengikuti perkembangan teknologi dan kebutuhan pemain modern.
Dengan tren live casino yang diperkirakan terus berkembang, Baccarat Evolution tampaknya masih akan menjadi pilihan utama bagi banyak pecinta casino live yang menginginkan pengalaman bermain lebih interaktif, elegan, dan mendekati atmosfer kasino sesungguhnya.
May 20 Green Energy News
Headline News:
- ¶ “New US DOE Funding Opportunity To Strengthen Microgrids” • The NLR is launching a funding opportunity through the Community Microgrid Assistance Partnership, with funding from the US DOE Office of Electricity. It offers up to $2.5 million in direct project funding $1 million in technical assistance to help with remote microgrids. [CleanTechnica]
Hughes, Alaska (Tanana Chiefs Conference)
- ¶ “Solar To Dominate Power By 2032” • Solar will become the world’s largest source of electricity by 2032, according to BloombergNEF’s New Energy Outlook 2026. BloombergNEF said rising electricity demand driven by electrification, data centres, population growth and higher incomes is reshaping global energy systems. [reNews]
- ¶ “New “Atlas” Will Catalog Proteins That Bind to Rare Earth Elements” • Led by the NLR and supported by PNNL, the creation of the first-ever Microbial Rare Earth Element Atlas could help address the list of 60 critical minerals identified by the US Geological Survey as vital to the national economy but at risk of disrupted supply chains. [CleanTechnica]
- ¶ “Nabrawind Tests ‘Crane-Less’ Installation System” • Nabrawind installed its first wind turbine using its Skylift system at the InnoVent Diaz wind farm in Namibia. The Skylift lifting system integrates two technologies developed by Nabrawind: the Self-Erecting System, adapted to conventional tubular towers, and BladeRunner. [reNews]
- ¶ “Italy To Assign 10 GW Of PV In 2026-2027 Renewables Auctions” • Italian energy agency Gestore dei servizi energetici announced that the renewable energy FerX auctions planned for 2026 and 2027 will allocate 10 GW of PV capacity and 16 GW of wind power. “The goal is to hold one auction by the end of the year and the other two in 2027.” [pv magazine International]
For more news, please visit geoharvey – Daily News about Energy and Climate Change.
Electric car sales race ahead in SE Asia and Latin America amid oil supply crisis
Nearly 30% of cars sold this year are set to be electric as the war in Iran has sent petrol and diesel prices soaring and drivers in many parts of the world look to electric vehicles as a cheaper alternative.
The analysis, released on Wednesday by the International Energy Agency (IEA), shows that in March, after Iran effectively closed the Strait of Hormuz following US and Israeli military strikes, around 30 countries saw record-breaking monthly sales of battery electric cars and plug-in hybrids.
In the first three months of the year, sales grew by 80% in Asian countries outside of China and by 75% in Latin America – driven by adoption in Brazil and Mexico – compared to the same period last year. In Europe, sales were up close to 30% year-on-year.
Iran war creates upside potential for EV salesGlobally, electric car sales are expected to grow to 23 million this year, accounting for 28% of total car sales, despite falling in China and the US in the first quarter of the year.
In Europe, one in three cars sold this year is projected to be electric. In China, early data for April shows that monthly sales grew to more than 60% of total car sales. Outside China, sales are projected to rise by more than 50% in Asian countries and 45% in Latin America this year.
Araceli Fernandez, the head of the IEA’s technology innovation unit, said the energy crisis caused by the Middle East war has spotlighted the benefits of driving an electric car and created “an upside potential” for the agency’s EV forecast this year. But, she added, it will take time for this to be reflected in the market, partly because of the time lag between ordering a car and it being ready to drive.
Consumers might also be weary of the impact of the war on the economy and wait for government support and policy incentives to make the switch to electric. As a result, the extent to which the growth in sales recorded since the start of the year can be attributed to the energy crisis is hard to estimate, IEA analysts said.
Attractive response to the energy crisisThe road transport sector is the largest consumer of oil, accounting for close to half of global demand.
The IEA has described the blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, through which around a fifth of oil and gas trade passes, as the “largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market”. Earlier this week, it warned that global oil inventories were depleting at record pace.
How governments respond to soaring oil prices could shape the global car market for years to come, according to the Paris-based agency, which was set up to respond to the oil crisis of the 1970s.
Unlike in the 1970s, electric vehicles are now an alternative to oil dependence for transport. In 2025, a quarter of all new cars sold were electric. That year, the global EV fleet avoided the consumption of around 1.7 million barrels of oil per day, according to the IEA’s analysis.
“Many governments in oil-importing countries in particular will potentially turn to identify ways for scaling up electric vehicle deployment,” said Timur Gül, the IEA’s chief energy technology officer.
Southeast Asia’s ‘spectacular growth’Countries in Southeast Asia, including Vietnam, the largest EV market in the region, have already announced plans to expand or extend EV tax incentives in response to the energy crisis.
“It’s possible that other countries will follow,” said Gül, adding that supportive policies being implemented this year could lead to “important upside potential for EV sales”.
The region, which heavily depends on fuel imports from the Middle East, has been particularly affected by the crisis, with prices at the pump spiking.
In Nepal, where nearly three-quarters of new cars sold are electric, the EV roll-out has helped cushion the impact of the oil shock. In Bangladesh, where significant barriers to EV deployment remain, dealers of electric cars, scooters and three-wheelers said they have seen a rise in sales and customer enquiries in recent months.
Gül said electric car sales across Southeast Asia have seen “spectacular growth” over the last two to three years, reaching nearly 20% of car sales across the region last year, led mainly by Vietnam, Thailand and Indonesia.
More than half of the cars sold in the region were made by Chinese carmakers but around a third were manufactured by Vietnamese company VinFast, whose small affordable models have enabled mass adoption in the country. Nearly 40% of new car sales in Vietnam were electric in 2025 – above levels seen in most European countries.
China’s hegemonyTechnological advances and cheaper prices have continued to drive EV deployment in China, the world’s largest oil importer.
In 2025, seven out of 10 electric cars sold in the country were cheaper to buy than their petrol and diesel engine counterparts in Europe. The cost of owning an electric truck is now competitive with owning a diesel one and last year, one in four trucks sold in China were electric – a market that doubled twice in just two years.
Cheaper EVs saw car exports from China double in 2025, mostly targeting Europe and Asia. Chinese automakers manufactured 60% of electric cars sold around the world last year and imports of Chinese cars account for more than half of sales outside Europe and the US.
“We are seeing increasingly intense competition domestically in China, which is squeezing the margins for electric car manufacturers and is making them increasingly look for export opportunities overseas,” said Fernandez.
The post Electric car sales race ahead in SE Asia and Latin America amid oil supply crisis appeared first on Climate Home News.
After Two Decades, E360’s Founder and Editor Is Moving On
When Yale E360 launched in 2008, it was a pioneer in online environmental journalism, filling a critical gap in coverage. As he prepares to step down, founding editor Roger Cohn reflects on his years at e360, his debt to the writers he’s worked with, and his hopes for the future.
The Iran war is destroying oil demand. Could it also spark a shift to clean energy?
With the average price of gasoline in the United States above $4.50 a gallon — about a 40 percent rise since the Iran war began in late February — Americans have been climbing into their cars less often, and stepping onto trains and buses instead. It’s been declared the largest oil supply disruption in history, with U.S. drivers paying $45 billion more for gasoline and diesel compared to last year. Some 44 percent of U.S. adults say they’ve cut back on driving because of high gas prices, according to a survey in late April from ABC News, The Washington Post, and Ipsos.
Cities across the country have seen rising numbers of people riding public transit, from Cincinnati to Los Angeles. Sales of used electric vehicles and hybrid cars have grown substantially over the past couple of months. People are replacing car trips with bikes and scooters; railroads like Amtrak have reported more riders than usual. Much of America is built around highways and suburbs, however, making alternative transportation difficult. So, many people are cutting down on driving without ditching their vehicles, by carpooling, consolidating errands, or working remotely more often.
It could be the start of a green, global shift, according to some experts — even if most Americans eventually end up hopping back in their cars. That’s because the crisis is hitting the hardest in Asia, which was projected to account for nearly all the increase in oil and gas use over the coming decades, but is now rethinking its reliance on fossil fuels.
“If Asia turns around and says, ‘No, we’re not going to grow with fossil fuels, we are going to grow with electrotech,’ that means fossil fuels will peak, and will peak sooner than we think,” said Daan Walter, who leads strategy research on the future of energy for the think tank Ember. “It’s very likely that if this crisis continues to be as bad as it is, and we see this conversion happening, that we’re currently living in the peak year of oil, and that demand will just never come back to the level that it was just before Hormuz closed.”
With roughly 20 percent of the world’s oil shipments choked off in the Strait of Hormuz, households and industries have found ways to use less of it. This can create what economists call “demand destruction” for oil — meaning that the world simply won’t need as much as it used to. The phenomenon is already happening across the globe, according to the International Energy Agency. Last week, the agency reiterated that demand for oil is being destroyed, forecasting a contraction of 420,000 barrels a day this year. It’s a silver lining in an otherwise grim situation: Price shocks driven by conflict in the Middle East are nudging people away from fossil fuels.
While people sometimes use “demand destruction” as a dramatic way to refer to a short-term drop in demand, the phrase more accurately describes a deeper economic shift. “To me, the term ‘demand destruction’ really only makes sense if you’re talking about it as a longer-term thing. Like, it’s truly destroyed the source of demand,” said Kenneth Gillingham, a professor of environmental and energy economics at Yale University.
The destruction in global oil demand has been concentrated in Asia rather than in the U.S., where the country’s overall wealth enables people to pay more for fuel relative to much of the world, even as it strains the budgets of low- and middle-income Americans. Factories in Japan are producing fewer petrochemical products — demand for naphtha, used to make plastics and chemicals, fell by a quarter year-over-year — amplifying the country’s “long-term declining trend” in oil demand, according to the International Energy Agency. Its report notes that gasoline demand in South Korea fell by about 5 percent as prices rose at the pump, suggesting that behavioral changes are also contributing to demand destruction. As the crisis in the Middle East deepened, South Korean President Lee Jae Myung called for a sharp shift to renewable energy, saying, “Our future will be at serious risk if we continue to rely on fossil fuels.”
Countries and companies are also decreasing their oil use in response to the crisis. Pakistan, the Philippines, and Sri Lanka have all introduced four-day work weeks to encourage fewer commutes.
To what extent these fuel-saving adjustments stick around is an open question. President Donald Trump has promised that oil prices will “drop like a rock” once the war in Iran ends. But even after shipping through the Strait of Hormuz resumes, oil supplies could remain tight for months as facilities are repaired and wells get restarted. The Iran war is also the second oil shock in recent years, following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2022, and experts say that this pattern of oil crises is more likely to lead to a prolonged fall in demand.
Passengers on the D-line subway train in New York City on May 15.Charly Triballeau / AFP via Getty Images
“If prices are low for a very, very long time, and then you have a shock, it’s easy to write it off as not a big deal, not going to happen again. But if you continue getting shocks, then you’re like, ‘Maybe I should really start thinking about making some changes,'” Gillingham said.
A report from Ember, co-written by Walter, makes the case that the “twin fossil shock” of the 2020s opens up new political possibilities, just as the double oil shocks in the 1970s prompted investments in energy efficiency and nuclear power. “The parallels with the 1970s oil shocks are striking. But so too is the difference,” the authors write. “For the first time, there are scalable, cost-competitive alternatives. Solar, wind, batteries, EVs, and other electrotech offer a permanent route out of fossil dependence.”
The report predicts that Asia, affected the most by the current oil crisis, will fast-track electrification, switching to EVs and pushing liquefied natural gas out of power generation. The first sign that may already be happening: In March, after the bombing of Iran had started, China’s exports of solar, batteries, and electric vehicles surged.
“It really shakes countries and companies around the world out of this complacency of thinking that there is a path back to a normal stable fossil system,” Walter said. “Import dependency is just incredibly risky at the moment, and the second crisis kind of confirms that.”
And some of the new routines people adopt during the oil crisis could endure. “A shock like the big increase in gas prices, or an earthquake that closes a freeway, is really helpful in getting people to change behavior,” said Susan Handy, a professor of environmental science and policy at the University of California, Davis. “It is really hard to get people to change behavior without those kinds of shocks — not that we want these things to happen, but it is what pushes behavior change.” When a bridge that collapsed reopens, for instance, most people will go back to driving, but some of them will keep their new biking routine, she said.
So what determines whether a habit sticks? It comes down to what people grow to like, Handy said. People might realize they enjoy riding a bike around town or reading on the bus, as opposed to sitting behind the wheel in traffic, once they have reason to try it. “I think there are probably more alternatives out there than people realize, or the alternatives may be better than they realize,” Handy said. Rising prices can also prompt people to adopt more energy-efficient vehicles or appliances, locking them into lower fuel usage going forward.
Of course, Americans are still driving a lot — and will probably continue to do so. “We’ve seen oil prices go up and down many, many times in our history, even in recent history,” Gillingham said. “Generally, those shorter-term behaviors tend to bounce back to where they were before.”
But in the global picture, it’s looking more and more likely that the second oil crisis in half a decade, at a moment when alternatives to fossil fuels are becoming cheaper and widespread, may lead to more lasting changes, accelerating the decline of oil — and the rise of cleaner replacements. As the author Rebecca Solnit wrote in a recent newsletter: “What if in a decade or a century people remember this as the point when the world really turned away from this filthy, corrupting, unreliable, destructive resource?”
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The Iran war is destroying oil demand. Could it also spark a shift to clean energy? on May 20, 2026.
Trump’s EPA vows to fight ‘forever chemicals’ by loosening regulations
The Trump administration has announced what it is calling “a major step forward” in the fight against a class of toxic chemicals called PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances. Extended exposure to PFAS, often referred to as “forever chemicals” because they can persist indefinitely in the environment, has been linked to various cancers, autoimmune diseases, and other harms.
On Monday, Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. lauded Donald Trump as the first president who is “completely committed” to removing forever chemicals, which are found at unsafe levels in tap water in some 80 percent of congressional districts and lurk in the blood of 97 percent of Americans.
But what Kennedy considers a step forward looks like a big step back to most of those who have long kept an eye on the issue. That’s because the Trump administration is unraveling key parts of the PFAS limits approved by Joe Biden’s administration in 2024, which are the first and only regulations to put limits on PFAS in drinking water in the nation’s history. Restrictions on four substances in the PFAS class would be rescinded entirely, while water utilities would be given two additional years to comply with limits for two other substances. The Environmental Protection Agency first signaled its intention to make these changes last year, just a few months after Trump took office. The changes will be finalized after a 60-day public comment period expires.
Secretary Kennedy, who is known for his pledge to “Make America Healthy Again,” turned attention instead to the EPA’s recent announcement of $1 billion in grant funding for small and disadvantaged communities to detect and eliminate PFAS. “We have a president who has made a greater financial commitment than any president in U.S. history,” Kennedy said. But the commitment was not exactly Trump’s to make: The $1 billion comes from an appropriation made by Congress in 2021, when Joe Biden was president.
PFAS has been used in a wide variety of products, including industrial firefighting foams, for decades. As evidence of health harms linked to these substances has mounted, many manufacturers have developed new types of PFAS that have comparatively shorter lifespans. But this new generation of chemicals, of which there are thousands of members, may also cause adverse health impacts.
“The Biden administration had at least set health protective limits for six of these chemicals out of the literally thousands that have been registered for use in the marketplace,” said John Rumpler, clean water director for the environmental advocacy nonprofit Environment America. “Now the EPA is walking back from even that small step toward protecting our drinking water.”
On Monday, the administration tried to rationalize the proposed roll backs by saying that Biden-era PFAS limits were approved in a rush that would have made them vulnerable to ongoing legal challenges. Water utilities and chemical companies have sued the EPA over its PFAS rules, arguing that the regulations are procedurally flawed, financially onerous, and require compliance on timelines that are too tight.
But the EPA has itself sought to undermine the limits since Trump took office last year, asking a federal appeals court to summarily vacate Biden-era restrictions on four types of PFAS last fall. The EPA has since stopped defending the standards in court.
“This is about being realistic,” EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said at an event alongside Kennedy on Monday. “A deadline you cannot physically meet is not a public health protection.” He pointed to the fact that technology capable of removing the chemicals is improving and may eventually bring costs down for utilities burdened by the price of removing PFAS from tap water.
In a statement provided to Grist, the EPA said that “the previous administration’s rule set deadlines many water systems simply could not meet — risking costly violations that punish communities without removing a single part per trillion from anyone’s tap.”
So far, the EPA has offered little in the way of a regulatory substitute for the limits it is removing. “I don’t think there’s anything new here,” said Jared Thompson, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental protection group that is one of several groups defending the Biden-era limits in ongoing litigation brought by chemical companies.
“It seems like they have largely adopted the positions of the chemical industry challengers and the water industry challengers who are saying that these standards are not appropriate,” he added.
Zeldin asserted that the EPA is going to “do it right” this time, and the EPA’s statement to Grist said that “it is entirely possible the result will be more stringent requirements” once the four PFAS substances whose limits are being rescinded are reviewed a second time.
But some outside experts think Zeldin is already doing it wrong. The Safe Drinking Water Act, which Congress passed in 1974, has a provision that states that the EPA can’t weaken drinking water standards once they’ve been set.
“There are going to be legal challenges,” said Richard L. Revesz, dean emeritus at the New York University School of Law and former administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs under Biden. “They’ll have to give reasons and those reasons are very likely to be inadequate.”
Editor’s note: The Natural Resources Defense Council is an advertiser with Grist. Advertisers have no role in Grist’s editorial decisions.
toolTips('.classtoolTips12','An acronym for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS are a class of chemicals used in everyday items like nonstick cookware, cosmetics, and food packaging that have proven to be dangerous to human health. Also called “forever chemicals” for their inability to break down over time, PFAS can be found lingering nearly everywhere — in water, soil, air, and the blood of people and animals.');
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Trump’s EPA vows to fight ‘forever chemicals’ by loosening regulations on May 20, 2026.
Once a climate leader, Canada is now doubling down on oil
Before he became prime minister of Canada, Mark Carney was perhaps one of the world’s biggest supporters of the idea that climate action was good business. He led the clean energy investment fund for Brookfield, one of the world’s largest financial firms, and founded a global alliance of bankers and politicians who wanted to channel their resources toward green energy. When he took over from outgoing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, many expected that he would follow the previous Liberal leader’s ambitious climate agenda, which included taxing fossil fuels and subsidizing clean technology.
But just like in Carney’s beloved sport of hockey, momentum in the climate world can change fast. In the year since he took over, Carney has unveiled a suite of new policies to gut Canada’s ambitious climate regulations and support the country’s powerful fossil fuel industry. This reversal reached a climax last week when he struck a deal with the province of Alberta to prop up its tar sands oil industry and vowed to expand the country’s power grid through the use of natural gas.
Carney is pitching the reversal as a political and economic necessity. Canada is facing the prospect of a severe economic downturn as a result of President Donald Trump’s disruptive trade agenda, and a group of conservatives in Alberta are waging a campaign to secede from Canada altogether. He has claimed that the country can achieve economic security by investing in oil and gas production while still making progress toward reducing its own carbon emissions.
“It will be an opportunity to accelerate the energy transition across Canada, and it’s also an opportunity for Canada to be a reliable supplier for partners across the globe, and to do so in a manner that makes Canada more prosperous and independent,” said Carney in announcing the strategy.
The reversal reveals a stark truth about the direction of global climate action: Despite the rapid deployment of clean energy, even countries and politicians once seen as climate leaders are turning to fossil fuels to protect against the turmoil of Trump’s trade disputes and the war in Iran.
But Carney’s new strategy doesn’t seem to have pleased anyone. Major oil producers and conservatives in Alberta are still pressuring Carney for further concessions, and a broad spectrum of left-wing politicians and civil society groups have condemned it as short-sighted. The critics argue that doubling down on fossil fuel exports is the wrong move at a time when the rest of the world may be shifting away from them.
“The problem is we’re defaulting back to what Canada’s known how to do in the past, rather than what the world’s going to need in the future,” said Simon Donner, a climate scientist at the University of British Columbia who served as chair of the federal government’s climate policy advisory board until he resigned late last year.
Carney has already rolled back several of Trudeau’s climate initiatives. He scrapped Canada’s federal electric vehicle mandate and eliminated the country’s unpopular consumer carbon tax, which added a surcharge on gas stations and power bills. The one major policy he left alone was the “industrial carbon price,” which charges polluters a fee for every ton of carbon dioxide they emit. The nation’s biggest emitters are multinational oil and gas companies, which produce sticky crude from the massive tar sands fields in Alberta; the oil sector produces about 30 percent of Canada’s emissions, more than buildings or cars.
Canada and Alberta have a mutual dependence. Oil makes up more than 15 percent of Canada’s export volume, and Alberta’s oil wealth makes it a net contributor to the federal budget. Under the Canadian constitution, provinces have control over natural resources, and Alberta leaders have long viewed the industrial carbon tax as a threat to their sovereignty. But the oil industry in Alberta needs help from the Liberal government, too. The inland province is producing more oil than it can sell, and the industry’s future growth depends on building another pipeline to the Pacific Ocean, which needs federal support. (The existing pipeline to the Pacific is nearing capacity. Oil producers are also seeking to build new pipelines to the United States.)
Last week, Carney and Alberta Premier Danielle Smith unveiled a “grand bargain” meant to resolve this conflict: Carney removed a proposed hard cap on carbon emissions from the oil sector, and in exchange Alberta agreed to support a long-term increase in carbon prices. The federal government will also expedite permitting for a new Pacific Coast pipeline, while oil producers agreed to build a massive carbon capture system that would offset emissions from oil drilling.
Climate advocates in Canada say the final deal is toothless, and makes major concessions to the oil and gas industry. The deal will lower the headline price of the industrial carbon tax and slow down the rate of the price increase by three-quarters, whereas Carney had at first proposed to tighten the price. The proposed carbon capture project has also shrunk to a fraction of its original size, and the oil industry hasn’t agreed to it yet.
“It would have been a big enough motivator to find those emissions cuts, but it wouldn’t have jeopardized the possibility of oil and gas companies making money,” said Julia Levin, the associate director for national climate policy at the nonprofit Environmental Defence. She noted that under the previous framework, the per-barrel cost of the carbon tax comes out to the price of a Timbit, the Canadian equivalent of a Munchkin donut hole: about 50 cents. Now, she says, “the companies don’t have to do anything at all for 15 years.”
A Syncrude oil sands mining facility near Fort McKay, Alberta. Prime Minister Mark Carney is relying on oil produced in Alberta to help Canada weather the economic turbulence of President Trump’s trade war. Ed Jones / AFP via Getty ImagesEven early news of a potential deal triggered a revolt within Carney’s own party, leading to the resignation of his climate minister, Steven Guilbeault, as well as two members of the government’s independent climate advisory panel. But the industry isn’t satisfied, either. The chief executive of the Canadian oil company Cernovus said last week he doesn’t think the country should have a carbon price at all, saying it “doesn’t incent us to decarbonize,” and some producers have said they still worry about making money even under the loose regulations. A leader of the Alberta separatist campaign said the deal only made him more convinced the province needs to leave Canada.
Richard Masson, a longtime oil sands executive who has worked for Shell and the government of Alberta, said that companies should see the carbon tax as the price of doing business in a country where most voters want some action on climate change.
“The producers will probably take a little bit less return, but in the world we’re in, there’s enough money to go around,” he said. “You’re saying, ‘I’m going to spend a premium on this to prevent having the world turn its back on me.’”
Masson also said that the ultimate climate impact of the deal depends on whether a pipeline to the Pacific actually comes together. Carney has already eased environmental permitting laws to make it easier, and last month he created a $25 billion development fund that could help pay for construction. But there is still no private company that has come forward to build it, and a number of First Nations tribes with treaty rights on the Pacific coast have rejected the idea.
“No offer of equity or ownership will change our position, and no proponent is acceptable to us,” said Marilyn Slett, president of the Coastal First Nations, in response to the pipeline plan. First Nations have ironclad consultation rights under British Columbia provincial law, and securing a pipeline without tribal agreement will be impossible.
Even so, in what seemed to be a further embrace of fossil fuels for economic security, Carney also unveiled a “national electricity strategy” at the same time as the Alberta deal. This strategy seeks to double the size of Canada’s grid by 2050 through investments in renewable energy and a new network of transmission lines connecting the provinces. But it also calls for natural gas to have a major role on Canada’s future power grid, even though the country has made major investments in zero-carbon power and gets most of its electricity from hydropower dams and nuclear reactors.
Here again, the Carney government framed the decision as a necessary step toward geopolitical resilience. The strategy claims that “Canada’s economic growth and long-term competitiveness will depend on its ability to attract and retain investment in high-growth, electricity-intensive sectors, including artificial intelligence … liquid natural gas export facilities, mining, and critical minerals.”
Underlying all these moves is the assumption that fossil fuels will provide protection against economic uncertainty. As long as Canada can extract and export natural resources, it will be able to balance its budgets and keep its citizens safe. But despite Carney’s reputation as a shrewd central banker, critics of his government view the prime minister’s new strategy as short-sighted — Carney is pinning his economic hopes on the sale of a commodity that the world is starting to abandon.
“This is the sort of decision that they’re probably happy about today, and we will look back in 10 years and think, ‘What the hell were we doing?’” said Donner, the former chair of the government’s climate advisory board.
This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Once a climate leader, Canada is now doubling down on oil on May 20, 2026.
Coastal Stewardship Takes Flight as Shorebird Nesting Season Ramps Up
Seeds Series Volume 2: Building regenerative economies in an age of collapse
Fact-checking Trump’s false claims about the IPCC and ‘RCP8.5’ climate scenario
Crazy Town: Episode 125. The Lighter Side of Dark Ages with Chris Smaje
New House Infrastructure Bill: Cuts To Transit, Mixed Bag for Active Transportation
The first draft of America’s next major federal transportation law threatens big cuts to transit and a mixed bag for active modes — and some advocates say it doesn’t even have significant guardrails to prevent President Trump from trampling on the handful of positive provisions it does have.
Late on Sunday, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee released its version of the bill that will replace the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law that expires on Sept. 30, sounding the starting bell on the marathon reauthorization process that many expect to stretch even past that loose deadline.
The $580-billion Building Unrivaled Infrastructure and Long-Term Development for America’s 250th Act — or BUILD America 250 for short — clocked in at 1,005 pages, a slim offering compared to its predecessor’s $1.2-trillion haul.
Many of those cuts came from formula transit programs, which the Union of Concerned Scientists noted would take a 20-percent ($43 billion) hit across the bill’s five years. Highway funding, meanwhile, would increase 8 percent ($28 billion) over the same period — a move which Kevin X. Shen compared to ” a highway contractor’s wishlist.”
As dire as that sounds, some advocates noted it’s better than the Trump administration’s proposal for the bill, which recommended zeroing out the mass transit account completely.
The damage to active transportation programs, meanwhile, was also less bad than some feared after committee Chairman Sam Graves (R–Mo.) warned in November that the bill was “not going to be spending money on … bike paths or walking paths.”
Still, some say that absent a more radical overhaul, even BUILD 250’s few bright spots could be too easily snuffed out — and the already-devastating impacts of mass car dependency could get even worse.
“We thank the committee for their work, but before any planned markup, we challenge them to dream bigger than re-upping an approach that has failed to move the needle on what matters to Americans,” Steve Davis of Transportation for America said in a statement. “[We need to be] giving them freedom from high gas prices by investing in transit and more efficient, affordable vehicles, taking decisive action to end the preventable crisis of traffic fatalities, and responding to the overwhelming popular support for prioritizing repair and maintenance ahead of costly road expansions.
“As written, this proposal fails to deliver on its promise of a transportation system that safely, affordably, and reliably connects Americans to where they need to go — and for that reason, we cannot support it,” Davis continued.
Recommended Trump Is Holding Affordable Transportation Projects Hostage, and Congress Could Call His Bluff Kea Wilson May 7, 2026Davis’s organization is among the dozens that signed onto a letter earlier this month urging Congress not to negotiate the next infrastructure bill until the Trump administration had fulfilled its legal obligations to execute the last one – something the White House has categorically not yet done, as billions in grants remain frozen.
He also says BUILD 250 doesn’t contain enough guardrails against the same thing happening all over again.
“Consider the dissonance of celebrating any positive changes in the program for building or expanding transit service at the same time that the Trump administration has failed to advance a single new transit project since taking office,” Davis wrote. “The House T&I Committee has failed to recognize that this administration is not implementing the current law as intended and seems poised to ignore whatever they pass.”
Even if they should take the bill with a veritable boulder of salt, though, advocates say it’s still critical for transportation reformers to engage with the reauthorization process and fight for their priorities as horse-trading over BUILD America 250 begins — and as their counterparts in the Senate gear up to write counterpart bills of their own.
Here are a few of the initial highlights catching their attention.
The good news … with asterisksActive transportation advocates applauded House negotiators for not eliminating the Transportation Alternatives Program, the nation’s largest dedicated source of formula funding for biking, walking, and trail infrastructure, which has frequently fallen under threat. The bill even promises more funding to TAP, as it’s colloquially known, growing the total to about $1.66 billion a year by the end of the five-year bill.
That positive news, though, was undercut by a provision making it easier for states to “flex” money out of TAP to other programs — including those that fund highways.
“[This] could return us to the bad old days of the [twenty]-teens, when we were losing lots of Transportation Alternatives [dollars] to transfers by states … That could really put a put a hole in the program,” said Kevin Mills of the Rails to Trails Conservancy.
Recommended An Open Letter to the New U.S. Congress and the New Administration: It’s Time to Unite to Solve America’s Roadway Crisis November 15, 2024Of course, forward-thinking states probably won’t flex their sustainable transportation dollars over to drivers — and BUILD America 250 gives them new opportunities to flex motorist-focused money back to people outside cars, too.
Happily, the bill contains some of the key provisions from the Sarah Debbink Langenkamp Active Transportation Act, which makes it easier for states and local governments to fund bicycling and walking out of their Highway Safety Improvement Program dollars, rather than having to pony up for onerous local matching requirements.
The formula Recreational Trails Program was also included in the bill, though its funding remained stubbornly low at $84 million a year — despite the fact that motorized trail users like ATVs pay $281 million a year into the federal gas tax, and non-motorized trail users save their fellow taxpayers considerable money by picking a sustainable mode.
BUILD America 250 also continues many of the discretionary grant programs that advocates feared would be cut, including Safe Streets and Roads for All — though the level of funding has been slashed from $982 million in 2025 to an average of $750 million per year over the course of the new bill.
The BUILD Grant will continue as well, allowing communities to compete for $1.5 billion a year for locally impactful transportation projects. Not to be confused with the BUILD America 250 Act — or that program’s two previous names, RAISE and TIGER, because Congress is hellbent on making life harder for transportation journalists — that money could be a massive boon to local transit, biking, and walking efforts … or yet another highway-widening program, depending on who’s in the White House to pick the winners.
Recommended Study: How The Last Three Presidents Helped Shape Our Local Transportation Landscapes Kea Wilson October 9, 2024While the new bill does eliminate many of the most-loved discretionary programs from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, it also creates at least one new one: the Surface Transportation Accelerator Grant, or STAG.
Essentially a counterpart to BUILD, the new effort will let states compete for $2.4 billion a year to build multimodal infrastructure, with the caveat that a quarter of the funding is set aside for rural areas, a quarter for urban areas, and half for projects “local and regional” significance.
However, Rails to Trails dinged the program for ambiguous eligibility requirements that made it unclear whether rural areas, specifically, can make the most of the STAG party and win money for active transportation projects — despite the fact that rural areas are among the most prolific applicants for federal bike/walk dollars.
Both formula and discretionary bridge programs, meanwhile, won more than $50 billion funding collectively, but it was also unclear whether adding bike and pedestrian infrastructure to these mega-projects would be an eligible use of the funds.
Considering all the other proposed cuts to programs aimed at making life easier for people outside cars, those ambiguities could prove a big deal.
The unequivocally bad newsAdvocates have already found significant cuts to active and shared transportation priorities — with more possibly to come.
In what Mills of Rails to Trails called a “slap,” the BUILD America 250 Act totally repeals the Active Transportation Infrastructure Investment Program, whose preservation was among his organization’s biggest priorities.
“[Congress is] going out of their way to just entirely eliminate it, when that’s the only program that uniquely invests in filling the gaps in our active transportation networks,” he added. “When you build a road system, when you build a rail system, you’ve got to think in terms of connectivity. [But] when it comes to safe walking and biking routes, and they’re like ‘No; we don’t even want it to be mentioned.’ That’s a big concern.”
The Carbon Reduction Program, Neighborhood Access and Equity Grant Program, and Healthy Streets Program would all be repealed completely, too, slashing key funding sources for non-automotive modes.
Recommended Trust Fund Babies: Advocates Argue House-Proposed EV Fee Won’t Solve Highway Funding Woes Kea Wilson May 1, 2025Some advocates, meanwhile, slammed the introduction of a new electric vehicle registration fee, which experts say would do little to close the gap in the winnowing Highway Trust Fund even after the annual fee increases from $130 to $150 over five years. (Hybrids would get slapped with a $35 per year fee, too, which would eventually scale to $50.) And once again, with highway funding set to increase and transit set to decrease, that gap will only get larger, despite big talk in Washington about cutting government waste and implementing the “user pays” principle.
Worse, experts say a new EV fee would decrease electric vehicle uptake, especially when taken together with sharp cuts to the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure program proposed under the bill. That would leave the most car-dependent communities in the country with virtually no alternatives to get around besides burning ever-more-expensive gas.
“Congress should be boosting investments in projects that cut costs, cut emissions, create jobs, and build a transportation system that works for all Americans,” said Shruti Vaidyanathan, director of federal and state transportation advocacy at the Natural Resources Defense Council.”This bill largely ignores the need to build cleaner, more affordable transportation options.”
And across the bill, many good programs will face significant funding insecurity, thanks to the elimination of many “advanced appropriations” across Build America 250 — with transit taking the brunt of the burden.
That means that even if this bill gets passed exactly as written, future congresses could decline to provide many transit programs the money that this congress promised them, while most highway dollars will remain insulated from political horse-trading. And that’s before any future White House follows the Trump playbook of clawing back, rescinding, illegally impounding, and slow-walking programs they just don’t like.
The road aheadWith a mark-up scheduled for Thursday and months of drawn-out negotiations to come in both chambers of Congress, the House’s mega-bill is only a first draft.
Still, advocates say it’s troubling that the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee is starting the conversation by setting the bar so low – and urging their representatives to fight for better.
Recommended Advocates: Here’s What to Tell The Feds You Want From the Next Big Transportation Bill Kea Wilson August 18, 2025“We are in an affordability crisis with transportation policies that tie us to the fuel pump,” said Mike McGinn, executive director of America Walks. “When given the chance to do something about it, we get a bipartisan proposal to increase highway expansion, cut transit, and eliminate programs designed to make neighborhoods more walkable.”
“Any federal candidate running on affordability should be ashamed to vote for this bill for that reason alone, not to mention the continued damage to health, safety and the environment,” McGinn continued. “Personally, I’m looking for the members of congress willing to stand up to the powerful lobbying interests and fight for a more forward looking approach than this.”
Wednesday’s Headlines Aren’t All the Way Back
- Transit agencies still haven’t fully recovered from the pandemic. In 2024 ridership was just 78% of 2019 levels, and only six of 31 commuter rail systems had matched their pre-COVID numbers. (Eno Center for Transportation)
- Building more transit-oriented development is one way out of the death spiral. (Transportation for America)
- High gas prices are bringing people back to public transit — at least, the ones in places with good enough transit that not driving is an option. (Grist)
- Unlike a lot of cities overseas, it’s tough to kick the car habit in the U.S. (Common Edge)
- The Trump administration is putting parking for White House staff on a pedestrianized portion of Pennsylvania Avenue. (CNN)
- Speakers at a recent conference on high-speed rail emphasized that building a national network will require a national vision. (Railway Age)
- Charging fees on delivery robots could help cities pay for sidewalk repairs. (Next City)
- Amazon’s new e-cargo bikes, now being deployed in Washington, D.C., are almost the size of a van. (Electrek)
- A driver in Oakland who drove onto a sidewalk killed three people and injured three more (ABC 30). And in New York City, a suspected drunk driver set off a cascade of crashes that wound up killing two men sitting in front of a barber shop (NY Post).
- Kansas City’s streetcar is not just an economic development tool; it fills an actual transportation need, carrying a third of the city’s transit riders (Governing). Its latest extension opened on Monday (KCUR).
- Cleveland is converting vacant industrial land along a freight rail line into a mixed-use community and greenway. (Cleveland Magazine)
- The D.C. Metro’s CEO is trying to flatter President Trump into funding the Gold Line. (Axios)
- Milwaukee’s Bublr Bikes is expanding. (TMJ 4)
- Richmond temporarily stopped issuing tickets for parking in bike lanes due to driver backlash. (Axios)
- Portland, Maine selected a firm to develop a new long-range transportation plan. (Maine Wire)
- The World Naked Bike Ride may be coming to a city near you this summer. (Momentum)
Alaska Wilderness League Condemns Nomination of Steve Pearce to Lead Bureau of Land Management
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: May 19, 2026
Contact: Anja Semanco | anja@alaskawild.org | 724-967-2777
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In response to yesterday’s nomination of former Congressman Steve Pearce to serve as Director of the Bureau of Land Management Alex Cohen, director of government affairs at Alaska Wilderness League, issued the following statement:
“Time and again, this administration has shown it will go to extremes to sell off Alaska’s iconic public lands to private interests, from buying stakes in foreign mining companies to opening up every acre possible for development,” said Alex Cohen, government affairs director at Alaska Wilderness League. “Public lands belong in public hands, and Steve Pearce’s tenure in Congress — where he repeatedly demonstrated his opposition to protecting our public lands — makes him the wrong man for the top job at the BLM. We urge the Senate to reject his nomination this week, and we’ll oppose every effort he would bring to give away our wildest places if he’s confirmed.”
The Bureau of Land Management oversees roughly 245 million acres of public lands across the United States, including critical landscapes in Alaska that are central to subsistence traditions, wildlife habitat, recreation, and climate resilience.
During his time in Congress, Pearce built a record closely aligned with extractive industry interests, repeatedly supporting expanded drilling and mining on public lands while opposing conservation protections and climate action. His nomination comes as the administration intensifies efforts to dismantle protections across Alaska, including renewed attempts to expand drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, weakening protections for the Western Arctic, and rolling back protections for the Tongass National Forest.
###
Working Together in the Lower Gila River Corridor
ENCORE: May 19th! The Legacies of Ho Chi Minh and Malcolm X (both born today)
Response: New BC Hydro plan maintains key programs, but the province and utility are leaving larger household savings on the table
VICTORIA — Evan Pivnick, associate director of public affairs at Clean Energy Canada, released a statement in response to BC Hydro’s release of its new energy efficiency strategy, Power Smart 2.0:
“BC Hydro has a strong history of using energy conservation to reduce electricity use in B.C. as well as prepare for the growing demands for electrification. However, while this new plan makes meaningful investments and continues in this tradition, it falls short of fully harnessing the opportunities that household technologies have to save families—and BC Hydro—money.
“A recent study from Dunsky Energy + Climate Advisors found that distributed energy resources (electric technologies that can generate or store energy or control demand) could meet more than 10% of B.C.’s total peak electricity demand by 2040, saving ratepayers money by avoiding more expensive infrastructure build-outs while improving grid reliability.
“As such, it’s good to see support for consumers to adopt clean solutions, from energy-efficient appliances to battery storage, that help realize this potential. But this is only a first step. B.C needs to follow the lead of other jurisdictions across North America that are going much further in advancing changes to their electricity systems and standing up new programs that can help households save on their energy bills.
“Beyond energy-efficient appliances, new technologies have unlocked much greater opportunities to save, like managed EV charging, smart panels, controllable water heaters, and household batteries that work in harmony with the grid. The new plan lays out a vision for using these technologies, but more should be done to encourage British Columbians to make the switch. The Dunsky study found that greater financial incentives, like rebates, and other ambitious installation programs, were key to realizing the full potential of distributed energy resources for reducing both household bills and costs to the utility.
“What’s more, heat pumps will be vital to reducing power demand, offering the ability to displace power-hungry baseboard heating and air conditioning. With another hot summer around the corner, the provincial government should introduce regulations that ensure new permanent air conditioning systems are heat pumps. Our analysis shows that a province-wide switch to heat pumps could save a cumulative $675 million in annual energy bills: that translates to average savings of approximately $170 a year for those currently using natural gas with A/C.
“Already, B.C. has some of the lowest electricity rates in North America, making the switch to EVs and household electrification especially enticing for British Columbians. And while today represents a positive step, at a moment when the cost of living is top of mind for most families, there is much more we could be doing to lower electricity bills across the province—while simultaneously building a smarter, more cost-efficient electricity system.”
The post Response: New BC Hydro plan maintains key programs, but the province and utility are leaving larger household savings on the table appeared first on Clean Energy Canada.
Boone County to Discuss Moratorium on CO2 Pipelines at May 27 Public Hearing
Nebraskans: Sign the Letter of Support for Boone County CO2 Pipeline Moratorium
The Boone County, Nebraska Commissioners will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, May 27 to discuss a proposed moratorium on CO2 pipeline construction in the county.
- WHAT: Public Hearing to Discuss CO2 Pipeline Moratorium
- WHO: Boone County, Nebraska Commissioners
- WHEN: Wednesday, May 27, 10:30 A.M.
- WHERE: 222 South 4th St., Albion, NE, 68620
Landowners and residents of Boone County and others in the vicinity who want to protect property rights against eminent domain land seizures, and who oppose the risky Summit CO2 pipeline are encouraged to attend the hearing in person to show support, and share their concerns during public comments.
Faced with the looming prospect of local landowners being targeted by Summit Carbon Solutions to obtain easements for its proposed risky CO2 pipeline, and potentially seeking to use eminent domain, Commissioners in Boone County are taking action to protect their community. The public hearing and vote by Commissioners on a proposed moratorium on the construction of CO2 pipelines in Boone County follows similar previous actions taken by neighboring counties. Stanton County unanimously denied Summit’s permit request in February 2024, and Dakota County tabled the company’s request in November 2025 and has since removed it from their agenda.
Bold Nebraska supported a bill introduced in the Nebraska Legislature in 2026, LB 916, which would have banned eminent domain for CO2 pipelines in Nebraska. Shelli Meyer, whose family’s land in Dixon County is threatened by the Summit pipeline, testified and Bold’s Founder Jane Kleeb also submitted testimony along with over 700 Nebraskans who wrote letters to their Senators urging them to support LB 916.
Bold will support another bill to ban eminent domain for CO2 pipelines next year, but in the meantime — show your support for the Boone County Commissioners by signing a letter endorsing the CO2 Pipeline Moratorium before the public hearing on May 27.
Nebraskans: Sign the Letter of Support for Boone County CO2 Pipeline Moratorium
Now Hiring: Legal Fellow (Salt Lake City)
Location: Salt Lake City, Utah (on-site, full-time, exempt)
Salary Range: $70,000-$78,000, commensurate with experience
Application Deadline: June 15, 2026
Download the Legal Fellow Job Description as a PDF
About the Southern Utah Wilderness AllianceThe Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) is the only nonprofit organization working full-time to protect Utah’s redrock wilderness—some of the most spectacular public lands in America. Since 1983, SUWA’s staff, board, and members have worked to defend this landscape from threats like fossil fuel development, unnecessary road construction, and destructive off-road vehicle use. With offices in Salt Lake City, Moab, and Washington, DC, and tens of thousands of supporters across the country, SUWA has secured lasting protections for more than 5.5 million acres of wild public lands.
Our mission is to preserve the outstanding wilderness at the heart of the Colorado Plateau and ensure these lands remain in their natural state for the benefit of all. We are committed to diversity, equity, and inclusion in our work and in our organization, knowing that the redrock is for everyone.
Position SummaryThe legal fellow is a 2-year litigation position that will focus on defense of Utah’s wildest federal public lands. SUWA’s litigation docket includes cases involving national monuments, off-road vehicles, Quiet Title Act (R.S. 2477), energy development, and vegetation removal. The legal fellow works closely with other program staff in SUWA’s Salt Lake and Moab offices and is supervised by the legal director.
Qualifications- 1-3 years of relevant experience, including familiarity with federal public land, environmental, and administrative law statutes and regulations.
- Demonstrated interest in environmentalism or conservation—passion for wilderness and public lands preferred.
- Excellent time management, analytical, legal research, and writing skills.
- Ability to handle a substantial workload that will, at times, require working nights and weekends.
- Commitment to wilderness preservation and SUWA’s mission.
- Utah Bar Licensure: (1) Utah bar membership, or (2) the ability to transfer UBE score; or (3) be admitted by motion
- Location: SUWA’s Salt Lake City Office. We work a hybrid schedule with at least 3 days per week in the office.
- Salary range: $70,000-$78,000, commensurate with experience.
- Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, vision, retirement contributions, and general leave policies; details can be found online at suwa.org/careers
Please submit a cover letter, resume, law school transcript, 3-5 page writing sample, and 3 references to Steve Bloch, Legal Director, at hiring@suwa.org.
Application deadline: June 15, 2026
The lands SUWA works to protect are the ancestral homelands of many Tribes, including those that were forcibly removed at the hands of the U.S. government in an effort to exterminate their cultures, languages, and ways of life. These injustices are still felt today, but the quest to erase the Tribes failed: Indigenous communities continue their traditions and remain an integral part of the landscape and our community. We are committed to working toward understanding this history; to expanding present-day common ground, collaboration, and reconciliation with our Tribal neighbors; and to advocating that Tribes receive a seat at the table when others would exclude them.
SUWA is an equal opportunity employer and does not discriminate in hiring or employment on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, gender, marital status, sexual orientation, age, disability, veteran status, or any other characteristic protected by federal, state, or local law.
The post Now Hiring: Legal Fellow (Salt Lake City) appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.
May 2026 Redrock Report
Grand Staircase-Escalante Remains in the Spotlight
For months now, the fight to protect Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument’s management plan has been the number one priority at SUWA. Senator Lee and Representative Maloy are seeking to undo the plan using the Congressional Review Act (additional background can be found here) and their efforts may soon be coming to a head: we’re anticipating a vote in either the House or the Senate during the first two weeks of June.
If both chambers of Congress pass the measure by simple majority votes, the plan 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. Thanks to the Protect Wild Utah movement, opposition is growing nationwide—conveyed through phone calls, in-district meetings, letters to the editor, DC fly-ins, and so much more—and we know members of Congress are getting the message!
Here are a few recent materials we wanted to highlight:
- Executive Director Scott Braden has a piece—Congress is gunning for a National Monument in Utah—in Writers on the Range.
- Patagonia CEO Ryan Gellert wrote an op-ed for the Salt Lake Tribune (which no longer has a paywall!)
- The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) has issued a statement in opposition to use of the CRA.
- Over 150 scientists joined a sign-on letter in opposition, garnering stories in the Salt Lake Tribune, Outside, and other outlets.
- SUWA launched a “Love for GSE” Storymap of art inspired by the monument (and we’re still accepting submissions)
We’ll be in touch as soon as we know more about the vote timing. No matter where you live, our Grassroots Organizing Team can help you find the most effective ways to take action. Click here to learn more.
Photo © Jeff Foott
Speak Up for the San Rafael Swell and Desert!
Utah’s San Rafael Swell and San Rafael Desert are home to irreplaceable cultural and historic resources, important wildlife habitat, and unmatched recreation opportunities, including destinations such as Mexican Mountain, Buckhorn Draw, Tomsich Butte, Sweetwater Reef, designated wilderness areas, and the San Rafael Swell Recreation Area. Unfortunately, Trump’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is considering substantially expanding damaging off-road vehicle use across these unique landscapes.
As a refresher, the BLM completed travel management plans for these two regions in 2022 and 2024. Those plans were far from ideal, designating hundreds of miles of new motorized vehicle routes at the expense of natural and cultural resources as well as non-motorized recreationists. Now the BLM is planning to go even further with a proposal to open hundreds of miles of additional off-road vehicle routes in its latest quest to transform quiet, wild places into motorized playgrounds.
The agency is accepting public comments through Monday, June 8. While the comment deadline is the same for each plan, they are being analyzed separately. Please follow the link below to submit comments, especially if you have first-hand knowledge of one or both landscapes.
>> Click here to submit your comments by June 8.
Photo © Ray Bloxham/SUWA
Tell BLM: No Active Airstrip in the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness!
The Bureau of Land Management’s (BLM) Price field office is proposing to authorize aircraft takeoffs and landings in the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness by designating the unauthorized Keg Knoll backcountry airstrip as open for aircraft use. The airstrip is located on the west side of Labyrinth Canyon and north of Canyonlands National Park.
While the Wilderness Act gives the BLM some discretion to allow (or prohibit) continued use at airstrips that were legally established prior to wilderness designation, it does not allow the agency to authorize aircraft use when the airstrip was not legally open prior to the wilderness designation. That’s the situation here. And there are plenty of backcountry airstrips throughout Utah that don’t impact designated wilderness areas (only around 4% of BLM land in Utah is designated wilderness).
The BLM is preparing an environmental assessment (EA) and intends to issue a decision soon. Please follow the link below to submit comments as soon as possible. At the Trump administration’s direction, the agency is not planning to release a draft EA to the public or hold a formal public comment period.
>> Click here to submit comments now
Photo © Ray Bloxham/SUWA
Proposed Plan for San Rafael Swell Recreation Area Favors Development, ORV Dominance
Last week, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released the final environmental assessment and proposed resource management plan (RMP) amendment for the San Rafael Swell Recreation Area and surrounding region. You may recall that this 117,000-acre recreation area was established under the 2019 Dingell Act, along with 663,000 acres of BLM wilderness and other conservation designations.
The BLM is required to update its management plan for each of the new designations. Unfortunately, for the recreation area, it’s choosing to reverse course and emphasize off-road vehicle use and extractive development over conservation. This includes removing over 12,000 acres of natural areas (wilderness-quality lands managed to protect their wilderness values), eliminating commonsense recreation management and resource protection requirements, and reducing or eliminating Areas of Critical Environmental Concern outside of designated wilderness.
“We’re disappointed that BLM, at the behest of the Trump administration, squandered this opportunity to set out a proactive, comprehensive vision for resource protection and recreation management in the incredible San Rafael Swell and instead focused its energy and limited resources on rolling back existing protections to allow for more development and off-road vehicle abuse,” said SUWA Wildlands Director Neal Clark.
Photo © Ray Bloxham/SUWA
DC Update: The Good, Bad, and Ugly News from this Month
The Bad: Senate Confirms Steve Pearce as BLM Director. Yesterday, by a vote of 46–43 the U.S. Senate confirmed anti-public lands politician and former U.S. Representative Steve Pearce (R-NM) as the next director of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM).
“Today’s vote is disappointing,” said SUWA DC Director Travis Hammill. “Anyone who cares about the future of public lands, national monuments, or the redrock knows that Steve Pearce has fundamentally disqualifying views—such as opposing the very existence of public lands—and should not hold the position of Director of the Bureau of Land Management.” >> Read our full statement
The Ugly: Trump Interior Department Rescinds Public Lands Rule. We’ve known for a while that this was coming, and last week the BLM’s Public Lands Rule (aka the Conservation and Landscape Health Rule) was officially rescinded. Responding to the news, SUWA Legal Director Steve Bloch said, “The Public Lands Rule reiterated that the BLM had to put conservation on equal footing with other uses and laid out a framework for the agency to restore degraded landscapes and protect intact public lands for current and future generations. Americans and Utahns widely supported the Rule and we are deeply disappointed to see the Trump administration’s shortsighted effort to undo it. Our work to Protect Wild Utah continues, undeterred.” >> Read our full statement
The Good: House Sustainable Energy & Environment Coalition (SEEC) Endorses ARRWA. Earlier this month, the SEEC endorsed 21 member-led bills—and America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act (championed by SEEC member Rep. Melanie Stansbury, D-NM-01) is among them! According to the coalition’s May 7 release, “The bills we are endorsing today reiterate that we must protect our nature and wildlife, invest in American science and clean energy innovation, hold polluters and corrupt corporations accountable, and safeguard our communities against rapidly worsening extreme weather fueled by the climate crisis. This is the future that the American people want and deserve.”
>> Please add your support today by asking your members of Congress to cosponsor America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act (or thanking them if they already have!).
The post May 2026 Redrock Report appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.
Pages
The Fine Print I:
Disclaimer: The views expressed on this site are not the official position of the IWW (or even the IWW’s EUC) unless otherwise indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of anyone but the author’s, nor should it be assumed that any of these authors automatically support the IWW or endorse any of its positions.
Further: the inclusion of a link on our site (other than the link to the main IWW site) does not imply endorsement by or an alliance with the IWW. These sites have been chosen by our members due to their perceived relevance to the IWW EUC and are included here for informational purposes only. If you have any suggestions or comments on any of the links included (or not included) above, please contact us.
The Fine Print II:
Fair Use Notice: The material on this site is provided for educational and informational purposes. It may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. It is being made available in an effort to advance the understanding of scientific, environmental, economic, social justice and human rights issues etc.
It is believed that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have an interest in using the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. The information on this site does not constitute legal or technical advice.




