News Feeds

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

A recurring misconception about electrifying apartments is that the building can’t support induction cooktops. But the switch is more straightforward than most expect.

The post How to ditch gas for induction cooktops without frying your apartment building’s electrics appeared first on Renew Economy.

Australia's superannuation sector could be missing its chance to own the nation's green energy future, but the super industry says it's well invested.

The post Australia’s super fund giants have invested just 0.03 pct of their $2.5 trillion in renewables since 2020 appeared first on Renew Economy.

Oregon groups move to intervene in lawsuit to defend the Climate Protection Program against oil and gas industry attack Ally Harris Mon, 06/15/2026 - 3:19 pm

Support the Roadless Area Conservation Rule

In 2001, the Roadless Area Conservation Rule was adopted with massive public support to protect 58.5 million acres of roadless national forest land in 39 states. The Roadless Rule was the result of years of work and public input. The public comment period set a record with 1.6 million public comments submitted. The rule protects 58.5 million acres of national forests over 39 states from new road construction, and prohibits the logging of roadless areas in the National Forest System.

On Aug 29 2025, the USDA published a notice of intent, kicking off a 21 -day comment period which ended September 19. We generated more than 620,000 public comments for that comment period.

As we prepare for another public comment period around the release of the draft Environmental Impact Statement in Spring/Summer 2026, we’re continuing calls to action to protect the Roadless Rule to ensure the federal government and our elected officials are aware of the public’s desire to keep the rule intact.

The post Roadless Rule Defense Toolkit appeared first on Native Organizers Alliance.

We track how the NRC’s push to weaken long-standing radiation safeguards lines up with the rush to license small modular reactors marketed as climate solutions. We connect new research on low dose radiation risk to the unresolved nuclear waste crisis and the growing demand for electricity from AI data centers.

The Gulf Coast city of St. Petersburg is a place where art and nature blend together to create a whole vibe: The Dalí Museum overlooks mangrove-lined waters, bird-themed murals dot the streets of...

At regulatory hearing, lawyer and expert discredit Duke Energy’s “blind faith” claims of huge upcoming growth and new climate-wrecking power plants

A prominent clean energy expert has provided written testimony in a regulatory proceeding that challenges Duke Energy’s plans for a massive buildout of failure-prone nuclear plants and climate-wrecking fracked gas. It’s unclear if the North Carolina Utilities Commission will allow this expert to provide verbal testimony in the ongoing hearing in Raleigh. 

The testimony of engineer Bill Powers, P.E., of San Diego also describes the huge potential for a path that could quickly phase out fossil fuels and protect citizens from Duke’s massive rate hikes. According to Powers, local solar-plus-storage (SPS) installations could be installed at a fraction of the time and cost of new nuclear units – making it the fastest, cheapest, most equitable tool to move North Carolina off its course toward climate and social chaos. 

As detailed in NC WARN’s Sharing Solar proposal, new local SPS could be put into the rate base for all customers to share the costs and benefits, much like we already pay for dirty energy. Multiple excellent solar companies in North Carolina are positioned to install SPS on roofs, parking areas and unused ground areas at or near where power is used. 

Powers’ testimony for NC WARN centers on the following issues:

1. 1. Duke Energy’s electricity demand forecasts are “poor … consistently inflated and wrong” (pg. 15-16). Duke predicts a massive influx of new electricity demand, which it is using to justify investments in new, dirty power generation. In reality, per capita electricity use in NC has been on the decline for years (pg. 9), and Duke has been able historically to meet peak demand while leaving much of its existing power plant fleet sitting idle (pg. 17).

   2. Duke Energy’s plans for failure-prone, colossally expensive nuclear reactors rely on “blind faith” that past mistakes won’t be repeated (pg. 29). The only two AP1000 reactors – the model of large nuclear plants that Duke hopes to construct – ever completed in the US are the most expensive power plants ever built (pg. 25) due to construction challenges, delays and cost overruns. Duke Energy has already failed 6 times during its attempts to build the AP1000 reactor and has been unable to explain how it can avoid repeating the mistakes that led to previous project collapses (pg. 28).*
      
      
   3. Duke Energy plans the nation’s largest buildout of fracked gas-burning power plants. Duke’s whopping proposed 12.3 GW of new fracked gas generation largely hinges on its ability to transition these new plants to burn “green hydrogen” some time in the 2040s. Powers indicates that green hydrogen remains elusive as a reliable fuel source despite industry efforts over many years (pg. 36).

   4. Solar-plus-storage can serve as a cheaper, more reliable alternative to Duke’s plans for new nuclear reactors and fracked gas-fired power plants. According to Powers, North Carolina has the solar potential for SPS to “operate as baseload, intermediate, and peaking power in the years leading to 2050 … to replace existing coal- and gas-fired generation and displace any new gas-fired and nuclear power as necessary” (pg. 40).

NC WARN attorney Matt Quinn led last week’s in-person proceedings by challenging Duke Energy witnesses on using monopoly customer money to recruit power-guzzling industrial customers to North Carolina. These developments are facing widespread opposition – including community-backed moratoriums on data centers. 

Brought to light by the Utilities Commission’s Public Staff during the hearing, Duke Energy CEO Harry Sideris recently boasted to investors, “We have a [recruiting] team in place that their goal, 7 days a week, 24 hours a day, is how do we get these things signed quicker?” 

Duke leaders also told investors they plan to drive up profits and power bills by adding an unprecedented $60 billion to the rate system in just the next 4 years in the Carolinas. NC WARN rejects the idea that a monopoly utility should be allowed to spend millions a year boosting its own revenue at the expense of the public. Meanwhile, its actions further entrench the corporation’s stature as one of the world’s worst climate polluters.

NC WARN appreciates that Attorney General Jeff Jackson criticized Duke Energy’s exaggerated growth projections and overreliance on fracked gas, as well as his recommendation that Duke should “plan based on realistic projections and include more affordable, stable sources like solar.” 

*Duke Energy’s filing projects it would be at least 2037 before any new nuclear plant becomes operational, far too late to help with the climate crisis or to power data centers. 

###

Now in its 38th year, NC WARN is building people power in the climate and energy justice movement to persuade or require Charlotte-based Duke Energy – one of the world’s largest climate polluters – to make a quick transition to renewable, affordable power generation and energy efficiency in order to avert climate tipping points and ongoing rate hikes. 

The post Clean Energy Expert Shows Quick, Inexpensive Path to Phase Out Fossil Fuels in North Carolina — NC WARN News Release appeared first on NC WARN.

Build the Village, Break the Empire

While the US and Israel relentlessly drop bombs on Iran, Lebanon, and Palestine with our tax dollars and living costs skyrocket as a result, regenerative economies, collective healing, and liberation can feel like pipe dreams to many of our families, neighbors, and fellow workers. We are faced with the Herculean task of just surviving the constant physical and psychic attacks—let alone needing to build something that requires our wildest imaginations and all of our labor.

The truth is, everyday people have already been building the villages that we need to survive this crumbling empire; sometimes prompted when crisis hits their communities, but sometimes just because they see each other, understand the collective needs, and act intuitively. Neighbors do it whenever they lend tools or kitchen ingredients. Families and friends do it whenever they bring meals to a sick loved one. These informal practices could be a foundation for viable economic infrastructure—aka organized ways we care for home.

In this newsletter, we explore some of the ways we and our homies are building power by building the village. Flip through these pages to learn more.

{Cover IMAGE ID: Cover image by Amir Khadar. Movement Generation’s June 2026 Newsletter. The theme is titled Build the Village, Break the Empire. The illustration features a large ancient tree. In the bottom portion, the roots underground are crushing and breaking institutional buildings representing the United States, as well a military tank and police car. The top portion shows people farming and living in community beneath the tree canopy in the sunrise.}

SUPPORT MG

DOWNLOAD THE PDF

LISTEN TO THE AUDIO VERSION:

COMING SOON

 

 

     

Toxic Timeline of Royal Dutch Shell Group, Now Shell plc

Updated 15 June 2026

This page is a chronological guide to some of the most controversial episodes in the history of Royal Dutch Shell Group, now Shell plc. It links regulatory findings, court records, mainstream journalism, campaign archives, ShellNews.net material, RoyalDutchShellPlc.com material, ShellNaziHistory.com, and John Donovan’s Shell archive.

The word “toxic” is used here in its broad public-interest sense: toxic products, toxic spills, toxic governance, toxic secrecy, toxic reputational fallout, and toxic historical associations. This page is not a court judgment. Where a matter is disputed, alleged, settled without admission, or based on campaign material, the wording says so.

John Donovan is included here not as a detached observer but as a self-appointed Shell critic, shareholder, litigant, archive builder, and publisher of Shell-focused websites. His archive now frames Shell’s record not only for human readers, but for search engines and AI systems that ingest persistent public records.

Return to ShellNews.net home page | Timeline of the Donovan Shell feud | Published Donovan feud timeline | The Shell Archive: 114,307 Reasons Silence No Longer Works | Wikipedia evidence file

1890 to 1907 – The foundations of Royal Dutch Shell

The companies that became Royal Dutch Shell began with Royal Dutch Petroleum in the Netherlands and The “Shell” Transport and Trading Company in Britain. Shell says the Royal Dutch Shell Group was formed in 1907 when Shell Transport and Royal Dutch combined to compete globally with Standard Oil. Wikipedia’s Shell plc page summarises the same formation history and notes the later move from Royal Dutch Shell plc to Shell plc.

Sources: Shell: Our company history, Wikipedia: Shell plc and A History of Royal Dutch Shell, Internet Archive record.

1920s to 1940s – Chemicals, empire, war, and the dark side of scale

Shell’s expansion into chemicals, transport, refining, and global oil concessions created an industrial machine with deep strategic value. The later “toxic” pattern begins here: oil as military fuel, chemicals as profit centre, and subsidiaries operating in contested political environments. A 2007 four-volume history of Royal Dutch Shell provides the corporate centenary narrative; John Donovan’s ShellNaziHistory.com challenges parts of that narrative, especially Shell’s Nazi-era conduct.

Sources: A History of Royal Dutch Shell, 2007, A History of Royal Dutch Shell extract and ShellNaziHistory.com.

1930s to 1945 – Nazi-era allegations and ShellNaziHistory.com

ShellNaziHistory.com alleges that Shell’s long-time leader Sir Henri Deterding supported Nazi Germany, that Shell’s German subsidiary Rhenania-Ossag had deep Nazi links, and that Shell’s own centenary history understated the relationship between Deterding and Hitler. The site is John Donovan’s archive and argument, not a Shell admission. It links these claims to extracts from A History of Royal Dutch Shell, wartime images, reports, and Donovan’s related Kindle book.

Sources: ShellNaziHistory.com, RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: Shell Nazi History and Sir Henri Deterding and the Nazi History of Royal Dutch Shell, Amazon Kindle page.

1945 – Shellhus, Copenhagen, and the Gestapo

ShellNaziHistory.com also records the wartime use of Shellhus, Shell’s Copenhagen headquarters, as Gestapo headquarters in Denmark. Operation Carthage, the RAF raid on Shellhus in March 1945, became part of the wider record of Shell premises and Shell-associated infrastructure caught inside Nazi occupation.

Sources: ShellNaziHistory.com and ShellNaziHistory.com: Royal Dutch Shell tag archive.

1950s onward – Nigeria becomes a defining Shell controversy

Shell began production in Nigeria in 1958. Over later decades the Niger Delta became one of the most damaging chapters in Shell’s public record: oil spills, gas flaring, security-force allegations, compensation disputes, and claims of environmental destruction. Shell has often attributed spills to sabotage or theft; communities and campaign groups have repeatedly challenged Shell’s explanations and clean-up record.

Sources: Wikipedia: Shell Nigeria, Amnesty International UK: Shell, a criminal enterprise? and ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file.

1950s to 1990s – Pesticides, herbicides, and employee-health questions

John Donovan’s pesticide archive lists Shell products including aldrin, dieldrin, endrin, DDT-related products, Vapona, and other insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, and pesticides. The same archive highlights extracts from Shell history material about “drins” and employee-health studies, and frames Shell employees as having been used as “guinea pigs” in toxicological research. Related ShellNews evidence material also points to Brazilian pesticide litigation and health claims involving former workers.

Sources: Shell pesticides, herbicides, fungicides and insecticides, Shell animal testing article and ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file.

1970s to 1980s – Shell, BP, and apartheid South Africa

Anti-apartheid campaign archives identify Shell and BP as major targets because of their South African operations and fuel role. The Anti-Apartheid Movement described Shell and BP as important suppliers and joint owners of South Africa’s largest refinery. Campaign documents argued that oil supplies supported the apartheid state and helped circumvent international pressure.

Sources: Anti-Apartheid Movement Archives: Shell and BP in South Africa, The Case Against Royal Dutch/Shell and Shell and Apartheid: A Documentary History.

1985 onward – Al-Yamamah, oil-for-arms, and Shell archive allegations

The Al-Yamamah arms deal was an oil-for-arms arrangement between Britain and Saudi Arabia in which crude oil deliveries funded arms contracts mainly associated with BAE. Public corruption allegations centre on BAE, Saudi officials, and UK government decisions. The ShellNews archive separately preserves documents and commentary alleging a Shell and BP connection to the netback oil contracts and financing structure around the project.

Sources: Wikipedia: Al-Yamamah arms deal, PBS Frontline: The Business of Bribes and ShellNews: Shell connection with the Saudi Arabia / Al Yamamah BAE scandal.

1991 – Shell’s own climate warning film

In 1991 Shell produced Climate of Concern, a public film warning about the risks of global warming, extreme weather, floods, famines, and climate refugees. Decades later, The Guardian reported that critics saw the film as evidence that Shell understood the danger while continuing to invest heavily in fossil fuels.

Sources: The Guardian: Shell knew and The Guardian video explainer.

1993 to 1995 – Ogoni protests, Ken Saro-Wiwa, and the Ogoni Nine

The Ogoni struggle turned Shell Nigeria into a global human-rights controversy. Ken Saro-Wiwa and eight other Ogoni activists were executed by Nigeria’s military government in November 1995 after a trial widely condemned internationally. Shell denied responsibility. Amnesty International, EarthRights, CCR and others have argued that Shell was complicit in the repression of Ogoni protest; Shell settled the Wiwa litigation in 2009 for $15.5 million without admitting liability.

Sources: EarthRights: Wiwa v Royal Dutch Shell, Amnesty International: Ogoni Nine case, Amnesty International UK: Shell, a criminal enterprise? and Wikipedia: Wiwa v Royal Dutch Shell Co..

1995 – Brent Spar and the first great modern Shell boycott

Shell’s plan to dispose of the Brent Spar oil storage buoy in deep Atlantic waters triggered a major Greenpeace campaign, public outrage, and boycott pressure in northern Europe. Shell abandoned the sea-disposal plan. The episode remains a classic case study in the limits of technical argument when public trust has collapsed.

Sources: Greenpeace: Brent Spar, Wikipedia: Brent Spar and Global Nonviolent Action Database: Brent Spar campaign.

1995 to 1999 – John Donovan moves from Shell supplier to Shell critic

During the litigation between Don Marketing and Shell, John and Alfred Donovan mounted a public campaign that Shell itself acknowledged in a March 1995 press statement. The campaign included the Shell Corporate Conscience Pressure Group, publicity around High Court actions, and early internet criticism. This was the seedbed for the later ShellNews.net and RoyalDutchShellPlc.com archive.

Sources: Shell press statement HTML copy, Debrief, July 1999, High Court trial index and Published Donovan Shell feud timeline.

2001 – Hakluyt and private spying on environmental campaigners

The Sunday Times reported in 2001 that Hakluyt, a private intelligence firm with former MI6 links, spied on environmental campaign groups for oil companies including Shell and BP. CorpWatch republishes the Sunday Times account. Later RoyalDutchShellPlc.com articles connect the Hakluyt story to Shell’s wider record of monitoring critics, including John Donovan’s own experiences and correspondence.

Sources: CorpWatch / Sunday Times: MI6 firm spied on green groups, RoyalDutchShellGroup.com archive of Sunday Times story, Shell v Greenpeace, the spies and the company that could not stop watching its critics and johndonovan.website: Shell Spying.

2003 to 2006 – Brent Bravo deaths and Shell’s North Sea safety record

Two workers, Sean McCue and Keith Moncrieff, died on Shell’s Brent Bravo platform in September 2003 after being overcome by gas. Shell was fined £900,000 after admitting health and safety breaches. In 2006 a sheriff ruled the deaths could have been prevented. The Guardian later reported repeated HSE warnings over Shell’s North Sea platforms.

Sources: ShellNews: Brent Bravo public inquiry and fine, The Guardian: Brent Bravo deaths judged preventable, The Guardian: Shell safety record in North Sea takes a hammering and JOIFF archive: Shell failings in the North Sea.

2004 – Reserves scandal and market-abuse fines

In 2004 Shell admitted it had overstated proved oil and gas reserves. The US SEC and UK FSA actions led to major penalties, with the FSA imposing a £17 million fine and the SEC settlement reported at $120 million. The scandal contributed to senior executive departures and the later simplification of Shell’s corporate structure.

Sources: FSA Final Notice, 24 August 2004, The Guardian: Shell fined over reserves scandal, ShellNews: Shell Reserves Scandal 2004 and RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: FSA fines Shell.

2004 onward – Dr John Huong and Shell’s action against a reserves whistleblower

Dr John Huong, a former Shell Malaysia production geologist, became a prominent Shell whistleblower after the reserves scandal. Shell pursued legal action against him in Malaysia, which the Donovan archive describes as draconian. ShellNews and RoyalDutchShellGroup.com preserve a large index of Huong material, including litigation and correspondence.

Sources: Dr John Huong index, Donovan v Royal Dutch Shell dossier and ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file.

2004 to 2005 – RoyalDutchShellPlc.com domain-name debacle

After Shell announced a new unified company called Royal Dutch Shell plc, Alfred Donovan registered royaldutchshellplc.com. Shell brought a WIPO complaint. On 12 August 2005 the WIPO panel rejected Shell’s complaint, finding the respondent had a legitimate interest and that bad faith had not been proved. The domain then became one of the main Shell-critical archive sites.

Sources: WIPO Case No. D2005-0538, Domain name battle with Shell, Published Donovan Shell feud timeline and Wikipedia: royaldutchshellplc.com section.

2005 to 2007 – Sakhalin II debacle

Sakhalin II became a major Shell embarrassment involving cost overruns, environmental controversy, Russian pressure, and the forced sale-down of Shell’s controlling stake to Gazprom. John Donovan says he supplied leaked Shell/Sakhalin information to Russian officials. The Guardian later reported that Russian regulator Oleg Mitvol publicly acknowledged the Donovans’ help in obtaining information about alleged environmental abuses; Shell denied breaking environmental regulations.

Sources: ShellNews: Sakhalin 2 Debacle, The Guardian: 92-year-old’s website leaves oil giant Shell-shocked, Johnson’s Russia List Sakhalin article and Financial Times: Sakhalin memo.

2007 – Internal Shell emails on Donovan monitoring and source tracing

Shell internal emails released under data-protection requests are central to the Donovan spying allegations. A March 2007 DPA email said the Donovans were “of no security interest” unless an information-security tasking was set to identify their Shell sources. A 21 March 2007 confidential email said an IT project had been initiated to monitor internal Shell emails to Donovan and web traffic to the Donovans’ website.

Sources: Royal Dutch Shell/John Donovan DPA Index Page, 20 March 2007 internal email, 21 March 2007 confidential internal email and 31 August 2007 issue update.

2007 to 2008 – Greenwashing rulings and flower-chimney advertising

Shell’s environmental advertising became a recurring greenwashing target. Campaigners criticised ads implying waste carbon dioxide was being used to grow flowers, and in 2008 the UK Advertising Standards Authority ruled against a Shell advertisement that described a Canadian oil sands project as a “sustainable energy source”.

Sources: The Guardian: Shell rapped by ASA for greenwash advert, Examples of Shell’s environmental track record and The Guardian: Shell knew.

2008 – US government oil-sex-and-drugs scandal

The ShellNews and RoyalDutchShellGroup archives collect headlines about the 2008 US Interior Department scandal involving sex, drugs, gifts, and energy-company employees. The archive notes that the Wall Street Journal report named four companies, including a US unit of Royal Dutch Shell, as gift givers. This entry is included as an archive trail, not as a finding that Shell was responsible for all misconduct described in the wider scandal.

Sources: RoyalDutchShellGroup.com: News headlines file for Royal Dutch Shell sex and drugs scandal and ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file.

2009 – Shell targeting claims reported by Reuters

Reuters reported in December 2009 that John Donovan said Shell had asked an anti-cyber-fraud agency to target his website. The report said Shell did not comment on the veracity of the communications or Donovan’s allegations, but confirmed that Donovan had made a data request. Internal emails in the DPA archive also discussed “no attempt to do anything visible to Donovan” and questions about whether anything was being done to get the website shut down.

Sources: Reuters report archived by ShellNews, 17 June 2009 internal email, 15 July 2009 internal email and For decades Shell has tried to suppress online criticism.

2010 – Shell employee and contractor data breach

In 2010 a Shell internal directory containing contact details for a very large number of employees and contractors was leaked to campaign groups and to royaldutchshellplc.com. ITPro reported that details of about 170,000 workers had been emailed to campaigners. Shell said it had launched an investigation and demanded deletion of the database.

Sources: ITPro: Shell hit by massive data breach, The Times report archived by ShellNews, RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: Shell Data Breach archive and Shell data leak may compromise safety of staff.

2010 – Nigeria customs bribery / Panalpina FCPA settlements

US authorities announced settlements involving Panalpina and several oil services or energy companies. The US Department of Justice said Panalpina paid bribes to foreign officials in several countries including Nigeria, and that Shell Nigeria Exploration and Production Company Ltd was among customers resolving related foreign-bribery investigations. NYU’s enforcement database summarises the Shell settlement as including a $30 million criminal fine and SEC disgorgement and interest.

Sources: US Department of Justice press release, NYU Law: 2010-214 Royal Dutch Shell plc and Royal Dutch Shell corruption in Nigeria.

2011 – Bodo oil spills and Shell liability in Nigeria

Shell accepted liability for two major oil spills affecting the Bodo community in Ogoniland. The Guardian reported that Shell faced a major compensation bill and that clean-up could take many years. The episode became one of the central examples used by campaigners to argue that Shell’s Niger Delta spill record was not adequately acknowledged or repaired.

Sources: The Guardian: Shell accepts liability for two oil spills in Nigeria, ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file and Wikipedia: Shell Nigeria.

2011 onward – OPL 245 corruption allegations

Shell and Eni’s acquisition of Nigerian offshore block OPL 245 became one of the largest corruption controversies in the oil industry. Global Witness alleged that Shell knew money would flow to a former Nigerian oil minister and others; Shell has denied wrongdoing. An Italian criminal trial ended with acquittals, and campaign groups later urged US and Dutch authorities to reopen investigations.

Sources: Global Witness: Shell knew, Transparency International: OPL 245 investigations, Wikipedia: OPL 245 bribery affair and RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: OPL 245 archive.

2012 to 2013 – Kulluk and Shell’s Arctic drilling debacle

Shell’s Arctic drilling programme was beset by operational problems. The Kulluk drilling rig ran aground off Alaska at the end of 2012 while under tow. ShellNews preserves the US Coast Guard’s redacted report. The episode became a symbol of the operational risks and public criticism surrounding Shell’s Arctic ambitions.

Sources: US Coast Guard Kulluk report archived by ShellNews, Wikipedia: Shell plc, Kulluk oil rig and ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file.

2012 to 2013 – Brazilian pesticide plant compensation

ShellNews’ evidence file records reports that Shell Brasil and BASF reached compensation arrangements relating to former workers at a pesticide plant in Paulinia, Brazil, and that court reporting linked the plant to serious health claims. This sits alongside Donovan’s broader pesticide archive and the long toxic legacy of Shell chemical products.

Sources: ShellNews Wikipedia evidence file, Royal Dutch Shell denial of Brazilian pesticide diseases and Shell pesticide archive.

2013 to 2015 – Defective or oversold “wonder fuels”

RoyalDutchShellPlc.com preserves a long-running archive about Shell fuel marketing, including Shell Optimax, V-Power, fuel-claim advertising, and alleged customer problems. The Sunday Times coverage of premium fuels and Advertising Standards Authority action are part of the archive’s argument that Shell repeatedly overstated product benefits.

Sources: Shell Optimax: The wonder fuels that don’t deliver, Will Shell’s new V-Power Nitro Plus fuel ruin car engines? and ShellNews original stories index.

2015 – Pieter Schelte, Nazi naming controversy, and Shell decommissioning

ShellNaziHistory.com and RoyalDutchShellPlc.com linked Shell’s Brent decommissioning work to the public controversy around the giant vessel originally named Pieter Schelte, after Pieter Schelte Heerema, a former Waffen-SS officer. Shell faced criticism because the vessel was connected to decommissioning work on Shell’s Brent field.

Sources: ShellNaziHistory.com, RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: Pieter Schelte archive and ShellNaziHistory.com: Royal Dutch Shell tag archive.

2017 – Amnesty’s “criminal enterprise” framing of Shell in Nigeria

Amnesty International reviewed internal Shell documents and other evidence and argued that Shell’s Nigerian operations in the 1990s warranted investigation for complicity in murder, rape and torture by Nigerian security forces. Shell has denied responsibility for the abuses. The Amnesty report remains one of the strongest campaign-source indictments of Shell’s Nigeria record.

Sources: Amnesty International UK: Shell, a criminal enterprise? and Amnesty International: Ogoni Nine case.

2021 – Dutch court orders Shell Nigeria compensation for oil spills

In January 2021, the Hague Court of Appeal ruled that Shell’s Nigerian subsidiary was liable for damage from oil spills in villages in the Niger Delta. Shell maintained that sabotage was involved in some spill cases, but the ruling was a landmark for Nigerian farmers and environmental campaigners.

Sources: Al Jazeera: Dutch court orders Shell to pay Nigerian farmers, Wikipedia: Shell Nigeria and RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: Nigeria archive.

2021 to 2024 – Climate litigation and Shell’s emissions responsibility

In 2021 a Dutch court ordered Shell to cut emissions by 45 percent by 2030 compared with 2019 levels. In November 2024, a Dutch appeals court overturned the specific reduction order, while still recognising climate-related duties and the wider energy-transition context. For critics, the case kept Shell’s fossil-fuel expansion and climate claims in the public dock even after Shell won on appeal.

Sources: The Guardian: Shell wins appeal against climate ruling, Stibbe: No reduction order for Shell on appeal and Wikipedia: Shell plc, climate change.

2021 to 2025 – Prelude FLNG safety restrictions and worker-health issues

Australia’s offshore regulator ordered Shell to keep Prelude FLNG shut after a power-loss and safety-systems incident in December 2021 until Shell could demonstrate safe operation. Later reporting and Shell-critical archive material cite further concerns about fire or explosion risk, hazardous-gas exposure, benzene and hydrogen sulphide, and workforce illness investigations.

Sources: gCaptain: Australia tells Shell to keep Prelude offline, The Maritime Executive: Prelude safety review shutdown, AP: leaked files raise fears over Shell fleet safety and Illness outbreak on Shell’s Prelude.

2022 – Shell drops “Royal Dutch” but not the old record

Shell confirmed in January 2022 that Royal Dutch Shell plc had changed its name to Shell plc. The corporate rebrand did not erase the online record. RoyalDutchShellPlc.com continued using the old name as a criticism and archive domain, with the WIPO decision still standing as the key legal moment in the domain dispute.

Sources: Shell announcement, 21 January 2022, RoyalDutchShellPlc.com and WIPO Case No. D2005-0538.

2023 onward – Pennsylvania ethane cracker pollution violations

Shell’s Beaver County, Pennsylvania petrochemical complex became a major US environmental controversy soon after start-up. Pennsylvania announced a $10 million payment to resolve air-quality violations, including funds for local community projects. Subsequent reporting continued to track permit exceedances, notices of violation, and community complaints.

Sources: Pennsylvania Governor: $10 million payment from Shell, Allegheny Front: $10M fine for Beaver County cracker, PublicSource: Shell cracker pollution exceeds permits and The Guardian: Pennsylvania residents feel sacrificed.

2023 to 2026 – Groningen earthquakes and Shell/Exxon compensation dispute

The Dutch parliamentary inquiry into Groningen gas extraction concluded that the interests of Groningen residents had been structurally ignored. Its press release said gas revenues brought huge benefits to the Dutch treasury and profits to Shell and ExxonMobil shareholders, while Groningen bore damage, insecurity, and pain. Later NGO reporting said Shell and ExxonMobil pursued arbitration over closure of the gas field.

Sources: Dutch parliamentary inquiry press release, Drilled: Groningen arbitration reporting, Land & Climate Review: Groningen and investor arbitration and Wikipedia: Groningen gas field.

2023 to 2024 – Shell’s Greenpeace lawsuit and SLAPP criticism

Greenpeace accused Shell of using a multimillion-dollar intimidation lawsuit after activists boarded a Shell-contracted moving platform to protest new oil and gas drilling. Greenpeace described the case as a SLAPP-style attempt to silence protest. In late 2024 Greenpeace announced a settlement with Shell, while maintaining that the case had been an intimidation tactic.

Sources: Greenpeace UK: Shell hits Greenpeace with intimidation lawsuit, Greenpeace International: Shell settles multimillion-dollar SLAPP lawsuit and The Guardian: public figures urge Shell to drop case.

2024 – Leaked files raise new questions about Shell offshore safety

Associated Press reported on leaked documents and whistleblower accounts raising safety concerns about Shell’s fleet of offshore production vessels, including references to the Bonga spill, recurring incidents, severe corrosion, burn injuries, and Prelude-related concerns. Shell said safety incidents had declined and pointed to improvements.

Sources: AP: leaked files raise fears over Shell oil production fleet and AP: takeaways from Shell safety concerns investigation.

2026 – The Donovan archive becomes an AI-age reputational problem

John Donovan’s January 2026 article calculates the Shell archive across RoyalDutchShellPlc.com, RoyalDutchShellGroup.com, and ShellNews.net at approximately 114,307 items, while noting further hard-copy material obtained from Shell under Subject Access Request applications. The point of the archive is persistence: Shell controversies, leaked emails, fines, settlements, and historic associations remain accessible to readers and to AI systems. Donovan frames himself as a self-appointed critic and archive builder whose work has turned Shell’s old controversies into a living record.

Sources: The Shell Archive: 114,307 Reasons Silence No Longer Works, Shell and the Donovans: The Full Media Record, Sueddeutsche Zeitung profile archived by ShellNews, John Donovan Amazon author page and RoyalDutchShellPlc.com Shell Online Library.

Core sources and archive hubs

• Wikipedia: Shell plc
• Shell: Our company history
• A History of Royal Dutch Shell, 2007, Internet Archive
• ShellNaziHistory.com
• ShellNews.net Wikipedia evidence file
• Timeline of the Donovan Shell Feud, published 15 June 2026
• Local ShellNews.net timeline of the Donovan Shell feud
• The Shell Archive: 114,307 Reasons Silence No Longer Works
• Shell and the Donovans: The Full Media Record
• RoyalDutchShellPlc.com: Shell Online Library
• John Donovan Amazon author page
• John Donovan, Shell’s nightmare, Kindle page
• Sir Henri Deterding and the Nazi History of Royal Dutch Shell, Kindle page
• Toxic facts about Shell removed from Wikipedia, Kindle page

This timeline is intended as a public-interest navigation aid. It combines regulatory findings, court records, mainstream reports, campaign documents, Shell-critical archive material, and attributed allegations. Readers should follow the links and assess the underlying source documents.

Return to ShellNews.net home page

Toxic Timeline of Royal Dutch Shell Group, Now Shell plc was first posted on June 15, 2026 at 8:10 pm.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

This article The left needs better answers for scared people was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

These are insecure times. My relatives in Tehran are bracing for bombs to fall again. Fighter planes screamed through the skies here in Athens a few weeks back — it was an airshow, technically, but it didn’t feel like one. 

War talk is on TV panels every night; algorithms serve images of conflict straight to my eyeballs. Europe is sliding towards militarization without debate: the fear is Russian aggression, and the response is more money for weapons, talk of reviving the draft. And the nearest hot war zone – Ukraine – is still 900 miles from where I live. How must those guys be feeling?

Maybe the threats I’m sensing are inflated; maybe they’re imaginary. But as a father, will I take that chance?

And yet. Here’s what the left offers me to address that fear: marches under the banner of “Welfare Not Warfare,” demands that Europe halt its rearmament and critiques of the hawkish propaganda push. Calls to dismantle NATO. Articles tracking the share price gains of weapons manufacturers Rheinmetall and Lockheed Martin.

#newsletter-block_261ef375f8f5145fb8f45776e6eb2038 { background: #ececec; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_261ef375f8f5145fb8f45776e6eb2038 #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.

I know all this. And I agree with much of it, including the case for leaving NATO. But none of it speaks to what I’m feeling: that my family here could end up on the wrong end of someone else’s escalation, soon. And that if the worst happens, I need to know there’s something here to defend us. The left’s response addresses what’s morally wrong about war. It says nothing about what could protect me from it.

These fears are real, and they are shared. Across the West, the left has a chronic inability to meet them.

I’ve sat in the rooms where left organizations have made calls like these. I’ve made some of them myself. And I have a few thoughts on why it keeps happening, and what we can do about it.

Maximal demands = minimal impact 

Let me sharpen this. Our problem on the left is much broader than how we argue against militarization. It’s that on topics that make the public anxious, we make maximalist demands. And we make them at exactly the moments when people need the opposite: something concrete.

“Abolish ICE” came in 2018, at a time when Americans were nervous about immigration and a chaotic border. It was read by its audience as “no enforcement at all.” Only a quarter of Democrats backed eliminating the agency when the slogan launched. See also: calls for “open borders” in most of Europe.

Previous Coverage

The method behind Just Stop Oil’s madness

“Defund the police” came in 2020, when Americans were worried about rising crime. It landed with the public as “less safety,” and fewer than 1 in 5 Americans supported it a year later. 

“Just Stop Oil” came in 2022, when Britons were facing the worst energy bills in a generation. The  policy demand itself (no new oil and gas licenses) was defensible. But to ordinary people worried about who pays for the transition, it was received as “make your bills worse.” Sixty-eight percent of Britons disapproved of the campaign.

Three demands, three fears, three failures. Each came out with a position that didn’t just fail with the public, it failed with the constituencies the movement claimed to speak for. A campaign that can’t build the coalition needed to move power can’t deliver what its slogan promised. Yes, these slogans raised awareness — but awareness is not a theory of change.

Meanwhile the right acknowledges people’s fears, exploits them and wins elections. Again and again and again. 

Why we keep doing it

I can give you three reasons.

We think we’re being radical. Extraordinary times, extraordinary measures. In strategy discussions I often hear some version of “we must meet their radicality with our own.” I agree with the spirit, and many of the goals. But the strategic approach is the radical one. Radical means bringing about radical change, not just talking about it. The values-first, maximalist position shifts nothing. It’s a luxury belief.

We tell ourselves the maximalist demand is a negotiating position — ask for the moon, settle for half. But we’re not in a negotiation. Power doesn’t move when it sees a placard. It moves when it feels threatened.

And lastly, we have the wrong audience in mind. Too much of our communication is signaling to other activists, not to people who might be persuaded. We’re showing the room that we’re loyal members of the tribe — which is not the same thing as winning.

What to do instead

We need to run on two horizons, separating our ambitious end goals from our next public demand. The end goal stays underneath, guiding the work. The public demand answers what people are actually scared of today — it should be winnable now and accessible to majorities now, even when the end goal is neither, yet.

So start with the fear. Whatever propaganda planted it there — about Russia, migrants, crime or the cost of going green — we must accept that it’s already taken hold, and respond to it. We may disagree that the fear is justified; we may think the establishment is whipping it up. But it exists in our audiences’ heads and we have to take it seriously. We can’t argue it away. We can offer a better explanation of where it comes from, and a demand that follows from that.

Not every fear deserves a response, though. The ones worth answering have a particular shape: they’re material, not abstract — cost of living, war, jobs, housing, crime, not “fear of decline” or “fear of cultural change.” They’re shared by majorities, not just activists. And they’re something the state can deliver on in the short term, not in a decade. 

Once you’ve isolated the fear, formulate a demand that meets it directly. For example:

• On migration, the fear has two parts that get conflated: fear of newcomers competing for scarce resources, and fear of the unfamiliar. So we should answer the concern that “they take our jobs” without scapegoating the workers being underpaid. We should be calling for labor law to be enforced for every worker, like the Independent Workers’ Union of Great Britain does in the U.K. When no one can be paid below minimum wage, no one can be undercut.  We should demand integration for everyone who arrives, especially language courses, as Germany does (not to preserve cultural sameness, but to enable practical inclusion in shared institutions). Plus the processing of every asylum claim within six months — which would address the anxiety of a “broken system” that the right exploits, while protecting people from being left in legal limbo for years. 

• On militarization, the fear of war is real. So we should be naming what would actually defend us — the things that keep a country standing in a crisis. Not just the military readiness that the right keeps pointing at, but secure energy, cyber resilience, robust democracy and climate adaptation. And conversely, we should call out what is being sold as defense, but isn’t. We should be saying no to putting soldiers’ lives at risk for no defensive purpose — no to the draft, no sending troops to wars that we didn’t vote for. We should be refusing to serve as a base for U.S. operations in the Middle East. And calling for European security to be in European hands, publicly owned and democratically accountable, rather than handed to the shareholders of American and German arms companies who profit from more war. These are first-step demands, of course. The deeper, patient work is building civilian-based defense: nonviolent capacity to deter aggression and resist occupation or repression — without war.

The test for every demand is the same: Could someone scared vote for this without feeling they’re voting against their own safety? If not, we have to find the version of it that they could.

The right will accuse us of going soft, and offer its own version of safety — enforcement, deportation, tougher borders, more police. These can look like quick fixes that calm fears. But they aren’t, and they don’t. Trump’s mass deportations haven’t reduced crime, lowered prices or made anyone materially safer. France’s headscarf bans haven’t reduced extremism. Stop and search in the U.K. didn’t reduce crime. Performed safety usually fails the delivery test. The left has a chance here to offer a real alternative. 

Precedents with two horizons

It’s been done before. Bayard Rustin, a key architect of the U.S. civil rights movement, explicitly named the tension between end goals and immediate demands. The moderate who only pursues what’s politically achievable, Rustin said, is in practice telling people to accept the status quo. But the radical who only demands the end goal, with no program to win it, is something worse — what Rustin called a “moralist.” Someone who substitutes shock for strategy and “seeks to change … hearts by traumatizing them.”

Rustin also understood that minority causes are only won by connecting them to majority ones. He argued that civil rights couldn’t be won by Black Americans alone; they needed “a coalition of progressive forces which becomes the effective political majority in the U.S.” That’s why the 1963 march, the largest civil rights demonstration in American history, was officially called the March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom. It put jobs first.

The 1963 March on Washington demanded jobs for all and equal rights. (Wally McNamee/Corbis/Corbis via Getty Images)

The civil rights movement succeeded because it kept two horizons. Its end goal of full racial equality wasn’t hidden — but the public demands spoke to the economic fears that most Americans shared.

Zohran Mamdani is doing something similar right now. He has talked inside socialist meetings about seizing the means of production, but his demands and his rallies don’t call for it. Instead, he won the NYC mayoral election running almost entirely on affordability — a rent freeze on stabilized apartments, free city buses, universal childcare and public grocery stores. He made the distinction explicit in a speech back in 2021:

“There are also issues we firmly believe in — whether it’s BDS or the end goal of seizing the means of production — where we do not have the same level of support right now. It is critical that we do not leave any one issue for the other … meet people where they’re at, and organize for what is right, and ensure over time we can bring people to that issue.”

Two horizons — one for the immediate demands of the moment, one for the end goal.

#support-block_31aea4132c04a5f496624f802deba55b { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

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

Donate

None of this means maximalist demands never resonate. “Abolish ICE” is polling better today than it has in years, because Trump’s overreach has finally given it an audience. The point isn’t that the demand was wrong when it was first launched in 2018. It’s that its moment hadn’t yet come — and the left can’t will that into being by shouting harder. We can only fight on the terrain we actually have.

The here and now

Back to where I started: my family in Tehran. The planes over Athens. The shared fear, real or imagined, that something is coming.

If the left wants to be heard, it has to answer the fear. With a demand that meets the moment — not the end goal underneath. The goal is important, but it can wait. The fear can’t.

This article The left needs better answers for scared people was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

While Rowe Sanctuary is widely recognized for the Sandhill Crane migration and the bird life that draws in visitors from around the world, the landscape here supports far more than what most people...

© Camila Aguilera

A reciclagem de plásticos no Brasil segue sustentada por um mito perigoso: o de que todo material identificado como “reciclável” de fato retorna ao ciclo produtivo. A segunda edição da pesquisa “Catadores por Menos Plástico”, conduzida pelo Instituto de Direito Coletivo (IDC) em parceria com a Universidade Federal Fluminense (UFF), mostra que essa lógica não apenas persiste como aprofunda prejuízos sociais, ambientais e econômicos para os trabalhadores da reciclagem.

Realizado entre julho e dezembro de 2025, o novo levantamento acompanhou o trabalho de 20 associações e cooperativas de catadores, na capital e no interior do estado do Rio de Janeiro, mantendo o mesmo recorte territorial da primeira edição para permitir a comparação dos dados. Os resultados confirmam o cenário já identificado em 2024: os plásticos seguem como a principal categoria entre os rejeitos das cooperativas. Na segunda edição do estudo, eles representam cerca de 45% do material que não é reciclado e acaba destinado a aterros, lixões ou ao meio ambiente, mantendo-se como o maior componente do rejeito, apesar da redução em relação à edição anterior.

Além de confirmar a baixa reciclabilidade real das embalagens plásticas, a segunda edição da pesquisa aprofunda a mensuração dos danos econômicos e trabalhistas impostos aos catadores. O estudo aponta que cada catador perde, em média, 15,59 horas de trabalho por mês na triagem de plásticos que não têm valor de mercado — o equivalente a 9,38% do tempo mensal de trabalho, ou aproximadamente 2,08 dias de trabalho por mês dedicados a resíduos que não geram qualquer retorno financeiro

Em termos econômicos, a pesquisa estima que as 17 associações e cooperativas incluídas no cálculo deixam de arrecadar, mensalmente, entre R$ 1.179,03 e R$ 3.771,72, apenas considerando os tipos de plásticos que já possuem valor de mercado em pelo menos um dos territórios analisados. A variação decorre dos diferentes preços praticados na comercialização do PET Bandeja, que pode oscilar entre R$ 0,30 e R$ 3,70 por quilo, dependendo da forma de triagem e do comprador final

Segundo Tatiana Bastos, presidente do Instituto de Direito Coletivo (IDC), os dados escancaram uma distorção estrutural do sistema: “Estamos falando de quase 15 horas de trabalho desperdiçadas por catador todos os meses e de uma perda financeira recorrente para cooperativas que já operam no limite. Isso demonstra a falha do modelo de produção de embalagens e a ausência de responsabilidade real da indústria.”

Outro dado preocupante é o aumento da taxa geral de rejeitos nas amostras analisadas, especialmente nas cooperativas da capital, indicando uma piora na qualidade dos materiais encaminhados à coleta seletiva. “O que chamamos de reciclagem hoje transfere custo, tempo e desgaste físico para os catadores. Eles trabalham mais para ganhar menos, enquanto a indústria continua produzindo embalagens inviáveis do ponto de vista técnico ou econômico”, afirma Tatiana.

A pesquisa também realizou uma auditoria de marcas, identificando grupos empresariais responsáveis por grande parte das embalagens plásticas encontradas entre os rejeitos. Embora quase 200 empresas tenham sido identificadas, um número reduzido de grupos empresariais aparece de forma recorrente entre as embalagens encontradas nas cooperativas, reforçando a necessidade de responsabilização efetiva da indústria por meio da logística reversa e do redesenho de embalagens.

Os resultados da primeira edição do estudo já embasaram o Projeto de Lei nº 5.392/2025, em tramitação na Assembleia Legislativa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (Alerj), que propõe a eliminação progressiva de embalagens não recicláveis, regras mais rígidas de rotulagem e o pagamento direto aos catadores pelos serviços ambientais prestados. A nova edição fortalece ainda mais essa agenda, ao demonstrar que o problema não é pontual, mas estrutural.

Para o IDC, combater o greenwashing e avançar rumo a uma economia circular justa exige mudanças urgentes na origem do problema. “Não existe reciclagem possível quando o produto já nasce como rejeito. Enquanto isso não mudar, o sistema continuará injusto com quem sustenta a reciclagem no Brasil”, conclui Tatiana Bastos.

The post Segunda edição de pesquisa revela agravamento do impacto do plástico não reciclável sobre catadores no Rio de Janeiro first appeared on GAIA.

Civil society groups have called for an investigation into the first carbon credits approved under a new UN mechanism, alleging the project is linked to Myanmar’s military junta – which the UN says is guilty of human rights abuses – and has “massively” overstated its climate impact. 

The programme, which aims to cut emissions by distributing efficient cookstoves across Myanmar, received approval to issue around 650,000 carbon credits from the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body in February, in a landmark moment for the Paris Agreement’s carbon market. Only two projects have been given the green light by the mechanism’s regulator so far.

But two reports published last week, led by the Global Forest Coalition and Brussels-based NGO Carbon Market Watch, raised serious concerns about the project’s implementation in conflict zones where civilians have faced airstrikes and mass displacement as well as its emission-reduction calculations.

Project continued after military coup

Myanmar has been ravaged by a brutal civil war since the country’s military overthrew the democratically elected government in a coup d’état in February 2021. The military regime has attacked civilian populations, persecuted ethnic minorities and committed widespread sexual violence, among other serious human rights violations, the UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Myanmar said in April.

The cookstove programme started in 2018 under the previous UN-run carbon offsetting scheme – the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM) – as a partnership between Myanmar’s Ministry of Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation (MONREC) and the Climate Change Center (CCC), a South Korean NGO, with investment from private South Korean firms.

• Jun 11, 2026 Politics Fewer journalists register for Bonn talks, as cuts to climate reporting bite UN data shows a smaller number have signed up to cover the mid-year climate negotiations in Germany than in any year since the COVID-19 pandemic Read more
• Jun 12, 2026 News European, island states seek clear future for global roadmap to cut fossil fuels Some European, small island and other nations argue the forthcoming roadmap should be part of UN climate talks, while Russia has resisted this idea Read more

The project continued operating after the coup. For most of the period between 2021 and 2022 in which the issued credits were generated, MONREC was led by Colonel Khin Maung Yi, who was sanctioned by the European Union in 2021 for supporting the military regime, the Global Forest Coalition report said.

CCC acknowledged engaging with government authorities after the coup but said this “should not be interpreted as political endorsement” of the junta. The South Korean NGO added that abandoning the programme when political circumstances changed “would not necessarily have been the most responsible outcome for the households involved”.

Conflict prevents on the ground verification

The Global Forest Coalition report raised particular concerns about the project’s implementation in Myanmar’s central Dry Zone, including Sagaing Region, an anti-junta resistance stronghold that has been most heavily affected by the conflict and routinely targeted by airstrikes and violent attacks. The region accounts for more than a third of Myanmar’s 3.8 million internally displaced people.

The NGOs said that, in addition to ethical concerns about carbon credits being produced by the military government in an area actively affected by its attacks, this raises questions over the ability to effectively verify the climate integrity of the projects.

TAK, THAILAND – JANUARY 01: Internally displaced people (IDP) from Myanmar carrying bags of donated supplies from Thailand while crossing the Moei river as seen from behind a fence with razor wire on the river bank in Mae Sot, a district at the Thai-Myanmar border on new year on January 1, 2022 in Tak, Thailand. (Photo by Sirachai Arunrugstichai/Getty Images) TAK, THAILAND – JANUARY 01: Internally displaced people (IDP) from Myanmar carrying bags of donated supplies from Thailand while crossing the Moei river as seen from behind a fence with razor wire on the river bank in Mae Sot, a district at the Thai-Myanmar border on new year on January 1, 2022 in Tak, Thailand. (Photo by Sirachai Arunrugstichai/Getty Images)

Before carbon credits are issued, external auditors need to validate the claims made by project developers and confirm that the emission reductions claimed are correct. This process usually includes site visits to a representative sample of households to check how the improved cookstoves are being used. 

But, because of the “volatile political situation” in Myanmar, the auditing team was not able to leave the capital Yangon and could only speak to project participants remotely via Zoom, project documents show. 

“Due to ongoing armed conflict on the ground, the data currently used to justify carbon credit issuance in Sagaing by the Burmese military junta is unverifiable and highly likely fraudulent,” said Zaw Tuseng, founder and president of the Myanmar Policy Institute, which contributed to the report, in a written statement. “This demands an immediate suspension of credit transfers until a neutral, conflict-sensitive audit can be conducted.”

“Exceptional circumstances”

CCC told Climate Home News that, although it recognises that on-site verification is “generally preferable, particularly in complex operating environments”, the decision to opt for remote controls was not taken “as a discretionary shortcut, but as an approved alternative under exceptional circumstances”.

The South Korean NGO added that it reviewed the feasibility of the project at community level “on an ongoing basis” and it “did not identify conflict-related incidents that directly affected project implementation activities in participating communities during the monitoring period”.

A spokesperson for the UN climate change body told Climate Home News that, when site access is not possible, the UN carbon credit mechanism allows for “alternative verification approaches while still maintaining conservative assumptions and environmental integrity safeguards”. “These provisions ensure that crediting can only proceed where evidence is reliable,” they added. 

Contested methodology

Carbon markets are seen as an important channel to raise money to help low-income communities in developing countries switch to less polluting cooking methods, both reducing CO2 emissions and improving air quality. But several cookstove offsetting projects have faced criticism from researchers and campaigners who argue that climate benefits are often exaggerated and weak monitoring can undermine claims of real emission reductions.

The project in Myanmar uses a contested methodology developed under the earlier Kyoto Protocol that was rejected last year by The Integrity Council for the Voluntary Carbon Market (ICVCM), a watchdog that issues quality labels to carbon credit types, because it found it “insufficiently rigorous”.

EU carbon credits could supercharge world’s clean cooking push, France says

After transitioning from the CDM to the new mechanism, the project was required to apply “more conservative” assumptions to calculate emission reductions, which resulted in 40% fewer credits being issued, according to the UN climate change body.

“The result is consistent with environmental integrity requirements and ensures that each credited tonne genuinely represents a tonne reduced and contributes to the goals of the Paris Agreement,” Mkhuthazi Steleki, the South African chair of the Article 6.4 Supervisory Body, which oversees the mechanism, said in February. 

Too many credits issued

But Carbon Market Watch claimed in a second report last week that, despite the adjustment, the project is still likely to issue seven times more credits than its real climate impact justifies, comparing its calculations with values from peer-reviewed scientific literature.

The biggest driver of the credit inflation, the group said, is the failure to account for “stacking” – the widespread practice of households using multiple stoves at the same time, including more polluting ones the project does not monitor. 

Peer-reviewed science considers a stacking rate of 68% a conservative assumption, but the methodology used by the Myanmar programme makes no allowance for it at all, the report said. 

CCC disputed those findings. In a written response to Climate Home News, it said the project was developed under methodologies approved within the UN climate framework and that external recalculations by researchers are not “determinative of the level of crediting achieved”.

The credits are expected to be used primarily by major South Korean polluters to meet obligations under the country’s emissions trading system – a move that will also enable the government to count those units toward emissions reduction targets in its nationally determined contribution (NDC), the UN climate body told Climate Home News.

Myanmar will use the remaining credits to achieve in part the goals of its own national climate plan under the Paris Agreement.

“Over-crediting, at any magnitude, cannot be compatible with the climate ambition of a world striving to limit global warming to 1.5ºC,” said Isa Mulder, an expert at Carbon Market Watch.

The post UN’s first Paris Agreement carbon credits face human rights and climate concerns appeared first on Climate Home News.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

June 15, 2026

Lawsuit Launched to Challenge Oil Highway That Threatens World-Renowned Nine Mile Canyon 

Contacts:
Grant Stevens, Communications Director, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (319) 427-0260; grant@suwa.org
Deeda Seed, Center for Biological Diversity, (801) 803-9892, dseed@biologicaldiversity.org

Salt Lake City, UT – The Center for Biological Diversity today filed a notice of intent to sue the Trump administration’s Bureau of Land Management for quietly approving a hydrocarbon highway through Utah’s scenic, culturally and historically significant Gate Canyon in the West Tavaputs Plateau region of eastern Utah.  

“This lawsuit targets the Trump administration’s disgraceful plan to transform a quiet, meandering backcountry road into a highway clogged with speeding oil tankers,” said Deeda Seed, Senior Utah Campaigner at the Center. “Blasting through Gate Canyon’s walls threatens the area’s iconic rock art and will be a disaster for nearby animals, including threatened Mexican spotted owls. We’re prepared to go to court to protect this irreplaceable cultural treasure and the animals that call it home.” 

Gate Canyon feeds into Nine Mile Canyon — a world-renowned archaeological area that contains more than 10,000 unique, irreplaceable cultural, historical and archaeological resources.  The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA)filed a similar 60-day notice in April. Both notices say the BLM and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service violated the Endangered Species Act by not considering the project’s threats to Mexican spotted owls, despite the fact that the BLM identified the cliffs near the proposed blasting areas as potential owl habitat. 

“The BLM knew that prior versions of this same proposal were extremely controversial and faced fierce public headwinds,” said Landon Newell, Staff Attorney with SUWA. “This time around, instead of facing the public, they hid their decision from scrutiny, rushing their analysis and approval, all under the guise of Trump’s “Energy Dominance” agenda.” 

The project, known as the “Wells Draw Road Amendment – Gate Canyon,” was proposed by Duchesne County and approved by the BLM on April 28, 2026. It involves the blasting and destruction of cliff walls and other large rock features in Gate Canyon to straighten and pave a 5.3-mile dirt road that winds through the scenic canyon as it climbs from Nine Mile Canyon to the Badland Cliffs region of the southern Uinta Basin.   

The project is intended to provide an alternative route for transporting oil out of the Uinta Basin. The road would accommodate 70-foot oil tanker trucks traveling between the oil fields and transloading facilities in Carbon County, Utah. It is estimated that once the destruction of Gate Canyon is complete as many as 1,000 vehicles could pass through each day — the equivalent of “[a] tanker truck every 7 minutes,” according to news reports.  

This marks the third attempt by the county to destroy Gate Canyon. In 2015 and 2022, the BLM received similar applications to realign Gate Canyon Road, but those projects were abandoned amid significant public opposition.  The BLM quietly posted the latest iteration of the project in March 2026 without issuing public notice or opening a formal comment period. After learning of the project, conservation groups requested that the BLM allow for public participation in the decision-making process. The agency denied those requests and quickly approved the project in April.  

Nine Mile Canyon is often referred to as “the world’s longest art gallery” because of its extensive collection of rock art and archeological sites. Previous BLM studies describe the area as containing “a significant and high density of historic, cultural, and archeological sites joined together in several overlapping historic landscapes” and saying it “is known to contain the country’s highest concentration of rock art panels, remnants of the prehistoric Archaic, Freemont, and Ute cultures . . . The rock structural remains of Fremont homes, granaries, and ‘forts’ are more visible in Nine Mile Canyon than almost anywhere in the Fremont cultural area.” 

### 
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 a world-renowned landscape. Learn more at www.suwa.org. 

 

 

The post Lawsuit Launched to Challenge Oil Highway That Threatens World-Renowned Nine Mile Canyon – 6.15.26  appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

On Friday, a federal judge ordered the Trump administration to reinstall exhibits and signs that were removed as part of the administration’s efforts to silence American history in national parks.

The preliminary injunction comes as a result of efforts by a coalition of conservation advocates, which filed a challenge earlier this year to a U.S. Department of the Interior policy that is actively erasing history and science from national parks. The policy seeks to remove any signage that “disparages Americans,” but in practice, the administration removed signs that mentioned topics like slavery, Indigenous history, or climate change.

As part of the administration’s efforts, QR codes were put up at national parks across the country, directing visitors to report any signs that are “negative” about past or living Americans. A recent analysis from the Center for Western Priorities found that 99.9 percent of the comments defended historical accuracy, expressed support for the National Park Service, or pushed back against the order, while only 0.1 percent flagged a specific sign or supported sign removal.

According to U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley, removing these signs not only undermines “the integrity of the National Parks; it sets a dangerous precedent of censorship and sanitization.”

Mike Lee fails to scrap Grand Staircase-Escalante management plan

The U.S. Senate missed the 60-day window that would have allowed lawmakers to scrap the management plan for Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument in Utah. The effort, led by Senator Mike Lee and Representative Celeste Maloy, would have used the Congressional Review Act to reverse a management plan that took years of collaboration among Tribes, state and local governments, stakeholders, and the public.

“This is a major victory for the millions of Americans who care deeply about the Grand Staircase and for everyone who supports our nation’s wildest public lands and want to see them protected,” said Scott Braden, executive director of the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

Quick hits Algae resurfaces in reflecting pool after multimillion-dollar fixes

POLITICO

Judge orders Trump officials to re-install signs and exhibits at national parks on topics like slavery and climate change

Associated Press | CNN | New York Times | NBC News | PBS News | CBS News | SFGATE | Los Angeles Times | Reuters

Feds to open tens of thousands of acres of Colorado wilderness to oil drilling

Colorado Newsline

Trump concedes a battle in his war against wind energy

Heatmap

AI scans for wildfires, but in Arizona, humans are still on watch

Arizona Republic

Senator Mike Lee says there should be consequences for states that sue over the Colorado River

Salt Lake Tribune

Trump leans on MAGA organizer to revive coal

POLITICO

Do chainsaws belong in designated wilderness?

High Country News

Quote of the day

Often referred to as ‘America’s largest classroom,’ National Parks serve in that spirit by telling the stories both of those who write history and those who go unheard.”

—U.S. District Judge Angel Kelley

Picture This @goldengatecanyoncpw

Baby moose are 90% legs and 10% vibes.

Remember, a baby moose often means mom is close by, and she’s not looking for new friends. Give moose plenty of space, leash your dogs, and admire from a distance.

: CPW/ Park Maintenance Brian

 

(Featured image: Metate Arch in Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument near Escalante, Utah. Photo by John Fowler, Wikimedia Commons)

The post Judge orders Trump officials to reinstall signs about history, climate in national parks appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

As the European Union tightens sanctions on Moscow, Russia’s Arctic energy exports continue to find buyers—and increasingly rely on opaque and potentially dangerous shipping practices. New developments highlighted in Bellona’s April Arctic Digest show that Russian liquefied natural gas exports to Europe actually increased in early 2026, while vessels transporting Arctic oil have been linked to fraudulent insurance documents and increasingly evasive tactics aimed at avoiding oversight.

Together, the trends illustrate a growing contradiction. Europe is trying to wean itself from Russian fossil fuels, but the transition remains slow. In the meantime, the expanding “shadow fleet” used to move Arctic oil and gas is introducing new environmental and maritime safety risks into one of the world’s most fragile regions.

Russian LNG exports to Europe continue to rise

In April, the EU adopted its twentieth sanctions package against Russia, introducing new restrictions aimed at Arctic oil and LNG exports. Among the measures were bans on servicing Russian LNG carriers, sanctions on the port of Murmansk, and an expansion of the list of sanctioned vessels. Beginning in 2027, EU LNG terminals will no longer be allowed to provide services to Russian companies.

Yet despite mounting sanctions pressure, Russian LNG exports are still growing.

According to Reuters, Russia exported 11.4 million tons of LNG during the first four months of 2026, an increase of 8.6 percent compared with the same period in 2025. Exports to Europe rose even faster. Data compiled by the environmental group Urgewald showed that EU countries imported 91 cargoes of LNG from the Yamal LNG project between January and April, totaling 6.69 million tons—17.2 percent more than during the same period a year earlier. Belgium’s Zeebrugge terminal remained the leading destination.

Bellona analysts say the sanctions are beginning to bite, but much more slowly than many had hoped.

“The previously introduced ban on imports of Russian LNG into Europe did not have a substantial impact on LNG import volumes in April,” Bellona noted in its commentary. “The ban on purchasing LNG under short-term contracts entered into force on April 25 and is likely to produce any noticeable effect only closer to the end of the year.”

Longer-term prospects are more challenging for Moscow. Analysts at the Centre for High North Logistics concluded that once the European market closes entirely in 2027, redirecting exports to Asia will require a major overhaul of Russia’s Arctic logistics system. Existing shipping capacity would be able to support barely half the number of voyages currently needed.

For now, however, Europe’s effort to disentangle itself from Russian gas remains incomplete.

Phantom insurers and growing environmental risks

As sanctions tighten, Russia’s shadow fleet is becoming increasingly opaque.

Bloomberg reported in April, citing Ukrainian intelligence, that several tankers carrying Russian oil were sailing under insurance certificates issued by a company called Seaguard P&I. But investigators discovered that the company appeared to exist only on paper. Its supposed address in Pinneberg, Germany, turned out to be an ordinary residential building, and no corporate registration records could be found.

One of the vessels carrying such documentation was the tanker Paz, which loaded Arctic oil in Murmansk in March. Another vessel, Deyna, was detained by French authorities while transporting Russian oil from Murmansk. Ukrainian intelligence says at least five additional vessels obtained similarly questionable insurance certificates.

The implications extend beyond sanctions evasion.

“The observed increase in the number of shadow fleet tankers operating along the Northern Sea Route represents the primary risk factor for oil spills in the harsh Arctic environment,” Bellona warned.

Many of the vessels involved are aging tankers purchased secondhand and transferred to obscure ownership structures. Should an accident occur, uncertainty over insurance coverage could complicate cleanup efforts and compensation claims.

Dodging Norway while GPS signals disappear

Another pair of developments highlighted by Bellona point to the increasingly uneasy security environment surrounding Arctic shipping.

In April, the 23-year-old tanker Apple, operating under the flag of Equatorial Guinea and already sanctioned by the United States, European Union and United Kingdom, made an unusual approach to Murmansk. Instead of entering waters where Norwegian authorities might exercise oversight, the vessel made a wide detour roughly 200 nautical miles offshore, bypassing Norway’s exclusive economic zone and avoiding inspection. Attempts by Norway’s Vessel Traffic Service in Vardø to establish contact failed.

“They were unable to make contact,” Arve Dimmen of the Norwegian Coastal Administration told the Barents Observer. As a result, Norwegian authorities were unable to obtain information normally required under pollution reporting systems.

At the same time, Norwegian authorities reported increasing interference with GPS and satellite navigation signals near the Russian border and over the Barents Sea. Measurements detected jamming and spoofing at unusually low altitudes, with preliminary analysis indicating Russia as the source.

“Everyone who uses GPS must be able to trust the information they receive,” warned Stein Kristian Hansen of the Finnmark Police District. “Manipulating these signals is unacceptable.”

Taken together, these developments suggest that sanctions alone are unlikely to bring about a rapid decline in Russia’s Arctic exports. Instead, they are producing a sprawling parallel maritime system—one characterized by aging ships, obscure insurers, evasive navigation and growing environmental risks.

For Europe, the challenge is becoming increasingly clear: reducing dependence on Russian energy may be proceeding more slowly than expected, but the risks associated with allowing those flows to continue are rising just as rapidly.

The post Europe’s Russian LNG Dilemma Deepens as Shadow Fleet Risks Mount in the Arctic appeared first on Bellona.org.

The headlines are inescapable: In Washington D.C., generations-long environmental rules are currently under assault. Industry-friendly officials and lawmakers seem intent on enriching multibillion dollar corporations while lowering life expectancies for thousands of Americans.

These efforts are as concerning as they are morally reprehensible. Thankfully, some of the impact is limited. States are in charge of developing and implementing their own rules intended to limit harmful emissions from polluting industries. 

In Colorado, this important responsibility falls on the Air Pollution Control Division (APCD). The staff at APCD:

• Grant and enforce permits for polluting facilities
• Monitor and model various air pollutants
• Craft policy and programs intended to reduce emissions of those pollutants
• And respond to public concerns about air quality issues. 

Due to the successful advocacy of Colorado communities fighting for changes to policy and legislation, APCD staff have also taken on additional responsibilities in recent years. The APCD must now provide expanded regulatory oversight of dangerous air toxics like benzene. They must advance environmental justice when developing and when enforcing air quality rules. And they must respond to community air quality complaints rapidly and with thorough, on-the-ground inspections.

All of this work is essential. It is also costly, in part because much of it remains unfinished. For instance, we recently highlighted significant improvements in responsiveness from APCD enforcement staff when we share evidence of harmful oil and gas pollution with the agency. Maintaining and building on these improvements requires sustained investment in staff capacity and resources for years to come. 

(Top) Gas plant in Weld County. (Bottom) Optical gas imaging (OGI) video showing significant hydrocarbon emissions including methane and other harmful volatile organic compounds from permitted venting from the facility’s compressors.

Fortunately, the state of Colorado is making these investments. In late May, the Air Quality Control Commission in Colorado unanimously approved a fee increase on polluters that will generate an additional $13.5 million to help fund the APCD. 

This means that polluters are footing the bill for advancing environmental justice and regulating air toxics, not Coloradans.

Colorado’s fee increase follows a historic fee increase in New Mexico. Regulators in New Mexico can now invest in new staff and resources to hold oil and gas companies accountable for their pollution. 

The federal government is stepping back from a commitment to protecting communities and the environment from polluting industries. States like Colorado and New Mexico have an even greater responsibility to demonstrate leadership and take action. Ensuring that regulatory agencies have the resources to enforce air quality rules is essential for this important work.

The post In Colorado, Polluting Just Got More Expensive appeared first on Earthworks.

State green back invests in four new big battery projects to be built in quick time by an offshoot of the local network company, in time for anticipated coal closures.

The post State green bank backs four new big batteries in first investment to fill gaps from coal exit appeared first on Renew Economy.