News Feeds

Vermont passes first-in-the-nation bill to ban toxic herbicide linked to Parkinson’s disease Anthony Lacey May 13, 2026

In a historic show of bipartisan leadership, Vermont lawmakers today approved a bill to ban the highly toxic herbicide paraquat. It’s the first time a state legislature has passed legislation to phaseout paraquat, a chemical linked to Parkinson’s disease.

House Bill 739 would, if enacted, end Vermonters’ exposure to one of the most dangerous pesticides still in use. 

The Environmental Working Group is urging Gov. Phil Scott to sign the legislation and set a first-in-the-nation precedent for banning paraquat. The vote also comes as 12 other states have introduced bills to ban or restrict the chemical and California’s Department of Pesticide Regulation is re-reviewing paraquat.

Paraquat has been linked not only to Parkinson’s disease but also to other serious health harms, including cancer. More than 70 countries have banned paraquat due to these health concerns, yet it remains used in the U.S.

“With today’s vote, Vermont is making history and putting the health of its residents first,” said Geoff Horsfield, legislative director at EWG. “This is the first time any legislative body in the country has passed a bill to fully ban paraquat, sending a powerful signal that the days of tolerating this dangerous chemical are numbered. 

“Democratic and Republican lawmakers alike have made clear that safeguarding farmers, rural communities and children must take precedence over continued use of one of the most hazardous pesticides still on the market.” he added. “Now that the House has passed this landmark bill, we urge Gov. Scott to sign it.”

State Rep. Esme Cole (D-Windsor) and state Sen. Martine Gulick (D-Chittenden-Central District) championed their chambers’ versions of the bills. 

In addition to EWG, groups supporting the paraquat ban bill include the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, The Michael J. Fox Foundation, Parkinson’s Foundation, the American Parkinson Disease Association, the Vermont Natural Resources Council and others.

“No one, including farmers, farmworkers, families or children, should be exposed to a chemical with such well-documented risks,” added Horsfield.

Once Scott signs the legislation, it would mark a major milestone in the fight to eliminate paraquat use in the U.S. and could accelerate efforts in other states. 

###

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization dedicated to empowering people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and education, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Paraquat Press Contact Alex Formuzis alex@ewg.org (202) 667-6982 May 13, 2026

Editor’s Note: Covering the on-going arguments regarding the reuse of oil and gas wastewater hasn’t been in La Jicarita’s purview, but the latest decision by the Water Quality Control Commission is so egregious that I’m posting the New Energy Economy’s press release. The WQCC, lobbied heavily by the Water Access, Treatment and Reuse Alliance — or WATR Alliance — a trade group with members from the oil and gas industry, voted for the second time to advance a petition to expand and regulate the reuse of oil and gas wastewater. The Lujan Grisham administration also lobbied WQCC to overturn a year-old decision prohibiting the reuse of the wastewater, making sure that her appointed WQCC commissioners were making the right decision. WQCC will hold a public hearing to advance the rule making, a hearing that will be protested by the many environmental and public advocacy groups that oppose this decision.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Mariel Nanasi, Executive Director, New Energy Economy
(505) 469-4060 | mnanasi@newenergyeconomy.org

May 12, 2026

Despite The Fact that Science is Missing to Prove Oil and Gas Industry Waste Water Is Safe for Reuse or Discharge WQCC Votes to Move Oil & Gas Industry Petition Forward

Santa Fe, NM — Environmental and public interest organizations lost today; oil and gas industry’s latest attempt to weaken New Mexico’s produced water protections was greenlighted today despite the fact that the science remains fundamentally incomplete, uncertain, and incapable of demonstrating safety for human health or the environment.

While the Petition cites scientific studies, the studies themselves do not establish the central claim the industry needs to prove: that produced water can actually be treated and reused safely in the real world. Critically, the industry repeatedly claims that produced water can be treated and reused “to a non-toxic level in a real-world setting,” yet that statement does not appear in the cited studies or in the scientific literature itself.

The scientific record instead demonstrates the opposite: the science surrounding produced water reuse remains in an early and highly uncertain stage. Major unresolved problems remain, including incomplete characterization of contaminants, the presence of unknown and unmeasured compounds, lack of comprehensive toxicological datasets, and the complete absence of established regulatory frameworks capable of ensuring safe discharge or reuse.

The Water Quality Control Commission’s Vice Chair said “the Petition is not ready for us to hear it.” The Chair of the Commission said the Petition has “serious legal flaws” and has pages, 20 page or more of blank empty spaces” and stated that he could “not support it in its current form.” He specifically pointed out that produced water contains complex mixtures that the industry has not “fessed up” to. Produced water is full of known and unknown contaminants, that treatment technologies remain experimental, and that the state lacks sufficient standards and data to regulate reuse safely.

“The oil and gas industry is asking regulators to leap far ahead of the science,” said Mariel Nanasi, Executive Director, New Energy Economy. “While there is new science – that science does not state what it must: that produced water can be treated and discharged and is safe. New Mexicans should not become guinea pigs for an experiment involving toxic radioactive wastewater that has not been proven safe.”

Under New Mexico law, the Commission’s role is to prevent and abate water pollution — not to create new industrial water supplies for oil and gas operators or speculative development projects. Many Commissioners raised questions about bias, concerned with who is paying for the NM Produced Water Consortium and the studies that result therefrom; they were also concerned with the accuracy of statements in the Petition.

At its core, the situation is simple: the science is not settled. It is evolving, incomplete, and deeply uncertain. That is exactly why the Commission previously prohibited discharge and reuse of produced water outside tightly controlled pilot projects in 2025. Until comprehensive science, toxicology, and enforceable regulatory safeguards exist, allowing widespread reuse or discharge would place New Mexico’s groundwater, rivers, communities, and future generations at unacceptable risk.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: May 13, 2026

Bold Statement Re: Summit Carbon Solutions’ Alternate Plan to Route Risky CO2 Pipeline Through Nebraska

Landowners with the Nebraska Easement Action Team will oppose Summit’s efforts to acquire land; any attempts to use eminent domain will face court challenges

Hastings, NE – Bold issued the following statement after Summit Carbon Solutions issued an announcement that it now intends to attempt to seek a route through the state of Nebraska for its proposed risky carbon dioxide (CO2) pipeline:  

“Transporting a dangerous waste product across the entire state of Nebraska so that a private company can capture billions of dollars of our tax dollars is not a public use, and surely is not in the public interest of Nebraskans. Bold and the Nebraska Easement Action Team will oppose Summit’s latest scheme to appease its investors,” said Shelli Meyer, Director of Bold’s Nebraska Easement Action Team (NEAT) landowners’ legal co-op. “Nebraskans are not willing to expose our families and farms to the risks of a CO2 pipeline rupture, like what happened in Satartia, Mississippi in 2020, where vehicles attempting to flee stalled and dozens were hospitalized due to lack of oxygen, with some experiencing negative health impacts to this day.”

After the citizens of South Dakota voted overwhelmingly to ban the use of eminent domain to seize landowners’ private property for CO2 pipelines, Summit was confronted with a “pipeline to nowhere,” as the company initially intended to pipe the CO2 through South Dakota into North Dakota, where it would be injected into underground sequestration well waste dumps.

Now, Summit says its new plan is to instead attempt to obtain a pipeline route directly across the entire state of Nebraska, to an alternate underground CO2 waste dump site in Wyoming. The company will also switch focus from offering ethanol plants a way to improve their “carbon scores,” to “enhanced oil recovery” as a potential use for the captured CO2 – erasing whatever climate benefits the company and its ethanol plant partners are claiming from the project, if the CO2 will instead be utilized to extract and burn more oil. 

Just like an alliance of landowners stood together to defeat the proposed Keystone XL pipeline through Nebraska, landowners with the Nebraska Easement Action Team landowners’ legal co-op are organizing landowner and community opposition within impacted counties threatened by Summit’s potentially deadly carbon pipeline. NEAT landowners and their attorneys stand ready to file litigation should Summit attempt to seize Nebraskans’ farmland via eminent domain. 

Bold’s Easement Teams in Iowa, South Dakota and North Dakota have also been organizing landowner opposition to the Summit CO2 pipeline for years. Bold’s Easement Teams are helping fund attorneys who have represented landowners at agency hearings that resulted in pipeline permit rejections in North Dakota and South Dakota, and the most-contested project in the history at the Iowa Utilities Commission, where landowners with the Iowa Easement Team also continue to challenge Summit’s pipeline route approval in the courts.  

About Bold’s Easement Action Teams: 

The Easement Action Teams are a project of the Bold Education Fund. The EATs work with local communities to provide immediate legal representation to landowners facing pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure. Our first priority is to protect landowners’ property rights and water. We believe landowners should have the ultimate right of what does and does not happen on their land. We stand against the use of eminent domain for private gain. (https://easementteams.org) The first landowners legal co-op formed was the Nebraska Easement Action Team, which successfully organized landowners to fight the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, and currently works with landowners fighting carbon pipelines in the state. (https://neeasement.org) 

About Bold Pipeline Fighters Hub: 

The Bold Pipeline Fighters Hub, a project of the Bold Education Fund, provides technical, legal, story telling and organizing assistance to any community fighting pipelines and other fossil fuel infrastructure, with the goal of protecting the land and water. (https://pipelinefighters.org)

About Bold:

The Bold Alliance and Bold Education Fund are coordinating state-based groups with our Pipeline Fighters Hub and landowner legal groups called the Easement Action Teams to stop pipelines from using eminent domain for private gain. (https://boldalliance.org)

# # #

BALTIMORE – The National Audubon Society has received a $13 million grant that will support large-scale marsh restoration projects across Maryland, addressing the rapid loss of salt marsh habitat...

The Wednesday, May 13, 2026, Climate Justice Forum radio program, produced by regional, climate activists collective Wild Idaho Rising Tide (WIRT), features an Earth Day panel discussion facilitated by Bill Moyer of Solutionary Rail, with environmental justice and labor organizers Ryan Calbreath of the UE Union Green Locomotive program, Jess Conard of Rail Watch, mark! Lopez of East Yard Communities for Environmental Justice, Tabitha Tripp of Public Rail Now, and Andrea Vidaurre of People’s Collective for Environmental Justice, talking about shifting harmful, private, Wall Street-extractive, Class 1 railroads into beneficial, public, electrified, rail and transmission infrastructure systems that could provide better accountability and community safety and services. We also share news, videos, and reflections on the proposed, unpermitted, bedrock blasting under rivers for construction of the Enbridge Line 5 tar sands pipeline, rerouted around a Wisconsin indigenous reservation near the Great Lakes, and Idaho citizen objections to Snake River Oil and Gas plans to drill the Miller 1-15 methane well and extract their privately-owned resources via forced leasing, close to hundreds of Fruitland residences, businesses, and water wells. Broadcast for fourteen years on progressive, volunteer, community station KRFP Radio Free Moscow, every Wednesday between 1:30 and 3 pm Pacific time, on-air at 90.3 FM and online at KRFP and the Pacifica Network AudioPort, the show describes continent-wide, grassroots, frontline resistance to fossil fuels projects, the root causes of climate change, thanks to generous, anonymous listeners who adopted program host Helen Yost as their KRFP DJ.

New: Enbridge’s Line 5 Reroute Blasts through Bedrock Without Permits, Threatening the Great Lakes, May 7, 2026 Unicorn Riot

WIRT Comments and CAIA Objection with Attachments Opposing Snake River Oil and Gas Miller 1-15 Methane Well Drilling Application, April 20, 2026 Wild Idaho Rising Tide

Panel Discussion: Solutionary Earth Day Special — From Problem to Solution, May 2, 2026 Solutionary Rail

Any animal that triggers a cyanide bomb can asphyxiate and die in just minutes.

By Denise Robbins, CCAN Communications Team

In London, nations at the International Maritime Organization (IMO) advanced a proposal for a net-zero framework on maritime shipping, functionally creating the world’s first-ever price on carbon. 

In Santa Marta, Colombia, more than 50 countries gathered for the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, a historic attempt to move the world from vague climate promises toward concrete plans to phase out oil, gas and coal.

And in the rest of the world, many countries are moving away from fossil fuels as quickly as possible due to the Middle Eastern conflict causing oil prices to skyrocket. 

The movement to make polluters pay for a just transition is growing to the point of inevitability, no matter what President Donald Trump does to try and stop it. But what exactly is happening, and what does it mean for the United States? 

Jack Hall/PA Media Assignments

A Groundbreaking Carbon Price on Maritime Shipping

International shipping has long been treated as one of the hardest sectors to regulate. The sector produces roughly 3% of global greenhouse gas emissions, and because ships operate across borders, national climate rules alone cannot easily cover it. So the IMO is one of the few venues capable of setting global standards for shipping emissions.

The IMO’s framework that advanced through last week’s talks would create a global fuel standard for ships and an economic mechanism for emissions, with funds intended to support cleaner fuels and help developing countries navigate the transition. 

This happened despite Trump’s best efforts. For the past year, United States representatives have been bullying and pressuring other countries to pull away from the net-zero framework. As a result, Greece pushed back, even as the European Union continued to have a public unified statement of support. Liberia and Panama led a counter-proposal that would have removed carbon pricing from the framework. The United States continued its aggressive approach during the talks this spring, pulling out all the stops to derail the framework. They lobbied delegates, backed delay tactics and aligned with Saudi Arabia and other opponents of the emissions fee. Yet the nations were not dismayed. The draft text, which would combine a global fuel standard with a pricing mechanism charging ships for emissions above set limits and channeling revenue into cleaner fuels and support for developing countries, moved forward, and it will be officially voted on in December. 

If passed, a global framework that prices pollution would mark a major shift from voluntary climate promises toward enforceable rules — and toward making polluters contribute to the cost of the transition.

Marco Perdomo / Oxfam Colombia y Trineo Comunicaciones

Meanwhile, in Colombia….

More than 50 countries met for the First Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels, a historic attempt to move the world from vague climate promises toward concrete plans to phase out oil, gas and coal.

The conference focused heavily on financing. For many countries, especially in the Global South, the barrier to getting off fossil fuels is not a lack of will or clean energy potential. It is debt, high borrowing costs, limited fiscal space and a global financial system that still makes it easier to fund fossil fuel projects than renewable energy.

That is why “make polluters pay” is becoming central to the next phase of climate politics. The transition away from fossil fuels will take money and this money shouldn’t come from the communities already paying for debilitating climate disasters. Instead, the companies that made billions from extracting and selling fossil fuels must be required to contribute to the cost of moving beyond them.

Outside the formal negotiation halls, civil society in Santa Marta demanded a fair transition. The People’s Summit for a Fossil-Free Future brought together frontline communities, Indigenous peoples, Afro-descendant leaders, trade unions, youth, farmers, fisherfolk, feminists and social movements.

Nearly 1,000 organizations united behind a declaration calling for a fossil fuel phaseout that is fast, fair, fully funded and grounded in justice. Their demands included no new fossil fuel expansion, time-bound national phaseout plans, grant-based public finance, debt cancellation, an end to fossil fuel subsidies and binding safeguards against fossil fuel lobbying.

And U.S. States Are Taking Action

Make Polluter Pay Campaign in D.C.

Even as the federal government retreats, state campaigns are advancing their own versions of “make polluters pay.”

Vermont and New York have already passed climate superfund laws that seek to recover climate-related costs from major fossil fuel companies. These laws build on the same principle as traditional Superfund-style accountability: companies that created the harm should help pay to clean it up and protect communities.

Maryland has taken a first step as well. In 2025, lawmakers passed a climate superfund cost assessment bill requiring the state to study the financial impact of climate change and explore how fossil fuel companies could be made to pay for the damage they helped cause.

Virginia advocates have also pushed legislation to make the biggest polluters contribute to disaster relief and resilient clean energy infrastructure. The proposed Extreme Weather Taxpayer Relief Act would establish a cost recovery program aimed at ensuring fossil fuel companies help fund responses to the extreme weather made worse by climate change.

Fossil Fuels Profiting from War

The timing matters. As governments met in Colombia to discuss how to pay for a just transition, fossil fuel majors were preparing to announce another round of huge profits driven by instability and energy price spikes.

Oil majors banked more than $30 million every hour in unearned profit in the first month of the conflict and could make around $234 billion in excess profits by the end of 2026 if oil prices remain high. 

Those profits strengthen the case made in London, Santa Marta, and across the U.S. If shipping companies can be asked to pay for their emissions, oil and gas companies can be asked to pay for the climate damage and economic instability their products create. If countries struggling with debt are being told to finance their own transition, then fossil fuel companies posting crisis-driven windfalls should be first in line to contribute.

Marco Perdomo / Oxfam Colombia y Trineo Comunicaciones

The Movement Is Bigger Than Trump

Trump’s strategy is not stopping the broader movement. Trump may be trying to protect fossil fuel executives, weaken climate rules and isolate the United States from global climate progress. But the make polluters pay movement is still growing — internationally, nationally and locally.

London showed that governments are still pursuing global rules to price pollution, even in hard-to-regulate sectors like shipping. Santa Marta showed that countries are beginning to plan the end of the fossil fuel era and name the financing challenge directly. U.S. states are showing that climate accountability legislation can move forward even when the federal government refuses to act.

New polling commissioned by Oxfam in seven countries found that approximately two thirds of people supported increasing taxes on the profits of large oil and gas corporations to help fund the transition to renewables. This movement is growing in popularity and political momentum. 

So when you’re fighting for “make polluters pay” legislation in Richmond, you’re not alone. When you’re helping figure out next steps for the “make polluters pay” movement in Maryland, you’re not alone. When you’re writing to your D.C. Councilmembers, you’re not alone. You’re part of an era-defining shift that will keep growing and becoming more powerful. 

The movement to make polluters pay is moving unstoppably forward. The world has stopped waiting for Trump. 

Want to help make polluters pay? Join CCAN’s efforts in Maryland, D.C., Virginia, and beyond.

Become an Action Team Member Today!

The post Who’s Waiting for Trump? The World is Taking Steps to Make Polluters Pay  appeared first on Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

A Brazil-led initiative that is pulling together a global roadmap to end deforestation will invite countries to produce their own voluntary pathways to halt and reverse forest loss by 2030, experts managing the process said this week.

At last year’s COP30 climate summit in the Brazilian Amazon city of Belém, a group of around 80 countries led a failed push to start developing two new global roadmaps – one to stop deforestation by 2030 and another to transition away from fossil fuels. All countries signed up to these commitments in a landmark deal at COP28 in Dubai, but little progress has been made to implement them since then.

As a bridging alternative, Brazil’s COP30 presidency agreed to draft two voluntary versions of these roadmaps. COP30 officials said a final version of the deforestation roadmap will be published by September this year, after receiving more than 130 written submissions from countries.

This Monday, Juliano Assunção, executive director of Climate Policy Initiative/PUC-Rio in Brazil and an advisor to the COP30 presidency on deforestation, presented a first outline of the roadmap to countries at the United Nations Forum on Forests in New York (UNFF21).

Assunção said the roadmap “will not prescribe a single model”, but would rather invite countries to translate commitments they have already made to halt and reverse deforestation by 2030 – which is a longstanding global goal – “into forest roadmaps grounded on regional and national diagnosis”.

In 2025, the world lost 4.3 million hectares of tropical primary rainforest, an area roughly the size of Denmark, according to annual data published by Global Forest Watch. While that was 36% lower than in 2024 when climate-fuelled fires pushed forest loss to a record high, deforestation was still 70% higher than it should to be to meet the 2030 international pledge to end it, the report said.

• May 12, 2026 Politics Paris Agreement committee snubbed over missing NDC climate plans Many governments have still not submitted a nationally determined contribution to the UN, breaching a key requirement of the Paris Agreement Read more
• May 12, 2026 News Scientists warn El Niño could intensify climate extremes in 2026 Climatologists say a particularly powerful weather pattern could amplify wildfire risk, heatwaves and flooding worldwide as global temperatures continue to rise Read more

What will be in the roadmap?

Assunção said the COP30 team “were positively surprised by the level of depth and how comprehensive” the contributions from countries and experts were in the consultation phase for the global roadmap, noting that these served to inform the current outline.

The plan is for the global roadmap report to be structured in two parts: one on the social, economic and environmental risk of continued forest loss; and a second presenting a menu of options to tackle deforestation by 2030.

“The roadmap will be practical, based on countries’ experiences. It will help identify the key challenges, and understand their drivers, which vary quite differently among different countries. It’s going to be drawing on existing policy tools,” Assunção told countries at the UN forests meeting this week.

The COP30 advisor said that, while countries can draft national plans, there’s also “a lot of room for international co-operation”, which governments themselves requested as part of the consultation.

The roadmap will include a sub-section on international co-operation, which will include how countries can share tools such as satellite platforms to improve monitoring systems, how to improve the finance architecture to channel more resources for forests, and how to align international regulations on trade, crime and due diligence to protect forests.

Indigenous groups warn Amazon oil expansion tests fossil fuel phase-out coalition

Marco Tulio Cabral, a diplomat at Brazil’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs who leads the deforestation roadmap process, told governments that, while the document is not a negotiated outcome, the COP30 presidency is “investing a lot of time and effort” in talking with countries to “make as good a text as we can” that represents a range of views.

He noted that, while the COP30 initiative for a fossil-fuel phase-out roadmap led to a coalition of countries that gathered for a first landmark conference in Santa Marta last month, a similar dedicated push is not necessarily expected for a deforestation roadmap.

“The supportive actors and those who oppose it are very different, so there are limits to what we can do together or associate one thing with the other,” Cabral said.

Cattle graze on deforested areas of the Ituxi ranch near Kaxarari Indigenous land, in Porto Velho, Rondonia State, Brazil August 12, 2024. (Photo: REUTERS/Adriano Machado) Cattle graze on deforested areas of the Ituxi ranch near Kaxarari Indigenous land, in Porto Velho, Rondonia State, Brazil August 12, 2024. (Photo: REUTERS/Adriano Machado) Forest nations seek focus on local realities

Countries at the UN event were supportive of the roadmap, but also expressed the need to offer real alternatives to rural communities.

Joseph Malassi, climate advisor at the Ministry of Environment of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), said that in the Congo basin – the planet’s second-largest rainforest – deforestation “is not caused by vast industrial or infrastructure projects, but rather by extreme poverty” as local people cut down trees for firewood, minerals or crops.

“The roadmap will be confronted with these realities,” Malassi said, adding that it should avoid competing with other UN forest initiatives already working at the intersection of conservation and development.

Nicholas Suryobasuindro of Indonesia’s Ministry of Forests, which manages another mega-diverse rainforest basin, welcomed the Brazilian roadmap, adding it will need to address the “complex interaction between land use chains, economic pressure, spatial planning challenges and development needs”.

Finance will be key to dealing with these realities, according to Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, Guyana’s permanent ambassador to the UN. She said the roadmap should take into account an existing six-point plan to scale up forest finance launched last year by 34 countries.

Two options in that plan in particular have potential to drive up funding for forest protection and “must immediately receive strong international support”, she added. They are a new rainforest fund called the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF) – launched last year by Brazil and supported by several donor governments – and “high-integrity jurisdictional” carbon markets, which refers to government-led sales of carbon credits from large forested areas.

“Both approaches can support countries with different forest and deforestation profiles, including countries with historically low deforestation rates achieved with sustainable forest management,” Rodrigues-Birkett said.

The post COP30 roadmap to end deforestation will invite countries to draft domestic plans appeared first on Climate Home News.

Food industry claims state chemical laws will spike grocery bills, but that doesn’t add up Ketura Persellin May 13, 2026

In a page straight out of the industry playbook, a powerful group of U.S. food companies has funded a “study” claiming consumers will pay more if harmful chemicals are labeled or banned.

The industry front group, which represents food giants Nestlé and General Mills, among many others, is also backing other efforts to quash states’ ability to enact stricter food chemical laws.

The Policy Navigation Group, a lobbying and consulting firm whose clients include Dow Chemical and Snack International, published the so-called study. It says food chemical laws in Louisiana, Texas and West Virginia would increase household grocery spending by 12%, or $860, per year. 

Louisiana and Texas enacted laws requiring a simple label or QR code be added to a food products packaging if it includes select ingredients of concern, such as certain artificial dyes and preservatives. West Virginia’s law bans food products containing potentially harmful ingredients like propylparaben, Red Dye No. 3, Red Dye No. 40 and Yellow Dye No. 5 from being sold in the state.

Federal regulatory failures have driven dozens of states to introduce similar laws targeting dyes, additives and other ingredients of concern.

But the study has serious flaws. From faulty data to bad math and poor logic, scrutinizing the claims makes clear they don’t add up.

Flawed grocery price analysis

The study uses highly selective examples, false assumptions and outdated models to drive up the cost estimates.

The study’s central assumption is that consumers who see a warning label on food will waste valuable time searching for an alternative that is more expensive. That’s because the study’s authors looked at only a handful of selected retailers who possibly charge more for products with fewer ingredients of concern. 

But that’s not how most Americans actually shop.

Many major grocery chains, including Kroger, Publix, ShopRite and Wegmans, already offer affordable store-brand products that are free of many of the chemicals states are targeting with new food safety laws. 

ShopRite, for instance, designed its Wholesome Pantry store brand to be free of artificial additives at competitive prices.

The study largely fails to account for these affordable, available alternatives – a limitation the researchers themselves acknowledge, noting that their focus on particular retailers likely led them to overlook some products and introduce bias in their results.

Texas, where H-E-B dominates the grocery business, is a heavy focus of the study. Under market pressure, H-E-B has already removed more than 175 synthetic ingredients from its store-brand line. That’s most of the ingredients targeted by Texas’ food chemical labeling law. 

The study didn’t disclose the products and brands it analyzed. But its retailer of choice, Amazon, also owns Whole Foods, so it’s possible many of the pricier alternatives the study identified were Whole Foods products, not the kind of everyday substitutes most shoppers reach for.  

According to a separate food industry report from February, two-thirds of all grocery retailers are reformulating brands to meet consumers’ desire for cleaner products. This includes removing artificial dyes and additives while maintaining affordability.

Faulty math skews study's outcomes

The study’s flaws don’t stop there. 

Most significantly, it claims to be a cost-benefit analysis yet it fails to include the benefits of food chemical labels. This is not a minor methodological oversight but a fundamental failure.

Lower consumer exposure to chemicals of concern would benefit public health, yielding significant healthcare savings. Increased consumption of ultra-processed food, or UPF, is linked to higher rates of obesity, cardiovascular disease, cancer and diabetes, dementia and reproductive harm. 

And the study’s calculations included the 14% of consumers who said they would ignore warning labels. This inflates estimates in consumer spending by assuming cost increases among consumers whose behavior would not actually change. 

It also relied on consumer behavior data that is more than 16 years old, a limitation the researchers themselves flagged as a source of unknown bias. 

Rather than use the lowest available prices for label-free alternatives, as a budget-conscious shopper would likely do, the study used average prices, further overstating the real cost to consumers.

Further, industry representatives and lawmakers sympathetic to them have misused the results to claim that labeling laws would increase by 12% the prices we see on store shelves. The study doesn’t predict that individual grocery items will get more expensive. It actually – and inaccurately – predicts some people will choose to buy more expensive groceries to avoid ingredients of concern. Those are not the same thing.

Helping shoppers make more informed choices is a public health benefit, not a burden. But the study frames labeling requirements as financial harm only.  

Real-world effects of changing food labels

Faulty studies and overinflated price claims are tired industry responses to requests for greater food ingredient transparency. 

In 2022, a federal rule took effect requiring labels on products made with genetically modified ingredients. Industry-funded studies predicted major price increases when products made with GMO ingredients were required to bear labels. 

But the new labels didn’t drive prices up. Many brands simply chose to include the new symbol on their existing labels while other household staples like Cheerios and Grape Nuts were reformulated at no extra cost to consumers.

Consumer Reports found similar industry-funded studies overstated the costs of GMO labeling by nearly a factor of 10. The most realistic industry estimate was around $66 per family of four per year, compared to the original estimate of nearly $500, and even that lower figure was likely inflated. 

Food companies update their labels regularly for seasonal promotions and rebranding, without consumers switching to pricier products. Ingredient disclosure labels would be no different.

A label change would cost a company as little as $205, an amount too small to show up on store shelves, according to the Agriculture Department in 2024.

Clearer labels mean more confident consumers

The study’s authors are correct about one thing: Shoppers’ time is valuable.

Right now, consumers who want to make better food purchases have to read fine-print ingredient lists on every product. Clear labels designed to identify chemicals of concern make it easier and faster for them.

While states push for better public health protections, EWG has tools to help you shop with confidence. 

At home, consumers can check EWG’s Dirty Dozen Guide to Food Chemicals, which highlights top food chemicals to avoid due to health and safety concerns. 

For more guidance, search  EWG’s Food Scores, which provides ratings for more than 150,000 foods and drinks based on nutrition, ingredients and processing. Food Scores also flags unhealthy UPF and can help you identify alternatives. 

Or if you’re on the go, EWG’s Healthy Living app puts that information at your fingertips while you shop.

Areas of Focus Food Ultra-Processed Foods Food Chemicals Authors Jared Hayes Sarah Reinhardt, MPH, RDN May 13, 2026

We’ve all been stuck in jobs we’ve hated for one reason or another —  for example, when a workplace doesn’t share our values. It’s a tough job market right now, but we can still take back our agency. Let’s explore how to move past feelings of bitterness and alienation and find the vocational niche that supports our beliefs and sense of morality.

Dr. Green,

In my workplace, an alien from outer space would fit in better than I do. My soul is hurt every day by the wanton waste and disregard for natural resources I see. For example, despite having a full galley with sinks for dishwashing, the company springs for disposable plates, cups, plastic cutlery, and even those godawful plastic coffee stirrer straws! Toilet paper rolls are tossed way before they’re empty. The same goes for detergent bottles, soap containers, and more. Good, usable products end up in the trash for no discernible reason and don’t get me started about food waste. I try to set an example by never using the disposables and practicing efficiency, but nobody has ever followed suit. I’m sure I’m also the only vegetarian within a 15-mile radius of our home port.

I’m desperately looking for another job, gritting my teeth (dentist told me I have bruxism), communicating as little as possible (They’ll never listen. They already think I’m a freak. Guess which news channel they watch?), using the “un-empty” items myself, invoking the “environmentalist curse” (May you live next to a landfill.) silently on them and trying my best to not explode in eco-rage. Anything else I can do for myself?

Breathing exercises and meditation are not going to cut it. After nearly a year of trying, they’re not helping. I’m just too high-energy. Any research vessels or companies involved in trying to REPAIR the environment rather than destroy it need to hire a great mariner?

Hello Friend,

I certainly understand your frustration — it’s clear you’re unhappy and want to find a position that’s a better cultural fit. This can be difficult in a soft job market. On the other hand, if you expend too much energy on eco-rage, you’ll have little left over to seek a better-fit position and workplace with clarity.

Musicians go where there are other musicians and musical opportunities, engineers go where there’s engineering, and environmentalists gravitate toward where environmentalism is cultivated and upheld in practice and deed. Let’s see if we can help make that happen for you.

What Is Eco-Rage?

You may not have realized it when you used the phrase, but “eco-rage” is a very real and common feeling — though not always productive.

Eco-rage is an intensely negative emotional response to the lack of other people’s concerns for the environment — an overwhelming feeling of helplessness when others around you don’t seem to share your urgent concern. That can elevate antisocial aggression and even result in you lashing out at coworkers, family and friends, or strangers. You become isolated because you can’t control your emotions or actions, and an increasing fatalism can cause you to lash out further or shut down in depression. This is related to climate doomism.

At the same time, because you’re overwhelmed with negativity, your brain begins to release chemicals that physically and mentally further degrade your system.

Rage can be a destructive force, but it can also be a powerful catalyst for positive change. A desire for a better world and an anger over natural destruction lie at the heart of environmentalism. Try to refocus of your rage into finding a new job, career, or avocation; cultivate intelligent control over runaway emotions. Get out of your own way.

Here are some suggestions for working with your eco-rage to develop skills in self-possession and inner strength so that you can more fruitfully explore new opportunities and feel validated and supported. (And see the resource guide below for more information.)

Talk to a Therapist

To identify and organize your overwhelming feelings, it’s a great idea to seek the help of an objective person trained in one-on-one sessions where you can slow your feelings down a bit and separate each bad feeling into an item for exploration on how to cope.

Psychologists and psychiatrists are trained in this and bound by law and The Ethics Code (the equivalent of The Hippocratic Oath for medical professionals) to maintain confidentiality. Make sure only to work with psych professionals who are legally licensed and certified. Most health insurance plans cover therapy (at least, in network and in your home state). And some remote or distance psychological services will accept health insurance, too. See The Revelator’s “Dr. Green: The Therapist-Patient Relationship” for more resources on finding help.

I highly recommend engaging a psych professional to make sense of your current state of mind and learn coping skills. While you search for that new job, the one you feel stuck at job may be a good place to challenge yourself by practicing your newfound self-regulation techniques.

Cultivate Emotional Intelligence

Emotional intelligence refers to the ability to identify and manage your own emotions, as well as the emotions of others. This skill requires awareness, an ability to identify your own feelings, and an effort to redirect those emotions toward strategic and creative thinking to solve problems.

Stop cleaning up after your coworkers or “educating” them. When people perceive that they’re being scolded or preached at — especially in a pervasive culture like the one you describe — they get defensive and dig in. Simply let it go, stop monitoring them, and work on yourself instead. Set an example through your silent deeds (which can be more effective than we think, since people who respond to them also often do so silently). In the workplace, address your own feelings and behaviors. Rage is wasted energy that will be best used in strategic planning for future employment.

Consider Stoicism

Stoicism is a philosophy focused on developing emotional regulation and inner fortitude, regardless of external circumstances. It emphasizes distinguishing what is within our control from what is not in our control, exercising self-discipline, and accepting what comes. It’s excellent for gaining and projecting inner strength, focus, and resilience.

All philosophies are imperfect, but taking a bit of wisdom from each can help you define yourself clearly in self-empowerment. My personal mix of humanism, nihilism, and stoicism has been invaluable in both my personal and professional life.

Here are a few ideas from stoicism:

“Any person capable of angering you becomes your master; he can anger you only when you permit yourself to be disturbed by him.” — Epictetus

 “If you want to improve, be content to be thought foolish and stupid.” — Epictetus

“Whenever you are about to find fault with someone, ask yourself the following question: What fault of mine most nearly resembles the one I am about to criticize?” — Marcus Aurelius

“You have power over your mind — not outside events. Realize this, and you will find strength.” — Marcus Aurelius

A Few Words of Advice on Job-Hunting

If you’re applying for jobs now, make sure that your resume and cover letter are objective and dispassionate. Remove any editorial comments that may reflect negative feelings you have about your current job. If you land an interview, don’t say even one negative thing about your current or previous employers and coworkers. Simply say you’re seeking a new position because you’re ready for new challenges and leave it at that.

I tell you this because I once got the best job of my life by not complaining about my previous employers. The hiring manager didn’t know that I was being brutally bullied by two managers at the job I held while HR did nothing and coworkers looked the other way so they wouldn’t get bullied too.  I focused on my strengths and what I could bring to the new job — not what was holding me back.

Now stop wasting your energy on the actions of others and get to work on finding a job where you feel appreciated for the values you hold dear.

Cheers,

Dr. Green

What are you struggling with in your job as a dedicated environmentalist?  Let us know by sending your questions and success stories in the text box below.

All participants are anonymous. Even Dr. Green has no idea who you are.

Send Dr. Green your questions and stories below:

All questions are intended for publication; published questions will be kept anonymous. Individual replies are not possible.

See you next time!

Disclaimer: This column is not a replacement for therapy, and the advice given is educational in nature, not a replacement for professional psychological or psychiatric therapy. This is a peer-driven support effort by The Revelator to inform and build community with environmental and wildlife defenders.

If you are feeling critically depressed and suicidal, it’s time to immediately find professional help. Go to your closest emergency room or call the following numbers to get immediate help in your area:

SUICIDE HOTLINES

Worldwide: http://www.befrienders.org/support/

United Kingdom: http://www.samaritans.org

USA: http://www.suicidepreventionlifeline.org

1-800-273-TALK

Resources:

Jobs in environmental mariner fields (though I don’t know what type of mariner you are):

Search engine term: environmental mariner jobs

Conservation Job Board – https://www.conservationjobboard.com

Environmental Jobs – https://environmentaljobs.com

Green Jobs Network – https://greenjobs.net

United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) – https://www.unep.org/work-with-us

EcoJobs – https://ecojobs.com

Conservation International – https://www.conservation.org/conservation-international-jobs

Environmental Career Center – https://environmentalcareer.com

EnableGreen – https://enable.green

(These should get you started!)

Emotional Intelligence – a good resource to start with: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/basics/emotional-intelligence

Eco-Grief and Psychotherapy Support Resources: Many of these groups are donation-based or free, or will take your insurance, offering a crucial outlet for those feeling isolated in their climate anxieties.

BetterHelp

Talkspace

Climate Grief Groups

Good Grief Network

GreenFaith

Stoicism Resources

The Daily Stoic

How to Be a Stoic: 9 Stoic Exercises to Get You Started

The post Dr. Green: What If Your Job Doesn’t Align with Your Eco-Values? appeared first on The Revelator.

Trump’s war in Iran is now bleeding through the wholesale pipeline. April’s Producer Price Index (PPI) report shows wholesale prices rose 6% over the past year, the largest annual increase since December 2022, with core wholesale inflation at 4.4%. Despite the grim report, Trump said this week that he “[doesn’t] think about Americans’ financial situation,” and it’s clear. The president could not be more out of step with Americans. For working families struggling with high prices, their financial situation is top of mind.

The PPI reading comes just one day after the April CPI report revealed that consumers faced the sharpest inflation in nearly three years, and shows inflation pressures are still building. Rising diesel and jet fuel prices are increasing transportation-related costs. These upstream price increases indicate that families will face additional price hikes at the grocery store and across other everyday expenses in the months ahead.

Groundwork’s Executive Director, Lindsay Owens, shared her reaction to the news:

“Trump’s war in Iran has driven prices through the roof and today’s reading shows there is no end in sight. Inflation has now eaten through a year’s worth of wage gains, painting a brutal picture for working families’ budgets heading into summer. Rather than focus on making life more affordable for Americans, Trump is spending time – and taxpayer funds – on his billion dollar ballroom.”

BACKGROUND

• Wholesale inflation is running hot, signaling higher prices for consumers in the months ahead.
  • Final demand producer prices climbed 6% over the past year, the largest annual increase in three years, and 1.4% in April alone, while core wholesale prices (less foods, energy, and trade services) rose 4.4% over the past year and 0.6% in April alone. Wholesale inflation typically runs ahead of consumer prices, so today’s print suggests further price increases are on the horizon for consumers.

• Trump’s war in Iran has closed the Strait of Hormuz for more than two months, and the resulting energy shock is feeding into wholesale prices.
  • Final demand energy prices surged 7.8% in April alone, with wholesale gasoline up 15.6% in the month and 39.3% over the past year, diesel fuel up 12.6% in April and 73.8% over the past year, jet fuel up 36.4% in April and 103.8% over the past year, and natural gas is up 4.9% in April and 27.3 percent over the past year.
  • The energy shock is increasing wholesale transportation prices: transportation and warehousing is up 5% in April, which includes truck transportation of freight, rising 8.1%, and air transportation of freight, increasing 3.6%. These wholesaler price hikes will feed into price hikes for consumers in the months ahead.
• Trump’s war in Iran is layered on top of his tariffs that continue to raise wholesale prices for tariff-exposed goods.
  • Wholesale final demand goods (less food and energy) climbed 4.6% over the past year and 0.7% in April alone.
  • Wholesale prices for tariff-exposed goods continued rising, including metals up 35.6% in the past year, electronic components up 27.6%, and communication equipment up 11.9%.

Publication of plans to restart oil production at Horse Hill – suspended after a landmark Supreme Court ruling – is unlikely for several weeks.

Horse Hill site, near Reigate, Surrey. Google Earth image uploaded 13/05/2026

UK Oil & Gas plc, majority owner of the Horse Hill operator, announced early this month that it had submitted a new planning application.

But so far, the proposal has not been published.

The application seeks to replace planning permission, quashed in June 2024 by the Supreme Court.

The court’s judgement, now known as the Finch Ruling, decided the permission for long-term oil production and new wells was unlawful.

The ruling said the decisionmaker, Surrey County Council, failed to take into account the greenhouse gas emissions resulting from the use of Horse Hill oil.

The county council told DrillOrDrop today publication of the new application and a public consultation were expected late this month (May 2026) or early next month (June 2026).

A Surrey County Council spokesperson said:

“Further environmental and planning information was submitted by the applicant on 30 April 2026 in support of planning application ref: Ref: RE18/02667/CON which remains with the County Planning Authority (CPA) for determination. This follows the quashing of the original decision by the Supreme Court in June 2024. The submission was in response to a request from the CPA for the provision of additional information.

“Once the submission has been reviewed to ensure all the information requested has been provided by the applicant, there is a process to go through and arrangements that need to be put in place before publicity and consultation can begin. This process is more complicated for applications such as this which are accompanied by an Environmental Statement and the process needs to be undertaken alongside other work priorities.

“We estimate that online publication and public consultation are likely to take place towards the end of this month or in the early part of June.”

President Donald Trump is using the National Park Service as a conduit to funnel money to his favorite construction firms and using Interior Secretary Doug Burgum as his bagman, as the duo spends excessive taxpayer money on Trump’s vanity projects in Washington, D.C., while strangling the rest of the Park Service.

In a new Westwise blog post, Center for Western Priorities Communications Manager Kate Groetzinger highlights examples, including $17.4 million to restore two fountains at Lafayette Park that was projected to cost just $3.3 million in 2022, $13.1 million to paint the bottom of the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool “American flag blue,” which Trump originally said would cost just $1.8 millon, and a request for a $10 billion “slush fund” seemingly designed to finance Trump’s vanity projects in Washington, D.C.

Meanwhile, the president’s proposed 2027 budget asks for a staggering $757 million—or 26 percent—reduction in funding for the National Park System, which faces a $24 billion deferred maintenance backlog. Specifically, Trump and Burgum are also calling for a 44 percent reduction in the annual Park Service construction and major maintenance budget, leaving less than $50 million to address critical repairs at historic sites and parks nationwide.

The contrast between the administration’s treatment of the nation’s capital city and the rest of the country’s national parks is jarring and has sparked bipartisan outrage. As Groetzinger points out, “When infrastructure at national parks across the country begins to crumble as the ‘American flag blue’ reflecting pool turns green with algae, Doug Burgum will hold the blame as much as Donald Trump.”

Burgum is set to appear this morning before the House Natural Resources Committee to answer questions about Trump’s budget request for the Interior department.

Quick hits Report: Nevada’s lithium boom comes at the expense of Indigenous rights

Grist

Colorado lawmakers have ‘deep concerns’ about federal government’s wildfire preparedness amid drought

Summit Daily

Interior staffers raise concerns about Reflecting Pool repairs

New York Times

Interior refuses to release documents related to Freedom 250, prompting lawsuit

National Parks Traveler

Program protecting wildlife migration expands across West

Wyoming Public Radio

Ted Turner owned vast swaths of Western land. What happens to them now?

High Country News

Editorial: U.S. Forest Service needs reform but Trump is looking to burn it down

Seattle Times

Opinion: A water doom loop is coming

New York Times

Quote of the day

This is our land. We should have a say in what happens.”

—Fermina Stevens, Western Shoshone Defense Project, Grist

Picture This @elmalpaisnps

The desert can be both beautiful and harsh. Its rugged, isolated beauty often reveals itself when you least expect it.

This banana yucca bloomed atop the Sandstone Bluffs Overlook—an incredible feat in a year when drought has pushed plants and animals to their limits.

Moments like this remind us how resilient life can be, even in the most unyielding places.

 

Featured image: Trump and Burgum appear at a press conference for the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool; Source: screenshot, LiveNow from Fox, May 7, 2026

The post How Burgum is helping Trump gut national parks to fund vanity projects appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

The government committed in today’s King’s Speech to a permanent ban on fracking – but there’s no still detail on which operations would be included.

Fracking equipment at Cuadrilla’s Preston New Road shale gas site, 20 August 2019. Photo: Ros Wills

Briefing documents confirmed that the Energy Independence Bill would deliver the government’s manifesto promise to ban fracking.

But campaigners said the ban must cover all forms of fracking.

A moratorium on fracking in England, introduced in 2019, has a presumption against fracking that uses more fluid than a threshold set out in law: 1,000m3 per fracking stage or 10,000m3 in total.

But lower-volume fracking, sometimes known as proppant squeeze or reservoir stimulation, is currently allowed. This has been described by opponents as a legal loophole.

There are plans to use lower-volume fracking to increase oil and gas production at onshore sites in North East Lincolnshire and East Yorkshire.

An application for proppant squeeze in North Yorkshire was refused permission last month. Europa Oil & Gas, the company behind that scheme, has said it will appeal.

Steve Mason, of Frack Free United and a North Yorkshire councillor said:

“I welcome this commitment to ban fracking…again, but let’s have some clarity. This pledge is merely a recycled headline that fails to close the loophole that the frackers just tried to drive a rig through in Burniston.

“That time, North Yorkshire Council stood with residents to reject ‘fracking by stealth,’ yet still the government plays semantic politics in Westminster, while communities are left hanging on the front line.”

He added:

“Its frustrating and exhausting that this has not moved a single inch since. The victory at Burniston proved that when you look past the policy mirage of labels like ‘proppant squeeze,’ you find the same unacceptable risks and the same climate ‘carbon bombs’.

“If the government wants to protect our communities, simply ban ALL new onshore fossil fuels extraction. If they won’t do that, then at least legislate for ban on the intent and product extracted and close the loophole that invites the industry game the system.”

Rosie Downes, head of campaigns at Friends of the Earth, said:

“This legislation must shut the door on fracking once and for all. Labour has pledged a permanent ban – now it must deliver one that covers every form of fracking, including so-called “proppant squeeze”.

“A loophole in the current moratorium is already being exploited by fossil fuel companies, putting communities across England at risk.”

The bill would also meet a manifesto commitment not to issue new licences to explore new oil and gas fields.

The briefing says the legislation would aim to “scale-up home grown renewable energy and protect living standards for the long-term”.

Friends of the Earth said the Energy Independence Bill was “urgently needed to unlock the UK’s vast homegrown renewable potential and deliver a step change in energy efficiency”.

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

Precision agriculture is a data-driven farm management approach that uses technology like GPS, sensors, drones, and Artificial Intelligence to collect and analyze detailed information on crops, soil, and environmental conditions in real time.

These tools can help farmers account for variability within fields, track and analyze soil quality, crop health, pest infestations, and temperature levels, and apply inputs like water, fertilizers, and pesticides with greater precision. The aim is to improve resource efficiency, productivity, and profitability while reducing waste and optimizing decision-making.

Precision agriculture tools can be used separately or combined into integrated data-driven platforms. GPS-guided tractor systems seek to improve field accuracy by minimizing overlaps or gaps in herbicide or fertilizer application. And yield monitoring technologies collect and map GPS and farm equipment data to guide decisions about when to sow, fertilize, or harvest.

Drones and remote sensors capture high-resolution imagery to assess crop health and detect variability. Variable rate technology uses this data to adjust the application of inputs like fertilizers and pesticides in real time.

As investment accelerates, the digital farming sector has grown into a multi-billion-dollar industry, valued between US$10 billion and US$30 billion  in 2025 with projections of doubling in the next decade.

Precision agriculture shows potential by enabling farmers to make timely, data-driven decisions tailored to conditions on their land. Precision tools can improve resource efficiency, support more precise decision-making, and facilitate adaptability, which researchers associate with lower fuel, labor, and maintenance costs. These capabilities may contribute to improved outcomes for soils, crops, livestock, and overall farm performance.

But many farmers cannot access precision agriculture technologies because high costs, infrastructure demands, and technical requirements create significant barriers. Farmers must navigate substantial upfront investments, limited training opportunities, and a reliance on consistent internet and electricity, which makes adoption especially difficult for small-scale producers and those in lower-income regions.

Most smallholder farms, which account for about 85 percent of farms globally, continue to operate without these tools, while adoption remains concentrated among larger, capital-intensive operations. Authors of a recent HEAL report warn that these disparities may further exacerbate deeply rooted racial and economic inequities in agriculture.

A report from the International Panel of Experts on Sustainable Food Systems (IPES) links this dynamic to a broader shift toward farm consolidation, as alliances between major agribusiness and technology firms expand control over data, inputs, and decision-making across the food system. “They are shaping what technologies are developed, how food production decisions are made, and what the future of farming looks like,” IPES says.

In parallel, research evaluating environmental outcomes has found limited and inconsistent evidence that precision agriculture reduces inputs or emissions in practice. And there questions about whether the approach could deliver meaningful sustainability gains if it were more equitably accessible.

The wide-spread adoption of precision agriculture is a conflation between efficiency and sustainability, Celize Christy, Member Organizing Lead at HEAL Food Alliance, tells Food Tank. According to HEAL, the production and use of precision agriculture technologies relies heavily on internet-connected devices and energy-intensive operations which generate substantial global emissions.

While innovation is central to improving agricultural efficiency and sustainability, its benefits depend on how it is developed, governed, and deployed, experts caution.

IPES calls for “reclaiming innovation for people and planet,” emphasizing the need to strengthen public oversight, limit the concentration of power among major technology and agribusiness firms, and reshape dominant narratives about what constitutes innovation. HEAL Food Alliance suggests focusing on regenerative practices that regenerate soil, strengthen rural economies, and prioritize equity.

“Climate solutions should serve communities,” Christy tells Food Tank. “Not corporations.”

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

Photo courtesy of Job Vermeulen, Unsplash

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

EWG on FDA’s request for information on SPF and UV protection values rcoleman May 13, 2026

Attached are EWG’s comments asking the Food and Drug Administration consider moving away from SPF testing in people in favor of in vitro UV protection testing, and for the agency should consider replacing the SPF value with a UV protection value that equally weights the entire UV spectra.

File Download Document fda-1978-n-0018-15844_attachment_1.pdf Areas of Focus Personal Care Products Sunscreen Toxic Chemicals Authors David Andrews, Ph.D. Carla Burns Emily Spilman November 1, 2021

EWG on FDA’s request for information on butylated hydroxyanisole in food rcoleman May 13, 2026

Attached are EWG’s comments asking the Food and Drug Administration to remove BHA from food. submitted in response to the agency’s request for information.

File Download Document ewg-s-final-comments-on-bha-to-fda-4_13_2026-1-1.pdf Areas of Focus Food & Water Food Ultra-Processed Foods Toxic Chemicals Food Chemicals Authors David Andrews, Ph.D. Tasha Stoiber, Ph.D. May 13, 2026

Southern California has seen a spike in great white shark sightings amid a spate of unseasonably warm spring weather. Experts expect to see more unusual heat, and more sharks, in the months ahead.

Read more on E360 →

Scientists, including ecologists, are data hogs. More data can give analyses more statistical power, increasing confidence that a researcher is seeing something real in the numbers, whether it’s fluctuations in an animal’s numbers, location, or some other metric. There is generally no such thing as “too much data.”

Except when there is. As technological advances enable people to collect more information, such as images from satellites or audio from tiny weather-resistant recorders, some scientists are drowning in data.

Just one example: The proliferation of small, cheap wildlife cameras has enabled researchers to amass tens of thousands of images that can take months of tedious work to catalog. Recently, AI tools have been some help, enabling scientists to, for example, sift out images containing no wildlife at all. But people are often still spending months scrolling through grainy snapshots before doing any of the “real” analysis. In computer parlance, there’s still a “human in the loop.”

That might not be true soon, however. AI-powered programs have grown sophisticated enough that in some cases they can screen and analyze wildlife camera data with enough accuracy that the final result isn’t meaningfully different from the more common labor-intensive approach, according to a new paper in the Journal of Applied Technology. In other words, no more human in the loop.

“We’re not trying to replace people,” said Washington State University wildlife ecologist Daniel Thornton, the study’s lead author. “The goal is to help researchers get to answers faster so they can make better decisions about managing and conserving wildlife.”

The new research didn’t involve some fancy technical breakthrough in AI programming. Rather, ecologists like Thornton collaborated with people at tech giant Google to see how they could harness existing AI tools. To do that, they set up what amounted to a competition: computers versus humans.

They started with nearly 3.8 million digital photos taken by 1,200 wildlife cameras in three different locations – eastern and central Washington state, Glacier National Park in Montana, and a jungle reserve in Guatemala. The photos had been scrutinized by experts to identify the species of any mammal that turned up. Then the researchers handed them over to AI.

 

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

 

First, they used MegaDetector, a program that detects whether animals, humans or vehicles are in an image. After that initial screening, the animal-positive images were turned over to SpeciesNet, a Google-developed program built to identify what animals are in a photo. It covers approximately 2,500 different groups of species from around the world. The results were then fed into a computer model built to convert these animal sightings into an estimation of where each species occurred on a landscape, what’s known as “occupancy.”

With the exception of a few outliers, the results from the automated AI approach weren’t very different from the analysis with a more human touch. The results aligned between 85% and 90% of the time.

It doesn’t mean the computers were perfect. Rare or hard-to-identify species sometimes tripped up the programs. SpeciesNet mistakenly classified mountain goats in Montana as domestic goats. Grizzly bears were reported in Washington, when they haven’t been there in decades.

But for many species in each of the three regions, the lightning-fast computers were as accurate as the plodding humans.

“The key question wasn’t whether the AI got every image right,” said Dan Morris, a scientist at Google who helped create SpeciesNet and is a co-author on the study. “It was whether the ecological conclusions you care about would end up being basically the same.”

If this approach finds its way out of academia, it could enable wildlife managers to get up-to-date information much more quickly about what’s happening to wild populations. Among other things, that could mean quicker alerts when an endangered species shows up somewhere, or if it’s starting to vanish.

“The big takeaway is that this doesn’t have to be a bottleneck anymore,” Thornton said of the image backlog. “If we can process data faster, we can respond faster, and that’s really what matters for conservation.”

Thornton, et. al. “Identification of camera trap images by artificial intelligence and human experts produces similar multi-species occupancy models.” Journal of Applied Ecology. May 6, 2026.

Image (based on) ©Smithsonian via Flickr

Headline News:

• “The Navy Plans To Build Fifteen Trump-Class Battleships Through 2055 At $17 Billion Per Ship” • According to the Navy’s May 2026 shipbuilding blueprint, the service intends to procure fifteen Trump-class battleships through 2055. The Navy has confirmed that the proposed Trump-class battleship will be nuclear-powered. [National Security Journal]

Proposed USS Defiant (US Navy, public domain)

• “Heat Pump Sales Proliferate In Germany As Gas Boiler Sales Drop” • In Germany, heat pumps have become the best-selling heat technology, making up 48% of all new heating systems sold in the country last year. But eight countries are transitioning faster, and in the three countries farthest north, over 50% of all homes have them already. [Euronews]
• “Renewable Energy Central To Industrial Competitiveness For India: Pralhad Joshi” • In India, Union Minister for New and Renewable Energy Pralhad Joshi highlighted that renewable energy is becoming a critical determinant of competitiveness in key industrial sectors such as steel, aluminium, chemicals, automotive and textiles. [pv magazine India]
• “Qualitas Aims To Invest €10 Billion In Energy” • Qualitas Energy plans to invest over €10 billion by 2029 in renewable energy and sustainable infrastructure. The goal is centered on the Qualitas Energy Fund VI, which launched at the end of 2025 with a €3.25 billion target volume. Investment will go primarily to Spain, Germany, the UK, Poland, and Chile. [reNews]
• “Inflation Jumps To Highest Level In Three Years” • Inflation rose for a second consecutive month as the US-Israeli war with Iran kept making gasoline prices grow in April, government data showed. The inflation report matched economists’ expectations. Prices rose 3.8% in April compared to a year earlier, an increase from 3.3% in the prior month. [ABC News]

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