News Feeds

Carbon Tracker analysis finds widespread under-reporting of automaker emissions creating hidden transition risks for investors

LONDON, 2 June, 2026 

New research from financial think tank Carbon Tracker shows that several legacy automakers carry climate-related financial risks comparable to traditional oil and gas producers. The findings are particularly relevant for Japanese OEMs ahead of the country’s AGM season, given their continued reliance on hybrid vehicles and their outsized role in global vehicle production.

The research, from financial think tank Carbon Tracker, finds that major automakers are systematically understating the emissions linked to their vehicles. Across a sample of 17 of the world’s largest OEMs, representing 80% of passenger vehicle sales, Carbon Tracker found an average discrepancy of 33% between reported and real-world emissions from vehicle use.

This “Carbon Gap” stems from widespread use of unrealistic lifetime mileage assumptions, optimistic plug-in hybrid vehicle (PHEV) usage estimates, and the exclusion of upstream fuel-production emissions.

Using a standardised methodology designed to reflect real-world vehicle usage, Carbon Tracker found that several automakers exhibit carbon intensity levels higher than major oil and gas companies when measured on the basis of emissions as a proportion of enterprise value (tCO₂e/EVIC).

Ben Scott, Head of Energy Demand at Carbon Tracker and co-author of the report, said: 

“Automakers are the gatekeepers of future oil consumption. Passenger vehicles are the largest source (27%) of global oil demand and every ICE or hybrid vehicle sold today locks in 10-20 years of additional consumption.  

Automakers’ flawed emissions reporting masks the reality that a dollar invested in legacy automotive firms is in many cases just as carbon intensive as a dollar invested in oil and gas.” 

Leaders and laggards 

The analysis identifies major differences both in transition strategy and emissions disclosure practices across the automotive sector, with some automakers aligning more closely with electrification trends and transparent reporting than others.

Renault and Stellantis emerged as relative leaders on emissions transparency, with reported Scope 3 emissions closely aligned with Carbon Tracker’s estimates, while companies such as BYD and BMW demonstrated substantially higher BEV sales shares than hybrid-heavy peers.

These issues are particularly relevant to Toyota, whose AGM falls on June 17. As the world’s largest automotive manufacturer by volume, with more than 10 million annual vehicle sales, Toyota maintains a hybrid-heavy strategy, selling approximately 27 hybrids for every battery electric vehicle in 2024.

Michael Wells CFA, Analyst at Carbon Tracker and co-author of the report, said: 

“Toyota’s hybrid emissions are an outlier in the sector, exceeding the total emissions of entire manufacturing groups such as BMW. Its hybrid-heavy resource allocation indicates a commitment to technology that faces obsolescence. As major markets move toward outright bans on internal combustion components, Toyota’s hybrid-heavy portfolio risks becoming a fleet of stranded assets.” 

Ken Maeda, Founder of Undertones Consulting, said:  

“Toyota’s heavy reliance on hybrids has delivered short-term sales success but carries significant long-term financial and market risks for both Toyota and the wider Japanese automotive industry. By locking in long-term oil consumption, this strategy heightens stranded asset risks at a time when global peers are accelerating electrification.”  

Mazda and Mitsubishi display the highest emissions intensities, of 10.2 and 9.9 tCO₂e/EVIC, respectively, compared with 4.0 for Shell, the highest intensity oil and gas firm featured in the report.

General Motors exhibits the sector’s largest absolute emissions gap, driven by a high-intensity product mix heavily weighted toward trucks and SUVs in the North American market, combined with the most significant disclosure deficit in the peer group. 

Subaru showed the largest relative reporting gap, with emissions potentially understated by more than 200% due to reporting assumptions that fail to reflect the high-mileage reality of its predominantly US-based fleet. 

Geopolitical Uncertainty and Consumer Lock-in

The financial risks of delaying the EV transition are being compounded by global energy shocks. The ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz underscores the extreme vulnerability of the legacy automotive business model. Automakers persisting with ICE and hybrid technology are effectively locking consumers into highly volatile, inflated fuel costs for decades to come.

This exposure is particularly acute for the Japanese automotive sector. Japan is overwhelmingly dependent on foreign energy, importing more than 90% of its oil, largely from the Middle East through vulnerable chokepoints like Hormuz. By continuing to build vehicles that rely entirely on liquid fossil fuels, domestic giants like Toyota expose both their global consumer base and their home economy to structural macroeconomic instability.

Scott added: “The crisis in the Strait of Hormuz is a stark reminder that the real-world cost of driving a legacy vehicle isn’t static. When an OEM sells a hybrid or an ICE vehicle today, they aren’t just selling hardware – they are anchoring a consumer to the oil tap for the next fifteen years. In an era of acute geopolitical supply shocks, failing to decouple transport from crude oil is no longer just an environmental misstep; it is active destruction of consumer value and an unhedged risk for investors.”

Investor implications  

Carbon Tracker argues that that inconsistent and potentially understated emissions reporting creates material challenges for investors attempting to assess automaker transition risk and carbon exposure accurately.

The report finds that differing assumptions around vehicle lifetime mileage, hybrid usage and fuel-cycle emissions can materially distort reported Scope 3 Category 11 emissions, reducing comparability across issuers and potentially leading to the mispricing of carbon-intensive business models.  

Giuseppe (Joseph) Jacobelli, Managing Partner at Bourne Impact Capital Ltd and Founder of actE, said: 

“As for many other industries, carmakers failing to transition from carbon-intensive legacy assets to bankable ones face significant financial liabilities. Institutional portfolios must navigate this ‘bumpy flight’ by prioritising the economic inevitability of the green shift to prevent systemic capital erosion and asset stranding.” 

Carbon Tracker said that investors should move beyond headline emissions disclosures and scrutinise the assumptions underpinning automaker climate reporting, particularly ahead of key shareholder votes and transition-related engagements, such as Toyota’s AGM on 17 June. 

In particular it urges investors to focus on BEV Sales Share as the core transition KPI and incorporate carbon intensity (tCO₂e/EVIC) into corporate valuation models to avoid mispricing high-emission business models. 

 

Notes to editors  

The report, Oil Companies in Disguise, can be downloaded free of charge from here. 

 To arrange an interview please contact:   

Conor Quinn conor.quinn@greenhouse.agency  +44 7444 696 214 

Greenhouse Communications  TrackerGroup@greenhouse.agency     

A Japanese version of the press release is available here.

The post Legacy automakers are just as carbon-intensive as oil and gas firms, new analysis shows appeared first on Carbon Tracker Initiative.

Feeding Change at the Milken Institute recently released a report providing Food Is Medicine (FIM) stakeholders with a framework for designing, governing, and sustaining partnerships. The report, Activating the FIM Ecosystem: A Framework for Stakeholder Partnerships, seeks to help nonprofit, for-profit, and public policy actors collaborate in an increasingly complex sector.

According to the report, FIM began as a community-based response to unmet nutrition and health needs, evolved into a national movement, and has now reached a critical inflection point.

FIM programs rely on an expanding range of activities, from clinical referrals and care coordination to reimbursement, data sharing, and food delivery. Coordination requires an increasing number of stakeholders, including health care providers, community-based organizations (CBOs), participants, food retailers, funders, and transportation companies.

This growing complexity can create barriers to collaboration, the report says. FIM stakeholders interviewed for the report describe challenges including unclear roles, misaligned incentives, redundant responsibilities, uncertain payment pathways, and decision-making structures that struggle to adapt as programs evolve. This causes strained relationships, reduces efficiency, and reduces the ability to scale FIM programs.

Increasing resilience in an ever-changing FIM landscape requires thoughtful partnership design and adaptable models, Holly Freishtat, Senior Director of Feeding Change, tells Food Tank. Rather than prescribing a single model or a universal solution, the report offers a variety of tools.

The report is designed to help stakeholders quickly navigate to the sections most relevant to their objectives, sector, and stage of engagement in the FIM ecosystem, the co-authors explain. And certain sections are interactive and customizable. It was intentionally designed for stakeholders across the FIM ecosystem, Anna Lin-Schweitzer, Associate Director at Feeding Change and co-author of the report, tells Food Tank.

“We wanted to make sure that the toolkit was not designed just for one sector or just for one stakeholder, that it was going to be useful to anyone who picked it up,” Lin-Schweitzer says. “Whether they’re a nonprofit or a health plan or a food retailer, whether they have been in the FIM space for a long time or they just started.”

To develop the framework, Feeding Change conducted 43 interviews, two sector-specific working sessions, and a 40-person roundtable, while also incorporating feedback from FIM program participants. Freishtat says the resulting recommendations were grounded in qualitative analysis and stakeholder experience.

The report is organized around three themes. The first, Designing Partnership Architecture, explores a range of partnership structures applicable to a variety of goals, funding mechanisms, operation scales, and stages of development.

The Optimizing Funding Partnerships for Collaboration section, explores existing funding pathways, ensuring stakeholders are aware of their options and encouraging a diversified financing approach.

And Building Shared Understanding and Long-Term Value, focuses on challenges that commonly emerge as partnerships develop, scale, and adapt to changing circumstances. According to the report, aligning goals, responsibilities, decision-making processes, and measures of success can help organizations navigate these tensions in the long term.

Looking ahead, Lin-Schweitzer highlights the importance of cross-sector and cross-regional collaboration, which allows stakeholders to learn from one another and build on existing successes. Lin-Schweitzer also emphasizes the value of keeping program participants involved in, and at the center of, FIM discussions.

According to Freishtat, “if we want to see reduced healthcare costs and improved health and nutrition outcomes, we need to be very intentional and strategic and disciplined on how we continue to design, evolve, and grow FIM for this country.”

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 Inigo De La Maza

The post Report Explores How Food Is Medicine Stakeholders Can Build Lasting Partnerships appeared first on Food Tank.

Nurses at Saint Mary of Nazareth Hospital in Chicago, Ill. gave notice to their employer today that they will hold a strike for one day on June 11 to protest the administration’s retaliation against nurses who speak out about unsafe conditions.

This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections

Thanks to the transition from fossil fuels to clean technologies, what used to be considered the worst-case climate change scenario now appears to be outside the realm of plausibility, climate scientists said in a recent study.

That study made headlines in May when President Donald Trump falsely claimed that climate scientists had admitted that their projections had been wrong, a claim akin to an anti-vaxxer gloating that the official end of the pandemic proved that COVID was never a problem.

And the study contained sobering news: The best-case climate scenario is close to slipping out of reach, and a business-as-usual scenario is still a very dangerous one, with high risks of widespread species extinctions, extreme heat-related illnesses and deaths, and expanding vector-borne diseases like malaria.

World makes progress on climate change

Scientists developed the worst-case climate change scenario known as RCP8.5 nearly 20 years ago.

A 2010 paper described RCP8.5 as representing the 90th percentile of plausible climate-warming emissions, cautioning that the RCPs “are neither forecasts nor policy recommendations, but were chosen to map a broad range of climate outcomes.” A 2011 paper summarizing RCP8.5 noted that this scenario envisioned a world with high population growth, slow improvements in energy efficiency, and a heavy reliance on fossil fuels, including a nearly tenfold increase in coal consumption.

Although the U.S. government under Trump favors high birth rates, has dismantled energy efficiency programs, and supports coal and other fossil fuels, policies implemented around the world over the past decade have shifted us away from the characteristics of RCP8.5, leading scientists to say it is now implausible.

Spurred by the 2015 Paris Climate Agreement and dramatically falling costs of clean energy technologies, many countries have increasingly transitioned away from climate-warming fossil fuels. All global growth in electricity demand last year was met by clean sources – predominantly solar panels – European energy think tank Ember and the International Energy Agency recently reported.

Change in annual global electricity demand (blue line) and the amount met by fossil fuels (gray bars), solar power (dark green bars), and other clean sources (light green bars) between 2000 and 2025. (Graphic: Ember)

Clean energy has gotten a boost from the Iran conflict, which spiked prices of fossil fuels and spurred many countries to accelerate their efforts to wean themselves off oil and natural gas. China’s exports of solar panels, batteries, and electric vehicles to many regions, including Southeast Asia and Latin America, have surged. And the International Energy Agency has said that the world has reached peak coal consumption.

Read: What the Iran conflict means for gas prices, clean energy, and the climate

Annual electric vehicle sales in China (red), Europe (dark blue), the U.S. (light blue), and the rest of the world (green). (Data: International Energy Agency. Graphic: Dana Nuccitelli)

New climate scenarios

Because the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is heading into its next cycle of climate change reports, a group of scientists called the Scenario Model Intercomparison Project was tasked with establishing an updated set of emissions scenarios. In the new paper, they outline six new scenarios ranging from a best-case “very low emission scenario” to a worst-case “high-emission scenario.”

Their scenarios show that meeting the climate targets set in the 2015 Paris Agreement is becoming increasingly difficult as the years pass and global emissions continue to rise. A middle-of-the-road scenario involving continued climate policies would result in high risks of dangerous outcomes like extreme weather-related deaths and widespread species extinctions.

And a new worst-case scenario involving a Trump-style rollback of climate policies would likely result in catastrophic climate change.

The good, the bad, and the ugly

The new high-emission scenario envisions that many countries could weaken or abandon climate policies. The researchers’ description of this scenario may sound familiar to some Americans, suggesting that “a rollback of climate policies could result from a lack of public support for the energy transition. This could be related to, for instance, local opposition to building new wind farms or concerns about impacts on fossil industries related to jobs and national energy security.”

Climate scientists Zeke Hausfather, Glen Peters, and Piers Forster described this scenario as “a more Trumpian future where current policy is rolled back and clean energy deployment slows.”

In this scenario, atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations rise from about 430 parts per million today to around 700 parts per million in 2100, when temperatures reach about 3.5°C above preindustrial levels, up from about 1.3°C today. That outcome would still likely represent a climate catastrophe, but it’s less severe than the 936 parts per million and nearly 5°C global warming that would have resulted from RCP8.5 by 2100.

The new medium-emission scenario and very-low emission scenario have fairly similar carbon dioxide and global warming trajectories to their previous counterparts, called RCP4.5 and RCP2.6, respectively.

Global average surface temperature change in the old scenarios (solid lines) and new scenarios (dashed lines). (Graphic: Dana Nuccitelli).

The new medium-emission scenario envisions that climate policies continue at the current level. Climate pollution declines slightly into the middle of the century and then remains flat thereafter, resulting in an extremely dangerous 3°C global warming by 2100.

And the new very-low emission scenario illustrates the increasingly difficult challenge of meeting the Paris Agreement to limit global warming to “well below 2°C above preindustrial levels.” Achieving that goal would require rapid reductions in global climate pollution starting today, reaching net-zero emissions around 2050. The previous best-case scenario allowed for a more gradual emissions reduction, not approaching net zero until the 2070s, because there was more time left when it was developed.

 

By: Katie O’Reilly, Sierra Magazine Some have nicknamed it “Keystone Light.” But this fossil fuel pipeline, if it becomes a reality, would not be small by comparison.  If approved, the newly proposed expansion of the Bridger Pipeline through Montana would transport 1,047,000 barrels of tar sands oil—a heavy crude that’s among the most environmentally destructive …

The post Bridger Pipeline Is the Latest Attempt to Revive the Keystone XL “Zombie Project” appeared first on Montana Environmental Information Center - MEIC.

By KAY MATTHEWS

Kit Carson Electric Cooperative CEO Luis Reyes just announced that the company has hired GZA GeoEnvironmental/Glorieta Geoscience (GZAGeoEnvironmental recently acquired Geoscience, which is based in Santa Fe) to conduct a water study of the proposed hydrogen facility in Questa. Kit Carson has only contracted for Phase 1 of that study, that states it will “assess the influence of pumping the Chevron production well (RG-14117-POD-18) on the groundwater flow conditions in the Questa, NM area.” However, the Phase I study will only develop a “three-dimensional visualization model,” which doesn’t involve well testing, drilling flow logs, measuring the rates of aquifer replenishment, and other critical water studies. If requested, Phase 2 would create “a groundwater flow model, calibrate the model, and prepare a report that summarizes the groundwater modeling work.” 

The Questa Watershed Coalition has received a detailed letter from a local hydrologist that lays down the details and requirements that a competent water study must include. The letter begins with this statement: “This will be a critically important study, and it is paramount that it be technically sound, comprehensive, and independently and impartially reviewed and validated.” The hydrologist emphasized that both Phases, 1 and 2, are necessary to “adequately predict hydrologic impacts. The visualization model should be accompanied by a conceptual model (which is basically a qualitative description of the flow system) and a quantitative water budget for all relevant hydrologic components (recharge, flux, discharge to rivers and wells, etc.) along with a clear statement of the objectives of the modeling exercise. He also stated that the 100 afy extraction rate is probably inadequate and 250 afy, the well’s adjudicated capacity, will be more likely needed. The Coalition will use the input in the letter to help assess the GeoScience study.

Questa Watershed Protectors have been asking Reyes for a comprehensive water study for months, as concerns over drought and the climate crisis are exacerbated by this year’s extreme situation. Snowpack measurements for the Sangre de Cristos are the lowest ever recorded, and both of the Questa acequias, Cabresto Lake Irrigation Community Ditch Association and Llano Community Ditch, have seen a significant loss of irrigation water. The well that will provide water for the hydrogen project is a Chevron exploratory well that they call the tailings facility water well. It’s 500 feet deep and will supposedly supply clean water for the project (the OSE will have to provide an assessment). A mile-wide study was done that said four other wells could be affected by the Chevron well, but Questa’s wells are not within that one-mile radius. A two-mile radius could affect 58 wells, including the many private wells in the community.

While GeoScience promotes its hydrogeology analyses and has worked all over the state, the president and senior hydrogeologist, Jay Lazarus, has an extensive history in the Taos area that may not bode well for an unbiased, comprehensive study of water quantity and quality in the Questa area that could be affected by the hydrogen facility. He’s been a longtime consultant for the Abeyta Water Rights Adjudication (Taos Pueblo) that resulted in a settlement in 2013. As such, he was a vocal opponent of the Public Welfare Statement that was drafted by a group of citizens as part of the Taos Regional Water Plan, back in 2006. The statement laid out the criteria for determining whether proposed water appropriations or transfers from the Taos Region to other regions and within the Taos Region from one sub-watershed to another are consistent with the public welfare.

Public welfare is one of the criteria the Office of the State Engineer is supposed to use to determine whether to approve a water transfer, but has rarely done so. That’s why the citizen committee urged that the Public Welfare Statement be incorporated into the Taos Regional Water Plan. But the parties to the Abeyta settlement raised objections to the proposed PWS, claiming it would prevent the implementation of the settlement and that it was contrary to state law. They, represented by Lazarus, wanted nothing to interfere with whatever transfers might be necessary for implementation of the controversial Abeyta Settlement.

In 2013, when Blackstone Ranch, which had acquired the historic McCarthy Ranch, “Taos’s last great grasslands” on Upper Ranchitos Road, applied to transfer just under 12-acre feet per year of surface water rights from the Alamitos Acequia to a groundwater well to irrigate landscaping around the “main-house,” a small orchard, gardens, greenhouse, and “fire-prevention pond”—which translates to 6 afy of groundwater. Their hydrogeologist, Jay Lazarus, was quite frank about the reason for the transfer: it would ensure the ranch irrigation water when there isn’t enough water in the acequia. This, of course, sets a bad precedent: As surface water continues to dry up more and more irrigators will want to pump groundwater instead. It’s already happening in southern New Mexico—and on a much larger scale than 12 afy of water—as farmers dependent on Elephant Butte Irrigation District for irrigation come up short and pump groundwater to save their crops. Texas sued, and a settlement agreement will require the retirement of thousands of acres of farmland to provide Texas with its allotted water rights under the Rio Grande Compact.

Finally, in 2025, at a public meeting about Sipapu Ski Area and Resort expansion plans, Lazarus was confronted in two claims he made as the ski area’s consultant on water quality monitoring. When asked about the ingredient surfactant, or Drift, used in snowmaking, Lazarus said that a New Mexico Environment Department study had found no impact on downstream users. The representative from the NMED corrected him that the agency was unable to test for snowmaking because surfactant is already present in the agency’s lab.

Lazarus was also challenged by Robert Templeton, a parciante from Dixon, when he made the often-touted claim that ski areas act as water reservoirs and help downstream users when the snow is released into the watershed in the spring. Templeton argued that stored water is only available during the spring runoff when the river flow is at or approaching flood conditions and is of no use to irrigators. The time that the “potentially stored” water is used for snowmaking is the exact moment when the water is needed in the river for recharge of wells and the sub-surface lands along the river’s course after the irrigation season.

.In a Taos News article Reyes was asked about allocating such a large amount of water during a time of extreme drought. His response was, “I’ve never seen it, living here [that] in a year we’ll get so much snow that it undoes, you know, 10 or 15 or 20 years of drought, but we’re not using [the water] for a while,” Reyes said. “I have faith that, like any cycle, we’ll start to get rains and moisture back, hopefully, like we did in the old days.”

The people of Questa would rather rely on a scientific assessment of what the water situation is right now before a water-guzzling project moves forward. Hopefully, that’s what they get.

Born and raised in Colorado, Cory Kreft began working on a honey farm at 15 years old. He returned to beekeeping after college, eventually buying the business from his former boss. But in 2021, his bees suddenly began dying. He lost 85 percent of his hives. The losses continued the next year, and the next. After extensive testing, he identified the culprit: a relatively new class of pesticides called neonicotinoids, often shortened to neonics. 

These chemicals are commonly used to coat crop seeds before planting, ostensibly to protect the plant from pests and insects during early growth. Thanks in part to a federal regulatory loophole, the use of neonic-treated seed has quietly exploded in recent years, with little regulation or oversight. Almost all conventional corn and more than half of soy seed in the U.S. is now treated with neonics. 

A legal loophole called the treated article exemption allows companies to apply these toxic chemicals to products like seeds without registering them separately as pesticide products. The seeds then fall into the same class as antimicrobial toothbrush coatings or treated lumber sold at major home improvement stores, with few legal limitations around how they are monitored, used, or disposed of. “Anyone can legally go buy this pesticide-treated seed, dump it in a river, and then contaminate the entire water system,” Kreft said.

Promised to be safer, but still toxic

Neonics were first introduced in the 1990s with the promise of being safer than older pesticides. “Neonics are neurotoxins, and they work by attacking critical parts of insects’ nervous systems,” says Jennifer Sass, a scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, or NRDC. The chemicals target neural receptors that are more common in insects than mammals. 

Neonics are systemic, so they move from treated seed into the tissues of the entire plant, including the pollen and nectar, and the fruits and vegetables that people eat. Manufacturers and government regulators claimed that these properties would make neonics relatively harmless to wildlife and people, and reduce soil and water contamination, since they claimed the pesticides would stay within the plant. 

Those claims didn’t hold up, says Sass, who has been researching pesticides for over 25 years. “They were supposed to be safe for people and wildlife. But none of that turned out to be true.” 

Since then, research has shown that neonics pose profound health risks for pollinators, ecosystems, and likely also people. The pesticides persist in the environment long after application and can travel via wind or waterways, contaminating ecosystems and communities miles away from where they were originally used. Overall, the amount of land treated with insecticide has continued to increase.

Research on seed coatings has found that they don’t typically help corn farmers’ bottom line either. Treated seeds have shown little or no impact on crop yield, so farmers are also paying more for unnecessary chemicals. Even so, pesticide-treated seeds have become so ubiquitous that it’s often hard for farmers to source untreated seed, and many use neonic pesticide-treated seed when they’re not needed. 

Neonics have become nearly impossible for pollinators and people to avoid. “They’re everywhere,” Kreft said, noting that he now buys food to place inside his hives during the summer months to keep the bees from foraging contaminated plant material. “They’re in the corn pollen in Colorado and the Midwest, and almond farmers in California are injecting neonics into their trees and putting them into irrigation systems. There’s absolutely nowhere we can go that our bees won’t be exposed to them.” 

When bees encounter neonic-contaminated pollen, the neurotoxin disrupts the neurological functions they rely on to navigate, forage, and survive. The hive then slowly declines and dies. “Over the last five years, we’ve seen between 60 to 85 percent hive mortality each year,” said Kreft. “It’s about a million dollars in losses for us annually.” 

The impacts of neonic pollution

The regulatory loopholes around neonics don’t end at the seed sales stage. They extend to disposal, too. Judy Wu-Smart, an entomologist at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, has devoted her career to pollinator research. In 2017, she and her team made a disturbing discovery when they checked their beehives at a research site near Mead, Nebraska: The bees in every hive were dead. The pattern continued year after year. “We had almost 100 percent mortality from 2017 through 2020,” she said.

The team discovered that an ethanol plant called AltEn was operating near their research site. Major agrichemical companies use facilities like this to dispose of unpurchased seed before it spoils. The AltEn plant, Wu-Smart said, was processing much of North America’s surplus neonic-treated corn seed, contaminating surrounding ecosystems. Because neonic-treated seed is exempt from many rules that normally govern similar pesticide products, the facility was not subject to the same regulation and oversight as other pesticide disposal locations.

At the same time, residents in the nearby town of Mead began experiencing troubling developments: dead wildlife, sick family pets, and mysterious health problems. The seed disposal plant was selling ground-up pesticide-treated seed residue as a soil conditioner to nearby farms. Farmers were unknowingly applying high concentrations of neonicotinoids to their fields. 

After mounting scrutiny, the AltEn ethanol plant closed in 2021. But Wu-Smart notes that now, no one knows where excess neonic-treated seed is going for disposal. “It’s a big black box,” she said.

A growing push for stronger regulation

While the harm neonics inflict on pollinators is well documented, their effects on humans remain less certain. A recent study found that over 95 percent of pregnant women had neonics in their bodies. The chemicals have been linked to neurological, reproductive system, and developmental harms. Because neonics are now so widespread in food and water, Sass said, exposure has become nearly constant. “It’s everywhere now,” she said. “It’s in breast milk, tap water, even in baby food.”

Sass highlights research showing links to autism and learning disabilities among children from families living and working around farm chemicals like neonics. “I want people to understand that neurotoxic chemicals are bad for our brains, especially with fetal or early childhood exposure,” she said. “Early life exposure is more likely to cause permanent harm, much like lead or mercury.” 

Yet while research into human health effects continues, the regulatory gaps around neonic-treated seed are enormous. Wu-Smart said that when her bees were dying, neither state nor federal agencies could intervene, since there was no clear legal pesticide violation, like using a product in a way that contravenes its label instructions or other rules. Instead, the bees were being exposed through neonics that had spread into the surrounding environment — something current pesticide enforcement mechanisms were not designed to address. The same loopholes that allow treated seed to avoid full pesticide oversight also have created regulatory gaps around storage, disposal, contamination, and exposure well beyond the farm fields the pesticides are intended for.

Advocacy groups like NRDC have turned to state-level legislation. In Colorado, lawmakers recently considered the SEED Act, which would have expanded farmers’ access to seeds without insecticide coatings, while limiting unnecessary use.  The bill highlighted how a handful of major agribusiness companies have dominated the seed market, leaving many farmers with few options beyond chemically treated seeds. 

During the SEED Act hearings in the Colorado Senate, the act’s opponents argued that the legislation could increase costs and administrative burdens for farmers, while supporters highlighted the data showing limited benefits from pesticide-treated seeds and the evidence of the harm that neonics cause to pollinators and human health. They argued that the bill would protect pollinators, waterways, and public health, while also giving farmers more choice.

The act was ultimately defeated in Colorado, but similar laws have passed in New York and Vermont, and neonic regulation proposals have emerged in other states, including Minnesota, Massachusetts, and Hawaii.

Commonsense solutions

There’s an urgent need to close the gaps around neonic regulation by advocating for policies that limit unnecessary neonic use, expand seed options without harmful insecticides, and shift agriculture away from default chemical use. Since most neonic seed treatments are not actually needed to address pest problems, and typically provide no overall benefit, critics say that farmers should not be automatically using the pesticides. Instead, they propose a need-based model that preserves farmers’ ability to use treated seed when truly necessary, while restricting unnecessary use that spreads pollution. Quebec adopted this approach in 2019, with striking results: Neonic treatment for corn seed went from near universal to near zero in just a few years.

Those protections can’t come soon enough. In Mead, Nebraska, the environmental damage from neonic-treated seed did not end when the plant closed in 2021. Wu-Smart said that the pesticide contamination still lingers. “We’re still seeing high amounts of neonics in the honey from our hives in the area,” she said. “I wouldn’t eat it.” 

In Colorado, beekeeper Cory Kreft is not sure he can continue his honey farm. “There’s so much work that goes into beekeeping,” he said. “If I can’t keep my bees alive because this pesticide is everywhere, why would I keep doing this?”

Seed We Need is a coalition of farmers, scientists, educators, and advocates working to change the system. We support eliminating unnecessary neonic use in Colorado and bring safer, more transparent seed options to the table because our land, our health, and our future depend on it.

Join us in fighting for safer seed and a healthier Colorado. 

LEARN MORE

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The fight to protect pollinators and people from the ‘pesticides that are everywhere’ on Jun 1, 2026.

From engaging in door knocking campaigns to speaking at city council meetings, APEN’s youth leadership in Carson plays an important role in our strategy to hold Phillip’s 66 accountable for remediation of their Carson refinery.

Through our advocacy, we were able to pass a resolution to create a taskforce to engage residents, community members, and environmental experts on the refinery remediation process.

Today we hear directly from Jonathan Garcia, a youth leader and Carson resident, on the impact of living so close to the refinery and the future of APEN’s work in the South Bay Harbor Gateway.

Hi, my name is Jonathan and I’m a member of APEN LA. I’ve been a part of that community for about two years now. A lot of our work recently has been focused on Phillips 66 and the refinery closure. 

To me that’s an issue that really hits home because I’ve lived near the major refinery complex in Carson my entire life. 

There’s a lot of pollution, noise, costs, occasional explosions that come with having to live near oil infrastructure. 

I didn’t realize I had asthma until my late high school years. A lot of my peers have breathing issues or cancer in their families. 

Recently, we received political education around the war in Iran and the connections between our national reliance on fossil fuels and our military aggression abroad. 

We discussed how the same fossil fuels that cause cancer, sickness, and death in our own neighborhoods drive resource wars and destruction overseas.

 Destructive forever wars like the war in Iran will keep happening and fossil fuels will keep poisoning our communities unless we transition fully to renewable energy. 

We want renewable energy investments in our people, schools, healthcare, and communities and that can only happen when we stop oil companies from squeezing as much profit as they can out of infrastructure, and declare bankruptcy leaving toxic sites that they refuse to clean up.

That’s why last year APEN LA mobilized and won a taskforce from the Carson City Council to oversee the Phillips 66 refinery closure. 

This coming year, APEN LA will focus on working with Carson City Council and the Planning Commission to build up this taskforce, meet with LA Regional Water Board to understand the remediation process for refinery grounds, and expand our youth membership so we can have a say in the clean up process.

Please donate to our spring fundraiser so we can continue to do this crucial work in Carson and the South Bay Harbor. 

In solidarity,

Jonathan Garcia

Youth Member, APEN Los Angeles

 

The post Holding Phillips 66 Accountable appeared first on Asian Pacific Environmental Network.

With less than two weeks for the Senate to take up Senator Mike Lee’s Congressional Review Act (CRA) joint resolution to undo the management plan for Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, our staff in DC are closely watching the Senate’s calendar. In the meantime, we’re throwing a Virtual Rally for Grand Staircase-Escalante this Wednesday evening! Please join us—and bring any friends, family, neighbors, and colleagues who also love the redrock, Grand Staircase-Escalante, and southern Utah.

Virtual Rally for Grand Staircase-Escalante!
Wednesday, June 3, at 6 pm MT on Zoom
Click here to register

We know the ongoing uncertainty and “hurry up and wait” feeling surrounding the CRA fight has been hard. But our love of the monument keeps us grounded in a world filled with distractions. 

During this virtual rally, you’ll hear from SUWA’s Organizing Team and executive director, as well as some of the many voices speaking out to defend the monument—Native leaders, scientists, former Bureau of Land Management staff, and others! We’ll share the latest on the CRA timeline, hear stories from grassroots activists, and, of course, send you off with the latest actions you can take to protect this remarkable place.

Click here to register now.

Thank you for all you’re doing to speak up and protect Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. Need some inspiration? Check out our “Love for Grand Staircase-Escalante” StoryMap and review this interactive piece from the More Than Just Parks Substack.

 

The post Virtual Rally for Grand Staircase-Escalante! appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

Orhan Solak is deputy director of Türkiye’s Directorate of Climate Change.

In today’s fraught economic context, everyone is looking to do more with less, and financing climate action is no exception. Yet there are clear opportunities to make better use of existing funding to achieve climate goals, including the repurposing of more than $700 billion in agricultural subsidies to support a just rural transition.

While public support for agriculture and food security has increasingly been reflected in global climate discussions, particularly in the context of the Paris Agreement’s Global Goal on Adaptation (GGA), the scale and urgency of current challenges call for stronger consensus and rapid implementation of practical, context-sensitive solutions.

The need to empower farmers to adopt sustainable practices, such as reducing food loss, cutting waste, building resilience and managing water resources wisely, is not a modern ethos. It echoes the model of Göbeklitepe, civilisation’s earliest-known settlement, built on the principles of solidarity, balance and harmony with nature.

This historical perspective underscores that sustainable resource management is deeply rooted in human development, and it reinforces the importance of aligning today’s agricultural transformation with both environmental integrity and social equity.

• May 28, 2026 News El Niño expected to bring next record-hot year as soon as 2027 With El Niño set to return, the World Meteorological Organization has raised its predictions for another record-breaking hot year Read more
• May 29, 2026 Comment COP31 must persuade countries to make fossil fuel transition plans  As the Iran war disrupts oil and gas supplies, the UN climate summit should tackle fossil fuel dependency, energy affordability and energy access – national roadmaps are a good start Read more

However, to date, public support for farming globally has largely prioritised synthetic fertilisers and input-intensive production models, often overlooking more sustainable, resource-efficient and resilience-oriented agricultural practices.

The good news is that countries are increasingly recognising that climate action cannot come at the cost of food security, dignified livelihoods and greater equality. Any transition to more sustainable food systems must be “just” for the farmers and the rural communities who underpin them.

Enhancing long-term food security

As COP31 President, Türkiye will draw on its unique historical and geographical position as a bridge between regions and civilisations to foster dialogue, strengthen cooperation and mobilise collective efforts toward scaling up finance towards net zero targets, a vital pillar of this year’s COP31 climate talks in Antalya.

Moving forward, greater emphasis should be placed on supporting sustainable and climate-resilient agricultural systems through targeted investments, capacity-building, innovation and nature-positive practices.

Strengthening support for efficient water use, soil health, agroecological approaches and circular production models can enhance long-term food security while improving resilience to climate-related shocks.

Comment: Nature cannot be ignored by Europe’s next big budget

In this context, aligning agricultural policies and financing mechanisms with sustainability objectives will be essential not only for protecting natural resources, but also for ensuring inclusive rural development and intergenerational equity.

A just rural transition that achieves climate goals and zero waste without undermining agricultural communities and economies is not possible without countries providing the necessary financial support. Redirecting agricultural subsidies offers a promising path toward both objectives, but only when reform is carefully designed and sensitive to context. Done well, it can offer a way to ease pressure on governments to find fresh funding.

New high-level panel to offer alternatives

This is the mission of a new High-Level Panel for a Just Rural Transition, recently launched in Ankara. Together with panel members that include former heads of state, senior officials from international organisations, and government representatives from across Africa, the Americas and Europe, I believe we can provide governments worldwide with viable and sustainable alternatives.

In the context of heightened scrutiny over international aid and finance, redirecting existing funding makes both economic and environmental sense.

New data shows rich nations likely missed 2025 goal to double adaptation finance

In Türkiye, farm subsidies have, for several years, increasingly supported organic farming through an established certification system aligned with international standards. The Green Deal Action Plan, published in 2021, set out objectives to reduce the use of pesticides and chemical fertilisers, promote organic production, increase renewable energy use, and improve waste and residue management.

In addition, Türkiye’s Climate Change Adaptation Strategy and Action Plan (2024–2030) further strengthens this policy direction by integrating climate resilience considerations into agricultural practices and supporting sustainable land and resource management approaches.

Other countries are also embracing innovative approaches. Malawi, for example, is piloting a system in which subsidies for synthetic fertiliser are conditional on other, more climate-positive practices such as diversifying the crops planted to help improve soil health or applying soil conservation measures and managing soil organic matter. Elsewhere, the UK is also shifting to a model that rewards environmental stewardship through its Sustainable Farming Incentive (SFI).

The exact ways in which farm subsidies are redirected will depend on each country’s specific circumstances and needs, but the overall approach is one that stands to benefit all nations.

Channelling public support away from high-emission practices is not only a strategy for addressing today’s challenges, but also one that helps build long-term resilience.

Waki Munyalo works on her farm after harvesting her maize insured by an agricultural insurance company that helps small-scale farmers to manage the risk associated with extreme climate conditions, in Kitui county, Kenya, March 17, 2021. (Photo: REUTERS/Monicah Mwangi) Waki Munyalo works on her farm after harvesting her maize insured by an agricultural insurance company that helps small-scale farmers to manage the risk associated with extreme climate conditions, in Kitui county, Kenya, March 17, 2021. (Photo: REUTERS/Monicah Mwangi) Just Transition Mechanism consultations in Bonn

This month’s Bonn Climate Conference will mark an important milestone on the road to COP31, helping to shape the agenda for the negotiations in Antalya six months later.

Countries will consult over the Just Transition Mechanism, the financial framework designed to ensure the transition to a climate-neutral economy is fair. This is a vital opportunity to ensure that agrifood systems and rural communities are placed at the heart of its agenda, and it is a moment to reinforce the philosophy of COP 31: from dialogue to consensus and action.

To accelerate climate action at the “COP of the Future”, we must learn from the past and improve upon it through strengthened dialogue, consensus-building, and concrete, action-oriented outcomes.

Countries should recognise that a just rural transition requires action not only from actors within the agrifood system, but across all relevant sectors and industries. Momentum is steadily growing, and under Türkiye’s COP31 Presidency priorities, this agenda is expected to feature prominently. This momentum sets the stage for a defining COP31 for climate equity and inclusive climate action.

The post Agricultural subsidies can be repurposed for a just and sustainable rural transition appeared first on Climate Home News.

Peter Massie spent a decade inside Canada’s energy bureaucracy, where he learned the importance of strategic industry policy.  

That makes Massie ideally positioned to make the case that Canada needs to rebuild its energy strategy to seize the rare opportunity presented by geothermal energy.  

Canada sits atop an enormous, inexhaustible supply of clean geothermal energy, but the country currently lacks a cohesive strategy to unlock that energy for the benefit of Canadians.  

Massie runs the Cascade Institute’s Geothermal Energy Office from Ottawa, guided by a foundational idea: Canada’s greatest energy achievements were not accidents — they were strategized. For example, Canada’s oil and gas industry it is the result of smart, targeted research and development.  

“Maintaining a strong energy sector is no longer just an economic imperative for Canada,” he argues. “It’s an existential one.” 

Energy, Massie says, is quickly becoming the most sought-after global currency. Canada holds the fourth-largest oil reserves on the planet — and sells almost all of it to a single, increasingly unpredictable customer south of the border.  

“Expanding our infrastructure is already showing returns, but it’s a comfortable half-measure,” he says. “And comfort is no longer a viable strategy.” 

The energy is there, but tapping it requires smart cooperation across government, academia and industry. It requires (sometimes risky) business of a country investing in something new. Massie likes to borrow a line from the Harvard economist Michael Porter: “National prosperity is created, not inherited.” 

“Canada’s natural resources were our inheritance,” Massie says. “The technologies that convert them to prosperity are creations of Canadian ingenuity.” 

Massie sees geothermal as an essential companion to Canada’s other energy industries – each of which emerged from deliberate strategy. The CANDU reactor grew out of the Chalk River laboratories and a postwar federal push. Steam-assisted gravity drainage, the made-in-Canada breakthrough that unlocked the deep oil sands, came from a 1970s coalition of government, industry, and academia.  

Peter Massie will be hosting a number of discussions and announcments at the World Geothermal Congress in Calgary, June 2026.

“These projects were defined by strategic long-term thinking, calculated risk-taking, and collaboration across the public and private sectors,” Massie says. In recent years, he argues, Canada has drifted into “a non-strategy — much talk, but little clarity over what, exactly, we need to do as a nation to remain competitive.” 

Massie believes Canada should start with what it’s best at; the country’s deep subsurface expertise — built over decades of oil and gas production — transfers almost directly to new industries like geothermal energy, critical minerals, and carbon capture. Canada is perfectly positioned to be a goethermal leader.  

But Massie is also adamant that technology is never enough on its own. “Technology does not exist in a vacuum,” he says. “Technologies exist in social and economic systems. And when we want to drive a transition, we have to drive a socio-technical transition.” 

That requires the unglamorous work of dissecting regulations, markets, institutions, and public opinion. “There is no such thing as technology neutrality,” he says. “Blunt instruments, such as the carbon price and tax credits, can scale existing industries.  But alone, they just aren’t enough for transformative breakthroughs.” 

For the Cascade Institute — which studies the tangle of interconnected global crises called the polycrisis — geothermal is what’s known as a high-leverage intervention. Geothermal can be a well-timed “nudge” that alleviates strains on multiple global systems at once.  

“By providing a source of clean baseload power, geothermal can relieve all kinds of other systemic stressors, including energy security, powering data centres, and addressing climate change” says Massie.  

Massie spent more than a decade in the federal government, most recently as acting director of strategic policy and techno-economic analysis in Natural Resources Canada’s Office of Energy R&D, modelling how emerging technologies could help Canada decarbonize.  

Nowadays, the stakes are far greater to Massie. He’s a new father, so the future he studies and strategizes for is also the one his daughter will inherit. 

“Canada has faced challenging moments before,” he says. “Each time, we made the choice to invest, innovate, and lean into our strengths. With higher stakes than ever, we now face that choice again: strategize or stagnate.” 

The post Strategize or Stagnate: Peter Massie on Canada’s geothermal moment appeared first on Cascade Institute.

California nurses are celebrating today, June 1, the historic implementation of long-awaited safe nurse-to-patient staffing ratios in the state’s acute psychiatric hospitals (APH) that should dramatically improve the care behavioral health patients receive and that RNs can provide.

The article covers what rights for wetlands need to be recognized as, the responsibilities of humans towards and with wetlands, the legal structures necessary to effectively implement and enforce wetland's rights, and examples of rights of wetlands in practice.

The post Suggested Reading – How Implementing the Rights of Wetlands Provides Benefits to People and Wetlands: Relationships, Rights, Responsibilities, Experiences, and Actions appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

Read and subscribe to our monthly newsletter and support our work.

The post Latest Newsletter first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

How the Bamako Convention Can Drive Real Implementation of the Basel Convention in Africa

By Gilbert KUEPOUO, Executive Director of Centre de Recherche et d’Education pour le Developpement (CREPD)

The African continent has historically been a dumping ground for hazardous chemicals, technologies, and waste from the global north and from countries such as China, India, and Turkey.

This dumping is the result of brute economic forces, often characterized as “toxic colonialism,” as evidenced by the recent case of Italian waste dumped in Tunisia. The real costs of waste disposal are shifted onto the recipient population and environment, transferring negative externalities born in the global north and other countries onto the African continent. 

As African civil society strives to drive action on waste trade as an urgent environmental and social justice issue in Africa during Africa Day, it is important to examine the global and regional instruments that govern waste trade, their weaknesses, and areas of complementarity and effectiveness. 

At the global level, the Basel Convention on the transboundary movement of hazardous waste and its disposal, adopted in 1989 and entered into force in 1992, regulates the global trade in hazardous and other waste.

While the Basel Ban Amendment (Article 4a of the Basel Convention), adopted in 1995 and entered into force relatively recently on 5 December 2019, prohibits the export of hazardous waste from developed countries (Annex VII) to developing countries (non-Annex VII), it is not applicable to countries that have not ratified it, including many African countries.

Further, the Basel Ban Amendment does not apply to Basel’s Annex II waste, which includes household waste, mixed plastic waste, and non-hazardous e-waste, nor does it apply to as defined by the African Bamako Convention. It is therefore vital for all African countries to ratify both the Basel Ban Amendment and the Bamako Convention.

The Bamako Convention, which I like to refer to as the “African dam regulation”, is a treaty of African nations, created by Africans for Africans, that entered into force in 1998 and is intended to protect the continent against the dumping of hazardous and other waste.

It is a regional agreement accepted by the Basel Convention under its Article 11, which allows legal waste trade agreements that are no less environmentally sound than the Basel Convention, and can, for example, in particular interests of developing countries, be stronger than the Basel Convention. For example, the Bamako Convention offers stronger protections than the Basel Convention in the following ways: 

1. The Bamako Convention considers any waste containing either listed hazardous substances or listed hazardous characteristics as hazardous wastes. The Basel Convention, on the other hand, requires both a hazardous substance and a hazardous characteristic at the same time to qualify as hazardous waste. 

2. The Bamako Convention considers all chemicals, whether they are factually waste or not, as hazardous waste if they are banned or severely restricted for environmental or human health reasons anywhere in the world. The Basel Convention does not consider these banned or severely restricted chemicals as wastes subject to control in Africa. 

3. The Bamako Convention uniquely considers nuclear wastes of all kinds (Y0), as well as wastes collected from households, and incinerator ashes from the burning of wastes collected from households (Y46 and Y47) to be hazardous wastes. The Basel Convention does not consider these wastes to be hazardous waste.

4. The Bamako Convention bans the import of all hazardous wastes into the continent of Africa, as well as the ocean dumping in the waters under the jurisdiction of African States. There are no such provisions under the Basel Convention.

In light of these stronger protections, the Bamako Convention is truly a regional dam treaty to prevent hazardous and other waste, including chemicals banned or severely restricted by governments around the world, from crossing the sovereign borders of the African continent and causing further harm. It provides African countries with strong protections against environmental injustice and exploitation, and gives them future opportunities to self-regulate and set stronger trade bans or controls than the Basel Convention, keeping regional needs top of mind.

For example, the Bamako Convention plays a major role in preventing plastic and electronic waste from being exported to the African continent. It is also well-positioned to prevent toxic technologies, such as the chemical recycling of plastics and waste incineration, from being moved to the African continent from the Global North.

However, while in legal force for 29 African countries, Bamako is not yet fully functional as intended.  

First, the Convention needs to be fully ratified by all 54 member states of the African Continent. To date, only 25 countries, including those regularly targeted for hazardous waste dumping, such as Nigeria, Ghana, and Kenya, have not ratified the Bamako Convention. 

Second, and of critical importance, is the mobilization of resources to allow for a steady source of funding, for adequate operationalisation, and to hold regular meetings, as any Convention must have in order for it to function. An initial step toward this was taken during the last BRS COP through a decision calling for communication and synergies with Basel, aiming for a stronger partnership.

The AMCEN-20 (African Ministerial Conference on the Environment) decision on Bamako also calls for ratification and the convening of the next COP—COP4 of the Bamako Convention — with the support of the African Union and UNEP (United Nations Environment Program).   

We must collectively call on UNEP, AMCEN, the GEF (Global Environment Fund), and all national governments of Africa to ratify the Bamako Convention if they have not, and, moreover, to explore ways to overcome these critical institutional challenges and gaps to finally achieve a functional regional convention on chemicals and waste. The most important job is finished—we have a convention. It is now our time to breathe life into it so it can fulfil its promise of protecting Africa, now and for its future generations.

The post Why Africa’s Own Treaty May Be the Key to Fixing Global Waste Trade Rules first appeared on GAIA.

On June 2, PM Press will publish Three Roads: Labor Music Ecology by Joe Uehlein, founder of the Labor Network for Sustainability. Here’s a description of the book:

“After decades organizing from within the labor establishment, Joe Uehlein realized that winning real climate and economic justice meant moving beyond the limits of traditional labor and environmentalism.

As former secretary-treasurer of the AFL-CIO’s Industrial Division and director of the AFL-CIO’s Center for Strategic Campaigns, Joe fought from the inside. But in 2005, he stepped away from the AFL-CIO to found the Labor Network for Sustainability, forging deep alliances between labor, climate, and environmental movements. His vision: transform the labor movement to embrace ecological responsibility—and environmentalism to uplift working-class solidarity.

But Joe’s work has never been confined to boardrooms or picket lines. With a guitar in hand, he’s shared stages with Pete Seeger and Tom Morello, turning songs into rallying cries and stories into tools for resistance.

Three Roads weaves strategy, memoir, and music into a powerful call to action. Through compelling personal narrative and frontline insight, Joe offers an urgently needed blueprint for bridging movements and pushing boundaries. This is a book for anyone who dreams of a world where working people and the planet thrive together.

Because the road to justice has to walk in more than one direction—and we need all of them.”

Here are some early comments on the book:

“The story of an extraordinary life spent making change, from one of the greatest labor organizers of our era. Anyone who has ever asked ‘what can I do’ should read this book—part memoir of compassion and grace; part manifesto for the world we need.”

—Annie Leonard, Author of The Story of Stuff, cofounder, Jane Fonda Climate PAC

“There is no one who has so seamlessly combined idealism, activism and music as Joe Uehlein has. He is a once in a generation heir to Woody Guthrie and Phil Ochs and he is also a helluva writer.”

—Saket Soni, Author of The Great Escape, Founder of Resilience Force

“Joe Uehlein is one of our great movement troubadours, organizers and good troublemakers. He brings the vision and commitment and joy with his music to add life and power to our struggles for a better world. This book tells his story, and it should inspire us all to take the action we need to take in these times.”

—Jeff Johnson, Former President, Washington State Labor Council, AFL-CIO

“Joe is an unwavering warrior-troubadour for working folks everywhere. If you can listen to his song ‘Sweet Lorain’ without choking up, then you’ll never understand working for a living. Woody Guthrie; Ella Mae Wiggins; Pete Seeger; Rev. Fred Kirkpatrick; AND their heir: JOE UEHLEIN. He is the living symbiosis of labor and environmental—and he doesn’t just sing it: he has lived it in the trenches. I have been a fan forever!”

—Heather Booth, Organizer Extraordinaire, Democratic Party Consultant

“Joe Uehlein has lived enough for not just one, but three extraordinary lives. As a labor activist, he has been a tireless advocate for union democracy and progressive politics. When he understood the perils to our earth represented by climate change, he walked away from a big AFL-CIO job to devote himself to sounding the alarm about climate to a hesitant labor movement. Through it all he has used music to convey what speeches alone cannot. In the process Joe has emerged as ‘labor’s troubadour,’ a worthy successor to Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger, keeping political folk music alive and teaching upcoming musicians the richness and appeal of this music. If you are seeking inspiration on how to live your life in a meaningful way—start with this book.”

—John Harrity, President Emeritus of the Connecticut Roundtable on Climate and Jobs

Order Three Roads: Labor Music Ecology here.

The post LNS President Uehlein Tells His Story in New Three Roads Book first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

LNS president Joe Uehlein will kick off a tour for his new book, Three Roads: Labor Music Ecology June 11 in Dearborn, MI to celebrate the release of Three Roads: Labor, Music, Ecology. The book is the powerful autobiography of longtime labor leader and Labor Network for Sustainability Founder Joe Uehlein. This special event for the national Book & Music Tour will bring together movement leaders, organizers, and music lovers for an evening of stories and songs from a lifetime spent fighting for workers, the environment, and a better world. Blending live music with reflections from the frontlines of labor and climate activism, Uehlein will share how the “three roads” of labor, music, and ecology have shaped his journey- and the movements he helped build. Come celebrate the launch and join us for a powerful evening of music and solidarity!

When: 5-8 pm June 11

Where: UAW Local 600 Union Hall, 10550 Dix Ave., Dearborn, MI

MORE INFO
RSVP NOW

If you are at the Labor Notes conference in Chicago you can catch Joe at the “meet the authors” event June13, 4:00-6:30 pm in the Hyatt Grand Ballroom C.

If you are near Denver, join us for Joe’s third tour event:

When: 5:30-7:30 pm June 22

Where: Event Room, Colorado People’s Center, 730 21st St, Denver, CO 80205

The post Uehlein Book-and-Concert Tour Kicks Off in Dearborn, Chicago, and Denver first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.

Photo by Sydney Ghazarian

By Sydney Ghazarian, LNS Director of Strategic Campaigns

At the recent Jobs With Justice conference in Atlanta, labor and community organizers joined Union of Southern Service Workers members in a powerful march and rally alongside Waffle House workers demanding dignity on the job, safer workplaces, and a living wage. Workers and allies filled downtown streets chanting “We work, we sweat, put $25 on our check!” as they called for $25/hour wages, 24/7 security protections, and an end to mandatory meal deductions that dock workers’ pay whether they eat or not. The action connected frontline worker struggles to broader fights for economic and racial justice in the South, highlighting how mega-events like the upcoming World Cup are driving profits and tourism while service workers continue to face poverty wages and unsafe conditions. With support from unions and movement partners (including LNS), the rally showed growing momentum for cross-movement solidarity rooted in the belief that our future must include respect, safety, and economic security for all workers.

Support Union of Southern Service Workers demands by signing their petition today.

The post LNS Marches with Southern Service Workers first appeared on Labor Network for Sustainability.