News Feeds

Missourians delivered a powerful endorsement of conservation this month, voting overwhelmingly to renew the Parks, Soils and Water Sales Tax with an unofficial 82% approval. The voters showed...

Ten Senate Democrats are accusing the Interior Department of using a routine-sounding policy review to lay the groundwork for stripping wilderness protections from nearly 200 million acres of public land. In a letter to Secretary Doug Burgum, Sen. Martin Heinrich of New Mexico and nine colleagues wrote that the review “undermines Congress’ role in wilderness management.”

The review, opened through three Federal Register notices in June, covers land managed by the Bureau of Land Management, National Park Service, and Fish and Wildlife Service, including up to 91.4 million acres at BLM alone, according to the Wilderness Society. The public comment period closes August 14.

Heinrich called the process unusual. “It is atypical for the Interior Department to conduct land management planning by asking for comment on its agencies’ general operating procedures,” he wrote, adding that it’s “really just a ploy to weaken protections for public lands,” pointing to the administration’s “obsession with development and disposal of public lands.”

Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda is only helping oil and gas companies

President Donald Trump promised to “cut your energy prices in half” within his first year in office. Instead, “energy dominance” has produced record profits for oil companies and higher gas prices for everyone else. Trump has used his power to cut the cost of drilling on public lands, while driving up the price of oil by waging war on Iran. Eight of the world’s largest oil companies made a combined $93 billion in profit in the second quarter of 2026, nearly double what those companies made last year and more than $1 billion in profit every single day. Read more in a new Westwise blog post on Substack by CWP’s Lilly Bock-Brownstein and Rachael Hamby.

Quick hits People are betting millions to predict wildfires. Congress wants to stop it

Outside

Opinion: Sportsmen should get a say on our public lands, that’s why we need the Local Input Act

Colorado Times Recorder

Bulldozing begins at Big Bend National Park for border wall construction

Washington Post

New Mexico delegation introduces bill to ban uranium mining in Chama Watershed

Source New Mexico

An Indigenous photographic history of America in pictures

The Guardian

White House asks Justice department to consider new reflecting-pool prosecution

Wall Street Journal

House Democrats seek records in dropped Reflecting Pool case against ex-Olympian

Washington Post

The Reflecting Pool haunts Doug Burgum

Axios DC

Quote of the day

The BLM used to be able to look at a nominated parcel, listen to the people who use it, and hold it back when leasing would, for example, impact elk or mule deer calving grounds, choke off a trailhead, or industrialize high-priority habitat. That discretion is gone. The oil company picks the parcel; the BLM is told to process the paperwork. End of story.”

—David A. Lien of Colorado Springs, Colorado Times Recorder

Picture This

@Interior

The monarch migration is about to begin. Along the way, they depend on native flowering plants to rest and refuel. Planting native wildflowers and milkweed in your yard or in your community is one simple way to help these remarkable travelers complete their journey.

Feature image: Rainbow Mountain Wilderness: Source: BLM Nevada, by Bob Wick/Flickr

The post Democrats call Interior wilderness policy review a ‘ploy’ appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

A new draft text to revive deadlocked UN plastics treaty talks does not include specific measures on managing runaway plastic production, a growing source of greenhouse gas emissions, drawing criticism from some countries and campaigners that ambition for the global pact is shrinking.

After diplomats met in Nairobi early in July for the first time since negotiations fell apart a year ago, Chilean ambassador Julio Cordano, who is chairing the talks, released a first document last weekend, setting out elements of a possible treaty to tackle plastic pollution.

Cordano stressed this is an “informal reference document” rather than a negotiated text. But its structure is similar to a draft treaty and closely resembles the previous version rejected by governments during the last round of formal negotiations in Geneva.

The new text recognises the world’s “unsustainable” levels of plastic production and consumption, both of which are projected to nearly triple by 2060. But it contains no measures to stem that growth, critics say, pointing to what they see as a broader weakening of ambition.

They argue the document is increasingly aligned with the demands of fossil fuel-producing countries, including Gulf states, the US and Russia, which have pushed for the treaty to focus on managing plastic waste rather than limiting production.

“When you leave the countries that have the most vested interests in delaying meaningful action to shape the agenda, you end up with a text that does nothing to end plastic pollution,” said David Azoulay, environmental health programme director at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL).

France disappointed with production omission

“We’ve gone backwards rather than forwards,” Christina Dixon, a campaigner at the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), told Climate Home News. “A text that was rejected by the majority of countries in Geneva as being too weak and not ambitious enough has been repackaged one year later with some key elements removed and put out as a kind of sign of progress.”

A French diplomatic source told Climate Home News it was “disappointing” that the text lacked any concrete provisions on tackling “unsustainable” levels of plastics production and consumption. That is despite a majority of countries repeatedly advocating for curbs and scientists saying the world cannot put an end to plastic pollution without tackling the issue at source, they added.

• Aug 11, 2026 Oceans South Africa’s offshore oil push meets grassroots resistance in court Two court cases against oil majors TotalEnergies and Shell could derail South Africa’s plan to expand offshore fossil fuels Read more
• Jul 29, 2026 Politics UN bid to keep 1.5C alive exposes deepening divisions over fossil fuels Vulnerable island nations and the poorest countries want the Belém Mission to 1.5 to drive fossil fuel phase-out, while Arab states call for more investment in oil and gas Read more

Governments across Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Pacific islands have previously called for efforts to limit the manufacturing of plastics to “sustainable levels”, but their efforts have been frustrated by strong and persistent opposition from a small group of fossil fuel producers, who see plastics as a growing market for oil and gas.

Weakening of production ambition

Cordano told Climate Home News that the “concept” of sustainable production is still reflected in different parts of the new document.

But measures aimed at achieving that objective have progressively weakened over time. Initial versions of the draft treaty, dating back to 2024, included a standalone article with the option of setting a global target to reduce the production and consumption of primary plastics.

That disappeared from successive drafts published in Geneva last year. The last version nevertheless said data on plastic production could be considered in future assessments of whether the treaty was meeting its objectives. Observers saw this as an important provision that could have strengthened the pact over time and potentially kept the door open for a global production target.

The new text only mentions “sustainable production” in the preamble and includes an article saying that countries could improve the design of plastic products in order to contribute to “sustainable production”.

“There’s a war of attrition element,” said Dennis Clare, a negotiator for the Pacific island nation of Micronesia. “The countries that want to do less are dragging out discussions and gradually pressuring the more ambitious to compromise towards a lower common denominator.”

Little space for thorny discussions

Countries have twice failed to agree on a global plastics treaty at what were meant to be final rounds of negotiations in December 2024 and August 2025. After being selected as the new chair earlier this year, Cordano has been working to steer the process back on track through a series of informal meetings, hoping diplomats can find common ground ahead of the next formal negotiations scheduled for early 2027.

But he has been criticised for sidelining discussions on some of the thorniest issues. Cordano kept plastic production off the official agenda for the Nairobi meeting a few weeks ago. He said beforehand that countries could bring any issue to the table, but production did not feature in the summary of discussions subsequently published by the chair.

Clare said discussions on fundamental elements of the treaty, including production, had been “constrained” and that there was little space for them in Nairobi.

Cordano told Climate Home News the Nairobi talks had provided space both for “reaffirming positions and expressing new ideas”, adding that countries “remain free to raise all issues they consider important”.

Informal talks between negotiators are held behind closed doors and neither the media nor external observers can take part.

Workers sort plastic waste at a recycling workshop on November 17, 2025 at Xa Cau village, outside Hanoi, Vietnam. (Photo by Thanh Hue/Getty Images) Workers sort plastic waste at a recycling workshop on November 17, 2025 at Xa Cau village, outside Hanoi, Vietnam. (Photo by Thanh Hue/Getty Images)

Campaigners have accused the chair of making political calculations to reach an agreement at any cost. “He has clearly identified that the only way to achieve an agreement by consensus is to do away with the more complex elements of the treaty like those that deal with sustainable production and consumption of plastics,” the EIA’s Dixon said.

Cordano said he continues to be guided by countries as “they develop their own exchanges and continue working towards possible landing zones”.

Push for more ambition

Governments will debate the new text at another meeting of chief negotiators in Bangkok, Thailand, at the end of September, and a new version of the document is expected after that meeting.

The French diplomatic source said the current text should not be viewed as “an end-product”, but as a starting point that “can and should be improved”.

France, together with the EU and members of the High Ambition Coalition (HAC), will continue pushing for stronger provisions, including measures to address plastic production, the source said.

China’s coal power rebounds as record clean energy goes to waste

The HAC group includes over 70 countries, primarily from across Europe, Latin America, Africa and the Pacific.

Micronesian negotiator Clare said countries on the frontline of the plastics crisis may decide to reject a really weak treaty that puts the burden on them to clean up somebody else’s waste, while producers can keep churning out plastics unrestrained.

“If the treaty does not include essential elements of the solution, even an initial, apparent diplomatic success – an agreement – can come to be seen over time as an environmental failure,” Clare warned.

The post “We’ve gone backwards” – new plastics treaty text dims hopes for production curbs appeared first on Climate Home News.

CIW signs an agreement with the Florida Tomato Growers Exchange (2010), leading to the creation of the Fair Food Program ProPublica: “(T)he gold standard for preventing worker abuse is the Fair Food Program”

Last week, we shared with you the news that the largest modern-day slavery prosecution in U.S. history, dubbed “Operation Blooming Onion,” had just wrapped up. In updating you with the latest developments in that case, which the CIW uncovered over a decade ago and helped federal authorities investigate, we also reflected on the importance of preventing the kind of abuses that occurred within the Blooming Onion operation — forced labor, sexual violence, wage theft, threats, and retaliation — before they ever have a chance to take root.

This week, for our final post in this year’s Sustainer Drive, we want to share a feature-length piece from ProPublica that approaches the problem from the perspective of prevention, and to let you know how you can help be a part of the solution.

After reporting extensively on Operation Blooming Onion and the workers who suffered under that sprawling criminal conspiracy, ProPublica reporter Max Blau set out to answer a deceptively simple question: How can any of us know whether the fruits and vegetables in our grocery carts were harvested by workers whose fundamental rights were protected?

His search led him to the Fair Food Program — a program that has demonstrated how the kinds of abuses in Blooming Onion can not only be remedied after the fact, but prevented in the first place. Below are some excerpts from the ProPublica story:

My Maddening Quest to Find Out if Blueberries Come From Farms Where Workers Were Harmed

“Over the past year, I’ve reported at length about crimes against farmworkers who have come to the U.S. legally from Mexico and Central America.

I haven’t stopped thinking about how they suffered. Their wages were stolen, guns were pointed in their faces, and one woman I met was held captive, raped and nearly killed.

As I wrote those stories, there was something else I couldn’t stop thinking about — something I keep thinking about: Whenever I go to the grocery store, I have no easy way of knowing if the fruits and vegetables I put in my cart are part of the problem I’ve documented…

That case, which I wrote about at length, revealed that thousands of foreign farmworkers had been illegally charged fees by labor contractors to work in the U.S. Some were forced to pick crops for little to no pay in what prosecutors described as a form of modern-day slavery.

This wasn’t the first case of the abuse of farmworkers at the hands of labor contractors. Or the last. Many of these harms might have been prevented if the workers had received the protections they were promised by the U.S. government. And there have been no substantial reforms to address the abuses, either…

I spoke with experts to see if there are ways for consumers to know if the people picking their blueberries are being mistreated.

Those experts, who study farm labor conditions and food supply chains, said the gold standard for preventing worker abuse is the Fair Food Program. Under the program, supermarkets and other corporate buyers commit to paying a little more for produce — a cost so negligible, at a few pennies per pound, that one expert said it shouldn’t drive up prices.

For those few pennies, grocers get crops from farms that offer their workers stronger protections.

Fruits and vegetables from those farms are labeled with a green sticker of a woman holding a basket of tomatoes. The stickers give consumers like me a clear indication that the workers who picked that produce were treated fairly.

When I’ve found these tomatoes in my grocery stores, they don’t cost measurably more than others without the label.

Dozens of farms have signed on to the Fair Food Program, and participation in it has been shown to prevent abuse in the fields.

But only a few small blueberry farms participate in the program.

Until that or something else changes, consumers will know virtually nothing about the farms their blueberries come from. And they won’t be able to make choices that could make a difference in the lives of the people who pick them.”

The question ProPublica leaves us with is the same one that has driven the CIW’s work since the launch of the Fair Food Program nearly two decades ago:

Now that we know how to prevent these abuses, how do we make those protections available to every worker who needs them?

The Fair Food Program has already demonstrated what prevention looks like in practice. But for true prevention to become a reality across U.S. agriculture, the Program must grow dramatically — reaching countless more farming operations, crops, and communities, and ultimately protecting hundreds of thousands more workers every year.

The need to scale is only becoming more urgent by the day. Outside the protections of the Fair Food Program, workers remain vulnerable to the very abuses documented in Operation Blooming Onion. To make matters worse, the growing pressure on the country’s existing immigrant worker community is driving more and more growers across the country to turn to the H-2A “guestworker” visa program to recruit farmworkers, a program with a long and documented history of labor abuse and the same program the Blooming Onion ringleaders exploited to control and mistreat thousands of workers over nearly a decade. As the risks facing workers multiply, the life-saving protections of the Fair Food Program — protections created by workers themselves and backed by real, enforceable consequences — will only become more essential.

And that is why your support matters so much.

Monthly gifts help ensure that the FFP’s protections can reach more workers, on more farms, in yet more distant corners of the agricultural industry from Florida to California.

Today, the Fair Food Program is like the earliest days of the electrical grid in this country. In those early days, the electric grid, in the rare community where it existed, worked beautifully and transformed everyone’s lives, from great industries to the smallest households. But it only covered a small percentage of the entire population, and great swaths of the country remained in the dark. With time, significant resources, and great effort, however, a mass electrification movement was mounted to bring the miracle of electric light to homes across the country, and a social and economic revolution ensued.

The Fair Food Program today covers tens of thousands of farmworkers in 23 states, which sounds great… until you realize that those tens of thousands are only a small part of a population estimated to be more than one million across the country. And, yes, just like electricity, where the FFP operates it transforms everyone’s lives — from the individual farmworker to the grower and even the billion-dollar retail food giant alike. Indeed, like the electrical grid, the Fair Food Program is a shared infrastructure that operates in the background to meet everyone’s needs, ending labor abuse for workers, eliminating regulatory and reputational risk for growers and buyers, and providing ethically grown and harvested produce for consumers. It is a true miracle, one that transformed fields that federal prosecutors famously dubbed “Ground Zero for Modern-day Slavery” into what human rights experts called “The best workplace environment in American agriculture” on the front page of the New York Times in the space of just three years.

But as it was with electricity in the early days of the last century, the challenge before us today isn’t inventing the FFP; it’s building its protections out so that its life-changing power can be experienced by everyone, on every farm, big or small, in every corner of the country. We stand on the doorstep of great change, but we are not there yet.

So, as we close this year’s Sustainer Drive, we are asking you to help us take the next step. If you are not yet a Sustainer, become one today. If you already give monthly, consider increasing your sustaining gift.

The solution to human rights abuse exists. Together, we can make sure it reaches the hundreds of thousands of workers who still need it.

Together, we can complete the human rights revolution in the fields that started in Immokalee 30 years ago this year.

Become a Sustainer today.

Today’s Consumer Price Index (CPI) report shows prices rose 0.1% in July and are up 3.4% over the past year. July’s price increase reverses the disinflation seen in June, which was built on a short-lived ceasefire that quickly unraveled. Nearly six months into his war with Iran, the president has failed to swiftly end the conflict and recently said he does not “think about Americans’ financial situation” when negotiating an end to the war he started.

Meanwhile, oil prices are back on the rise, gas is back above $4.00 a gallon, and Trump’s latest tariffs on 99% of imports are now in effect. As the war drags on and Trump’s tariffs work their way to store shelves, prices are poised to reaccelerate in the months ahead. This price squeeze is happening at the same time that workers are struggling to find jobs. The economy lost 23,000 jobs last month, while wages failed to keep pace with prices. Prices are up, jobs are down, and working families are bearing the brunt of it all.

Groundwork’s Senior Vice President of Policy and Advocacy, Alex Jacquez, released the following statement:

“Prices started climbing again in July and Trump’s catastrophic mismanagement of our economy means more spikes in the months ahead. The president said it himself: he is only ‘semi-negotiating’ an end to the war, all while slapping new tariffs on 99% of our imported goods. Trump is not serious about bringing much needed relief to working families who are weary of higher prices at the pump and on the shelves, and who are pessimistic about an economy that is bleeding jobs.”

To speak to a Groundwork expert about this month’s CPI reading, email press@groundworkcollaborative.org.

BACKGROUND

Trump’s war is keeping gas prices high, while families face higher electricity prices to keep cool.

• Energy prices are 14.7% higher than one year ago, with gasoline up 24.6%. Airfares rose 2.2% in July as jet fuel prices climbed, and are up 25.5% over the past year.
• Prices at the pump have climbed above $4.00 per gallon since the collapse of Trump’s ceasefire, and remain 35% above their pre-war level, turning routine trips to work, school, the grocery store, and the doctor’s office into a bigger strain on household budgets. The average household has paid an extra $634 in gas and diesel expenses because of Trump’s war.
• Keeping the lights and AC on this summer has cost families more. Electricity prices are 4.2% higher than one year ago. The average family will spend $792 on their summer cooling bills, up 10.5% from last year. This comes at a time when one in six households is already behind on utility bills.

Paychecks are losing ground to higher prices.

• Wages rose just 3.2% over the past year in July – the slowest pace since 2021 – while prices rose 3.4% over the same period.
• Real private-sector wages fell 0.4% over the past year in the second quarter of 2026, and the savings rate has dropped to 2.7%, the lowest since 2022. Workers’ purchasing power has weakened, and the cushion they lean on during hard times is at risk of disappearing.

Families continue to face higher prices at the grocery store.

• Trump’s war with Iran is increasing the cost of moving food across the country. Diesel prices are up 46% since the war began, raising transportation costs throughout the food supply chain, particularly for fresh and refrigerated products that depend heavily on trucking. Those higher costs are passed along to shoppers at the grocery store, where prices for fresh fruits are up 2.2%, baby food 0.7%, and milk 0.5% in July alone.
• Trump’s tariffs are also showing up in the grocery store. Prices for primarily imported foods such as coffee and seafood increased 10.3% and 7%, respectively, over the past year.
• Food prices remain a major source of financial strain for families. A new McKinsey Institute for Economic Mobility report found that 90% of respondents cited groceries and food prices as a top concern.

Trump’s tariffs are making everyday household goods more expensive.

• Prices for tariff-exposed goods continued to rise in July. Dishes and flatware are up 10.4% over the past year, cookware and tableware up 6.4%, sporting goods up 4.3%, and apparel up 3.9%. Today’s CPI report captures only one week of Trump’s newest tariffs on 99% of imports, and does not yet show much of the impact of Trump’s new pharmaceutical tariffs, which began to take effect July 31.
• Executives are telling investors that tariffs have led to price increases this year, and more price increases may be on the horizon.
  • Whirlpool, a manufacturer of home appliances, told investors it had raised prices twice this year in response to tariffs.
  • Newell Brands, the owner of famous brands like Rubbermaid, Sharpie, and CrockPot, said tariffs would add $127 million to its costs this year, and that previous price increases “don’t come anywhere close” to covering the added costs, signaling the company could raise prices again.

An ongoing drought in Europe has sapped French rivers. Officials say that 43 percent of small waterways in France have been partially or completely dried up.

Read more on E360 →

The PJM Interconnection is considering setting “ride-through” standards after data centers tripped offline in Northern Virginia on July 22, the latest and largest such event in PJM’s history, the grid operator said.

How does a young wolf learn how to be a wolf?

Genetics certainly plays a role, but so do the knowledge and techniques passed on by the previous generation of wolves, who teach their young how to hunt, what areas to avoid, and how and when to howl (and what each variation in those howls means).

And much like human dialects and accents, wolf howls vary depending on where a wolf grows up. Research published a few years ago found that wolves around the world have at least 21 different types of regional howls.

In other words, wolves — and many other species — have unique regional cultures, just like people.

Should preserving those nonhuman cultures be a more important element of wildlife conservation?

A new short communication in the journal Oryx argues just that — and suggests how to make it happen.

Written by David Jennings, Heather Harl, and Andrew Carter of Defenders of Wildlife’s Center for Conservation Innovation, the paper does a deep dive into how behavior is reflected in decision-making for the Endangered Species Act and other conservation laws in the United States.

Behavior, they write, is one factor in a list of five that can be used to designate a distinct population segment of a vertebrate species as a discrete and significant group worthy of conservation (rather than or in addition to protecting a species as a whole). It can’t be the only factor, but in theory it could be a major one. (Other factors include physical, genetic, or ecological differences and international boundaries.)

Distinct population segments don’t receive Endangered Species Act protection very often — Atlantic salmon in the Gulf of Maine are a noteworthy example — and the authors didn’t find many examples where behavior played a deciding role to date. “[N]on-human animal culture was considered in distinct population segment listing determinations only twice,” they write, “both of which were for discreteness findings; once for the orca Orcinus orca in 2005, and once for the false killer whale Pseudorca crassidens in 2012.”

They found more evidence of nonhuman culture being used in the recovery plans required to be written for each species protected under the Endangered Species Act — but again, those were all restricted to whales.

The authors argue that it may be time to change that and start using nonhuman culture more often as a component of the best-available science required by the Endangered Species Act, because preserving culture may make animals more likely to survive. “Recognizing and conserving these cultures is important because socially transmitted behaviors can contribute to fitness, as well as indicate the extent to which groups may be able to adapt to changing environmental conditions,” they write.

On the other hand, they say using culture to establish a distinct population segment should “be used sparingly and not solely to divide a species and delist a specific population.”

Either way, it wouldn’t be easy. And as a strategy, it’s not immediately ready for widespread adoption because there aren’t many guidelines for using animal culture in this way — and because culture evolves rapidly. “Implementing the ESA for a distinct population segment based on distinctive cultures would potentially be challenging, given, for example, that cultures can be dynamic, and that conserving them may not always be as straightforward as simply protecting habitat,” they write.

Still, they provide several recommendations on how to start rolling it out, including integrating nonhuman culture into broader concepts of biodiversity protection in the Endangered Species Act and other laws and policies.

That seems unlikely to happen quickly given the Trump administration’s ambivalence, apathy, and antipathy toward wildlife conservation and the Endangered Species Act. But the paper serves as an important reminder that culture is worth preserving — whether it’s in our cities, our neighborhoods, or in the wild.

Here’s some additional recent research about nonhuman culture:

Patricia Izar, Erica van de Waal, Martha M. Robbins; Integrating culture into primate conservation. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 1 May 2025; 380 (1925): 20240135. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2024.0135

Greggor, Alison L., ‘Animal Culture in Biodiversity Conservation’, in Jamshid J. Tehrani, Rachel L. Kendal, and Jeremy Kendal (eds), Applications, in Jamshid J. Tehrani, Jeremy Kendal, and Rachel L. Kendal (eds), Oxford Handbook of Cultural Evolution, Oxford Library of Psychology (2025; online edn, Oxford Academic, 23 Feb. 2023), https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198869252.013.74

Whiten, Andrew, et al. “Collective Knowledge and the Dynamics of Culture in Chimpanzees.” Philosophical Transactions: Biological Sciences, vol. 377, no. 1843, 2022, pp. 1–9. JSTOR, https://www.jstor.org/stable/27096992

Nöbel, S., Jacquet, A., Isabel, G., Pocheville, A., Seabright, P. and Danchin, E. (2023), Conformity in mate choice, the overlooked social component of animal and human culture. Biol Rev, 98: 132-149. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12899

Fredriksen, A. (2025). Re-sounding spring: listening to planetary crisis and survival in recombinant birdsong. Cultural Geographies, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/1474474025138686

Pilar Roncero, Olivia de Mendonça-Furtado, Patrícia Izar, Human-induced rapid environmental change: A case study showing negative impact on animal culture, Journal for Nature Conservation, Volume 74, 2023, 126424, ISSN 1617-1381, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2023.126424

Fitzpatrick, S., Andrews, K. Animal cultures matter for conservation, but also to animals. Learn Behav 54, 163–179 (2026). https://doi.org/10.3758/s13420-025-00700-4 

Republish this article for free! Read our reprint policy. Previously in The Revelator:

Species Spotlight: The Straw-Headed Bulbul Sings About Extinction

 

The post Conserving Culture in Endangered Species appeared first on The Revelator.

Save ourselves from the climate crisis or prepare for war – it’s either, or…

Please note: the figures in these graphics refer to the budget of the EU as an institution. The budgets of individual member states are far higher.

By Paul Atkin

This graphic from Stop Rearm Europe deserves wide circulation in the climate, labour and anti war movements.

The militarist tunnel vision evident in the EU budget is also a risk in UK spending priorities – where the evident and immediate threat of climate breakdown is downgraded and played down, while the “whole society approach” that we need to combat it is instead cranked up to prepare for war; and resources sucked from one into the other.

We need clarity in all three movements – in responding to the acute crisis of fossil fuel prices caused by the war on Iran and the chronic impacts of heatwaves, wildfires, droughts and floods driven by the climate crisis, we should be campaigning on all of these three principles.

1. To stop the crisis we need to stop the war, tax war profits and transfer military spending
2. The transition to renewable energy and energy conservation is the solution.
3. Crisis measures must be social justice measures.

A draft motion for union and Party branches can be accessed here.

Please put it and lets shift this debate.

Join Us

Get in the loop! Sign up to receive future GJA Newsletters and Blogs here.

SIGN UP Join the debate

Send us your contribution to the debate. We will contact you about using it here on our News & Debate page.

Name

Email

Contribution

Submit

The post Save ourselves from the climate crisis or prepare for war – it’s either, or… first appeared on Greener Jobs Alliance.

The world’s butterflies are on the move.

Whether it’s the iridescent blue Godartiana byses flitting south in Brazil as temperatures rise or Europe’s endangered Danube clouded yellow losing ground to more intensive agriculture, roughly 1 in 10 of the world’s 19,000 butterfly species appear today in different places than they were once found.

That’s according to perhaps the most through accounting to date of how butterflies are changing locations as the planet changes around them, published last week in Nature Ecology & Evolution.

“We found butterfly species shifting their ranges on every continent where they occur. The scale is astonishing,” said Shawan Chowdhury, the paper’s lead author and head of Monash University’s Global Change Ecology Lab in Melbourne, Australia.

This isn’t the first time such butterfly shifts have been documented. But much of the past research has concentrated on insects in North America and Europe, where money and scientific infrastructure support more intensive and long-running research. That, however, isn’t where most butterfly species occur. They are concentrated in the biodiversity hotspots of the tropics.

To remedy this mismatch and create a more comprehensive picture of what’s happening to butterflies, Chowdhury and colleagues went beyond the usual sources of scientific papers. They sought out research published in languages other than English. And they surveyed 68 butterfly experts from 49 countries to get their insights.   

“When we included non‑English studies and expert knowledge, a completely different global picture emerged,” said Chowdhury. “Without these sources, we would have dramatically underestimated the global patterns of range shifts, especially overlooking key patterns in the tropics, where 80% of insect species live.”

 

.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:A bold new experiment suggests humans could help butterflies outrun global warming

 

The resulting picture was one of global turmoil, with butterflies buffeted by both climate change and habitat loss. Of the 1,758 species reported to have altered their location, 80% expanded their range, showing up in places where they previously hadn’t been seen, including Brazil’s little Godartiana. Those range expansions were concentrated in the tropics, where insects already live at the edge of the temperature limits they can tolerate.

In contrast, nearly 30% of species lost ground in some places, a phenomenon chiefly documented in Europe and North America. Meanwhile, 22% of species had moved to different elevations, a phenomenon often associated with rising temperatures, which organisms try to escape by moving to higher ground.

While the reasons for these changes are many, two major factors emerged most frequently in the literature. Climate change was identified as a major driver in 79% of the species in which scientists had identified causes of the butterfly movements. Habitat disturbance and agriculture were cited most often in cases where a butterfly species saw its range shrink.

These mass movements of butterflies around the globe highlight the need for conservation initiatives that can aid them, the authors write. That includes identifying and protecting places likely to provide the most hospitable conditions for a species as the climate changes; reducing harm from activities such as farming; preserving land that connects different patches of habitat to aid the butterflies in their movements; and forecasting where species are likely to move when considering what land to protect.

While butterflies are attention grabbing thanks to their beautiful colors and the remarkable metamorphoses they undergo from larva to adult, the alarm over the changes in their locations isn’t just about the insects. It’s also an alert that something bigger is amiss.

Much as Rachel Carson’s book “Silent Spring” tied the pesticide-induced loss of insects to broader ecological mayhem, so people can read a bigger message into the movement of butterflies. “Butterflies are early warning indicators,” said Chowdhury. “If their ranges are shifting this dramatically, it signals profound changes across ecosystems.”

Chowdhury, et. al. “Extensive climate-induced range shifts in butterflies across the globe.” Nature Ecology & Evolution. Aug. 5, 2026.

Photo by Evie S. on Unsplash

Faced with enormous challenges, the experience of 2025 demonstrates our resilience and our ability to unite diverse struggles towards a common goal: unity in diversity, internationalist solidarity.

The post La Via Campesina – 2025 Annual Report appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Headline News:

• “Heatwaves In France: Is Thermal Comfort Becoming A New Property Criterion?” • Heat is a factor during property viewings in France now, after the heatwaves of this summer. Home buyers are paying more attention to the thermal comfort of a property, evaluating its exposure, shutters, air conditioning, ventilation, and shade of nearby trees. [Euronews]

Cottage in France (Pascal Bernardon, Unsplash)

• “Jellyfish Force Shutdown Of Three Reactors At Gravelines Nuclear Power Plant” • A nuclear plant in France shut down three reactors after a swarm of jellyfish clogged pumps used to cool its reactor units, EDF said. Overfishing, plastic pollution, and warming seas due to climate change have created conditions allowing jellyfish to thrive. [Euronews]
• “Vernon Now Faces Three Futures For The Valley That Once Held Vermont’s Only Nuclear Plant” • The decommissioning task for the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant went to NorthStar Group Services, in 2019. NorthStar leased the site recently to PowerTransitions, which offers three use options: a data center, a battery center, or a nuclear plant. [Energies Media]
• “UK Set For ‘Warmest Summer On Record’ As Europe Preps For Yet Another Heatwave” • The UK is on course to record its “warmest summer on record,” according to the Met Office. Provisional statistics showed that the current recorded mean temperature across the UK from 1 June to 10 August was 1.88°C (3.38°F) above the average for 1991-2020. [Euronews]
• “Federal Government Ends Support For Key Arctic Climate Report” • For two decades, NOAA’s Arctic Report Card has provided a comprehensive view of the health and changing conditions of the Arctic, where climate change is having its greatest effect. But now, the agency has announced that it will no longer sponsor the annual report. [ABC News]

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

Concerned about microplastics after watching The Plastic Detox documentary on Netflix? Read along and learn how to reduce plastic use, avoid microplastics, and support long-term solutions with simple swaps you can make at home.

If you've recently watched The Plastic Detox, you're not the only one wondering how much plastic finds its way into our lives. From food packaging and plastic bottled water to clothing and household products, tiny plastic particles known as microplastics have become increasingly difficult to avoid.

Now, more people are searching for practical answers to questions, such as how to avoid plastic and microplastics, and how to reduce microplastics in our bodies.

The good news is that reducing plastic use doesn't have to be aggressive and overwhelming. Simple everyday swaps can help lower your exposure to microplastics while reducing plastic waste sustainably. 

What are microplastics, and should people be concerned?

Microplastics are tiny plastic particles measuring less than five millimeters in size. These particles can either be intentionally manufactured for use in products or result from larger plastic items breaking down over time. As plastic pollution continues to accumulate, microplastics have spread far beyond oceans and waterways.

SEM image highlighting nanoplastic fragments and fibers detected in human sperm samples, from Ecoton.

Microplastics can now enter our bodies through multiple pathways. We may ingest them through food and water, inhale them in the air, or encounter them in products we use every day.

While scientists have detected microplastics in various parts of the human body, the science around their long-term health effects is still developing. Researchers have identified concerning associations between microplastic exposure and certain health outcomes, but many studies show correlation rather than direct causation. 

In other words, scientists are still working to understand exactly how microplastics affect human health over time, and further scientific research is required around the specific impacts. However, when something we never evolved to live with is now inside our hearts, our lungs, and even our maternal placentas, humanity needs urgent action. 

Protecting public health requires making decisions based on the best available information. Ideally, this means following the precautionary principle, which emphasizes caution and pausing to review scientific findings before adopting new technologies at a large scale in case they might prove dangerous. Plastics are still new in the timescale of human evolution, and we would do well to protect humanity from the potential impacts that these microplastics might be having on our health.

The safest path forward is clear: drastically reduce plastic production, shift to toxic-free reuse systems, and protect people and the planet from harmful chemicals. 

How to Reduce Microplastics in Our Bodies Through Everyday Habits Should You Stop Heating Food in Plastic Containers?

If you're wondering how to reduce microplastics in your body, one of the simplest places to start is the kitchen. Studies show that heating food in plastic containers can increase the release of both microplastic particles and chemicals from the plastic into food, particularly when containers are exposed to high temperatures in microwaves or ovens. Apart from plastic food containers, we’re also exposed to microplastics through the plastic cutting boards, utensils, plates, and bowls we use in the kitchen.

That doesn't mean you need to throw away every plastic container in your home. Instead of creating unnecessary waste (and succumbing to consumerism), consider replacing plastic food storage items with glass, ceramic, or other toxic-free alternatives when possible. 

Can Switching from Plastic Bottled Water Help Reduce Microplastic Exposure? 

The water you drink is often one of the first places people consider to avoid microplastics. However, studies have detected microplastics in both bottled water and tap water. Plastic-bottled water frequently contains higher levels of microplastic particles, partly because the water comes into contact with plastic packaging during production, storage, and transportation. While scientists are still studying how these particles affect human health over time, reducing unnecessary exposure is one practical way to reduce microplastics in our bodies.

For households with access to safe drinking water, using a home water filtration system and storing water in reusable containers may help reduce the use of single-use plastic bottles and eventually save on costs, too! Some communities also offer water refill stations that allow people to access drinking water without generating additional plastic waste.

At the same time, it’s important to recognize that access to safe and affordable drinking water is not equal everywhere. In many communities, bottled water may still be the safest or most accessible option available, and people should make the best choice available to them based on their circumstances. Long-term solutions require investments in safe public water infrastructure, accessible refill systems, and policies that reduce single-use plastics in the first place.

How can you reduce microplastics from clothing?

When people think about microplastics, they often picture plastic bottles or single-use food packaging. Textiles are the largest source of microplastics, responsible for roughly 35% of the microplastic volume in our oceans. Synthetic fabrics such as polyester, nylon, acrylic, and elastane shed tiny plastic fibers—known as microfibers—during everyday wear and washing. These microfibers can enter waterways through wastewater systems and eventually make their way into the environment. 

The good news is that you don’t have to purge your wardrobe. In fact, replacing perfectly usable clothes can create unnecessary waste and even promote overconsumption. 

When it's time to purchase new clothing, consider buying natural fibers such as cotton, linen, or wool over synthetic materials. Many natural fibers are also more breathable and comfortable, especially in warmer climates. Want to save up on clothes while choosing sustainably? Buy second-hand or “thrift shop” clothing made of natural fibers and could survive multiple wears.

Some might find this hard to believe, but how you care for your clothes can also make a big difference for the environment. Experts recommend washing garments only when necessary, using full loads, choosing cold water and shorter wash cycles, and air-drying clothes when possible. While these laundry habits won't completely eliminate exposure, they are among the simple swaps you can do at home to reduce microplastics while extending the life of your clothing and reducing plastic pollution at the source.

How to Reduce Plastic Use Beyond Individual Choices Why Reducing Plastic Isn't Only a Personal Responsibility 

A person can learn how to limit their exposure to plastics at a personal or household level, but behavior change as consumers can only do so much when single-use plastics are ubiquitous. 

Break Free From Plastic's Regional Brand Audit Report demonstrates how a small number of multinational companies continue to be among the biggest contributors to plastic pollution in Asia, particularly through single-use sachets and other disposable packaging. 

The harsh reality: plastic pollution is not simply the result of individual consumer choices, but also the result of the production and packaging systems that make plastics essentially impossible to avoid. For many people seeking to avoid microplastics, the challenge is not a lack of willingness to change habits, but a lack of accessible alternatives. Consumers deserve better options than having to choose between convenience and sustainability.

How Do Reuse and Refill Systems Help Reduce Microplastics? 

While simple swaps you can do at home to reduce microplastics can help lower everyday exposure, sustainable long-term solutions require reducing plastic production in the first place. 

Reuse and refill systems prevent waste before it’s created by replacing single-use packaging with containers that can be returned, cleaned, and used again. These include refill stations for household products, reusable beverage bottle systems, and refill stores that allow customers to bring their own containers.

It’s important to address plastic pollution at its source rather than relying solely on waste management. Unlike recycling, reuse systems reduce demand for new plastic, helping prevent future plastic waste and the microplastics that can form as plastic breaks down over time. Because when you recycle plastic, it’s still plastic with a second life.

Why systemic change matters?

Sustainable long-term solutions depend on changing the systems that produce plastic pollution in the first place. Experts increasingly point to reduce and reuse measures such as packaging redesign, investments in reuse and refill infrastructure, and stronger policies that hold companies accountable for the waste they generate.

The Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) policy principle was established to make producers all over the world to be accountable for the entire lifecycle of the products they place on the market.  In the Philippines, the EPR Act of 2022requires large companies to take responsibility for recovering and managing their plastic packaging, creating incentives to reduce unnecessary packaging and explore more sustainable alternatives.  

On the contrary, some organizations argue that well-designed EPR schemes work best when they prioritize waste prevention and reuse (not just recycling) by encouraging businesses to redesign products and packaging from the start, which makes more sense as we adopt the “polluter pays principle.”

Supporting policies and business models that reduce plastic pollution at the source can be just as important as the simple swaps you can do at home to reduce microplastics. It’s about time to put more pressure where it should be.

What can you do to demand systemic change?

Learning how to avoid plastic in our daily lives is an important first step—but it shouldn't stop there. 

Explore our wide array of films and documentaries on reducing plastic pollution at the source – whether you want to know how microplastics enter our bodies or are simply curious about plastic solutions driven by local communities.

Watching The Plastic Detox documentary might be like a real-life modern-day horror movie, but you don't have to be perfect to make a difference. Rather than striving for a perfect "plastic-free" lifestyle, focus on gradual changes that make sense for you and your household.

At the same time, beating plastic pollution requires more than individual action. We need businesses to redesign packaging, governments to invest in reuse and refill infrastructure, and stronger policies that reduce plastic pollution at its source.

Together, let’s make plastic-free choices more accessible for everyone.

NIGERIA: Forests, Critical Minerals, and the Crisis of Human Security NSAC 2026 See original article from HOMEF here

On 14 July 2026, Abuja hosted the Third Nigeria Socio-Ecological Alternatives Convergence (NSAC), convened by HOMEF and partner organisations under the theme: Deforestation, Mining and the Crisis of Human Security in Nigeria.

The gathering pulled in traditional rulers, frontline communities, academics, labour groups, youth and women’s organisations. The message from HOMEF’s Executive Director, Nnimmo Bassey, in his welcome address cut straight to the point: “We cannot restore forests while chainsaws are still roaring. We cannot heal rivers while mining waste continues to poison them.” With Nigeria losing up to 300,000 hectares of forest annually and already stripped of over 90% of its original forest cover, there was certainly cause for alarm in the room.

What brought that alarm to bear, however, was the question Professor Omolade Adunbi posed in his keynote: who benefits from the global push for critical minerals…and at whose cost? Nigeria sits atop lithium, nickel, copper, tantalite, and rare earth deposits that the world’s green energy industry desperately wants, yet beneath those maps are farms, rivers, sacred lands, and people. The demand from every attendee in the room was clear: that communities must have the power to say no before a single licence is issued, that primary forests and watersheds must be declared No-Go Zones, and that restoration cannot remain a post-damage promise.

As Professor Adunbi put it, critical minerals may be the new oil, but they do not have to become the new curse we must bear.

Read more here: https://homef.org/2026/07/22/forests-critical-minerals-and-the-crisis-of-human-security/

 

The post NIGERIA: Forests, Critical Minerals, and the Crisis of Human Security – NSAC 2026 appeared first on Yes to Life No to Mining.

Matthew LaPlante doesn’t have to go to a lab to see his research in action. On some mornings, he can just look out his own window in the mountains high above Salt Lake City. After a warm night when the temperature stays above freezing, he’ll wake up and see that the snow level has dropped by inches, revealing more of the aspens he taps for syrup.

“It feels like a monster came and just in the middle of the night, took a bite out of a snowpack,” said LaPlante, a journalist and climate scientist at Utah State University.

So it’s fitting that scientists have started calling these kinds of heat waves, marked by unusually high temperatures in the spring and early summer, “snow eaters.” 

LaPlante was part of a recent study, published in the journal Science Advances, that attempted, for the first time, to identify what conditions exactly make for a “snow eater.” Compared to normal warm spells or heat waves, the researchers determined that these events happen when temperatures stay above freezing through both day and night for multiple days, typically three to five. These events can roughly double the rate at which snow melts, causing flooding and making it challenging to manage water resources. 

“Snow eaters” appear to be occurring earlier in the year and becoming more widespread in the Western United States as the climate warms. Since the 1850s, the study found, the area affected by snow eaters has increased by an average of about 40,000 square miles per century, and the first snow eater of the season has been arriving about one month earlier per century. 

The term “snow eater” has a murky history. By at least the 1880s, people in the West were talking about “snow-eating” chinooks, warm mountain winds that make snow disappear quickly. More recently, the phrase “snow-eater heat wave” first made headlines in March, when an early heat wave enveloped much of the West, quickly wiping away snowpack in the Colorado Rockies and California’s Sierra Nevada. The scientists hope the catchy, evocative term can help draw more attention to this type of heat wave, since there’s still a lot to learn. The study only looked at the Western U.S., but snow eater heat waves almost assuredly occur elsewhere, LaPlante said.

Solar radiation is a major, but sometimes overlooked, driver of snowmelt, said Noah Molotch, a professor of geography at the University of Colorado Boulder who was not involved in the new study. When it interacts with heat waves, those impacts are amplified. As snow crystals warm up, they lose some of their structure and light-reflecting abilities, causing snowpacks to absorb more sunlight and melt faster. “It’s a little bit of a — no pun intended — a snowball effect,” he said.

Much of the Western U.S. saw record-low snowpack this spring. What was really unusual about it, Molotch said, was how widespread it was. Colorado received less precipitation than normal this winter, while California got lots of precipitation, but in the form of rain instead of snow. But across the region, “the one thing in common was above-average air temperatures,” Molotch said.

These conditions have likely helped fuel exceptionally severe wildfires in the West, from Utah to Spokane, Washington, where hundreds of homes burned earlier this month. “Drought stress for mountain forests around the Western U.S. is heavily dictated by the snow that accumulates each winter and then melts through the spring and summer,” Molotch said. “There is a direct connection there in terms of the water availability and drought stress that can provide one of the important ingredients for increases in wildfire intensity and frequency.”

If scientists are able to better predict what will happen to snowpack, it could help water managers plan for what’s coming. Early or rapid snowmelt poses problems for managing water resources in the West, where snowpack serves as a key source of fresh water in the drier summer months. “Water that would otherwise be stored as snow comes out early, and then we have to deal with it as a hazard instead of a resource at our reservoirs and along the rivers and streams,” said Ben Hatchett, a co-author on the study and a scientist at Colorado State University’s Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere.

Snow-eater heat waves also may pose risks to skiers, hikers, and anyone else on or near mountains. They could be linked to hazards such as avalanches, glacial collapses, and permafrost melt, Hatchett said, though scientists are still investigating those connections. He lives in the Sierra Nevada, and he’s noticed one tangible change over his lifetime: The soundscape has changed.

“At night, it used to be quiet,” he said. “And now it’s not quiet, because everything’s melting all the time.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Scientists define a new category of heat wave: ‘Snow eaters’ on Aug 12, 2026.

A new daily investigation into the documents behind the battle over Shell, oil pollution and accountability in the Niger Delta

Tomorrow we begin something substantial.

Over the coming days and weeks, we will be examining a remarkable collection of documents concerning Shell’s operations in Nigeria, oil pollution in the Niger Delta, pipeline integrity, oil theft, environmental damage and what senior personnel inside the company knew about the problems confronting its operations.

And we intend to examine them one story at a time.

Not with slogans.

Not by pretending allegations are proven facts.

And not by accepting corporate explanations without examining the documentary record behind them.

Our starting point is material made publicly available by Nigeria’s Human and Environmental Development Agenda — HEDA Resource Centre.

Who is HEDA?

HEDA — the Human and Environmental Development Agenda — is a Nigerian non-governmental and non-partisan civil-society organisation whose work encompasses good governance, environmental sustainability, human rights and social justice.

It has been operating for more than two decades and has been active on environmental accountability in the Niger Delta, including questions surrounding pollution, extractive industries and the responsibilities of multinational oil companies.

In June 2026, HEDA publicised newly released Shell documents which it said raised serious questions about the management of environmental risks and pollution associated with Shell’s historic Nigerian operations.

Those papers are now publicly accessible through HEDA’s website.

And they deserve to be read.

Carefully.

What are these Shell documents?

The collection contains internal Shell material disclosed in connection with litigation concerning pollution in the Niger Delta.

That distinction is important.

These are not simply newspaper allegations about what somebody believes Shell may have done.

They include corporate documents, internal communications, technical material and management discussionswhich can be compared with Shell’s public statements, its operating standards and the allegations being advanced by Nigerian communities and campaign organisations.

Their existence does not mean every accusation against Shell is automatically proved.

Nor does an internal email necessarily provide the complete context surrounding a complicated operational decision.

But corporate records can tell us something extraordinarily valuable:

what people inside the organisation were saying when they were not writing press releases for the public.

That is why we are interested.

What we are going to do

Beginning tomorrow, we intend to publish one investigation every day based upon this documentary record.

Each article will concentrate on a particular issue.

Among the questions raised by the material are:

• What did Shell know about the condition of important Niger Delta pipelines?
• Why were large numbers of clamps apparently being used on sections of infrastructure?
• What did internal assessments say about ageing pipelines and replacement schedules?
• What happened when illegal oil connections were discovered?
• Were pipelines allowed to continue operating despite known environmental risks?
• How effective was Shell’s leak-detection capability?
• How reliable were investigations used to decide whether spills resulted from equipment failure or sabotage?
• What concerns existed internally about contractors, employees and oil theft?
• What were senior managers being told about pollution visible across creeks and mangrove areas?
• What did Shell estimate eventual decommissioning and remediation might cost?
• And how much responsibility remained when Shell ultimately moved to divest its Nigerian onshore interests?

Some of those questions may produce uncomfortable answers.

Others may turn out to be more complicated than the headlines suggest.

We intend to publish both.

We are not going to pretend sabotage did not exist

Any credible examination of Shell’s Nigerian history must acknowledge the enormous problem of crude-oil theft, illegal pipeline connections, sabotage and makeshift refining in the Niger Delta.

Shell has repeatedly argued that third-party interference has been responsible for a substantial proportion of oil spilled from its facilities.

That evidence must be considered.

But invoking sabotage does not end the inquiry.

It begins another one.

Once an operator knows that pipelines have been compromised, what does it do?

Does it shut them down?

Repair them?

Replace them?

Continue pumping?

What risks are considered acceptable?

Who makes those decisions?

And what happens to communities living beside the infrastructure while those decisions are being taken?

Those are questions corporate press releases cannot answer on their own.

Internal records sometimes can.

Shell will have its say

This series will not operate on the assumption that an accusation is a verdict.

Shell disputes important interpretations being placed upon the disclosed material.

The company has argued that extracts from internal documents can produce a misleading picture when divorced from the exceptionally difficult operating environment in the Niger Delta, including sabotage, organised oil theft and illegal refining.

Those responses matter.

Where Shell has offered a material explanation, rebuttal or alternative interpretation, we will report it.

Where something remains an allegation, we will call it an allegation.

Where litigation remains unresolved, we will say so.

Where we draw an inference from documentary evidence, we will identify it as an inference.

That is not deference to Shell.

It is how serious documentary investigation should be conducted.

But we will also call things what they are

Objectivity does not require timidity.

If an internal document reveals something extraordinary, we will say that it is extraordinary.

If corporate conduct appears difficult to reconcile with public assurances, we will examine the contradiction.

If people inside Shell were warning colleagues about environmental consequences, pipeline conditions or reputational risks, readers deserve to know exactly what those warnings said and when they were made.

And if the documents ultimately support Shell’s explanation on a particular issue, we will say that too.

The objective is not to manufacture a predetermined conclusion.

The objective is to expose the record.

One document trail. One investigation every day.

There is too much material here to compress into a single article.

Doing so would probably reproduce the very problem that makes large documentary releases difficult for the public to understand: sensational quotations appear, the story moves on, and the underlying evidence disappears into hundreds or thousands of pages.

We intend to do the opposite.

One issue.

One documentary trail.

One article.

Every day.

By the time this series is finished, readers should be able to see not merely isolated extracts but the much larger picture emerging from Shell’s own historical records and the evidence surrounding them.

Tomorrow we begin with perhaps the most fundamental question of all:

What happens when an oil company knows continued production could mean further environmental damage — and keeps the oil flowing?

The documents have something to say about that.

So will we.

The Shell Nigeria Files begins tomorrow.

Source note

The underlying Shell-document collection has been published online by HEDA Resource Centre, alongside reporting and analysis concerning the disclosed material. HEDA describes itself as a Nigerian civil-society organisation working on good governance, environmental sustainability and social justice.

This series is independently written from the source material. Publication of or reliance upon a document does not mean that every interpretation advanced by HEDA, campaign organisations, litigants or Shell is adopted by this site.

Site wide disclaimer also applies.

COMING TOMORROW: Inside the Shell Nigeria Files was first posted on August 12, 2026 at 9:33 am.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

In 2017, after about 10 years of discussions, then-superintendent Amy Shane finally got to see a much needed expansion at the O’Neill Public School District’s aging junior-senior high school get approved. Expanded classrooms, state-of-the-art science labs, a new gym. The difference-maker that helped push the $13.2 million project from proposal to reality: taxes on renewable energy developments. Over nine years, the school district has taken in about $7.6 million, which Shane said helped offset the expansion cost. 

“We could get something good for our students without putting a huge burden on our taxpayers,” Shane said. 

The project is an example of what economic development and renewable energy proponents have long argued: Renewable energy projects can help communities diversify their revenue streams and offset property tax burdens. The Nebraska excise tax, known as the nameplate capacity tax, requires qualifying renewable energy developments to annually pay $3,518 per megawatt of power that the facility can generate. The money flows to counties whose treasurers allocate it amongst local jurisdictions, including the county governments, community colleges, and school and natural resource districts. 

But in recent years, a number of Nebraska counties have enacted strict regulations on renewable developments, as opponents have raised concerns about property values, noise, health, safety, and fire risks. 

About 15 years after the tax was implemented, it’s worth looking at where the money has actually gone. Revenue distributed from the tax and the number of counties receiving it has risen over the years. In 2015, just nine counties received nameplate capacity tax revenue, which totaled $2.03 million, including penalties and interest, according to data from the Department of Revenue. In 2025, communities received over $13.6 million. But there’s an imbalance. More than 88 percent of that money went to just 10 of Nebraska’s 93 counties.

Lawmakers created the nameplate capacity tax in 2010 to replace personal property tax for renewable developments. This allows local taxing authorities to continue to receive a steady amount of tax revenue, said Jon Cannon, executive director of the Nebraska Association of County Officials. The landowner still pays property taxes.

“In county budgets, nameplate capacity tax revenue functions like other general fund revenue,” said Candace Meredith, deputy director of the Nebraska Association of County Officials, in a statement. “It helps offset the amount that would otherwise need to come from property taxes, allowing counties to keep up with state mandated essential services and inflationary costs.”

On average, counties get about 23 percent of the nameplate tax revenue, Cannon and Meredith said.

Recently, lawmakers have discussed increasing the rate. A 2025 proposal would have raised it from $3,518 per megawatt to $6,560. But the bill, part of a larger tax package, ultimately died. However, lawmakers did pass a bill this year that expands the tax to include qualifying battery energy storage developments. 

According to the state, 1 in 4 jobs in Nebraska are tied to agriculture. The state’s top commodities include cattle and calves, corn, soybeans, and hogs. So it may be no surprise that Nebraskans have raised concerns that renewable energy projects, specifically solar, will reduce farmland. However, there are areas of the state where the land isn’t productive and landowners could benefit from the added revenue. John Hansen, president of the Nebraska Farmers Union, said urban sprawl and acreage housing developments are leading threats to farmland in Nebraska.

“The one thing that we know in the ag sector is that we continue to be extremely dependent on off-farm jobs to subsidize our farming operations that are not working, and so every wind turbine is like an off-farm, part-time job, except that the farmer or rancher doesn’t have to leave their farm or ranch to get paid for it,” said Hansen, who chairs the Nebraska Wind and Solar Conference.

Some Nebraska counties have gone so far as to adopt moratoriums or strict zoning regulations that have effectively banned renewable energy developments or made them more difficult to site. 

But with rising power demand, advocates and experts see renewables as a contributor to future economic development in Nebraska. Pushback against renewables comes as utilities in Nebraska and across the country wrestle with an energy crunch caused by skyrocketing demand from electrification, manufacturing, and data centers.

Renewable developments, like this solar farm in Nebraska’s Saunders County, can help the utility manage energy costs and address peak demand when the grid is stretched thin.
Lily Smith / Flatwater Free Press

The Omaha Public Power District, which serves a large swath of eastern Nebraska, is taking an all-of-the-above approach, where coal remains on the grid, natural gas assets are expanding, and the utility plans to have more power purchase agreements with renewable energy developments. 

Renewables can help the utility manage energy costs and address peak demand when the grid is stretched thin, said Dustin Marvel, manager of government and community relations at OPPD.

Right now, renewables are affordable compared to other energy sources and can be built quickly, said Kenneth Gillingham, a professor of environmental and energy economics at Yale University. This is especially important for utilities since new nuclear plants can take time to build and the natural gas generator supply chain remains tight.

For Nebraska, adding more power to the grid now isn’t just about serving existing customers, it could also spur more economic growth from other industries, said Hunter Traynor, an executive vice president at Nebraska Chamber of Commerce and Industry. A recent report commissioned by the Nebraska Chamber Foundation recommended the state take a more active role in promoting energy development.

“We have a lot of stated economic goals in Nebraska, and energy and public support for energy infrastructure, in particular, is a bedrock necessity right now to keep our economies all across the state flourishing and growing,” Traynor said.

Nevertheless, these projects face a few challenges. Currently, the infrastructure that transmits energy across the state is limited, which restricts where new energy generation can be located. It also takes time for new projects to connect to the grid. And then there’s community opposition.

“We do see oftentimes where a developer has an opportunity, maybe the project is advantageously located. However, due to community opposition or feedback, maybe that project loses steam or loses the ability to actually come to market,” Marvel said.

Cannon, with the Nebraska Association of County Officials, said that in order for renewable developers to actually make headway with communities that are skeptical, they need to be transparent about their intentions and address concerns early on.

Traynor said that these projects involve layers of regulatory approvals that can allow communities to assess if they are suitable. However, some projects get stopped by local resistance before they go through the regulatory process. He is concerned these experiences could cause a chilling effect on companies that are considering moving to Nebraska.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Some Nebraska communities are cashing in on renewables. Others are being left behind. on Aug 12, 2026.

A prolific writer, teacher and communicator trying to alert students, policymakers and the public to the limits to growth on a finite planet, Richard was, in my experience, also humble and a good listener, always interested in different perspectives.

Brussels, 12th August 2026 – As of today, 12th August 2026, the EU’s Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) applies, marking a significant milestone in Europe's efforts to tackle the packaging waste crisis, despite an unprecedented last-minute industry lobbying push that aimed to delay and weaken the regulation.

This landmark regulation will contribute to protecting public health and the environment. Over the next few years, the regulation will introduce legally binding measures aimed at reducing packaging waste, increasing reuse and refill, restricting certain single-use packaging formats, and improving packaging design requirements.

As of today, food-contact packaging that contains ‘forever chemicals’ PFAS exceeding a critical threshold is banned from the European market. The use of these chemicals is used to make food packaging such as coffee cups and takeaway containers impervious, and is particularly concerning because the forever chemicals can leach into the food and can thus be ingested (1,2).

A recent study by the EU’s Joint Research Centre (3) showed that efforts to tackle the packaging waste crisis are urgently needed: The total amount of all packaging placed on the market amounts to a striking 98 kg per capita (this weight is very significant as packaging is usually so light). Food and beverage account for the largest share, covering 97% of the whole packaging material on the market. Plastic packaging, in particular, is a growing concern, as it is the only packaging category showing an upward trend between 2011 and 2025, growing by 11% in absolute terms.

As the PPWR application period kicks-in, there’s no time to waste. The Rethink Plastic Alliance and the wider BFFP movement commend the European Commission for safeguarding the PPWR and continue to offer support for effective implementation. At the same time, we urge national and local governments to implement the provisions of the Regulation with a high level of ambition by championing waste prevention and reuse and slash record levels of packaging waste across the EU.

Quotes

“Forever chemicals in packaging are harmful and unnecessary, posing a serious risk of contaminating our food and entering our bodies. With these new rules, the EU has taken swift action to remove PFAS from food contact packaging, helping to reduce our exposure to them as well as making packaging more circular. Industries and Member States must now keep up the pace and implement these rules without delay to protect consumers and the environment.” - Emily Best, Senior Programme Manager at ECOS.

“The entry into application of the PPWR on 12 August marks a crucial milestone for Europe’s transition to a circular economy. After years of negotiations, now is time for an ambitious implementation that delivers on the regulation’s core promise: preventing packaging waste before it is created. The coming years must focus on turning reuse and waste-prevention obligations into reality through clear national measures to reduce unnecessary packaging and invest in well designed reuse systems. If Europe is serious about cutting packaging waste, reuse needs to become the norm, not the exception.” - Larissa Copello, Reuse and Packaging Policy Officer at Zero Waste Europe.

"The PPWR shows us a glimpse of what future-fit EU legislation should look like: preventing waste before it is created, accelerating the shift to reuse, and reducing exposure to harmful chemicals. As the EU prepares its Circular Economy Act, the packaging regulation offers a clear lesson for the next generation of circular economy legislation: true circularity starts with prevention and reuse." - Marco Musso, Deputy Policy Manager for Circular Economy at the European Environmental Bureau.

References 

1. Zero Waste Europe: Why is toxic food packaging still legal? - Zero Waste Europe 
2. European Environment Agency: What are the impacts of PFAS polymers on our health and the environment? | Press releases 
3. Joint Research Centre (2026): Packaging materials in the EU: quantities stay significant, plastic grew by 11% 
4. Rethink Plastic Alliance: 160+ environmental and health groups respond to last-minute attempt by Coca-Cola, McDonald’s and Others to Reopen EU Packaging Law - Rethink Plastic 
5. Rethink Plastic Alliance: PPWR Implementation Guide for National and Local Governments

Bagi Raka, dunia game online awalnya tidak lebih dari cara sederhana untuk mengisi waktu luang. Seusai bekerja, ia biasanya duduk di depan komputer, memasang headset, lalu memilih permainan yang sedang ingin dicoba. Tidak ada ekspektasi besar. Namun, perlahan ia menemukan bahwa pengalaman bermain ternyata tidak hanya soal layar, tombol, atau skor yang muncul di sudut monitor.

Perubahan itu terasa ketika Raka menemukan sebuah platform yang memungkinkan satu akun digunakan untuk mengakses berbagai jenis permainan. Ia sempat berhenti beberapa detik di depan layar. Baginya, kemudahan tersebut terdengar sepele, tetapi dalam penggunaan sehari-hari justru terasa cukup berarti. Ia tidak perlu mengingat banyak data masuk atau berpindah dari satu layanan ke layanan lain hanya untuk mencoba permainan berbeda.

Dari sana, Raka mulai memahami satu hal: pengalaman dalam game online banyak dipengaruhi oleh bagaimana sebuah platform dirancang.

Satu akun dapat menjadi pintu menuju beragam pilihan hiburan digital. Ada permainan dengan mekanisme sederhana yang bisa dipahami dalam beberapa menit, ada pula judul yang menawarkan tantangan lebih kompleks sehingga membutuhkan waktu untuk mengenali aturan dan strateginya. Keragaman tersebut membuat aktivitas bermain terasa lebih personal karena setiap orang dapat menentukan jenis permainan sesuai minat dan waktu yang tersedia.

Namun, kemudahan akses juga membuat Raka belajar untuk tidak terburu-buru. Ia mulai membaca informasi permainan sebelum memulai, memahami aturan, memperhatikan fitur yang tersedia, serta memeriksa ketentuan penggunaan platform. Kebiasaan tersebut penting karena game online memiliki karakter yang berbeda-beda. Tidak semua permainan memberikan pengalaman yang sama, dan setiap fitur sebaiknya dipahami terlebih dahulu.

Raka juga menyadari bahwa keseruan tidak selalu identik dengan kemenangan. Ada kalanya ia menikmati permainan karena visualnya menarik. Pada kesempatan lain, ia tertarik pada sistem tantangan atau interaksi dengan pemain lain. Bagi dirinya, pengalaman terbaik justru muncul ketika ia mengetahui batas waktu dan anggaran hiburan yang telah ditentukan sejak awal.

Pemahaman itu sejalan dengan prinsip penggunaan layanan digital secara bertanggung jawab. Platform yang nyaman memang dapat membuat akses menjadi lebih praktis, tetapi keputusan tetap berada di tangan pengguna. Membaca aturan, menjaga keamanan akun, menggunakan kata sandi yang kuat, dan menghindari membagikan informasi pribadi merupakan bagian penting dari pengalaman digital yang aman.

Beberapa minggu kemudian, kebiasaan Raka berubah. Ia tidak lagi membuka game hanya karena merasa bosan. Ia memilih permainan dengan lebih sadar, mengatur durasi, dan berhenti ketika waktu yang tersedia telah selesai. Baginya, satu akun bukan sekadar alat untuk masuk ke berbagai permainan, melainkan akses menuju pengalaman digital yang perlu digunakan dengan bijak.

Pada akhirnya, Raka menemukan bahwa keseruan dunia game online bukan hanya terletak pada banyaknya pilihan. Yang membuat pengalaman terasa berbeda adalah kemudahan, pemahaman, keamanan, serta kemampuan pengguna mengendalikan cara mereka bermain.

Satu akun mungkin membuka banyak pintu. Tetapi bagaimana perjalanan setelah pintu itu terbuka, tetap menjadi pilihan setiap pemain.