News Feeds

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.

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.

Canada’s newly-released National Electricity Strategy for an electrified Canadian economy highlights how buildings, among other sectors, are a nation-building opportunity for economic growth, affordability, and climate action.It’s an essential step...

Mengapa Bonus Harian Banyak Diminati?

Bonus harian memberikan keuntungan langsung yang bisa dirasakan oleh pemain. Dengan adanya bonus ini, pemain memiliki peluang untuk mendapatkan tambahan modal bermain tanpa harus mengeluarkan biaya ekstra setiap saat.

Selain itu, bonus harian juga membuat aktivitas bermain menjadi lebih seru. Setiap hari ada kesempatan baru untuk mendapatkan hadiah, sehingga pemain memiliki alasan untuk kembali mengunjungi platform favorit mereka. Sistem ini menciptakan pengalaman yang lebih interaktif dan tidak monoton.

Jenis Bonus Harian yang Sering Ditawarkan

Setiap platform biasanya memiliki program bonus yang berbeda-beda. Namun, beberapa jenis bonus berikut menjadi yang paling populer di kalangan pemain slot online:

1. Free Spin Harian

Free spin atau putaran gratis menjadi bonus favorit banyak pemain. Dengan bonus ini, pemain bisa mencoba berbagai permainan slot tanpa menggunakan saldo utama.

2. Cashback Harian

Cashback memberikan pengembalian sebagian dari total permainan yang dilakukan dalam periode tertentu. Bonus ini membantu pemain mengurangi risiko kerugian dan memperpanjang waktu bermain.

3. Bonus Login Harian

Beberapa platform memberikan hadiah hanya dengan melakukan login setiap hari. Semakin rutin login, biasanya hadiah yang diperoleh juga semakin besar.

4. Event dan Misi Harian

Selain bonus langsung, banyak platform menghadirkan misi harian yang dapat diselesaikan untuk memperoleh hadiah tambahan. Sistem ini membuat pengalaman bermain terasa lebih menantang dan menyenangkan.

Tips Memanfaatkan Bonus Harian Secara Maksimal

Meskipun bonus harian terlihat menguntungkan, pemain tetap perlu menggunakannya dengan bijak. Langkah pertama adalah membaca syarat dan ketentuan yang berlaku pada setiap promo. Dengan memahami aturan yang ada, pemain dapat menghindari kesalahpahaman saat melakukan klaim hadiah.

Selanjutnya, manfaatkan bonus sesuai kebutuhan bermain. Jangan hanya tergoda oleh jumlah bonus yang besar, tetapi perhatikan juga bagaimana bonus tersebut dapat digunakan secara efektif. Pengelolaan saldo yang baik tetap menjadi faktor penting dalam menikmati permainan secara nyaman.

Bonus Harian Membuat Pengalaman Bermain Lebih Menarik

Kehadiran bonus harian menjadi salah satu alasan mengapa slot online semakin populer di berbagai kalangan. Selain memberikan keuntungan tambahan, bonus ini juga menghadirkan sensasi baru setiap hari yang membuat permainan terasa lebih hidup.

Bagi pemain yang ingin mendapatkan pengalaman bermain yang lebih seru, memilih platform dengan program bonus harian yang konsisten bisa menjadi pilihan yang menarik. Dengan memanfaatkan berbagai promo yang tersedia secara bijak, pemain dapat menikmati permainan dengan lebih maksimal sekaligus memperoleh berbagai keuntungan tambahan yang ditawarkan setiap harinya.

Headline News:

• “In Venice, A Growing Flamingo Population Finds Refuge In Recovering Wetlands” • Flamingos started showing up in the vast Venetian Lagoon in the early 2000s, but they were rare enough that the local dialect has no word for them. Last year, climate change brought the number of wintering flamingos in Venice to a record of nearly 24,000. [ABC News]

Flamingo (Gislane Dijkstra, Unsplash)

• “The Race To Build The World’s Largest Solar Farms” • As panel prices fall and governments worldwide look to diversify their energy mix, some developers are launching mega-projects to meet the growing demand. One in China will have 16.9 GW of capacity. California plans a 21 GW solar project with batteries. They aren’t the largest. [OilPrice.com]
• “Wind Power Sets A Clear Course For Shipping’s $1 Trillion Energy Transition” • Conflict in the Middle East is driving fuel price uncertainty. Scientific validation shows that fuel saved by wind propulsion can be predicted with greater confidence and consistency than the commodity markets can. The value of the transition could be $1 trillion. [Energy Voice]
• “Ford Mustang Mach-E Cheaper than Ford Escape! (5-Year Total Cost of Ownership)” • The Ford Mustang Mach-E is clearly a superior vehicle to the Ford Escape. It’s got better tech, better driving quality, better acceleration, and a cooler look. It comes at a higher price. Nevertheless, its 5-year total cost of ownership is quite a lot lower. [CleanTechnica]
• “Energy Giant Switches On First Phase Of $1.1 Billion Texas Solar Farm Set To Power AT&T And Toyota” • Sequoia Solar, in Callahan County, Texas, has brought its first 400 MW of capacity online. That first phase is now operating, while a second 415-MW phase is due online before the end of the year. The two phases combine to 815 MW. [Yahoo Finance]

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

By Ismail Wolff

On 26 May, investors, government representatives and financial actors gathered in Rotterdam to discuss the future of the Tropical Forest Forever Facility (TFFF), a controversial forest finance proposal that continues to raise serious concerns among Indigenous Peoples, forest-dependent communities and civil society organisations worldwide.

Yet despite the significance of the meeting, very little public information has emerged about what was actually discussed, proposed or agreed behind closed doors.

What commitments were made to investors? What governance arrangements are being negotiated? What safeguards for Indigenous Peoples’ rights and community land tenure were discussed? Were civil society concerns meaningfully addressed? And why do affected communities continue to remain largely outside these conversations?

The lack of transparency surrounding the Rotterdam meeting reflects a broader problem that has characterised the development of the TFFF from the beginning.

A recent roundup by REDD-Monitor, “Tomorrow’s Tropical Forests Forever Facility”, provides an important overview of the growing debates surrounding the mechanism and the increasing involvement of financial actors. As the TFFF gains traction in international finance circles, independent scrutiny and public oversight become increasingly essential.

Can the TFFF actually deliver on its promises?

While promoters of the TFFF present it as an innovative mechanism capable of mobilising billions for tropical forest conservation, serious doubts remain over whether the proposal can realistically deliver the funding it promises.

In recent months, even analysts broadly supportive of market-based forest finance approaches have begun acknowledging major weaknesses and uncertainties surrounding the initiative.

A recent article published by the German Institute of Development and Sustainability (IDOS), while generally supportive of the TFFF concept, nevertheless raises significant concerns about the mechanism’s financial architecture, political feasibility and long-term viability. The article openly questions whether the facility will actually be able to mobilise the scale of donor and investor funding required and warns that the model depends heavily on uncertain financial market conditions. This is a crucial point.

The TFFF has repeatedly been promoted as capable of mobilising up to USD 125 billion in combined public and private finance, generating billions annually for tropical forest countries. Yet concrete commitments remain far below these figures, and it remains unclear whether governments and investors are genuinely willing to provide funding at the scale required.

Even supporters of the initiative now acknowledge this challenge. The IDOS analysis notes that it remains uncertain whether the targeted donor contributions can realistically be mobilised and concludes that, because of the TFFF’s “design flaws” and “inadequate donor commitments,” it is doubtful the mechanism will deliver the “quantum leap” in tropical forest protection that its promoters promise.

Other commentators have also warned that the TFFF’s promised forest payments ultimately depend on volatile financial markets and complex investment structures that may fail to generate the expected returns.

This raises a fundamental question: why should the future of the world’s tropical forests, and the livelihoods of Indigenous Peoples and forest-dependent communities, especially women and youth, depend on the confidence of private investors and the performance of global financial markets?

The danger is not only that the TFFF could create new risks and inequalities. It is also that the initiative could consume enormous political attention, institutional energy and public resources while ultimately failing to deliver meaningful protection for forests at all.

Another false solution for forests?

The Global Forest Coalition (GFC) and many allied organisations have repeatedly warned that the TFFF risks becoming yet another false solution, one that allows governments and corporations to continue destructive economic models while packaging forests as financial assets for investors.

For decades, forest peoples and civil society have witnessed a succession of market-based forest schemes promoted as “win-win” solutions to climate change and biodiversity loss. From carbon offsetting to REDD+, these initiatives have often failed to address the structural drivers of deforestation while creating new pressures and conflicts for Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women, and youth.

In many cases, they have enabled continued pollution elsewhere, commodified forests and nature, weakened customary governance systems and concentrated power and decision making in the hands of financial institutions and corporate actors.

The TFFF appears to follow many of these same dangerous pathways.

One of the central concerns is that the mechanism could further entrench the financialisation of forests by transforming standing forests into investment vehicles linked to financial returns. Rather than supporting systemic transformation and direct rights-based and gender-responsive support for forest peoples, the TFFF risks prioritising investor confidence and market logic over ecological integrity, justice and community governance.

Who is the TFFF really designed to serve?

The growing role of private investors in shaping the TFFF raises urgent questions about whose interests are driving the initiative.

Is the priority to support forest peoples and address the root causes of deforestation? Or is the mechanism increasingly being designed around the expectations of international investors seeking new “green” financial opportunities?

GFC and allied organisations have also warned that the TFFF lacks sufficient guarantees regarding Indigenous Peoples’ rights, land tenure, participation, decision-making, and free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). Forest conservation cannot succeed without securing collective territorial rights and supporting the leadership of Indigenous Peoples, local communities, women, and youth who have consistently proven to be the most effective guardians of forests worldwide.

Another major concern is the lack of transparency and democratic oversight surrounding the development of the facility. Key decisions continue to be discussed primarily among governments, multilateral banks and private financial actors, while civil society participation remains limited and many affected communities remain excluded from meaningful engagement.

The Rotterdam meeting only deepens these concerns. If governments and financial institutions genuinely believe the TFFF represents a positive and transformative proposal, why is there still so little publicly available information about its negotiations, investor expectations and potential impacts?

What solutions are being ignored?

At the same time, the TFFF debate risks diverting political attention and public resources away from solutions that are already proven to work.

Around the world, Indigenous Peoples, peasant communities, women’s rights groups and grassroots organisations are already protecting forests through collective governance systems, agroecology, territorial defence and biodiversity-based livelihoods. Yet these approaches remain chronically underfunded compared to large-scale financial schemes and market-based mechanisms.

Real solutions to deforestation do not lie in creating new speculative financial instruments. They lie in recognising and securing rights, ending extractivism and industrial agriculture, reducing overconsumption, transforming food and energy systems, cancelling unjust debt burdens driving systemic change in sectors that heavily contribute to biodiversity destruction and directly supporting community-led forest conservation and restoration, including women and youth.

If governments truly wanted to protect tropical forests, these measures could already be scaled up today, without creating another global financial mechanism dependent on investor confidence, debt markets and speculative returns.

Forests are not financial assets

As the TFFF continues to evolve through investor meetings and high-level negotiations, continued public oversight is essential. Civil society organisations, journalists, researchers, women’s rights groups, and social movements must continue closely monitoring developments, asking difficult questions and challenging attempts to present the TFFF as a simple or inevitable solution. Forests are not financial assets. They are living territories, homes, cultures and ecosystems that cannot be reduced to investment portfolios or payment mechanisms.

At a time of accelerating climate breakdown, biodiversity collapse and escalating attacks on environmental defenders, the world cannot afford another false solution that protects investors’ profits while failing forests and forest peoples. Instead of repeating the mistakes of past market-based mechanisms, governments and international institutions must prioritise approaches grounded in rights, gender and all forms of justice, territorial governance and systemic transformation. The future of the world’s forests depends on it.

Further reading

• “Tomorrow’s Tropical Forests Forever Facility” by REDD-Monitor
• “No to TFFF, Yes to Forest Rights” – Global Forest Coalition
• “The Tables Turn Against the TFFF” – Global Forest Coalition
• “Tropical Forests Forever or Deforestation Forever?” – Global Forest Coalition
• “New Report on TFFF” – Global Forest Coalition

Canada in the World: Settler Capitalism and the Colonial Imagination by Tyler Shipley (2020, Fernwood Press). Tyler A. Shipley’s book Canada in the World: Settler Capitalism...

The post Colonialism, capitalism and Canada  first appeared on Spring.

The latest addition to Seattle’s already impressive public transit system opened to great fanfare this spring when more than 200,000 people rode the Crosslake Connection light rail line.

Its March 28 debut was second only to the parade that followed the Seahawks’ Super Bowl victory as Sound Transit’s busiest day ever. Trains now glide across Lake Washington on what is believed to be the world’s first electric rail line that spans a floating bridge, linking the city with Bellevue and Redmond, and doubling the frequency of stops in the heart of Emerald City.

Those same tracks will carry tens of thousands of fans downtown to Lumen Field for the six World Cup matches the city will host between June 15 and July 6. Kirk Hovenkotter, who leads the transit advocacy organization Transportation Choices Coalition, has no doubt that Seattle’s sustained commitment to public transit helped it become a host city.

This summer’s spotlight follows an earlier snub. When the World Cup came to the United States in 1994, Seattle hoped to host matches at Husky Stadium but came away empty-handed.

In the 32 years since, the metropolitan area has grown from 2.5 million people to more than four million. Its transportation infrastructure has boomed as well. Steady investment that began with voter approval of the Sound Move transit package in 1996 helped launch light rail in 2008 and turn Seattle into one of the country’s most ambitious builders of public transit. This summer’s World Cup became the deadline for opening the Crosslake Connection.

“Our region hasn’t been preparing for the World Cup for 18 months,” Hovenkotter said. “It’s been preparing for 18 years.” 

Seattle is one of 16 cities, 11 of them in the U.S., that will host matches in a tournament FIFA, the sports’ sanctioning body, expects to draw more than five million fans. Several are using the event as an opportunity to open rail lines, redesign bus networks, and make other changes that will benefit residents long after the final match. Some cities used the tournament as a deadline. In others, it helped build support for projects or push delayed efforts over the goal line. 

These investments come as rail and bus systems nationwide continue recovering from the steep ridership decline sparked by the pandemic while confronting aging infrastructure and a dire financial outlook. In a country that is less supportive of mass transit than other nations, the World Cup has become an unusual catalyst for change.

Plenty of stadiums remain disconnected from public transportation, of course. But what’s happening in places like Seattle and Atlanta shows that a mega-event like the World Cup can strengthen transit systems — if the investment starts long before kick-off.

The World Cup’s infrastructure legacy has often been more cautionary than celebratory. Past tournaments have raised questions not only about human rights violations and environmental harm, but about whether host cities deliver the public benefits they promise. Brazil and South Africa, for example, failed to fulfill the mass transit commitments they made.

Such disappointments often reflect a broader problem: Host cities plan first for the event, then for the people who live there, said Simon Kuper, who wrote World Cup Fever and has attended nine World Cups. He likens it to hosting a wedding. “Let’s say it’s at the house,” he said. “You paint the house, you fix the toilet, you fix the door that wasn’t working, you redo the kitchen.” 

But the transit needs of 80,000 fans differ from those of residents. “You risk overinvesting in the route to the stadium and not in what makes residents’ lives better every day.”

Seattle followed a different plan. The $1 billion Crosslake Connection was not built for the World Cup –– the money came from a funding package voters approved in 2008, 14 years before Seattle’s selection as host city ––  but Sound Transit used it as a deadline for finishing a project that was three years behind schedule.

“It was like, ‘We’re going to do everything. We’re going to move heaven and earth. We’re going to be working every shift to make sure that when the world is here, our flagship bridge and our double capacity are ready to run passengers,’ and they were,” said Henry Bendon, a public information officer with the agency. 

The $1 billion Crosslake Connection was not built for the World Cup, but Sound Transit used it as a deadline for finishing a project that was three years behind schedule. Courtesy of Sound Transit

Building infrastructure matters, but so does helping people use it. Brian McCullough, who lived in Seattle from 2014 until 2020 and is now an associate professor of sport management at the University of Michigan, said communication will be key to the system’s success. 

Here, too, Seattle has a blueprint. When it hosted the 2018 Special Olympics USA Games, McCullough helped with a campaign encouraging athletes, coaches, and caretakers to use alternative transportation. The plan included providing them with free rides on the city’s expansive light rail system. It worked: Initially, 78 percent of participants planned to rent a car, but in the end, only 7 percent did. Sound Transit has an extensive messaging campaign geared toward soccer fans, including signage in the languages of the countries playing in Seattle.

That lesson is shaping preparations for the World Cup that could further benefit residents, too. Sound Transit expanded its airport bus service to provide 24-hour rides to and from Seattle. The Legislature funded an intercity bus between Pasco, a city in the state’s rapidly growing southwestern corner that is hosting a tournament event, and Spokane, which is hosting an Egyptian team with one of the sport’s biggest stars. It also increased frequency on other routes throughout the state. Hovenkotter hopes those improvements are here to stay. 

“It’s going to be hard to disinvest in this once these start running and people start benefiting from it,” he said.

Some 2,600 miles to the southeast, another city is preparing for an influx of soccer fans. The Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, or MARTA, is rolling out a major redesign of its bus network and preparing new railcars with expanded capacity, moves that will move more people more often during the event — and long after it.

Like Seattle, Atlanta did not make the list of 1994 World Cup host cities. But two years later, it faced a bigger transportation challenge: the 1996 Summer Olympics. MARTA added 7 miles of rail to ensure everyone got around efficiently. 

Today, the system, which typically carries more than 5 million passengers per month, has 48 miles of track and more than 1,500 miles of bus network.

Soccer fans will discover a system overhauled first and foremost to serve residents. Beginning in 2021, MARTA started working with the community on the first revamp in 40 years. The remake launched in April, and although it cut the number of bus lines from 113 to 81, the agency said the change increased the number of residents who live within a quarter mile of a stop. It also nearly tripled the number of residents living near a route with buses that arrive every 15 minutes, according to MARTA.

MARTA also added a rapid transit line in downtown Atlanta and introduced 12 on-demand “microtransit zones” in which vans provide short rides within each zone.

Among other things, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority overhauled its bus system in a makeover that nearly tripled the number of residents living near a route with buses that arrive every 15 minutes. Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority

The rail system saw similar changes. MARTA plans to update all 224 train cars, some of which have been in service since the 1980s, with more spacious interiors starting in June. Each four-car train will carry 752 passengers, a 13 percent increase. That will be a boon during the tournament, given that four stations are within walking distance of Mercedes-Benz Stadium. 

The World Cup provided an incentive to move quickly. “Folks around here figured out if I want to get my projects some priority … I need to say ‘I want to do this for the World Cup,’” said Rhonda Allen, the agency’s deputy general manager. 

Not everyone is convinced these projects will benefit the community, however. Bakari Height, co-founder of the transit advocacy group MARTA Army, said transit has stagnated since the Olympics, with only two stations added. He called the new trains a “subtle upgrade” and the bus redesign a “sour point” because it cut routes. He doubts the system will handle the World Cup. 

“I don’t know if they’re really ready,” he said, “and for sure, not ready for these crowds.”

In some cities, the changes are smaller, but still practical.

The Massachusetts Bay Transit Agency will open an expanded station near Gillette Stadium in Foxboro this month. The $35 million project adds an additional platform that improves accessibility and allows the station to handle more cars. Caitlin Allen-Connelly, executive director of the advocacy group Transit Matters, said the upgrades will benefit people headed to New England Patriots games and concerts long after the tournament ends. “There was definitely a need to make beautification and accessibility standards to be able to accommodate this level of service for the World Cup,” she said.

That said, moving all those soccer fans around will impact residents.  The MBTA is also reducing commuter rail service on most lines during the tournament. The transit agency said it has “made some minor reductions and adjustments” to service on non-game days to account for the need to reconfigure trains and make other changes to suit the influx of riders to the stadium to watch matches.

Kansas City Streetcar extended its southern service by 3.5 miles last fall and opened a 0.7-mile northern extension in May. While the line does not reach Arrowhead Stadium, it will help soccer fans reach the “Fan Fest” events that accompany matches. Shuttle buses will carry fans from there to the stadium. Tom Gerend, executive director of the Kansas City Streetcar Authority, said the city highlighted the growing system in its host-city bid and that the tournament provided additional pressure to finish projects. “We’re certainly using the World Cup as motivation to make progress and to have these services up and running in time,” he said.

Whether transit projects for the World Cup provide lasting gains often depends on who pays for them — and whether cities keep investing after the tournament ends.

So far, the federal government has done little to help host cities with this. The Department of Transportation allocated $100 million in March, or roughly $10 million per city — far too little to transform most transit systems. FIFA does not contribute anything toward transportation costs. That’s forced cities to seek funding elsewhere, including the fare box. The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority plans to charge $80 for round-trip train tickets to each World Cup match in Boston, while NJ Transit will charge $98 for round-trip tickets to games in New York.

Balsam Nehme, director of sustainability at Sidara Collaborative, a firm that advises on large-scale infrastructure and sustainability projects, said the World Cup can bolster greener transit if cities use it to test new ideas and accelerate existing plans. That can mean short-term fixes like shuttle buses or long-term investments like light rail, she said, so long as they fit broader sustainability goals. The priority, she said, should be “long-term system-level thinking.”

For Gerend, the most important question was what would be useful after the fans left. Kansas City, he said, avoided spending big on permanent event services with little long-term value. That meant using the World Cup as a deadline, not a blueprint. “Let’s invest our resources in permanent solutions that are part of a long-standing, regional plan that will have staying power.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline US host cities made transit improvements a World Cup goooooooal on Jun 1, 2026.

Power lines across the country weren’t designed for a changing climate, with much of the nation’s grid built more than half a century ago. Today, stronger storms and heavier precipitation cause hundreds of outages a year, many because of trees falling on above-ground power lines.

In northern Michigan, some utilities want to change that.

In March 2025, a devastating ice storm hit the region, knocking down trees and snapping utility poles. Thousands of people lost power for weeks.

During the blackout, Lewiston, Michigan, resident Wanda Whiting suddenly had to get her husband, Dave, to the hospital. He was having heart trouble. The side of the highway was littered with downed wires and broken poles. The streets were so dark, she said, that she got lost on familiar roads.

“I still can’t get over how astonished I was, how much we rely on street lights,” Whiting said.

At one point, she had to drive over thick cables that had fallen across the road. Downed wires are dangerous; they can still be live even if the power is out. The couple made it to the hospital and Dave Whiting recovered. But the power in the area didn’t come back on for another two weeks.

Wanda and Dave Whiting stand outside their home in Lewiston, Michigan.
Vivian La / IPR News

For Michiganders, the ice storm was a reminder of the power grid’s vulnerabilities during severe weather. The state already sees some of the longest power outages in the country.

Climate change could make that worse. Research suggests northern Michigan will see more freezing rain instead of snow and possibly more destructive ice storms. Communities need to plan for a different future, said Richard B. Rood, a professor emeritus at the University of Michigan who studies climate change adaptation.

“You can’t think of what we’re experiencing as, ‘This is how it used to be, and this is where it will be,'” Rood said. “You are right in the middle of the change here.”

The biggest challenge to undergrounding power lines is cost. Consumers Energy, one of the largest utilities in Michigan, says it hears from customers “consistently” about burying more lines. The company estimates that undergrounding 1 mile of line in the state can cost $400,000. In some urban areas that cost can swell, with estimates ranging from $2 million to 3 million per mile, according to a report from the Michigan Public Service Commission.

In contrast, installing overhead lines is typically a fraction of that cost.

Instead of undergrounding existing wires, burying new lines during construction is generally easier and cheaper, because crews can install power lines alongside other utilities like water or gas.

Tony Chartrand, director of electric engineering and operations for Traverse City Light & Power, which serves around 42,000 people, said utilities face a balancing act. “Part of that solution is undergrounding lines,” he said. “But it’s not necessarily undergrounding everything.”

Tony Chartrand, director of electric engineering and operations for Traverse City Light & Power, stands next to a conduit containing an underground wire in Traverse City. Vivian La / IPR News

Great Lakes Energy, the state’s largest electric co-op serving 26 counties across northern Michigan, has announced plans to bury all new power lines. The new policy came in response to last year’s ice storm, which caused more than 66,000 power outages for the electric co-op and cost about $150 million in damages.

Even so, burying new lines will be expensive, said Shari Culver, chief operating officer for Great Lakes Energy. It can cost 3 to 5 times more than putting up an overhead line, and costs will be passed onto ratepayers. But, she said, “I think there’s reliability benefits for our membership, because it’s going to help prevent outages over the long term.”

The utility isn’t planning on burying all its existing overhead lines. That’s when expenses for construction, labor, and materials can add up quickly.

Besides the cost, there are other challenges with burying power lines. Any problem often requires digging up sidewalks to reach wires, Chartrand said. For utilities, that can be a balancing act.

“Part of that solution is undergrounding lines. But it’s not necessarily undergrounding everything,” he said. “It’s trying to balance that cost with the benefit.”

Michigan utilities aren’t alone in addressing the problem of downed lines during intense storms. Across the country, Americans are experiencing longer and more frequent power outages due to severe weather.

Read Next The winter storm exposed the grid’s real weakness: Lots of old poles Rebecca Egan McCarthy & Jake Bittle

Utilities nationwide are looking to bury more lines, said Andrew Phillips, vice president of transmission and distribution infrastructure at the Electric Power Research Institute.

But expensive electricity bills are another concern, as utilities balance upgrades to an aging grid and increasing demand.

“If the utility wants to make any investment, this money doesn’t come from nowhere,” said Tao Sun, a postdoctoral scholar at Stanford University who studies the impact of extreme weather on power systems. “They have to pass on those costs to their customers.”

That can be a hard sell.

Sun said utilities need to plan ahead, identify the areas that would see the most benefit from undergrounding, and get buy-in from local communities for rate increases — ideally before any major disaster.

Right now, he said, those changes typically happen after disaster strikes.

Electric poles and wires along M-32 near Gaylord, Michigan. Wanda Whiting recalls that poles like this were snapped in half during the March 2025 ice storm.
Vivian La / IPR News

“We will only take actions after local customers feel or experience those events that are really severe or disrupt their lives,” Sun said.

For instance, California’s largest utility, PG&E, is in the middle of the country’s largest undergrounding project — in response to destructive wildfires.

A year after the devastating ice storm in northern Michigan, residents like Wanda Whiting are still recovering. There are now new poles and wires near her home. But Whiting can’t help wondering how these power lines will hold up in the next storm — and whether there’s a better solution.

“If it means going underground,” she says, “Then by God, go underground!”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A simple — yet expensive — way to climate-proof the grid: Bury the power lines on Jun 1, 2026.

Leah Atwood was rattled. It was the tail end of March, and for days she and her colleagues at Agroecology Commons had been fielding dozens of emails alerting them to grant terminations targeting a $300 million U.S. Department of Agriculture program. One after another, within a single week, 49 of the 50 grantees received notices from the USDA informing them that their grants were canceled. 

By the end of the month, Agroecology Commons still hadn’t gotten a notice from the USDA. While their peers were figuring out how to pick up the pieces, it seemed as though their $2.5 million grant, structured largely to help farmers of color acquire and sustain land, remained untouched. All they could do was wait. Resignation settled in — after all, they’d been in this position before.

Shortly after President Donald Trump returned to office last January, his administration launched a sweeping campaign to eliminate initiatives it has deemed wasteful or misaligned with its political agenda. At the USDA, that has meant slashing billions in grants and gutting a mix of newer and longstanding federal programs that Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins has repeatedly framed as the administration’s attempt to “stop wasteful spending.”

During the administration’s first year, Agroecology Commons lost multiple grants amidst the USDA’s funding purge. In response, the nonprofit filed a joint lawsuit against the agency, claiming that the grants were terminated unlawfully. In August, a judge granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction that restored their access to some of the money until the court makes its final determination based on the merits of the case. 

All 49 other recipients of the Increasing Land, Capital, and Market Access grants received termination emails from the USDA during that week in March. In their written cancellations, which gave grantees two business days’ notice, Steven Peterson, the associate administrator of the USDA’s Farm Service Agency, explained to the grantees that their programming didn’t align with the agency’s priorities and that its funding structure was not in keeping with the intent of Congress. He used the same language about cutting waste and discontinuing DEI efforts that had become routine for the administration. But whereas the administration tended to be vague about its claims of waste and fraud, Peterson’s letter was surprisingly specific. 

“Instances of excessive or frivolous expenditures,” he wrote, “such as purchasing gazebos, massages, a camper/RV, and oversized office supply budgets (in one case, over $130,000) — instead of land are an affront to taxpayers.” 

Through it all, Agroecology Commons still hadn’t heard a thing. 

Questions swirled throughout the grantee network, but no one could explain why Agroecology Commons’ project alone was spared. Atwood’s team presumed their grant wasn’t terminated because of the ongoing litigation. Now, they continue to wait to see whether their funding will abruptly disappear, too. 

“We are trying to accomplish as much as we can in the time that we have, because we don’t know when it’s going to be canceled,” said Atwood. “It’s a strange reality.” 

Read Next Following the USDA’s food and farm funding: Here’s what’s been canceled and frozen, and resources for those affected Ayurella Horn-Muller & Lyndsey Gilpin

Neither Agroecology Commons nor any of the other grant recipients that Grist spoke to seems to know who may have made those expenditures. 

Kavita Koppa helps run RAFI, a farming organization based in North Carolina that was one of the 49 grants that was canceled; they’d been awarded $8.5 million to help agricultural producers in North Carolina, Florida, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 

Koppa says RAFI was just about halfway through its five-year contract with USDA and had spent roughly $1.1 million when the termination notice came. From the beginning, almost $2.3 million of their total award had been set aside for grants to support farmer land acquisition and market access, with around $400,000 of that set aside for RAFI to acquire land parcels on behalf of farmers. Another $1.9 million was budgeted for project management costs, which included the fees associated with verifying financial compliance in federal audits, attorneys for farmland acquisition, and translation fees; and then $350K for a bucket of miscellaneous project activities, such as paying guest speakers at workshops, contracting report writers, and mass distributing hard copies of farmer resources. The last $3.9 million was budgeted for technical assistance, a figure that encompassed the full budgets of the five subawardees that RAFI was working with on the project. 

“Under the guise of increasing land access for producers, the ILA program included no minimum requirement for direct producer support,” a USDA spokesperson told Civil Eats in March. “Instead, the program permitted the abuse of federal funds, including expenditures on the purchasing of a barbeque smoker, construction of a gazebo, massages, and for one awardee, a $20,000 budget for ink pens alone. To no surprise, a peek behind the curtain of this Biden-era program revealed the egregious misuse of taxpayer dollars to the tune of nearly $300 million dollars.” 

Koppa says she has never seen the budget items that the USDA cited. “The details were shocking,” she said. “We didn’t do those things. Why are we being treated as if we did something unethical or wasteful?”

Breanna Horsey, executive director of Sustainable Iowa Land Trust, who led another land access project working to expand Iowa’s fruit and vegetable farmers ability to secure permanent and affordable land access, is also adamant that her $1.8 million grant had no carve-outs for the expenditures detailed in their termination notice. Viva Farms’ Anna Chotzen, project manager of another ILCMA project that was awarded a $2.5 million grant to help beginning and historically underserved farmers in two Washington counties access farmland, said the same. Her team has no idea where those budget items came from. All she knows is that it wasn’t them.

Gloria Montaño Greene, former Deputy Undersecretary of the USDA’s Farm Production and Conservation in the Biden administration who helped oversee the creation of the ILCMA program, questions the validity of the excessive spending claims. 

“If that dollar amount for $20,000 in pens was put in there, did they show proof of that?” said Montaño Greene. “Show the proof, right?”

Read Next Inside the program cuts, workforce purges, and secretive reorganization of the USDA Ayurella Horn-Muller

Throughout April, at least 45 of the 49 terminated grantees — including two subgrantees — filed appeals against the termination to the National Appeals Division, an independent office of the USDA, Grist has learned. According to Amanda Koehler, a consultant on the land access program, all but two were informed that their award terminations are not appealable because the decision to terminate “was a matter of general applicability and not based on the individual application of specific program criteria.” (The outstanding two, said Koehler, have not heard back yet.) 

That finding by NAD should put the USDA’s justification for cancellation under closer scrutiny, she added, because it “underscores, in my opinion, that terminations were not based on anything the awardees did or didn’t do.” To her knowledge, none of the grantees — including Agroecology Commons — had budgets that included any of the claims USDA has made concerning wasteful or fraudulent spending. 

“This termination doesn’t seem like it was rooted in anything about our conduct with this grant,” said RAFI’s Koppa. “It seems to be part of some sort of larger motivation where we were not being treated fairly.”

JohnElla Holmes, who oversees the Kansas Black Farmers Association, which was awarded a land access grant of $8.4 million to help Black producers acquire farmland across Kansas, Texas, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Nebraska, says that roughly 62 percent of the organization’s grant was intended to go directly to farmers. She alleges that, following the administration change, the USDA took nearly a year to supply her team with the necessary approvals required by the grant’s built-in budgetary structure to award payments to farmers. Last November, Holmes says they finally heard from FSA staffers who requested changes to their paperwork. Over the next two months, she worked with them to submit all the revisions and additional documentation the agency asked for. Then, after another period of waiting on USDA, the grant was canceled.

Other grantees and sources close to the program also say that the USDA obstructed the distributions of funding to farmers with its scarce and severely delayed communication, lack of institutional support, and, crucially, the absence of necessary budgetary approvals over the last year. 

The USDA declined to comment for this story. 

On Tuesday, 24 other ILCMA grantees joined the lawsuit that Agroecology Commons filed last year. The plaintiffs are seeking another preliminary injunction, with the aim of reversing the grant cancellations and restoring grantees’ access to the funds. 

While it still has its money, Agroecology Commons plans to move forward with the land access grant. Atwood’s team, though, is proceeding cautiously — holding off on making longer-term investments into hiring or programming, and scrambling to fundraise against the possibility of a sudden cutoff. 

“When you talk about wasteful spending — the years and years that went into getting this program to even exist, and then to just terminate it,” Atwood said incredulously. That, to her, “seems like the real waste.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The USDA canceled $300M in farm grants, citing fraud. Did it make up the evidence? on Jun 1, 2026.

Revolution, climate denial, invasive species, planetary history, ecocivilization, and the war makers

Source

A group of Las Vegas advocates are tackling one of the trickiest problems in the fight for livable streets: making sure people on bikes have a good place to lock up once they’re off the street and done with their ride.

Sin City cyclists recently announced that they’d mapped more than 2,152 bike parking locations across the Las Vegas Valley as part of a campaign helmed by the founder of BikeRackMap.com, who lives in the area.

There’s no way to know exactly how much of the community’s bike parking the map represents — and that’s part of the problem. Because bike racks are often sited on private land — and because they’re not legally required by most city building codes, unlike car parking — many local governments have no idea where cyclists can publicly lock up, and do little to proactively increase the share of available spots.

Cyclists themselves, meanwhile, have no choice but to find storage on the go, even if that means reluctantly chaining to a pole and blocking the sidewalk, or praying their ride doesn’t get stolen off a shoddy, grid-style rack that all but asks thieves to pop off a front wheel and abscond with the frame.

For BikeRackMap founder Craig Davis, that’s simply unacceptable — and with the power of grassroots activism, it’s fixable.

“To have viable active transportation, you have to have safe, shared streets — and you have to have a safe, convenient, and secure network of excellent bike parking,” Davis added.

Recommended It’s Time for America to Talk About Bike Parking Kea Wilson November 5, 2021

Davis says that while many city governments maintain searchable, public-facing maps of bike routes, few have similar maps for bike racks, making it hard to identify bike storage “deserts” with no cycling storage for multiple blocks. The maps they do have also tend to be published on user-unfriendly interfaces aimed at traffic planners like ArcGIS, which aren’t helpful for a rider who just wants to figure out where to park for a concert.

When it comes to the quality of bike racks, meanwhile, many governments do promote good bike parking guidelines like the ones published by the Association of Pedestrian and Bicyclist Professionals. In practice, though, it’s largely up to property owners to decide whether they’ll follow those guidelines, never mind exceed them by providing amenities like e-bike charging, covered bike “hangars,” or video monitoring.

In Las Vegas, the vast majority of them don’t clear that bar — and some are way worse than others.

Davis and his fellow advocates recently did a survey of Albertson’s grocery stores across the Valley, and found that nearly all of the racks were obstructed, difficult to access, hard to lock to, or otherwise lost points on the site’s 10-point evaluation system. At the end of the blitz, the group gave a zero-out-of-five rating to 81 percent of the racks.

“[These racks] repel cyclists,” the group wrote in a blog post. “They do not make a positive difference in our communities. Rather, they force shoppers to use expensive and polluting vehicles instead of clean transportation that improves our communities, planet, and shoppers mental and physical well-being.”

Racks at rival grocery Sprouts, though, consistently won high marks from the reviewers – a fact which they highlighted when they brought their results to Albertson’s store directors to lobby for change.

By making the map searchable by company as well as by neighborhood, Davis hopes advocates can pressure the property owners who install bad racks to do better — particularly if those owners are corporations with a stated commitment to promoting public health.

“If cyclists don’t feel that [these racks] are usable, then they won’t get used,” Davis adds. “And it will be a wasted investment, whether it’s from a corporation or from public dollars.”

With thousands of undocumented bike racks peppered across major cities, Davis acknowledges that it’s not easy to create a comprehensive municipal bike storage map — and that putting that burden on advocates isn’t realistic in all communities.

Still, he argues that some advocates enjoy scouting out their cities’ bike storage supply, like one group in Reno, Nevada who mapped over a hundred locations in a single go and ended the night with pizza and beer.

“Cyclists really want to have voice,” Davis continues. “This is giving them agency in this process, and generating very unique data that local governments don’t have.”

• New research shows that building more housing near existing jobs, stores and transit generates more tax revenue and reduces infrastructure costs, saving taxpayers money. (Pew)
• Another new study found that development patterns are at least partly responsible for the high number of traffic deaths in the U.S. It recommends mixing households and businesses instead of putting commercial uses along dangerous arterial roads. (CNU Public Square)
• Climate Town explains that the U.S. actually has an extensive rail system, but most tracks are old, slow and owned by freight companies, so they’re unsuitable for passenger rail. (YouTube)
• Ironically, drivers are dealing with high gas prices by going out of their way to find deals and topping off their tanks more often. (NPR)
• The Rails to Trails Conservancy has tips for getting around World Cup cities by walking, biking or transit.
• Sound Transit is cutting back or delaying future Seattle transit projects to address a $34 billion deficit. (KING)
• Pittsburgh Regional Transit approved a $600 million budget that includes no fare hikes or service cuts. (WESA)
• Cyclists will soon be able to pedal around Michigan’s Belle Isle park without having to cross paths with cars. (TMDN)
• Florida didn’t suspend its gas tax, but at least residents can save on guns and camping gear for when society collapses Mad Max-style. (Orlando Weekly)
• Bus trips by young people rose almost tenfold after Scotland introduced free bus passes for everyone under age 22. (BBC)
• A new European ticket system will simplify international train travel. (European News)
• A list of the 10 most bike-friendly cities includes the usual suspects like Amsterdam, but also a few surprises like Taipei and Buenos Aires. (Islands)

A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, May 24, 2026 thru Sat, May 30, 2026. Stories we promoted this week, by category:

Climate Change Impacts (7 articles)

• Malnourished Gray Whales of the Eastern North Pacific Are in `Serious Trouble` The population has plummeted over the past seven years as climate change triggers mass starvation in warming Arctic waters. Inside Climate News, By Blaine Harden, May 24, 2026.
• An Unusually Early Heat Wave Breaks Temperature Records Across Western Europe 'This is an unprecedented event with a one in 1,000 chance of happening at this time of year based on the climate from 1979 to 2025 and virtually impossible in the preindustrial era,'' Christophe Cassou, a climate scientist, told Le Monde. Inside Climate News, Kiley Price, May 26, 2026.
• UK heatwave has `fingerprints of climate change all over it` It’s clearly exceptional when the May temperature record falls not once but twice in two days’ The Independent News, Nick Ferris, May 26, 2026.
• It's so friggin' hot Dr Gilbz on Youtube, Ella Gilbert, May 26, 2026.
• `Mind-bogglingly crazy`: climate experts alarmed by deadly spring heatwaves searing Europe Scientists warn of ‘new reality’ of heat extremes that claim three times more lives than car crashes and 16 times as many as murderers The Guardian, Ajit Niranjan, May 27, 2026.
• Western Europe is roasting in unprecedented spring heat - and it`s not alone Climate scientist Christophe Cassou said the heat in France would have been virtually impossible in the preindustrial era. Yale Climate Connections, Bob Henson, May 27, 2026.
• An Arctic community on the climate front lines | Science The harsh realities of global warming are becoming difficult to ignore in Norway’s Longyearbyen Science, Sarah Boon, May 28, 2026.

Climate Education and Communication (5 articles)

• How the jet-setting commissaries of the climate change quango use dodgy statistics to peddle hysteria - and justify their own existence: MATT RIDLEY Op-ed is a display of classic climate-denier tactics intended to change the subject and swerve public attention from what's important. Mail Online, Matt Ridley, May 22, 2026.
• Twenty Years After His Film, Al Gore Tweaks the Climate Script Mr. Gore is still giving the slide show that ''An Inconvenient Truth''” was built around, but with changes that reflect a shift in the discussion of climate change. NYT, Chico Harlan, May 25, 2026.
• Which of your climate actions make the biggest difference? Here`s how to find out The Conversation, Charlotte A. Kukowski and Kimberly Nicholas, May 27, 2026.
• Translating Climate Awareness Into Action at New York High Schools State of the Planet, Emma Kyzivat, Aynsley Kretschmar and Laurel Zaima-Sheehy, May 28, 2026.
• Ask a Climate Therapist: Is it still `catastrophizing` if the threat is real? Psychotherapist Leslie Davenport breaks down some of the tools that can help manage anxiety in the face of mounting climate catastrophe. Grist, Leslie Davenport, May 29, 2026.

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation (4 articles)

• UK bets on private investors to fill climate aid gaps after cuts Humanitarian organisations say the needs of private investors and developing countries are not always aligned. The Independent News, Nick Ferris, May 23, 2026.
• When Will Emissions From Air Travel Start to Fall? Perhaps we will fly less when we accept that ''bored and restless'' is less important than ''don't cook the planet.'' NYT > Climate and Environment, Claire Brown, May 26, 2026.
• Deadly Europe Heatwave Linked to Multiple Deaths as Temperatures Continue Rising Officials have warned that without major adaptation efforts, future heatwaves could place even greater pressure on health systems and urban infrastructure. IBT, Rosemarie Zamora, May 27, 2026.
• Backlash is often swift when authorities try to plan retreat from the coast. There`s a better way Research shows why planned retreat can become divisely emotional and how planners and communities can tackle this backlash. The Conversation, Anne Maree Kreller, May 28, 2026.

Climate Policy and Politics (4 articles)

• TikTok’s Climate Pledges Collide with Sponsorship of Climate Deniers By backing a right-wing Canadian conference featuring anti-climate speakers, experts warn TikTok has “abandoned” its commitments to combat climate misinformation. Desmog, Rei Takver, May 22, 2026.
• Once A Climate Leader, Canada Is Now Doubling Down On Oil The reversal reveals a stark truth about the direction of global climate action: Despite the rapid deployment of clean energy, even countries and politicians once seen as climate leaders are turning to fossil fuels to protect against the turmoil of Trump’s trade disputes and the war in Iran. Grist, Jake Bittle, May 25, 2026.
• Why Kate Marvel left NASA The former NASA climate scientist explains how pronouns have become more important than the planet at the nation's space agency. HEATED, Emily Atkin, May 28, 2026.
• EPA rollbacks could raise air conditioning, refrigeration costs despite promise of lower prices A new Trump administration rule will likely cost consumers more money while creating higher emissions of climate-warming superpollutants, industry and environmental groups warn. Inside Climate News, EHN Curators, May 29, 2026.

Miscellaneous (4 articles)

• The Paradox of AI and Climate State of the Planet, Renée Cho, May 21, 2026.
• 2026 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #21 A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, May 17, 2026 thru Sat, May 23, 2026. Skeptical Science, Bärbel Winkler & Doug Bostrom, May 24, 2026.
• Document leak at Australia's richest company shows how it put off going green Mining giant BHP quietly shelved billions of dollars of green projects despite promising the public it was committed to cutting emissions, and telling its board climate action was "urgent" and any delays would "risk" its reputation. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, Angus Grigg, Alex McDonald, and Jade Toomey, May 25, 2026.
• Environmentalists Turn Out in Force to Oppose Trump Coal Ash Rollbacks Proposed new regulations from the EPA would loosen requirements for protecting groundwater near power plants where the toxic residue from burning coal is stored. Inside Climate News, Arcelia Martin, May 28, 2026.

Climate Science and Research (1 article)

• Solar, wind, and EVs have knocked out a doomsday climate scenario Explosive growth in clean technologies has pushed an old coal-heavy scenario out of the realm of plausibility, according to a recent study. But there’s more work to be done. Yale Climate Connections, Dana Nuccitelli, May 29, 2026.

Geoengineering (1 article)

• With geoengineering, a fringe climate solution moves into the mainstream A decade before Exxon’s scientists warned the company’s executives about the likely fallout of burning fossil fuels, White House scientists were already advising then-president Lyndon B. Johnson on a theoretical technology that might curb the impacts of global warming: geoengineering. Atmos, Miranda Green, May 28, 2026.

Health Aspects of Climate Change (1 article)

• Climate change could significantly worsen summer air quality in future decades The Conversation, Rebecca Kaarina Saari, May 25, 2026.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Science (1 article)

• One Nation says it`s the only party in Australia to question climate science. It should ask itself why | Temperature Check Climate change denial has become untenable yet Hanson’s party digs in – with conspiracy theories, cherrypicking and claims that are easy to refute The Guardian, Graham Readfearn, May 21, 2026.

If you happen upon high quality climate-science and/or climate-myth busting articles from reliable sources while surfing the web, please feel free to submit them via this Google form so that we may share them widely. Thanks!

At first, he thought it was smoke.

Jackie Onsurez was driving the bustling New Mexico highway between his home in Loving and nearby Carlsbad last Tuesday evening when he thought the smoke didn’t look right. As he pulled closer, he saw that the 70-foot plume was actually a roaring geyser of toxic oilfield wastewater, commonly called produced water, spewing from a pipe at a site operated by NGL Energy Partners. 

Onsurez, who until recently was running for the state’s lieutenant governor position, said he called NGL, 911, the New Mexico Environment Department and others. He was at the site for a few minutes when an oilfield roughneck arrived in a pickup truck and tried to stop the spraying water but couldn’t. 

Stills from video footage of a geyser of oilfield wastewater at a site operated by NGL Energy Partners in southeast New Mexico. Courtesy of Jackie Onsurez

He said the man then “started to haul ass out of there. He said, ‘Get out of here. There’s gas coming out. I don’t know what’s there. Get out, get out!’”

Onsurez didn’t leave, though. He is an engineer and serves on the New Mexico State Emergency Response Commission — the day before, he had attended a commission meeting on hazardous materials spills. The serendipity wasn’t lost on him. 

“I was able to observe firsthand the equipment and the training and everything else that’s needed for here [in the oilfield],” he said. “The only people that had protective gear was the fire department when they arrived.”

The fire department cordoned off the area a few minutes after the roughneck fled. NGL representatives arrived soon after and shut off the shooting water. By that point, Onsurez had been at the site for about a half hour. He didn’t know how long it had been spewing before he arrived.

The contaminated water flowed across the road and ran into a nearby drainage ditch. Onsurez had also called Alisa Ogden, a farmer and rancher and member of the Carlsbad Soil and Water Conservation District, to let the group know of the spill. 

“I said, ‘Ms. Ogden, I hate to bother you, but it looks like this might be getting into your acequias,’” Onsurez said, using the common Spanish term for the traditional Southwest water system.

Read Next Oil companies accused of massive accounting fraud in New Mexico Jerry Redfern, Capital and Main

“If you don’t know what happens, you can’t do anything about it,” Ogden said later. “Gratefully, Jackie let us know immediately when he saw it, and we got right on it and were able to keep the produced water … from flowing down towards the Pecos River,” she said.

“It doesn’t keep us up at night, but with the oilfields out here, it’s always a hazard that it could happen,” Ogden said.

According to a report filed by NGL with the New Mexico Oil Conservation Division, a one-inch nipple broke on a high-pressure water injection line, leading to the blowout. The report said 40 barrels of produced water escaped, 10 of which were recovered. The remaining 30 flowed into the nearby ditch.

Sidney Hill, the public information officer at the New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department, which oversees the Oil Conservation Division, said that NGL collected samples from the ditch, and “We expect to receive them sometime this week.”

“Accidents do happen,” Ogden said. “We’ve all had accidents occur. It’s how you react to ’em.”

She said NGL is responsible and has agreed to do the cleanup. “They did everything they could at the time,” she said. “Once we get all the samples back and everything, then we’ll come up with a plan on what they need to do.”

Read Next The Colorado River is nearing collapse. It’s Trump’s problem now. Jake Bittle & Rebecca Egan McCarthy

NGL did not respond to phone and email requests for comment.

In December 2024, an inspector from the state’s Oil Conservation Division found a pump leaking wastewater on the wellsite’s cement slab. Asked by Capital & Main about a scheduled three-month follow-up visit that didn’t appear in the well files, Hill said, “Thank you for pointing out the past due compliance. We will investigate why it isn’t closed out, but it does not seem associated with the current release.”

NGL transports oil, gas, and wastewater around oil basins from the Gulf Coast, Oklahoma, Colorado, Kansas, and New Mexico. It also has a growing business disposing of produced water in deep injection wells like the one just north of Loving. In its annual report, the company claimed to be the largest independent wastewater transporter and disposal company in the U.S., handling nearly a billion barrels of the toxic water across its operations last year.

In the greater scheme of wastewater spills in New Mexico, NGL’s accident was notable for being visible, not for being big. Between Jan. 1 and May 19, 48 companies reported 356 spills, losing 15,335 barrels of wastewater across the state. The biggest was a 2,000-barrel spill in January by Hilcorp Energy Company, just 1,300 feet from a neighborhood in north Farmington. Devon Energy Corporation reported the most wastewater spills so far with 93, compared to three for NGL.

But last week’s briny geyser highlights one of the fastest-growing controversies in New Mexico’s oil and gas industry: what to do with produced water. In 2025, oil producers brought up more than 800 million barrels of oil and 2.7 billion barrels of wastewater in the state. Those barrels of wastewater increase as oil and gas production grows, and the total has doubled since 2020. There is little agreement on what to do with all of it. 

Read Next ‘A fraudulent scheme’: New Mexico sues Texas oil companies for walking away from leaking wells Mark Olalde, ProPublica & Nick Bowlin, Capital and Main

The water occurs naturally in oil and gas formations and is highly saline, laced with petroleum-based chemicals. It is often radioactive and can include the chemical cocktails that companies inject into wells during the fracking and production processes. The recipes for those cocktails are often protected trade secrets and can differ radically from well to well. Basically, the water is toxic, and its use outside the oilfield for anything but testing is forbidden in New Mexico.

Wastewater can be used to drill new wells, but the most common disposal method is underground disposal wells — like the one near Loving — where the water is reinjected into rock formations under extreme pressure.

The report filed by NGL with the Oil Conservation Division said the broken nipple was on a pipeline charged to 2,600 pounds per square inch. But the state is running out of injection locations as the rock formations fill and shift under the intense pressure of the injections, resulting in swarms of earthquakes across the Permian Basin in both Texas and New Mexico. In addition, high-pressure wastewater deposits have breached old oil and gas wells, leading to brine leaks and geysers.

A proposal put forward by the industry group Water, Access, Treatment and Reuse Alliance to allow wastewater to be treated and used outside the petroleum industry is once again before the state’s Water Quality Control Commission. It was knocked down last year following a fracas where Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham appeared to pressure the commission to overturn a recently instituted ban on using the wastewater outside the oilfield. Earlier proposals argued that treated water could be used by other industries or possibly discharged into lakes and streams, a highly controversial use in a state that continues to suffer from a decades-long drought. 

Read Next The cowboy who got rich selling veggie burgers Frida Garza

In separate interviews, lead lawyers from each side of the debate tackled each other’s arguments.

Matthias Sayer, co-founder of the alliance, said he views treated water as “a new source of water supply and as a reduced burden on the current management system.”

Sayer said, “Spills happen because oilfield [waste]water management is massive, constant, and operationally complex … That does not excuse spills, but it explains why a system built around moving very large volumes of high-salinity water will continue to experience [spills] unless the state improves infrastructure and creates better incentives for treatment, recycling, and beneficial reuse.”

Tannis Fox, senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center and a lead attorney against the reanimated wastewater proposal, said, “The main argument that industry is making is that reuse of produced water is one solution to the water scarcity problem. And with that, we disagree. It’s not a silver bullet.” 

Sayer said a “robust body of science” shows that oilfield wastewater can be treated and safely reused. “The question is not whether it can be done, but how to craft a rule that appropriately manages the risk,” he said. “That question is answered by engaging the science and the experts behind it.”

Fox said, “There is, of course, a significant debate about what the science is telling us.” She and others are skeptical that new water treatment processes can reliably clean what’s coming out of the ground. Water testing generally starts with looking for known, likely contaminants in the water. 

But, she said, “We don’t know all the constituents in produced water because the hydraulic fracturing fluids that industry uses are protected by trade secret rules.” In addition, basic water chemistry and salinity vary widely across the state. The lack of clarity about what’s in the water “is a problem for emergency response workers if you don’t know what’s in those fluids,” she added, with a nod toward the Loving spill.

In addition, Fox said there hasn’t been large-scale testing. “There have not been studies at scale. There has not been discharge at scale. There has not been treatment at scale. Reuse of produced water at an industrial scale is not there yet. So it is not a solution to water scarcity tomorrow,” she said.

“If the [Water Quality Control Commission] approves a rule, the system will necessarily ramp up organically,” Sayer said. “This is a runway, not a light switch.”

Fox said, “It is by its nature a dirty industry, and obviously the world needs energy, and the sooner we get to clean energy, the better.”

Copyright 2026 Capital & Main

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline 70-foot wastewater geyser reflects New Mexico’s latest oilfield challenge on May 31, 2026.