News Feeds

Clean electricity isn’t just about climate — it’s about Canada’s security, economy, and independence in an unstable world....

A sidewalk is more than just a strip of asphalt. It’s a place where countless laws collide. Those laws govern our movement, our safety, our right to free speech and our economy. They dictate who exactly is responsible for shoveling snow after a blizzard. But most communities don’t have a single agency that manages all of these competing concerns — and maybe it’s time they create one. 

Today on The Brake, we interview sidewalk law expert Michael Pollack about his new book “Sidewalk Nation: The Life and Law of America’s Most Overlooked Resource.” And in that book, he untangles the dense web of policies that shape our pedestrian spaces, which might just change the way you look at sidewalks forever. 

For an unedited transcript of this conversation (with AI typos), click here.

The company that makes the illegal stand-up electric scooter used by one of the victims of last week’s deadly head-on collision on the Queensboro Bridge bike path has added a warning label on its website after reviewers alerted the manufacturer to Streetsblog’s coverage.

Teverun — which makes the Blade GT II on which Francis Delvalle was riding on May 28 when he smashed into Dmytro Stechenko, killing them both — has since added some fine print to its website:

“All TEVERUN scooters are shipped with a speed limit of 25 km/h [15 miles per hour] for public roads. Unrestricted mode is for private or off-road use only. Always comply with local laws and wear protective gear,” it reads (you can see the small warning at the top of the webpage … if you squint).

The disclaimer could be a move to shift liability from the company to the consumer in the aftermath of the high-profile crash, one lawyer suspected.

“It’s a bit of an acknowledgement that these scooters are dangerous on the roads at higher speeds,” said Peter Beadle, a bike lawyer and a safe-streets advocate.

The scooter maker’s website added a disclaimer that the Blade GT’s 53-mph mode is not street-legal. But it still markets it as an “urban wolf.”

After Streetsblog reported the make and model of the scooter and pointed out that the device is illegal to operate on all New York City streets and bike paths, people began flooding the comment section with links to our coverage.

“You will die and kill someone else too,” one commenter, Eric, wrote before giving the scooter one-star and linking to Streetsblog.

“Perfect killing machine,” posted “Tom Smith.” “Great for killing myself and others! Just wish it could go even faster so I could end more lives.”

Scooter companies commonly falsely advertise their devices as legal by offering buyers the option of shifting to a different “mode” to violate speed limits or city rules. Many online retailers sell scooters and e-motos with “off-road” modes, as Streetsblog reported last year.

Recommended



The ‘Problem’ With E-Bikes? The Super Fast Illegal Ones
Sophia Lebowitz

October 21, 2025

The details of the state’s vehicle and traffic code don’t clearly draw a line on mode shifting. But another factor that affects the legality of an electric two-wheeler is the wattage of the motor. The VTL clearly states that bicycles with electric assist must have a motor with 750 watts of power or less. Vehicles that can be shifted into “off-road” modes with high speeds will inevitably have motors with greater wattage.

For example, the brand Ride1Up specifically calls its vehicles “moped-style e-bikes.” On its website, the company clarifies that a “moped-style e-bike” has “programming and motor capabilities that allow for a higher top speed than class 3 e-bike regulations allow. The company then adds a disclaimer that it’s only for a private course. Ride1Up markets it as a Class 2 e-bike, which legally can reach 20 miles per hour with the throttle. But the motor is 1,820 watts, which exceeds the 750-watt limit, making it illegal to ride regardless of mode.

Our Revv1 … is pre-programmed as a Class 2 e-bike, so you can ride most anywhere at 20 miles-per-hour with throttle and pedal assist. However, you can unlock the programming to reach speeds north of 28 mph. This is intended for private property only.

This agile and robust bike is tough enough to cope with the most demanding of rides. However, with its practical and sturdy design, it remains suited to any rider with a comfortable saddle, upright riding position and throttle forward use-case that provides a boost up to twenty-eight MPH or more when unlocked for “Off-Road Mode.”

The brand Ride1Up calls this a “moped-style” e-bike. Its motor is too big to be legal.

The state’s traffic code does not specify a wattage cutoff for e-scooters. But companies selling them must display maximum speed and wattage on a sticker for both scooters and e-bikes. Still, the city’s own educational materials state that the max speed capability for a stand up electric scooter is 20 miles per hour.

It’s very difficult for police officers to, at a glance, know which motorized two-wheeled vehicle is a legal electric bike or an illegal e-moto, though police agencies in Europe, where e-bikers are common and provided ample space where their riders do not have to compete with cars, don’t seem to have this problem.

Beadle pointed out that although the company added a small disclaimer to the site about its modes, the page still reads as an advertisement for the fastest settings.

“The problem is that, some of these bikes and scooters can have their modes changed so easily that of course users are going to change the mode, it’s part of the marketing,” he said.

The site still advertises the scooter as “built for street dominance” and focuses on the scooter’s max speed. The site also specifically addresses safety, saying “speed is thrilling but safety comes first,” before encouraging riders to wear a helmet (as both victims of last week’s crash were). The website also clearly markets the scooter for city use:

Its 11-inch puncture-resistant tires, high-torque motor, and stable suspension allow it to tackle uneven roads, steep inclines, and urban obstacles with ease. Whether it’s potholes, gravel, or curbs, this scooter maintains smooth, controlled performance.

“That’s not marketing to a 15-mph scooter. That’s marketing to the 53-mph,” said Beadle.

• Drunk driving kills more than 12,000 people a year in the U.S., mostly in car-centric places with little to no public transit. Studies show that there are far fewer DUI arrests in cities where imbibers can take a train home. There is a similar effect where rideshares are readily available. (Planetizen)
• People for Bikes breaks down its position on the BUILD America 250 transportation funding bill.
• Five years after the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act put $5 billion toward electric vehicle charging stations, only 98 have been built. (Government Technology)
• While raging against dangerous drivers can be cathartic, sustained activism is what actually gets things done, according to a streets.mn writer.
• Americans seem to love everything about trains except riding them. (USA Today)
• Active Towns interviewed Sara Lind, co-director of Streetsblog’s parent nonprofit Open Plans. (YouTube)
• California regulators changed the state’s cap-and-trade program in ways that will benefit fossil fuel companies. (Los Angeles Times)
• The Urbanist further explores Sound Transit’s recent vote to delay or cut back on future transit projects.
• Assaults on Charlotte trains and buses fell by 67 percent through the first three months of this year compared to the first quarter of 2025. (WFAE)
• The Utah Transit Authority further reduced fares for the elderly, but made them more complicated to pay. (Salt Lake Tribune)
• A new Maryland law opens up 300 acres of state-owned land near transit stations for developing 7,000 housing units. (Smart Cities Dive)
• Light rail on the I-5 bridge between Portland and Vancouver, Washington remains up in the air. (The Oregonian)
• The president of Cornell University backed his car into a group of students who questioned him about free speech. (The Ringer)
• Missoula won an award for best transit system of its size. (Metro)
• Backlash against bike lanes and low-emissions zones led Krakow voters to elect a new right-wing mayor. (Politico)
• Italian cities are trying to make public spaces more equitable toward women. (24 Italy)

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.

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.

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)

Sudah saatnya beralih ke pengalaman bermain yang lebih santai, praktis, namun tetap menghadirkan sensasi yang mendebarkan. Slot gacor dengan gameplay sederhana menjadi pilihan favorit banyak pemain karena mudah dipahami sejak putaran pertama.

Tanpa perlu mempelajari strategi yang kompleks, Anda sudah bisa langsung menikmati setiap putaran dengan nyaman. Tampilan yang ramah pengguna, fitur yang mudah diakses, serta alur permainan yang jelas membuat siapa saja dapat bermain dengan lebih percaya diri. Inilah alasan mengapa slot dengan mekanisme sederhana semakin diminati oleh berbagai kalangan.

Kenapa Banyak Pemain Menyukai Slot dengan Gameplay Sederhana?

Kesederhanaan bukan berarti membosankan. Justru dari konsep yang mudah dipahami itulah pemain bisa lebih fokus menikmati permainan tanpa terganggu oleh aturan yang rumit. Setiap putaran terasa lebih cepat, lebih praktis, dan lebih menghibur.

Beberapa keunggulan yang membuat slot jenis ini semakin populer antara lain:

• Mudah dimainkan oleh pemula maupun pemain berpengalaman.
• Tampilan visual yang menarik dan nyaman dilihat.
• Fitur permainan yang jelas serta tidak membingungkan.
• Proses bermain lebih cepat dan efisien.
• Memberikan pengalaman bermain yang santai namun tetap menegangkan.

Dengan kombinasi tersebut, pemain dapat menikmati hiburan yang lebih maksimal kapan saja dan di mana saja.

Sensasi Menarik di Setiap Putaran

Meskipun mengusung gameplay sederhana, slot gacor tetap mampu menghadirkan momen-momen yang membuat jantung berdebar. Setiap simbol yang muncul membawa harapan baru, sementara fitur bonus yang tersedia mampu menambah keseruan selama bermain.

Tidak heran jika banyak pemain menjadikan permainan ini sebagai pilihan utama untuk mengisi waktu luang. Selain mudah dimainkan, ritme permainan yang cepat membuat pengalaman bermain terasa lebih hidup dan tidak monoton.

Cocok untuk Pemain yang Mengutamakan Kenyamanan

Bagi Anda yang mencari permainan dengan mekanisme sederhana namun tetap menyenangkan, slot gacor jenis ini layak menjadi pilihan. Tidak perlu menghabiskan waktu memahami banyak aturan. Cukup nikmati setiap putaran dan rasakan sensasi hiburan yang mengalir secara alami.

Kemudahan akses, tampilan modern, serta pengalaman bermain yang lebih nyaman menjadikan slot dengan gameplay sederhana sebagai salah satu favorit di kalangan komunitas pemain saat ini.

Saatnya Rasakan Keseruannya Sendiri

Jangan biarkan hiburan Anda terasa membosankan. Pilih slot gacor dengan gameplay sederhana dan menarik untuk menikmati pengalaman bermain yang lebih praktis, seru, dan penuh kejutan. Setiap putaran menghadirkan peluang hiburan baru yang siap membuat waktu luang Anda terasa lebih menyenangkan.

Nikmati kesederhanaannya, rasakan keseruannya, dan temukan mengapa semakin banyak pemain memilih slot dengan konsep yang mudah dimainkan namun tetap menghadirkan pengalaman yang menghibur.

Headline News:

• “Clean Energy Saved EU €51 Billion In 2025 By Cutting Fossil Fuel Imports” • Using wind and solar to generate power meant significantly less reliance on imported oil and gas, according to energy think tank Ember. Europe looks set for further savings in 2026 as renewable energy generation hits record highs thanks to ideal Spring conditions. [Euronews]

Solar array in Italy (Sungrow EMEA, Unsplash)

• “Cuba Bets On Solar Power As Energy Crisis Deepens” • Cuba has gone through a worsening energy crisis for years, leading it to rely on Venezuelan oil. Following the US intervention in Venezuela in February, the energy crisis has grown even worse, as Cubans face regular blackouts and the economy suffers. Now Cuba is turning to solar power. [OilPrice.com]
• “California Has Lowest Wholesale Electricity Prices In USA” • Wind power, water power, and solar power all mean no fuel and low wholesale electricity prices. But given how much people love to exclaim “California is expensive,” it is a shock to find out that wholesale electricity is cheaper in California than anywhere else in the country. [CleanTechnica]
• “Company Bets $1.2 Billion On Massive Wyoming Solar And Battery Hub For Meta Data Centers” • A clean energy project tied to one of Meta’s data centers is drawing attention after Enbridge announced a $1.2 billion investment in Wyoming. The Cowboy Project combines 365 MW of solar capacity with battery storage of 200 MW and 1,600 MWh. [Yahoo Finance]
• “Connecticut Approves Plug-In Solar” • Small-scale solar is growing every year. Connecticut passed HB 5340, making the state the sixth to send a plug-in solar bill to the governor for final approval. Colorado, Maine, Maryland, Virginia, and Utah are the other states that are making it easier for consumers to add new types of solar. [CleanTechnica]

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

The pricing review proposing high fixed network tariffs has got it wrong on home batteries, dynamic pricing and the impact on households.

The post Proposal for high fixed network charges is wrong on home batteries, dynamic pricing, and impact on CER appeared first on Renew Economy.

With the official start to hurricane season right around the corner, people living in the path of hurricanes are experiencing rain, wind and stormy weather. These communities are no strangers to the full extent of damage caused by destructive weather. Many have lost everything to storms and are still building their lives back after throwing away all of their belongings, boarding up broken windows, buying generators and living out of hotel rooms. 

Meanwhile, the fossil fuel industry is making more money than ever before. Six of the world’s biggest fossil fuel companies that are driving the climate crisis – Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Exxon and TotalEnergies – are on track to make almost $3,000 in profits every single second this year, according to a new report, as households across the world grapple with soaring energy prices and inflation, which are driving a cost-of-living crisis.

The climate crisis increases global temperatures. Rising temperatures mean hurricanes that form have the potential to bring stronger winds and heavier rain, which, in turn, means more damage. But it’s not just the fossil fuel industry that is making storms worse. Oil and gas companies cannot build their destructive projects without the same corporations that hold significant power over our financial security and daily lives: insurers, banks and investors.

Insurers

Just like how we can’t drive a car or buy a house without insurance, oil and gas corporations can’t build or operate new projects without insurance. Insurance giants like Chubb, Liberty Mutual and AIG provide insurance to fossil fuel companies so more destructive projects can be built. Insurers also take the money we pay for car, health and life insurance and invest it in fossil fuel companies. It’s estimated that insurance companies have more than $534 billion invested in coal, oil, and gas companies.

Insurers know the climate crisis is happening now and that they’re on the hook to pay for the damage it’s causing. But instead of ditching fossil fuels, they’re withdrawing coverage for communities in disaster-prone areas. In Louisiana, insurance is becoming harder to find and difficult to afford. Massive claims from Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Rita drove large national insurance companies to scale back their coverage and remaining companies to jack up rates. Homeowners in New Orleans saw their premiums double, with some required to pay an extra $3,000 per year. After Louisiana was hit by Hurricanes Laura, Delta, Ida, and Zeta, a dozen insurers became insolvent and many others left the state. We pay more and get less protection. They do business “as usual.”

Banks

Similar to a car loan or mortgage, banks lend fossil fuel companies money that must be repaid over time with interest. Banks also give companies revolving loans or lines of credit that companies can draw from as needed, kind of like a credit card. They also help companies raise money by facilitating the sale of stocks and bonds to investors, a process called underwriting.

In 2024, the warmest year on record, JP Morgan Chase was the world’s top fossil fuel financier for the year, with $53.5 billion in fossil fuel financing. Bank of America rose two ranks to become the second biggest financier of fossil fuels globally. Over two-thirds of banks covered in the Banking on Climate Chaos report (45 banks) increased their fossil fuel financing from 2023 to 2024, with Citigroup, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, and Barclays each financing over $12 billion more than last year.

Investors 

Investors provide the funding for fossil fuel projects by purchasing the stocks and bonds that companies issue. Institutional investors hold more than $1.6 trillion in shares and bonds across companies planning major petrochemical expansions in the U.S. Vanguard is the largest investor in fossil fuels worldwide, with $444 billion invested across the sector. The new Toxic Finance report found just five investors control nearly one-third (31%) of companies leading the U.S. petrochemical expansion: Vanguard, BlackRock, State Street, Capital Group, and Berkshire Hathaway.

Storms didn’t used to be this bad. It didn’t get this hot so soon. Wildfires weren’t this frequent. In fact, a new report from the UN states that the next five years are projected to be the hottest on record. Fossil fuel companies and the institutions that finance them know this, yet they won’t stop injecting their client’s money into projects that continue sacrificing communities for short-term profits. All financial institutions have a responsibility to adopt transition plans that drastically cut fossil fuel financing, including an immediate end to expansion financing. Their money would be much better spent on clean, renewable energies so we can prevent disasters before they happen.

The post Who Makes Hurricane Damage Worse? Insurers, Banks and Investors appeared first on Earthworks.

Reflexiones sobre la seguridad en una época de profunda crisis civilizatoria - Una conversación Fecha y horario * Fecha: 17 de junio, 2026 * Horario: 1pm GMT * Enlace de Registro: Aquí * Participantes: Manuel Rozental (Colombia) y Deepa Sinha (India)

Conceptualizing Security in a Time of Deep Civilizational Crisis - A conversation Date and time * Date: June 17th, 2026 * Time: 1pm GMT * Registration Link: Here * Speakers: Manuel Rozental (Colombia) and Dipa Sinha (India) * Moderation: Madhuresh Kumaralternativesalternativesalternatives