News Feeds

Avfuel Corporation, the leading independent supplier of aviation fuel and services, is expanding its sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) footprint with the addition of a new, strategic supply point in Denver, Colorado—the first of its kind in the region.  

Eco Wave Power has successfully completed of the installation of floaters for its first U.S. wave energy project at the Port of Los Angeles. The company is now moving full speed ahead toward the official unveiling on Sept. 9, 2025, as planned.

As the global push for decarbonization accelerates, wind power has become a cornerstone for the renewable energy transition. But behind its clean energy image lies a growing environmental challenge: a rising tide of end-of-life wind turbine blades.

Brazil’s solar and energy storage markets are expanding rapidly, with solar capacity surpassing 53 GW in early 2025—driven largely by distributed generation and strong demand from commercial, industrial, and agribusiness sectors. 

Solar energy integrated solutions provider Sunotec and PV inverter and energy storage systems provider Sungrow have signed a strategic agreement to deploy 2.4 GWh of Battery Energy Storage Systems (BESS) across multiple solar power projects in Europe.

The US wind market in Q1 exceeded 2024’s pace, more than doubling activity with 2.1 GW of installations, but regulatory uncertainty led to a significant retreat in wind turbine orders, according to the US Wind Energy Monitor report released by Wood Mackenzie and the American Clean Power Association (ACP).

Specialist global investment manager Quinbrook Infrastructure Partners, which focuses on infrastructure needed for the energy transition, has announced it has closed its first Irish investment with the acquisition of the Wexford Synchronous Condenser Project, a proposed 963 MVA.s. facility to be located in Co. Wexford, Ireland.

Stop for a minute and picture a few endangered species. What came to mind? For most, it’s probably charismatic animals like a wolf, condor or dolphin. Some might go a bit further and think of insects, like monarch butterflies. Perhaps plants—rare orchids, ancient redwoods.

But will anyone think of a soil-dwelling fungi? I thought not.

Now maybe you will, if a group of scientists get their way. They just released a global map of mycorrhizal fungi, along with a paper in Nature that documents a troubling phenomenon. While these fungi are critical to plant health and sequestering carbon, less than 10% of the most species-rich spots on the planet enjoy any official protection.

“For centuries, we’ve mapped mountains, forests, and oceans. But these fungi have remained in the dark,” said Toby Kiers, an evolutionary biologist and executive director of the Society for the Protection of Underground Networks (SPUN), which created the new map. “This is the first time we’re able to visualize these biodiversity patterns—and it’s clear we are failing to protect underground ecosystems.”

It’s easy to see why they have gone under appreciated. These organisms form hairlike underground networks that are easy to overlook. Even if you are digging around in the soil, you might not notice a handful of tiny white threads in a spadeful of dirt.

Despite their invisibility, these fungi are biological marvels critical to life on the planet. They form vast interconnected systems that shuttle nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorous to plants, while collecting carbon in return. Scientists have tracked how these seemingly simply organisms can form smart “waves” that spread through the soil, homing in on the most promising plant roots. At least 80% of plant species are known to be plugged into these networks. The carbon funneled into the soil by these fungi totals 3.6 billion tons per year, a third of global fossil fuel emissions.

 

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

 

But a lot isn’t known about these species and their health. A tiny fraction – .001% – of the Earth’s surface has been sampled in the search for mycorrhizal fungi. To begin assembling a more complete picture, scientists with SPUN and universities around the world turned to artificial intelligence.

They compiled data from 25,000 soil samples containing more than 2.8 billion fungal DNA sequences representing more than 150,000 different species. They then used that information to train a high-powered computer model to predict where the different fungi are likely to occur across the planet. The model took into two dozen different factors that seemed to influence what fungi turned up in a bit of soil, including soil chemistry and structure, climate variables such as average temperature and rainfall, the types of vegetation and the geography. The result is a set of digital maps that predict the mycorrhizal fungi of the Earth’s land surface broken into 1-kilometer squares.

These maps reveal that not all parts of the planet are created equal. Some places stand out for the rich variety of soil fungi or for the high numbers of unique, rare fungi. Those locations vary depending on the type of fungi. Arbuscular mycorrhizae (AM), which integrate themselves inside the cells of plant roots, are the most common, found in around 80% of all plants, including crops, grasslands and tropical forests. Their hotspots are concentrated in tropical regions of South America, Africa and Asia. Less common ectomycorrhizae (EcM) form a sheath around a plant’s roots, rather than penetrating the root cells. They are concentrated in cooler places like boreal forests in Canada and Siberia. Some of the rarest ectomycorrhizae, however, are predicted to be in far flung places including northern tundra, mountain forests in Indonesia and conifer forests in Central America.

While the maps reveal these fungi occur just about anywhere you find plants, it also shows that places with the richest or rarest fungal communities frequently lie outside protected areas such as national parks. Just 9.5% of the most biodiverse fungal hotspots occurred in land with some kind of protection. The picture for the rarest collections was slightly better, with 23% of those places protected.

It’s perhaps no big surprise that conservation efforts up to this point haven’t focused on species that, though important, are largely invisible and not very charismatic. Scientists involved in the project hope these new maps will call attention to what’s underfoot, and help make future decisions about where to protect or restore ecosystems more fungi-friendly.

“For too long, we’ve overlooked mycorrhizal fungi,” said Merlin Sheldrake, a biologist, SPUN member and author of the bestselling book about fungi, Entangled Life. “These maps help alleviate our fungus blindness and can assist us as we rise to the urgent challenges of our times.”

Van Nuland, et. al. “Global hotspots of mycorrhizal fungal richness are poorly protected.” Nature. July 23, 2025.

Image: ©Anthropocene Magazine/AI-generated

On November 16, Chileans will head to the polls to elect their next president, who will govern until 2030 and, in doing so, set the course for the country’s most important economic engine: its mining sector. 

At stake is the future of Codelco, the state-owned copper giant that helped build modern Chile but is now drowning in debt, stuck with aging infrastructure and recovering from years of production declines.

Once a source of national pride, Codelco has been teetering on the edge of an industrial crisis. As of December last year, the company’s debt has ballooned to over $20 billion and production was slowly edging higher after hitting a 25-year low in 2022.

Legal obligations to hand over 70% of its profits and 10% of its sales to the government have choked its ability to reinvest in itself, threatening its future and the fiscal stability of the country.

Once a source of national pride, Codelco has faced challenges. (Chuquicamata miners, courtesy of Codelco.)

With rival candidates offering radically different solutions, from sweeping privatization to aggressive state reinvestment, this election is shaping up to be more than just a political contest. It’s a make-or-break moment for Chile’s mining future.

As the world’s leading copper producer and a top supplier of lithium, Chile’s supply is essential to the global push for electrification. If its mining engine stalls, the ripple effects won’t stop at its borders.

With the primary season behind them, the final contenders are now locked in a high-stakes battle over the country’s economic core. If no one wins a majority, a runoff on December 14 could extend the uncertainty. 

Candidates on both sides of the political spectrum are presenting starkly different paths forward, ranging from state-led modernization to partial privatization. Either way, the path Chile chooses later this year could redefine its role on the global resource map and determine whether its mining sector sinks or rebounds.

Right-wing rivals: privatization and market-oriented policies LEFT: José Antonio Kast. (Image courtesy of Patricio Alarcón | Flickr Commons.) | RIGHT: Evelyn Matthei. (Image courtesy of Chile’s Government | Wikipedia.)

On the right, both Evelyn Matthei and José Antonio Kast are pushing for partial privatization of Codelco. They argue that opening the company to private capital and loosening state control would improve efficiency and restore its financial health.

Their plans include selling non-core assets to pay down debt and shifting focus from state revenues to operational performance. While these proposals could generate immediate fiscal relief, they carry political risks. Chileans have historically resisted privatization of strategic assets, and backlash from workers and unions could be fierce.

Still, their market-oriented vision has gained traction among investors frustrated with sluggish permitting, bureaucratic delays and rising costs under the current administration.

Jeannette Jara and the far left: full public control Jeannette Jara. (Image courtesy of Chile’s Government | Wikipedia.)

Jeannette Jara of the Communist Party was chosen in June to represent the ruling coalition. She beat her second-place rival Carolina Tohá, who was proposing a restructuring of Codelco to allow it to retain more profits for reinvestment rather than draining cash to fill government coffers.

Jara opposes the current government’s proposed joint venture between Codelco and lithium miner SQM (NYSE: SQM), citing past scandals and calling for a new public company to co-develop lithium resources. If elected, she says she would honour any deal finalized before her term, but prefers a model akin to Codelco’s role in copper.

On foreign policy, Jara has pledged to focus on diversifying trade ties, including with China, India and within Latin America, especially if US tariff threats escalate.

“We have to act prudently to safeguard our national interest,” she has said.

While polls suggest she could make it to a run-off, most scenarios show her losing to a right-wing contender in the second round.

Tightrope for investors

Chile’s economy has held up well in 2025, buoyed by mining activity. GDP grew 2.3% year-on-year in the first quarter, with further acceleration in April, according to BNP Paribas. But long-term stability will depend on resolving Codelco’s troubles and creating a regulatory environment that attracts investment without sparking social unrest.

John Zadeh, CEO of junior mining investment firm Discovery Alert, said the election could tip the scales for global investors.

“Chile’s election is a referendum on how to balance resource nationalism with economic pragmatism,” Zadeh said. “The status quo, however, guarantees decline.”

Security concerns continue to be a primary issue for voters, as rising crime in what was once a safe and peaceful Chile has emerged as the leading worry in recent polls. That adds another layer of complexity for companies already navigating volatile commodity markets, tightening capital, and global decarbonization pressures.

With the first round of voting set for November and a likely run-off in December, the race is entering a decisive phase. What’s certain is that the direction Chile takes, toward deeper state control, partial privatization or something in between, will ripple across global supply chains and investment flows.

Extreme “wind droughts” that reduce power output from turbines for extended periods could become 15% longer by the end of the century across much of the northern hemisphere under a moderate warming scenario.

That is according to a new study in Nature Climate Change, which explores how climate change could impact the length and frequency of prolonged low-wind events around the world.

According to the study, “prominent” wind droughts have already been documented in Europe, the US, northeastern China, Japan and India.

As the planet warms, wind droughts will become longer in the northern hemisphere and mid-latitudes – especially across the US, northeastern China, Russia and much of Europe – the paper says.

The study – which focuses on onshore wind – warns that “prolonged” wind droughts could “threaten global wind power security”.

However, they add that research into the effects of climate change on wind supply can help “prepare for and mitigate the adverse impacts” of these prolonged low-wind events.

Combining wind power with other energy technologies – such as solar, hydro, nuclear power and energy storage – can help reduce the impact of wind droughts on global energy supply, the study says.

One expert not involved in the research tells Carbon Brief that the findings do not “spell doom for the wind industry”.

Instead, he says the study is a “navigation tool” which could help the energy industry to “counteract” future challenges. 

Wind drought

Wind power is one of the fastest-growing sources of energy in the world and currently makes up around 8% of global electricity supply. It is also playing a crucial role in the decarbonisation of many countries’ energy systems. 

Wind is the result of air moving from areas of high pressure to areas of low pressure. These differences in air pressure are often due to the Earth’s surface being heated unevenly. 

Human-caused climate change is warming the planet’s atmosphere and oceans. However, different regions are heating at different rates, resulting in a shift in global wind patterns. The IPCC finds that global average wind speeds (excluding Australia) slowed down slightly over 1979-2018.

There have already been dozens of recorded instances of prolonged low-wind events, known as wind droughts, which can drive down power production from wind turbines.

Dr Iain Staffell is an associate professor at the Centre for Environmental Policy at Imperial College London who was not involved in the study. He tells Carbon Brief that wind droughts often “push up power prices” as countries turn to more expensive alternative energy supplies, such as fossil fuels.

For example, Staffell tells Carbon Brief that, in the winter of 2024-25, Germany saw an “extended cold-calm spell which sent power prices to record highs”. (In German, this type of weather event is referred to as a “dunkelflaute”, often translated as “dark doldrums”.) He adds:

“It’s important to note that I’m not aware of anywhere in the world that has suffered a blackout because of a wind drought.”

Capacity factor

The productivity of wind power sites is often measured by their “capacity factor” – the amount of electricity that is actually generated over a period of time, relative to the maximum amount that could have been generated in theory.

A capacity factor of one indicates that wind turbines are generating the maximum possible amount of electricity, while zero indicates that they are not producing any power. 

The authors define a wind drought as the 20th percentile in each grid cell – in other words, winds ranking in the slowest bottom fifth of winds typically recorded in the region.

They look at the frequency of prolonged wind droughts and how that might change as the world warms.

The map below shows regions’ average capacity factor at 100 metres above the ground level, derived from the ERA5 reanalysis data over 1980-2022, where darker shading indicates a higher capacity factor.

It also shows 19 wind droughts recorded since the year 2000 across Europe, the US, northeastern China, Japan and India. Wind droughts are indicated by yellow triangles for local events and hashed areas for larger-scale events.

Wind droughts, indicated by yellow triangles for local events and hashed areas for larger regions. Shading shows the region’s average capacity factor at 100 metres above the ground level, derived from the ERA5 reanalysis data over 1980-2022, where darker shading indicates a higher capacity factor. Source: Qu et al (2025).

The map also shows that the darker shading for “abundant wind resources” is typically found in the mid-latitudes near “major storm tracks”, including the central US, northern Africa, northwestern Europe, northern Russia, northeastern China and Australia.

Modelling wind

To assess the severity of past and future wind droughts, the authors consider both the frequency and duration of these low-wind events.

To calculate wind drought duration, the authors use reanalysis data and models from the  sixth Coupled Model Intercomparison Project (CMIP6) – the international modelling effort that feeds into the influential assessment reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 

The authors then look at how wind drought conditions may change in the future, by modelling wind speeds over 2015-2100 under a range of future warming scenarios.

They find that wind drought frequency and duration will both increase in the northern hemisphere and mid-latitudes by the end of the century. The authors identify “particularly notable increases” in wind drought frequency in the US, northeastern China, Russia and much of Europe.

In the northern mid-latitudes, there will be a one-to-two hour increase in average wind drought duration by the end of the century under the moderate SSP2-4.5 scenario, according to the study. This is a 5-15% increase compared to today’s levels.

The authors also assess “extreme long-duration events” by looking at the longest-lasting wind drought that could happen once every 25 years.

The study projects roughly a 10%, 15% and 20% “elongation” in these long-duration wind droughts across “much of the northern mid-latitude regions” under the low, moderate and very high warming scenarios, by the end of the century.

However, the authors find “strong asymmetric changes” in their results, projecting a decrease in wind drought frequency and intensity in the southern hemisphere.

The authors suggest that the increase in wind droughts in the northern hemisphere is partly because of Arctic amplification – the phenomenon whereby the Arctic warms more quickly than the rest of the planet.

Accelerated warming in the Arctic narrows the temperature gap between the north pole and the equator and alters atmosphere-ocean interactions, which reduces wind speeds in the northern hemisphere. 

Conversely, the authors suggest that increasing wind speeds in the southern hemisphere are caused by the land warming faster than the ocean, resulting in a greater difference in temperature between the land and the sea.

Record-breaking wind droughts

Finally, the authors also investigate the risk of “record-breaking wind droughts” – extreme events that would only be expected once every 1,000 years under the current climate. 

They use CMIP6 models, based on historical data over 1980-2014, to assess how long-lasting such an event would be in different regions of the world. These results are shown on the map below, where darker brown indicates longer-duration wind droughts.

One-in-1,000 year “record-breaking wind droughts”, based on observed data over 1980-2014. Source: Qu et al (2025).

These 1,000-year record-breaking wind droughts typically last for 150-350 hours (6-15 days), occasionally reaching up to 400 hours in regions such as India, East Russia, east Africa and east Brazil, the paper says.

The authors go on to assess the risk of record-breaking wind droughts for existing wind turbines under different warming scenarios. 

The plot below shows the fraction of the CMIP6 models used in this study that project record-breaking wind droughts for onshore wind turbines.

Blue bars show the percentage of wind turbines that face a “weak” risk of exposure, meaning that fewer than 25% of models predict that the turbine will be exposed to record-breaking wind droughts by the year 2100. Green bars indicate a “moderate” risk of 25-50% and brown bars denote “severe” risk of greater than 50%.

Each panel shows a different region of the world, with results for low (left) moderate (middle) and very high (right) warming scenarios.

Fraction of models used that predict record-breaking wind droughts for currently deployed wind turbines under different climate scenarios. Blue bars show turbines with “weak” riskgreen bars indicate a “moderate” risk and brown bars denote “severe” risk. Source: Qu et al (2025).

The study finds that, globally, around 15% of wind turbines will face “severe” risk from record-breaking wind droughts by the end of the century, regardless of the future warming scenario. However, different parts of the globe are expected to face different trends.

In North America, the percentage of turbines facing a “severe” risk from such extended wind droughts in the year 2100 rises from 14% in a low warming scenario to 39% in a very high warming scenario. Europe also faces a higher risk to its wind turbines under higher emissions scenarios.

However, the trends vary across the world. In south-east Asia, for example, the percentage of wind turbines at “severe” risk of the longest wind droughts drops from 18% under a low warming scenario to 11% under a very high warming scenario. 

Energy security

The planet currently has 1,136GW of wind capacity. The authors say that, according to a report by the International Renewable Energy Agency, “wind power capacity is projected to grow substantially as the world pursues decarbonisation, aiming for 6,000GW by 2050”.

The paper sets out a number of ways that energy suppliers could reduce their exposure to record-breaking wind droughts.

The authors say that developers can avoid building new turbines in areas that are prone to frequent wind droughts. They add:

“Other effective mitigation measures include complementing wind power with other renewable energy sources, such as solar, hydro, nuclear power and energy storage.”

Staffell tells Carbon Brief the study provides helpful insights for how the world’s power supply could be made less vulnerable to prolonged low-wind events:

“I don’t see this study as spelling doom for the wind industry, instead it’s a navigation tool, telling us where to expect challenges in future so that we can counteract them.”

Staffell argues that there are “many solutions” for combatting wind droughts – including building the infrastructure to enable “more interconnection” between countries’ power grids. 

For example, he says the UK could benefit from connecting its grid to Spain’s, noting that “wind droughts in the UK tend to coincide with [periods of] higher wind production in Spain”.

He adds:

“Increasing flexibility and diversity in power systems is a way to insure ourselves against extreme weather and cheaper than panic-buying gas whenever the wind drops.”

Similarly, Dr Enrico Antonini, a senior energy system modeller at Open Energy Transition, who was not involved in the study, tells Carbon Brief that wind droughts “do not necessarily threaten the viability of wind power”. He continues:

“Areas more exposed to these events can enhance their resilience by diversifying energy sources, strengthening grid connections over large distances and investing in energy storage solutions.”

In a news and views piece about the new study, Dr Sue Ellen Haupt, director of the weather systems assessment programme at the University of Colorado, praises the “robust” analysis.

She says the work “would ideally be accomplished with higher-resolution simulations that better resolve terrain, land-water boundaries and smaller-scale processes”, but acknowledges that “such datasets are not yet available on the global scale”. 

Meanwhile, Dr Frank Kaspar is the head of hydrometeorology at Germany’s national meteorological service. He tells Carbon Brief how additions to this study could further help energy system planning in Germany. 

Kaspar tells Carbon Brief it would be helpful to know how climate change will affect seasonal trends in wind drought, noting that in Germany, wind power “dominat[es] in winter” while solar plays a larger role in the energy mix in summer. [The UK sees a similar pattern.]

He adds that the study does not address offshore wind – a component of Germany’s energy mix that is “important” for the country. 

IEA: Renewables will be world’s top power source ‘by 2026’

Renewables

|

31.07.25

UN: Five reasons why switching to renewables is ‘smart economics’

International policy

|

22.07.25

The Carbon Brief Interview: Ofgem CEO Jonathan Brearley 

Interviews

|

30.06.25

Guest post: How solar panels and batteries can now run ‘close to 24/365’ in some cities

Guest posts

|

21.06.25

jQuery(document).ready(function() { jQuery('.block-related-articles-slider-block_4ec1d6a327daaf728cf9d1d3cf7206df .mh').matchHeight({ byRow: false }); });

The post Climate change could make ‘droughts’ for wind power 15% longer, study says appeared first on Carbon Brief.

The agency that’s supposed to keep our food safe is being stretched too thin. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is facing budget cuts—meaning there are fewer inspectors, fewer checks, and fewer chances to catch problems before someone gets sick.

These cuts aren’t just numbers on a page. They affect real people—including you.

In Philadelphia, PA food isn’t just a necessity, it’s part of our culture. Whether it’s a hoagie from the deli or groceries from the corner store, we trust that food is safe. For years, we could eat those meatball subs from the store without worry—because one of the city’s countless health inspectors had checked to make sure it was safe. But that system that has kept us safe for so many years is quietly breaking down.

No one would knowingly eat something dangerous. But without strong oversight, contaminated food can end up on our plates, often without warning and without the protections we assume are in place.

The FDA has long been an invisible safeguard of public health, working behind the scenes for more than a century, from preventing widespread foodborne illness to responding quickly when something goes wrong. That could mean someone getting sick from contaminated chicken, a child having an allergic reaction to an undeclared allergen, or unsafe imported snacks hitting store shelves. In moments like these, the FDA acts fast to keep people safe. Inspectors, scientists, and public health experts show up every day to protect our food system. This isn’t about a lack of commitment. It’s about giving the system the support it needs to do its job well. But without adequate funding and staffing, even their best efforts can only go so far. I saw the consequences firsthand.

In 2018, my uncle Paul started forgetting words and losing track of conversations. At first, we thought it was stress. He worked in a meat processing plant and already had some health issues. But after a stroke landed him in the hospital, doctors diagnosed him with prion disease, a rare, incurable illness that causes rapid neurological decline and is often linked to eating or handling meat containing infected brain or spinal tissue. Around the same time, two of his coworkers were diagnosed with the same disease. There were no confirmed outbreaks or inspection issues at the facility, and we never got clear answers about how they contracted it. I’m not saying it was caused by the job—but when something that rare happens more than once in the same place, it’s hard not to wonder. I still do.

We watched him fade, his memory slipping, his personality dimming. Watching someone disappear like that is something you don’t forget. At the time, I was a public health student learning about foodborne illness and zoonotic diseases, the kinds that spread from animals to people. I remember sitting in class thinking, this could be one of those cases. That moment changed how I saw my work. Because food safety isn’t just about regulations we often take for granted. It’s personal. It’s about people like my uncle, families like mine and maybe yours, too.

Most people who eat beef will never get prion disease. But that’s not the point. The point is no one ever talked to my uncle about the risks, not even the rare ones. And not just as a patient, but as an employee. He deserved to know what he was handling.

More recently, we’ve seen outbreaks of Salmonella in cantaloupe and onions, Listeria in deli meats and cheese, and other recalls on food sold across the country. These aren’t flukes. They’re failures of a system that works, until it doesn’t.

And the threats aren’t slowing down. Bird flu, especially the H5N1 strain, is spreading in animals and raising concerns about illness through contaminated meat. While it doesn’t easily spread between people, it can still cause serious illness and shouldn’t be ignored. If an outbreak like that spreads further, we’ll need the FDA more than ever. But right now, the very system meant to protect us is being weakened.

If we want a stronger, safer food system, we have to urge lawmakers to fund food safety programs, back policies that prevent illness before it spreads, and stay informed about who’s responsible and what happens when protections fall short.

It also means showing up in our own communities. Talking to neighbors about food safety. Reporting unsafe practices. Supporting the workers who grow, cook, and serve our food. And paying attention to public health decisions like how the city funds inspections, how often restaurants are checked, or how quickly violations are addressed. In Philadelphia, that could mean following Health Department updates, attending hearings, or speaking up when policies affect how food safety is enforced in our neighborhoods.

Food safety is not just a government issue. It’s a family issue. A worker issue. And when it comes to the food on our plates, whether it’s from a processing plant, a restaurant, or a corner store we all have a role to play in making sure the protections we count on are there when we need them.

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

Photo courtesy of Vitaly Gariev, Unsplash

The post Op-Ed | Who’s Watching Our Food? appeared first on Food Tank.

We are the Union: How Worker-to-worker Organizing is Revitalizing Labor and Winning Big by Eric Blanc (University Of California Press, 2025) Eric Blanc’s We are...

The post Transforming the union movement from the ground-up first appeared on Spring.

The National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) is proud to announce that it has signed a two-year, above-inflation wage agreement with the Glass Industry Employers Association (GIEA) under the National Bargaining Council for the Chemical Industry, (NBCCI). This deal was signed yesterday (28 July), and covers all 13 000 workers in the sector and will be extended to non-parties, ensuring the gains reach every employee. The agreement is from 1 July and expires on the 30th of June 2027. It will be backdated to the 1st of July.

Key Agreement Highlights

Period Basic Wage Increase Minimum Wage (per month) 1 July 2025 – 30 June 2026 5.5% increase R 8 789.91 → R 9 273.36 1 July 2026 – 31 Dec 2026 5.5% increase 1 Jan 2027 – 30 June 2027 0.5% increase R 9 273.36 → R 9 319.73

• Total increase Year 1: 5.5% across the board
• Total increase Year 2: 6.0% (5.5% + 0.5%)

Additional Gains for Workers

Maternity leave improvement from 50% of basic salary for four months to 85% of the basic wage paid for four months. Pregnant women now have the following options:

• • Option A: 85% of basic wage paid for four months
  • Option B: 55% of basic wage paid for six months

• The NBCCI will set up an unemployment support fund to aid workers who lose their jobs as part of Section 189 processes.
• A ban on labour brokers and temporary services beyond three months, as per section 198 of the Labour Relations Act (LRA); longer-term workers to receive permanent contracts and full benefits the same as permanent employees
• First-time sector-wide negotiations for medical aid coverage, to be finalized by the NBCCI

 Implementation & Next Steps

• The Agreement is back-dated to 1 July 2025
• The Collective Agreement automatically applies to non-parties to the bargaining council
• Plant-level discussions will address:
  • Shift and danger allowances
  • Disaster and emergency leave
  • Housing and heat allowances
  • Long-service awards

NUMSA retains the right to renegotiate any benefit shortfalls at company level.

The NUMSA General Secretary Irvin Jim said,

“NUMSA remains committed to defending workers’ hard-earned gains and pushing beyond mere inflation adjustments.  This deal sets a new standard in the Glass Sector and sends a clear message: when workers unite, we win.”

Ends

For more information or interview requests, please contact:

Phakamile Hlubi-Majola
NUMSA National Spokesperson
T: 083 376 7725
E: phakamileh@numsa.org.za

NUMSA Head Office
T: 011 689 1700
Facebook: NUMSA Facebook Page
Twitter: @Numsa_Media
Website: https://numsa.org.za

PDF DOWNLOAD: NUMSA signs above inflation wage agreement in the Glass Sector

The post NUMSA signs above inflation wage agreement in the Glass Sector appeared first on NUMSA.

In 2009, the Environmental Protection Agency declared that the rising concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere threatened public health and welfare. This “endangerment finding,” as it’s known in legal jargon, may have sounded self-evident to those who had been following climate science for decades, but its consequences for U.S. policy were tremendous: It allowed the EPA to issue rules limiting emissions from U.S. vehicles, power plants, and other industrial sources. While those rules have not always survived court challenges and changing presidential administrations, the regulatory authority underpinning them has proven remarkably stable.

On Tuesday, President Donald Trump’s EPA took a major step toward changing that. At a truck dealership in Indianapolis, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced a formal proposal to repeal the endangerment finding, which has been in the works since the beginning of Trump’s second presidency. At the same time, Zeldin announced a plan to repeal all federal greenhouse gas emissions regulations for motor vehicles. “If finalized, today’s announcement would amount to the largest deregulatory action in the history of the United States,” he said at the press conference.

Zeldin accused his predecessors at the EPA of making “many, many, many mental leaps” in the 2009 declaration, and he argued that the “real threat” to people’s livelihoods is not carbon dioxide but instead the regulations themselves, which he claimed lead to higher prices and restrict people’s choices.

If the EPA succeeds in reversing the endangerment finding, it would “eviscerate the biggest regulatory tool the federal government has” to keep climate change in check, said Ann Carlson, an environmental law professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.

Republicans in Congress have already repealed much of former President Joe Biden’s landmark climate law, which aimed to put the U.S. within reach of its Paris Agreement targets primarily by funneling money to renewable energy sources. Rescinding the endangerment finding targets the other main tool the U.S. government can use to address climate change: the executive branch’s power to limit emissions through regulatory action. In other words, Republicans have already eliminated many of the federal government’s proverbial climate carrots — now they’re going after the sticks. 

“We will not have a serious national climate policy if this goes through,” said Patrick Parenteau, an emeritus professor of climate policy and environmental law at Vermont Law School.

But that’s a big “if.” Experts say that the EPA’s plan is bound to be embroiled in years of lawsuits, perhaps one day making its way to the Supreme Court, which blessed the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases in 2007 and declined to hear a challenge to the endangerment finding as recently as December 2023. And even if the EPA does manage to overturn the endangerment finding after all court challenges have been exhausted, it would result in sweeping consequences — including some that the administration’s allies in the oil industry may not like. Indeed, the risk is serious enough that some fossil fuel industry groups have urged the Trump administration not to repeal the finding.

The tussle over the endangerment finding stems from differing interpretations of the Clean Air Act. When Congress expanded the law in 1970, it tasked the EPA with regulating air pollutants that threaten public health, but it kept the definition of “pollutant” broad. “They had the foresight to understand that they could not foresee every potential air pollutant that would endanger public health and welfare in the many decades to come,” said Zealan Hoover, who was a senior adviser to the EPA under Biden. That gave the EPA some leeway to determine exactly what it should be regulating — a question that presidents have approached very differently, with Democrats typically trying to expand the agency’s power and Republicans trying to limit it. With its 2009 endangerment finding, the Obama administration added carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases to the list.

Now that Zeldin has announced a plan to strike down the finding, the EPA will open a 45-day period for the public to weigh in on the proposal. The agency is supposed to take that feedback into account before moving to finalize the rule. At that point, states and environmental groups may sue the EPA in what’s expected to be a yearslong court battle.

“The lawyering that’s going to go on is going to make a lot of people rich,” Parenteau said. In the meantime, Zeldin would likely work to undo existing regulations on greenhouse gas emissions, unless the courts were convinced to pause the implementation of the new rule. 

Any lawsuit would probably end up in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which hears cases concerning federal policymaking. Law experts say the EPA’s argument may not fare well with those judges, as the circuit has upheld the EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act in the past. On top of that, when Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022, Democrats amended the Clean Air Act to explicitly declare carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases as air pollutants, bolstering the foundation for regulating them. Republicans did not repeal that language when they gutted much of the rest of the Biden-era law, and challengers are likely to invoke those amendments in court, Carlson said.

But that wouldn’t necessarily be the end of it, because such a case might go all the way to the Supreme Court. The court’s conservative majority could then choose to undermine Massachusetts v. EPA, the 2007 decision that gave the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and led to the endangerment finding. “That may be the ultimate aim here,” Carlson said, “to get the Supreme Court to revisit Massachusetts v. EPA to make it basically impossible to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.”

Read Next Trump’s EPA wants to demolish the bedrock of US climate regulation. It won’t be easy. Naveena Sadasivam

Undoing the finding wouldn’t just dismantle the foundation of U.S. climate regulation — it might also weaken oil companies’ best legal defense in the flood of climate lawsuits brought against them by cities and states. For years, oil companies have relied on a different Supreme Court ruling to argue that federal law shields them from state lawsuits over climate change. In the 2011 ruling American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court found that because the EPA was already regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, states couldn’t separately sue polluters under federal “nuisance” law — a type of legal claim used when someone’s actions interfere with public rights, such as the right to a healthy environment.

The court’s reasoning was that Congress had delegated the task of regulating emissions to the EPA, leaving no room for federal courts to step in on making climate policy. But if the endangerment finding is revoked, and the EPA no longer regulates those emissions, that argument could fall apart, leaving fossil fuel companies vulnerable in courts across the country.

“There is great concern that reversing the finding would open the door to a lot more nuisance lawsuits against all types of energy companies,” Jeff Holmstead, a partner with energy law firm Bracewell, told E&E News earlier this year. The oil industry may then pursue a backup plan: Companies could ask Congress, which is currently controlled by a narrow Republican majority, to grant them legal protection from climate lawsuits, according to Parenteau.

Undoing the endangerment finding could leave fossil fuel companies navigating a patchwork of state laws instead of a single cohesive federal policy. If greenhouse gas emissions are no longer regulated under the Clean Air Act, states would presumably be free to make their own rules, Carlson added. Among other consequences, that could strengthen California’s case against the Trump administration over its right to place stricter-than-federal standards on vehicle emissions. “There’s potential for a lot of chaos,” she said. 

It’s possible that a more liberal presidential administration could one day reinstate the endangerment finding, even if Zeldin manages to revoke it. But it would be a while before that could translate to any meaningful action on climate change, according to Hoover.

“Unfortunately, for anyone who wants to see government solve a big problem, there’s very little you can achieve through regulations in four years,” he said.

toolTips('.classtoolTips3','Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases that prevent heat from escaping Earth’s atmosphere. Together, they act as a blanket to keep the planet at a liveable temperature in what is known as the “greenhouse effect.” Too many of these gases, however, can cause excessive warming, disrupting fragile climates and ecosystems.');

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Trump’s EPA is attacking its own power to fight climate change on Jul 30, 2025.

Over the last six months, Americans have been inundated with a near-constant stream of announcements from the federal government — programs shuttered, funding cut, jobs eliminated, and regulations gutted. President Donald Trump and his administration are executing a systematic dismantling of the environmental, economic, and scientific systems that underpin our society. The onslaught can feel overwhelming, opaque, or sometimes even distant, but these policies will have real effects on Americans’ daily lives.

In this new guide, Grist examines the impact these changes could have, and are already having, on the things you do every day. Flipping on your lights. Turning on your faucet. Paying household bills. Visiting a park. Checking the weather forecast. Feeding your family.

The decisions have left communities less safe from pollution, more vulnerable to climate disasters, and facing increasingly expensive energy bills, among other changes. Read on to see how.

— Katherine Bagley

 

 

Your Home Flip on your lights:

Pulling back from renewable energy could make your electricity bills go up.

When Trump began his second term, it was with a vow to “unleash American energy.” But over the last six months, it’s become clear that this call to arms was meant strictly for fossil fuels, not the country’s booming renewable energy industry. Trump has issued a series of executive orders to revive coal production, and he has opened up millions of acres of public land to oil and gas drilling and issued a moratorium on offshore wind leases.

This commitment was deepened with the Republican-led One Big Beautiful Bill Act signed into law on July 4. It bolsters investment in fossil fuels while sunsetting Biden-era credits for electric vehicles, energy efficiency, and wind, solar, and green hydrogen. Climate and clean energy advocates described the bill as “historically ruinous” for renewables and a massive handout to the oil and gas industry. The problem: Power demand is rising sharply, and recent growth in renewable energy has been reliably and affordably meeting that demand.

All of this could soon impact Americans’ electricity bills: According to one analysis by the nonpartisan think tank Energy Innovation, by 2035 the One Big Beautiful Bill Act could spike wholesale electricity prices 74 percent by stifling renewable energy at a time when new capacity is needed, and raise consumer rates by 9 percent to 18 percent, or $170 annually.

— Rebecca Egan McCarthy

 

Turn on your faucet:

Regulatory delays will continue to allow PFAS to contaminate drinking water.

Per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS, are a class of manmade chemicals used to make everything from firefighting foam to nonstick cookware. Better known as “forever chemicals” because they don’t break down easily, the compounds have become ubiquitous in our lakes, soil, and even our own bodies. Roughly half the U.S. population consumes water tainted with PFAS. 

After years of mounting contamination and public outcry, the Environmental Protection Agency finally took steps to regulate the chemicals last year, establishing maximum levels for six PFAS types in drinking water. But in May, the Trump administration said it would rescind the existing rules and issue new ones for four of the chemicals, and delayed implementation of two others until 2031. 

Exposure to PFAS has been linked to decreased fertility, developmental delays in children, and reduced immune function.

— Naveena Sadasivam 

 

Check your weather forecast:

Funding and staff cuts are making it harder to track climate change and weather.

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA, provides critical scientific research on the Earth’s environment to U.S. communities and lawmakers. It houses the National Weather Service, which generates the data that makes weather forecasts possible, as well as the National Hurricane Center, which tracks tropical storms. 

In the first few months of Trump’s second term, his administration fired hundreds of NOAA employees, with plans to cut the agency’s workforce by a further 17 percent next year. NOAA has also taken steps to discontinue the collection of essential satellite data that forecasters use to track hurricanes once they form. 

Combined, these cuts could threaten lives: In June, John Morales, a longtime meteorologist in Miami, warned his viewers that “the quality of forecasts is becoming degraded” and that meteorologists may be “flying blind” with hurricane tracking this year due to the Trump administration’s “cuts, the gutting, the sledgehammer attack on science.”

— Matt Simon 

 

Run your appliances:

Disbanding energy-efficiency programs could increase your utility bills.

If you’re browsing for a new household appliance, like a dishwasher or washing machine, you might notice that some of them come equipped with a blue “Energy Star” label. The mark signifies that a machine meets a certain energy-efficiency standard, set by the federal government, and it allows consumers to choose appliances that can help keep utility bills low. Earlier this year, the EPA announced internally that it was planning to shut down the popular, voluntary program — though building and consumer advocates are now trying to save it.

If Energy Star is indeed over, it would mark the end of a program that saves American consumers some $40 billion annually in energy costs, or about $350 for every taxpayer dollar that goes into the program. 

The Department of Energy has also separately rolled back a slew of mandatory efficiency standards on appliances, ranging from microwaves to washers and dryers, dehumidifiers to ovens. Researchers estimate that the lower benchmarks could cost consumers $43 billion over 30 years of sales, due to increased electricity bills.

— Tik Root

 

Pay your bills:

Tariffs are disrupting supply chains and raising household costs.

Trump dubbed April 2 “Liberation Day” and imposed tariffs as high as 50 percent on nearly every country in the world, as well as several key commodities. Although he swiftly paused them for 90 days, the threat of reinstatement looms and some tariffs — on China, Canada, and aluminum — have already gone into effect, with higher prices on consumer goods like clothes, toys, and furniture. 

Companies generally pass the cost of tariffs on to their customers (even if Trump tells them not to). If Trump’s full, proposed tariffs ever do take effect, economists anticipate increased prices on everything from cars to electricity to building materials, the latter of which could also make natural disaster recovery and home insurance more expensive.

— Tik Root

 

Your Commute Fill your gas tank:

Fuel-efficiency rollbacks could cost you more at the pump and worsen air quality.

Gas-powered cars have become more fuel efficient and less polluting over the years largely due to federal regulations. After the 2008 financial crash, the Obama administration used the bailout of the auto industry as leverage to impose stricter fuel-efficiency requirements, ensuring cars drive farther on less gas, thereby saving consumers money at the pump and reducing air pollution. The Biden administration later strengthened those rules, requiring that automakers sell passenger cars averaging 65 miles per gallon by 2031 — a one-third increase from 2024 standards. The threshold, which applies across an automaker’s product lines, was designed to gradually shift the industry toward electric vehicles, which do not release exhaust fumes or other tailpipe pollutants. 

In June, the Trump administration began the process of formally rescinding those rules. According to an estimate last year from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Biden-era rule would have saved $23 billion in fuel costs while also reducing emissions and pollution.

— Naveena Sadasivam

 

Drive your EV:

Loss of tax credits and cuts to federal program will make it harder to buy and drive an electric vehicle.

Under the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, federal tax credits for the purchase or lease of an EV — of up to $7,500 for new cars and $4,000 for used — would run through 2032. But the One Big Beautiful Bill Act repealed those measures and cut the runway to only a few months. The erasure will likely make electric vehicles more expensive, which would put the technology further out of reach for many low- to moderate-income Americans. 

For those who still can buy an EV, finding a place to plug in could be difficult. In February, the Federal Highway Administration said it was suspending the National Electric Vehicle Infrastructure, or NEVI, program, which would have directed some $3 billion to states to expand the nation’s charging network. In June, a judge blocked that move and ordered the administration to unfreeze funds, but the court battle isn’t over.

— Tik Root

 

Take public transit:

A funding freeze is pausing certain train, bus, and bike lane projects.

For those who don’t exclusively rely on cars to get around, Trump’s second term has been none too kind on the buses, railways, and bike lanes that make up the country’s public transit system. Trump has relentlessly attacked New York City’s congestion pricing, designed to reduce traffic and raise funds for public transit, and threatened to cut public transit funding to major cities like New York and Chicago. 

In March, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy froze funds and ordered an investigation into any departmental grants that involve “equity analysis, green infrastructure, bicycle infrastructure, [and] EV and/or EV-charging infrastructure.” The directive also instructed employees to flag projects “that purposefully improve the condition for EJ [environmental justice] communities or actively reduce GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions.” The decision reverses Biden-era efforts to reduce the climate footprint of the transportation sector, which is America’s largest contributor to global warming, emitting over 1.8 billion metric tons of greenhouse gases per year. 

— Sophie Hurwitz

 

Your Food Buy groceries:

New tariffs could raise your grocery bill.

The Trump administration’s whiplash approach to a wide swath of exorbitant tariffs on other countries has sowed confusion among consumers, manufacturers, and agricultural growers. 

Although Mexico and the U.S. briefly appeared to reach an agreement, Trump is now threatening a 30 percent tariff on all Mexican imports, and a 17 percent rate on Mexican tomato imports has already gone into effect. Other tariffs could drive costs up even higher: Trump’s 50 percent steel and aluminum imports could hike up the price of canned foods, for example. And country-specific tariffs could increase the prices of imported goods like coffee and chocolate.

— Frida Garza

 

Get food assistance:

Funding cuts are leaving people hungry.

Local food systems and national food safety nets have been decimated by recent federal cuts. In March, after freezing nearly two dozen streams of funding, the Department of Agriculture cancelled future rounds of the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program and the Local Food for Schools Cooperative Agreement Program. The two initiatives were slated to dole out roughly a billion dollars to states, tribes, and territories to reduce food insecurity. As a result, the USDA’s Emergency Food Assistance Program’s deliveries to food banks and soup kitchens have been reduced or cancelled entirely; kids in schools and lower-income families have less access to affordable meals; and agricultural producers across the country have been forced to lay off employees, delay projects, or shut down entirely.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act made unprecedented cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, a federal program that helps nearly 42 million Americans afford groceries. The cuts are further poised to increase food insecurity across the country at a time when persistently high food costs, fueled in part by worsening climate disasters, are among most Americans’ biggest economic concerns.

— Ayurella Horn-Muller 

 

Eat safe food:

Federal job cuts are disrupting food safety programs.

The Trump administration cut 20,000 jobs from the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees the Food and Drug Administration and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention— two agencies that monitor and respond to foodborne illness outbreaks. Although some employees were later reinstated, the FDA has paused multiple initiatives due to staff shortages, including a quality control program that keeps the agency’s network of food-testing laboratories running efficiently. The FDA also paused its quality-testing program for milk and suspended a program to test milk and cheese for bird flu just before the program launched. Meanwhile, the USDA axed a proposed Biden-era rule to reduce salmonella risk in poultry.

The U.S. food supply is one of the safest in the world, but experts say these cuts threaten to disrupt that system and undercut its ability to keep consumers safe in the long term.

— Frida Garza

 

Support local farmers:

Funding cuts are leaving small farmers in the lurch, threatening locally sourced food supplies. 

Federal agricultural policy has centered on two major priorities during the early months of the second Trump administration: First is the slashing of federal food and agriculture funding, which has left small producers struggling to stay afloat. Second is giving farmers who grow traditional commodities such as corn, cotton, and soybeans multibillion-dollar bailouts. This strategy first became clear when the USDA began freezing and cutting billions of dollars to programs that supported the purchasing of goods from small and midsize farms. Then, the agency expedited disaster subsidies — funds meant to help agricultural producers recover from extreme weather — for commodity farmers. The decision funneled economic aid away from small producers into the pockets of industrial-scale operations. 

With the strain of an agricultural recession looming over regions like the Midwest, experts see these moves by the administration ultimately leading to the loss of many more small American farms, which would disrupt local economies and limit access to fresh food.

— Ayurella Horn-Muller

 

Your Community Take a breath:

Regulatory rollbacks could make air quality worse.

From rally stages to debate podiums, Trump repeatedly promised to deliver “clean air and clean water” if elected to a second term. He broke that promise almost from Day 1. Trump’s EPA is carrying out a massive deregulatory agenda, much of it focused on rolling back protections for the air we breathe. It rescinded billions of dollars in funding for a range of air quality initiatives, including clean energy projects and monitoring efforts in low-income and minority communities, though a judge ultimately ruled the latter unlawful. At the same time, the administration has also dramatically reduced the number of cases it brings against polluters. It even set up an email inbox soliciting requests from companies seeking exemptions from a range of clean air rules.

The agency has also taken steps to roll back limits on carbon dioxide and mercury emissions from power plants and methane emissions from oil and gas fields, which drive climate change and threaten human health. And in July, it repealed the “endangerment finding” — the landmark legal determination that classifies greenhouse gases as air pollutants and gives the EPA authority to regulate them.

— Naveena Sadasivam

 

Prepare for extreme weather:

Cancelled grant programs are making communities less resilient to natural disasters.

This spring, the Trump administration cancelled the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities, or BRIC, program — an initiative that sends billions of dollars to communities, municipalities, and states proactively so that they can prepare for natural disasters before they hit. The program funds projects like burying power lines, building culverts, and upgrading power stations to make them more resilient to extreme weather. 

Trump canceled $750 million in new resilience funding and clawed back nearly $900 million in grant funding provided to BRIC by the 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law, money that was already approved but not yet disbursed. The abrupt move ultimately led to the disruption of $3.6 billion in planned resilience spending across the U.S. — the kinds of projects that help protect people from flooding, wildfires, hurricanes, and more at a time when climate change is increasing their severity and frequency. Under Trump, FEMA also cancelled $600 million in flood-mitigation assistance funding to communities this year.

— Zoya Teirstein

 

Go outdoors:

A defunding campaign is threatening our shared spaces.

The future of public lands, parks, and forests in the U.S. is in the midst of a dramatic reshaping by Republicans, risking permanent changes to the environment and how we experience the outdoors. The Trump administration has fired a thousand National Park Service workers, hindering conservation efforts and leaving parks unable to accommodate the millions of visitors they typically welcome each summer. The administration also stripped protections for nearly 60 million acres of national forest and identified millions of acres eligible for potential oil and gas development. And a growing movement among Republican lawmakers and the administration would sell off millions of acres of public lands for housing and energy development — a policy opposed by 74 percent of Americans. 

In June, the Department of Justice granted the president the authority to revoke national monument designations, a status that marks land as permanently protected. The move threatens sites such as Bears Ears in Utah and the Sáttítla Highlands in California — two monuments that Trump has singled out in particular — which are significant to tribes and illustrate the complex history of U.S. public lands as stolen land.

— Miacel Spotted Elk

 

Wildlife watching:

New definitions are weakening species protections.

For decades, the Endangered Species Act recognized that in order to protect animals, it was vital to save the habitats they live in. The policy has led to the rebound of iconic species like the bald eagle, grizzly bears, grey wolves, and panthers, and it has protected millions of acres from development. But in April, the Trump administration proposed a new definition of the word “harm” that scientists, legal experts, and conservationists warn will hamstring the act’s effectiveness. 

Instead of the Endangered Species Act regulating activities that indirectly impact endangered or threatened species, like drilling in the spawning grounds of Atlantic sturgeon or logging forests that are home to a rare owl, the law will now only consider direct, intentional harm to the animal itself — killing, hurting, or capturing it. The rule change comes at a time when climate change and land use decisions increasingly threaten ecosystems and the animals that rely on them.

— Katherine Bagley 

 

Protect your health:

An attack on science is hindering research on public health.

The federal government has hemorrhaged more than 50,000 employees since Trump was reelected in January, including many who play crucial roles in keeping American waters and air safe from pollutants and disease-causing organisms. A quarter of the staff at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention alone were fired, leaving gaping holes across an agency tasked with keeping tabs on the movement of pathogens across the nation. The EPA is in the midst of a defunding and deregulation campaign, including the elimination of its research division, all of which limits its ability to oversee polluters. And the National Institutes of Health is rebranding its research on the intersection of climate change and public health, now focusing solely on extreme weather and excluding any mental health work.

— Zoya Teirstein

 

Illustrations by Lucas Burtin, with art direction by Mia Torres.

toolTips('.classtoolTips3','Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases that prevent heat from escaping Earth’s atmosphere. Together, they act as a blanket to keep the planet at a liveable temperature in what is known as the “greenhouse effect.” Too many of these gases, however, can cause excessive warming, disrupting fragile climates and ecosystems.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips6','A powerful greenhouse gas that accounts for about 11% of global emissions, methane is the primary component of natural gas and is emitted into the atmosphere by landfills, oil and natural gas systems, agricultural activities, coal mining, and wastewater treatment, among other pathways. Over a 20-year period, it is roughly 84 times more potent than carbon dioxide at trapping heat in the atmosphere.'); toolTips('.classtoolTips12','An acronym for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, PFAS are a class of chemicals used in everyday items like nonstick cookware, cosmetics, and food packaging that have proven to be dangerous to human health. Also called “forever chemicals” for their inability to break down over time, PFAS can be found lingering nearly everywhere — in water, soil, air, and the blood of people and animals.
');

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Trump’s environmental policies are reshaping everyday life. Here’s how. on Jul 30, 2025.

Ecology at the end of the world Channel Comment brendan 30th July 2025 Teaser Media

Climate activism - a love story Channel News Catherine Early 30th July 2025 Teaser Media

Rystad Energy says the cost of China-made offshore wind turbines has dropped by 50 per cent over the past four years, offering significant potential savings for Australian projects.

The post Big cost falls in China-made offshore wind turbines offer hope for first Australian projects appeared first on RenewEconomy.

Construction has begun on a 30 turbine expansion to a wind farm north of Perth that will make it the biggest in the state with one of the world's most isolated grids.

The post Construction begins on 30 turbine expansion to deliver state’s biggest wind farm appeared first on RenewEconomy.

Listen to the bird in this mural! 1810418105 Painted: 6/13/2025 About the Mural: In this mural painted by Vanesa Álvarez Díaz, a Northern Waterthrush perches on a branch amid a selection of...