News Feeds

Recently, CRA has made changes to Old Age Security Eligibility, Payment Amount 2024. After the increment in CPI, the CRA decided to change the OAS Monthly Payment Amount to 2024. From July 2024 to September 2024. CRA will provide $718.33 to 65-74 old citizens and $790.16 to those citizens who are 75 or above. The ... Read more

The post OAS New Changes 2024 by CRA – Know Payment Amount & Eligibility Changes appeared first on Latest Finance & Govt Aid News Updates @ Conterview.Org.

The Department of Indian Post Office has issued India Post 2024 Office Recruitment. The department has announced 72186 Bhartis for MTS, Postmen, Mail Guard, and GDS at the India Post Office. aspirants will be capable to apply for the position soon. According to the info, candidates can expect the application procedure to begin on 18 ... Read more

The post India Post Office Recruitment 2024: GDS, MTS, Mail Guard, Postman Notification Pdf appeared first on Latest Finance & Govt Aid News Updates @ Conterview.Org.

The SSC will announce the official SSC CGL Notification 2024 on June 24th, 2024. After that, the applicant can visit the official website of SSC i.e. ssc.gov.in to know the required eligibility conditions and other necessary conditions. The Commission is most likely to release the online applications along with the notification on its official site. ... Read more

The post SSC CGL Notification 2024, Recruitment Application Form, Exam Date appeared first on Latest Finance & Govt Aid News Updates @ Conterview.Org.

The following is a post by Alex Silva, Climate Communications & Media Assistant at 350PDX.

Earth Day is a Protest!

April’s Action Night started out just like any other–there was socializing, food, and some talk about that afternoon’s rally at City Hall where hundreds protested a Hearing Officer’s decision to approve Portland General Electric’s plan to clearcut 5 acres of Forest Park to install powerlines.

Speakers included  350PDX’s Forest Climate Director Brenna Bell and Kenneth Kreusher– a criminal defense and civil rights attorney who has been practicing for 20 years. Kenneth’s involvement in direct action and protest are what led him to law school. The Oregon Justice Resource Center fights for immigration rights, civil rights, women, the wrongfully convicted and more.

Earth Day and Civil Disobedience

This month’s Action Night focused on Earth Month as an ongoing protest. Brenna emphasized that Earth Day has always been built on justice. It is not just another holiday to be monetized. Because of Earth Day, we have policies such as the Clean Water Act and the Clean Air Act. The first Earth Day involved 20 million people–10% of the US population at the time. Given the current political climate, we wanted to share how we can keep ourselves safe and informed about current events revolving around climate justice.

With that, Kenneth Kreusher gave some insight and important advice for those of us in protest and advocacy spaces. He stated, “We are at a moment right now where some of the forces that be…are trying to radically change society.” Protesters and advocacy groups are facing a lot of pressure and uncertainty with the law. He stressed that we may be made to feel uncertain about what can be done safely, however that uncertainty is intentional. We must not comply with rules that are not even in place yet. “Uncertainty is the point…so people will be fearful and comply in advance.”

Kreusher also made it clear that the current state of prosecutions has not changed dramatically–yet. However, for those who do not have citizenship status or whose status is rather complicated, and for those who have engaged in Gaza solidarity work, the current state of prosecutions has changed and those advocates must be more careful and take deeper consideration in how they engage in advocacy. With that, Kreusher reiterated the importance of your right to remain silent. If approached by law enforcement, never engage in conversation, simply state, “Sorry, I can’t talk right now” then walk away/shut the door/hang up. If they don’t let you walk away, invoke your right to remain silent and ask to see your lawyer. Do not give consent to a search. Clearly state that you “do not consent to a search”. Outside of the words, “Sorry, I can’t talk right now”, “I have the right to remain silent and call a lawyer” and “I do not consent to a search”, never say anything else. Even the simplest of statements can lead to a case against you.

Direct Action Personality

The night concluded with a survey to determine what our individual direct action personality types are! Once determined, we gathered into groups of the same direct action type and discussed forms of action within that type.

Banksies:

• A Banksy acts behind the scenes to display messages to the community far and wide. Banksies might:
  • create the signs used by protestors
  • write chants for rallies
  • build puppets to make a statement

Community-Builders:

• Community-builders lovingly gather folks, build trust, and care for the community. Community-Builders might:
  • host pot-lucks
  • hold book clubs
  • share food, love, and knowledge

Strategic Escalators:

• Strategic Escalators are at the forefront and jump into action when duty calls. Strategic Escalators might:
  • participate in the human blockades
  • protest on the streets
  • shout chants loud and proud

Overall, we came to understand that resistance requires momentum and intersectionality in each of these categories. The strategic escalators need the help of artists and community-builders. The artists must understand the community in which they are sending a message. And the community-builders need members of every category to strengthen their communities. Brenna reminded us that “as we escalate our resistance, we must escalate our knowledge.” None of us should act alone. We must build our knowledge and resilience together. 

As the night came to a close, we learned that the Portland City Council voted unanimously (12-0) to grant the appeal to stop Portland General Electric’s plan to cut down 5 acres of Forest Park. 

This Earth Day, let us remain motivated to fight for the climate and for our neighbors on the margins.

The post April Action Night – Earth Day is a Protest! appeared first on 350PDX: Climate Justice.

The latest release of the Albanese Government’s Safeguard Mechanism data reveals increases in greenhouse pollution from many coal mines, contrary to the purpose and promise of reforms passed two years ago. 

Community groups are calling for a ban on fracking across the entire Kimberley amid revelations Texan company Black Mountain has quietly put its “Valhalla” project up for sale.

Darling Downs farmers have protested to protect priority agricultural farmland threatened by Arrow Energy’s expanding Surat Gas Project, demanding the Crisafulli Government make good on its election promise to protect the critical Condamine Alluvium from CSG drilling.

The central claim of the Heritage Foundation’s special report that, because of New York’s ban on fracking, counties in the Marcellus region “lost out on around $11,000 per resident or $27,000 per household” is simply wrong. Why? Because . . . 

 

Very little of the money invested in or earned by fracking ever lands in local economies, leaving them as poor or nearly as poor as they were before fracking.

The report claims that growth in gross domestic product (GDP) is the most accurate indicator of economic prosperity. But the report doesn’t explain that little of the GDP growth that results from fracking lands in local economies. In fact, the bulk of the income generated by fracking goes instead to investors, bankers, service providers, and shareholders from outside the region. That’s why, as fracking increased from 1% of GDP in the Pennsylvania counties featured in the report to over 30%, the share of GDP that landed as income for residents plummeted from just over 100% of GDP to less than 70%, effectively wiping out any net increase.

This result is illustrated in the following chart in which you can see how, in 2002, before the fracking boom, the Mining sector (the blue line), which consists primarily of natural gas, contributed just over 1% of GDP in the relevant Pennsylvania counties [1]. At the same time, incomes in the region were actually greater than total GDP at nearly 103% [2]. But, as fracking grew, the share of GDP that landed as income for local residents plummeted to less than 68%.

Economists call this phenomenon “the resource curse” and the curse’s result is that nearly all of the incremental income generated by fracking gets exported to people in other places. That’s why residents in New York would have received almost none of the $27,000 per household the report says they “lost out on”.

 

The issue isn’t whether one side of the state line did slightly better or worse than the other, It’s how badly both sides are doing and how little difference fracking makes.

The report dismisses jobs as a measure of prosperity. That should be jarring to policymakers and the public, which has become accustomed to hearing job creation cited as the principal benefit of all economic development efforts. But the report’s dismissal of jobs as a measure of prosperity makes sense when it is revealed that communities on both sides of the state line were suffering from job loss before the fracking boom and the trend has only worsened since. With declines in jobs of 10% and 13% respectively, both the Pennsylvania and New York Counties are on long-term downward trajectories, which was only briefly interrupted between 2008 and 2012.

To put these losses in context, it’s helpful to consider that, during the period 2002 – 2023, the number of jobs in the US economy grew from 128 million to more than 153 million, an increase of nearly 20%. Jobs in Pennsylvania grew by 8%, which means that Pennsylvania’s natural gas counties, far from being contributors to job growth, actually dragged it down.

It’s also not clear that natural gas will help going forward. The number of natural gas jobs has fallen by 40% in the last five years. And statewide, Pennsylvania’s fracking industry provides fewer than 20,000 jobs out of more than 5 million in Pennsylvania’s economy.

 

The report purports to be an apples-to-apples comparison. It’s not.

Any differences found in the Heritage Foundation report between New York’s Marcellus counties and Pennsylvania’s northeast Marcellus counties are as likely to be explained by pre-existing differences in their economies as they are by the natural gas industry.

While the regions on either side of the state line are of similar size geographically, the New York counties are more than two and a half times as heavily populated as the Pennsylvania counties. They include cities, such as Binghamton and Elmira. Also the supposedly more prosperous Pennsylvania counties are depopulating faster than the New York Counties.

As a consequence, even if New York were to allow fracking, the industry’s already negligible economic impact would be diluted further in the much larger economies of the New York counties.  

As pointed out above, the small differences in economic outcomes between the two regions are far less important than the fact that both regions are suffering mightily. And, although natural gas has grown from 1% of the Pennsylvania counties’ economy to 30%, it has done little or nothing to change their economic trajectory. There is no reason to imagine that the results of embracing fracking in New York would be different.

 

Look out for the upcoming “Frackalachia Update.”

The Ohio River Valley Institute’s upcoming “Frackalachia Update” will explore in greater detail the economic impacts of natural gas development for all 30 major gas-producing counties in Ohio, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. The update will show that the job and population losses described in this report for Pennsylvania’s northeastern gas-producing counties are typical of the impact natural gas production has in the northeast United States. And, looking ahead, it will discuss the possible implications for the industry, the region, and the region’s economic development strategies of growing demand for energy.

[1] As defined by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, the Mining sector includes “Mining, Quarrying, and Oil & Gas Extraction.”

[2] The total income of an area can exceed total GDP as a result of government transfer payments, such as Social Security and AFDC benefits which add to the income generated by economic output.

The post Misleading and Just Plain Wrong appeared first on Ohio River Valley Institute.

Pluriversal politics offer an eclectic, egalitarian and emancipatory alternative to capitalist modernity, writes Levi Gahman

The post Key words: the pluriverse appeared first on Red Pepper.

The Landscape Lab, on the campus of the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, is a stormwater management landscape designed that serves as stormwater infrastructure but also as a research and demonstration facility. The steep slopes of the catchment basins represent standard institutional landscape practice: plants are planted into holes in weed barrier fabric … Continue reading Recognizing Rights and Responsibilities for Plants in the Metropolis →

Decision on all BIL/IRA Funds

U.S. Dist. Judge Mary McElroy, Federal Dist. Court of RI’s Order – applies nationwide to EPA, DOE, Interior, USDA, HHS & HUD (and OMB). The same theory could apply to Green Bank Funds (see third bullet below). A Green Bank litigation summary starts on page three.

Federal judge orders immediate thaw of climate, infrastructure funds – by Alex Guillén; April 15, 2025 – Politico – President Donald Trump does not have “unfettered power to hamstring in perpetuity” duly passed funding laws, the judge ruled. A federal judge ruled Tuesday that EPA, the Interior and Energy Departments and other agencies unlawfully froze funds under Democrats’ climate and infrastructure spending laws, ordering the agencies to immediately resume disbursing the money.

• The ruling from Judge Mary McElroy of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island, who was named to the bench by President Donald Trump in 2019, comes on the eve of an expected decision from another judge in Washington on whether EPA lawfully terminated $20 billion in climate grants. That case and other litigation are part of a complex web of lawsuits over frozen funds and terminated grants playing out in multiple courts.
• Notably, McElroy also dismissed the Trump administration’s arguments that she lacks jurisdiction to issue this order because these are contract disputes that by law would have to be heard by another court. Similar arguments have been raised by EPA in litigation over its canceled climate grants.
• But McElroy wrote that the nonprofits’ rights don’t stem from any contract with the government – they come from the laws passed by Congress. The groups are seeking to halt the government’s funding freeze, not get “money damages” for past harm done, she said.

US judge blocks Trump’s freeze on climate, infrastructure grants – By Nate Raymond – April 15, 2025 8:40 PM EDT – Reuters – A U.S. judge blocked President Donald Trump‘s administration on Tuesday from freezing billions of dollars in grants Congress authorized under climate investment and infrastructure laws of his Democratic predecessor, former President Joe Biden. U.S. District Judge Mary McElroy in Providence, Rhode Island, issued an injunction at the behest of environmental groups who argued the Trump administration was unlawfully freezing already-awarded funding for projects to combat climate change, reduce pollution and modernize U.S. infrastructure.

Judge orders federal agencies to release billions of dollars from two Biden-era initiatives by MICHAEL CASEY – April 15, 2025 at 5:36 PM EDT – Associated Press – BOSTON –  A federal judge on Tuesday ordered the Trump administration to release billions of dollars meant to finance climate and infrastructure projects across the country.

• S. District Judge Mary McElroy, who was appointed by Donald Trump during his first term, sided with conservation and nonprofit groups and issued a preliminary injunction until she rules on the merits of the lawsuit. The injunction is nationwide.
• McElroy concluded that the seven nonprofits demonstrated that the freeze was “arbitrary and capricious” and that the powers asserted by the federal agencies, including the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, in halting the payouts were not found in federal law.

‘The government failed’: Trump-appointed judge rips his spending cuts in late-night ruling – On Tuesday night, President Donald Trump’s administration suffered a loss in court — this time, at the hands of one of his own appointed judges. Politico legal correspondent Kyle Cheney tweeted Tuesday that U.S. District Judge Mary S. McElroy, who Trump appointed to the District of Rhode Island in 2019, authored a ruling that overruled his funding freeze for multiple federal agencies. In her 63-page ruling, McElroy granted a preliminary injunction in favor of a coalition of nonprofit organizations suing the Trump administration allowing them to have their funding turned back on while litigation plays out.

Federal judge orders immediate thaw of climate, infrastructure funds By Alex Guillén – 04/15/2025 06:34 PM EDT – Politico – President Donald Trump does not have “unfettered power to hamstring in perpetuity” duly passed funding laws, the judge ruled. A federal judge ruled Tuesday that EPA, the Interior and Energy Departments and other agencies unlawfully froze funds under Democrats’ climate and infrastructure spending laws, ordering the agencies to immediately resume disbursing the money.

 U.S. District Judge Mary S. McElroy’s Opinion and Order is HERE.

Agencies do not have unlimited authority to further the President’s agenda, nor do they have unfettered power to hamstring in perpetuity two statutes passed by Congress during the previous administration. Chief Justice Roberts put it best:

Justice Holmes famously wrote that “men must turn square corners when they deal with the Government.” But it is also true, particularly when so much is at stake, that the Government should turn square corners in dealing with the people. Id. at 24.

Here, the Government failed to do so.

 

Green Bank Litigation Order

U.S. Dist. Judge Tanya Chutkan (Federal Dist. Court of DC) ordered EPA & Citibank to unfreeze funds – “Citibank must disburse any funds properly incurred before the mid-February suspension of Plaintiffs’ funds.” However, this Order has already been “stayed.”  Judge Chutkan’s Order follows (Opinion not yet released). The “stay” is described below.

CLIMATE UNITED FUND, Plaintiff, v. CITIBANK, N.A., et al., Order – April 15, 2025 — “EPA Defendants, and others in active concert or participation therewith, including officials at the U.S. Department of the Treasury, are ENJOINED from directly or indirectly impeding Defendant Citibank or from causing Defendant Citibank to deny, obstruct, delay, or otherwise limit access to funds in accounts established in connection with Plaintiffs’ grants, including funds in accounts established by Plaintiffs’ subgrantees.” 

Release of E.P.A. Climate Grants Is Paused by New Court Ruling – By Claire Brown; April 17, 2025 – New York Times – Hours after a federal judge ordered Citibank to pay out as much as $625 million in federal climate grant money that had been frozen at the Trump administration’s request, an appeals court stayed the decision. The grant money was frozen again before any was sent to recipients.

• It amounted to at least a temporary setback for nonprofit recipients of $20 billion in funds that were appropriated by Congress through the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act.
• The grants, which were part of the EPA’s Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund and are sometimes called “Green Bank” funds, were finalized before the November election, then frozen in mid-February at the request of the Trump administration.
• Brooke Durham, a spokeswoman for Climate United, a nonprofit that had been awarded almost $7 billion and has sued the administration for access to the funds, said the organization plans to oppose the stay, in hopes of avoiding laying off employees because they can’t pay them.

Judge blocks Trump EPA from clawing back billions in Biden-era climate grants – by Ella Lee and Rachel Frazin – The Hill – April 16, 2025 – A federal judge on Wednesday indefinitely blocked the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from clawing back billions of dollars in Biden-era climate grants. U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan said the EPA may not suspend or terminate the green grant awards nor limit access to those funds while a lawsuit challenging the effort to recoup the money moves forward.

• Judge Chutkan also ordered Citibank, which received the funds but refused to disburse them at the government’s request, to unfreeze the climate groups’ funds. However, Chutkan directed Citibank to refrain from releasing any funds until Thursday afternoon. After that, the groups will be able to use that money to finance climate-friendly projects. The administration has already appealed her decision, which she said would be explained in a forthcoming memorandum.  

The EPA can’t end grants from $20 billion Biden-era fund for climate-friendly projects, a judge says – by  MICHAEL PHILLIS – Associated Press – April 16, 2025 – A federal judge says some nonprofits awarded billions for a so-called green bank to finance clean energy and climate-friendly projects cannot have their contracts scrapped and must have access to some of the frozen money. The ruling is a defeat for President Donald Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency, which argues the program is rife with financial mismanagement.

Judge blocks Trump EPA from clawing back $14 billion in climate grants – by Maxine Joselow – Washington Post – April 16, 2025 – The judge’s decision is the latest twist in a high-stakes battle over Joe Biden’s signature climate law. A federal judge has temporarily blocked President Donald Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency from terminating at least $14 billion in climate grants approved under President Joe Biden. U.S. District Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of D.C. issued a preliminary injunction late Tuesday that prohibits the EPA from “unlawfully suspending or terminating” the grant awards. She also ordered Citibank, which was tasked with disbursing the funds, to release the money to the grant recipients.

2 Judges Order Federal Agencies to Unfreeze Climate Money – by Claire Brown and Karen Zraick – New York Times – April 16, 2025 – Two court rulings on Tuesday unfroze hundreds of millions of dollars in federal climate funds, a win for nonprofit groups that have been denied access to money they were promised under the Biden administration. Judge Tanya S. Chutkan of the federal court for the District of Columbia on Tuesday ordered the immediate release of up to $625 million in climate grants that have been frozen since mid-February under the $20 billion Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. The fund is also known as the “green bank” program and has been a major target of Lee Zeldin, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency.

 

PA DEP Brings Back Clean Energy Opportunity Spotlight (CEOS) Series

PA DEP is renewing its Spotlight Series – with need-to-know information funding and technical assistance programs designed to help PA’s homes, municipalities, and non-profits thrive in a diversified, affordable clean energy future. Upcoming Spotlights:

• April 24, 2025 @ 2:00PM — Greening Your Community with the Local Climate Action Plan (LCAP) and Shared Energy Manager (SEM) Programs – Register Here

• May 2025: TBD – Energy Audits and Upgrades with the Municipal Opportunities for Retrofits and Energy Efficiency (MORE) Program and Partners
• June 2025: TBD – Getting the Most Out of Your Home with a Residential Energy Assessment

 

PJM Report – Describes Pathway to Avoid Consumer Cost Increases

Tackling the PJM Electricity Cost Crisis An Analysis of the Benefits of PJM Interconnection Reform – Press Event with Evergreen Collaborative & Keystone Energy Efficiency Alliance – April 15, 2025. Highlights:

• Electricity customers in the PJM region (which spans all or parts of 13 Mid-Atlantic states and Washington, D.C.) are facing a looming cost crisis stemming from two major issues: (a) worsening barriers to building and connecting new generation resources needed to supply the electric grid, and (b) unprecedented increases in projected electricity demand.
• Accelerating new resource deployment will be necessary to reliably serve new and existing load without greatly increasing energy costs to electricity customers. Bringing online more clean energy resources will also be critical to reducing carbon dioxide emissions and meeting state climate goals.
• Power companies in the region are grappling with several barriers that impede their ability to connect new resources to the grid, including PJM’s interconnection queue delays, local permitting and siting processes, and global supply chain challenges.
• Synapse conducted power sector analysis, bill impact analysis, and job impact analysis to understand the benefits of resolving these queue constraints to customers and residents in the PJM states.
• The analysis shows that if PJM continues down its current path, residential electricity bills in the region are expected to increase by nearly 60 percent by the 2036–2040 period compared to historical levels.
• However, if PJM adequately implements interconnection reforms to enable the deployment of more cost-effective energy generation, largely comprised of clean energy sources, electricity bills are projected to decrease 7 percent by the same time period.

 

Impacts From Potential Repeals of Tax Credits & BIL/IRA Funding Freezes

E2: $8 Billion and 16 New Clean Energy Projects Abandoned in First 3 Months of 2025, Triple 2022-2024 Cancelled Investments Combined– April 17, 2025 — Investors cancelled, closed, or downsized nearly $8 billion in investments and 16 new large-scale factories in the first three months of 2025 amid escalating market uncertainty, and as Congress begins debate on repealing the tax credits. The $8 billion in cancelled investments since January are more than three times the total investments cancelled over the previous 30 months, according to E2’s latest Clean Economy Works monthly update. A full map and list of announcements is available at e2.org/announcements/. 

Solar advocates lobby on strong fundamentals amid political uncertainty – By Diana DiGangi – Utility Dive – April 16, 2025 – As Congress weighs tax incentive cuts, and tariffs drive up materials prices, the solar industry is emphasizing the technology’s low cost and fast deployment speed.

• One of the things that’s resonating with lawmakers now is that you don’t want to strand investments that have been made by American businesses in local economies,” said Sean Gallagher, senior vice president of policy at the Solar Energy Industries Association. “You don’t want these factories that have opened up in the last couple years to go dark.”
• “Around 80% of the projects that are most advanced in interconnection queues across the country are solar and storage,” Gallagher said. He pointed to recent comments from NextEra Energy president and CEO John Ketchum, who said that “renewables are ready to go right now” while gas generation is facing deployment delays due to factors like high demand and labor shortages.

 

The Other Shoes Drop on EPA’s “Exemption By Email” Rule

Trump exempts nearly 70 coal plants from Biden-era rule on mercury and other toxic air pollution – By  MATTHEW DALY – Associated Press – April 15, 2025

• The Trump administration has granted nearly 70 coal-fired power plants a two-year exemption from federal requirements to reduce emissions of toxic chemicals such as mercury, arsenic and benzene.
• A list quietly posted as of Tuesday on the Environmental Protection Agency’s website lists 47 power providers which operate at least 66 coal-fired plants that are receiving exemptions from the Biden-era rules under the Clean Air Act, including a regulation limiting air pollution from mercury and other toxins.
• The actions follow an executive order last week by President Donald Trump aimed at boosting the struggling coal industry, a reliable but polluting energy source that’s long been in decline.
• The exempted plants are owned by some of the nation’s largest power companies, including Talen Energy, Dominion Energy, NRG Energy and Southern Co.

The post BIL/IRA Implementation Digest — April 18, 2025 appeared first on Ohio River Valley Institute.

Feeling the urge to get involved this week? You are in luck. Here is all the Backbone Campaign related bannering happenings and more:

In order to match the absurdity and audacity of the news headlines, it calls for the need to turn up some of the messaging for the weekly bannering. 

Legislators in Ohio seek to establish a regulatory framework for the long-term, geologic storage of carbon dioxide in order to provide the clarity needed to attract developers to the state.  But, HB170 and SB136 go far beyond this simple goal. If passed, these two bills would significantly erode landowner rights in Ohio and expose Ohio taxpayers and the communities that would be host to these storage projects to significant risk.

 

Background

CO2 storage involves injecting and storing CO2 deep underground for hundreds or thousands of years. This CO2 is stored below impermeable caprock in empty pockets known as pore space. Proponents claim that this process will help reduce emissions in a variety of industrial processes, including power generation and the production of hydrogen from natural gas. Regional proposals like the Appalachian hydrogen hub and the Tri-State CCS Hub both require massive amounts of CO2 storage capacity.

Many states have established regulatory frameworks to help court carbon storage developers. These frameworks typically address:

• the relationship between rights to pore space, surface rights, and mineral interests, i.e. oil, gas, and coal
• ownership of pore space (the underground voids and cavities targeted for CO2 injection) and whether the rights to pore space can be leased, or sold
• the state permitting process for injection wells
• and the creation of storage funds to support regulatory activities, including permitting  and long-term maintenance.

However, the legislative proposals in Ohio go much further than establishing these basic frameworks.

 

Statutory Consolidation

HB170 and SB136 would allow companies to dump CO2 underneath homes and private property without the owner’s approval. This practice, referred to in the bills as “statutory consolidation,” is intended to help companies aggregate different areas of pore space into a single project to streamline development. Concerningly, the Ohio proposal allows these storage projects to proceed without support from all pore space owners impacted by the proposal, meaning that some people will be forced into these projects and will have CO2 dumped under their property and homes without their permission.

To put this in practical terms, let’s say that a developer is developing a storage project involving 1,000 acres and they secure leases from two owners (A and B, depicted in yellow) whose pore space amounts to 700 acres. The developer can then petition the state to grant them access to the pore space owned by the remaining 300 acres (owners C through L, depicted in red) without their approval, even though they represent a numerical majority — in other words, the rights of ten owners that collectively own 300 acres are trumped by two owners who collectively own 700 acres of pore space.

The bill does require developers to attempt to notify all pore space owners included in a proposal but the fact that these storage projects can proceed under people’s homes and property without their consent or awareness is very worrying. This provision is a serious threat to the rights of surface owners and it would be made worse if Ohio allows CO2 storage under large tracts of state-owned land, as has been happening in West Virginia. Because the threshold for project development is determined by acreage, not the actual number of consenting owners, small landowners would be especially at risk if these measures are approved.

In 2020, the rupture of a CO2 pipeline hospitalized 45 residents in Satartia, MS and forced 200 others to evacuate from their homes. Ohio communities forced to live near CO2 storage projects could be at risk of similar incidents, including pipeline ruptures and well-head blowouts. Allowing companies to trample on local rights in this way eliminates the most important protection for communities concerned about these projects: the ability to opt out.

 

Long-term liability

This legislation would also allow operators of CO2 storage projects to push almost all of their post-site closure liability onto the state, leaving the public on the hook for the ongoing maintenance and monitoring of these projects. Ohio is already facing nearly a billion dollars in abandoned mine land reclamation costs and tens of thousands of abandoned oil and gas wells. Assuming responsibility for large CO2 storage projects only adds to these immense legacy issues from the state’s industrial past. The long-term responsibility for projects as complex and dynamic as CO2 storage projects should stay with the companies that built and operated them.

Letting companies off the hook for these obligations invites them to cut corners in construction, record-keeping, and operations. If someone else is responsible for any problems that arise in the future, companies have less of an incentive to ensure the integrity of their projects.

Not all states with carbon storage regulations allow for the transfer of liability or forced unitization. By including these two provisions, state legislators are going out of their way to reward private companies at the expense of everyday Ohioans. The priorities of the legislators advancing these bills are made even clearer when considering the protections the bills provide to the oil and gas industry.

 

Protections for industry, not communities

While HB170 and SB136 are similar in many respects to legislation passed in neighboring West Virginia and Pennsylvania, these bills differ in one very important way: the degree to which the Ohio proposals protect fossil fuel development from CO2 storage projects, protections not provided to any other stakeholder group.

One example of this is a provision allowing subsurface owners concerned about impacts to mineral rights to object to the statutory consolidation of pore space. In contrast, pore space owners are unable to opt out of these storage projects if enough owners grant their approval, even if those consenting landowners represent a numerical minority. Additionally, a surface landowner that no longer owns or controls the rights to the pore space underneath their property would have no say in whether CO2 stored beneath their home or land.

The bill also requires pore space projects to be isolated from any existing or future oil and gas production and calls for setbacks establishing buffer areas to protect oil and gas interests from CO2 storage projects. No such protection is afforded to environmental justice communities, schools, churches, parks, or other sensitive areas.

Worse, the bills also grant the state “sole and exclusive authority” over CO2 storage projects, preempting any protective steps local communities may choose to take to ensure their safety as these projects move forward in the state.

In other words, this legislation disenfranchises other stakeholders, including people who object to CO2 storage under their properties and homes, and exposes the public to novel safety risks — all while protecting and empowering the oil and gas industry. 

The backers of these two legislative proposals may present these bills as mere clarifications of the regulatory environment but, if passed, these bills could place local communities in harm’s way and impact property owners, especially small ones.

The post Ohio House Bill 170 and Senate Bill 136: What You Should Know appeared first on Ohio River Valley Institute.

The post Call to Action: Join us for ‘Food In Our Hands’ to Demand a Right to Food appeared first on Landworkers Alliance.

Let’s talk about coal. Yes—coal, the black rock that powered much of America’s past. Lately, some leaders have been trying to bring it back in a big way. But here’s the truth: no matter what policies are put in place, the coal industry is on its way out—and trying to prop it up is only making things harder for regular folks like you and me.

Coal Can’t Compete Anymore

Even though the Trump administration recently rolled out a handful of orders to boost coal—including loosening environmental rules, offering loans for new coal plants, and opening up public lands for mining—the market is saying loud and clear: coal just doesn’t make sense anymore.

Why? It’s simple. Coal is expensive to use compared to other energy sources. Clean energy like wind and solar has gotten way cheaper, and natural gas is still pretty cheap too. Most coal plants can’t keep up. A recent report found that 99% of coal plants in the U.S. are more expensive to run than replacing them with local renewable energy like solar, wind, and battery storage.

So even if the government wants to save coal, the math just doesn’t work out. Energy companies are choosing cheaper, cleaner options—and for good reason.

We’re Paying the Price

Unfortunately, regular people are getting stuck with the bill. Because coal is becoming more expensive, utility companies are passing those higher costs on to customers.

Take West Virginia, for example. It still gets most of its electricity from coal. Between 2008 and 2019, the average electric bill there went up by more than $40 a month—almost four times more than the national average. That’s a lot of money for families who are already stretching every dollar.

Figure 1: West Virginia, which gets most of its electricity from coal, has the highest-rising electric bills in the nation. 

Share of coal in fuel mix vs. change in average monthly electricity bill, 2008-2019

Source: Ohio River Valley Institute, 2021

 

New Technologies Won’t Save It

Some people think new tech—like carbon capture, which is supposed to trap carbon pollution before it goes into the air—could make coal cleaner. But here’s the catch: these technologies are super expensive and don’t work all that well in practice.

Adding carbon capture would make coal-fired electricity cost three times more than it already does. So instead of making coal cheaper or cleaner, it could actually make your electric bill even higher. And that’s just not a smart investment when we have better, cheaper options on the table.

Coal Workers Deserve Better

It’s not just about the cost—it’s about the people, too. Coal miners have always done hard, dangerous work. And now, even their safety is being put at risk. Cuts to federal safety agencies under the Trump administration mean fewer inspections and less support for worker health.

Black lung disease, caused by breathing in coal dust, is back on the rise—especially in Central Appalachia. Nearly 1 in 5 miners there now has it. These workers deserve protection and a future beyond the mines.

A Better Path Forward

But here’s the good news: there is a way forward—one that doesn’t involve clinging to a dying industry.

Some communities are already leading the way. Centralia, Washington was once a coal town, but when its coal plant was set to close, leaders got smart. They invested in clean energy, energy efficiency programs, and education. The result? More jobs, higher incomes, and a growing population—faster than the national average.

We could see something similar in places like West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Kentucky, and Ohio. Cleaning up polluted land and water left behind by coal could create over 13,000 good jobs in those states alone. And investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency could lower electricity costs and help coal communities thrive again.

The Bottom Line

Trying to save coal isn’t just a losing battle—it’s costing us big time. Higher electric bills, unsafe working conditions, and missed opportunities for job growth are just a few of the consequences.

But if we stop looking backward and start investing in the future—clean energy, safer jobs, and healthy communities—we all stand to win.

The post Why Trying to Save Coal Is Costing Us More Than We Think appeared first on Ohio River Valley Institute.

From the desk of Anne Petermann, GJEP’s Executive Director and Co-founder:  April has traditionally been a busy month for Global Justice Ecology Project.  It is the month in the Northern Hemisphere when the reawakening of spring energizes protest movements and actions for social and ecological justice. GJEP is proud to have been on the cutting edge […]

On this episode of Breaking Green we speak with GJEP’s Executive Director Anne Petermann about the human rights delegation to Chile organized by GJEP last October. We investigated the efforts by Indigenous Mapuche People to reclaim their traditional territories, and about the state repression and violence they are experiencing as a result of their efforts. […]

In Ancestral Future, the Brazilian Indigenous leader and philosopher Ailton Krenak recounts the story of the Maxakali community, an Indigenous group from the eastern rivers of Brazil. He describes how, despite being dispossessed and forcibly removed from their land, the Maxakali retain a remarkable ability to recall and narrate the presence of the living beings—animals and plants—that once shared their territory even though they no longer share it with them. Krenak emphasizes that this act of remembrance is more than nostalgia; it is a way of remaining rooted, or sustaining the experience of place. Even as modernity expands, imposing an abstract, homogenized notion of space—a void to be filled with ‘development’—the Maxakali resist this erasure by preserving their connection to nature through storytelling and memory. Their ability to inhabit, even in displacement, serves as a powerful testament to how communities, sometimes against all odds, retain their dignity, their sense of belonging, and their past and future as living, continuous realities. I often find myself returning to this thought as a profound example of resilience in the face of development and its multiple faces of dispossession.

The development enterprise, now 76 years old, has been remarkably effective not in solving poverty, but in producing and perpetuating it. As Majid Rahnema argues in The Development Dictionary, the term had multiple meanings before January 20, 1949. Poverty could be a voluntary choice, a form of exclusion from the community, a public humiliation, or a lack of protection. It was only with the expansion of industrial and mercantile economies that poverty became redefined as the opposite of ‘rich’ or a measure of wealth —a condition of material deficiency requiring intervention. The proposed solution, of course, was development— understood as the systematic deployment of industrial production, a wage-based economy, and the positivist advancement of technology and scientific knowledge, concentrated in the hands of professionals and experts. This logic did not simply enclose the means of production or subsistence, as Marxist thinkers might have predicted; it went further, creating a system of dependencies that rendered people perpetually in need of development itself—an alienating force that reshaped entire ways of being into something incomplete, always lacking, and requiring external intervention. Despite this there are many grassroots, autonomous and alternative movements resisting and creating alternatives to the development enterprise.

For five days in February, I had the privilege of joining land defenders, grassroots movements, Indigenous Peoples, and communities from 20 countries across the Global South in Port Edward, along South Africa’s Wild Coast, to discuss radical democracy, autonomy, and self-determination. Hosted by the Global Tapestry of Alternatives, the Academy of Democratic Modernity, the Amadiba Crisis Committee, and the Pan African Ecofeminist Alliance WoMin, this gathering was more than an exchange of ideas—it was a convergence of struggles, lived experiences, and collective visions for autonomy. Despite the participants’ diverse backgrounds, languages, and contexts, a striking commonality emerged: a clear and resounding rejection of the development enterprise. Over the past 40 years, what began as a slow erosion of the means of subsistence has escalated into a full-scale war against it. Development, far from being a means of upliftment, has proven to be an economic and political project of alienation, dispossession, and enforced dependency—disrupting ways of life, dismantling communal autonomy, and deepening systemic inequalities. This gathering reinforced that resistance is not just about rejecting this imposed model, but about reclaiming the power to define and create our own futures.

Participants at the inauguration of the Global Confluence on Radical Democracy, Autonomy and Self- determination’, Port Edward, South Africa, 2-6 February 2025.

 

What is the crisis we are facing?

Communities and grassroots movements striving to maintain their autonomy and practice radical or direct democracy are facing unprecedented challenges in an era of extreme inequality, shaped by centuries of exploitation and dispossession. The intersecting crises of climate collapse, economic inequality, and rising authoritarianism are intensifying new forms of oppression and violence—particularly against the ‘poor’ and marginalized communities produced by decades of development policies. The state has become central to enforcing the disciplinary, counterinsurgency, and social engineering technologies necessary to sustain capitalist extraction. At the same time, the far right has weaponized capitalism’s crisis to push liberal democracy toward xenophobia, racism, and hatred which serve as tools to entrench elite and corporate-driven forms of extreme neoliberalism.

Meanwhile, leftist and progressive governments have largely resigned themselves to crisis management, acting as administrators of capitalism’s systemic failures rather than challengers of its logic. In countries like Mexico, the rapid expansion of militarization and state-deployed social engineering technologies reinforces what Leanne Betasamosake Simpson calls the extraction-assimilation system—a model in which people, their knowledges, nature, and the more-than-human world are treated as resources to be rendered extractable. As these dynamics unfold, grassroots resistance remains critical, not only to oppose these structures but to reclaim autonomy and sustain alternative ways of being and relating beyond the confines of capitalist and state control.

At the heart of these struggles is a demand for more than rights or state recognition— a framework that ultimately reproduces condescending forms of hospitality, tolerating otherness while reinforcing systems of alienation through participatory and democratic mechanisms. Instead, these movements are fighting for radical autonomy. Paraphrasing the rich debates and discussions held during the meeting, the prevailing sentiment was clear: “We cannot ask or wait for the state to act. If we did, we would be long dead before development arrived. Instead, we must build, reclaim, or maintain systems of self-governance to sustain our territorialities.”

The concept of territory was central to this understanding. Participants emphasized that land and place are not only essential for constructing autonomous systems of self-determination and radical democracy, but also embody deep historical, epistemic, and ontological relationships—connecting people to nature and to ways of being that precede and resist capitalist modernity.

The meeting reinforced what many have long argued: the race toward development is a race toward deeper dispossession. This is not just about the extraction of resources; it is an increasingly violent system that enforces total alienation from the means of subsistence. As Ivan Illich warned, development is a war on subsistence—where in the logic of capitalism, economy becomes synonymous with scarcity. The crisis we face today is not merely economic or political, it is existential.

Participants of the Global Confluence on Radical Democracy, Autonomy and Self- determination’ in a visit to the Xolobeni Community, hosted by the Amadiba Crisis Committee (AAC). Photo by Ashish Kothari.

This ‘modern’ state system, as Ailton Krenak argues, has become highly proficient in the production of poverty and perpetual precarity by alienating people from their lands—whether through direct displacement or the slow contamination and degradation of their territories— forcing them into urban peripheries where no connection to autonomous livelihoods remains. Even institutions like the World Bank have acknowledged this trend, which is particularly visible in countries like Mexico, where nearly two thirds of those classified as poor under modern definitions live near or in cities. The state, in its contemporary form, does not function as a protector but as a facilitator of dispossession, offering ‘solutions’ that ultimately serve corporate and elite interests at the expense of communities.

How are communities responding?

While the term radical democracy is not one that communities use to describe their own decision-making processes, participants in the meeting in South Africa emphasized that autonomy and self-determination are not about seeking state recognition, but about reclaiming the power to govern and sustain life on communities’ own terms. The ‘radical’ in the term points towards the multiple struggles at the grassroots where alternatives are actively breaking away from liberal institutions and the extractivism that manufactures dependence. The response to this crisis is not uniform, but it is clear: grassroots communities are rejecting  formal education, healthcare, housing, transport and other expert-led systems that produce “needy” individuals. Instead, they are building self-sufficient networks of mutual aid, reclaiming food sovereignty, energy autonomy, traditional healing, learning and collective (re) inhabitation among many other direct challenges to capitalism and development’s monopolization of basic needs.

Many movements are resisting so-called “green transitions,” which disguise new forms of extraction under the banner of sustainability and climate change ‘mitigation’ and ‘adaptation’. Others are directly challenging the legal frameworks that reduce collective rights to manageable, individual, co-optable categories, reliant on expert, state or market produced services. Paraphrasing what some of the  participants argued: “collective and Indigenous peoples rights cannot be limited to human rights. These rights are based on the rights of nature, on our relationships with territory and place, and on our capacity to determine how we relate to and in these places.”

This response, again is not homogenous, but entails a radical plurality of actions, struggles and movements reclaiming dignity: building radical alternatives that are rooted in creating a sense of place and communitarian entanglements that redefine a sense of value produced through a commonly defined good life.

A tapestry of alternatives and radical democracy, made by participants of the Global Confluence on Radical Democracy, Autonomy and Self- determination’. Photo by Ashish Kothari.

The gathering highlighted the vital role of grassroots struggles in advancing radical democracy and emphasized the urgent need for academia, NGOs, and civil society to reconsider how they engage with these movements. Too often, these institutions, even with good intentions, align with the development agenda by treating knowledge as extractable and transferable, reinforcing the same systems of power that communities resist. In contrast, the struggles represented assert that knowledge is not the exclusive domain of universities: communities possess their own theories and political visions, rooted in everyday resistance and collective traditions.

The central question is no longer whether radical democracy is possible, but how to sustain it in a world bent on its erasure. This calls for a fundamental shift: from supporting movements through hierarchical models to co-creating with them in ways that dismantle the extractive-assimilation system. The struggle for autonomy is not merely opposition to development but a process of rebuilding social fabric through mutual aid, reciprocity, and self-determination.

As the confluence in South Africa demonstrated, these struggles are not isolated—they are interconnected nodes in a global movement toward radical democracy. As several  of the participants expressed: “We should no longer seek recognition from the state, but from each other.” From Indigenous communities defending their lands against extractivist projects, to urban collectives reclaiming the capacity of decision making from the state, what emerges is a vision of autonomy built on global solidarity that moves beyond reform to the active construction of new worlds. Autonomy and radical democracy thus cease to be abstract concepts: they entail the lived experiences of those who refuse to be governed and ‘developed’.

The post Reclaiming radical democracy in times of a civilizatory crisis appeared first on Undisciplined Environments.

VANCOUVER — The ongoing tariff drama created by President Donald Trump has turned economic diversification into a national imperative for America’s northern neighbour.

Fortunately, Canada has trade agreements with 60% of the global economy, making it well positioned to lessen its reliance on U.S. markets. But as Canadian governments and companies look to make strategic and long-term investment decisions with these trading partners in mind, Canada must accurately assess where their economies are headed.

Accordingly, a new Clean Energy Canada analysis finds that among Canada’s 10 largest non-U.S. trade partners, all of them have net-zero commitments and carbon pricing systems, and roughly half apply carbon border adjustments on imports and have domestic EV requirements reshaping their car markets.

Taken together, these measures send a clear, unmistakable signal. Carbon border adjustments, for example, levy a charge based on the carbon intensity of a good’s production and therefore incentivize low-carbon products from importing nations like Canada.

Meanwhile, the existence of a carbon price and a requirement for more EVs means that a market is weaning itself off fossil fuels, and thus demand for oil and gas will see a decline, while interest in clean energy imports and low-carbon products will increase.

A number of think tanks and business groups have analyzed and identified opportunities in Canada’s clean economy, including but not limited to clean electricity generation and transmission, critical minerals, EVs and batteries, low-carbon heavy industry, and value-added agricultural and forest products, all of which are explored in the report.

To realize Canada’s potential, federal and provincial governments should take a number of important steps, including:

• accelerating regulatory and permitting processes for clean growth projects,
• recognizing green collar worker credentials across provinces,
• accelerating the build-out of critical trade, energy, and transportation infrastructure,
• prioritizing interprovincial electricity grid interties in strategic regions,
• supporting demand for clean goods that benefit Canadian suppliers,
• and promoting Canadian businesses abroad and Canada as a destination for investment under the banner of a “Clean Canada” brand.

As The World Next Door concludes, seizing the clean economic opportunity is not about starting over, but about leveraging pre-existing industries and advantages in a way that sets Canada up for a sustainable future.

RESOURCES

Report | The World Next Door

The post Canada’s 10 largest non-U.S. trade partners focused on building clean economies, and Canada can deliver: report appeared first on Clean Energy Canada.