News Feeds

Bills signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom include regulations aimed at ensuring data centers pay for infrastructure needed to serve them and bear a larger share of wildfire mitigation and liability costs.

Print article Share Article Contents Expand menu

• Nepal’s needs
• Requests vs pledges
• ‘Rapid response’

The Nepali government has requested $20m from the UN fund for “loss and damage”, following the devastating floods that hit the country in late August.

This amounts to just 0.7% of the $2.7bn it has estimated in “physical damage” to infrastructure and “economic losses” from the flooding, according to Carbon Brief analysis.

The $20m request would, nevertheless, make Nepal the fourth-largest claimant to the UN loss-and-damage fund, which is intended to help deal with climate-related disasters.

Developing countries have already made 176 applications to the UN fund for responding to loss and damage, requesting, in total, $2.8bn to help recover from a variety of damaging events, such as drought, floods and storms.

Yet, to date, predominantly developed nations have only pledged $0.8bn to support the fund.

This means requests to the fund are already three times larger than the total amount pledged, raising questions about its potential to respond to emergencies.

As yet, no funding has been paid out of the fund to developing countries grappling with intensifying and more frequent climate change-induced disasters since it was established in 2023.

Nepal’s needs

On 26 August, Nepal was hit by flash floods following a catastrophic rock-ice avalanche in the Himalayan border region. The flooding has killed more than 1,400 people, with thousands still missing. 

Days later, the Nepali government sought an “urgent response” from the board of the UN fund for climate-driven loss and damage. 

It subsequently requested $20m in “financial compensation” from the fund. This is the maximum amount that can currently be requested for a single project.

“Loss and damage” is a term used to describe how climate change is causing serious and, in many cases, irreversible impacts around the world. Nations established the UN fund in 2023, after decades of effort by climate-vulnerable nations.

Nepal’s national disaster management authority has now released an extensive rapid preliminary assessment of “damage and needs” from the floods.

As the chart below shows, Nepal’s $20m loss-and-damage claim would only cover 0.7% of what authorities describe as $2.7bn in “total damage and loss” from the floods.

When accounting for another $4.8bn in “recovery and reconstruction” costs – part of how loss and damage is internationally defined – then Nepal’s $20m claim would be just 0.3% of the needs it estimates.

Reacting to the analysis, Nepal’s climate negotiator Raju Pandit Chhetri tells Carbon Brief that the country’s $20m request was for “rapid response”, adding: 

“That money is going to be a peanut if it was to be invested into reconstruction.”

Requests vs pledges

Vulnerable, developing countries have long argued that developed nations should be held responsible for loss and damage, while countries such as the US have blocked moves that could have led to them being liable for climate-related damages

From December 2025 until July 2026, developing countries made 176 applications to the loss-and-damage fund, requesting over $2.8bn in assistance.

So far, predominantly developed countries have pledged only $822m to the fund. (Some nations that are not categorised as “developed” under the UN, such as the UAE and South Korea, have also committed funds.)

Funding requests from developing countries to date are, therefore, more than triple what has been pledged.

Apart from Nepal’s new request, “requested” data is based on the project pipeline as of 29 June 2026. Analysis by Carbon Brief.

Moreover, only around half of the money pledged so far has been paid into the fund by donor nations, with large sums from France, Italy and the UAE still outstanding.

The fund has made $342m available in its initial funding round in July 2026. However, as of September, no money from the fund has been distributed to any countries facing climate-related disasters.

#gform_wrapper_4[data-form-index="0"].gform-theme,[data-parent-form="4_0"]{--gf-color-primary: #204ce5;--gf-color-primary-rgb: 32, 76, 229;--gf-color-primary-contrast: #fff;--gf-color-primary-contrast-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-primary-darker: #001AB3;--gf-color-primary-lighter: #527EFF;--gf-color-secondary: #fff;--gf-color-secondary-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-secondary-contrast: #112337;--gf-color-secondary-contrast-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-secondary-darker: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-secondary-lighter: #FFFFFF;--gf-color-out-ctrl-light: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.1);--gf-color-out-ctrl-light-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-out-ctrl-light-darker: rgba(104, 110, 119, 0.35);--gf-color-out-ctrl-light-lighter: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark: #585e6a;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark-rgb: 88, 94, 106;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark-darker: #112337;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark-lighter: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65);--gf-color-in-ctrl: #fff;--gf-color-in-ctrl-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-in-ctrl-contrast: #112337;--gf-color-in-ctrl-contrast-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-in-ctrl-darker: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-in-ctrl-lighter: #FFFFFF;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary: #204ce5;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-rgb: 32, 76, 229;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-contrast: #fff;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-contrast-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-darker: #001AB3;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-lighter: #527EFF;--gf-color-in-ctrl-light: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.1);--gf-color-in-ctrl-light-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-in-ctrl-light-darker: rgba(104, 110, 119, 0.35);--gf-color-in-ctrl-light-lighter: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark: #585e6a;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark-rgb: 88, 94, 106;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark-darker: #112337;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark-lighter: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65);--gf-radius: 3px;--gf-font-size-secondary: 14px;--gf-font-size-tertiary: 13px;--gf-icon-ctrl-number: url("data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg width='8' height='14' viewBox='0 0 8 14' fill='none' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%3E%3Cpath fill-rule='evenodd' clip-rule='evenodd' d='M4 0C4.26522 5.96046e-08 4.51957 0.105357 4.70711 0.292893L7.70711 3.29289C8.09763 3.68342 8.09763 4.31658 7.70711 4.70711C7.31658 5.09763 6.68342 5.09763 6.29289 4.70711L4 2.41421L1.70711 4.70711C1.31658 5.09763 0.683417 5.09763 0.292893 4.70711C-0.0976311 4.31658 -0.097631 3.68342 0.292893 3.29289L3.29289 0.292893C3.48043 0.105357 3.73478 0 4 0ZM0.292893 9.29289C0.683417 8.90237 1.31658 8.90237 1.70711 9.29289L4 11.5858L6.29289 9.29289C6.68342 8.90237 7.31658 8.90237 7.70711 9.29289C8.09763 9.68342 8.09763 10.3166 7.70711 10.7071L4.70711 13.7071C4.31658 14.0976 3.68342 14.0976 3.29289 13.7071L0.292893 10.7071C-0.0976311 10.3166 -0.0976311 9.68342 0.292893 9.29289Z' fill='rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65)'/%3E%3C/svg%3E");--gf-icon-ctrl-select: url("data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg width='10' height='6' viewBox='0 0 10 6' fill='none' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%3E%3Cpath fill-rule='evenodd' clip-rule='evenodd' d='M0.292893 0.292893C0.683417 -0.097631 1.31658 -0.097631 1.70711 0.292893L5 3.58579L8.29289 0.292893C8.68342 -0.0976311 9.31658 -0.0976311 9.70711 0.292893C10.0976 0.683417 10.0976 1.31658 9.70711 1.70711L5.70711 5.70711C5.31658 6.09763 4.68342 6.09763 4.29289 5.70711L0.292893 1.70711C-0.0976311 1.31658 -0.0976311 0.683418 0.292893 0.292893Z' fill='rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65)'/%3E%3C/svg%3E");--gf-icon-ctrl-search: url("data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg width='640' height='640' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%3E%3Cpath d='M256 128c-70.692 0-128 57.308-128 128 0 70.691 57.308 128 128 128 70.691 0 128-57.309 128-128 0-70.692-57.309-128-128-128zM64 256c0-106.039 85.961-192 192-192s192 85.961 192 192c0 41.466-13.146 79.863-35.498 111.248l154.125 154.125c12.496 12.496 12.496 32.758 0 45.254s-32.758 12.496-45.254 0L367.248 412.502C335.862 434.854 297.467 448 256 448c-106.039 0-192-85.962-192-192z' fill='rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65)'/%3E%3C/svg%3E");--gf-label-space-y-secondary: var(--gf-label-space-y-md-secondary);--gf-ctrl-border-color: #686e77;--gf-ctrl-size: var(--gf-ctrl-size-md);--gf-ctrl-label-color-primary: #112337;--gf-ctrl-label-color-secondary: #112337;--gf-ctrl-choice-size: var(--gf-ctrl-choice-size-md);--gf-ctrl-checkbox-check-size: var(--gf-ctrl-checkbox-check-size-md);--gf-ctrl-radio-check-size: var(--gf-ctrl-radio-check-size-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-font-size: var(--gf-ctrl-btn-font-size-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-padding-x: var(--gf-ctrl-btn-padding-x-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-size: var(--gf-ctrl-btn-size-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-border-color-secondary: #686e77;--gf-ctrl-file-btn-bg-color-hover: #EBEBEB;--gf-field-img-choice-size: var(--gf-field-img-choice-size-md);--gf-field-img-choice-card-space: var(--gf-field-img-choice-card-space-md);--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-size: var(--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-size-md);--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-icon-size: var(--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-icon-size-md);--gf-field-pg-steps-number-color: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.8);}

NameThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Free fortnightly newsletter

.preheader p{ margin-top: 0; font-family: 'PT Sans', sans-serif; font-weight: var(--type--3--font-weight--bold); color: var(--button--color); font-size: var(--button--font-size, inherit); } .newsletter-inline{ display: flex; border: solid 1px #333333; padding: 1em; background: #ffffff; } .inline-email{ display:inline-block; margin-right:1em; margin-top:0 !important; margin-bottom:0.5em; } #field_submit{ display:inline-block; margin-top:0 !important; } .gform_wrapper .gfield+.gfield{ margin-top:0 } Email gform.initializeOnLoaded( function() {gformInitSpinner( 4, 'http://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg', false );jQuery('#gform_ajax_frame_4').on('load',function(){var contents = jQuery(this).contents().find('*').html();var is_postback = contents.indexOf('GF_AJAX_POSTBACK') >= 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find('#gform_wrapper_4');var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find('#gform_confirmation_wrapper_4').length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf('gformRedirect(){') >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery('html').css('margin-top'), 10) + parseInt(jQuery('body').css('margin-top'), 10) + 100;if(is_form){jQuery('#gform_wrapper_4').html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass('gform_validation_error')){jQuery('#gform_wrapper_4').addClass('gform_validation_error');} else {jQuery('#gform_wrapper_4').removeClass('gform_validation_error');}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ jQuery(document).scrollTop(jQuery('#gform_wrapper_4').offset().top - mt); }, 50 );if(window['gformInitDatepicker']) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window['gformInitPriceFields']) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery('#gform_source_page_number_4').val();gformInitSpinner( 4, 'http://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg', false );jQuery(document).trigger('gform_page_loaded', [4, current_page]);window['gf_submitting_4'] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find('.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK').html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery('#gform_wrapper_4').replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).scrollTop(jQuery('#gf_4').offset().top - mt);jQuery(document).trigger('gform_confirmation_loaded', [4]);window['gf_submitting_4'] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery('#gform_confirmation_message_4').text());}else{jQuery('#gform_4').append(contents);if(window['gformRedirect']) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger("gform_pre_post_render", [{ formId: "4", currentPage: "current_page", abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( "gform_wrapper_4" ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( "span" ); visibilitySpan.id = "gform_visibility_test_4"; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( "afterend", visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( "gform_visibility_test_4" ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 4, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === 'attributes' && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ 'style', 'class' ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );

According to Carbon Brief analysis, off the 176 loss-and-damage fund requests received from 118 countries, more than 60% are from least developed countries  – such as Nepal – and small-island nations. So far, each individual funding request is capped at $20m. 

The flood-related request is Nepal’s fourth appeal to the fund and, as the chart below shows, this makes it the fourth-largest claimant overall. 

Apart from Nepal’s new request, data is based on the project pipeline as of 29 June 2026. Analysis by Carbon Brief.

Nine other countries have made multiple requests to the fund. Madagascar – hit by back-to-back cyclones after a prolonged drought – has made six requests in total. 

Drought-ravaged Suriname, Ecuador, Brazil and Barbados have specified that their funding requests are part of an “emergency response”.

‘Rapid response’

Nepal’s $20m claim has sparked a conversation on climate justice and the ability of the loss-and-damage fund to deliver, in the face of increasingly frequent extreme-weather events.

In a letter sent five days after the disaster, Nepal’s finance minister Dr Swarnim Wagle appealed to the fund’s board to mobilise an “urgent response” that would “signal” that the fund:

“[I]s capable of responding with humanity, speed, flexibility and solidarity when climate-vulnerable countries face losses and damages beyond their capacity to address alone.”

Board members from Asia-Pacific and African countries wrote a letter in support of the Himalayan country in crisis, urging the board to convene and “potentially agree to a provisional set-aside allocation of resources to support rapid response funding for Nepal”. 

They pointed out that the board’s response to Nepal could offer “procedural lessons” in how to strengthen its “rapid-response” to sudden-onset extreme-weather events. Such support is explicitly part of the fund’s mandate.

On 14 September, developed-country members of the fund’s board wrote that they supported a “consultation” on Nepal, but made no commitments in terms of actual funding. 

Harjeet Singh, loss-and-damage expert and global convenor of the Fill the Fund campaign, tells Carbon Brief that the fund’s board deals with most funding requests as regular projects, rather than emergencies. Singh continues: 

“Developed countries gave a really cold response to Nepal’s request. They have not addressed it because they know that if this happens once, they are going to be under pressure all the time. This is unacceptable.” 

Meanwhile, BBC News reported that Nepal plans to use climate attribution studies to strengthen its claim.

According to a rapid attribution study by World Weather Attribution and climate experts who spoke to Carbon Brief, factors such as glacial retreat and permafrost thaw that played a key role in the disaster have been linked to climate change. A full attribution study is pending. 

Nepal’s prime minister Balendra Shah will address the UN general assembly on 24 September and is expected to raise issues around climate justice, loss and damage and the vulnerability of mountain countries.

The next board meeting of the loss and damage fund is on 15 December, two months from now, and a fortnight after the conclusion of COP31 in Turkey.

Pandit Chhetri tells Carbon Brief:

“It’s a shame that, until now, the fund has not been able to even give a penny to developing countries. And, starkly, the event in Nepal only demonstrates why this kind of fund is so important for highly vulnerable, poor, developing countries.”

Pandit Chhetri adds that, after nearly three weeks since the disaster, there is yet to be a decision on the request and that the country has “only received messages of solidarity”, with no assurance of rapid response funds. He says that it is “quite an interesting scene for [us] to observe”, adding:

“If the fund cannot respond in a crisis like this for a country like Nepal – when you have this massive destruction and devastation – then what is the use of the fund itself? That’s why it is a test for the fund, though the resources are limited.”

Related Analysis: India’s power-sector emissions flat for two years due to clean-energy surge 17.09.2026 Emissions World falling short on 22 of 23 nature targets for 2030, says draft UN report 29.07.2026 International policy Analysis: 84% of nations miss deadline to identify ‘nature-harming’ subsidies by 2025  28.07.2026 International policy Access to finance ‘strengthens climate resilience’ among sub-Saharan women 24.07.2026 International policy

The post Analysis: Nepal’s $20m ‘loss-and-damage’ claim only covers 0.7% of flood costs appeared first on Carbon Brief.

The order called out Duke’s commitment to the White House Ratepayer Protection Pledge, saying the utility had not established the specific extent to which the proposed facility is intended to serve data centers.

The complaint at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is part of a trend of states seeking to end an extra 0.5% return utilities can earn for voluntarily joining a transmission organization.

Wetland plants grown on the surface of wastewater treatment lagoons can reduce greenhouse gas emissions from these water bodies by more than one-quarter, according to a new study. These so-called “floating wetlands” may be an elegant solution that works with existing infrastructure to address a growing emissions hotspot.

Wastewater treatment is responsible for 1.6% of global greenhouse gas emissions. As economic development brings better sanitation to more of the world’s population, this climate impact is also increasing. “Wastewater treatment solves one environmental problem by cleaning dirty water, but creates another by emitting greenhouse gases,” says study team member Lukas Schuster, who studies nature-based climate solutions at RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia.

Floating wetlands, in which native reeds and other marsh plants are planted on buoyant artificial structures with their roots dangling in the water, are becoming a widespread tool for soaking up excess nutrients such as nitrogen and phosphorus in wastewater lagoons. These open-air ponds temporarily store treated water before it is released into adjacent waterways, reused for irrigation, or undergoes further treatment to be recycled into drinking water.

Researchers have suspected that floating wetlands might also reduce greenhouse gas emissions from the surface of wastewater lagoons. In the first large-scale, real-world test of this hunch, Schuster and his collaborators constructed a floating wetland the size of one-and-a-half tennis courts on portion of a wastewater lagoon in southeastern Australia. They monitored water quality and greenhouse gas emissions from the surface of the water for two years.

The floating wetlands reduced carbon dioxide emissions off the surface of the lagoon by up to 36%, methane up to 66%, and nitrous oxide by up to 18% compared to an adjacent portion of the lagoon without a floating wetland, the researchers found. Overall greenhouse gas emissions are reduced by up to 31%.

 

.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:Designer bacteria clean wastewater and generate power—at the same time

 

“One of the biggest surprises was how quickly greenhouse gas emissions declined after the floating wetland was installed,” Schuster says. The researchers expected that emissions would only be dampened after nutrients were removed from the water. In fact, greenhouse gas emissions declines were seen four to seven months into the experiment, but nutrient reductions only emerged after about a year.

It’s not yet clear exactly how the plants work their magic. “We suspect that interactions between plant roots, microbial communities, and greenhouse gas production and consumption may be important, but targeted measurements are needed to test these mechanisms,” says Schuster.

And there are still some kinks to be worked out. Trimming the plants—necessary to promote regrowth and maximize nutrient uptake—tends to trigger spikes of methane release, so the researchers want to figure out how to minimize that result. The harvested material, which amounted to nearly one metric ton in the current study, also needs to be converted into some form of longer-term carbon storage to make sure the system truly benefits the climate (the researchers suggest biochar).

Schuster and his team are now looking at adding floating wetlands to farm ponds. “These systems receive substantial inputs of nutrients and organic matter from livestock and can have high greenhouse gas emissions relative to their size,” Schuster says. The new study will help assess whether floating wetlands are a climate solution that could be applied to various types of aquatic systems, he says.

Sources: Schuster L. et al. “Constructed floating wetlands cut greenhouse gas emissions from wastewater lagoons.” Journal of Environmental Management 2026.

Image: Courtesy of Lukas Schuster.

 

AI data centre growth presents an opportunity for Ontario to build the electricity system it needs for the future. With the right policies, private investment from this emerging industry can help bring new clean power, storage, and grid...

Headline News:

• “Final Turbine Installed At Revolution Wind” • Ørsted has installed the final turbine at the 704-MW Revolution Wind array off the coast of Connecticut and Rhode Island. The 65-turbine wind farm began exporting power to the grid in March of this year, and Ørsted plans on reaching full commercial operation later this year. [reNews]

Revolution Wind ( Ørsted image)

• “Kallas Urges EU Countries To Bolster Red Sea Mission As Houthi Threats Mount” • EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas has asked EU countries to strengthen the Aspides mission in the Red Sea, as threats from Houthis to navigation in the Bab el-Mandeb increase. The strait is crucial for trade routes between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean Sea. [Euronews]
• “Tackling Contrails Could Avoid Ten Years of Aviation-Related Climate Warming” • Contrails left by planes reflect heat back to the Earth, adding to global warming at a similar level to the CO₂ emissions of aviation. A report by Klima Consulting finds that preventing their formation could delay aviation-related global warming by ten years. [CleanTechnica]
• “Nvidia Chip-Use Emissions Match That Of A Russian State Coal Producer, Report Says” • Emissions from the use of Nvidia’s chips could equal those of burning coal sold by Russian Coal, a Russian state-owned company, a report says. Nvidia’s supply chain emissions have risen by 725% since 2020, an increase of about 9.4 million tonnes of CO₂. [Euronews]
• “Donald Trump Loses In Court, Solar Energy Funds To Be Reinstated” • A Trump-appointed judge on the US District Court for the District of Rhode Island ruled against the Trump regime’s attempt to withhold $7 billion of funding for projects for solar energy. The funding had been for the Solar For All program. The Sierra Club commented. [CleanTechnica]

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

During the military dictatorships, Mejía faced political persecution because of her trade-union and organizational activities. She died on August 29, 2026, at the age of 77.

The post Bolivia: The National Federation of Indigenous Women (Bartolina Sisa) remembers the life and legacy of Lucila Mejía Soto appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Three education unions have now set up strike votes for November. The Elementary Teachers Federation of Ontario announced on September 18 that their 84,000 teacher...

The post OECTA, ETFO and CUPE-OSBCU set strike votes for November first appeared on Spring.

Amtrak and Canal Edge are building a modern maintenance facility to support passenger rail in Chicago and across the Midwest. Read more.

Beneath the Rocky Mountains, the Sierra Nevada, and the deserts in between, lies a massive energy source — and it isn’t a fossil fuel. The smashing and separating of tectonic plates that produced many of the West’s most dramatic landscapes have also allowed heat from the planet’s core to rise nearly to the surface. Now, an explosion of new geothermal energy companies wants to drill into the Earth and capture that heat for clean electricity. These companies have new technologies to better reach the heat, and a massive new customer base: energy-hungry data centers.

Tech giants seeking to build data centers while meeting their climate goals see geothermal as a promising option because it can produce consistent power around the clock, unlike solar and wind. Meta and Google have signed agreements with geothermal start-ups in New Mexico and Utah, including a deal announced this month in which Google agreed to buy 396 megawatts from Fervo’s soon-to-come-online Cape Station facility in southwest Utah, enough to power around 430,000 households. The federal government also received record per-acre bids from developers seeking to build geothermal on public lands in the Mountain West this year. New geothermal technology borrowed from the oil and gas industry, along with California’s renewable-energy goals, have helped drive the boom, but experts say demand from tech companies is a major factor. 

“A lot of these companies have clean power goals, though they are not firm goals when other factors are on the line,” said Wilson Ricks, who manages the electricity program at the climate-focused nonprofit Clean Air Task Force. “Constant power, the kind that geothermal can provide, is really key to supplying data center growth as cleanly as possible, and specifically for providing an alternative to just building lots of gas turbines.”

These new geothermal projects are located in dry Western states because of their geology, but they face an ironic practical challenge: Most new geothermal technologies need water to produce power. If they’re serving data centers, that water use comes on top of the water that data centers pipe in to prevent their servers from overheating. Meeting Western data centers’ demand with geothermal may require careful planning, given the region’s limited water resources, and innovations to make geothermal wells less thirsty. 

Geothermal’s tech and business boom is all about water. Traditional geothermal power works by punching a well into a super-hot pocket of underground water and bringing that water to the surface, like an artificial hot spring. The water either becomes steam or turns another fluid into steam, which spins a turbine to generate electricity. The water is then sent back into the ground to heat up again.

This method requires the perfect combination of heat and naturally occurring water to function, so it’s limited to a few small areas of the map. Newer, “next-generation” geothermal technologies try to get around this problem by bringing their own water to dry, hot rocks and circulating it. The amount of water developers have to introduce, however, can vary widely depending on the method.

A company called XGS Energy is trying to provide geothermal energy that requires nearly no water to New Mexico, which is currently suffering a decades-long drought. XGS uses “closed loop” technology that cycles water through the Earth in a continuous pipe, transferring the Earth’s heat to that water through a special material it layers onto the pipe, and then heating a secondary fluid that vaporizes and runs a turbine. The system recycles the same water over and over again without losing it to evaporation or seepage. In 2025, Meta agreed to support XGS’s project to produce 150 megawatts of power at a yet unspecified location in New Mexico.

XGS said its water savings are what sets it apart from other geothermal systems, and that its simple design yields benefits in terms of scalability, operating cost, and performance predictability.

“For geothermal to broadly scale across the United States, communities need geothermal systems that actively conserve water,” XGS said in a statement. “This design enables us to develop in more locations across the West, and consistently win competitive contracts.”

A cyclist rides across the dry bed of the Rio Grande River in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in July.
Susan Montoya Bryan / AP

But XGS’s type of water-efficient technology may not be well suited to produce power on the scale of data centers’ power needs, according to Roland Horne, who leads the geothermal program at Stanford University. Closed-loop systems generally produce less power per well, and their wells have shorter lifespans than with other approaches, Horne said. Unless technology improves or tech companies absorb the higher costs, water-free geothermal may struggle to produce large amounts of power economically. 

A more popular approach is “enhanced geothermal,” which uses oil-and-gas-style fracking to circulate water through hot rock, manufacturing the kind of underground reservoir traditional geothermal relies on. Inevitably, this method involves losing some water underground. Enhanced geothermal can use less water than natural gas power, which uses it for cooling and steam generation, but the comparison varies by project.

At Fervo’s Project Red site in Nevada — the first enhanced geothermal project to produce commercial power — operators have reported losing 30 percent of the water they inject underground. Fervo says losses will be much lower at its Cape Station project in Utah, which is contracted to supply power to Google, because of its different design; but even at a 5 percent loss rate, large-scale deployment could consume substantial amounts of water. 

For instance, the software company Oracle recently proposed building up to 2 gigawatts of new renewable energy generation, possibly including geothermal, in New Mexico. (The announcement came in response to criticism over the climate impacts of a gas-powered data center Oracle is constructing that could become one of the state’s largest greenhouse gas emitters.) Rough calculations by Kristie McLin, principal investigator at the government geothermal laboratory Utah FORGE, suggest that supplying those 2 gigawatts entirely with enhanced geothermal could consume 42 million gallons of water per day — about half of Albuquerque’s average daily water demand.

“This is a real problem that the industry absolutely needs to try to figure out,” said McLin. “When it’s additive and all your other water sources are already allocated to other uses, it can be challenging to find the volume of water you need to start up and sustain enhanced geothermal.”

Protesters gather outside the New Mexico Environment Department to voice opposition to the Project Jupiter data center during a demonstration in Santa Fe, New Mexico, on August 21.
Susan Montoya Bryan / AP

Fervo isn’t using potable water at Cape Station; it uses salty brackish groundwater. But in a landscape where drought has made any water source valuable and potentially hard to find — and amid public outcry over data centers’ own water usage — a reliance on constant available water supplies could add another hurdle to geothermal’s spread. 

Water is one of several uncertainties, including transmission access, geology, and drilling costs, that can scare investors away from geothermal projects. The unusual combination of oil-and-gas-style exploration and electric generation has already made it hard to attract capital in some cases. Data center interest has eased that strain, but not solved it, according to Mike O’Connor, director of the Mountain West Geothermal Consortium, a nonprofit research organization. O’Connor is researching new funding mechanisms for geothermal to overcome some of these challenges.

Meanwhile, Utah FORGE researchers, whose facility is located next to Cape Station, are testing ways to reduce water losses, including changing how wells are spaced and how water is injected and recovered.

“Utah FORGE is going to demonstrate these different opportunities to reduce water losses and see what performance looks like long term,” McLin said.

The geothermal industry’s ability to answer these questions doesn’t just matter for data centers. California needs clean firm power like geothermal if it wants to meet its goal of 100 percent clean electricity sources by 2045. California already gets more than half its electricity from renewables like solar and wind, but it needs reliable power that can fill the gaps when those sources and batteries aren’t operating. The state’s utility regulator has required power providers to procure a gigawatt of clean firm power by 2026, prompting a California utility to promise to buy 320 megawatts of geothermal power from Cape Station.

“There was an argument for geothermal power before data centers, and there will be an argument for geothermal power after these data centers are built,” said O’Connor.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline A clean energy source is buried under the desert, but it takes water to use it on Sep 22, 2026.

There are many ways to enjoy the outdoors, but thrill-seekers visiting the nation’s national forests often turn to motorized recreation. They might ride ATVs along dirt trails, snowmobile down winding tracks, or go off-roading in 4x4s. The United States Forest Service’s approach to all such forms of recreation on trails can be summed up in four words: closed unless designated open. 

Unless a trail is explicitly designated as open to off-highway vehicles, such as side-by-sides and dirt bikes, it can only be used for nonmotorized recreation. Most national forests have travel-management plans that outline when a trail is open for nonmotorized use like mountain biking, horseback riding, or hiking, and when it’s open to off-highway vehicles. These plans tend to be exhaustive and list which types of motorized or nonmotorized access are allowed on every trail, two-track, and road. The strict guidelines are a result of a Forest Service policy called the travel-management rule. 

But the Trump administration wants to turn the current rule on its head. In late August, the Forest Service announced its plan to revise the rule so that trails are open unless designated closed. It would mean forest managers would be expected to prioritize motorized access on service roads, trails, and even backcountry airfields. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture, of which the Forest Service is a part, has said that the move will increase recreation access and “simplify regulatory requirements.” The change is being opposed by sportsmen, backcountry horsemen, conservation organizations, and nonmotorized recreation groups. They say opening up all Forest Service trails to motorized access could have devastating consequences for the ecosystems and wildlife that rely on these lands. Healthy, intact forest ecosystems are also critical for sequestering carbon in a warming world.

Hillary Eisen, the federal policy director for Wild Montana, a public lands advocacy organization, said everyone who uses forest lands, from recreationists and ranchers with grazing leases to those in the timber industry, relies on the clarity provided by travel-management plans. The Forest Service’s formal announcement to revise the rule is “vague,” “somewhat poorly written,” and “difficult to follow,” Eisen said. Without clear guidelines in place, she fears motorized users could end up anywhere on the landscape. 

“Any sort of feature that you could interpret to be a trail or a road would be open to every type of use, unless closed,” she said. “That could mean if you can get your side-by-side on there, have at it.” 

Read Next Trump administration advances plan to open national forests to development Ellis Juhlin

Chris Edgington, a watershed project manager with Montana Trout Unlimited, witnessed firsthand the environmental damage that can happen from off-highway vehicle use on the Middle Fork of the Judith River, which runs through the Little Belt Mountains of central Montana.

Prior to 2023, there were more than 80 entrances and 27 shallow spots along a 6-mile stretch of the river, where various types of vehicles, including cars and side-by-sides, crossed. As these vehicles cut across, they caused erosion and an influx of sediment that coats rocks along the riverbed, suppressing insect life and the ability for fish to successfully spawn. By 2020, the sediment runoff had gotten so bad it was choking out nearly all the fish, Edgington said. 

“The fish population was estimated to be less than 10 percent of what we’d expect of a river that size and character,” Edgington said. “The river had become over-widened and shallow, creating unusual riffles, and the river couldn’t manage its sediment load.” 

So Edgington brought together a diverse coalition of groups, including the off-highway vehicle community and the Great Falls Trail Bike Riders Association, environmental groups, and federal and local government agencies to address the issue. They rebuilt 1,000 feet of riverbank, reduced the number of crossings by 80 percent, and built a new section of the off-highway vehicle and jeep trail so the area could still be used for recreation, without harming the river. It’s been a huge success, Edgington says, and the work is already paying off.

“Fish numbers are up,” he explained. “The work we did to remove the sediment is restoring water quality and the fish population in that incredible backcountry setting.”

The vehicles crossing the river weren’t breaking any rules; the Forest Service had designated the area open for motorized recreation, but the number of stream crossings degraded the health of the river and the threatened species that lived there, including the cutthroat trout. “I’m totally OK with appropriate machine use in the forest,” Edgington said. “But there are just places where the ecosystem is too sensitive to use this equipment.” 

The travel-management plan, written by the Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest, recognized this impact to the river and the need to reroute the road out of the river corridor. Parts of the Middle Fork are protected as a Wilderness Study Area and an Inventoried Roadless Area. Edgington said that because of those protections and the travel-management plan, it was worth investing in this restoration; he knew the conservation work would last. 

Before and after photos of restoration work on the Middle Fork of the Judith River. Courtesy of Montana Trout Unlimited

He said a full repeal of the travel-management rule would create more problems than it intends to solve. A change of this magnitude, he said, could be a devastating blow to river health and restoration projects like the Middle Fork Judith. 

“Whether that’s off-highway vehicles in the river or motorcycles on horse trails, it’s going to create a lot of conflict and confusion and animosity between different user groups.”

The process to change a federal rule is a long one. The Forest Service is accepting public comments on the plan to revise the rule, which is the first step in the process, through September 23.  

These proposed revisions to travel management aren’t occurring in a vacuum. They are one of several widespread policy changes that could take effect across the 193 million acres of land the Forest Service manages, including more than 19 million acres in Montana alone. Last month, just before the travel management revision, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the USDA was moving forward with rescinding the roadless rule, a policy that prevents road building and commercial logging on 45 million acres of Forest Service land. The Forest Service and other scientists have conducted extensive research showing how roads fragment habitat, disturb wildlife, introduce noxious weeds, and increase human-caused wildfires. In the first round of public comment, 99 percent of commenters opposed removing roadless protections. 

The short public comment periods have received public backlash. On September 11, the Forest Service announced it was adding 15 days to the comment period for the roadless rule; it is now open until October 6. In a statement about the decision, the agency wrote the extension was “to provide interested persons additional time to review the proposed rule and supporting materials.” 

Read Next The Trump administration wants to take an ax to the East’s last great forests Grist staff

Eisen, the federal policy director for Wild Montana, said the roadless rule and travel-management rule help uphold the purpose of public lands.

“The intent in Congress is that they support current generations,” she said. “That they are also available for future generations, that’s the sustained yield, conservation piece of it. And the regulations we have that connect to public lands all tie in to that in one way or another.” 

The roadless rule, she said, ensures intact habitat remains for clean water and wildlife, but the travel-management rule affects far more people every time they visit a national forest.  

“Anytime you go anywhere on national forest land outside of wilderness, the travel-management rule is part of your experience,” she said. “And your experience is not an accident.”

Supporters of these changes, like Kerry White, who runs the Bozeman-based nonprofit Citizens for Balanced Use, say making trails open unless designated closed would create more opportunities for recreation. Citizens for Balanced Use is an organization that advocates for motorized access on public lands. 

“Without roads and trails, people can’t get out in the woods,” said White, who represented a section of Bozeman in the state legislature from 2013 to 2021. This is public land, and people with disabilities, the elderly, need some sort of transportation to get out there.” 

Karla Gagby, above, rides through the Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest in southwestern Montana on July Fourth. Gagby cannot hike because of a lung injury.
Gary Friedman / Getty Images

White said these new changes will allow for better access and clarity for visitors on ATVs, e-bikes, and other motorized vehicles. “By making everything open unless posted closed,” he said, “it puts a bit more onus on the Forest Service to do due diligence and, if a trail is closed, make sure those signs are posted and maintained and kept in place.”

White also believes these changes won’t have negative environmental impacts. “People are freaking out [that] we’ll have strip malls and open-pit mining in these areas, and that’s simply not the case,” he said. “There’s a lot of regulation that has to be done to do any kind of projects in these areas.”

But Eisen with Wild Montana said these changes are occurring alongside the Trump administration’s rollback of a myriad of the nation’s bedrock environmental protections, including changes to the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.

“This administration does not appear to value what our public-land system is rooted in,” she said. “It’s more about, ‘How can I make a quick buck off of this for my benefit?’ I think it gets back into that interest in privatizing.”

To Edgington, these changes are a concerning pile-on. “Many of these rules were created with a thoughtful balance of forest use,” he said. “And there are probably areas where we could improve these rules, but a full repeal would be devastating to fish and wildlife resources beyond our comprehension.” 

He spent years overseeing restoration work and conservation for some of Montana’s most beloved trout fisheries. “Cold, clean water is a finite resource,” he said, “and we need to do whatever we can to protect it.”

While Edgington is proud of the work he and partners did to restore the Middle Fork of the Judith River, he doesn’t know how work like that happens without policies like the roadless and travel-management rules.

“This project was funded by three federal sources,” Edgington said. “If protections are possibly lifted and those investments are diminished? It is pretty counterintuitive to the responsible use of taxpayer dollars.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Trump wants to open nearly all national forest trails to dirt bikes and ATVs on Sep 22, 2026.

A landowner-led wind farm is seeking state and federal environmental approvals, but could struggle to proceed if a hotly contested transmission line doesn't go ahead.

The post Huge landowner-led wind project seeks green tick, despite looming threat to transmission link appeared first on Renew Economy.

Within the framework of the Mesoamerican Youth Camp "Monsignor Óscar Arnulfo Romero," we, the youth of the countryside, the forests, the coasts, and the rivers of the Mesoamerican region, raise our firm and unified voice...

The post CLOC Mesoamerican Youth Camp “Monsignor Óscar Arnulfo Romero”: For Land, Territory, and Food Sovereignty appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Local TV promised to platform grassroots politics and marginal voices, but weak regulation and a broken business model let the sector thin out. Andy Brain surveys the survivors and asks how communities might reclaim local video

The post The people’s airwaves: saving local TV appeared first on Red Pepper.

Canada is not on track to meet its 2030 climate target. The latest federal data shows national emissions are just 10.3 percent below 2005 levels, which is the weakest performance in the G7, and the Prime Minister has acknowledged the 2030 goal is out...

This primer introduces solar radiation modification (SRM) to Canadian environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) and policymakers, situating the topic in the context of accelerating climate timelines, Canada's own emissions shortfall, and...

With parts of the feminist movement drifting towards personal empowerment and green actors emphasising cost of living issues, few voices remain connecting the dots between ecological and feminist struggles. Yet studies show that rising temperatures increase domestic violence, and women are more heavily impacted by food scarcity during draughts and floods. How to build counterpower at times of gender and climate backlash? Ros Taylor spoke with the author of Feminism for a World on Fire. 

When I meet Natasha Walter towards the end of August, Britain’s arid summer is at last beginning to ebb. A few drops of rain have fallen on the yellow, desiccated parks, but not enough to revive them. In the past eight weeks, north London has had just two millimetres of rain.

But the drought and wildfires barely impinge on the political round. Andy Burnham, the new prime minister, belatedly sends a text message to Britons urging them not to light unnecessary fires. His new secretary for energy security and net zero, Miatta Fahnbulleh, will open up a North Sea gas field for drilling. Her Conservative shadow, Andrew Bowie, declares himself the “energy security secretary”, dropping any reference to net zero.

As temperature records are broken, the fight seems to have gone out of Britain’s environmental movement. Perhaps they expected the proof of global heating and multiple energy crises to concentrate politicians’ minds on the green transition. If so, they were very wrong. Instead, the talk now is almost exclusively of adaptation and how to generate enough electricity for air conditioning. Even the Green Party now mainly focuses on the cost of living and overheated workplaces. This has helped them in the polls, but it has done little to keep up the pressure to phase out fossil fuels.

Climate of repression

For activists like Walter, who was arrested in 2019 at a climate protest, the sense of powerlessness is distressing. Even as the Labour party made progress on decarbonising the grid and expanded wind and solar energy, it continued to crack down hard on environmental protesters. Judges imposed long prison sentences on people blocking roads and prevented them from mentioning their motives in court, so as not to sway a jury. In 2024, nine people who were arrested on their way to a planned action at Heathrow Airport spent ten months on remand before they appeared in court. The harsh sentences have significantly reduced climate protests in the UK. The government has also designated the pro-Palestinian group Palestine Action as a terrorist organisation, meaning that anyone who expresses support for it is liable to be prosecuted for a criminal offence.

“I feel so angry about it,” Walter says. “I really feel that there was a possibility when the first wave of climate activism was happening. You know, around 2018, a lot of people were taking to the streets. It was disruptive, [though] it wasn’t terribly disruptive to most people’s everyday lives. And I think it brought a lot of people together. It coalesced a sort of sense of urgency, and the community around that urgency.”

“And I think that some mainstream political parties on the left or towards the left could have done a lot more to connect with that energy, to learn from why people were coming out, and actually to support that energy and work with those desires to find ways forward. I find it really so baffling. And I feel so angry with this Labour government.”

She admits some of the actions “weren’t brilliantly planned or executed” – Just Stop Oil activists throwing soup at Van Gogh’s Sunflowers in the National Gallery in 2022, for instance – “but that’s OK. These sorts of movements are messy. But I just find it insane, the level of repression, and how little mainstream liberals and conservatives, left and right, have stepped up to this.”

Time for ecofeminism

Walter came relatively late to climate activism. In The New Feminism (1998), she argued that women needed to stop policing each other’s behaviour and focus on securing political power and equality. Living Dolls (2010) tackled the sexualisation of culture and what it meant for women. Her latest book, Feminism for a World on Fire, imagines a feminism that acknowledges what the climate crisis means for women, especially but not exclusively in the Global South. Feminism, she argues, has let itself be subsumed by the consumer society and dreams of personal empowerment. It has stopped being political. She wrote Feminism for a World on Fire partly out of a sense of frustration that the environmental movement in the UK seemed to have no space for ecofeminism.

“When I was in Extinction Rebellion, I was really struggling to get women together to talk about feminist ideas in the environmental movement.” There was an emphasis on care, she says, and feminist principles guided the movement, but somehow it did not quite come together. Yet, for Walter, the movements are meaningless without each other. “Environmentalism without feminism is a patriarchy in the forest, but the women’s movement without environmentalism is a women’s centre on a dead planet.”

Bringing the two movements together is all the more important when mainstream feminism has become a marketable commodity to which the big tech companies pay lip service, and where women must climb over each other to reach the top. She says “this rhetoric of Lean In, ‘You go girl, give zero fucks, keep moving on, keep moving up’” reached an apogee in 2025, when Amazon’s chairman Jeff Bezos launched six women into sub-orbit to promote his Blue Origin space programme.

Feminism has let itself be subsumed by the consumer society and dreams of personal empowerment. It has stopped being political.

“The interests of capitalism feed off that kind of self-empowerment. It suits capitalism. You can sell women more goods, more stuff with the message that you can liberate yourself just through shopping, through constant makeovers and renewal… I was quite shocked when I started using Instagram by how many women that I thought of as feminists are engaged there in just selling stuff.”

Platforms have enabled some women to establish vast personal brands, but have also fed a form of apolitical narcissism. In the past decade, Walter says, the women’s movement has atomised, with “less and less empathy and solidarity between women from different parts of the world and different backgrounds.”

As director of the charity Women for Refugee Women, she found herself increasingly frustrated by performative, celebrity-driven events that felt very distant from the lives of ordinary women. At the same time, charities working with vulnerable women became more professional. There is more transparency and clearer guidance about how to act, but something has been lost. In the 1980s, one activist told her, women who reported domestic abuse would be supported, driven to a refuge, and hugged. “Now I see my colleagues taking that same call. They are polite. They go through the safeguarding checklist. They give her another number to call…” Grassroots work is vital because it is “where women find the tools for survival”.

In the UK, the Rochdale child sexual abuse scandal, where girls were raped by groups of men of mainly Pakistani origin between the 1990s and 2010s, has become a rallying point for the far-right Reform UK and Restore parties. They claim that the failure to prosecute the rapists for years shows that feminists did not protect girls for fear of being seen as racist. Walter, however, argues that the scandal persisted because the police did not listen to women working in frontline organisations.

She has spent time with women’s groups in the Middle East, and Feminism for a World on Fire reminds readers that however frightening global heating seems in Europe and the US, it has even worse consequences for the Global South. The impact specifically on women is under-researched, but the work we do have shows that women are more likely to die than men when food is scarce and during droughts and floods. Domestic violence rises during climate crises. A UN study found that it increases by 4.7 per cent for every 1-degree Celsius rise in global temperature. Another study on heatwaves in Kenya found that pregnant women were vulnerable to cardiovascular problems in high temperatures and were still expected to collect water. Feminism for a World on Fire reminds readers that however frightening global heating seems in Europe and the US, it has even worse consequences for the Global South. The impact specifically on women is under-researched, but the work we do have shows that women are more likely to die than men when food is scarce and during droughts and floods. Domestic violence rises during climate crises. A UN study found that it increases by 4.7 per cent for every 1-degree Celsius rise in global temperature. Another study on heatwaves in Kenya found that pregnant women were vulnerable to cardiovascular problems in high temperatures and were still expected to collect water.

Domestic violence rises during climate crises, 4.7 per cent for every 1-degree Celsius rise in global temperature.

“When societies are stressed, men are often taking out that stress and that precarity on women … It’s here, it’s now. You know, women’s crops are already failing because of the droughts and then the cyclones in Malawi. The girls living in the areas affected by floods in Bangladesh, they’re already missing out on school, they’re already being married off early. Their future is gone.”

Involvement at all levels

How to conclude a book that sets out the scale of the crisis and the misery to come? Walter admits it was difficult. She feels the least satisfactory sections of her previous two books about feminism were her efforts to direct people to organisations that were doing good work. Instead, “We need to have more faith in the idea that we can get involved in our community,” and organise to achieve a particular goal.

How to conclude a book that sets out the scale of the crisis and the misery to come? Walter admits it was difficult. She feels the least satisfactory sections of her previous two books about feminism were her efforts to direct people to organisations that were doing good work. Instead, “We need to have more faith in the idea that we can get involved in our community,” and organise to achieve a particular goal.

She is drawn to local activism, partly as an antidote to the sense of powerlessness that has seized the environmental movement, but also as an alternative to the endless scroll of digital “engagement”, a “relentless roll call of pain” – and because, as 1980s activists knew, only by meeting people face-to-face do we come to understand the messy complexity of their lives.

Walter acknowledges that the kinds of frustrations and compromises involved in unglamorous, local activism are by no means easy. “I’m not romanticising it, but I think it’s the only way to rebuild in the face of what we’re facing now.” Naomi Klein and Astra Taylor’s new book End Times Fascism offers a similar vision for local activism in the face of Big Tech dominance and the rise of the far right.

I ask Walter why so few women, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez excepted, are leading the charge against Trumpian politics and environmental destruction. Zohran Mamdani is the great hope of socialists in the US, and the figureheads of the British left are men: Zack Polanski leads the Greens in England and Wales, while Labour has never had a female leader in its entire history. The European far right, by contrast, has cultivated several charismatic women leaders, including Giorgia Meloni, Alice Weidel, and Marine Le Pen.

“I think women who try and emerge on the left as leaders just feel too disruptive,” Walter says. “They break the mould of what our societies want to see in women too much, and they’re not valued. They face such a barrage of misogyny from their enemies. It just makes them unviable as leaders, as we saw with Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris. I’m not saying they were particularly charismatic or progressive leaders. Very problematic, I think, in many ways.” Both the former New Zealand PM Jacinda Ardern and Finland’s Sanna Marin left frontline politics before middle age also because of intense backlash.

But the fact that female leadership is lacking should not deter women from getting involved. “We need more women climate leaders. But I also think we need more good followership. I think we need, as women, to get involved in stuff.”

“And you can make a change by contributing whatever you contribute. I really like telling stories and drawing out threads. But I also like doing the other stuff, just standing at the stalls at the eco-fair or going along and helping in the community garden or with the drop-in at the women’s centre.”

Stepping up

An earlier generation of radical feminists might observe that this is what middle-class British women like Walter have done for centuries – volunteered in their communities, unpaid and largely unnoticed, meeting the needs that the state will not. Is this a flight from catastrophe into the private sphere, a 21st-century version of Voltaire’s il faut cultiver notre jardin? But Walter’s feminism is anchored in the city, in the marches and demonstrations she still regularly attends. “I’m not much of a hippy. I’m living quite a normal urban life. People see ecofeminism in a maybe more radical and hippy box than that, and I’d like to say no, this is for everyone.”

Walter’s feminism is alive to the cruelties that emerge when people compete for scarce resources. As a charity leader, she saw “such divisions between women, hardening borders, that dehumanisation that creeps into people’s rhetoric”. In the UK, where groups of black-clad, balaclava-wearing men have been gathering to block roads and demand Britain “stop the boats”, the sense of fracture is acute. The Left observes bitterly that when climate protesters – some of them elderly women – lay down in the street, they were put in jail: the men of the far right, on the other hand, have been allowed to disperse without being arrested.

Towards the end of the book, Walter recounts seeing on her phone images of “the body of a female fighter being thrown from a building” in north-east Syria, where she had visited a group of women planning a better future. She tries to apply the lessons she learnt there about female solidarity in London, too. “When I feel really lost about the way forward it’s often the women around me who keep me going,” she writes. None of them “only spend their time asking other people to do things… They use their own talents and courage, and put them to work.”

The biggest wind project to begin construction in Australia this past year faced multiple hurdles. And perhaps the most difficult of all is the cost of capital.

The post “Like spinning 42 plates in the air at the same time:” How this impossible project broke Australia’s wind drought appeared first on Renew Economy.

With private-sector power and resources, major food brands can help spearhead significant food system transformations—but only if they embrace transparency and long-term thinking, leaders said. At Food Tank’s annual “Mission Driven Brands Sustainability Summit” at Climate Week NYC, founders and corporate sustainability officers had candid conversations about building trust in the food system.

“We’re making food, so there’s nothing more important than trust,” says Peter McGuinness, CEO of Bel North America. “If we’re making healthy food with real, simple ingredients, we are respecting the planet.”  

The event was hosted in partnership with Mission Driven Brands: Bel US, Northstar Recycling, Global Traceability Framework for Beef and Leather, and Bonterra Organic Estates. You can watch the livestream recording on Food Tank’s YouTube channel. 

As a surprise guest for a fireside chat, Jennifer Siebel Newsom, First Partner of California, grounded the audience in discussing the beneficiaries of better food-industry practices: The next generation.

“As a mother of four, I was trying to feed my own children local and organic,” she told the packed crowd. “I thought, ‘I can’t just be nourishing my own children, but all California children need to have this.’ … It’s a shame that we’ve been feeding kids such horrible food for so long.”

So how do we steer the ship? Trust is one of the most powerful resources a food business has—and also one that requires constant work to maintain, leaders said. This means both trust in individual companies and trust in broader institutions, like the food system at large. 

“Consumers more than ever want transparency, but they also want to know that they’re eating real food,” says Ann Marie Hourigan, Head of Quality Standards for Whole Foods Market. “There’s a lot of distrust in what’s been allowed in the food system over time.”

Building trust means focusing on transparent supply chains and traceable ingredients.

“[Traceability] makes companies accountable for what they’re doing and where they’re sourcing their products from,” says Diana Hanus, Senior Executive Vice President of Commercial & Business Development at Sovereign Seas. “It’s good for business; it’s not just good for the consumers. What traceability does is it puts a face to where your products are coming from.”

The solution is information: Not just more information, but better information, communicated more effectively to the shoppers and eaters who consume the companies’ products.

“If you can’t see it, you can’t really make claims and verify what’s in that supply chain,” says Mark Kaplan, Chief Marketing and Sustainability Officer at Wholechain. “In the future, I see labels on pretty much everything—policy and the world is asking for it.”

Across the food business landscape, several of the companies leading the charge toward more transparent, regenerative, transformative practices are not exactly food businesses at all—they’re beverage producers and sellers.

“At the end of the day, my team and myself are stewards of this type of farming and we are there to guide people,” says Elaina Leibee, Wine Director at Erewhon. “There really is not a lot of transparency in winemaking and what is in the bottle. Some people don’t know you can add up to 300 different additives in the wine, and it doesn’t have to be listed on the label.”

So what do better beverage business practices look like?

At Bonterra Organic Estates, Sustainability Manager Beatrix Scolari says, “We are cultivating our vineyards as a living, thriving ecosystem. Nearly every wine grower is facing some sort of climate pressure. But wine growers are extremely resilient.”

Practices like these mean that “you can eat and drink your way out of climate change with regenerative organic,” according to Stephen Cronk, Co-Founder and Trustee of the Regenerative Viticulture Foundation and the Co-Founder and CEO of Maison Mirabeau. 

As Rob Samuels, Eighth-Generation Whisky Maker and Managing Director at Maker’s Mark, reminded us, “Whisky is grown. Whisky is an agricultural product.” 

When you focus on that, it only makes sense for businesses to think and act sustainably, he said. 

“When you’re in the whisky business, you have to think long-term,” he says. “Oftentimes family companies have a sense of responsibility to the community. We want to be in business thriving all over the world for the next 100 years—of course we should be investing in this.”

We also have to remember that circular food systems of the future can’t just be accomplished by switching a plastic fork for a compostable one—the changes we need are truly systemic.

“Waste isn’t the problem; how it’s managed is,” says Shawna Laczko, Chief Revenue Officer at Northstar Recycling. “A material that’s compostable in theory needs the infrastructure at the right scale and in the right place.”

As Jordan Catalana, Senior Manager for Social Impact at the Tapestry Foundation, reminded us, “Scalability and adoption matter. That’s how we’re going to achieve anything.”

“It’s not about what we’re striving for; confidence and transparency are the only way we can prove any of it,” she says. 

Explore the entire Food Tank event schedule during Climate Week NYC 2026, and live-stream every Summit on FoodTank.com and Food Tank’s YouTube channel. 

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 by Ryan Rose for Food Tank.

The post Industry Leaders Talk Transparency And Trust At Annual Climate Week Brand Sustainability Summit appeared first on Food Tank.