G1. Progressive Green

Lynas, Rare Earths and the War Machine Inside the recent militarised extrtactivism webinar co-hosted by YLNM and AidWatch

Photo: Protest against Lynas-United States deal for military supplies of rare earths on July 6. Credit: Malaysian Protest 4 Palestine

Lynas Rare Earths likes to present itself as a green technology company, as a clean supplier of the minerals the world needs for the energy transition. Sit with the evidence for an hour, as everyone who joined our recent webinar did, and that story falls apart.

What emerges instead is a company kept alive for close to two decades by Japanese state money, subsidised by the Pentagon and the Australian Government, dumping radioactive waste on a Malaysian coastal community, and now sitting inside the supply chain that arms Israel’s genocide in Gaza.

The Lynas Rare Earths: Militarised Extractivism in Action webinar was co-hosted by AidWatch and Yes to Life No to Mining (YLNM). It’s the first in a webinar series which builds on a YLNM position paper published at the end of last year, Militarism is Extraction: From Mines to Missiles which builds on.

AidWatch Chair, Liz Downes opened the webinar and set out why Lynas matters and how deep the Pentagon money runs, before handing over to Shigeru Tanaka, Executive Director, Pacific Asia Resource Center (PARC, Japan), Farwina Faroque, Boycott, Divest and Sanctions (BDS), Malaysia, and AidWatch’s Lee Tan, who has been organising against Lynas since 2011.

Here’s what they told us.

What Lynas actually is

Liz Downes, AidWatch Chair, opened by laying out exactly what Lynas is: an Australian-owned company that mines rare earths at Mount Weld in Western Australia and, since 2012–13, processes them at the Lynas Advanced Materials Plant (LAMP) in Kuantan, Malaysia. A long-promised processing plant at Kalgoorlie remains unreliable at best due to its limited water supply. Lynas moved the hazardous separation stage of production offshore quite deliberately: Australia’s environmental standards were expensive and inconvenient, Malaysia’s were not.

The company took advantage of lower costs and more permissive waste rules to do in Kuantan what it did not want to do at home. The result is millions of tonnes of hazardous waste, including a radioactive stream from the water-leach purification process.

Lynas has spent years pushing Malaysia to accept a permanent radioactive waste dump on flood and fire-prone coastal peatland, a proposal that falls well below international standards for managing low-level radioactive waste. And it matters well beyond Malaysia’s borders, because LAMP is currently the only commercial-scale producer of separated rare earth oxides outside China.

The Pentagon pipeline

Liz then walked us through how a single fact – that Lynas is currently the only ‘game’ outside China, is exactly why the US Department of War (formerly Defense) has poured so much money into the company under both the Biden and Trump administrations. Funding for a heavy rare earth separation plant in Texas has gone nowhere, but the money hasn’t disappeared: it has flowed instead into extracting heavy and light rare earths through the Malaysian plant, backed by a four-year supply agreement guaranteeing the Pentagon a framework for rare earth oxides. In March this year alone, Lynas picked up another US$96 million.

The US still imports more than 70% of its rare earths from China, but it is racing to change that as it prepares for confrontation with China rather than cooperation. Lynas is now the world’s biggest rare earth miner and the only commercial-scale processor outside China, which makes its output “critical” to Washington’s plans. This is not for green technology, but for the expanding military capabilities, producing more deadly weapons for profit, and furnishing war and genocide around the world.

Until 2025, Lynas mostly produced light rare earths like neodymium and praseodymium – elements it could plausibly describe as feeding green technology. Pentagon money is now pushing it to separate dysprosium, terbium and samarium too — elements essential for the durable magnets in high-precision weapons, with yet more to come for production of high-powered lasers, night vision, fighter jet engines, missile guidance, nuclear reactor control systems, radiation shielding and nuclear submarines.

Australia has also funded Lynas through trade agreements – part of its bid to be Washington’s key ally in militarising the Pacific – and Japan’s investment runs deeper still.

Liz traced the same supply chain forward to its disastrous end point: local environmental damage in Kuantan, regional militarisation of the Pacific through military exercises like RIMPAC and a wave of “defence critical minerals” projects, and the involuntary enlistment of countries like Malaysia, in a supply chain feeding the military-industrial complex – including, as Liz laid out with sobering figures, the weapons pipeline into Gaza.

Two decades of Japanese rescue

Shigeru Tanaka, Executive Director with the Pacific Asia Resource Center in Japan, walked us through a history that reframes Lynas as far more than an Australian company operating in Malaysia.

Lynas announced its plan in 2007 and nearly went bankrupt within a year, as the global financial crisis dried up capital and interest rates climbed. By 2009 the company had around $7 million in the bank against monthly overheads in the millions, Lynas was genuinely on the edge of collapse. A Chinese state-owned company offered to buy a 51.6% stake for $252 million plus a further $252 million loan, effectively $500 million in total. The Australian government blocked the deal outright, unwilling to see a Chinese-controlled monopoly on rare earths.

Japan stepped in instead, but not out of goodwill. In September 2010, a collision between a Chinese fishing vessel and Japanese coast guard boats near the tiny island of Senkaku, a contested territory escalated into a diplomatic crisis, and China responded by halting rare earth exports to Japan. With China holding a monopoly on these elements, the shock sent Japan into overdrive to secure an alternative. The state-owned Japan Oil, Gas and Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC, since renamed the Japan Organization for Metal Security) and trading house Sojitz co-invested $250 million for 30% of LAMP’s output. This is half of what China had originally offered, but enough to keep Lynas alive.

Japan came back again in 2013–14, when the rare earth price bubble collapsed as a result of the WTO ruling which stopped China from placing a quota and restricts its rare earth export. WhenLynas’s stock and investment base started falling away, a ten-year extension on loan repayments and reduced interest rates were quickly granted. It came back a third time in 2018–19, blocking a hostile takeover that would actually have suited Japanese lenders financially, apparently preferring to keep Lynas under its thumb rather than cash out. And in 2023, as Lynas moved into heavy rare earth elements, JOGMEC and Sojitz added a further $200 million.

Three rescues, one pattern. As Shigeru put it, Japan isn’t only importing the materials — it is exporting the harm, and allowing Malaysia to absorb it, all under the rhetoric of “mineral security” and anti-China positioning.

 

From Kuantan to Gaza

Farwina Faroque, secretary general of BDS Malaysia, drew the line from the soils of Kuantan to the rubble of Gaza.

BDS was founded in July 2005 by 170 Palestinian civil society organisations, calling for an end to military occupation and colonisation, full equality for Palestinian citizens of Israel, and the right of return under UN Resolution 194.

Boycotts work. Intel halted construction of a US$25 billion plant in Israel in 2024 under sustained pressure, and Puma finally dropped its sponsorship of the Israeli Football Association. In Malaysia, direct action has blocked shipments too, including a container belonging to Israeli shipping giant ZIM at the Thai border in 2024, and just this past month, a Maersk container linked to weapons manufacturer Elbit Systems.

Lynas sits inside this picture as a critical part of the US war machine. The Pentagon’s funding – including the Texas contracts, the 2022 US$120 million agreement, and the US$96 million framework locked in this March – exists to guarantee rare earth oxides for weapons production.

Following Lynas’s mineral supply chain to the end, means following it toward Gaza: the Costs of War Project at Brown University’s Watson Institute puts US military aid to Israel and regional operations at US$22.7 billion in the year after October 2023 alone, including more than 50,000 tonnes of weapons shipped, and half a billion dollars annually for missile defence and F-35 jets,(aircraft that depend heavily on rare earth magnets). US officials have received more than 500 internal reports documenting these weapons being used to commit atrocities in Gaza, and taken no action to stop the flow. Journalists and human rights organisations, including Al Jazeera, have repeatedly found serial numbers and manufacturing stamps from US-made munitions in the rubble of schools, hospitals and designated safe zones in Gaza.

BDS Malaysia has built an unprecedented coalition around this, joining with Malaysian Protest for Palestine, Greenpeace Malaysia and Sahabat Alam Malaysia to bring petitions and street protest directly to parliament, to name and shame the politicians and corporate enablers who put foreign defence contracts ahead of human lives.

It has worked: the campaign forced a parliamentary select committee review, and rattled Lynas into issuing a sanitised statement claiming the US$96 million contract was merely “research and development” for permanent magnet production. Farwina wasn’t buying it. Everyone knows where those magnets end up: fighter jets and guided missiles. The contradiction cuts deep in a country whose government publicly champions Palestinian rights while its rare earths flow to the Pentagon.

The ground truth in Kuantan

Lee Tan has been part of the Stop Lynas campaign for more than 20 years, and her section of the webinar made the human and ecological cost impossible to look away from.

Rare earths are the “spices and vitamins” of modern industry: only tiny amounts are needed in almost every piece of electronics we touch, from smartphone touchscreens to laptops. Lynas has marketed itself in Malaysia as exactly that: a green raw-materials supplier. But separating these elements requires highly concentrated acids at temperatures around 600 degrees, and it generates enormous volumes of radioactive and hazardous wastes. This is precisely why almost all rare earth processing happens in the Global South, where regulation is weakest and resistance hardest, rather than in wealthy countries that can actually afford to manage the waste safely. Lynas, for its trouble, enjoyed twelve years of tax-free status in Malaysia as a “pioneer” in green technology.

The Kuantan site was once a pristine tropical peat and mangrove forest before Lynas cleared it in 2011. Waste retention ponds now sit where a peat forest used to be, and the company’s proposed “permanent” radioactive waste facility sits on a flood-prone peat swamp next to it. This is an engineering and hydrogeological absurdity, given that the thorium and uranium in Lynas’s waste stream have half-lives of roughly 14 billion and 4 billion years respectively. This waste is, in any meaningful sense, permanently hazardous.

Malaysia’s 2018 change of government briefly opened a path to end this. A review found that Lynas’s original operating licence required it to remove its radioactive waste from Malaysia unless a genuinely safe storage site could be found. A wet, low-lying peat swamp plainly isn’t one. Enforcing that clause could have shut Lynas down. Instead, incoming Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, a long-time ally of Japan, and the same figure behind an earlier radioactive contamination case involving Mitsubishi’s Asian Rare Earth plant, travelled to Japan and personally overturned his own environment minister’s ruling. Under Japanese pressure, the plant kept running.

The double standard doesn’t stop there.

In Western Australia, community objection and a state regulatory requirement (secured partly through AidWatch submissions backed by expert Professor Gavin Mudd and Lee Tan) forced Lynas to remove radioactive waste from its Kalgoorlie site within 24 months, taking it back to Mount Weld mine under stricter Australian radioactive waste management requirements.

Malaysia has no equivalent requirement, and its safety threshold is dramatically weaker: the International Atomic Energy Agency’s benchmark for thorium and uranium is 1 becquerel per gram, but Malaysia has adopted a threshold 100 times more permissive, meaning Lynas’s radioactive waste often isn’t even classified as radioactive under Malaysian law.

Photographs shown during the webinar documented waste stored under nothing more than garbage-bag-grade plastic, repeatedly flooded, while posters and glossy picture books were distributed trying to convince local residents that it was safe to keep swimming downstream at the estuary. Soil sampling by Professor Yoshihiko Wada, a Japanese researcher found dramatic increases in toxic elements and heavy metals in sediment samples nearby including a two fold increase in thorium at the estuary. Local fishermen in this traditionally significant fishing and shellfish area strongly object, Lee said, but face real political pressure to stay quiet.

What comes next

The Q&A drew the threads together. 

Malaysia’s parliamentary select committee inquiry which was reopened this year with new evidence about the Pentagon deal, largely thanks to work led by Greenpeace Malaysia, Sahabat Alam Malaysia and Malaysian Protest for Palestine, has yet to report back, a month after a special hearing. There’s real legal and political leverage here: Malaysia’s foreign policy is explicitly pro-Palestinian, and Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim has publicly positioned himself as a defender of Palestinian rights while his country’s rare earths help supply the Pentagon.

Shigeru pointed to the Rarotonga and Bangkok Treaties, which establish nuclear-free zones across the Pacific and Southeast Asia and to which both Australia and Malaysia are signatories. These are  treaties that a properly classified nuclear waste dump would plainly violate, if only the waste were honestly called what it is.

He also flagged a structural obstacle that campaigners can’t ignore: Malaysia, Australia and Japan are all parties to the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), whose investor-state dispute mechanisms (SDS) could let Lynas sue Malaysia for lost profits even if the government moved to shut the plant down. Stopping Lynas, in other words, means confronting these investment treaties too.

Speakers closed by underlining the value of exactly the kind of cross-border organising this webinar represents:

• • BDS Malaysia’s own networks, for instance, learned about Israeli navy participation in RIMPAC exercises and about vessels to target for blockade through contacts as far away as Hawaii. 
  • Lee is now working on a briefing paper to help connect the Stop Lynas campaign with peace movements, Palestinian rights groups and organisations like Friends of the Earth Australia. 
  • Liz closed the session by placing Lynas inside AidWatch’s wider work: joining the dots between Australia’s critical minerals policy, the money pouring into mining expansion across Aboriginal lands, Australia’s deepening role in Pacific militarisation through AUKUS and a growing web of regional defence agreements, and the way aid dollars increasingly underwrite infrastructure that feeds the same military-industrial complex. Liz also flagged an upcoming look at the minerals race behind AI and defence technology.

Rare earths aren’t rare, and this story isn’t over. If it feels like a lot to take in, that’s because it is, but as one of our speakers put it, you don’t need to be a scientist or a lawyer to do something.

Get informed, share what you’ve learned, and get active in whatever way is open to you, including:

– Follow website and social media updates from the various organisations that speakers are connected with (links in email above);

– Join up to AidWatch’s mailing list for updates or join as a member (see links below);

– Sign up to receive Yes to Life No to Mining’s newsletter that shares stories of how people around the world are resisting mining and forging alternative futures!

Watch this space for the recording, the position paper behind this series, and further webinars in our militarised extractivism series.

The post Lynas, Rare Earths and the War Machine appeared first on Yes to Life No to Mining.

Thomas Homer-Dixon and Toby Shannan

The version of record of this op-ed appeared in The Globe and Mail.

Full Environics Research polling data, summary and highlights, and methodological details are available here.

After the breakdown of trade negotiations between Canada and the United States, Canadians across the political spectrum are rallying round the Maple Leaf. But we’re still in the confrontation’s early stage, where outrage feels good and comes easily. The true costs will come later.

Current polls of our attitudes may mislead. Dopamine flows in pulses. Foreboding and second thoughts may well follow our current high, as prices for tariffed products climb, national and provincial debts soar, and tens of thousands of good jobs vanish.

To really gauge Canadians’ commitment to resistance, regardless of our potential foe, we need data that capture our deeper, more enduring sentiments. New evidence suggests we may indeed be ready to sustain the costs of our newfound defiance.

Continue reading. 

 

The post How stiff is Canada’s spine? A poll suggests we may be ready to sustain the costs of our newfound defiance appeared first on Cascade Institute.

Just days after Egyptian nuclear authorities reportedly accused Rosatom of construction defects, poor management and violations of “nuclear safety culture” at the El Dabaa nuclear power plant, Cairo is considering an unusual response: buying two more Russian reactors. 

Egyptian Electricity Minister Mahmoud Esmat met Rosatom chief Alexei Likhachev in Russia this week to discuss progress at El Dabaa, a four-reactor nuclear station under construction on Egypt’s Mediterranean coast. The talks also covered a second phase that could add two more VVER-1200 reactors. 

That would expand the plant from 4.8 to 7.2 gigawatts and deepen a nuclear relationship with Moscow that would likely to last decades. 

The timing is curious. Earlier this month, POLITICO reported that a confidential June 4 letter from Egypt’s Nuclear Power Plants Authority to Rosatom detailed a series of construction and management problems at El Dabaa. 

According to the report, Egyptian officials cited defects in foundation slabs at reactor Units 1, 2 and 3, voids behind metal cladding at Unit 4 and problems with the cylindrical wall of its reactor building. The letter also reportedly accused Rosatom personnel of “deliberate negligence” and violations of nuclear safety culture, including shortcomings in workplace safety and site security. 

Separate internal Rosatom documents obtained by POLITICO pointed to construction-quality and management problems of their own. One assessment reportedly warned that completion of El Dabaa’s first reactor could slip by as much as 18 months, from September 2028 to March 2030. 

Cairo pushes back 

Egyptian authorities have strongly rejected suggestions that the disclosures show El Dabaa is unsafe. 

The Nuclear Power Plants Authority called POLITICO’s report “inaccurate and unbalanced”  saying that construction non-conformities are routinely identified and corrected during a project of El Dabaa’s scale. Egypt’s nuclear regulator likewise said the plant is being built according to internationally recognized nuclear safety and security standards and stressed that construction remains under continuous inspection. 

Egyptian officials have also pointed to an International Atomic Energy Agency review mission in June, which concluded that Egypt has a comprehensive regulatory framework for nuclear and radiation safety, while also recommending further improvements to legislation, licensing and radioactive-waste policy. 

However, it’s important to bear in mind that the El Dabaa site is still under construction. El Dabaa and contains no nuclear fuel. The reported defects thus do not constitute a radiological hazard—nor does the purported existence of construction problems necessarily demonstrate that the finished reactors will be unsafe. 

But the source of the complaints makes them hard to dismiss. If authentic, the June letter reported by POLITICO did not come from an environmental organization or a Russian nuclear critic. It came from within the Egyptian state authority overseeing the project. 

“There is no question that shortcomings and defects arise during construction. Normally, these problems are resolved between the customer and the contractor,” said Alexander Nikitin, a nuclear expert with Bellona. “What is unusual in this case is that complaints about shortcomings and defects have spilled into public discussion. That may indicate that the customer and the contractor were unable to resolve these problems between themselves.” 

Dmitry Gorchakov, another of Bellona’s nuclear experts, said that what’s important about the leaked complaints is that they are addressed.  

“It is difficult to speculate about how or why this correspondence reached journalists. It could have been a deliberate leak intended to achieve certain political goals, or it could simply have been accidental: the project is enormous, and breaches of confidentiality can occur as well,” he said. “Of course, the existence of these problems is cause for concern — although we are not yet talking about radiological risks. But it would be considerably more worrying if the problems were not corrected, or if their existence were simply denied altogether.” 

Rosatom offers more than reactors 

Whatever tensions exist behind the scenes, they do not appear to be weakening Egypt’s commitment to Russian nuclear technology. Likhachev said this week that talks are underway on El Dabaa Units 5 and 6, including how the additional reactors might be financed. 

Cairo is also discussing possible cooperation with Rosatom on small modular reactors for industrial facilities, remote regions and other applications. 

That apparent contradiction points to one of Rosatom’s greatest advantages abroad: it sells much more than just the nuclear reactors. 

Under the existing El Dabaa agreements, Russia is financing much of the project while Rosatom companies are building the plant, supplying nuclear fuel for its operating lifetime, helping train Egyptian personnel, assisting with operation and maintenance during its first decade and providing equipment for storing spent nuclear fuel. 

That creates a relationship that can continue long after construction crews leave the site, and those long relationships are exactly the point, Bellona’s experts explained. 

“When you sign contracts covering everything on the list, you become deeply dependent on the supplier—and getting out of that relationship is extremely expensive,” as countries like Ukraine and Finland have found, Nikitin said. 

Gorchakov explained that this model is attractive for customers that are new to nuclear power, or that aren’t in a position to finance the entire project themselves—and who don’t particularly care about the political consequences of cozying up to Rosatom.  

“The trade-off is political and technological dependence,“ he said. “Good relations with Russia and attractive financing terms may simply outweigh considerations of independence.” 

For Moscow, those ties have only become more valuable since the invasion of Ukraine. While sanctions have pushed Russia out of many Western markets, Rosatom continues to build reactors abroad and preserve technological, commercial and political relationships that can stretch across generations. 

The controversy at El Dabaa has thus attracted attention far beyond Egypt. Ukraine cited the reported problems in a renewed call for European Union sanctions against Rosatom, with Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha arguing that the allegations provided further evidence that the Russian nuclear corporation was not a reliable international partner. 

The allegations also resonate inside the EU. Rosatom is building two VVER-1200 reactors at Hungary’s Paks II nuclear plant—the same reactor model under construction at El Dabaa. 

“The concerns are understandable,” said Gorchakov. “At the same time, in Hungary— especially following the change of government—the customer and its regulators are far more experienced, rigorous and demanding than their counterparts in Egypt, as are the EU institutions overseeing the project. That is evident from the lengthy delays and the difficulties involved in securing the necessary approvals. In Egypt, things have been much quieter, and this leak is essentially the first major ‘scandal’ associated with the project.” 

The post Egypt complained about Rosatom’s nuclear work. Now it wants two more reactors  appeared first on Bellona.org.

A Lane County, Oregon initiative, part of a rising global movement, fundamentally reimagines humanity’s relationship with nature.

The post Oregon Humanities: Declaration of the Rights of Nature appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

A fifth of the world’s oil passes through a strait just 55km wide. Right now, that strait is closed, and it’s not the only one. For most of us, the Strait of Hormuz, the Panama Canal and the Bab el-Mandeb Strait are names we half-remembered from a geography lesson. But right now, all three of these critical shipping lanes, plus the Suez Canal and the South China Sea straits, are under simultaneous strain. And the causes aren’t separate stories. War, the climate crisis and a strong El Niño are compounding each other, squeezing the narrow waterways that carry the fuel, food and goods the world runs on.

That’s the warning at the heart of a report from the climate think tank E3G, Beyond Securing Supply. It makes a case that should worry anyone who cares about a just, liveable future: the world’s energy system isn’t just fragile because of any one crisis. It’s fragile because a small number of choke points now have to absorb war, sabotage, congestion and climate breakdown, often at the same time and there’s no cushion left when several hit at once.

Three narrow waterways, one overstretched system

The Strait of Hormuz. Just 55km wide at its narrowest point, this single passage between Iran and Oman normally carries roughly a quarter of the world’s seaborne oil and a fifth of its LNG. Since the outbreak of the 2026 war between Iran, the US and Israel, the strait has been effectively shut to commercial shipping. Attacks on tankers pushed war-risk insurance premiums up as much as fourfold, and freight rates on the key Gulf-to-Asia route jumped over 300% almost overnight. Oil and gas prices spiked globally within days, even hitting countries with no direct trade link to the region at all. 

The Gulf of Oman connects the Arabian Sea with the Strait of Hormuz. Photo: picture alliance/dpa/NASA/The Visible Earth

Bab el-Mandeb, at the mouth of the Red Sea, is a vital 18-mile-wide sea lane, a primary global chokepoint where roughly 10% to 12% of international trade and millions of barrels of oil pass dailyOngoing Houthi attacks since late 2023 have made it too dangerous, pushing most Western-linked shipping to go all the way around Africa, via the Cape of Good Hope. That’s not a return to normal , it’s a new, permanently more expensive normal: longer voyages, higher freight and insurance costs, and less spare tanker capacity to absorb the next shock. Egypt runs the  Suez Canal revenues and depends on its tolls, a critical piece of its economy, that have now reportedly fallen by roughly half.

The Bab al-Mandeb Strait from space, between the Horn of Africa (left) and the Arabian Peninsula (right). Photo: by Gallo Images, Orbital Horizon/Copernicus Sentinel Data 2021/Getty Images

 

The Panama Canal. This is a channel where 5-6% of all global trade goes through, including critical food and gas supplies. Unlike the other two, this chokepoint isn’t shut by conflict , it’s impacted by drought. A strong El Niño, layered on top of long-term climate change, has driven Gatún Lake (the freshwater reservoir the canal’s locks depend on) to record lows for a second time in three years. Daily transits have been cut from the normal ~36–38 ships down toward the low 20s. Ships without a booked slot now face costly reservation auctions , where the average winning bid has reportedly jumped from around $135,000 to as much as $4 million. Scientists studying the 2023 Panama drought concluded it would have been “unlikely” without El Niño, and that climate change is making these swings between El Niño and La Niña more extreme and more frequent.

The Panama Canal is located directly between the Atlantic Ocean (via the Caribbean Sea) and the Pacific Ocean Photo: GeogGlobeTales, TikTok

 

Why these aren’t separate problems 

It would be easy to file all this under “geopolitics” and move on but climate change isn’t a bystander here  it’s a structural multiplier of chokepoint risk.

Three things are happening at once:

1. Physical disruption: War, attacks and accidents slow-down or block the routes directly..
2. “Paper chokepoints”: , Insurance companies, sanctions and shipping contracts make it hard to reroute,  even when another path technically exists. 
3. Climate change: drought, heat and extreme weather are steadily eroding the capacity and reliability of the routes that would normally offer a way around a crisis.

Crucially, these layers stack. When Hormuz  closed ships couldn’t simply detour through the Red Sea route as an escape valve from the Hormuz crisis , because that route was already too dangerous.. When shipping gets rerouted around Africa to avoid the Red Sea, that adds pressure on tanker capacity everywhere else. And when the Panama Canal , one of the few large alternative corridors for Asia-bound US cargoes , is running at reduced capacity because of drought, there’s less slack left in the whole system to absorb the next shock, wherever it comes from.

In other words: the more the climate crisis narrows our margin for error, the harder every other kind of shock , war, sabotage, an accident, a blockage , hits.

Who pays the price

The costs of this don’t land evenly, and that’s the injustice at the centre of it.

While governments of oil-exporting countries may actually see revenues rise when prices spike; Ordinary households, especially in import-dependent countries, see the opposite: higher fuel and shipping costs pushed straight through to food and energy bills. A 10% rise in fuel prices is estimated to raise food distribution costs by 3–5% in import-dependent economies , a burden that falls hardest on the poorest households, where food can already absorb 50–70% of income.

• South Asian economies like Pakistan and Bangladesh are the most structurally exposed of all major importers, heavily dependent on Gulf LNG routed through Hormuz, with little spare capacity to cushion a shock.
• There’s also a slower-moving hit still coming: the Gulf supplies close to half the world’s sulphur and urea (both critical fertiliser inputs) and roughly 40% of global helium. E3G’s analysis (echoed elsewhere) suggests fertilizer shortages triggered by the Hormuz disruption could take 6–9 months to show up, meaning the full effect on food prices and harvests across South Asia and East Africa may still be ahead of us. 

More fossil fuels won’t fix this

The instinctive response to a supply shock is to look for more fossil fuel supply, from new suppliers, new pipelines, new terminals but more supply does not remove the exposure. Oil is priced on integrated global markets, so a shock anywhere raises prices everywhere, regardless of where your own cargo comes from. Diversifying suppliers can smooth short-term bumps, but it doesn’t touch the structural vulnerability of depending on a small number of narrow physical corridors in the first place.

The one thing that does reduce exposure, durably, is needing less oil and gas to move through these chokepoints at all. Once a wind turbine or solar panel is installed, it generates power locally for 25–30 years, immune to a closed strait or a dried-up lake, in a way that no amount of LNG diversification can match. Electrification, efficiency, grid build-out and clean power aren’t just climate policies anymore , they’re energy security policy, and arguably the only kind that actually holds up under simultaneous shocks.

That’s the throughline connecting Hormuz, Bab el-Mandeb and Panama: three very different crises, one shared root cause , a global energy system built on continuous shipments through a handful of chokepoints, now colliding with a warming, more volatile world. The war in the Gulf will end at some point. The next El Niño will not be the last, and it won’t be gentler. Building resilience means shrinking our dependence on the fossil fuel system that keeps putting all of us at the mercy of these narrow stretches of water.

Sources:

• E3G, Beyond Securing Supply: Chokepoint Risk for Oil and Gas Importers, March 2026.
• Additional information from World Weather Attribution, Carbon Brief, and reports on the August 2026 Panama Canal restrictions.

The post When war, warming and El Niño collide: the world’s shipping lanes are buckling all at once appeared first on 350.

California bill to require full disclosure of diaper chemicals heads to Gov. Newsom for signature Monica Amarelo August 26, 2026

SACRAMENTO – California’s Legislature today passed a bill that would, if enacted, require manufacturers of children’s diapers sold, distributed or manufactured in the state to fully disclose their ingredients on the product’s packaging and online. 

Assembly Bill 1901, by Assemblymember Marc Berman (D-Menlo Park), now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his signature. The Environmental Working Group, Consumer Reports, Children Now and the Center for Environmental Health are co-sponsoring the bill.

“As a new dad, I have a new appreciation for how important it is for parents to make informed decisions when it comes to the health and wellness of their children,” said Berman.

“We all want the best for our children, but the lack of transparency around diaper ingredients prevents us from knowing what ‘the best’ is when buying the one thing that is touching our baby’s skin every minute of their lives for years,” he said. 

“I’m proud to author AB 1901 to give parents greater transparency about the chemicals in their children’s diapers so that they can make the right choice for their family,” Berman added.

Newborns and toddlers especially vulnerable

Babies spend much of their first two to three years of life in diapers. Yet the federal government does not require disposable diapers to carry ingredient labels of any kind. 

Manufacturers are not required to inform regulators about the chemicals used to make them. Instead, they can hide dozens of chemicals behind umbrella terms like “fragrance” or “colors” – potentially toxic mystery cocktails. This situation leaves parents with no way of knowing what chemicals sit against their baby’s skin day after day.

“A newborn’s skin is thinner, more permeable and still developing, which means it absorbs chemicals more readily than an adult’s does, and diapers are in constant contact with that skin, around the clock, for years,” said Sydney Swanson, a senior science analyst at EWG.

“Right now, parents have no way of knowing what their baby is being exposed to. Every hour of every day, an infant’s skin is absorbing whatever industry decided not to tell us about. Parents can read a nutrition label or a shampoo label but not this,” she added. 

“AB 1901 isn’t asking for anything radical. It’s asking for diapers to contain ingredient labels that are similar to labels required of other baby products,” Swanson said.

Chemicals found in diapers

Recent tests have found diapers may contain volatile organic compounds and phthalates, linked to hormone disruption and reproductive and developmental harm.

Tests have also found diapers containing quaternary ammonium compounds, or quats, used in wetness indicators and linked to reproductive effects, skin irritation and asthma, as well as dyes and bleaching agents that can cause allergic reactions or skin and respiratory irritation. 

Because babies’ skin is thinner, more permeable and still developing, they are especially vulnerable to potential harms from these chemical exposures. 

Many children with special needs rely on diapers for years, prolonging the exposure risk. When manufacturers hide their ingredients, caregivers may feel fearful and sidelined. 

“Transparency isn’t about causing fear but about replacing uncertainty with the facts parents need to protect their children,” said Susan Little, California legislative director. 

“And because an infant’s thin skin absorbs chemicals more easily, hidden ingredients like phthalates can trigger a lifetime of health challenges.” 

“California parents shouldn’t need a chemistry degree to buy a diaper. They deserve to know exactly what is touching their child’s skin. Caregivers want this information,” said Little.

Making baby products safer

California has already shown that more transparency about what’s in baby products can help spur changes that reduce hazardous ingredients and their health threats. After the state required public disclosure of results of heavy metal tests of baby food, in January 2025, manufacturers responded by reducing heavy metal contamination levels in many product categories. 

AB 1901 applies that same principle to diapers while giving parents and caregivers more informed choices. If enacted, it would be a first-in-the-nation law requiring such full diaper ingredient transparency. The bill would require online disclosure to begin on January 1, 2029, and disclosure on the package to begin July 1, 2029. 

“Stronger regulation and full disclosure are needed, and that’s why this bill is so important to protect children's health,” said Little. 

And AB 1901 is something manufacturers can comply with – a 2023 New York law that requires on-label disclosure of diaper ingredients shows that greater transparency is achievable.

EWG has created a Guide to Safer Diapers to help parents navigate the market in the meantime, and diapers earning the EWG Verified® mark meet our strict standards for ingredient transparency and health.

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Founded in 1936, Consumer Reports has a mission to create a fair and just marketplace for all. Widely known for our rigorous research and testing of products and services, we also survey millions of consumers each year, report extensively on marketplace issues, and advocate for consumer rights and protections around safety as well as digital rights, financial fairness, and sustainability. CR is independent and nonprofit.

The Center for Environmental Health believes everything people consume, from the water they drink to the toys their children handle, should put health first. We insist on laws and policies that protect the public from harm, work to make communities more aware of risks, and push to transform corporate behavior. CEH advances environmental health and justice for the greater good, from the courtroom to the boardroom.

Children Now harnesses collective power to achieve transformational and systemic results for California’s kids as one of the country’s most impactful kids’ nonprofits. Led by experienced policy and government relations teams spanning health, education, early childhood, child welfare, and a range of other areas, Children Now learns from kids and families where they need support and lift up solutions to policymakers with the power to act. 

Areas of Focus Household & Consumer Products Children’s Health Toxic Chemicals Chemical Policy California Press Contact Monica Amarelo monica@ewg.org (202) 939-9140 August 27, 2026

Landmark California bill that would track and disclose PFAS pesticide use heads to Newsom’s desk Monica Amarelo August 26, 2026

SACRAMENTO – Groundbreaking legislation that would address the widespread use of toxic PFAS “forever chemicals” pesticides on California produce today passed the state Legislature. 

It now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for his signature.

If enacted, Assembly Bill 1603, by Assemblymember Nick Schultz (D-Burbank), would require the state to monitor and disclose PFAS pesticide use. State agencies were not tracking the concerning use of toxic PFAS on crops until the Environmental Working Group raised concerns.

More than 2.5 million pounds of PFAS pesticides are applied to Golden State crops each year, contaminating produce sold in the state and throughout the U.S., in addition to soil and water. 

EWG research found PFAS pesticides on nine in 10 California-grown samples of non-organic peaches, nectarines and plums tested by the state, as well as in local waterways.

“As a father, I don’t want my kids eating strawberries contaminated with chemicals that will stay in their bodies for decades,” said Schultz. 

“AB 1603 is a vital step toward ensuring California’s agricultural legacy is defined by health and innovation, not by the accumulation of toxic PFAS in our soil and water,” he added. 

“We need to help our farmers transition away from these persistent chemicals so California can be a global leader in food safety,” Schultz said.

“The state cannot act on this newly revealed PFAS problem if it ignores the issue and pretends it doesn’t exist,” said Susan Little, EWG California legislative director. 

“Right now, the state has no comprehensive picture of where these chemicals are being sprayed or in what quantities,” she added.

The bill would also establish a class-based definition of PFAS pesticides, consistent with other California laws and regulations already addressing these chemicals. That definition matters: It ensures tracking and disclosure requirements can’t be sidestepped with chemical-by-chemical loopholes. 

The definition would also lay the groundwork for action that avoids “regrettable substitutions” – PFAS replacements that can also have health concerns.

Though thousands of PFAS are used today, comprehensive toxicity data is available about very few. But what is known is alarming: The health harms linked to the most well-studied PFAS, including cancer, suppression of the immune system and reproductive and developmental harm, show up at doses far lower than regulators once considered safe.

Other AB 1603 sponsors include Californians for Pesticide Reform, the Center for Environmental Health and the Pesticide Action and Agroecology Network.

Why tracking and monitoring matter

If enacted, AB 1603 will require the Department of Pesticide Regulation to begin systematically tracking and publicly disclosing PFAS pesticide use across the state, marking the first time California has required this level of visibility about where the chemicals are applied.

“Because of their chemical structures, all PFAS share the core characteristics of extreme environmental persistence and potential harm to immune and reproductive systems,” said Varun Subramaniam, EWG science analyst. “That raises serious concerns about the long-term health risks of using PFAS pesticides on food crops.”

“We need to stop spraying our produce with toxic ‘forever chemicals.’ With this bill, we are telling it like it is, so farmers and the public alike can be aware of the extent of this hidden PFAS use,” said Subramaniam. 

Collecting reliable, ongoing tracking data will end the long-running gap in data about PFAS pesticide use in the state. Access to this data will help build a foundation for action that could include use restrictions, farmer transition support, water monitoring and more.

“The United States depends on California for its fruits and vegetables, but right now that produce is  being seasoned with chemicals that never break down,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, EWG’s senior vice president for California.

“We cannot claim to lead the world in public health while allowing millions of pounds of toxic PFAS to be deliberately sprayed on our most iconic crops,” she said.

States leading on regulation

The federal Environmental Protection Agency regulates and approves pesticides for national use, but states aren’t required to follow suit. 

California operates its own approval system: Its Department of Pesticide Regulation must independently evaluate and authorize each chemical before farmers can use it. That gives the state the authority to protect its residents – power it has largely chosen not to use when it comes to PFAS pesticides.

That authority matters more than ever because of what is happening at the federal level. The EPA has continued to approve new PFAS pesticides at an accelerating pace, greenlighting three more in July. 

With the EPA fast-tracking approvals, California taking the lead in informing the public and local officials about the pesticides that do contain PFAS, while monitoring the pesticides’ use, is necessary.

Banning PFAS pesticides

While California remains one of the world’s largest users of PFAS pesticides, other jurisdictions have moved to restrict or ban them. In 2023, Maine enacted the nation’s first ban on PFAS pesticides, starting in 2030. In the same year, Minnesota banned nonessential PFAS uses, including pesticides, phasing them out by 2032.

Other countries are also acting. The European Union has prohibited 23 of the PFAS pesticides heavily used in California, including bifenthrin, trifluralin and flufenacet.

AB 1603, if enacted, will put California in line with these other states and jurisdictions, laying the groundwork for the nation’s salad bowl to once again be a public health leader. 

“California has been a public health bellwether for decades, from car emissions to chemical safety,” said Del Chiaro. “But we’ve been silent on PFAS pesticides, even though we are one of the biggest users.

“AB 1603 can begin to change that. This is the least we can do for families and communities struggling to contain widespread PFAS contamination in our soil, air, water and food,” she added.

###

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Californians for Pesticide Reform (CPR) is a diverse, statewide coalition of 200+ member groups working to strengthen pesticide policies in California to protect public health and the environment. Member groups include public and children’s health advocates, clean air and water groups, health practitioners, environmental justice groups, labor, education, farmers and sustainable agriculture advocates from across the state.

The Center for Environmental Health believes everything people consume, from the water they drink to the toys their children handle, should put health first. We insist on laws and policies that protect the public from harm, work to make communities more aware of risks, and push to transform corporate behavior. CEH advances environmental health and justice for the greater good, from the courtroom to the boardroom.

Pesticide Action & Agroecology Network (PAN) North America, is the North America Regional Center for the international PAN network. We work with those on the frontlines to tackle the pesticide problem and reclaim the future of food and farming from the pesticide and biotech corporations that have, for far too long, dictated how we grow food, placing the health and economic burdens of pesticide use on farmers, farmworkers and rural communities.

Areas of Focus Farming & Agriculture Toxic Chemicals Pesticides PFAS Chemicals California Transparency legislation would reveal ‘forever chemicals’ sprayed on the state’s produce Press Contact Monica Amarelo monica@ewg.org (202) 939-9140 August 26, 2026

California lawmakers pass bill to create landmark ‘non-ultra-processed’ food label Iris Myers August 26, 2026

SACRAMENTO – Today the California Legislature took a major step toward protecting public health by passing a first-of-its-kind bill to create a certified “non-ultra-processed” food label intended to make it easier for consumers to choose less-processed foods in the grocery store.

Assembly Bill 2244, authored by Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel (D-Encino), would develop a state certification program for products that are not ultra-processed, or UPF. If enacted, it would create a new standardized and government-backed seal for non-UPF foods.

It would also require some of the largest grocery stores to highlight these products in store so they’re easier for shoppers to identify. 

The Environmental Working Group is cosponsoring the bill, which now heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk for his signature.

“Parents shouldn’t need a Ph.D. in chemistry to understand what they’re feeding their kids,” said Gabriel. 

“AB 2244 will empower consumers with clear, trustworthy information and make it easier for them to locate healthier foods that are free from harmful additives. This new seal doesn’t limit consumer choice, it just makes informed choice possible,” he added.

A new standard for healthier food

Under AB 2244, the state would create a standardized label bearing the phrase “Non-Ultraprocessed Certified.” Products would not be permitted to carry the new label if they are classified as UPF under state law. 

Some types of food, such as substances or additives used to manipulate taste and quality, would not qualify for the new label. These food chemicals, such as dyes, flavor enhancers, non-sugar sweeteners and processing aids, are used to make food hyperpalatable and irresistible. 

AB 2244 builds on a precedent-setting earlier law by Gabriel. AB 1264 set the first U.S. legal definition of UPF and banned the worst UPF from K-12 public schools. 

If Newson signs AB 2244, the California Department of Public Health would oversee approved agents’ independent certification of products that meet the state’s non-UPF standard and qualify to use the label. 

AB 2244 would direct the department to accredit these third-party agents no later than June 1, 2029. It would also require product recertification at least every three years.

“This is about setting a higher bar for what we consider healthy food and helping consumers make wise choices,” said Bernadette Del Chiaro, EWG senior vice president for California. 

“Consumers deserve labels they can trust. And families deserve a simple way to tell which foods are closer to what comes from a kitchen rather than a factory.”

“If enacted, the bill would establish a state-verified seal for foods free from the additives, emulsifiers, food dyes and flavors that have come to define the modern American diet,” she added.

Transparency and accountability

The bill includes these strong oversight and transparency measures:

• Certification agents must register with the state and disclose all certified products
• The state can audit certification records at any time
• The state would maintain a public, online list of certified products 
• Misuse of the label would be illegal and subject to enforcement

These provisions are designed to ensure the label’s credibility.

Making healthier choices easier

In addition to creating the label, the bill would require large food retailers to display certified products carrying the label in a way that’s easy for consumers to identify, such as through special signage or physical separation within the store.

This requirement would apply to any grocery store that sells more than 25 individual non-UPF-certified product types and brings in more than $10 million in annual sales. 

Addressing the rise of UPF

UPF are industrially manufactured, chemically modified products often made with harmful additives to enhance taste, texture, appearance and shelf life. 

In the U.S., these foods make up more than two-thirds of children’s diets and more than half the typical adult diet.

Experts say ultra-processed food and drinks, particularly soda, are engineered to trick people into consuming more than they want.

Scientific research has linked diets high in UPF to serious health harms, including cancer, heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, metabolic disorders such as Crohn’s disease and fatty liver disease, and mental health issues.

Obesity is chief among the health problems linked to UPF. Rates of obesity in the U.S. and globally have skyrocketed in tandem with the rising UPF consumption.

Help for consumers

Despite these concerns, consumers have no clear, standard labeling system to help them identify UPF.

With federal regulators slow to update oversight of food additives and processing, states are increasingly taking action to protect public health.

AB 2244 builds on California’s leadership in addressing harmful food chemicals and improving transparency for consumers. 

“Because companies are not required to disclose an ingredient’s purpose, it can be really difficult even for experts, even for people like me who have a doctoral degree in nutrition, to look at a food package and determine whether a food is ultra-processed or not,” said Alyssa Moran, ScD, MPH. 

Moran is deputy director of the Center for Food and Nutrition Policy at the University of Pennsylvania.

“And from a behavioral science perspective, we also know people seldom use information on the back of food packages to make food decisions. So that is exactly why clear, science-backed labels on the front of food packages can be so influential in helping people to make better choices,” Moran said.

“If we want to meaningfully curb disease, we need a suite of complementary policies that limit the availability of ultra-processed foods, while promoting non-ultra-processed alternatives. I firmly believe this is the only way we’ll make progress,” she added.

Consumers can consult EWG’s Food Scores database to find products that are less processed. Food Scores also flags unhealthy ultra-processed food and drinks and can help identify alternatives.

###

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Food Ultra-Processed Foods Food Chemicals California UPF labeling legislation now heads to Gov. Newsom’s desk Press Contact Iris Myers iris@ewg.org (202) 939-9126 August 28, 2026

This was an international webinar for the People's Climate Summit held in Antalya, Turkey, parallel to COP31 in November, featuring Max Wilbert (CELDF's Co-coordinator of the Community Resistance & Resilience Program and author of Biocentric) as the main speaker.

The post Greenwashing: The Central Strategy of Next-Generation Industrialism with Max Wilbert appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.

California Legislature approves bill easing access to clean, affordable ‘balcony solar’ Anthony Lacey August 25, 2026

SACRAMENTO – The Environmental Working Group today applauds the California Legislature for passing a bill that will help Californians invest in clean energy while also tackling sky-high energy bills by making it easier to install small, affordable “balcony solar” systems.

Senate Bill 868, known as the Plug and Play Solar Act, would eliminate red tape that has kept these systems from being placed in apartments, condos and single-family homes. The legislation would also ensure the systems comply with strict safety standards.

The bill is authored by Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) and sponsored by EWG and the Abundance Network. SB 868 heads to Gov. Gavin Newsom for his signature.

“This is the most exciting clean energy idea around,”  said Bernadette Del Chiaro, EWG’s senior vice president for California. “With this bill, California is poised to fling its doors wide open to a real, tangible affordability solution for everyday consumers.

“Solar energy is a no-brainer for California and we applaud Sen. Wiener and his legislative colleagues for their hard work to put this critical clean energy solution on the governor’s desk,” she added. 

Balcony solar is thriving in Europe – in Germany more than 4 million systems have been installed. Efforts to ease their deployment are gathering steam in other countries.

But in the U.S., regulatory barriers keep this technology out of reach for many. If enacted, SB 868 would remove those barriers while ensuring the systems meet safety standards. 

Homeowners and renters could then buy portable balcony solar panels from retailers and plug them in without first having to get an interconnection agreement from their utility. The cost and time involved with getting that agreement has been a barrier to greater deployment of these systems. 

The Assembly amended the bill with a provision sunsetting the interconnection exemption on Jan. 1, 2030 – language sought by the utilities – but SB 868 gives the market four years to take off and the Legislature has the opportunity to remove the sunset in the future. 

Solving an urgent public health problem 

EWG this month released a report showing that California is experiencing more frequent and dangerous heat days, with extreme heat events up 55% statewide threatening public health and safety without access to cooling. But soaring utility bills mean millions of people can’t afford the air conditioning that could keep them safe. 

Balcony solar is one solution, helping lower electricity costs and making it cheaper to run vital cooling. With 2027 shaping up to be the hottest year on record, it can’t come soon enough. 

That’s why EWG is calling on policy makers to prioritize solutions like customer-sited solar energy that can drastically lower or eliminate annual utility costs for air conditioning.  If it becomes law, SB 868 would help millions of families tackle air conditioning costs.

“These small, easy-to-use solar panels will give everyone, including renters, the relief they desperately need on our outrageous energy bills,” said Wiener. “Electricity costs have reached ridiculous levels here in California and the Plug and Play Solar Act provides a much-needed tool to provide relief. It’s time to put money back in the pockets of Californians.”

A single 400-watt balcony solar system can cover roughly 14% of the average apartment’s electricity usage, providing savings of about $250 per year. While the cost of balcony solar starts around $500 today, with broader adoption enabled by SB 868, EWG expects costs to fall, making solar even more accessible to renters and low-income households.

California electricity rates have nearly doubled over the past decade, leaving the state with the nation’s second-highest energy prices. SB 868 provides consumers with a straightforward way to take control of their energy bills.

And the systems are easy to use. “Installing balcony solar is as simple as plugging an appliance like a toaster into a standard wall outlet,” said Del Chiaro. 

“At a time when many struggle to pay their energy bills, balcony solar is a powerful cost-cutting tool that also helps the state meet its clean energy goals,” she added.

SB 868 would also ensure these plug-and-play systems meet strict safety standards. All systems must be certified by UL, or Underwriters Laboratories, the global independent safety science company, or an equivalent national testing lab. To protect utility workers and prevent electrical hazards, systems must automatically shut off within seconds if the grid goes down. 

System size is capped at 1,200 watts, enough to power everyday appliances such as fridges, lights, Wi-Fi routers and AC units.

California is not the first state to remove barriers to balcony solar. Utah became the first in 2025, and so far, eight other states have enacted laws to do the same. 

With today’s vote, California joins New York as another state with a balcony solar bill sitting on the governor’s desk. Newsom has 30 days to take action on SB 868. The California Assembly and Senate both gave the bill strong bipartisan support, with over 90% approval in both chambers.

“California may not be the first out of the gates but we are the biggest prize,” said Del Chiaro. “If Gov. Newsom signs this bill into law, the size of our market will radically transform and accelerate the adoption of this brilliant new way to tackle both climate change and energy affordability.” 

###

The Environmental Working Group is a nonprofit, non-partisan organization that empowers people to live healthier lives in a healthier environment. Through research, advocacy and unique education tools, EWG drives consumer choice and civic action.

Areas of Focus Energy Renewable Energy California SB 868 would end red tape blocking millions from utility bill savings Press Contact Alex Formuzis alex@ewg.org (202) 667-6982 August 25, 2026

Germany is among the top three countries in Europe with the highest private jet flights per year1. The NGO ROBIN WOOD e.V. in Germany decided to do something about it. They’ve been working on a campaign for a ban of private jets at the airport in Hamburg. Private jets are one of the most climate-wrecking forms of transport2 and the number of flights increases every year. What exactly are the…

Source

Photo: Julien Helaine | Activists break onto the tarmac at Roissy Charles-de-Gaulle Airport to protest against the Terminal 4 project, October 3, 2020. This overview of the opposition to the expansion plans for Roissy Charles-de-Gaulle Airport was co-authored by Charlène Fleury, Audrey Boehly and Eric Lombard. It forms part of the ‘Emergency Landing’ feature in the October issue of the…

Source

ARGENTINA: Gatherings for Life and the Future 29th Seed Festival of Misiones Province Explore BePe's campaigns here

On Pachamama Day, organizations from Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay gathered in Aristóbulo del Valle, Misiones, one day after the 29th Provincial Seed Fair, to strengthen the political, organizational, and educational capacities of leaders and organizations in the Triple Frontier region committed to defending seeds as the heritage of the people.

The event was attended by more than 800 people from organizations in the three border countries.

YLNM member BePe participated in this political coordination meeting as an organization that is part of the MAELA Network, the Latin American and Caribbean Agroecology Movement. In addition to the indispensable exchange of experiences and contextual analyses, the meeting affirmed that agroecological practices and those of the social and solidarity economy are real alternatives for breaking free from the system of death generated by colonial, patriarchal, and extractivist capitalism. In this context, it is worth noting that the territories of Catamarca constitute “sacrifice zones” for big capital: we have endured nearly thirty years of mining exploitation disguised as a “productive and progress-generating” activity. The experience of participating in the process of creating alternatives constitutes a vital response to challenge the prevailing notions of progress, development, and authentic wealth for the people.

True wealth does not lie in money or in the financial system, which was invented as a fetish to distort the reality of life itself. True wealth lies in the alliance of peoples who have formed communities rooted in their territories, the true producers of life and the future. This alliance possesses the power and ancestral memory to bring us back to the reality of life: a marvelous emergence that springs from the relationships between the Cosmos, the Earth, and the human and non-human beings born of it.

Only by recognizing our origin can we build a future, one that is more than merely “sustainable,” but a future worth living. On this path, the gathering was also a timely opportunity to develop a plan for tri-national collaboration among seed-saving organizations and others dedicated to advancing agroecology and creating community-based, territorially rooted spaces.

We continue to walk in these footsteps, inherited from ancestral struggles. Furthermore, at BePe, we are committed to standing alongside the organizations from Catamarca and Santiago del Estero so that they may be part of the preparations for Brazil’s National Agroecology Meeting, to be held in Foz do Iguaçu in June 2027.

BePe: https://www.bepe.org.ar/conozcanos/

Other references:

https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1515365267285488&id=100064360885231&rdid=lPNohWB43KIArtfM#

https://www.lavozdemisiones.com/provinciales/feria-de-semillas-tierra-corpus-y-yerba-viejas-luchas-reaparecen-en-misiones/

The post Argentina – Gatherings For Life and the Future appeared first on Yes to Life No to Mining.

Warriors Defending Our Mother Nature: The Ocean Is Our Home The Alliance of Solwara Warriors and the Fight Against Deep Sea Mining

 

 

Bismarck & Solomon Seas, Papua New Guinea

Women and men from Duke of York Islands and New Ireland Province at the Shark Calling Festival in the west coast of New Ireland Province. Credit: The Healthy Oceans Network and Piku Biodiversity Network Inc.

An emblematic case by the Alliance of Solwara Warriors with the support of the West Coast Development Foundation and the Deep Sea Mining Campaign

Along the Bismarck and Solomon Seas of Papua New Guinea, coastal communities have spent more than fifteen years standing between their ocean and the machines that would tear it open. They are Duke of York Islanders and West Coast Namatanai villagers, Milne Bay fisherfolk and Karkar Islanders, Manus seafarers and Nissan clanspeople. They are nited across six provinces, dozens of languages and a thousand kilometres of coastline as the Alliance of Solwara Warriors (ASW) – in Tok Pisin: Yumi Lukautim Solwara — we look after the sea

Their fight began against Solwara 1 deep sea mining project in the Bismarck Sea. This project is the world’s first commercial deep sea mine given an operating licence, until today the project has not started operating.

This is not only a case about resistance. It is a case about what the Solwara Warriors are saying YES to: a living ocean that is mother, garden, highway, law-giver and ancestor all at once. YES to a world of Locally Managed Marine Areas, coral farms, fisheries cooperatives and cultural revival that they are building in its place, on their own terms.

The Ocean Is Our Mother:
Life in the Bismarck and Solomon Seas "The ocean is not a resource. It is our ancestor, our provider, our home."

– Jonathan Mesulam, Alliance of Solwara Warriors Coordinator, New Ireland Province

For the coastal peoples of the Bismarck and Solomon Seas, the ocean is not scenery and it is not a commodity. It is family.

“The sea carries our ancestors’ voices and connects us to other clans across islands,” says Edderlink Sarwau of the Alliance of Solwara Warriors (ASW) Karkar, in Madang Province.

In Milne Bay Province, communities put it just as plainly: for a Milne Bayan, the sea is called mother, because it provides everything needed for life. While gardens on land supply yams and taro, it is the sea that supplies the protein, the trade, and the very sense of who people are.

That relationship is woven into economy and identity alike. The Kula ring — the centuries-old exchange of shell valuables that binds islands from the Trobriands to Woodlark — is carried across deep-sea trade routes that run over seamounts and trenches communities consider sacred.

Clan and family names carry the ocean inside them:

“My dad’s name is Michael Melebe. Melebe refers to shark. Lebe in the Madak language means shark. This is how sacred and special our culture is,” one ASW member explains. The root of the Shark Calling Culture that ASW works to protect.

Livelihoods flow directly from this bond.

Families fish reef fish, parrotfish, mullet and mackerel for daily protein; women and men dive by hand for trochus, beche-de-mer, clams and mud crabs to sell for school fees, church contributions and household goods; bamboo fish traps are set to catch only what a family needs, sized so the small fish swim free through the gaps.

“We fish with wisdom,” Milne Bay ASW members explain. “We take only what the family needs. Use hand lines, not dynamite or chemical fishing that kills little fish for the future.”

Elders read the ocean like a text, including frigate birds diving that signal baitfish running, clouds that warn of storms, moons that tell which nights the fish are spawning and should be left alone.

"The ocean is Earth's life force — regulating climate, sustaining biodiversity, and nourishing communities."

— Edderlink Sarwau, ASW Karkar, Madang Province

Climate change is already unsettling this inheritance. “The old signs are less reliable,” ASW members report; mangroves that once buffered villages from storm surge now struggle against rising seas and stronger cyclones, gardens are lost to inland flooding, and coral that should be vivid with colour is bleaching white. Into this already-stressed ocean, the mining industry now proposes to bring machines to the seafloor itself.

Two boys preparing their fishing nets with the ocean behind them in Mioko, Duke of York Islands in the Bismarck Sea of Papua New Guinean. Credit: Nat Lowrey, Deep Sea Mining Campaign

Solwara 1 Deep Sea Mining project:
A World-First Experiment the Sea Never Consented To

In 2011, the Canadian company Nautilus Minerals secured a mining lease from the Papua New Guinea government for Solwara 1, a project that would have become the world’s first commercial deep sea mine — tearing into hydrothermal vent fields roughly 1,500 to 1,600 metres beneath the Bismarck Sea, some 25 kilometres offshore, to extract copper and gold.

“The Solwara 1 site sits at a very crucial location where the impact of this project will affect coastal communities along the Bismarck Sea,” an Alliance of Solwara Warriors (ASW) member notes. “For people along the Duke of York Islands and West Coast Namatanai communities, this project threatens our daily survival.”

No comparable project had ever been attempted anywhere on Earth.

“The life in the oceans has taken millions of years,” Jonathan Mesulam, Alliance of Solwara Warriors Coordinator and Founder and Director of the West Coast Development Foundation, has said, “to be what it is today” — and “no one knows what the environmental impact will be.”

Communities who had fished, dived and navigated these waters for generations were never meaningfully asked.

“The information and knowledge of seabed mining is very limited,” an ASW member explains. “Locals have been convinced of the monetary benefits the project will bring, without really understanding the potential negative impact.”

Consultations, where they happened at all, arrived as technical documents in languages people did not speak, decisions communities were told about rather than asked into.

“Our people felt decisions were made elsewhere, not in our villages,” as ASW Karkar members put it.

This is the pattern the global Yes to Life No to Mining network calls the colonial extractive development model: a resource frontier opened without the free, prior and informed consent of the people who will carry its risks, dressed in the language of jobs and progress.

In Papua New Guinea, ASW is explicit about who now stands in the way of the people’s right to say no.

“The challenge has shifted from local communities and landowners making the critical decision, to political leadership,” the Alliance of Solwara Warriors (ASW) notes. “Political leaders are our main enemy.”

"Developed nations have banned seabed mining… experts and scientists have stated that the unknowns are too great."

— Governor Gary Juffa, Oro Province

Above all, ASW has refused to let the risk be reduced to economics.

“If we allow seabed mining, then we may just call for the end of humanity,” Jonathan Mesulam has warned, describing an ecosystem, and a food chain, too complex and too poorly understood to gamble with. “The sea has no boundaries,” he adds: whatever is unleashed on the Bismarck Sea floor will not stay there.

Ancestors of the Deep:
The Sacred Law of Kastom

Mioko in the Duke of York Islands in the Bismarck Sea of Papua New Guinea. The Solwara 1 deep sea mining project sits 25km from Duke of York Islands. Credit: Nat Lowrey, Deep Sea Mining Campaign.

Long before any environmental impact statement, the peoples of the Bismarck and Solomon Seas had their own law governing the deep, ‘kastom’. Kastom is carried orally through elders, chiefs and clan leaders, and enforced not by regulators but by consequence.

Across Milne Bay Province alone, community members shared names, stories and spiritual figures tied to specific seamounts, trenches and channels, each one a boundary on what may be taken and how.

East of Kiriwina in the Trobriand Islands lies Tewala, a reef wall dropping into deep water called bwaibwai, home to a powerful masalai. Only men with clean hearts may dive there; anyone who boasts or takes too much risks being taken by the current, never to return. Ancestral law ‘gumagabu’ reserves the fish of the deepest channels for chiefs and feast days alone; ordinary people fish the shallows.

Along the Kula route to Dobu and Woodlark, spirits are said to ride the currents over the seamounts, and to sink the canoes of anyone who fights, spills blood (or mines and extracts) along the way.

On Goodenough Island, elders describe a giant sea serpent asleep in the trench toward Fergusson Island, its back forming the seamount chain and its stillness holding back earthquakes; to cut its skin with dynamite or a drill is to shake the island and wash away the gardens.

In the channel to Wagifa, a masalai woman is said to sing; when fishing turns greedy or the sea is polluted, her song changes and the fish stop coming.

South of Dobu, the seamounts called Bwebweso are the resting houses of Kula spirits, crossed only in silence, therefore no fishing, no anchoring, no industry.

Around Panaeati and Brooker Islands, unseen beings called tokwai are said to farm tuna and trevally on the deep seamounts; people may eat what strays to the reef, but:

“we must eat the fruits, not the tree — mining is cutting the tree down.”

In the waters off Sudest, a mother spirit is said to birth all the fish and send them to feed the people; damage her home, and “the whole food chain collapses.”

"It's not just rocks and water. It's ancestors' house, spirits' garden, bones of the sea. If you break it, you can't fix it again."

— Composite of Milne Bay chiefs, elders and mothers, as told to ASW

Further north on Karkar Island, ASW Madang members describe the same principle in their own terms: masalai, guardian spirits, protect specific reefs and currents, and the message across every telling is the same, to approach the deep with humility, not greed.

Certain reefs are set aside as resting places for ancestors; entry requires protocol, prayer, or the permission of an elder, and breaking that protocol is believed to bring sickness or misfortune.

Communities read the health of their sea the way scientists read instruments: coral colour and growth, seabirds feeding close to shore, water clarity, whether tuna return to Panaeati in season, whether sharks are still seen at the Tewala drop-off.

“These natural signs guide us more than scientific instruments,”ASW Karkar notes.

It is this law, not a regulator’s checklist, that communities invoke when asked whether Free, Prior and Informed Consent has ever truly been given.

“In Milne Bay, the same rule applies — not just for mining but for marriage, for land. If you don’t follow it, it’s not worth it,” one member explains.

In Karkar, Free Prior and Informed Consent (FPIC) is defined with equal clarity:

“Free: no bribery or pressure. Prior: consultation before decisions are made. Informed: information given in our language, with time to discuss among clans.”

By that standard, the community’s own standard is that consent for seabed mining in Papua New Guinea has never been met.

The Warriors of The Alliance of Solwara Warriors

Community alarm over seabed mining in Papua New Guinea reaches back to 2009, when the state issued Nautilus Minerals its first environmental permit, and hardened in 2012, when more than 25,000 signatures were carried to Northern Governor Garry Juffa and the Mining Minister.

In those early years, resistance was scattered. A few individual voices and a handful of civil society groups such as the Bismarck Ramu Group, and politicians including Governor Juffa and Dr Allan Marat, with the Catholic and Lutheran churches played a critical early role.

In 2016, those voices coalesced formally into the Alliance of Solwara Warriors (ASW), a coalition built specifically to “speak one voice, in one language,” maintaining a single, grassroots-driven position: Ban Seabed Mining.

Today ASW brings together coastal communities, community-based organisations, NGOs, churches and concerned individuals across the Bismarck and Solomon Seas, coordinated by seven regional focal points:

No. Name Organisation Province 1 John Momori Caritas Kavieng Diocese New Ireland 2 Jenny Jack Duke of York AE1 Development East New Britain 3 Lawrence Smith Balel Conservation Autonomous Region of Bougainville 4 Pais Alik Caritas Papitalai Manus 5 Edderlink Sarwau ASW Karkar Madang 6 James Tomiyavau Caritas Alotau Milne Bay 7 Jonathan Mesulam West Coast Development Foundation New Ireland

Jonathan Mesulam, Coordinator of the  Alliance of Solwara Warriors and Founder and Director, West Coast Development Foundation speaking on NBC Current Affairs in Papua New Guinea. Credit: West Coast Development Foundation

Jonathan Mesulam (pictured above) has coordinated the Alliance’s response for over a decade as founder of the West Coast Development Foundation, campaigning against deep sea mining, illegal logging and climate impacts across New Ireland Province since 2011, and facing threats for it. Hey says: “We never losing hope.”

Women lead throughout the network: from Jenny Jack’s work with Duke of York communities to the mothers, aunties and clan mothers who, as Milne Bay members describe it, “spoke” alongside chiefs and youth when the decision came to stand against mining.

The Catholic and Lutheran churches, through diocesan Caritas offices in Kavieng, Alotau and Papitalai, provide organisational backbone and moral authority across provinces.

Knowledge passes down deliberately, through elders and clan leaders to parents, uncles and aunties, and finally to children and youth who: “learn by doing.” ASW’s own name for itself in Tok Pisin says it plainly: Yumi Lukautim Solwara — we look after the sea.

Fifteen Years of Resistance

Alliance of Solwara Warriors at their 2nd Strategic Meeting held in Namatanai, New Ireland Province, October 2023. Credit: West Coast Development Foundation.

ASW’s campaign has combined community mobilisation, education, lobbying, church solidarity, and sustained legal action. This has led to winning real victories, while the threat of deep sea mining itself has refused to stay defeated.

YEAR MILESTONE 2009 PNG’s environmental regulator issues Nautilus Minerals its first permit for Solwara 1. 2011 Nautilus is granted Mining Lease ML-154 — the world’s first deep sea mining lease. 2012 Civil society delivers a 25,000+ signature petition to Governor Garry Juffa and the Mining Minister. 2016 The Alliance of Solwara Warriors is formally established, uniting scattered opposition into one grassroots voice. 2017 Coastal communities file court action against the Mineral Resources Authority; the Pacific Council of Churches condemns seabed mining; the first Namatanai forum is held; Jonathan Mesulam and three others file the landmark Deep Sea Mining – Freedom of Information (DSM-FOI) case. 2019 Nautilus Minerals collapses into bankruptcy after sustained community resistance and investor withdrawal; PNG’s Prime Minister announces a ten-year moratorium on seabed mining. It is a hard-won victory — and, ASW insists, only a pause. 2022–23 After the DSM-FOI case is dismissed at the National Court, PNG’s Supreme Court quashes that decision and sets a precedent ruling on Section 51 — the constitutional right to freedom of information — before ordering the case back to trial. ASW attends the International Seabed Authority in Jamaica and holds a third public forum plus 20 Days of Human Rights Activism across Namatanai and Kavieng. 2023 Despite the moratorium, PNG’s Mining Minister confirms the project’s backers — now trading as Deep Sea Mining Finance Ltd — intend to return, even as coastal communities reaffirm their opposition. 2024 ASW and partners launch the Wokisok Association and Kono Enpun Cooperative Society — community-owned economic alternatives; the National Court orders regulators to disclose all Solwara 1 documents to Mesulam and fellow plaintiffs; communities respond publicly when the survey vessel MV Coco resumes testing and sampling in their waters. 2025 The fight for political leadership continues: an acting provincial governor voices support for seabed mining even as the Prime Minister restates PNG’s opposition abroad; Governor Garry Juffa, Allan Bird and civil society renew their objections; ASW convenes its own provincial stakeholder consultation on seabed mining in New Ireland. 2026 The Alliance of Solwara Warriors continue to educate and mobilise within their local communites in their ongoing resistance against deep sea mining in the protection of their lives, livelihoods, cultural practuces and their living ocean.

 

The through-line across fifteen years is consistent: every time the project appears defeated, it resurfaces under a new name or a new backer, and every time, the Alliance of Solwara Warriors is still there — in the courts, in the villages, and at the national, regional and international tables.

Saying Yes to Life:
Building the Post-Extractive Ocean

The Alliance of Solwara’s (ASW) fight has never been only about refusal.

“Our main focus remains on protecting the ocean,” the Alliance states, “whilst promoting sustainable ocean management”

This is a living, practical answer to the question of what a post-extractive Papua New Guinea and Pacific looks like.

That answer is already taking shape in Locally Managed Marine Areas designed and governed by the communities who depend on them; in coral farming and marine research programs that rebuild reef health from the bottom up; and in fisheries projects and new community enterprises like the the Wokisok Association and Kono Enpun Cooperative Society among them. Such local cultural and economic initiatives keep income in the hands of the people who hold the knowledge, not offshore investors.

In May 2025, the West Coast Development Foundation ran a two-day fisheries training program for the community, passing skills forward exactly the way kastom knowledge always has: hand to hand, generation to generation.

Culture is treated as infrastructure, not decoration. ASW organises annual World Ocean Day celebrations and actively promotes cultural practices tied to the sea — above all the Shark Calling Culture that gives the Alliance’s own name its meaning. Reviving these practices is itself a form of resistance: proof that a living relationship with the ocean, carried in language, ritual and totem, is precisely what an industrial seabed mine would sever for good.

"The ocean is our everything, and destroying the oceans means destroying our everything."

— Pais Alick, ASW Manus

ASW is candid about what has made this model work, and offers it freely to others facing the same fight.

“One very important lesson,” the Alliance reflects, “is simply to tell the truth about any development project — people knowing the truth and accepting the facts will resist projects that will not benefit them. You do not need to force people to support the fight.”

And no community needs to face it alone:

“When I started talking about seabed mining, I thought I was the only one in the village,” one member recalls.

Awareness-raising and networking revealed how many others already stood against it.

That is how the Alliance itself was built, and it is why ASW has appreciated regional and global solidarity — with the Deep Sea Mining Campaign, with Yes to Life No to Mining, and with allies in Fiji, Tonga, Vanuatu, Hawaii, Cook Islands, Aotearoa/New Zealand and tacross the Pacific, all pushing together for a Pacific-wide ban.

 

"The Ocean is the source of our livelihoods — we depend on it greatly."

— Lawrence Smith, Balel Conservation, Bougainville

A Message To The Grandchildren

from Molot village, Duke of York Islands in the Biasmarck Sea, Papua New Guinea. Credit: Dr Helen Rosenbaum, Deep Sea Mining Campaign.

Nowhere is the meaning of “Yes to Life” clearer than in the words ASW’s own members chose when asked what they wanted their grandchildren to know about this moment. In the voice of an elder and ASW member from Milne Bay Province:

“My grandchildren, if you are reading this, it means the sea is still alive. It means the reef still has colour, the fish still run, and the spirits still rest in peace in the sea.”

“I am telling you this because big companies came asking to dig up the deep sea floor. They talked about jobs. They talked about money. But we saw the water grow hot, the coral turn white, and the big fish stop coming like they used to. So I, with your other grandparents, made a choice. We stood up and said no. We heard the sea cry. We stood by the law of our ancestors — the chiefs spoke, the Kula leaders spoke, the mothers spoke, the youth spoke.”

“Free, Prior and Informed Consent means: sit properly, talk straight, agree together in truth — and we did not agree to break the seafloor. We carried the pain, so you would not carry the burden. We ate little, so you could eat well later.”

“If you stand on the bow of a canoe and look down and see the colour of the reef — that is our gift to you. Do not let anyone fool you with the word “development.” Real development is when children can still catch fish with their own hands.”

Because of your grandparents’ decision — we live.”

— An Alliance of Solwara Warrior Elder, Milne Bay Province

Yes to Life No to Mining

Fifteen years on, the Solwara Warriors have already won things no court order can undo: a bankrupt mining company, a moratorium no government asked for on its own, a constitutional precedent on the public’s right to know, and a generation of youth who, in ASW’s own words, “see the sea as their identity and pride.”

Traditional knowledge, the Alliance is clear, “is not dying — it’s fighting under heavy pressure,” and it is winning ground: in Locally Managed Marine Areas, in coral farms, in cooperatives, in a fisheries training course, in a shark-calling song still sung on the water.

The threat has not gone away with political leaders who continue to court the very project communities have refused for a decade and a half. But so has the Alliance.

As a global network of communities defending the right to say no, and building the right to say yes, we stand with the Alliance of Solwara Warriors, with the people of the Bismarck and Solomon Seas, and with every coastal community choosing life and culture over short-term money.

“My grandparents fought in their time, so the sea lives.”

— A Milne Bay Elder

For this, we say Yes to Life, No to Mining!

Special Thanks:
Jonathan Mesulam, Coordinator, Alliance of Solwara Warriors (ASW) and Co-founder and Director of the West Coast Development Foundation (WCDF) who interviewed Alliance of Solwara Members across the Bismarck and Solomon Seas and collated the timeline of ‘Fifteen Years of Resistance’.

Editor:
Nat Lowrey, Deep Sea Mining Campaign (DSMC)

ASW, WCDF and DSMC are members of Yes to Life No to Mining

 

The post Warriors Defending Our Mother Nature: The Ocean Is Our Home appeared first on Yes to Life No to Mining.

Industry says food safety costs more. Some store brands show it doesn’t need to. Ketura Persellin August 24, 2026

Food industry lobbyists argue that food safety laws drive up grocery prices. EWG’s review of the shelf tells a different story – retailers are already proving that removing chemicals of concern from food doesn’t cost consumers a dime, and often costs them less. 

Grocery “store brands” like Walmart’s Great Value tend to be less expensive than famous name brands like Kraft and Kellogg. Grocers save money when they work directly with manufacturers and they pass some of those savings along to you. 

But store brands can sometimes also have fewer chemicals of concern while saving consumers money, proving that “healthier” and “cheaper” aren’t in conflict. Reformulating products while cutting the price shoppers pay is possible, and already being done.

Many retailers have created lists of chemicals they no longer use in their store brands, including Albertsons, H-E-B, Meijer, Hy-Vee, Kroger, Harris Teeter, Publix, ShopRite, Trader Joe’s, Walmart and Wegmans.

Some of these retailers have removed more than 100 chemicals of concern from their own store brands. For example, Albertsons list 117 substances that are not used in their “Open Nature” store Brand. H-E-B includes 203 that are free from their “Select Ingredients” line of products. These chemicals include BHT and TBHQ, preservatives that have been linked to tumor promotion in animals and immune dysfunction. 

That’s not only good news for consumers. It also undercuts the false claims food companies are making right now to fight food safety bills in Congress.

Affordable foods with fewer harmful chemicals

EWG looked at the name and store brands of common grocery items sold by several national chains that have store brands that have committed to not use select food chemicals of concern, such as those found on EWG’s Dirty Dozen™ Food Chemicals. 

A few examples:

• Aldi Fruit Rounds, Mom’s Best Fruity Rings and Wegmans Frosted Fruit O’s are all cheaper alternatives to Kellogg’s Froot Loops – and are free of synthetic dyes.
• Trader Joe’s version of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups leave out the TBHQ.
• WalMart’s store brand, Great Value, has a version of Cheez-It that’s free from TBHQ and costs less than the name brand version.

Source: EWG review of retailer websites accessed July 28, 2026

Store brands are often cheaper than name brands. Soda is one product type where the store brand can be less expensive and contain fewer toxic chemicals. For example, Whole Foods’ lemon-lime soda is more than $1 less than Mountain Dew.  

This doesn’t mean that every store brand food is healthy. Sugary cereals, soda and candy are still full of sugar. But when consumers choose to enjoy these foods as part of a healthy diet, they should know that foods free of harmful chemicals don't require paying more for it. 

Yet that’s exactly what food companies have been telling Congress.

Industry deception

Some of your favorite food companies are telling lawmakers that removing toxic chemicals from food and food packaging will drive up the cost of food. 

Their industry front group falsely claims that state laws making our food safe would increase food prices. Food lobbyists have even hired “experts” who worked for chemical manufacturers like Dow to argue that food chemical ban bills would raise costs for consumers. 

But their math makes bogus assumptions about how consumers actually shop. And it ignores affordable alternatives sitting on the same shelf. In fact, it’s also contradicted by another food industry report that found two-thirds of all grocery retailers are reformulating brands to meet consumers’ demand for cleaner products. 

If reformulation were as costly as industry claims, retailers wouldn’t be doing it voluntarily, at scale, while keeping prices flat or lower. Their math simply does not add up. 

States are leading on food safety laws

States have banned many toxic chemicals from food and food packaging, including chemicals linked to cancer. 

The Food and Drug Administration, by contrast, has banned just two – and only after states had done so. So far, the second Trump FDA has not banned a single chemical of concern. Without state action, there is little hope that the worst food chemicals will be off our plates any time soon. 

We need the states to protect us. 

When it comes to the toxic chemicals in our food, the FDA has a long history of failure. It has largely allowed food chemical companies to decide which food chemicals are safe and permitted these companies to add new chemicals to food without the FDA’s knowledge. Proposals to narrow these loopholes are still just that: proposals. 

Some members of Congress now want to make things even worse.

They would block states from keeping our food safe, and would do so both retroactively and prospectively. This isn’t just about stopping states from passing new food safety protections. Their bill would also retroactively wipe out laws already in effect. 

In all, the proposal in Congress could preempt more than 100 state laws that keep our food safe from chemicals, contaminants and pathogens like cyclospora. 

Retailers are doing their part – removing many of the worst chemicals from their own store brands. But consumers shouldn’t have to worry about which brands they can trust every time they go to the grocery store. 

For consumers who want to find out more about what’s in their food, EWG’s Food Scores rates more than 150,000 foods and beverages based on nutrition, ingredients and level of processing. Food Scores also flags ultra-processed food and can point shoppers toward healthier alternatives.

Areas of Focus Food Authors Scott Faber August 27, 2026

This is a guest post by Camilo Sánchez, a communications strategist working for Greenpeace International.

We are living through a cost of living crisis that is being treated as if it were a mysterious, purely “economic” event, when in reality it has a clear, combustible cause: our dependence on coal, oil and gas. Across the United States, Europe and far beyond, the main driver of recent price surges has not been wages or “too much money” in the system, but repeated fossil fuel shocks feeding into everything from electricity bills to food prices. When we talk about inflation today, in many countries we are mostly talking about fossilflation, a price spiral rooted in the fossil fuel system itself.

War, chokepoints and the human cost of fossilflation

The US‑Israeli war on Iran is first and foremost a human catastrophe, with thousands of lives lost, families displaced and communities facing bombing, blackouts and water cuts across Iran and the wider Middle East. Those impacts are compounded by the environmental devastation of burning refineries, major oil spills, leaking pipelines and militarised shipping lanes, whose toxic fallout will last far beyond the nightly news cycle. At the same time, the decision to wage war in a region that carried a substantial share of the world’s oil and LNG has triggered what the International Energy Agency calls the worst energy crisis since the 1970s, sending fuel, food and transport prices soaring.

The closure and repeated disruption of the Strait of Hormuz, which controls around a fifth of global oil and gas shipping, has shown again how easily a single chokepoint can turn into a global economic weapon. Another fossil fuel chokepoint, the Bab al‑Mandeb strait, has become a flashpoint in a connected war over Red Sea shipping and Yemen, against the backdrop of the same energy shock. This strategically located transit route has enabled Saudi Arabia to boost its oil revenue during the crisis, even as missile threats and blockade politics deepen a humanitarian emergency and ripple into higher bills far from the frontline. As long as our energy system relies on oil and gas flowing through war‑prone chokepoints, war anywhere becomes a crisis everywhere.

The US‑Israeli war on Iran is not an isolated episode. Russia’s full‑scale invasion of Ukraine, earlier energy crises and repeated OPEC (Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries) supply squeezes have all followed a familiar pattern, fossil fuel prices surge, inflation jumps, whiteland households are left to absorb the shock through higher bills. Each time, governments and central banks talk about “temporary energy noise”, but the reality is that every fossil shock leaves a permanent mark on the price level, pushing people deeper into hardship even after headline inflation starts to fall again.

Governments are bailing out fossil fuels, not people

August 06 2023, Canada, Alberta. Tar Sand Processing in Alberta near Fort McMurray. © Markus Mauthe / Greenpeace

Since fossilflation is driven by oil and gas, governments must cut down their countries’ dependence on fossil fuels as a response to energy shocks. But this is not what we are seeing. An analysis of seven EU countries’ responses to the US‑Israeli war on Iran shows that most emergency packages have been designed to protect fossil fuel consumption rather than to cut dependence on it. Across Europe, roughly 86% of crisis spending by governments is encouraging more fossil fuel use through fuel tax cuts, broad VAT reductions on energy (cutting sales tax on everyone’s gas and electricity bills) and untargeted subsidies (direct payments or price supports for fossil fuel costs for all consumers rather than prioritising support for the most vulnerable households. 

Spain, Germany, and Ireland have spent the most on broad fossil fuel bailouts by cutting fuel taxes across the board. This brings prices down for now, but keeps these countries hooked on imported oil and gas.

The Spanish government’s energy relief €5 billion package is a mixed bag: it includes protection for people against rising energy costs and measures towards shifting to renewables but also a massive tax break for heavy industry, making it one of Europe’s strongest renewable energy commitments and one of its biggest fossil fuel lock-ins, at the same time.

Despite its bold climate rhetoric, Germany’s actual response to the energy price shock has been almost entirely fuel tax cuts and price caps, nothing that meaningfully reduces its fossil fuel dependence.

The Netherlands and Sweden have done better, putting more money into things like energy-efficient homes, heat pump incentives, and cheaper public transport. But even they still spend heavily on fossil fuel subsidies.

Overall, none of these seven EU countries has a plan that actually ends fossil fuel dependence, all are allocating more to fossil fuel bailouts than to structural solutions.

Such measures make fossil fuels cheaper to keep using, rather than helping people use less of them which is not only inconsistent with climate goals, it also deepens inequality. Broad tax cuts and general fuel untargeted subsidies tend to benefit higher‑income households and sectors with high fossil consumption, while leaving the poorest communities with only partial relief and no long‑term protection. Only a small share of the government spending is going towards reducing fossil fuel for good, or speeding up the transition to renewables.

Instead of using limited  public budgets to insulate buildings, expand clean public transport, support agroecology and tax windfall fossil profits, many governments are effectively writing cheques to the fossil fuel industry, hoping that temporary discounts will buy social peace.

Fossilflation, inequality and peace

Fossilflation is not just a technical issue for central bankers, it is a justice and peace issue. Every time oil and gas prices surge, it is ordinary households, especially in low‑income communities on the frontlines of climate impacts, that pay the price through rising bills and reduced public services. In the first 50 days of the US‑Israeli war on Iran, an estimated 150 billion dollars moved from households to oil and gas companies through higher energy prices alone, while governments worldwide are on track to spend around 1.1 trillion US dollars propping up the fossil fuel industry in 2026.

Meanwhile, the social and environmental costs of fossilflation are enormous too. Air pollution from burning coal, oil and gas is linked to roughly 8.7 million premature deaths a year worldwide, and climate‑driven disasters such as floods and heatwaves add hundreds of millions of euros to energy bills in countries like France and Germany on top of lives lost. When governments choose to preserve fossil fuel profits and military alliances over people’s wellbeing, they are effectively trading peace and stability for an economy built on volatile, violent energy sources.

May 01 2002, Germany, Ingolstadt. Esso Refinery. © Jens Küsters / Greenpeace

Dependence on fossil fuel chokepoints such as Hormuz and Bab al‑Mandeb also undermines peace directly. It gives armed actors leverage over global energy prices, incentivises military protection of shipping lanes, and turns entire regions into geopolitical battlegrounds where civilians pay in parts: first through war and destruction, then through the economic fallout and ultimately, through more extreme weather. Breaking this dependence is therefore imperative not only to the climate imperative but also to peace.

The way out: decentralised renewables and a fair response to fossilflation

August 16 2023, Indonesia, Jakarta. Electric Bus in Jakarta.© Jurnasyanto Sukarno / Greenpeace

The evidence from the US, Europe and conflict zones points to a clear conclusion: tackling fossilflation means ending our dependence on oil and gas. There is no shortage of sunlight or wind threatening our energy security, what keeps our societies vulnerable is the decision to stick with fuels whose price and supply can be disrupted at any moment by Trump’s mood, a pipeline explosion or a war.

A coherent response needs four pillars.

• Decentralised, price‑stable renewables. Wind and solar have become the cheapest forms of new electricity generation in history, with solar costs falling by around 87% and battery storage by more than 90% since 2010, and they do not depend on shipping through war‑prone chokepoints. Scaling up local energy communities, rooftop solar, heat pumps, smart grids and green storage can turn households and communities from passive bill‑payers into active participants in a resilient energy system.
• Demand reduction and fair transport. Instead of subsidising fossil fuels for private cars, governments can introduce affordable climate tickets for public transport, strengthen rail networks and night trains, and support remote working and speed limits to cut oil demand. Fair transport policies reduce emissions and shield people from future oil price spikes.

June 10 2015, Japan, Kanagawa-ken. Neighbors Visiting at Farmer’s Market in Japan © Kayo Sawaguchi / Greenpeace

• Resilient food system. Large‑scale renovation of homes, phasing out gas from buildings, and investing in agroecology to break dependence on fossil‑based fertilisers can turn cities and rural areas into climate‑resilient spaces, while making heating and food more affordable in the long run.
• Tax justice and ending fossil fuel bailouts. Ending fossil fuel subsidies and broad tax cuts, introducing permanent taxes on super‑profits and on the ultra‑rich, and banning fossil fuel advertising can help fund solutions that can actually protect people from energy shocks while accelerating the transition.

February 24 2025, Germany, Nauen. Wind Farm. © Paul Langrock / Greenpeace

Breaking free from fossil fuels is not just climate policy, it is an anti-inflation policy, social policy and peace policy. As long as we remain locked into oil and gas, we will remain trapped in repeated cycles of fossilflation, war‑fuelled price shocks and widening inequality. Shifting to renewables, efficiency, fair taxation and justice‑based solutions, is both the opportunity and the precondition for real energy independence, economic stability and lasting peace.

What can you do?

For us to fully tackle this situation, we have to look at both its causes and its solutions. You can start by calling it the right way: fossilflation, so that we put the light on the oil and gas addiction that is causing this crisis in the first place.

Together with that, you can also demand your government to tax those fossil fuel polluters that are reaping astronomical profits from the war. That money would fund the policies and measures that are needed to protect you and your community in this and the next crises, as well as to finance the shift towards the clean, stable and renewable energies that we so urgently need.

The post When oil sets the price appeared first on 350.