News Feeds

By Mike Tidwell, Executive Director, Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN)

“We are moving in the right direction but at the wrong speed.”

That was the key message from Brazil’s President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva as the United Nations climate talks in Belem, Brazil wrapped up in November. The world is currently projected to warm between 2.5-2.9 degrees Celsius by 2100, according to U.N. estimates released during the conference. That warming would bring incalculable harm to the planet. Still, it’s down from the 3.5 degrees of warming projected just a decade ago.

Progress in recent years has come in part from China, whose leaders created the most buzz at the Belem climate talks with their powerhouse exports of nearly $1 trillion worth of solar panels, batteries and EV since 2018. But China, while revolutionizing the tools the world needs to decarbonize, is still building NEW coal plants inside its borders. Those coal plants – combined with the reckless boom in fracked gas and oil in the US (a nation that didn’t even bother to send a delegation to Belem) – contribute to a world already approaching 1.5 degrees C of warming above preindustrial levels.

This real-time warming is already creating hurricane monsters like Helene in the U.S. and crop-killing heat waves in India and sea-level rise everywhere. A near doubling of the current heat to up to 2.9 degrees C will almost certainly be catastrophic, according to our best science.

So thank god a growing number of scientists, philanthropists, government agencies, and nonprofit leaders worldwide are committed to exploring a possible “Plan B” for the planet. Their goal is to find potentially safe ways to artificially cool the Earth until the inevitable full transition to clean energy is achieved globally later this century.

Until recently, this concept of “geoengineering” was considered too controversial to even discuss in many quarters. But today, as the heat mounts, full-blown programs at Harvard University and the University of Chicago are exploring ways to effectively reflect sunlight away from the planet while international conferences on the topic draw thousands of people.

Last year, the biggest step to date on this topic occurred when the United Kingdom committed to spending $75 million on geoengineering research projects scattered across the globe. The goal of the UK’s Advanced Research and Invention Agency is to transparently invest in computer modeling, atmospheric observations, and limited outdoor testing of technologies that could one day cool the planet. Ideas include everything from artificially brightening marine clouds with saltwater spray to mimicking the cooling properties of volcanic eruptions by placing sulfur aerosols in the stratosphere.

To be clear, no one – not the UK, not researchers at Harvard, not the growing number of climate-fighting nonprofits like mine around the world – is calling for actual deployment of ANY system to engineer the climate. The goal is simply to research and test plausible ideas so that future world leaders at least have a few carefully vetted options to consider if climate collapse becomes eminent.

Transparency is a key feature embraced by nearly all the actors in this growing geoengineering conversation and research push. The ARIA program, for example, is governed by a set of published principles that emphasizes a public versus private involvement in research and testing. The agency’s commitment to open dialogue with communities where research occurs is meant to avoid mistrust and confusion wherever possible.

Unfortunately, in the conspiracy-rich world of our current media landscape, preposterous theories abound about governments secretly creating storms to punish political opponents or using airplane “chemtrails” to brainwash citizens. US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin last July was compelled to publicly confirm the obvious: The US government is not engaged in any activities to change the weather or pollute the sky with mind-altering substances.

The opposite is actually true. An $11 million annual program at the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration protects the world from any rogue attempts to alter the climate. NOAA flies special B-57 planes regularly into the stratosphere to measure the concentration of various light-reflecting aerosols there. If these levels suddenly change in the future, NOAA could alert world leaders that a rogue nation or a private actor was tampering with the climate without international agreement.

This is good to know given that at least two private companies – one called Make Sunsets and the other Stardust – have raised millions in private capital and signaled an interest in commercializing geoengineering efforts. They have not been transparent in their activities and average people have every right to feel nervous about such companies.

The better approach – the only sensible approach given the health of the entire planet is at stake – is to increase publicly funded research with guidance from governments, universities and nonprofits. Thankfully, even as the Belem climate talks wrap up with underwhelming results, the growing support for responsible geoengineering research continues to grow.

About the author: Mike Tidwell is founder and director of the Chesapeake Climate Action Network, a grassroots nonprofit dedicated to raising awareness about the impacts and solutions associated with global warming in Maryland, Virginia, DC, and West Virginia.

Under Tidwell’s leadership, CCAN has helped pass landmark clean-energy legislation in Maryland and the District of Columbia; blocked coal and oil development plans in Virginia; and worked with groups nationwide to push for a fair and effective carbon cap policy on Capitol Hill. A long-time resident of Maryland, he lives in Takoma Park with his wife Beth and son Sasha. Read more about Mike here.

The post After Brazil Climate Talks, Thank God There’s Research Into a Plan B appeared first on Chesapeake Climate Action Network.

Skeptical Science is partnering with Gigafact to produce fact briefs — bite-sized fact checks of trending claims. You can submit claims you think need checking via the tipline.

Are solar projects hurting farmers and rural communities?

The largest land use scenario for solar development would occupy only 1.15% of the 900 million acres of U.S. farmland. Many would not be sited on farmland at all.

Agrivoltaics is a practice allowing the synergistic installation of solar arrays on farmland. Panels can provide beneficial shade to crops and livestock, reduce evaporation and soil erosion, and create refuges for pollinators. Agrivoltaics, already implemented in other countries, can increase the economic value of farmland by over 30% and annual income by 8%.

Failing to transition away from fossil fuels would worsen climate change’s impacts on farmers and global food supply. The IPCC forecasts up to 80 million additional people at risk of hunger by 2050, lower quality crop yields, and altered distribution of pests and diseases due to climate change.

The harms to farmers and rural communities from unmitigated carbon emissions far outweigh the effects of solar development.

Go to full rebuttal on Skeptical Science or to the fact brief on Gigafact

This fact brief is responsive to quotes such as this one.

Sources

U.S. Department of Energy Solar Futures Study

U.S. Department of Agriculture Farms and Land in Farms 2021 Summary

Princeton University Net-Zero America

National Renewable Energy Laboratory Agrivoltaics

MDPI Sustainability Compatibility between Crops and Solar Panels: An Overview from Shading Systems

Applied Energy The potential for agrivoltaics to enhance solar farm cooling

University of Georgia Empowering Biodiversity on Solar Farms

Columbia Law School Sabin Center for Climate Change Law Rebutting 33 False Claims About Solar, Wind, and Electric Vehicles

Please use this form to provide feedback about this fact brief. This will help us to better gauge its impact and usability. Thank you!

About fact briefs published on Gigafact

Fact briefs are short, credibly sourced summaries that offer "yes/no" answers in response to claims found online. They rely on publicly available, often primary source data and documents. Fact briefs are created by contributors to Gigafact — a nonprofit project looking to expand participation in fact-checking and protect the democratic process. See all of our published fact briefs here.

A pallet of produce, including Mastronardi cucumbers (located on the top right with Mastronardi’s Sunset Grown label), sits on Yale’s campus late last year. Mastronardi has been linked to a long history of farm labor abuse. [Photograph by members of Yale’s Student/Farmworker Alliance chapter pushing for the university to join the Fair Food Program as a participating buyer.]

For more than 15 years, the industry-leading protections of the Fair Food Program have stood fast against farm labor abuses ranging from wage theft and sexual violence to dangerous working conditions, physical abuse, and forced labor. Thanks to the FFP’s unique mix of worker-driven, market-backed monitoring and enforcement mechanisms, tens of thousands of workers live and work free of fear and exploitation on dozens of participating farms. Sadly, however, those abuses — and the pervasive climate of fear that protects and enables the abusers — remain all too common today on farms beyond the FFP’s reach.

One such grower — the produce giant Mastronardi — is a massive, national and international company with a particularly long track record of documented human rights violations across its operations. The publicly available record of labor and human rights abuses linked to Mastronardi ranges from a class-action lawsuit alleging dangerous pesticide exposure, to US Department of Labor findings of systematic wage theft, and even the revelation that Mastronardi was purchasing from farms in Mexico whose tomatoes were later seized by US Customs and Border Protection due to indicators of forced labor.

Given that context, it is easy to imagine the frustration of student leaders with the Yale Student/Farmworker Alliance when — in the middle of talks with Yale Hospitality on the students’ campaign calling on Yale to become a Fair Food University and join the FFP as a participating buyer — they discovered Mastronardi produce being delivered to a campus dining hall. Yale’s SFA chapter issued a press release about their discovery, and last week the Yale Daily News followed up with an article on the surprising development in the students’ campaign. 

This stunning news comes as students with Yale’s SFA chapter have repeatedly called on the university to join the Fair Food Program, a step that would require Yale to preferentially purchase from FFP participating farms, to cease purchasing from farms suspended from the program, and to pay a small premium on FFP produce to help improve farmworkers’ long sub-standard wages. Despite the students’ efforts, however — including a standing room only showing of the documentary “Food Chains”,  a campus-wide tabling campaign on the Fair Food Program, and a petition that quickly garnered hundreds of signatures — Yale’s administration has refused to join the FFP. Instead, officials with Yale Hospitality have announced, via large posters at campus dining halls, that they will voluntarily “prioritize purchasing” from farms affiliated with the program, refusing to commit to the very enforcement mechanism — binding purchasing commitments — that have made the FFP so uniquely successful at preventing abuses from sexual assault to modern-day slavery, and that would prevent precisely the kinds of abuses linked to Mastronardi from entering the university’s supply chain.

Below you can read excerpts from Yale Daily News’ latest coverage of the developing story. For the full article, click here. 

But first, we’ll close today’s post with the words of Yale students themselves, from their opinion piece, titled “Yale Hospitality, Will You Support Farmworkers’ Rights?”, published on  November 4th of last year: 

… As students and the consumers of the produce Yale purchases, we have the responsibility — and the power — to demand Yale fulfill its most basic obligations to the people who grow our food. Students have been essential to the success of the FFP since its inception: In 2001, students launched a campaign against Taco Bell, boycotting the chain and forcing Taco Bell franchises off college campuses until the corporation addressed unethical practices in its supply chain. In 2005, the work paid off, when Taco Bell became the first-ever major brand to sign an agreement with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers.

Twenty years ago, students helped bring the groundbreaking Fair Food Program into existence. Now, it’s our turn to help expand the reach of the FFP’s life-saving protections to as many workers as possible.

Check back soon for more breaking news from the Fair Food University front, and here below are the excerpts from last week’s story:

Students call out cucumbers as Hospitality sets fair-food tomato target

The Yale Student/Farmworker Alliance photographed a box of cucumbers from a producer linked to poor sanitary and working conditions. Yale Hospitality has not acceded to joining the Fair Food Program but committed to sourcing nearly all tomatoes from participating producers.

Published January 21, 2026

Yale Hospitality is facing renewed pressure from the Yale Student/Farmworker Alliance, a student activist group, over its sourcing practices after the group alleged that a dining hall received a shipment of produce from a farm which has been sued for poor working conditions.

In a press release and a subsequent email to the News, the alliance wrote that it identified “Sunset Grown/Mastronardi Mini Cucumbers” delivered to Trumbull College in November, attaching a photograph showing a palette of produce with at least one box which matches photographs of the brand’s mini cucumbers posted on social media.

The finding was the latest step in Yale Student/Farmworker Alliance’s campaign for Yale Hospitality to join the Fair Food Program — an initiative, adopted by companies such as McDonald’s and Walmart, that connects buyers to producers who abide by a code of conduct regarding farmworker working conditions.

Yale Hospitality does not participate in the program but has told the News that more than 64 percent of its tomatoes are sourced from farms partnered with the Fair Food Program, and that it hopes to exceed 90 percent by the end of the fiscal year.

Mastronardi, owner of the Sunset brand, was sued in 2022 by a group of migrant farmworkers who accused the company of exposing them to pesticides and bleach without personal protective equipment.

“When Defendants directed Plaintiffs Lopez and Lopez Ramirez and the greenhouse workers to disinfect tools, trays and gloves in tubs of bleach, they were forced to reach into the bleach up to their elbows, wearing only latex gloves covering their hands,” the complaint states…

In an email to the News, a Yale Hospitality spokesperson wrote that “Sunset Grown/Mastronardi Farms is not part of our current purchasing program, though their products may occasionally be substituted.”

A map showing the stark difference between the abuses on Mastronardi farms and the protections guaranteed in the FFP

The spokesperson did not directly address each allegation in the student alliance’s press release but said Yale Hospitality is “transitioning to new suppliers” and will “support and prioritize purchasing from FFP-affiliated farms to the greatest extent feasible.”

The Fair Food Program, or FFP, is operated by the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, a farmworkers’ rights organization. Buyers that participate in the Fair Food Program buy produce — originally only tomatoes — from farms in the program that guarantee certain worker protections and abide by a code of conduct. Buyers also agree to pay a premium of 1 cent per pound picked, which goes to farmworker wages.

The Student/Farmworker Alliance, which as of Tuesday had just over 350 followers on Instagram, started its campaign for Yale Hospitality to join the Fair Food Program with a film screening and interview with the Coalition of Immokalee Workers last September.

A petition started by the alliance, according to the press release, now has more than 250 signatures. It garnered 150 signatures within 24 hours, organizer Arjun Warrior ’26 told the News in November.

“Despite knowledge of Yale’s direct connection to a grower known for human rights violations and a growing petition campaign, Yale Hospitality told students it had no intention of joining the Fair Food Program,” the alliance’s press release stated, adding that Yale has refused to meet with representatives from the FFP directly…

The 64 percent statistic — tomatoes that Yale Hospitality sources from partnered with the Fair Food Program — is now displayed on screens in dining halls, alongside the message “Yale Hospitality is committed to ethical sourcing practices that reflect our values and strengthen the integrity of our supply chain,” citing the University’s supplier code of conduct.

Organizers of the Student/Farmworker Alliance have criticized Yale for counting on suppliers due to their volatility in terms of abiding to ethical sourcing rules.

The Fair Food Program also covers produce other than tomatoes. However, according to reporting done by ProPublica, non-tomato farms that participate in the program are less common, partly due to many buyers limiting their participation to a small variety of crops.

“By bragging about their FFP produce, Hospitality is proving our point: they understand that the FFP protects human rights, and that Yale is capable of buying from FFP-certified growers. But actions speak louder than words, and Hospitality must join the FFP to truly protect the human rights of farmworkers in Yale’s supply chain,” Seung Min Baik Kang ’26, a Yale SFA organizer, wrote in the SFA press release.

The Yale Student/Farmworker Alliance was founded in April 2025.

This is a guest article written by Jean McLean, Director of Engagement at the Green Economy Coalition (GEC), a global movement for green and fair economies.

Results from the Green Economy Coalition’s latest Global Green Attitudes Survey reveal a loud and consistent demand: People around the world, want more radical and transformative government action – not just on the environment, but on the economic systems driving the climate and nature breakdown.

And they don’t just want small “green tweaks” either, they want economies reshaped to serve the people and the planet, not pollution and profit.

Despite today’s shaky politics, the survey, which polled over 10,000 people across 10 countries, is clear: support for climate action is strong across countries and income levels. What’s missing now isn’t public backing, its political courage.

A tougher political context, but public support for climate action hasn’t weakened

Compared to the same survey in 2024, the political and economic context has become even more challenging. Since our first wave of research, the cost-of-living crisis has continued to bite. Trump’s re-election has emboldened right-wing populists and their pro–fossil fuel agenda, while “green hushing” has crept into government, corporate, and even civil society spaces, with sustainability quietly reframed, deprioritised, or hidden.

Yet even in this climate of economic anxiety and political retrenchment, our survey found that the public has not turned away from environmental action. Instead, people increasingly recognise that today’s economic model is failing them as well as the planet — driving inequality, locking in pollution, and leaving households exposed to rising costs and environmental risk.

And crucially, the survey shows just how deep that support runs: 84% of people globally would choose stronger environmental protection even at the cost of slowed economic growth.

People want a real change in the system, not just a tweak 

The polling reveals a powerful and consistent message: people want governments to lead a systemic economic transformation, not rely on voluntary action or individual sacrifice.

• 88% of people globally say governments should be doing more to combat climate change.
• 82% support prioritising public investment in clean energy, even when this requires significant government spending.

These are not abstract environmental preferences. They reflect a growing understanding that public investment, regulation, and economic planning are essential to building resilient, fair economies: ones that deliver decent jobs, affordable energy, and healthy environments.

And yet, only 42% of people believe their government is taking more action now than last year to protect the environment. The result is a widening credibility gap between what people know is needed and what governments are prepared to do.

Reclaiming economies means governments stepping up for the climate

Crucially, the survey shows that people do not see the green transition as something households can, or should, carry alone. The biggest barrier to more sustainable choices is not apathy or unwillingness, but lack of government support, cited by 52% of respondents globally.

This is especially pronounced in lower-income countries, where citizens are often most exposed to environmental harm while having the least influence over global economic rules. In countries such as Nigeria, Turkey, and South Africa, over 60% identify government inaction as the main obstacle.

When asked what would help, people pointed to:

• Better laws and stronger regulation
• Increased funding for environmental programmes
• Support for green jobs and environmentally responsible businesses

In other words, people are asking governments to reclaim their role in shaping the economy, rather than outsourcing responsibility to individuals and markets that reward pollution and short-term profit.

Trust in leaders is collapsing, but people still want ambitious action 

Trust in political leadership remains worryingly low. Just 39% of people globally trust political leaders to make the right decisions for a sustainable future. But this collapse in trust has not dampened ambition.

Instead, people are calling for bold reforms that challenge business-as-usual: stricter regulation of pollution, stronger accountability for corporations, and public investment to steer economies towards long-term wellbeing, even if this means economic trade-offs in the short term.

This reflects a growing public understanding that an economy designed around endless growth, extraction, and inequality is neither sustainable nor desirable. People are ready for a new direction — one that measures success by health, resilience, and shared prosperity, not just GDP.

The public has spoken, now it’s time our governments delivered

Taken together, the findings leave no room for doubt. Governments already have a clear public mandate to act on climate, on nature, and on the economy itself.

Reclaiming our economies means: 

• • putting people and the planet back at the centre of decision-making.
  • using public policy to reward care, restoration, and long-term value  and to hold polluters to account. 
  • moving beyond rhetoric, towards real investment, regulation, and reform.

People are already doing their part. They are ready for change. The question is whether political leaders are willing to listen, and to finally use the tools they have to build economies that work for everyone.

What do we want? Economies that serve people and the planet. When do we want them? Now.

DOWNLOAD THE RESEARCH

 

The post 84% of us want nature protected, even if it slows economic growth appeared first on 350.

Caroline Shenaz Hossein

Caroline Shenaz Hossein’s latest book sheds light on the activism of the Black women who act as ‘Banker Ladies’ in their communities, creating systems of mutual aid, co-operation, and collectivity. The book highlights how Black women counter …

Coal mining giant Yancoal has disrupted a community consultation process with a last-minute attempt to greenwash its proposal for the koala-crunching Moolarben coal mine expansion near Mudgee. 

This is a re-post from Yale Climate Connections by Bob Henson

A prolonged, dangerous bout of frigid temperatures with snow, sleet, and freezing rain will encompass much of the central and eastern United States this weekend into early next week. To make matters worse, there are fresh model signals that one or more reinforcing rounds of cold and snow may emerge around the end of January and early February, including parts of the mid-Atlantic and Northeast.

The intensity, duration, and geographic spread of this U.S. winter blast could have major consequences, from sustained power outages to transportation snarls and widespread business closures.

The National Weather Service office for the Washington, D.C., area warned on Friday: “The combination of heavy snow and ice alongside prolonged very cold temperatures presents a unique and significant risk to life and property across virtually the entire region.”

As of midday Friday, January 23, nearly all of the contiguous U.S. east of the Rockies was plastered with one or more winter-weather watches or warnings issued by the National Weather Service. Frozen precipitation is not expected in Florida and nearby parts of the Gulf and Atlantic coast, but even these areas will be markedly colder than average for late January.

Daryl Herzmann, the lead for the Iowa Environmental Mesonet sites that the weather community relies upon for many archived datasets, posted on BlueSky this morning that the number of counties under a winter storm warning for this event is second highest since 2008, only slightly trailing February 15, 2021. 

How far south – or north – will the heaviest ice and snow develop?

As we noted in a post on Jan. 7, some of the longest-range forecast models were already suggesting that a strong upper-level ridge could develop over western Canada and Alaska by late January, setting the stage for cold air to surge into the United States on the east side of the ridge. As that scenario firmed up, models such as the European and GFS (U.S.) coalesced on the wintry assault now unfolding. By early this week, there was noteworthy model agreement on the overall picture for this weekend.

The factors in play are:

• a sprawling polar air mass at the surface, which was racing southward on Friday as expected
• a pair of upper-level troughs, one in central Canada and another off the coast of western Mexico, that will come into alignment over the central U.S. this weekend, providing the upward lift for precipitation
• very warm, moist air over the Gulf of Mexico that will get drawn northward atop the cold air, providing ample moisture

High pressure centered in North Dakota on Friday afternoon already extended across much of the eastern half of the country. Air temperatures by early afternoon Friday were already near or below zero Fahrenheit from Omaha, Nebraska, to Detroit, Michigan, with even colder wind-chill values. Multiple days below freezing are possible as far south as Dallas-Fort Worth, which will put major pressure on regional power grids.

The bigger forecast challenge has been placing the north-south extent of the heaviest snow and ice, which will extend roughly from the Southern Plains to the mid-Atlantic and Northeast. There’ll certainly be ample fuel for precipitation: Sea surface temperatures over the Gulf of Mexico are close to record highs for late January. But more moisture doesn’t always mean heavier snow: Temperatures aloft still have to remain cold enough for snow production.

Models briefly converged early this week on the idea of epic, potentially all-time-heavy snowfall in places like Oklahoma City and Nashville. But it now appears the surge of warm, moist air from the Gulf just above the cold surface air will be stronger and will push farther north than originally thought as the upper lows orchestrating the flow join forces a bit sooner.

If more recent model runs prove accurate, the snowfall from the Southern Plains to the Tennessee Valley will be significant rather than record-smashing. However, heavy snow could extend from the Ohio Valley all the way into parts of the mid-Atlantic and Northeast. Totals of six to 12 inches are expected along the Interstate 95 corridor all the way from Washington, D.C., to Boston, with higher totals toward the north and just inland from the larger cities. (Near the coast, sleet and/or freezing rain could invade the mix and cut down on total accumulations.)

The juicy Gulf air will also raise the risk of a highly damaging and disruptive ice storm, especially in a belt from eastern Texas through parts of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and North Carolina. In Raleigh, news outlet WRAL warned on Friday in their forecast for Sunday: “We need you to prepare for a few days or possibly more of no power.”

Cold surface air often remains trapped against the eastern slopes of the Appalachians, a feature called “cold-air damming,” which will help keep the warm air aloft from working its way to the surface in parts of Virginia, the Carolinas and Georgia.

Far above the surface – and even above the jet stream – the stratospheric polar vortex is highly elongated. This isn’t quite the same as the polar vortex “splitting” and a lobe heading toward the United States, which is one mode that can help facilitate intense U.S. winter weather. Instead, it’s more of a stretching out – in this case, from the high Arctic to central Canada.

Figure 1. The stratospheric polar vortex is a mass of cold whirling air bounded by the jet stream that forms 10 to 30 miles above the Arctic surface in response to the large north-south temperature difference that develops during winter. Generally, the stronger the winds, the more the air inside is isolated from lower latitudes, and the colder it gets. But sometimes it can be shifted or stretched off the pole toward the United States, Europe, or Asia. (Image credit: Climate.gov)

In a 2021 Science paper, Judah Cohen (Atmospheric and Environmental Research) presented evidence for an increase in stretching events during the era of “Arctic amplification,” the phenomenon in which the Arctic is warming faster than other parts of the world as a result of climate change. (See our 2025 coverage of the Gulf Coast snowstorm for more background on polar-vortex stretching.)

A chilly wake-up call

This storm sequence is hitting after what’s been a mild winter with little snow from the Great Plains across the South and Southeast. The past 30 days were warmer than average for virtually all of the contiguous U.S., and only 25% of the nation outside Alaska and Hawaii was snow-covered as of January 23, the lowest fraction for that date in records going back to 2003.

The cold of the next few days doesn’t seem likely to be historically extreme in terms of sheer intensity. In fact, the number of daily record lows set could be surprisingly small, given some of the truly fierce Arctic blasts of the 19th and 20th centuries. However, the duration of noteworthy cold may push into once-in-a-generation territory in some places.

For example, the one-two punch of winter storms in Washington, D.C., assuming little temperature recovery in between, could produce a stretch of seven to 10 days at or below freezing. The longest stretch in modern times with high temperatures at or below 32°F at Washington’s Reagan National Airport lasted seven days, on Feb. 9-15, 1979. Nothing longer has occurred since Jan. 23–Feb. 3, 1936, when the nation’s capital failed to rise above freezing for a record-long 12 days. Correction: There was also a freezing-or-below stretch of 10 days on Dec. 16-25, 1989.

Jeff Masters contributed to this post.

In late April 2025, I took my Introduction to Geography students outside on the campus front lawn. Working in pairs, students were tasked to do the following: (1) to record and describe in detail as many elements of the atmosphere, hydrosphere, biosphere and lithosphere that they could see and feel; (2) to describe what they […]

The Floridian I would one day marry went to college in Gainesville, where the University of Florida’s sports teams are known as the Gators. That nickname fits. This is Gator Country, as the song goes — home to countless American alligators (Alligator mississippiensis).

In Gainesville the reptiles cluster in places like Paynes Prairie Preserve State Park, but they don’t stay confined there. They make use of the sewer system and sometimes stroll through the city streets.

For my future wife, alligators were simply part of the landscape. For me, with roots in a different part of the world, they were foreign. I’d never seen an alligator up close until adulthood, when I began visiting her in Florida.

Photo: Emil Siekkinen (used with permission)

The experience was awe-inspiring — and not just because of the reptiles themselves. In Florida I witnessed approaches to large carnivore conservation that reached beyond wilderness and protected areas into shared human landscapes, sustaining populations that remained both demographically and genetically viable.

Alligators teetered on the brink of extinction in the 1950s but recovered thanks to conservation work that took a broad approach: a federal ban on hunting, protection under the Endangered Species Act, wetland preservation, and an innovative management model that combined science, legislation, and local economies.

In Florida today there are about 1.3 million alligators, and altogether in the United States there are about 5 million — from smaller individuals in southern North Carolina to massive beasts in Florida, Louisiana, and eastern Texas.

Millions of people now live close to these big predators, who can weigh around 600 pounds. Around the southeastern U.S. they attract tourists to swamps, so they’re important to the local economy.

One autumn, when my wife and I visited Louisiana, we found ourselves in lush wetlands where heavy Spanish moss hung from cypresses that cast shade over some of the region’s momentarily sleepy alligators. A herd of wild pigs also moved through the swamp.

Wild pigs in the bayou. Photo: Emil Siekkinen (used with permission)

That surprised us, but what shocked us was seeing wetlands near the bayou drained to make room for suburban housing, asphalt, and concrete. That was hard to understand since Hurricane Katrina had visited the region in 2005 and showed how indispensable wetlands were when the waters rose.

These landscapes are certainly scenic, but they’re also a vital protective infrastructure.

Alligators belong to that infrastructure. Their presence, I learned, shapes wetlands in ways that extend far beyond what meets the eye — including how much carbon these places can keep out of the atmosphere.

Wetlands are among Earth’s richest — and most endangered — ecosystems. Between 60 and 70% of the wetlands that existed in preindustrial times have been wiped out. The wetlands that remain, however, store large amounts of carbon in oxygen-poor soils. When these ecosystems are drained, carbon dioxide is released. Today drained wetlands account for up to 10% of the world’s land-use emissions.

The draining and building we witnessed in Louisiana’s swamps were thus driving human-caused climate change.

But the United States can play an important role regarding wetlands’ significance for climate mitigation: North America harbors 42% of the world’s tidal-influenced wetlands.

Researchers speak of “blue carbon,” the carbon stored in marine biomes and coastal ecosystems such as mangroves, salt marshes, and swamps. These environments are particularly effective carbon sinks because they combine rich vegetation with slow decomposition.

For a long time, science mainly focused on the roles of plants and microorganisms in the carbon cycle. But researchers at Southeastern Louisiana University and the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium wanted to find out what role predators — in this case, alligators — might play. One of the researchers, Christopher Murray, who has worked with alligators for more than two decades, told me in an email, “I believe the value of a single animal can be quantified in terms of carbon stock.”

To test that idea, the researchers analyzed 649 soil samples from wetlands along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts, drawing from the Smithsonian’s Coastal Carbon Network. They compared carbon levels in surface soils with maps of alligator distribution and density, focusing on samples collected over recent decades.

The pattern was consistent. Across alligators’ native range, wetlands stored about 0.16 grams more carbon per square centimeter in surface soils when alligators were present. In mangrove forests, the difference rose to roughly 0.20 grams per square centimeter — a trivial amount in a handful of mud, but a substantial gain when multiplied across thousands of square miles of coastline.

Louisiana offered even clearer insight. There, researchers had precise data on nesting patterns and population density. They found that carbon storage increased every time alligator numbers increased. More gators meant more carbon locked into the soil.

How does this work? The answer lies in chain reactions in the ecosystem — the ecological domino effects that occur when top predators influence whole habitats.

Alligators feed, among other things, on herbivorous mammals such as nutria (Myocastor coypus), as well as crabs, fish, and sometimes various kinds of wild pigs. By keeping these populations in check, alligators protect vegetation that would otherwise be trampled or devoured. More plants mean more photosynthesis — and therefore more carbon bound in biomass and soil.

Alligators also function as ecosystem engineers. When they dig dens, move through the muck, or create small pools, sediments and nutrients are redistributed. These processes can create pockets where organic material is preserved for longer.

And the animals can live for 35 to 50 years (or even longer). Their impact accumulates slowly but persistently.

Alligators affect both what is eaten and what the landscape looks like. In short, these enormous reptiles are living regulators of carbon flows, and the predator’s presence enhances nature’s own climate solutions.

The relationship between alligators and carbon storage is strongest in mangrove forests — tropical wetlands where tree roots stretch like braids into the tidal zone.

Mangrove forests are already recognized as outstanding carbon sinks. They store up to 10 times more carbon per acre than an average forest. That alligators can amplify that effect shows how a predator’s presence can improve nature’s own climate solutions.

Researchers have previously found similar patterns in the ocean. Where sea otters (Enhydra lutris) live, kelp forests flourish. But in areas without these predators, kelp forests are decimated by sea urchins (class Echinoidea), and much of the carbon-sequestration capacity is lost.

When top predators return, ecosystems’ structure and function change — including how they store carbon. A British study estimates that reintroducing wolves (Canis lupus) to Scotland — where they could prey upon vegetation-eating deer and other animals and allow woodland to expand — could lead to an additional 1 million tons of CO2 stored per year. Each individual gray wolf is estimated, through its ecological impact, to contribute to the absorption of 6,080 tons of CO2 per year. Each wolf is therefore worth about £154,000 ($202,763), using accepted current valuations of carbon.

In boreal Canada scientists estimate that recovering wolf populations to historical levels could allow forests to store 46 to 99 million additional tons of CO₂ every year — equivalent to the annual emissions of up to 71 million cars.

This new understanding also reveals that predator-control policies have a hidden climate cost. In many regions — from Scandinavia to the U.S. West — large predators are deliberately kept at densities far below what ecosystems can naturally sustain. These decisions are typically justified through concerns about livestock, hunting interests, or culturally ingrained fear. But the climate consequences are rarely counted.

In Sweden undersized predator populations have led to oversized populations of ungulates who consume enormous quantities of young trees, slowing natural forest growth. Forest ecologists estimate that this overgrazing reduces Sweden’s carbon sink potential by about 12 million tons of CO₂ per year. Allowing predator populations to recover to ecologically functional levels could restore roughly half of that capacity — a natural climate gain of about 6 million tons of CO₂ annually.

There are not yet precise figures for alligators’ influence, but the research already suggests that each individual, through its lifelong presence, contributes to increased carbon storage in wetlands.

That biodiversity and climate wins often go hand in hand is an established reality. Protecting top predators is therefore not just about saving species but about preserving an entire ecosystem’s ability to help stabilize the climate.

Conservation should therefore not only be about counting species and their populations, but also about measuring how much CO2 their presence helps to sequester. Nature itself, with its ancient networks and its interplay of life and death and life, shows that everything is intertwined. When balance is found here, it is also found in the atmosphere.

In parts of the Southeast, they have managed to combine climate work with industry. Alligator-related commerce, which partly relies on limited hunting and farming, requires viable wild populations. That means that, on a practical level, the economy favors the conservation of both predators and wetlands.

Generally speaking Americans accept alligators because people feel it’s possible to live with them, control the risks, and even benefit from their presence.

For my wife it was natural to grow up with alligators almost on her doorstep. She knows the folklore and believes that Floridians take pride in them as a natural part of both regional identity and environment. In the primordial creature that is the alligator, culture and nature are united.

Alligators may not care much about this as they go about their lives in the swamps. But these ancient beasts nevertheless do great good, and benefit life on our shared living planet.

Republish this article for free! Read our reprint policy. Previously in The Revelator:

Saving Okefenokee

The post Gator Country’s Climate Guardians appeared first on The Revelator.

The world can feel like it’s moving in two directions at once. One day, leaders talk about climate action and the next, we see fresh drilling pushes and new fossil deals, from the Arctic to Asia and South America. But the bigger truth is this: the ground is shifting beneath the polluter industry, because the world is leaving fossil fuels behind and already rapidly moving onto clean, renewable energy. 

That’s why January 26, the International Day of Clean Energy, is fitting a moment to celebrate progress, and to double down on a just energy transition that works for everyone. Here are eight reasons we should feel hopeful today:

1. Clean energy is winning the investment race

Clean energy isn’t “emerging” anymore, it’s already outcompeting fossil fuels. The International Energy Agency projects around $2.2 trillion in clean energy investment in 2025, compared to roughly $1.1 trillion going into oil, gas, and coal. That’s the transition happening in real time. And it’s not slowing down: clean investment has outpaced fossil investment for years, and the gap keeps widening as technology improves and costs fall.

2. More governments are organizing to phase out fossil fuels

Despite weak consensus outcomes at the annual UN talks, COP30, in Brazil this past November, the diplomatic track is shifting. During the Summit, more than 80 countries from the Global South and Global North jointly called for a roadmap to phase out coal, oil, and gas. That matters because it shows unanimous agreement isn’t a necessary condition for political momentum for climate action. Countries are increasingly treating fossil fuel phaseout as a shared destination, and building the political alignment to get there. For instance, A growing “coalition of the willing” is building real phaseout architecture. Hosted by Colombia and the Netherlands’, the world’s first conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels this year in April aims to design “legal, economic, and social pathways” for a just transition beyond coal, oil, and gas. The goal isn’t a theoretical one-size-fits-all exit, it’s a practical, achievable roadmap tied to jobs, protection, and real opportunity.

3. The clean transition is becoming common-sense economics  

Investor behavior too, is shifting in a clear direction. Not because “green” is fashionable, but because fossil-heavy assets look increasingly risky in a changing world. In a Morgan Stanley survey of 950+ major investors, most said they plan to increase sustainable investing over the next two years. The logic is straightforward: future-ready assets look safer and more profitable over time, while fossil dependence creates volatility, stranded assets, and reputational risk. 

4. The rules are tightening for fossil fuel companies

Big investors are no longer willing to bankroll fossil companies that can’t prove they have a credible plan for the transition. That shift is already visible: in December 2025, Swedish pension fund AP7 cut off investments in companies it judged incompatible with climate goals. This is how the phaseout accelerates in practice, not just through speeches, but through capital discipline. “Business as usual” is becoming a financial liability, not a safe bet.

5. Courts and legal standards are shifting toward climate accountability

The legal “reasonableness standard” is moving upward, closer to what climate science actually requires. On July 23, 2025, the International Court of Justice issued a landmark advisory opinion strengthening what states owe on climate action, including on fossil fuel production and subsidies. It’s not binding, but it’s directional: the legal centre just shifted. That means more pressure, more scrutiny, and more risk for governments and corporations that keep expanding fossil fuels.

6. People are choosing solutions that improve life, not just emissions graphs

Clean energy is not only about cutting carbon. It’s about making daily life safer and more affordable: lower bills, cleaner air, and resilience in the face of energy and price shocks. When communities can generate and control power locally, through distributed solar, storage, and public renewables, they’re less exposed to global fuel price spikes and corporate profiteering. The transition becomes real when people can feel it: stability, dignity, and control over essential services like energy.

7. Even conservative energy authorities have drawn a line on new fossil supply

Campaigners and climate activists aren’t the only ones saying “stop drilling.” Even the International Energy Agency, one of the world’s most mainstream energy institutions, has made the case in its Net Zero pathway: a future where no new oil and gas fields should be approved for development beyond those already committed. That’s not radical politics. It’s basic risk management in a world that can’t afford more fossil lock-in. The safest investment now is building the clean energy system faster.

8. Clean energy could save us trillions, and it’s already getting cheaper

A fast energy transition is now the cheapest option on the table. A University of Oxford study found shifting to renewables by 2050 could save the global economy at least $12 trillion in energy system costs, even before counting avoided climate disasters. That’s because renewables are technologies, not commodities: costs fall as we scale. Over the last decade, solar fell ~90%, wind ~70%, and battery storage ~85% — while the sun and wind stay free. 

As we celebrate real progress toward a 100% renewable future, we can’t forget this: climate disaster is already here, and stopping fossil fuel expansion is the bare minimum for survival.

Clean energy is rising. But so are floods, fires, heatwaves, bill shocks, and fossil disasters. So the path forward has to do two things at once: end the harm, and build the alternative.

1) Stop the harm: no new fossil fuel expansion 

Governments and regulators must stop approving new oil, gas, and coal projects — and end fossil subsidies. When floods, fires, heatwaves, or bill shocks hit, alongside the media, we must connect the dots fast: this damage is driven by political choices that protect polluters. Courts must enforce climate and liability laws, hold governments and companies accountable for harm, and unlock compensation through litigation. Insurers must price climate risk honestly, withdraw cover from new fossil projects, and stop shielding polluters from the real costs of their damage.

2) Make polluters pay

Fossil fuel companies shouldn’t profit while communities pay the price. Governments must enforce real accountability through liability, levies, and an end to fossil impunity — so recovery and resilience are funded by those who caused the damage.

3) Deliver the Right to Energy

Governments, regulators, utilities, and cities must deliver affordable, resilient clean power people can feel. That means investing in distributed renewables, storage, and grids — plus tools like lifeline tariffs and free basic electricity where possible. 

4) Move money to the future

Investors, banks, and insurers must stop financing expansion and shift capital toward clean energy solutions that are credible, community-backed, and built to last.

5) Let’s organize to make the transition unstoppable

We make the shift away from fossil fuels real by organizing locally and forcing decision-makers to act. When a crisis hits, we show up, naming who’s responsible and demanding protection and justice. 

 

This is how we win: make fossil expansion harder, and make real alternatives easier.

DEMAND A FOSSIL FREE FUTURE NOW

 

The post 8 reasons to celebrate on this International Day of Clean Energy appeared first on 350.

Tourism takes toll on ancient seagrass Channel News brendan 26th January 2026 Teaser Media

We talk with Oglala Lakota poet and organizer Mark K. Tilson about the ICE surge in Minneapolis, the killing of Renee Good, and how neighbors are building a decentralized resistance. The conversation traces lawless tactics, historical patterns, and the courage that grows when people act together.

A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, January 18, 2026 thru Sat, January 24, 2026. Stories we promoted this week, by category:

Climate Change Impacts (7 articles)

• Ocean Damage Nearly Doubles the Cost of Climate Change "Ignoring the blue economy has left a multi-trillion-dollar blind spot in climate finance, according to a study from Scripps Oceanography." Inside Climate News, Johnny Sturgeon, Jan 15, 2026.
• ‘Climate change is here’: Experts warn environmental crisis is decades ahead of forecasts "Drought, heatwaves, hurricanes, and wildfires are arriving sooner than we imagined according to scientists" The Independent, Maria Butt, Jan 17, 2026.
• 2026 will likely be among the hottest on record: Environment Canada "12% chance of exceeding important threshold of 1.5 C this year" CBC, David Thurton, Jan 19, 2026.
• Scientists warn of ‘regime shift’ as seaweed blooms expand worldwide "Study links rapid growth of ocean macroalgae to global heating and nutrient pollution" The Guardian, By Damien Gayle, Jan 19, 2026.
• Era of ‘global water bankruptcy’ is here, UN report says "Overuse and pollution must end urgently as no one knows when whole system might collapse, says expert" The Guardian, Damian Carrington, Jan 20, 2026.
• Australia’s worst heatwave since black summer made five times more likely by global heating, analysis finds Lede: "Extreme heat ‘is getting worse and whether we like it or not … there’s ultimately a limit to what we can actually physically cope with,’ scientist says" The Guardian, Donna Lu, Jan 22, 2026.
• Trump says the big US winter storm is proof of climate hoax – here’s why he’s wrong "US president asks ‘whatever happened to global warming?’ Well, it could be making our winter storms worse" The Guardian, Oliver Milman, Jan 23, 2026.

Climate Policy and Politics (7 articles)

• Trump Wants to Halt Almost All Coal Plant Shutdowns. It Could Get Messy. "Critics accuse leading firms of sabotaging climate action but say data increasingly being used to hold them to account" The New York Times, Claire Brown & Brad Plumer, Jan 16, 2026.
• How Wall Street Turned Its Back on Climate Change "Six years after the financial industry pledged to use trillions to fight climate change and reshape finance, its efforts have largely collapsed."How Wall Street Turned Its Back on Climate Change The New York Times, David Gelles, Jan 17, 2026.
• How Trump’s Withdrawal From Climate Treaties May Ultimately Play Out "In addition to international stakes, states and cities face additionally challenges to acting autonomously this time around." Inside Climate News, Jenni Doering, Jan 18, 2026.
• Analysis: UK newspaper editorial opposition to climate action overtakes support for first time "Nearly 100 UK newspaper editorials opposed climate action in 2025, a record figure that reveals the scale of the backlash against net-zero in the right-leaning press." Carbon Brief, Josh Gabbatiss & Sylvia Hayes, Jan 19, 2026.
• The consequences of Trump’s war on climate in 7 charts "Seven snapshots reveal how climate rollbacks altered the trajectory of U.S. energy, environmental protection, and economic security." Grist, Staff, Jan 21, 2026.
• Records show DOE climate advisors targeted key EPA finding Lede: "The internal dialogue showed the researchers took a political tack in their discussions, a course critics said could complicate the Trump administration’s quest to kill the 2009 endangerment finding." PoliticalPro, Zack Colman, Jan 22, 2026.
• At Davos, Talk of Climate Change Retreats to the Sidelines "The annual gathering of top business leaders and policymakers used to be a center of the global climate movement. Things are much more complicated now." The New York Times, David Gelles, Jan 22, 2026.

Miscellaneous (5 articles)

• Federal Court Allows Dominion Energy in Virginia to Continue Offshore Wind Project "For the third time this week, the Trump administration is blocked from stopping a major renewable energy effort." Inside Climate News, Charles Paullin, Jan 16, 2026.
• 2026 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #03 A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, January 11, 2026 thru Sat, January 17, 2026. Skeptical Science, Bärbel Winkler, John Hartz & Doug Bostrom, Jan 18, 2026.
• Carbon-sucking fungi and 'forever chemical' crackdowns: Positive environmental stories from 2026 "Eco anxiety is very real, so we share this year's most uplifting stories to prove there’s hope for our climate." EuroNews, Angela Symons, Jan 19, 2026.
• A California Climate Expert Is Working to Restore Climate Risk Scores Deleted by Zillow "The real estate website scrubbed the data under pressure from California’s real estate brokers and agents who were concerned about its impact on home prices. Neil Matouka thinks prospective buyers have a right to know." Inside Climate News, Claire Barber, Jan 20, 2026.
• Half of world’s CO2 emissions come from just 32 fossil fuel firms, study shows "Critics accuse leading firms of sabotaging climate action but say data increasingly being used to hold them to account" The Guardian, Damian Carrington, Jan 21, 2026.

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation (3 articles)

• Talking About Energy Dominance? Solar Would Like to Have a Word. "We are in the solar-powered century, although some are taking their time to figure this out." Inside Climate News, Dan Gearino, Jan 15, 2026.
• Sea otters are California’s climate heroes "From kelp forests to sea grass meadows, these charismatic predators are quietly holding parts of the coast together." Yale Climate Connections, Daisy Simmons, Jan 20, 2026.
• Wind and solar overtook fossil fuels for EU power generation in 2025, report finds "Researchers say event described as ‘major tipping point’ for clean energy in era of destabilised politics" The Guardian, Ajit Niranjan, Jan 21, 2026.

Climate Science and Research (2 articles)

• The Women Saving America’s Climate Data Time Magazine, Kyla Mandel, Jan 16, 2026.
• Guest post: 10 key climate science ‘insights’ from 2025 "Every year, understanding of climate science grows stronger." Carbon Brief, Prof Kristie Ebi & Prof Sabine Fuss, Jan 22, 2026.

International Climate Conferences and Agreements (2 articles)

• Roadmaps and Colombia conference aim to shift fossil fuel transition into higher gear Lede: "Conferences in Santa Marta and the Pacific will discuss how to transition away from fossil fuels without harming workers or financial systems" Climate Home News, Jo Lo, Jan 16, 2026.
• Power play: Can a defensive Europe stick with decarbonisation in Davos? "With the US doubling down on fossil fuels, maintaining the clean energy transition is central to reducing geopolitical exposure and preserving Europe’s ability to act strategically" Climate Home News, Tsvetelina Kuzmanova, Jan 19, 2026.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Science (1 article)

• Bloggers claim Met Office fraud! (Let's investigate....) Potholer54 on Youtube, Peter Hadfield, Jan 17, 2026.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Solutions (1 article)

• Fact brief - Do solar panels release more emissions than burning fossil fuels? Do solar panels release more emissions than burning fossil fuels? Skeptical Science, Sue Bin Park, Jan 20, 2026.

If you happen upon high quality climate-science and/or climate-myth busting articles from reliable sources while surfing the web, please feel free to submit them via this Google form so that we may share them widely. Thanks!

by Mandela Linder, The Mendocino Voice, January 24, 2026

[excerpt:]

MENDOCINO CO., 1/24/26 — After decades of decline, endangered coho salmon have returned to the coast in numbers that more than double the targets set by habitat restoration projects. In 2008, just 5,000 coho were estimated across the entire state, one percent of their historic numbers; over the winter of 2024-25, more than 30,000 were counted in Mendocino County alone, showing that recovery is possible. Conservationists say that while it’s still too early to tell what this season’s numbers might be, it’s looking promising for another good year.

Over the past decade, the Nature Conservancy, Trout Unlimited, the Mendocino County Resource Conservation District, NOAA Fisheries, California Department of Fish and Wildlife, local landowners, tribes and other partners have restored habitat across the Ten Mile, Navarro, Big River, and Noyo River watersheds. Their work has included building side channels, off-channel ponds, large wood structures, and wetlands to support juvenile coho salmon. These structures give young coho salmon safe places to hide from predators, slow-moving water to rest in during storms and abundant food, creating the kind of habitat they need to survive winter storms and grow before heading to the ocean.

The main restoration site on northern Mendocino County’s Ten Mile River watershed at the Parker Ten Mile Ranch in Calif., on Jan. 21, 2026. Steep inclines to the water made it difficult for juvenile coho to survive storms. At this site alone, 8,000 dump truck loads of dirt were removed to create floodplains for the fish (Mandela Linder via Bay City News)

Coho salmon were listed as threatened in 1996, and by 2005 were officially endangered due to decades of habitat loss from logging, erosion and sediment from road construction and upgrading, and environmental changes that left rivers and streams inhospitable for spawning. By the early 2000s, populations had plummeted statewide, and restoring the rivers and floodplains became a priority for both conservationists and local landowners, who wanted to give the species a chance to recover.

. . .

“Timber, agriculture and land clearing have affected the habitat that they need to survive their fresh water life cycles. That includes clearing hillsides, and all the sedimentation that occurs, rerouting of a lot of streams, watersheds; they’ve basically been converted into timber conveyance systems,” Van De Burgt said.

. . .

To read the entire article, visit The Mendocino Voice:
Restoration efforts spark remarkable comeback for coho salmon on Mendocino Coast

The post Tell Tennessee lawmakers: Support HB 1369 for Kindergarten Lead Screening appeared first on ANHE.

The post Tell Tennessee lawmakers: Support HB 1369 for Kindergarten Lead Screening appeared first on ANHE.

Last week, the House Energy and Commerce Committee introduced draft legislation that reads like a chemical industry wish list. We are calling it The Toxic Act—because it would lead to more toxic chemicals, more cancer, and more polluter profits. 

The post The Toxic Act: More toxic chemicals. More cancer. More polluter profits. appeared first on Toxic-Free Future.

Baiting is cruel to bears and endangers the communities that live alongside them.

Our "Who is CELDF?" printable flyer is here! Learn more what we do, who we partner with, what services we offer, and CELDF's three primary program areas of Consultation, Education, and Community Resistance + Resilience.

The post Who is CELDF? appeared first on CELDF - Community Rights Pioneers - Protecting Nature and Communities.