News Feeds

Print article Share

When carbon dioxide (CO2) is released from a factory or power plant, the gas can be captured and permanently stored underground, preventing it from driving climate change.

This is the idea underpinning carbon capture and storage (CCS), a technology that is at the heart of many nations’ net-zero plans.

Influential organisations, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), describe CCS as “critical” for cutting emissions from key sectors – and for helping to avoid dangerous global warming.

In particular, capturing CO2 is seen as one of the only viable options for decarbonising some of the world’s highest-emitting industries, such as cement production.

The UK, for example, has committed to investing as much as £21.7bn over the coming decades in its nascent CCS industry, as part of the nation’s net-zero strategy.

Yet, in the UK and elsewhere, there has been a backlash against plans for CCS.

Citing high costs, ties to the fossil-fuel industry and a “history of poor performance”, critics describe CCS as a “dangerous distraction” or a “false climate solution”. 

Time and again, the outlook for the roll-out of CCS has been scaled back, as the technology has failed to deliver as quickly as expected – and as policy support has wavered.

Furthermore, critics state that the technology remains “unproven” on the scale required to make a meaningful impact on global emissions.

In this Q&A, Carbon Brief explores the role CCS is expected to play in achieving net-zero, its record to date and the reasons it has been criticised, using the UK as an example.

• What is CCS?
• How much CCS capacity has been built so far?
• What role is CCS expected to play in reaching net-zero?
• Why is CCS controversial?
• What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?

Article Contents Expand menu

• What is CCS?
• How much CCS capacity has been built so far?
• What role is CCS expected to play in reaching net-zero?
• Why is CCS controversial?
• What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?

What is CCS?

CCS involves capturing CO2 emissions released from a large source, such as a gas power plant or a cement factory.

The CO2 is separated from the facility’s exhaust stream, generally using a chemical solvent, before being compressed into a liquid and transported via pipeline or vehicle. The CO2 is then stored by injecting it into underground reservoirs, such as depleted oil fields or saline aquifers.

The term “CCUS” is sometimes also used, referring to the “utilisation” of CO2 to make products, including fertilisers, fuels or building materials. Such uses do not necessarily lead to permanent emissions cuts, as the CO2 can end up later being released back into the atmosphere. 

(“CCS” is used in this Q&A, unless quoting another organisation that specifically refers to “CCUS”.)

The infographic below shows the stages of capturing CO2 and transporting it to be either stored or used in other applications.

Infographic adapted by Carbon Brief from the IEA.

Carbon capture technology was originally rolled out at US and Canadian oil wells in the early 1970s as a way to achieve “enhanced oil recovery”. This involves injecting captured CO2 into depleted wells – a process that stores CO2, but also helps to extract more oil.

This remains, by far, the most significant end use for captured CO2 worldwide, with around three-quarters of it used for this purpose. 

Moreover, most of the CO2 currently captured is a by-product of gas purification – the process by which fossil fuels such as methane are separated from other, unwanted substances. Selling this CO2 can make such gas projects more economically viable.

Therefore, as shown in the chart below, which is based on International Energy Agency (IEA) data, the majority of CO2 that is both captured and used today helps the fossil-fuel industry to extract and sell more oil and gas.

CCS was first proposed as a way to deal with CO2 emissions in a 1976 academic article, which imagined injecting the captured gas into the ocean.

It is only since the early 2000s that CCS has gained traction as a proposed climate solution, with a 2005 “special report” by the IPCC exploring the topic. At that time, the authors note there were just three small-scale projects trying to capture and permanently store CO2.

Installing CCS at factories or power plants and permanently storing the CO2 would mean that, in theory, such facilities could continue using fossil fuels without contributing to climate change. 

Such applications are often mentioned alongside two related technologies, both of which could be used to “suck” CO2 out of the atmosphere and, thus, deliver “negative emissions”.

One is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). Crops absorb CO2 as they grow and BECCS  involves a power plant burning these crops, then storing the resulting CO2. 

The other technology is direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). 

These technologies are classed as “CO2 removal”, as they involve absorbing CO2 from the atmosphere using plants or machines and then storing it permanently.

By contrast, CCS installed at a factory is considered a way to avoid CO2 emitted by that specific facility from entering the atmosphere. This Q&A focuses on such applications, which account for the vast majority of existing and planned CCS.

First mention in the academic literature of capturing and storing CO2 for climate change mitigation. Source: Marchetti, C. (1977). How much CCS capacity has been built so far?

As of February 2026, there were a total of 75 operational CCS projects around the world. As noted above, almost all of them are at fossil-fuel extraction and processing sites, according to the IEA’s database. 

Together, these projects capture 62.5m tonnes of CO2 (MtCO2) each year. This is equivalent to the annual greenhouse gas emissions of Ecuador.

(This compares with the 22 CCS projects, promising to capture 40MtCO2 annually, that were operational or under construction as of 2014.)

As the chart below shows, the amount of CO2 currently being captured and stored is a tiny fraction of the total emissions from fossil-fuel use.

“CO2 captured and stored” includes all projects that capture CO2 and use it for enhanced oil recovery, store it permanently underground or use it “with significant climate benefits”, according to the IEA.

In a 2020 report, the IEA explained that the “story of CCUS has largely been one of unmet expectations: its potential to mitigate climate change has been recognised for decades, but deployment has been slow”.

A wave of interest in CCS in the 2000s, largely from countries in Europe and North America, focused on enabling coal power plants to continue operating with lower emissions. 

This interest largely petered out, as plummeting renewable energy costs weakened the case for coal plants with CCS. Today, there are only seven operating CCS-coal plants worldwide – five in China, one in the US and one in Canada.

Yet the Paris Agreement in 2015 – and the national net-zero targets that followed – highlighted the need for deep emissions cuts in sectors that previously expected to continue emitting for decades. This, once again, has fuelled interest in the use of CCS.

In recent years, there has also been growing interest in producing low-carbon “blue” hydrogen from gas with CCS. 

Hydrogen is widely seen as key for decarbonising certain sectors – particularly in industry – but analyses suggest that it may be difficult to make sufficient “green” hydrogen using renewable power on the timescales required.

As the map below shows, most CCS capacity is based in the US and Canada, with other major fossil-fuel producers such as Norway, Brazil and the Gulf states also contributing.

Projects listed in the IEA CCUS database as split between two countries are divided equally between them. This includes projects that only store CO2, but it excludes projects that only transport CO2. DACCS projects are excluded.

A surge of projects have entered the global CCS pipeline in recent years. According to the IEA, 93.7MtCO2 of capture or storage capacity is under construction as of February 2026 and another 1,279.6MtCO2 is in the “planning” stages.

“Planned” projects include any initiative at early concept, feasibility or engineering study stages and the industry has a long history of projects being cancelled or delayed. 

Nevertheless, this pipeline of projects could lead to a large expansion of facilities dedicated to permanent CO2 storage that does not involve extracting more oil.

The planned projects – if they are realised – would also include significant growth in sectors where CCS is virtually non-existent, such as steel, hydrogen and cement production, as shown in the chart below.

A project is considered “under construction” by the IEA if a final investment decision has been announced and construction is on-going or imminent. A project is considered “planned” if it is at concept, feasibility or engineering study stage. What role is CCS expected to play in reaching net-zero?

It will be impossible to stop dangerous climate change unless the world reaches net-zero emissions, according to the IPCC. The amount of global warming – and whether the Paris Agreement temperature target can be met – depends on when net-zero is reached.

Many global pathways that have been set out for achieving net-zero, including a majority of the IPCC-assessed pathways where global warming is limited to 1.5C, rely on the use of CCS at fossil-fuel plants and industrial sites.

“These models have been quite instrumental in bringing CCS back onto the agenda,” Lina Lefstad, an ecological economist at Lund University, tells Carbon Brief. 

Influential organisations relying on CCS in their net-zero scenarios range from the  International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) through to the oil company Shell. The IEA has stated that net-zero would be “virtually impossible” without CCS.

These scenarios often include 10s to 100s of times more CCS capacity being built in the coming decades. The IEA includes 1.7GtCO2 being captured by 2035 in its net-zero scenario – nearly 30 times more than is captured today.

(Some of the much higher numbers in scenarios assessed by the IPCC have been dismissed by experts as implausible, especially given the slow rollout of CCS to date.)

When considering CCS for both emissions cuts and removals, Dr Jennifer Roberts, a researcher at the University of Strathclyde and deputy director at the UK Carbon Capture and Storage Research Centre (UKCCSRC), tells Carbon Brief the situation is clear:

“From an IPCC climate modelling perspective…reaching net-zero without CCS is far more expensive, disruptive and potentially out of reach.”

This does not mean that it would be impossible to reach net-zero without using CCS. However, net-zero scenarios that use little or no CCS rely on dramatic changes elsewhere, such as much lower global energy demand.

Net-zero scenarios often include a crucial role for CCS in “hard-to-abate” sectors, referring to activities that lack available, low-cost options to fully decarbonise. In particular, CCS is widely seen as vital for decarbonising parts of heavy industry. 

The IPCC sixth assessment report (AR6) summary for policymakers calls CCS a “critical mitigation option” for some sectors, including cement and chemicals. The technical summary of the AR6 Working Group III report says that “CCS will be required to mitigate remaining CO2” in industrial sectors.

The IEA describes CCS as “virtually the only technology” that can significantly cut cement emissions, which account for around 7% of the global total. (Much of this CO2 comes from chemical processes, meaning it would still be released if the industry was electrified.)

Yet, the understanding of “hard-to-abate” emissions is changing, as alternatives to CCS become cheaper and increasingly available. As a result, CCS has become a less attractive option in some sectors, as well as being seen as less vital in some others.

Carbon Brief analysis shows that the IEA has reduced its outlook for CCS in the power sector by a third, compared to its expectations in 2021, as the chart below shows. 

This reflects both slow progress in deploying CCS and rapid cost reductions in renewables, which make running gas or coal power plants less attractive.

Data comes from IEA world energy outlooks between 2021-2025.

(Even prior to this adjustment, the IEA’s net-zero scenario was already at the lower end of CCS use, compared to those assessed by the IPCC.)

This declining role for CCS in the power sector would mean its use is more concentrated in industry. 

Industrial sectors – particularly cement, steel and chemicals – account for 60% of the CO2 captured in 2050 under the IEA’s net-zero scenario, as shown in the figure below. The remaining 40% is roughly split between electricity generation and blue hydrogen production.

Climate NGOs Bellona and E3G have stressed that with “limited public funding, infrastructure constraints and political attention, prioritisation is essential” for CCS. Their “CCS ladder” places CCS in cement and lime production at the top – with the highest “climate value” – while power CCS has “low and decreasing value”.

Despite this, the focus of the CCS sector so far has not been in heavy industry, which represents less than 10% of announced capacity.

Another key consideration is the role governments are assigning to CCS in their national net-zero strategies. 

One study found that 33 of the 67 long-term net-zero strategies submitted to the UN by governments, with a further 10 indicating some potential use. 

It concluded that high-income countries that produce a lot of oil and gas, such as Canada and Norway, showed the “firmest commitment” to capturing and storing CO2.

Nations have agreed at UN climate talks to “phase down” coal power that is “unabated”. This is generally understood to mean coal power without CCS – leaving space to develop “abated” coal plants. This could allow China, for example, to continue using its sizable coal fleet with CCS to reduce emissions.

Why is CCS controversial?

Despite its role in many net-zero scenarios, CCS remains a highly contested technology. 

It has long been framed in some circles as a “false solution” to climate change, that is backed and lobbied for by fossil-fuel companies to “delay” the clean-energy transition. 

Critics argue that CCS is expensive – especially compared to increasingly cheap wind and solar power – in part because it significantly increases the energy requirements of a facility. 

A University of Oxford working paper published in 2023 concluded that a “low-CCS” pathway to net-zero emissions would cost around $1tn less a year compared to a “high-CCS” pathway. The researchers stated that “no evidence is found for technological learning or associated cost reductions” in the development of CCS to date. 

(They added that CCS is “still likely necessary” for cement and chemical production.)

Pointing to the limited progress in scaling up the technology so far, some question whether CCS can play the role envisaged in many net-zero scenarios.

Responding to the IPCC’s most recent report, for example, the Centre for International Environmental Law stated that “abated fossil fuels only exist in models”. 

Proponents of CCS contest the notion that CCS is “untested” or “unreliable”, pointing to some projects that have been operating for many years. Moreover, most of the component parts that make up a working CCS project are in wide use for other purposes.

Yet, another key criticism levelled at CCS projects is that they simply do not capture enough CO2, diminishing their role as a climate solution.

There is a widespread view that CCS projects should aim to capture at least 90% of the CO2 being emitted. UK guidelines are among those targeting a higher capture rate of 95%.

The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA) has assessed the performance of existing projects. Its 2023 analysis is shown in the chart below.

The thinktank concluded that, in reality, most existing CCS projects are far below such capture rates, meaning they continue to emit significant amounts of CO2. (Capture is the most expensive part of the CCS process.)

Based on data analysed by IEEFA from the following projects: Petra Nova and Boundary Dam coal plants, US and Canada; Terrell, Lost Cabin, Shute Creek and Century Plant gas processing facilities, US, and Gorgon, Australia; Quest, Air Liquide and Air Products hydrogen production projects, US and Canada; Great Plains Synfuel and Coffeyville gasification projects, US; Enid and PCS Nitrogen fertiliser projects, US; Bonanza Bio Energy ethanol production, US; and Emirates Steel/Al Reyadah steel project, United Arab Emirates. 

Once the CO2 is captured, it must be stored. The IPCC says there is ample global geological storage available for CO2. It also says that, as long as sites are “appropriately selected and managed”, CO2 “can be permanently isolated from the atmosphere”.

Nevertheless, critics have noted that even relatively low rates of leakage along the transportation and storage chain could have a big climate impact when deployed at scale.

The continued use of gas in gas-CCS or blue hydrogen projects also brings risks of upstream emissions more broadly, such as methane leaks. (See: What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?)

Considering these factors, in 2023 Climate Analytics assessed a “high CCS pathway” from the IPCC database. It concluded that if CO2 was captured at rates seen in existing facilities – around 50% – and upstream emissions remain high, CCS use could see an extra 86GtCO2e emitted by 2050. 

The report found that even the IEA’s net-zero scenario, which relies on “more limited fossil CCS use”, could result in an additional 16GtCO2e due to “underperforming fossil CCS”.

All of this calls into question many uses of CCS, according to Andrew Reid, energy finance analyst at IEEFA: “Is there really any point in trying to decarbonise fossil fuels, which comes with significant technical, timing and additional cost risk?” Reid tells Carbon Brief:

“As for cement and chemicals, again, there are alternatives, but these are nascent and expensive. CCS may be a solution here and if investment is going to be made in any area, it most likely should be these.”

On the other hand, CCS advocates argue that gas, for example, is likely to be an important, “dispatchable” part of many electricity systems as nations transition to clean energy.

Prof Stuart Haszeldine, a CCS researcher at the University of Edinburgh, explains this position to Carbon Brief:

“If we’re going to burn gas, then we should be fitting CCS on that…Otherwise we’re just going to say it’s OK for us to burn lots of gas and carry on emitting.”

There is also a line of argument referred to – sometimes pejoratively – as “techno-optimism”, which often stresses CCS as a core climate solution. This was exemplified by a controversial report on climate action in 2025 by the Tony Blair Institute for Global Change (TBI), in which the former UK prime minister wrote that CCS should be “at the centre of the battle”.

This diverges from the IPCC’s conclusion that, while CCS will likely have a role in achieving net-zero emissions, its contribution will be dwarfed by that of renewables.

CCS also attracts criticism due to its connection to the fossil-fuel industry. Dr Jen Roberts at the UKCCSRC tells Carbon Brief that she agrees these links make for complicated messaging:

“CCS is critical for net-zero, but is intrinsically tied with an industry sector that is climate polluting and historically anti-climate lobbying.”

Roberts says careful policymaking, including the development of business models and standards, can support CCS in hard-to-abate sectors where it is most needed. 

Some experts suggest that governments should require companies to capture and store their emissions under the “polluter pays” principle.

Roberts also notes that fossil-fuel companies have the experience and the workforce needed to scale up CCS. “Oil and gas companies can evidence a track record in multi-million or billion-dollar subsurface engineering projects,” Roberts adds.

Despite the fossil-fuel industry’s apparent support for CCS, one 2021 study co-authored by Haszeldine noted that they had, in fact, invested relatively small amounts in the technology, compared to renewables and nature-based solutions.

Lina Lefstad at Lund University questions whether the fossil-fuel industry stands to benefit financially through the deployment of CCS as much as some critics imply:

“People seem really worried that the fossil-fuel industry is going to come out the winner again, but if that was the case I think we would have large-scale CCS by now.”

What are the UK’s plans for scaling up CCS?

The UK government has committed “up to” £21.7bn of funding over 25 years to support the nation’s first five CCS projects and to make the nation an “early leader” in the sector.

This package, supported by both the former Conservative and current Labour governments, is intended to help create “clusters” of connected facilities across industrial areas of the UK.

Some have suggested that this represents a large pot of government spending, which could be raided to support more pressing priorities. Indeed, media coverage often points to CCS funding as a potential target for government cuts, or as a way to boost, say, military spending.

This is in spite of the fact that three quarters of the funding is expected to come from levies on consumers, rather than government budgets.

The first two CCS clusters, which are currently set to be deployed in the late-2020s, are the East Coast Cluster in north-east England and HyNet in north-west England and north Wales. The second two, scheduled for around 2030, are Acorn in north-east Scotland and Viking in the Humber.

The projects are expected to include blue-hydrogen production, gas power with CCS and industrial uses. The CO2 captured would be pumped into offshore saline aquifers and depleted gas fields.

Former UK energy secretary Ed Miliband has stated that CCS will “unlock” hard-to-abate sectors and play an “important role” in achieving clean power by 2030.

This position is supported by the UK government’s climate advisors at the Climate Change Committee (CCC), who have consistently stressed that CCS is “essential” for net-zero. 

In the CCC’s most recent net-zero pathway, released as part of its seventh carbon budget advice, CCS contributes 2% of emissions cuts in 2030 and 8% in 2050, as shown in the chart below. (If CO2 removals using BECCS are included, this increases to 15% in 2050.)

The CCC maintains that it “cannot see a route to net-zero that does not include CCS”. Nevertheless, the committee has downgraded its expectations for CCS in recent years. 

Between the CCC’s sixth and seventh carbon budget advice, its recommendations for power and industry CCS capacity dropped from 46MtCO2 to 41MtCO2. 

Dr Jamie Tarlton, the committee’s CCS lead, addressed this at a conference in March 2025, stating that it was “partly because we see more opportunities for decarbonising the other sectors and reducing those residual emissions than we saw five years ago”.

More recently, the UK government also scaled back its expectations for industrial CCS in its latest carbon budget delivery plan for 2035, bringing it more in line with the CCC’s net-zero pathway. It still describes CCS as “part of the most cost-effective route to net-zero”.

The UK’s CCS plans have drawn criticism. A September 2024 letter to Miliband signed by 22 scientists and activists expressed concern about “locking the UK into a fossil-fuel based pathway”. 

They note that the gas-CCS power plants and blue hydrogen facilities initially backed by the government would leave the UK reliant on gas imports, as North Sea production declines. This could be expensive and result in “upstream” emissions due to methane leaks.

(At the end of 2025, BP withdrew its involvement in one of the blue hydrogen facilities at the Teesside site. A data centre is planned for the site instead.)

Net Zero Teesside, a gas-CCS power plant in the East Coast Cluster run by BP and Equinor, has been unsuccessfully challenged in court over its emissions savings. The challenge was based on the idea that potential upstream emissions could significantly exceed any emissions cuts from CCS use.

According to a report by Carbon Tracker, the lifecycle emissions of Net Zero Teesside gas-CCS power plant would depend heavily on where it sources its fuel.

The project could cut emissions by around three-quarters, relative to an unabated gas plant, says the report. But it adds that if the plant relies on imported gas with high upstream emissions, then it might only cut emissions by a quarter.

(Most of the upstream emissions from imported gas would be released overseas, meaning they would not be counted in the UK’s official emissions inventory.)

Besides driving “gas dependence” in the UK, the government’s approach has drawn criticism for failing to ensure that CCS is prioritised in the industries that are hardest to decarbonise.

A report by the Public Accounts Committee in early 2025 took aim at the government’s cluster-based approach. It said this “does not ensure that financial support for CCUS is directed at the sectors which will need it most” – highlighting cement production.

(Of the CO2 captured in the CCC’s net-zero pathway in 2050, around 40% is in the industrial and waste sectors, while the remaining 60% is from gas power plants and the production of fuels such as hydrogen.)

Dr Andrew Boswell, the energy analyst who challenged Net Zero Teesside in court, says he is “more nuanced” when it comes to applications of CCS that do not involve gas. “There may be a case for cement, lime and waste…However, the case is unproven,” he tells Carbon Brief.

The Public Accounts Committee report also criticised the “high-risk” approach of using public funds for CCS projects, as well as slow progress in developing the technology. 

Enrique Cornejo, head of energy policy at fossil-fuel trade body Offshore Energies UK, tells Carbon Brief that the UK needs to maintain momentum and deploy CCS in order to “achieve economies of scale” and to reduce the cost of the technology more broadly:

“It is indeed necessary to streamline the cluster sequencing process to ensure that emitters in sectors such as cement have a clear route to the CCS market.”

related Q&A: What do China’s provincial five-year plans say about climate and energy? 18.06.2026 China policy Analysis: China’s CO2 climbs 2% in early 2026 due to ‘wasted’ wind and solar 04.06.2026 Coal Q&A: What does India’s new Paris Agreement pledge mean for climate action? 27.03.2026 Emissions Analysis: India’s CO2 emissions in 2025 grew at slowest rate in two decades 26.03.2026 Emissions

The post Q&A: Does the world need ‘carbon capture and storage’ to reach net-zero? appeared first on Carbon Brief.

The post Regional Forum Road Show appeared first on ANHE.

Headline News:

• “Dominion Runs Into Delay On 2.6-GW CVOW” • Dominion Energy has delayed the expected final turbine installation at the 2.6-GW Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project to the end of 2027. The utility blamed delays on its own jack-up vessel and weather contingencies, as well as the stop-work order issued to CVOW by the Trump administration last year. [reNews]

Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind (Dominion image)

• “Ember’s Electric Coaches Show Intercity Bus Electrification Is Already Here” • Edinburgh makes electric transit visible. The city has electrified regional rail, trams, electric buses, including large battery-electric double-deckers that stand out clearly. The urban buses were always expected to be among the first to electrify, but intercity buses have taken that place. [CleanTechnica]
• “Cierco Signs Lease Agreement For Llŷr Floaters” • Cierco has signed an agreement for lease with the UK Crown Estate for its two 100-MW Llŷr floating wind projects off south-west Wales. The agreement grants Cierco the formal rights to an area around 30 km off Pembrokeshire where the two test and demonstration schemes will be deployed. [reNews]
• “Washington Wildfires Spread To Over 7,700 Acres, 600 Structures Damaged Or Destroyed” • Together, the Old Trails Fire, the Fairview Fire, and the Autumn Lane Fire are being called the Spokane Complex Fire, authorities said. They are burning over 7,700 acres with 0% containment in the Spokane area amid dangerous, windy conditions. [ABC News]
• “Eversource Books $164 Million Impairment On Revolution Wind” • Connecticut utility Eversource recorded a $164 million impairment on the 704-MW Revolution Wind offshore wind farm. CEO Joseph Nolan blamed two separate stop work orders issued by the Trump administration for the charges but said the project is on track to be finished on time. [reNews]

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

The post Application Open For the ANHE Environmental Health Nurse Fellowship! appeared first on ANHE.

After the US-Iran war caused energy prices to soar, ballooning Egypt’s energy import bill, the government has doubled down on plans to boost renewable energy in the country’s power mix – part of its broader plan to become a clean energy export hub for the region.

With abundant sunshine, swathes of unused desert land and plenty of wind, Egypt is seen as having the potential to become a major force in renewable power generation, helping to cut the planet-heating carbon emissions of Africa’s second-largest economy and beyond.

The conflict in the Middle East has given the government’s clean energy plans more salience, making the case for renewable power to bolster the country’s energy security and help it meet its economic development goals by exporting clean power.  

The government recently announced an accelerated timeline for renewables to reach 45% of the electricity mix within two years – up from a previous target of 42% by 2030 and a huge jump from around 13% in 2025, according to think-tank Ember. 

In June, President Abdel ​Fattah el-Sisi met with government ministers to discuss the faster delivery of solar and energy storage projects as well as upgrades to the electricity grid to deliver on the new goal, including 105 renewable energy projects intended to bolster grid stability. 

• Mar 4, 2026 Energy Gulf oil and gas crisis sparks calls for renewables investment Energy analysts and some politicians say the Iran war’s effect on oil and gas prices shows renewables are the path to energy security Read more
• May 22, 2026 Clean Energy Frontier Chinese EV brands woo Yemen’s wealthy elite as war prompts solar boom For the well-off few, buying an EV is the next step in a solar revolution that has helped Yemenis weather years of power outages and high fuel prices Read more
• Jun 24, 2026 News EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels Read more

Big challenges lie ahead, among them a parallel bet on continued fossil fuel exploration and the need to upgrade electricity infrastructure, a task that could require multibillion-dollar investments, experts say.

“The technical and financial plumbing – the grid, foreign-currency financing and the supply chain – are the real gatekeepers,” Nadia Elmasry, an expert at the Regional Center for Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency, told Climate Home News.

In a speech to the nation in March, President Sisi said $50 billion worth of investment were needed to overhaul the electricity grid and transmission infrastructure. 

During the COP29 climate talks in 2024, Prime Minister Mostafa Madbouly warned that Egypt’s targets for renewable power expansion could be missed without more international support for critical infrastructure. 

Multimillion-euro investment

Modernising and expanding power grids has emerged as a central pillar of an intensifying global push for electrification – a key priority of the COP31 UN climate talks taking place in Türkiye in November.  

As dozens of governments led by the European Union and the UK throw their political weight behind a rapid electrification of the global economy, Egypt’s hunt for foreign investment in power infrastructure has found sympathetic ears.

In June, the EU and its European Investment Bank lending arm announced a financing package of up to €690 million ($795 million) to modernise Egypt’s transmission network – widely seen as a weak point in the nation’s clean energy ambitions. 

The project aims to help the grid absorb 22 GW of renewable capacity by 2030, reduce electricity losses and move power from wind and solar zones to consumers and, eventually, foreign markets, including the EU. 

New substations and transmission lines will connect wind and solar zones around the Red Sea and the Gulf of Suez, reducing losses and preparing the network for future cross-Mediterranean trade.

Under the country’s ambitious regional plans, Egypt would supply clean power via existing interconnections with Jordan, Libya and Sudan, as well as a 3 GW link under construction with Saudi Arabia. 

Further ahead, proposals envision the export of renewable electricity to southern Europe via a subsea cable, and Egypt also aims to be a primary source of green hydrogen and ammonia for European markets.

Conflicts, cash among the challenges

Planned investment in electricity and renewables reached 136.3 billion Egyptian pounds ($2.7 billion) for the 2025/26 financial year, up from 72.6 billion pounds ($1.4 million) the year before, with public investment expected to account for about three-quarters of that.

Grid investment is “the cornerstone” of Egypt’s hub strategy, said energy and environmental economy expert Mohammed Abdel Raouf, allowing it to integrate renewables without destabilising the power system and create the smart-grid infrastructure needed to trade electricity with other countries.

But Egypt’s plans face several major challenges, besides the necessary grid upgrades, which are estimated to cost billions of dollars alone, according to a December 2025 study by the Amsterdam-based think-tank Transnational Institute. 

A man carries baskets of bread on his head through Cairo, Egypt (Photo: MM/Flickr)

Regional conflicts are disrupting supply chains and discouraging investment, particularly in renewable energy, Abdel Raouf warned. High borrowing costs, financing rules, limited EU-compliant capacity and uncertain long-term buyers of Egypt’s clean power could also slow progress, according to the Transnational Institute study.

The Arab world’s most populous country has been grappling with the aftermath of a steep currency devaluation and economic fallout from the Gaza and Iran wars.

Elmasry pointed to pressures from Egypt’s shortage of foreign currency and the need for concessional finance or guarantees to make long-term projects bankable. Egypt says it has mobilised $4 billion in concessional finance for 4.2 GW of renewable energy projects.

Regulatory coordination and workforce development will be essential, particularly as Egypt seeks to trade across grids governed by different technical and commercial rules, Elmasry added.

• Jun 24, 2026 News EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels Read more
• Jan 9, 2026 News Israel’s fossil gas power play pushes climate action to the sidelines Even as it faces international condemnation over the Gaza war, Israel is working to boost natural gas exports and offshore exploration to strengthen its strategic and regional ties Read more
• Jul 16, 2026 Comment Africa can lead the Age of Electrification The electrification agenda presents both an extraordinary opportunity for Africa and an immense challenge for the continent Read more

In order to generate an exportable surplus of clean electricity at a time of rising domestic power needs, Egypt also needs to give a bigger role to decentralised minigrid systems such as rooftop solar projects, said Cairo-based solar entrepreneur Hatem Tawfik.

“We will [only] be a hub in 2040 after we produce more than we need,” said Tawfik, co-founder and managing director of Cairo Solar, a solar engineering, procurement and construction company, calling for cheaper loans and simpler permitting and grid-connection rules. 

For Tawfik, such small-scale projects are also fundamental to the government’s goal of shoring up energy security to avert crises like that of 2023/2024, when Egypt’s falling gas output contributed to rolling blackouts during sweltering heatwaves. 

At a time of heightened geopolitical uncertainty in the Middle East, this is even more urgent. 

“In the event of war, or if a country such as Israel, which supplies 40-60% of Egypt’s [imported] gas, suddenly cut off supplies [again], Egypt would be less vulnerable,” he told Climate Home News. 

A man charges his mobile phone thanks to the electric solar panels above his house at Al-Basaysa village as the country struggled with continuous power cuts in 2024 (Photo: REUTERS/Mohamed Abd El Ghany) Home-grown batteries

Storage could determine whether Egypt’s renewable power is merely abundant at midday or commercially valuable around the clock.

“Storage is what turns intermittent renewables into firm, exportable power,” said Elmasry.

In January, Norwegian developer Scatec signed a 25-year power purchase agreement with the Egyptian Electricity Transmission Company for 1.95 GW of solar and 3.9 GWh of battery storage.

Demand for more storage has also raised the prospect of Egypt developing a domestic battery industry.

Chinese company Sungrow plans to build a battery-storage-system factory in Ain Sokhna, its first in the Middle East, with annual production capacity of 10 GWh and operations scheduled to begin in April 2027. It will provide the batteries for Scatec’s energy storage project. 

Egypt has also granted licences for two battery-storage projects in Aswan and Suez worth a combined $800 million. Huawei and Egyptian company AIS have meanwhile signed an agreement to explore local production of grid-forming battery systems.

At the same time, Egypt is conducting an aerial geophysical survey in search of critical minerals across six regions, a first in about half a century. 

Still, Mohamed Gamal Kafafy, president of the World Green Economy Council, said competing directly with China would be unrealistic, suggesting Egypt should instead manufacture under Chinese licences or through joint ventures, reducing imports while building local skills.

The Ministry of Electricity did not respond to Climate Home News’ request for comment. 

Mixed messages?

The government’s climate investment programme aims to add 10 GW of renewable capacity and retire 5 GW of inefficient fossil-fuel generation by 2028, but Egypt is not turning its back on oil and gas.

President Sisi told energy companies attending the Egypt Energy Show in March to pursue a double strategy – intensifying efforts to explore and increase oil and gas production while also accelerating investment in renewable energy. The Petroleum Ministry plans to drill about 480 exploratory oil wells over five years.

Drivers refuel vehicles at a gas station in Cairo, Egypt, after the government introduced power rationing measures due to shortages of petroleum products caused by the war between the US, Israel and Iran (Photo by Sayed Hassan/Getty Images)

The risk, Tawfik said, is that a large oil or gas discovery reduces the incentive to focus on investment in renewables.

“When a major oil or gas discovery, such as the Zohr gas field, leads to overconfidence, it reduces the focus on renewable energy,” he said, noting that renewable project rollouts largely stagnated after the completion of the giant Benban solar park in 2019. 

But major developments such as the El Dabaa nuclear plant and the Abydos solar and energy-storage project demonstrate that significant work is already under way to meet Egypt’s clean energy hub ambitions, Tawfik said.

“Simply implementing the existing plans would be an excellent outcome,” he added.

Main image: The Sharm El Sheikh solar power plant in Egypt (Photo:
Hassan Allam Utilities)

The post Egypt seeks to unlock renewable potential to power regional clean energy hub appeared first on Climate Home News.

Today, government negotiators will sit down in New York for the fifth round of talks at the UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. It is the sort of conference that might make most of our eyes glaze over.

But what actually happens in these rooms for the coming week is tied closely to our lives, our health and our cost of living. The decisions being made this conference are simple yet consequential to our lives: will polluters profiting from the economic and climate crises that the rest of us are paying for be made to pay their share?  

The price we are already paying Conflicts, oil shocks and rising bills

Since the conflict between the US, Israel and Iran escalated around the Strait of Hormuz — the passage that carries roughly a fifth of the world’s seaborne oil trade, plus major volumes of gas and fertilizer — disruptions to shipping have pulled millions of barrels of oil a day off global markets at various points this year, and crude oil prices have spiked sharply, at times trading well above USD$100 a barrel.

This cost doesn’t stop at shipping routes. We are seeing higher oil, gas and fertilizer prices that in turn raising transport costs, food prices, and electricity bills, for everyone, everywhere. In the US alone, people have already paid nearly USD$67 billion more at the pump since the war began, working out to over USD$500 in extra fuel costs per household. In fact, over USD$700 billion is estimated to be siphoned from households and businesses to the oil and gas industry by the end of 2026 caused by these elevated prices.

Extreme weather

There is a second shock underway too. The climate crisis, fuelled by fossil fuel companies, is making extreme weather events more frequent and severe, taking an ever-growing toll on both human lives and public budgets. This summer has brought Europe’s worst start to a wildfire season on record, with over 434,000 hectares burnt by late July — more than the same point in 2025, itself the worst year on record. France is currently seeing its most devastating wildfire outbreak in half a century, with more than 300,000 people evacuated across France and Spain, and Spain is battling its largest wildfire in modern history, with firefighting costs alone estimated at up to €3.3 billion. Countries like Algeria, Türkiye and Canada too are battling deadly wildfires and around the world, we see increasingly devastating climate impacts like floods, droughts, and heatwaves, upending millions of lives. Every year, our governments are spending more and more taxpayer money picking up the pieces — on firefighting, evacuations, emergency relief, rebuilding and more.

A firefighter battling a forest fire in Saint-Jean-d’Illac, around 30km from Bordeaux, France. Source: Getty

Every fossil fuel price shock and every climate disaster acts like an unofficial second tax on us: charged once through our everyday bills, and again through the public taxes we pay.

Where our money is actually going

This money out of our pockets isn’t disappearing either. While ordinary people struggle, oil and gas majors are posting exceptional profits, not despite these price shocks, but because of them. The volatility unleashed by the US-Israel-Iran conflict has been especially good for business, with the Big ones just having announced shockingly high earnings from second quarter of 2026 (April, May and June):

• TotalEnergies, the French oil and gas giant and France’s largest company by revenue, reported USD$6 billion in profits, more than double what it made a year ago. 

On July 22nd, 350.org activists staged an action at La Défense, the Paris business district, home of TotalEnergies headquarters, denouncing the responsibility of fossil fuel giants in the climate crisis and demanding stronger taxes on their profit – Credit: Rémy El Sibaïe/350.org

• Shell, the British oil and gas major and one of the world’s largest energy companies, posted profits of  USD$9.84 billion for the second quarter, also more than double last year’s figure, and its best quarter since 2022. CEO Wael Sawan told investors the company was built to “thrive through volatility.” BP, another UK based oil company, also just announced a net profit of over USD $5.73 billion, up $2.5bn from the quarter before. 
• US Big Oil companies Exxon and Chevron have netted over a combined USD$26 billion, with it being the largest quarterly profit ever for the latter. 

That’s over USD $48 billion taken in profits by just four large oil companie while the rest of the world is left dealing with climate and energy chaos. To put this in perspective, this is more than the entire yearly national incomes of over 100 countries,

The UN Tax Convention is an opportunity to course correct

There’s something deeply unfair about this picture: the same volatility that’s draining household budgets and straining public finances is the very thing fossil fuel companies are cashing in on. This Convention is a real chance to change that by creating binding rules that shift the cost off households and onto the companies that are recording obscene profits. This genuinely multilateral forum aims to deliver a global treaty by 2027 to end corporate tax evasion and opacity, and establish fairer taxation rules. Governments could use it to make oil and gas majors pay for their role in the climate crisis, including funding lasting protection for affected populations.

This matters most for countries in the Global South, who are often sitting on fossil fuel reserves or living through the worst of the climate damage, with the least power to claim a fair share of profits made from either. It is also important for other countries, where public budgets are increasingly being eaten up to prop up fossil fuel companies or coping with climate disasters caused by the very same industry. Every dollar Big Oil avoids paying in tax is a dollar of our taxpayers money that governments have to cough up. That money has to come from somewhere, and usually it’s taken from budgets for health, education, transport, and other public services.

What should be on the table

Leaders at the UN Tax Convention need to write three things into the treaty at once through tax rules that make polluters pay: 

1. A strong, permanent tax on the profits fossil fuel companies are making right now

Research found that a 20% surtax on the profits of the world’s 100 largest oil and gas companies could have raised over $1.08 trillion since the Paris Agreement was signed in 2015. This money could have gone toward protecting communities from climate disasters, funding adaptation, and speeding up the transition to more stable renewables, instead of sitting with Big Oil shareholders. To see how large that number really is, compare it with what’s currently on the table for climate-hit countries. The UN’s Loss and Damage Fund, set up specifically to help vulnerable nations recover from climate disasters, had received just $817 million in pledges as of late 2025, against an estimated $580 billion a year that experts say will be needed by 2030. A single fossil-fuel surtax, in other words, could raise roughly a thousand times more than an entire climate fund has managed to attract through voluntary pledges in three years.

2. Rules that stop those same companies from shifting profits out of reach before any government can tax them at all 

A surtax on paper profits means little if those profits have already been moved somewhere they can’t be taxed. With around a third of extractive-sector profits routed to low-tax jurisdictions, closing that loophole is the difference between a tax that exists on paper and one that actually collects. Governments at the Convention must also address the the legal loopholes that let extractive firms book profits in low-tax jurisdictions before any tax is ever assessed.

3. A binding commitment that the revenue is earmarked for climate response

Raising the money means little if it simply disappears into general treasuries or gets diverted to unrelated spending. The treaty should lock in that the revenue should be directed to the communities and countries hit hardest by climate disasters, energy poverty, and fossil-fuel price shocks, and to a fast, fair shift to renewable energy. Without that earmark, governments could tax the polluters and still leave the people paying the steepest price for their pollution without dedicated support.

Our leaders cannot keep proclaiming there isn’t enough money for the clean energy transition or other public priorities while vast pools of fossil-fuel profit remain largely untouched. They must tax the exceptional profits of an industry that has known for decades that its business model was driving the climate crisis, and still chose to keep extracting, keep expanding, and keep collecting record profits from it. That means taxing Big Oil’s windfalls, closing the loopholes that let those profits disappear before they’re ever assessed, and putting the proceeds where they’re needed most: with the people and countries paying for a crisis this same industry caused.

What can you do

You don’t need a seat in the negotiating room to have a stake in what happens there. If oil and gas companies keep profiting from every disruption while ordinary households absorb the cost, it’s because a set of rules enables them to do so. But these rules can change.

The week’s convention isn’t an opportunity worth letting pass. Big Oil’s Q2 profits have given us concrete numbers to hold up next to what governments could be collecting instead, right as the room decides whether to write that possibility into the treaty text.

That’s the leverage we actually have here. We are calling on Ramy Mohamed Youssef, Chair of the negotiations, and every government at the table, to write a permanent, unavoidable surtax on fossil fuel companies’ global profits into the Convention, and to spend that revenue on climate protection and affordable clean energy for the people who need it the most. 

Make polluters pay! 

ADD YOUR VOICE

The post This UN Tax Conference might sound boring appeared first on 350.

A pioneering California law meant to sharply limit use of the familiar “chasing arrows” recycling symbol has been blocked by a federal judge who said it probably violates the First Amendment.

In a preliminary injunction issued last month, U.S. District Judge William Hayes halted enforcement of SB 343 after food, packaging and retail groups sued, finding that key provisions were “unconstitutionally vague” and likely infringed protected commercial speech. Enforcement of the law, passed in 2021, was expected to start this fall.

The decision is a blow to environmental advocates, who had hoped to remove the familiar symbol from a huge array of plastic products, in line with a statewide study showing that only a fraction are widely collected and actually recycled. SB 343 said only goods and packaging accepted by recycling programs serving at least 60 percent of Californians and then actually sorted for recycling — not collected and thrown away —  could bear the chasing arrows.

Hayes’ constitutional reasoning surprised supporters of SB 343 because similar arguments against environmental marketing regulations have historically struggled in court.

“The First Amendment protects free expression, not a corporation’s right to commit consumer fraud,” said Nick Lapis, director of advocacy for the nonprofit Californians Against Waste. “We see this exact playbook every time the plastics industry is asked to stop misleading the public — they suddenly hide behind the Constitution.”

In his decision, Hayes applied a standard four-part test to determine whether SB 343 would unduly restrict companies’ speech rights. The law passed the first two tests handily, as it regulates “potentially misleading” speech and was intended to serve California’s legitimate interests in reducing consumer confusion and improving recycling rates.

The next tests are where the law ran into trouble. Hayes, siding with the industry trade groups, argued that the legislation would not advance those “legitimate interests.” Rather than encouraging companies to redesign their products and packaging to comply with California’s real-world recyclability criteria, he said the law would prompt them to remove the recycling symbol altogether. Products recycled at a rate below the 60 percent threshold that the law requires would no longer make it into recycling bins, which could in theory leave more of them bound for the landfill.

Hayes said a less stringent regulation could have better advanced California’s goals. For instance, the state could have passed a law requiring more descriptive qualifiers alongside the recycling symbol. He offered a hypothetical example of a label explaining that an item is “accepted by recyclers in the greater Los Angeles area but nowhere else in California.” Such a label would provide consumers with more and better information, he argued, but would not be allowed under SB 343.

Heidi Sanborn, executive director of the nonprofit National Stewardship Action Council, said the judge’s reasoning reflected a fundamental misunderstanding of the problems facing California recycling systems. People are throwing too much stuff into their blue bins, she said. In addition to not actually being recyclable, much of this refuse — including plastic bags and other plastic films — can gum up sorting machines, causing operational delays and creating safety risks.

“People are wish-cycling, they’re so desperate to recycle,” Sanborn told Grist. “We have to pull all this [contamination] out, which is very labor-intensive, and then everybody wants to know why their bills go up.” 

Read Next How the recycling symbol lost its meaning Kate Yoder

Industry groups welcomed the injunction, saying it would prevent California from “censoring truthful information on packaging.”

Scott Hochberg, general counsel and litigation director for the nonprofit Earth Island Institute, said he’s seen free speech challenges to environmental rules many times before. Big polluters have frequently invoked the First Amendment to oppose regulations that require them to disclose information — like their greenhouse gas emissions — or tone down statements about their sustainability.

“What’s relatively new and concerning is when these arguments succeed and states are blocked from implementing common-sense initiatives to protect their residents,” he said.

A lawsuit Hochberg’s organization is pursuing against Coca-Cola illustrates the same debate. It alleges the company presents itself as a “sustainable and environmentally friendly company” despite its outsize contribution to plastic pollution. Coca-Cola argued that statements about its sustainability efforts — including plastics recycling — were protected political speech rather than commercial advertising. A federal judge rejected that argument in 2024.

The companies that sued California didn’t make that same distinction; their suit is more like one filed in 1992 that sought to block a California law restricting the use of terms like “biodegradable,” “ozone-friendly,” and “recyclable.” A judge upheld the law, ruling that it would not stifle free speech because corporations could still use a restricted word or phrase as long as they included qualifiers explaining how, where, or under what conditions it applied.

The injunction against SB 343 leaves California with few easy options. Hayes’ ruling suggests the state faces a difficult road if the case proceeds to trial. Lawmakers could amend the law to address some of the judge’s concerns, though that may be unlikely given the politics surrounding the issue. California could also appeal the injunction, but the lower court would still have to decide the case on its merits.

Earth Island Institute and Californians Against Waste announced on July 27 that they are joining California as defendants. Hochberg said he hoped to provide the court with more information “about how the recycling system actually works.” Losing the lawsuit will make it harder for other states to pursue similar labeling regulations, he said. 

It could also jeopardize California’s nation-leading extended producer responsibility law, which shifts responsibility for collecting, recycling, and reducing plastic packaging from taxpayers and local governments to the companies that produce it. It relies on the same definition of recycling and is currently being challenged by a separate lawsuit.

Whatever happens next, Sanborn said she’s ready to work with industry to come up with other solutions — including legislation to clarify labeling rules at the national level. “We can and should work together to solve this,” she said. “But you should not have the right to lie to people.” 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Is the recycling symbol free speech? A judge just ruled it could be. on Aug 3, 2026.

People killed defending nature in Lebanon Channel News brendan 3rd August 2026 Teaser Media

With great growth comes great responsibility … to give residents better transit alternatives.

That was the message coming from Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt in his recent 2026 State of the City Address introducing a proposed sales tax to fund the region’s vision for transit expansion.

Oklahoma City Mayor David Holt

He wants to avoid the mistakes of peer cities like Austin and Nashville that have grown precipitously in recent decades without accommodating additional travel capacity, resulting in hellish levels of congestion. 

He also knows that highway expansion isn’t an acceptable long-term solution. 

“The metro has pretty much reached the point of saturation with highways,” said Holt. “New highways or adding significantly more lanes is just not feasible for most of our existing system. Adding lanes is not the panacea you may think it is.” He then showed the crowd a photo of a jam-packed 12-lane Interstate 405 in Los Angeles. 

Instead of that carmaggedon, Holt is pitching a transit improvement sales tax aimed at giving residents alternatives to the car-based transportation planning that dominates the U.S. 

“We can learn from their mistakes. The time to make a commitment is now,” he added. “That commitment must give us the resources we need to strengthen our existing system of city streets for those who remain in cars, and it must provide public transit alternatives that take some cars off the road and, at the very least, give each of us a choice.”

Oklahoma City has been able to facilitate growth in large part because of its Metropolitan Area Projects initiatives. The first iteration coming in 1993, the one-cent sales tax has funded numerous capital improvement projects aimed at transforming the city’s infrastructure and strengthen cultural amenities.

Past uses of that tax funded what is now the Oklahoma City Thunder’s arena, the revitalization of the historic Bricktown district, the OKC Streetcar, and bus rapid transit projects that are currently in the works. 

Three-quarters of the proposed transit tax would go to bus and rail infrastructure and improvements, with the remaining quarter going to maintenance of existing infrastructure. 

Oklahoma leaders knew that growth would necessitate building for the future. That’s why, in 2019, they formed the state’s first regional transit authority that would oversee this expansion, now known as ONE Transit. 

The agency is comprised of Oklahoma City and its two most prominent suburbs, Norman and Edmond. All three of the cities have experiencede remarkable growth in the past 20 years. The population of Oklahoma City, for example, increased by 17.4 percent between 2010 and 2020 and is on track to increase another 11.4 percent by 2030.

That’s on track for a population of more than 750,000, plus another 130,000 in Norman and 100,000 in Edmond — which are both growing.

The backbone of ONE Transit’s transit expansion plan for the region includes commuter rail that will connect all three cities with key stopping points along the way. The line would be created along an existing BNSF rail corridor. 

This rendering was partly made with AI, according to ONE Transit.

The hope is that the commuter rail line will enable those in the suburbs to feed into Oklahoma City’s more robust transit options in the downtown area, which already includes the improving bus network and the OKC Streetcar.

Future plans also include more robust bus rapid transit lines, including a western route, a route to Will Rogers International Airport to the southwest, and a route to Tinker Air Force Base to the east. A light rail line to the airport would be the final piece of the plan.

ONE Transit understands the value that transit can provide for a local economy, citing an APTA study that shows a five-to-one economic return produced by long-term investment in public transit.

“Collectively, this plan will preserve our quality of life by alleviating traffic congestion, it will preserve the mobility necessary to keep our economy strong and growing, and it will spur commercial development, among other benefits,” Holt said in his address, aligning with ONE Transit’s vision.

There are signs of a growing appetite for transit alternatives in the area. The OKC streetcar recently announced that its free fare pilot program was being extended until Aug. 20 due to increased ridership. The program kicked off in January of this year and brought 37 percent more ridership between January and April versus the same period last year.

The city’s first and only bus rapid transit line also saw a record month this year, with over 60,000 rides in May. 

Levels of support for the tax remain uncertain. Hope in the region certainly took a hit when riders learned that Oklahoma lawmakers failed to include 2027 funding for the Amtrak Heartland Flyer, the line between Oklahoma City and Fort Worth.

The measure is sure to meet a challenge in car-oriented and fiscally conservative Oklahoma, but there is hope that residents will see past success with Metropolitan Area Projects in boosting the health of the city. Holt is calling on Oklahomans to rise to the occasion.

“The resources we have today are not sufficient to meet the challenges of growth,” he said. “Meeting this new transportation challenge is going to require a new commitment from each of us.”

The proposed sales tax would need approval from Oklahoma City, Norman, and Edmond and then could be put up for a vote in 2027.

• Under the BUILD America 250 Act, House Republicans’ transportation budget bill replacing the Biden administration’s Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, funding for transit would plunge by 23 percent, adjusted for inflation. That includes a loss of $2 billion for California and New York alone. The share of funding for highways would grow from 63 percent to 70 percent, according to the Urban Institute. (Governing).
• Cities like New York, Paris, Berlin and London that invested in bike infrastructure during the pandemic and didn’t stop are now reaping the benefits. (Momentum)
• As the war with Iran rages on, driving up gas prices, oil companies are raking in massive profits. (Associated Press)
• Too much overlapping bureaucracy is delaying American infrastructure projects. (Government Tech)
• Automated traffic enforcement cameras make streets safer, but Flock surveillance is giving them a bad name. (Streetsblog USA)
• After a driver killed a Boston transportation official while she was riding her bike, Mayor Michelle Wu, who largely abandoned her pro-bike stance during the recent mayoral campaign, has flip-flopped back to bikes. (WBUR)
• Widening Houston’s Katy Freeway to 26 lanes only made traffic worse — proof of induced demand. (Space Daily)
• Atlanta’s transit system performed well during the World Cup, but will MARTA build on that success or fall back into complacency? (AJC)
• The Ballard light rail line in Seattle is not dead and could be built by 2042. (My Northwest)
• Las Vegas is installing its first protected bike lane. (LV Sports Biz)
• Kansas City set speed and age limits for e-bikes and e-scooters. (KCUR)
• Building sidewalks is a good thing, but in Milwaukee the construction is temporarily forcing vulnerable pedestrians and people with disabilities into the street. (TMJ 4)
• Costco parking lots are a war zone. (USA Today)

aru untuk bergabung menggunakan tautan atau kode referensi tertentu. Sistem ini dirancang agar memberikan keuntungan bagi kedua belah pihak, baik pemberi referensi maupun pengguna baru. Namun, setiap platform memiliki ketentuan yang berbeda, mulai dari syarat aktivasi akun, penyelesaian verifikasi, hingga aktivitas tertentu yang harus dipenuhi sebelum bonus dapat diklaim. Oleh karena itu, membaca syarat dan ketentuan secara menyeluruh menjadi langkah penting agar tidak terjadi kesalahpahaman.

Program referral yang berkualitas selalu mengedepankan transparansi. Platform yang terpercaya akan menjelaskan secara rinci besaran bonus, mekanisme pencairan, batas waktu penggunaan, serta ketentuan lain yang berkaitan dengan hadiah tersebut. karena informasi yang disampaikan mudah dipahami, memiliki dasar yang jelas, serta membangun rasa percaya pengguna terhadap layanan yang ditawarkan.

Bagi member setia, bonus referral eksklusif dapat memberikan nilai tambah yang menarik. Selain memperoleh penghargaan atas loyalitas, pengguna juga berkesempatan menikmati berbagai keuntungan tambahan, seperti bonus saldo, voucher promosi, poin loyalitas, hingga akses terhadap program khusus yang tidak tersedia bagi pengguna biasa. Manfaat tersebut tentu akan lebih optimal apabila digunakan secara bijak dan sesuai dengan kebijakan platform.

Di sisi lain, pengguna juga perlu memahami bahwa tidak semua program referral menawarkan keuntungan yang sama. Sebelum mengikuti sebuah program, ada baiknya melakukan evaluasi terhadap reputasi platform, kualitas layanan pelanggan, tingkat keamanan data, serta kejelasan informasi yang diberikan. Langkah ini membantu mengurangi risiko terjadinya penyalahgunaan program atau promosi yang kurang transparan. Pengalaman pengguna lain, ulasan independen, dan informasi resmi dari penyedia layanan dapat menjadi referensi yang bermanfaat sebelum mengambil keputusan.

Memberikan rekomendasi kepada teman atau keluarga juga sebaiknya dilakukan secara bertanggung jawab. Hindari memberikan informasi yang berlebihan atau menjanjikan keuntungan yang tidak dapat dipastikan. Sebaliknya, sampaikan pengalaman penggunaan secara jujur berdasarkan fakta yang telah dialami. Pendekatan ini tidak hanya meningkatkan kredibilitas pemberi referensi, tetapi juga menciptakan hubungan yang lebih sehat antara pengguna dan platform.

Keamanan akun tetap menjadi aspek yang tidak boleh diabaikan selama mengikuti program referral. Pengguna dianjurkan menggunakan kata sandi yang kuat, mengaktifkan autentikasi dua langkah apabila tersedia, serta menjaga kerahasiaan informasi pribadi. Selain itu, hindari membagikan kode referral melalui saluran yang berpotensi menimbulkan penyalahgunaan data. Kesadaran terhadap keamanan digital merupakan bagian penting dari pengalaman pengguna yang positif.

Pada akhirnya, bonus referral eksklusif untuk member setia dapat menjadi bentuk apresiasi yang memberikan manfaat nyata apabila dijalankan melalui sistem yang transparan dan bertanggung jawab. Dengan memahami mekanisme program, mempelajari ketentuan yang berlaku, serta mengutamakan keamanan dan kejujuran dalam memberikan rekomendasi, pengguna dapat memaksimalkan keuntungan tanpa mengabaikan prinsip penggunaan layanan yang sehat. Program referral bukan hanya tentang memperoleh bonus, tetapi juga membangun komunitas yang saling percaya dan berkembang melalui pengalaman positif yang berkelanjutan.

In our latest, we talk with journalist and author Jasper Craven (@Jasper_Craven) about his new book, “God Forgives, Brothers Don’t,” discussing the history of military education and toxic masculinity, the…

NNU castigated the Israeli government for destroying or badly damaging almost all of Gaza’s medicine warehouses as part of its ongoing genocide against the Palestinian people and in flagrant violation of a United Nations resolution prohibiting the targeting of medical facilities and medical workers during armed conflict.

A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, July 26, 2026 thru Sat, August 1, 2026. Stories we promoted this week, by category:

Climate Change Impacts (7 articles)

• State of the climate: Rapidly developing El Niño raises chance of record-warm 2026 Chances of a record setting 2026 El Niño rapidly increase, taking us closer to an important warming threshold. Carbon Brief, Zeke Hausfather, Jul 24, 2026.
• Why is Germany building roads for yesterday's climate? As the Autobahn buckles under heat waves, Germany is still paving roads for a past climate. Engineers know how to fix that — so what's the holdup? DW, Tim Schauenberg, Jul 28, 2026.
• Summer of Heat, Fires and Storms Is a Reckoning for Europe on Climate Europe is experiencing some of its biggest fires and highest temperatures ever; residents are fleeing, leaders are struggling to respond and “it will get worse,” one climate expert said. NYT, Mark Landler and Chico Harlan, Jul 29, 2026.
• `The heat took him from me`: India`s death toll rises amid escalating heat crisis As extreme heat claims the lives of workers in India’s poorest areas, many fear the true mortality rate is being dangerously undercounted. The Guardian, Hannah Ellis-Petersen and Aakash Hassan, Jul 29, 2026.
• 4 things to know about cyclospora and climate change A fragile food system, uneven public health messaging, and global warming are all working to supercharge the parasite’s spread. Grist, Frida Garza, Jul 30, 2026.
• `Was this heatwave caused by climate change?` - we`re asking the wrong question The question is not whether climate change caused the heatwave, but how much hotter and more dangerous heatwaves have become because greenhouse gases, primarily from burning fossil fuels, have accumulated in the atmosphere. The Conversation, Prof. Haley J. Fowler & Prof. Ed Hawkins, Jul 31, 2026.
• Everything on fire DrGilbz on Youtube, Ella Gilbert, July 31, 2026.

Climate Science and Research (6 articles)

• Human-driven climate change largely responsible for last 50 years of worsening fire weather in Western North America, new study shows Just as detectives can find literal fingerprints at a crime scene, scientists can detect human and natural ‘fingerprints’ in climate and meteorological data like temperature, precipitation, and relative humidity— all factors that can influence fire behavior. Science Feedback, Science Feedback team, May 8, 2025.
• How do scientists know if climate change made a heat wave, extreme storm or wildfire worse? When a devastating heat wave, hurricane, flood or wildfire strikes, people often want to know: How much did human-caused climate change influence this event, if at all? The Conversation, Kevin T. Smiley, Deepti Singh, Jennifer Marlon, Jim Hurrell, Jul 24, 2026.
• Low-Level Cloud Loss Amplifies Global Warming A new study adds weight to concerns over the positive feedback effects of clouds on global warming. CalTech, Katie Neith, Jul 24, 2026.
• Canopy-mediated climate feedbacks in the boreal continuous permafrost zone A vast amount of carbon locked up in permafrost is protected by a thin and increasingly threatened layer of vegetation. Nature Climate Change, M. Langer, Jul 27, 2026.
• Rising CO2 Alters Upper Atmosphere Response to Stratosphere Sudden Warming A whole-atmosphere model simulation shows that rising CO2 changes how the upper atmosphere and ionosphere respond to a sudden stratospheric warming (SSW), with implications for future space weather.? Eos, Huixin Liu, Jul 29, 2026.
• Why Hansen may end up being right about 2026 Whether 2026 sets a new record is increasingly likely to be a split decision between different groups The Climate Brink, Zeke Hausfather, Jul 30, 2026.

Climate Policy and Politics (3 articles)

• American Nero: Why Trump is trying to burn down the National Academy of Sciences The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Benjamin Santer, July 26, 2026.
• Trump administration eyes massive coal reserves under federal lands Despite vast contrary scientific evidence, the US executive branch sees vast reserves of coal as a resource desirable to burn. Inside Climate News, Lisa Sorg, Jul 27, 2026.
• Do small climate habits help or hurt the bigger cause? Researchers tracked nearly 2,800 people's habits, protests, and policy views to test whether small green acts help or hurt the bigger fight. Neither, it turns out. Anthropocene, Sarah DeWeerdt, Jul 28, 2026.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Solutions (3 articles)

•  2026 SkS Weekly Climate Change & Global Warming News Roundup #30 A listing of 28 news and opinion articles we found interesting and shared on social media during the past week: Sun, July 19, 2026 thru Sat, July 25, 2026. Skeptical Science, Bärbel Winkler & Doug Bostrom, July 26, 2026.
• Fact brief - Do solar plants require backup from fossil fuels? Solar plants require backup, but it doesn’t have to be from fossil fuels. Skeptical Science, Sue Bin Park, Jul 28, 2026.
• The influencer teaching millions to fear solar Alexandra Fasulo says she’s protecting farms and wildlife. How much of her rhetoric is actually true? HEATED, Alex Hannaford, Jul 30, 2026.

Miscellaneous (2 articles)

• `I can`t work in the farce of climate change cruise tourism anymore`: why Antarctic guides quit their dream jobs 'You’d see massive glacier calvings, and you’d just want to cry. But all the guests would be cheering. And you’d be like … ‘can you not put two and two together?’'' The Conversation, Zdenka Sokolickova, Christy Hehir, Elizabeth Cooper, Jul 21, 2026.
• Scientists decry Trump`s `blame game` after he claims Canada `poisoning` US air Trump told Mark Carney ‘you got to stop these fires from coming in’ as experts say wildfires symptom of climate crisis The Guardian, Oliver Milman, Jul 24, 2026.

Public Misunderstandings about Climate Science (2 articles)

• Factcheck: No, Europe`s heatwaves are not being `caused` by declining air pollution Scientists tell Carbon Brief that the framing of heatwaves being “caused” by declining air pollution is “wrong”. Carbon Brief, Robert McSweeney, Jul 24, 2026.
• Hot days, cold thermometers A graph popular with climate change deniers is desconstructed by Zeke Hausfather, exposing its economy of truth. Skeptical Science, Zeke Hausfather, Jul 27, 2026.

Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation (2 articles)

• Can we alter ocean chemistry to absorb carbon? Here are the pros and cons Procrastination on arresting fossil fuels leads to extreme measures; here are pros and cons of "ocean alkalinity enhancement" and pitfalls in public perceptions this technology will encounter should it require deployment. The Conversation, Harris Anderson, Andrew Lenton, Mathieu Mongin, Jul 23, 2026.
• U.S. Raises Threat of Steep Water Cuts in Lower Colorado River Basin A federal plan would impose drastic water cuts on Arizona, California and Nevada in dry years over the next decade. A legal battle could follow. NYT, Scott Dance, Jul 31, 2026.

Climate Education and Communication (1 article)

• Wildfires: why media coverage doesn`t always make the climate connection Exploring how contradictory press coverage can sit on the same front page tells us a lot about how climate change is narrated in the UK, and why climate reporting differs so much from country to country. The Conversation, Doug Specht,, Jul 28, 2026.

Climate Law and Justice (1 article)

• Shell`s hidden climate knowledge under scrutiny as court battle looms As the company faces a landmark climate lawsuit, confidential documents show how British scientist James Lovelock warned executives of the risks of burning fossil fuels in the 1960s. DeSmog, Rebecca John, Jul 30, 2026.

Health Aspects of Climate Change (1 article)

• Trump Administration Is Undoing Plans to Boost Workplace Heat Protections The Biden administration took steps to shield workers from extreme temperatures. The Trump administration is taking a gentler approach with employers. NYT, Scott Dance, Aug 01, 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!

EWG statement on Senate Republican farm bill proposal Anthony Lacey August 2, 2026

WASHINGTON – The Senate Agriculture Committee, chaired by John Boozman (R-Ark.), on July 31 released an updated farm bill proposal. 

The following is a statement from the Environmental Working Group’s Senior Vice President of Government Affairs Scott Faber:

No one should support a farm bill that fails to support family farmers, feed hungry children, support farmers adopting regenerative practices or build healthy diets.

The farm bill released Friday night by Sen. Boozman fails on all four accounts by failing to close loopholes that tilt the playing field against small farms, by failing to restore the cuts to SNAP that have left more than 1 million children without anti-hunger assistance and by failing to reverse a $2 billion cut to popular farm stewardship programs. 

We need farm and food policies that support healthy diets, the people who feed us, the hungry and our environment, not a farm bill for the 1%. 

###

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. Visit www.ewg.org for more information.

Areas of Focus Farming & Agriculture Conservation Food & Farm Workers Farm Subsidies Press Contact Alex Formuzis alex@ewg.org (202) 667-6982 August 2, 2026

Construction is underway on a $1.7 billion solar and battery storage project in Texas that will turn existing coal mining land into a hub of clean energy generation.

Panamint Capital announced last week that it broke ground on the 1.2-gigawatt Big Rooter Power solar farm in Bremond, about halfway between Dallas and Houston. The project will use some of the land and assets from the adjacent Twin Oaks coal-fired power plant and Calvert surface coal mine, both of which will continue operating.

Panamint’s clean energy project will be among the largest in the nation — and, the developer claims, the biggest solar array ever built at a brownfield site in North America.

“We believe deploying new capacity at existing energy sites is the clearest way to benefit communities, ratepayers, and the environment alike,” said Apolka Totth, CEO of Panamint, a Nevada-based investment firm.

The giant installation will further boost Texas’ thriving solar sector, which this year is expected to generate more electricity than coal in the Lone Star State. The renewable resource is helping meet the state’s energy demand from data centers, manufacturing facilities, and rising air-conditioning use amid more frequent and extreme hot weather.

The Calvert mine is a 19-million-ton surface lignite mine adjacent to the Twin Oaks coal plant. Panamint Capital

Panamint, which is backed by the private equity firm KKR, launched in 2019 with the goals of squeezing more life out of existing fossil-fuel infrastructure while building lower-emission facilities on the same sites. In 2023, Panamint acquired the 310-MW Twin Oaks coal plant and Calvert mine ​“with the express intention of leveraging the site’s existing characteristics to massively and rapidly expand generating capability at the lowest possible cost,” Totth said by email. 

Work has started on the first phase of the solar farm, a 491-MW section that is set to go online in August 2028. Construction will begin in December on the remaining 658 MW, which could start producing power in August 2029.

The 10,000-acre Big Rooter site will also include 1.6 gigawatt-hours of battery storage and 20 miles of new extra-high-voltage transmission lines. The investment firm says it also has the infrastructure and natural gas access needed to build at least 800 MW of gas-fired generation, either for the grid or customers like data center developers.

“Big Rooter is a landmark project that reflects the scale of investment being made in America’s energy future,” George Hershman, CEO of Solv Energy, said in a news release. The contractor is building the site’s solar array, substation, and transmission infrastructure.

Turning coal mines into clean energy 

Big Rooter’s pairing with active coal operations makes it unique within the nation’s small but growing coal-to-solar subsector, which has mainly focused on putting panels on former mine lands and retired industrial sites.

The largest of these projects is the 186-MW Tilden Solar Project in southern Illinois, followed by the 111-MW Martin County Solar Project in eastern Kentucky, which both went online last year atop abandoned coal mines.

In Louisiana, the 240-MW Dolet Hills Solar Project is now being built on a former coal mine property. And the developer BrightNight is advancing the Starfire installation on remediated mine land in Kentucky.

In 2023, when BrightNight announced the Appalachian project, electric truck startup Rivian signed on as the anchor customer, with a 100-MW power purchase agreement. Starfire was initially envisioned as a roughly 800-MW project, but is now on track for 410 MW, with construction slated for late 2027 and planned operations in 2030.

The 111-MW Martin County Solar Project in eastern Kentucky will supply power for Toyota’s automaking operations in the state. Toyota

“Earlier descriptions of a larger project reflected a broader long-term vision for the site, but as development has progressed, BrightNight has focused on the configuration that best aligns with current interconnection, permitting, site, and customer considerations,” a BrightNight spokesperson said by email. ​“We remain very enthusiastic about Starfire and its importance as a major redevelopment project on former coal mining land in Eastern Kentucky.”

Repurposing old mining sites for solar power has an obvious appeal. As opposition breaks out in rural areas over using prime farmland for solar — concerns stoked by Trump administration officials, including U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins — brownfield projects allow developers to sidestep those conversations and put sullied land to use. Doing so has typically proved more complicated and expensive than placing solar panels on flat or uncontaminated fields.

The 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law and 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act provided incentives to make it easier to finance clean energy installations on mine lands, while a $500 million Department of Energy program allocated funding for projects on current or former mines.

But last year, the Trump administration and Congress added more hurdles by phasing out tax credits for solar and wind energy, effectively ending the tax bonus for brownfield developments. And the administration scrapped at least one DOE mine-land award, for Mineral Basin Solar Power, as part of its sweeping cancellation of $7.6 billion in clean energy grants in the 16 states that voted for Democrat Kamala Harris in the 2024 presidential election.

The Nature Conservancy and its partners are developing solar projects on former coal mines, including at this site in Campbell County, Tennessee.
Cameron Davidson/TNC

“The federal policy landscape for developing clean energy on mines has changed, but the opportunity hasn’t,” said Jessica Wilkinson, the North America renewable energy team lead for The Nature Conservancy, a global nonprofit.

“In many parts of the country, wind and solar are the cheapest forms of energy and are succeeding on economics alone,” she added. ​“And if building on mine lands, brownfields, and landfills has fewer community conflicts, they may be seen as very enticing.” 

The nonprofit and its partners plan to develop 25 solar and battery storage projects on former mine lands that The Nature Conservancy manages in the Cumberland Forest, which spans parts of Kentucky, Tennessee, and Virginia. The first project, the 10-MW Wildcats Solar in Virginia, is expected to break ground this fall and could start delivering power to the grid next year.

Wilkinson noted that despite the federal pullback, states have continued to show support for what her group calls ​“mining the sun” projects. For example, Ohio and Colorado passed laws to incentivize renewable energy development on former industrial sites. And a handful of federal programs continue providing financial support for cleaning up coal mining areas — a crucial step for enabling future solar development.

“Communities still want to see these lands become economic engines again,” Wilkinson said.

Texas project adds solar — and more coal

Panamint, for its part, said it was able to secure clean energy incentives for Big Rooter Power before Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act on July 4, 2025, repealing large swaths of the Inflation Reduction Act.

“We ordered long-lead time equipment such as transformers and circuit breakers well before last summer’s OBBBA, so we were largely insulated from those impacts,” Totth said.

She noted that Panamint is partnering with U.S. firms First Solar and Nextpower (formerly Nextracker) to procure domestically made solar modules and racks. Big Rooter is also located in an ​“energy community” — the Department of Energy’s term for brownfield sites and areas affected by coal plant and mine closures. For those reasons, the company says it will receive a federal investment tax credit worth 50% of total project costs.

Read Next For first time, Americans are getting more of their electricity from solar than coal Tik Root

Yet as Panamint begins installing millions of solar panels in Texas, it has no plans to wind down production at the neighboring Twin Oaks coal plant.

“Twin Oaks is an economically competitive unit that provides low-cost reliability to Texas ratepayers, and we see no reason for an early retirement,” Totth said. She added that the company is also investigating both expanding the Calvert mine area and building a terminal facility to rail in coal for continued operations.

As Totth sees it, the new solar array will produce enough carbon-free power to ​“negate” the coal plant’s emissions profile on an annual basis.

It’s an example of the all-of-the-above approach to energy in Texas. Despite the massive amounts of solar, storage, and wind the state has built, it continues to cling to fossil fuels. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline This Texas coal mine will soon be home to a 1.2GW solar farm on Aug 2, 2026.

A recent study from Yuka and Harvard Law School’s Food Law and Policy Clinic finds that in the United States, cheap foods are more likely to contain ingredients that negatively impact health compared to more expensive products. The report recommends policies to regulate food safety, hold food companies accountable, and improve public health.

The study analyzed more than 800 packaged foods sold nationwide in the U.S. to determine how a product’s price relates to its nutritional quality. The least expensive products contain 163 percent more additives, 21 percent more sugar, and 10 percent more sodium than the most expensive ones. Some products also contain ingredients that are banned in other countries, according to the report.

“Healthy eating cannot simply be framed as an individual responsibility…without acknowledging the structural realities of the food system,” Julie Chapon, Co-Founder of Yuka, a consumer health app, tells Food Tank.

The products span the 12 most popular processed food categories in the Yuka app that are sold nationwide in major U.S. grocery retailers. Examples include store-bought bread, breakfast cereal, pizza, crackers, cereal bars, and tortilla wraps. The report finds that the products in each category can vary greatly in terms of nutritional quality.

“Most people believe that some types of food are generally healthy and others—like desserts or snack products—are not,” Emily Broad Leib, Director of the Harvard Food Law and Policy Clinic, tells Food Tank. She points to store-bought bread as an example, with the cheapest breads containing four times more additives than the most expensive ones. While many consumers view bread as a healthy part of their diet, the ingredients can vary widely between loaves.

“Even basic staples can be either fairly healthy or heavily engineered, and price is quietly pushing lower-income families toward the latter,” says Broad Leib. These findings demonstrate the nutrition inequity embedded in the U.S. food system and help explain the more than US$1 trillion a year spent on diet-related diseases, according to the report.

One of the major hurdles to overcoming these challenges is the generally recognized as safe (GRAS) exemption. The loophole allows companies to self-certify and introduce new ingredients into the U.S. food supply without U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) notification or review. The report says, “99 percent of new food chemicals introduced since 2000 have bypassed federal oversight.” These novel substances are rarely reviewed by the FDA after entering the market.

The study recommends reforming the food oversight and safety system that allows for this to happen. These include amending the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FD&C Act) to remove the GRAS loophole and require FDA review of new substances. It suggests systematic reassessments and monitoring of food additive ingredients within the food supply, placing limits on specific substances, improving transparency in flavoring ingredients, and requiring the disclosure of ingredient processing and sources.

The report also states that there is a need for policies to reduce consumer exposure to high-risk additives and ultra-processed foods (UPFs). These include banning these ingredients in schools, reforming food procurement within institutional settings, and utilizing tax credits to incentivize product reformulation without these ingredients.

The authors hope that these policy recommendations, along with public pressure, will push companies to reformulate their products and create a more equitable food system. “Healthier food should not be a luxury,” says Chapon, “Public health protections must evolve to better reflect today’s food environment.”

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

Photo courtesy of Haley Owens, Unsplash

The post Study Reveals Hidden Health Risks of Cheap Foods appeared first on Food Tank.

Headline News:

• “Zambia’s Government Delivers On Its Promise To Ramp Up Generating Capacity, With Solar Playing A Key Role” • Zambia made a conscious decision to have an electricity grid powered by renewable energy, mostly hydro. But this bold move has faced severe challenges recently due to prolonged droughts. Now the country is turning to solar. [CleanTechnica]

Boy learning by solar light (Patrick Bentley, CC BY-SA 2.0, cropped)

• “India’s Renewables Hit 20% Power Mix Record in July as Coal Share Drops” • India’s renewable energy generation reached a record 20% of the total power mix in July, while coal’s share fell. But the overall picture was complicated. The total amount generated fell from June, but increased year on year, as electric demand increased. [Whalesbook]
• “Renewable Power Generation Capacity To Hit 12,000 MW By Next March” • Since the 14th government’s term started, about 4,500 MW of new capacity have been added to Iran’s power grid, as the capacity of renewable power plants increased from 1,250 MW to about 5,800 MW. The capacity of renewable power plants will reach 12,000 MW by March 2027. [Tehran Times]
• “Wildfires Spark Evacuations In Washington Amid Dangerous Conditions Across The Pacific Northwest” • A wildfire spreading quickly outside Spokane, Washington, burned more than 2,000 acres and sparked evacuations, according to local authorities. The Old Trails Fire is just one of a number of fires currently threatening the state. [ABC News]
• “KIA Elects To Manufacture The EV3 In Mexico” • The Kia EV3 was introduced two years ago, with the expectation that it would be made at the existing Kia factory in Georgia for sale in the US market. That was before the immigration folks descended on a Hyundai battery factory and hauled off a few hundred South Korean in handcuffs. [CleanTechnica]

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

Dalam dunia casino online, bonus bukan lagi sekadar pelengkap, melainkan salah satu faktor yang membuat pengalaman bermain terasa lebih menarik. Banyak pemain memilih sebuah platform atau permainan bukan hanya karena tampilan visualnya, tetapi juga karena berbagai penawaran yang mampu memberikan nilai tambah. Mulai dari bonus sambutan, putaran gratis, hingga program loyalitas, semuanya dirancang untuk meningkatkan kenyamanan sekaligus memperpanjang waktu bermain.

Di balik popularitasnya, bonus memiliki peran yang jauh lebih besar daripada sekadar hadiah. Fitur ini membantu pemain mengeksplorasi berbagai jenis permainan slot tanpa harus mengeluarkan modal yang terlalu besar. Dengan pendekatan tersebut, pemain memiliki kesempatan untuk mengenal mekanisme permainan, memahami fitur khusus, dan menemukan gaya bermain yang paling sesuai dengan preferensi mereka.

Bonus Menjadi Daya Tarik Utama

Industri casino online berkembang sangat pesat. Persaingan yang semakin ketat membuat setiap penyedia layanan terus menghadirkan inovasi agar mampu menarik perhatian pengguna. Salah satu strategi yang paling efektif adalah menawarkan bonus dengan syarat yang kompetitif dan transparan.

Bagi pemain baru, bonus sering kali menjadi pintu masuk untuk mencoba berbagai permainan slot. Mereka dapat merasakan sensasi bermain tanpa harus mengambil risiko yang terlalu tinggi. Sementara itu, pemain yang sudah berpengalaman cenderung memanfaatkan promosi berkala sebagai bagian dari strategi pengelolaan saldo agar sesi permainan berlangsung lebih efisien.

Mengenal Berbagai Jenis Bonus Slot

Tidak semua bonus memiliki fungsi yang sama. Setiap promosi biasanya dirancang untuk tujuan tertentu sehingga pemain perlu memahami manfaatnya sebelum digunakan.

Bonus selamat datang merupakan penawaran pertama yang diberikan kepada anggota baru. Jenis bonus ini bertujuan memperkenalkan layanan sekaligus memberikan pengalaman awal yang lebih menyenangkan.

Selain itu terdapat bonus deposit yang memberikan tambahan saldo berdasarkan persentase tertentu dari nilai transaksi. Penawaran seperti ini cukup populer karena memberikan kesempatan bermain lebih lama dibandingkan hanya menggunakan dana pribadi.

Free spin atau putaran gratis juga menjadi favorit banyak pemain. Melalui fitur tersebut, pengguna dapat mencoba permainan tertentu tanpa mengurangi saldo utama. Cara ini sangat membantu untuk mengenal karakteristik sebuah slot sebelum memutuskan bermain lebih serius.

Tidak kalah menarik, program loyalitas menghadirkan berbagai keuntungan eksklusif bagi pemain aktif. Semakin tinggi tingkat keanggotaan, biasanya semakin besar pula manfaat yang diperoleh, mulai dari cashback hingga promosi khusus yang tidak tersedia untuk pengguna biasa.

Bonus Membantu Pengelolaan Modal

Salah satu alasan mengapa bonus begitu penting adalah kemampuannya membantu pemain mengelola anggaran bermain secara lebih bijak. Tambahan saldo atau putaran gratis memungkinkan sesi permainan berlangsung lebih lama sehingga pemain memiliki waktu untuk memahami pola permainan tanpa harus terburu-buru.

Pendekatan ini juga memberikan ruang bagi pemain untuk mencoba beberapa tema slot yang berbeda. Setiap permainan memiliki tingkat volatilitas, fitur bonus, dan mekanisme pembayaran yang unik. Dengan memanfaatkan promosi secara tepat, pemain dapat mengevaluasi permainan mana yang paling sesuai dengan preferensi mereka.

Meski demikian, setiap bonus umumnya disertai syarat dan ketentuan tertentu. Oleh karena itu, membaca informasi mengenai persyaratan penggunaan, batas waktu, serta ketentuan perputaran menjadi langkah penting sebelum mengaktifkan promosi. Kebiasaan sederhana ini membantu pemain mengambil keputusan dengan lebih percaya diri.

Memilih Bonus yang Berkualitas

Tidak semua penawaran memberikan manfaat yang sama. Pemain sebaiknya memperhatikan beberapa aspek penting seperti transparansi syarat, reputasi platform, variasi permainan yang tersedia, serta kualitas layanan pelanggan.

Platform yang profesional biasanya menyajikan informasi bonus secara jelas dan mudah dipahami. Transparansi menjadi indikator bahwa penyedia layanan menghargai pengalaman pengguna sekaligus membangun kepercayaan jangka panjang.

Selain itu, bonus yang berkualitas bukan selalu berarti memiliki nilai nominal terbesar. Penawaran dengan persyaratan yang realistis sering kali memberikan manfaat yang lebih optimal dibandingkan bonus besar dengan ketentuan yang terlalu kompleks.

Kesimpulan

Bonus telah menjadi bagian penting dalam ekosistem permainan slot modern. Kehadirannya tidak hanya meningkatkan daya tarik casino online, tetapi juga memberikan kesempatan bagi pemain untuk menikmati pengalaman bermain yang lebih fleksibel dan bernilai. Dengan memahami jenis bonus, membaca syarat penggunaannya, serta memilih platform yang terpercaya, pemain dapat memanfaatkan setiap promosi secara lebih efektif.

Pada akhirnya, bonus bukan sekadar tambahan saldo atau putaran gratis. Fitur ini merupakan salah satu elemen yang mendukung pengalaman bermain secara keseluruhan, memberikan kesempatan eksplorasi yang lebih luas, sekaligus membantu pemain menikmati permainan slot dengan pendekatan yang lebih cerdas dan terencana.

More than 50 years after the murder of iconic Chilean folk singer Victor Jara, the last man convicted of killing him has been tracked down and brought to justice. In 1973, a day after Pinochet's coup, Jara was seized, tortured, his hands broken to silence what was deemed music "more powerful than a thousand machine guns." Today, in a world tilting right, he remains an enduring symbol of resistance. Manifiesto: “A song has meaning/ When it beats in the veins/ Of a man who will die singing.”

On Sept. 11, 1973, troops under brutal, U.S.- backed General Augusto Pinochet bombed and stormed the presidential palace in Santiago to depose Salvador Allende, a Chilean physician who'd become the first democratically elected Marxist head of state in Latin America. Barricaded inside the palace, Allende gave a final speech defending Chilean democracy. "My words do not have bitterness but disappointment.," he said. "May they be a moral punishment for those who have betrayed their oath." He thanked the country's workers, farmers, miners, women, intellectuals, students for their heartfelt loyalty to "a man who was only an interpreter of great yearnings for justice." "I will always be next to you," he said. "My sacrifice will not be in vain. History is ours." Then he shot himself under the chin with an assault rifle.

A Marxist activist and singer hugely popular with Allende supporters, Jara had re-written the 1969 song Venceremos - composed by Sergio Ortega with original text by Claudio Iturra - as an anthem for Allende’s 1970 Popular Unity election campaign. Born to a poor farm family, Jara was mestizo, a mix of Indigenous Mapuche and Spanish heritage. He once said his first memory was hearing his mother sing folk songs as she worked in their garden or kitchen; after she died when he was 15, Jara went to seminary school but eventually decided against the priesthood. After military service, he studied theater and music at university, then turned to writing songs that merged tender folk music with political themes - rural working-class stories, brutal evictions of squatters: "We began to create a new kind of song. It was music that was born out of necessity."

In September 1973, widely recognizable, he was seized by soldiers the day after the coup and taken to Estadio Chile, a Santiago stadium now named for him, where about 5,000 people were being held. For four days, he was beaten, tortured, humiliated. An officer threw a cigarette on the ground and made him crawl for it; others played Russian Roulette with him; eventually, they broke both his hands before parading him through the stadium; later, through split lips, he sang a final Venceremos - "We Will Prevail." On his last day, said a fellow detainee, he found a pen and notebook and scribbled one more song, or harsh poem, Estadio Chile, later smuggled out. Two hours later, he was killed, his body dumped near a cemetery. His body had 44 bullet wounds 56 broken bones, including a shattered skull. He was 40 years old.

The Pinochet dictatorship went on to kill or disappear over 3,000 people, and detain and torture up to 40,000 during its brutal 17-year reign. It ended in 1990 through a constitutional process wherein voters rejected extending its rule and elected a civilian president. After years of legal efforts to hold Pinochet accountable, in 1998 a Spanish judge issued an international arrest warrant for his human rights abuses; he was detained in the U.K during a medical visit after the House of Lords ruled he did not have immunity, but Britain ultimately released him back to Chile in 2000 for health reasons. There, Chilean judges pushed their Supreme Court to strip him of immunity to face trial for murders and kidnappings tied to military death squads, but he died under house arrest of a heart attack in 2006, age 91, having never been formally tried or convicted for his crimes.

Victor Jara, one of the regime's most beloved and recognizable victims, swiftly became an enduring international symbol of resistance after the deadly, public silencing of his music. In 2003, Estadio Chile was renamed Estadio Víctor Jara; in 2009, Victor’s body was reburied in a public funeral attended by thousands of mourners; today, an annual 1,000 Guitars event held in his honor at that stadium also draws thousands. Still, the moral arc of the universe moved slowly. Over time, Chilean courts convicted hundreds of military officers and secret police for human rights abuses, but it was not until 2018 that eight retired officers were charged with Jara's murder, and that of Allende's director of prisons Littré Quiroga Carvajal. In August 2023, after five years of appeals and 50 years of evading justice, Chile's Supreme Court convicted them all in a unanimous decision.

The Court sentenced the eight, several in absentia, to 15 years and a day for the murders of both men, and 10 years and a day for their kidnappings, for a total of 25 years. A ninth was given eight years for concealing the crimes. The Court also dismissed all their appeals for annulment, and ordered the state to pay large reparations to the families of both men. Of those sentenced, 86-year-old Gen. Hernán Chacón killed himself moments after police arrived to arrest him at his home in a wealthy district of Santiago. Another, Pedro Barrientos, had fled Chile for the US in 1989; he was extradited back in 2023 after he was arrested in the US during a traffic stop. During his trial, one former soldier testified Barrientos liked to brandish his pistol in a crowd and declare, “I killed Víctor Jara with this!"

Five others have been in jail since then. Only one, Nelson Haase Mazzei, had remained missing since he failed to appear in court in 2018. A retired colonel, Haase Mazzei joined the Chilean army’s notorious Tejas Verde brigade in 1972 and was part of Pinochet’s brutal secret police; he worked closely with its head, Manuel Contreras, sentenced to over 500 years in jail for crimes against humanity before his 2015 death. Last weekend, in likely the final act of a too-long quest for justice, Chilean police announced they'd arrested Haase Mazzei, now 80, in rural Puyehue, south of Santiago. A judge ordered his immediate imprisonment to start his 25 year sentence; one article noted, "Impunity Takes Another Hit." Another said his defense lawyer has requested his transfer to Punta Peuco, a ritzy jail already housing many of the Pinochet era's murderers.

Through the Víctor Jara Foundation, started by Victor's widow Joan, a British dancer and activist who died in 2023 at 96, their daughter Amanda said she welcomes the news of Haase's arrest but, "Half a century after the murders, it is difficult to see this as justice." Still, Jara's songs live on from when Allende, after he won the presidency, spoke before a banner reading, "You can’t have a revolution without songs." "They were on the radio and television," said Joan in 1975. “The song movement was a tremendous weapon." Since then, music has continued fighting the fear authoritarianism depends on, transforming "political grievance into a shared language of survival" - Miriam Makeba, Mikis Theodorakis, Pussy Riot, America's Woody Guthrie to Dylan to Bad Bunny, who launched his 2026 tour in Chile with Jara's song, dedicated to Ho Chi Minh, The Right to Live in Peace.

In 2020, James Dean Bradfield, lead vocalist and guitarist for the Welsh alt-rock band Manic Street Preachers, released Even in Exile, a concept album dedicated to Jara's life and work, along with a three-part podcast. Bradfield discovered Jara as a teen, taken aback by a tenderness he didn't associate with "one of the only truly Marxist musicians. The truth...floats to you like a dream.” He learned more about Jara from poet Patrick Jones, whose brother is Bradfield’s bandmate; Jones had found two compilations of Jara songs in a thrift shop, became "obsessed" and wrote dozens of poems about Jara that, shared with Bradfield, became the album's songs. For Jones, the story of Jara's life and death is "a warning from history" that deeply . resonates with today's rise of the right: "Power is always afraid of those who stand up and say, 'There’s another way.'"

For the album, Bradfield wanted songs that span Jara's life, from his rural childhood to his final hours. He was moved by his singing of Venceremos near the end - "He died defiantly, but with grace" - yet felt, "If you just focus on his death, you ignore the journey." Above all, he wanted to highlight Jara's daunting courage and conviction throughout his life, a "naked truth" that rendered him what Phil Ochs called, when he met Jara in 1971, "the real thing." For Bradfield, it reminded him of the Preachers' 1998 song, If You Tolerate This Your Children Will Be Next. He also deliberately chose to include Jara's final Estadio Chile - "How hard it is to sing when I must sing of horror/ Horror which I am living, horror which I am dying” - which he calls "an anthem that became a prophecy." Of Jara's life and work, he hears "the echo time and time again. I wanted to show here’s an echo that doesn’t die."

- YouTube www.youtube.com

- YouTube www.youtube.com