News Feeds

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

This website and sisters royaldutchshellgroup.com, shellnazihistory.com, royaldutchshell.website, johndonovan.website, shellnews.net, and shellwikipedia.com, are owned by John Donovan – more information here. There is also a Wikipedia segment, as well as books written and published by John Donovan – Kindle eBooks. Timeline of the Donovan Shell Feud. Toxic History of Royal Dutch Shell Group. Shell and the Donovans: The Full Media Record — 550+ Articles, 110 Books, 40 Years. Donovan Shell Feud: Multiple Links was first posted on June 16, 2026 at 8:42 pm.
©2018 "Royal Dutch Shell Plc .com". Use of this feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this article in your feed reader, then the site is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact me at john@shellnews.net

Editor’s Note: That’s my friend and favorite mechanic Adam Griego in the bottom photo reaching across from prisoner to prison guard. He’s been involved in all kinds of prison reform projects and prisoner reentry into society. He’s also helped set up a facility for homeless people living in cars to spend the night.  While doing all  this he owns and runs a garage and is an expert Subaru  mechanic. He invites everyone to come to the showing of  this documentary at the Museum of International Folk Art.

english español Türkçe français ENGLISH

As Türkiye prepares to host COP31, we, the undersigned civil society organizations, acknowledge the Turkish Presidency’s decision to elevate Zero Waste and waste-derived methane reduction as top priorities within the Action Agenda. We affirm that zero waste is an indispensable strategy for climate mitigation, adaptation, and co-benefits, given that approximately 70% of global greenhouse gas emissions are linked to the materials economy—the extraction, production, and disposal of “stuff.” However, we stress that this focus must reinforce, not replace, a binding global roadmap for fossil fuel phase-out. 

1. Zero Waste as a Fossil Fuel Phase-Out Strategy 

Zero Waste is one of the central actions for climate mitigation. It is a vision and roadmap for designing waste out of the system through strategies that change how we produce and consume goods and process discarded materials. This approach meets environmental justice and eventually ends the disposal of waste in landfills and incinerators, while keeping the materials economy within planetary boundaries. The production and disposal of materials—plastics, cement, steel, paper, and others—generate roughly 29% of all global greenhouse gas emissions, and 99% of plastics are made from fossil fuels. Therefore, zero waste and plastic reduction policies are, by definition, fossil fuel phase-out strategies. A high-ambition COP31 agenda must include binding targets to cap and reduce plastic production, aligned with the UN Global Plastic Treaty, to ensure that the “Zero Waste” narrative does not become a cover for continued petrochemical expansion. 

2. Closing the Methane Accountability Gap and Advancing ROW Commitments 

While we welcome Türkiye’s focus on waste-related methane, we note the contradiction in prioritizing this sector while the country remains one of the few major economies that has not signed the Global Methane Pledge—an important accountability gap. To lead a 

credible COP31 presidency, Türkiye must commit to the pledge and translate this commitment into concrete, high-impact actions. Its signature of the COP29 ROW Declaration on Reducing Methane from Organic Waste demonstrates initial commitment, but ambitious implementation is needed. 

In addition to acknowledging the ROW Declaration, Türkiye should:

● Set quantified methane reduction targets for the waste sector with clear interim milestones. 

● Integrate these targets into its NDC. 

● Legislate mandatory source separation and phase out landfilling of untreated organic waste. 

● Establish dedicated financing and MRV frameworks to support implementation and ensure accountability. 

● Ensure the social dimension of waste management is honored, including formal recognition, protections, and inclusion of waste pickers in policy design and delivery, with access to training, safety, and financial support. 

● Explicitly avoid high-carbon “false solutions” such as open burning or waste-to-energy incineration. 

3. Avoiding Counterproductive or Carbon-Intensive Pathways 

These measures can reduce waste-sector methane by up to 95%, far more effective than technological fixes, and ensure that Türkiye’s leadership at COP31 is credible, ambitious, and socially inclusive. 

We caution against policy approaches that favor high-carbon waste treatment technologies under the guise of climate solutions. Rebranding incineration (“waste-to-energy”), pyrolysis, or chemical recycling as mitigation strategies risks locking in emissions-intensive infrastructure, creating long-term dependence on fossil-fuel-derived energy, and diverting investment away from upstream solutions. Incineration is extremely expensive and represents an unsustainable use of both public and climate finance. It also generates toxic air pollutants, including dioxins, furans, and particulate matter, that disproportionately harm frontline and vulnerable communities, undermines local recycling and informal waste recovery economies, and produces hazardous residual ash. COP31 should instead prioritize upstream measures such as waste prevention, organic waste diversion, and inclusive management practices, which reduce emissions at the source while delivering social, economic, and environmental co-benefits. 

4. Ending Waste Colonialism 

Türkiye is uniquely positioned to lead globally in zero-waste solutions by ending its role as a top destination for plastic waste exports from the EU and UK. Imported plastic waste is not only largely unrecyclable – often up to 50% – but also represents an endless source of plastic pollution. When illegally burned, it produces black carbon, a super pollutant that accelerates global warming, along with other toxic emissions that disproportionately harm vulnerable communities. By implementing a comprehensive

ban on plastic waste imports, Türkiye can prioritize domestic reduction, strengthen national recycling systems, protect public health, and demonstrate leadership in environmental justice and climate action. 

5. Centering a Just Transition for Waste Pickers and Other Waste Workers 

COP30 delivered a breakthrough with the creation of a rights-based Just Transition Mechanism, a long-sought win for informal economy workers, communities, and movements across the Global South. Yet governments left unanswered the core question: who will pay for the transition. Without new, grant-based public finance and structural reform of the global financial system, the mechanism risks becoming another promise without the resources to deliver justice. Türkiye’s championing of zero waste should take the baton on this agenda and go further, advancing a transformation of the waste sector in line with UNFCCC and environmental justice principles. A genuine zero-waste approach means that waste pickers and other waste workers must be prioritized, formally recognized, and protected, as they are central actors in the country’s waste management system. This includes ensuring social security, occupational safety, fair employment and living income opportunities, and meaningful participation in decision-making for the new materials economy. 

Conclusion 

We call on the COP31 Presidency and Champion to present a unified climate roadmap that combines a robust fossil fuel phase-out with justice-centered zero-waste implementation. All Parties must ensure that the “Zero Waste” label does not mask low-ambition climate targets. Success at COP31 will depend on moving beyond showcase policies toward systemic shifts that protect both the planet and its people. 

Signatories

Türkçe

Ortak Bildiri: Sıfır Atık Hedefi COP31’in İklim Eyleminde Yüksek Hedeflerle Uyumlu Olmalıdır

Türkiye, COP31’e ev sahipliği yapmaya hazırlanırken, aşağıda imzası bulunan sivil toplum kuruluşları olarak, Türkiye Başkanlığı’nın sıfır atık hedefini ve atıklardan kaynaklanan metan emisyonlarının azaltılmasını Eylem Gündemi’nin en önemli öncelikleri arasında konumlandırma kararını memnuniyetle karşılıyoruz. Küresel sera gazı emisyonlarının yaklaşık %70’inin kaynak çıkarımı, üretim ve bertaraf süreçlerini kapsayan malzeme ekonomisiyle bağlantılı olduğu göz önüne alındığında, sıfır atık yaklaşımının iklim değişikliğinin etkilerinin azaltılması, iklim değişikliğine uyum ve ortak faydalar için vazgeçilmez bir strateji olduğunu düşünüyoruz. Ancak, bu yaklaşımın fosil yakıtlardan aşamalı çıkışa  yönelik bağlayıcı bir küresel yol haritasının yerine geçmemesi, aksine bu yol haritasını  güçlendirmesi gerektiğini vurguluyoruz.

1. Sıfır Atık, Fosil Yakıtlardan Çıkışın Temel Stratejilerinden Biri Olmalıdır 

Sıfır atık, iklim değişikliğinin etkilerini azaltmaya yönelik en temel yaklaşımlardan biridir. Üretim ve tüketim biçimlerimizi dönüştüren, atık haline gelen materyallerin nasıl yönetildiğini yeniden tanımlayan stratejiler aracılığıyla, atığın sistemin dışına çıkarılmasını hedefleyen bir vizyon ve yol haritası sunar. Bu yaklaşım, çevresel adaleti gözetirken aynı zamanda atıkların depolama sahalarında ve yakma tesislerinde bertaraf edilmesine son verilmesini ve kaynak kullanımının gezegenin sınırları içinde tutulmasını amaçlar. Plastik, çimento, çelik, kağıt ve diğer malzemelerin üretimi ve bertarafı, küresel sera gazı emisyonlarının yaklaşık %29’unu oluşturmaktadır. Ayrıca plastiklerin %99’u fosil kaynaklardan üretilmektedir. Bu nedenle, sıfır atık ve plastik azaltım  politikaları, doğrudan fosil yakıtlardan aşamalı çıkış stratejilerinin bir parçasıdır.  “Sıfır atık” söyleminin petrokimya sektöründeki büyümeyi meşrulaştıran bir araca dönüşmemesi için, yüksek hedefli bir COP31 gündemi, BM Küresel Plastik Anlaşması ile uyumlu şekilde  plastik üretimini sınarlandıran ve azaltan  bağlayıcı hedefler içermelidir.

2. Metan Emisyonlarında Hesap Verebilirlik Güçlendirilmeli ve Organik Atıklardan Kaynaklanan Metanın Azaltımına Yönelik Taahhütler Hayata Geçirilmelidir 

Türkiye’nin atık kaynaklı metanları azaltmaya odaklanması memnuniyetle karşılıyoruz. Ankcak ülkenin hâlâ Küresel Metan Taahhüdünü imzalamamış birkaç büyük ekonomiden biri olması önemli bir çelişki ve hesap verebilirlik eksikliği yaratmaktadır. Türkiye’nin COP31 Başkanlığı’nı güvenilir ve güçlü bir şekilde yürütebilmesi için, Küresel Metan Taahhüdü’ne taraf olması ve bu taahhüdü somut, yüksek etkili politikalara dönüştürmesi gerekmektedir. Türkiye’nin COP29 kapsamında kabul edilen Organik Atıklardan Kaynaklanan Metanın Azaltılmasına İlişkin ROW Deklarasyonu’na imza atmış olması önemli bir başlangıç niteliği taşımaktadır. Ancak bu taahhüdün etkili olabilmesi için iddialı ve kapsamlı bir uygulama süreci gereklidir. 

Türkiye, ROW Deklarasyonu’nu kabul etmiş olmanın yanı sıra:

• Atık sektörü için net ara hedefler içeren nicel metan azaltım hedefleri belirlemelidir.
• Bu hedefleri Ulusal Katkı Beyanı’na (NDC) entegre etmelidir.
• Kaynağında ayrıştırmayı zorunlu hale getirmeli ve işlenmemiş organik atıkların depolama alanlarına gönderilmesini aşamalı olarak sona erdirmelidir 
• Uygulamayı desteklemek ve hesap verebilirliği sağlamak amacıyla özel finansman mekanizmaları ile Ölçme, Raporlama ve Doğrulama (MRV) sistemleri oluşturmalı, 
• Atık yönetiminin sosyal boyutunu gözeterek; atık toplayıcıların resmi olarak tanınmasını, korunmasını ve politika geliştirme ile uygulama süreçlerine dahil edilmesini sağlamalı; eğitim, güvenlik ve finansal destek imkanlarına erişimlerini güvence altına almalı, 
• Atık yakma veya atıktan enerji elde etme gibi yüksek karbon salımına yol açan “yanlış çözümlerden” açıkça kaçınmalı, buralara verilen teşvikleri sonlandırmalıdır.

Bu önlemler, atık sektöründen kaynaklanan metan emisyonlarını %95’e kadar azaltma potansiyeline sahip ve teknoloji yoğun çözümlerden çok daha etkilidir. Ayrıca teknoloji odaklı sınırlı çözümlere kıyasla çok daha etkili sonuçlar sağlayarak Türkiye’nin COP31 kapsamındaki liderliğinin güvenilir, iddialı ve sosyal açıdan kapsayıcı olmasına katkı sunacaktır. 

3. Karbon Yoğun Yanlış Çözüm Yaratan Atık Yönetimi Yöntemlerinden Kaçınılmalıdır

İklim çözümü adı altında yüksek karbon salımına yol açan atık işleme teknolojilerini teşvik eden politika yaklaşımlarına karşı dikkatli olunmalıdır.  Yakma tesislerinin (“atıktan enerji üretimi”), piroliz ve kimyasal geri dönüşüm uygulamalarının iklim değişikliğiyle mücadele aracı olarak sunulması; emisyon yoğun altyapıların uzun yıllar boyunca kalıcı hale gelmesine, fosil yakıt temelli enerji sistemlerine bağımlılığın sürmesine ve yatırımların kaynağında önleme çözümlerinden uzaklaşmasına neden olmaktadır. Atık yakma tesisleri son derece maliyetli olup hem kamu kaynaklarının hem de iklim finansmanının sürdürülemez biçimde kullanılmasına yol açmaktadır. Ayrıca dioksinler, furanlar ve partikül maddeler gibi toksik hava kirleticileri üreterek özellikle kırılgan topluluklar ile tesislerin etki alanında yaşayan kesimler üzerinde orantısız sağlık ve çevre yükleri yaratmaktadır. Bunun yanında yerel atık geri kazanım ekonomilerini baltalar ve bertarafı mümkün olmayan tehlikeli atık kül üretir. Dolayısıyla COP31 kapsamında öncelik verilmesi gereken yaklaşım; atık oluşumunun önlenmesi, organik atıkların düzenli depolama yerine kompost ve benzeri yöntemlerle değerlendirilmesi ve kapsayıcı atık yönetimi uygulamalarının yaygınlaştırılmasıdır. Bu tür politikalar emisyonları kaynağında azaltırken aynı zamanda sosyal, ekonomik ve çevresel faydalar da sağlamaktadır. 

4. AB’nin Atık Sığınağı Olmaya Neden Olan Politikalara ve Atık Sömürgeciliğine Son Verilmelidir

Türkiye, Avrupa Birliği ve Birleşik Krallık’tan gelen plastik atık ihracatının başlıca varış noktalarından biri olma rolünü sona erdirerek sıfır atık politikalarında küresel ölçekte öncü bir konuma gelebilir  Sıfır atık ancak sıfır atık ithalatıyla mümkün olur. Türkiye’ye ithal edilen plastik atıkların önemli bir bölümü düşük kaliteli ve geri dönüştürülemez niteliktedir; bazı durumlarda bu oran %50’ye kadar ulaşabilmektedir. Bu atıklar yalnızca sürekli büyüyen bir plastik ve mikroplastik kirliliği kaynağı yaratmakla kalmamakta, aynı zamanda açıkta ya da yasa dışı biçimde yakıldıklarında ciddi çevresel ve sağlık risklerine yol açmaktadır. Bu süreçlerde, küresel ısınmayı hızlandıran güçlü bir kirletici olan siyah karbonun yanı sıra, özellikle kırılgan toplulukları orantısız biçimde etkileyen toksik emisyonlar ortaya çıkmaktadır.  Türkiye plastik atık ithalatına kapsamlı bir yasak getirerek, yurt içindeki atık azaltım politikalarını güçlendirebilir, ulusal geri dönüşüm sistemlerini güçlendirebilir, halk sağlığını koruyabilir ve çevresel adalet ve iklim eylemi konusunda güçlü bir liderlik gösterebilir.

5. Atık İşçileri için Adil Geçişi Merkeze Almalıdır

COP30 kapsamında hak temelli bir Adil Geçiş Mekanizması’nın oluşturulması önemli bir dönüm noktası olmuştur.  Bu, Küresel Güney ülkelerindeki işçiler, topluluklar ve hareketler için uzun zamandır talep edilen önemli bir kazanımı temsil etmektedir. Ancak hükümetler, geçiş sürecinin finansmanının nasıl sağlanacağına ilişkin temel soruyu cevapsız bıraktı. Yeni ve hibe temelli kamu finansmanı sağlanmadan ve küresel finans sisteminde yapısal reformlar gerçekleştirilmeden, bu mekanizmanın gerekli kaynaklardan yoksun bir taahhüt olarak kalma riski bulunmaktadır. Türkiye, sıfır atık alanındaki öncü rolünü yalnızca atık azaltım politikalarıyla sınırlamamalı; aynı zamanda BM İklim Değişikliği Çerçeve Sözleşmesi (BMİDÇS) ve çevresel adalet ilkeleri doğrultusunda atık sektöründe adil bir dönüşümün ilerletilmesine de öncülük etmelidir.  Gerçek bir sıfır atık yaklaşımı, atık toplayıcılarının ülkenin atık yönetim sisteminde merkezi aktör haline getirilmesi ile mümkündür. Dolayısıyla sıfır atıkta öncü olmak ancak ve ancak atık toplayıcıların önceliklendirilmesi, resmi olarak tanınması ve korunması ile mümkündür. Bu aynı zamanda sosyal güvenlik, iş güvenliği, adil istihdam fırsatları, asgari yaşam ücreti ve yeni malzeme ekonomisi için karar alma süreçlerine anlamlı katılımın sağlanmasını da içerir.

Sonuç

COP31 Başkanlığı’nı ve İklim Şampiyonluğu mekanizmasını, fosil yakıtlardan aşamalı çıkışı adalet temelli sıfır atık politikalarıyla birleştiren bütüncül bir iklim yol haritası ortaya koymaya çağırıyoruz. Tüm taraflar, “Sıfır Atık” etiketinin yüksek hedefli iklim hedeflerini maskelemesinin önüne geçmelidir. COP31’in başarısı, vitrin niteliğindeki politikaların ötesine geçilerek; hem insanları hem de gezegeni koruyan yapısal dönüşümlerin hayata geçirilmesine bağlı olacaktır. 

İlk imzacılar ESPAÑOL Declaración conjunta: Alinear la meta de «Basura Cero» con una acción climática ambiciosa rumbo a la COP 31

Mientras Turquía se prepara para acoger la COP 31, nosotros, las organizaciones de la sociedad civil abajo firmantes, reconocemos la decisión de la Presidencia turca de elevar el objetivo «Basura Cero» y la reducción del metano derivado de los residuos a la categoría de prioridades principales dentro de la Agenda de Acción. Afirmamos que «Basura Cero» es una estrategia indispensable para la mitigación y la adaptación climáticas, así como para obtener beneficios colaterales, dado que aproximadamente el 70 % de las emisiones globales de gases de efecto invernadero están vinculadas a la economía de los materiales: la extracción, la producción y la eliminación de «cosas». Sin embargo, hacemos hincapié en que este enfoque debe reforzar, y no sustituir, una hoja de ruta global vinculante para la eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles.

1. Basura Cero como estrategia para la eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles

Basura Cero es una de las acciones centrales para la mitigación climática. Es una visión y una hoja de ruta para eliminar los residuos del sistema mediante estrategias que cambian la forma en que producimos y consumimos bienes y procesamos los materiales desechados. Este enfoque cumple con la justicia ambiental y, a la larga, pone fin a la eliminación de residuos en vertederos e incineradoras, al tiempo que mantiene la economía de los materiales dentro de los límites planetarios. La producción y eliminación de materiales —plásticos, cemento, acero, papel y otros— generan aproximadamente el 29 % de todas las emisiones globales de gases de efecto invernadero, y el 99 % de los plásticos se fabrican a partir de combustibles fósiles. Por lo tanto, las políticas de basura cero y reducción de plásticos son, por definición, estrategias de eliminación gradual de los combustibles fósiles. Una agenda ambiciosa para la COP 31 debe incluir objetivos vinculantes para limitar y reducir la producción de plástico, en consonancia con el Tratado Global de las Naciones Unidas sobre el Plástico, a fin de garantizar que la narrativa de «basura cero» no se convierta en una excusa para la expansión petroquímica continua.

2. Cerrar la brecha de rendición de cuentas sobre el metano y avanzar en los compromisos del ROW

Si bien celebramos el enfoque de Turquía en el metano relacionado con los residuos, observamos la contradicción de priorizar este sector mientras el país sigue siendo una de las pocas economías importantes que no ha firmado el Compromiso Global sobre el Metano —una importante brecha de rendición de cuentas—. Para liderar una presidencia creíble de la COP 31, Turquía debe comprometerse con el Pacto y traducir este compromiso en acciones concretas y de gran impacto. Su firma de la Declaración ROW de la COP 29 sobre la reducción del metano procedente de residuos orgánicos demuestra un compromiso inicial, pero se necesita una implementación ambiciosa.

Además de reconocer la Declaración ROW, Turquía debería:

• Establecer objetivos cuantificados de reducción de metano para el sector de los residuos con hitos intermedios claros.
• Integrar estos objetivos en su NDC.
• Legislar la separación obligatoria en origen y eliminar gradualmente el vertido de residuos orgánicos sin tratar.
• Establecer marcos específicos de financiamiento y MRV para apoyar la implementación y garantizar la rendición de cuentas.
• Asegurar que se respete la dimensión social de la gestión de residuos, incluyendo el reconocimiento formal, la protección y la inclusión de los recolectores de residuos en la economía informal en el diseño y la ejecución de las políticas, con acceso a capacitación, seguridad y apoyo financiero.
• Evitar explícitamente las «falsas soluciones» con altas emisiones de carbono, como la quema al aire libre o la incineración para la generación de energía.

Estas medidas pueden reducir el metano del sector de los residuos hasta en un 95 %, lo que es mucho más eficaz que las soluciones tecnológicas, y garantizar que el liderazgo de Turquía en la COP 31 sea creíble, ambicioso y socialmente inclusivo.

3. Evitar vías contraproducentes o con altas emisiones de carbono

Advertimos contra los enfoques de políticas que favorecen tecnologías de tratamiento de residuos con altas emisiones de carbono bajo el pretexto de ser soluciones climáticas. Renombrar la incineración («energía a partir de residuos»), la pirólisis o el reciclaje químico como estrategias de mitigación corre el riesgo de consolidar una infraestructura intensiva en emisiones, creando una dependencia a largo plazo de la energía derivada de combustibles fósiles y desviando la inversión de las soluciones en las etapas iniciales. La incineración es extremadamente costosa y representa un uso insostenible tanto de los fondos públicos como de los fondos climáticos. Además, genera contaminantes atmosféricos tóxicos, como dioxinas, furanos y partículas, que perjudican de manera desproporcionada a las comunidades vulnerables y en primera línea, socava las economías locales de reciclaje y recuperación informal de residuos, y produce cenizas residuales peligrosas. La COP31 debería, en cambio, priorizar medidas en las etapas iniciales, como la prevención de residuos, el desvío de residuos orgánicos y las prácticas de gestión inclusivas, que reducen las emisiones en la fuente al tiempo que aportan beneficios sociales, económicos y ambientales.

4. Acabar con el colonialismo de los residuos

Turquía se encuentra en una posición única para liderar a nivel mundial las soluciones de basura cero al poner fin a su papel como principal destino de las exportaciones de residuos plásticos de la UE y el Reino Unido. Los residuos plásticos importados no solo son en gran medida no reciclables —a menudo hasta un 50 %—, sino que también representan una fuente inagotable de contaminación plástica. Cuando se queman ilegalmente, producen carbono negro, un supercontaminante que acelera el calentamiento global, junto con otras emisiones tóxicas que perjudican de manera desproporcionada a las comunidades vulnerables. Al implementar una prohibición integral de las importaciones de residuos plásticos, Turquía puede priorizar la reducción interna, fortalecer los sistemas nacionales de reciclaje, proteger la salud pública y demostrar liderazgo en justicia ambiental y acción climática.

5. Centrarse en una transición justa para los recolectores y trabajadores del sector de residuos

La COP30 logró un avance decisivo con la creación de un Mecanismo de Transición Justa basado en los derechos, una victoria largamente esperada para los trabajadores, las comunidades y los movimientos de todo el Sur Global. Sin embargo, los gobiernos dejaron sin respuesta la pregunta fundamental: ¿quién pagará por la transición? Sin una nueva financiación pública basada en donaciones y una reforma estructural del sistema financiero global, el mecanismo corre el riesgo de convertirse en otra promesa sin los recursos necesarios para hacer justicia. La defensa de la política de basura cero por parte de Turquía debería tomar el relevo en esta agenda e ir más allá, impulsando una transformación del sector de los residuos en consonancia con la CMNUCC y los principios de justicia ambiental. Un enfoque genuinamente de basura cero significa que los recolectores y recicladores de residuos en la economía informal deben ser priorizados, reconocidos formalmente y protegidos, ya que son actores centrales en el sistema de gestión de residuos del país. Esto incluye garantizar la seguridad social, la seguridad laboral, oportunidades de empleo justas, un ingreso digno, y una participación significativa en la toma de decisiones para la nueva economía de materiales.

Conclusión

Hacemos un llamado a la Presidencia y al Defensor de la COP 31 para que presenten una hoja de ruta climática unificada que combine una eliminación gradual sólida de los combustibles fósiles con una implementación de «basura cero» centrada en la justicia. Todas las Partes deben garantizar que la etiqueta «basura cero» no enmascare objetivos climáticos de baja ambición. El éxito de la COP 31 dependerá de ir más allá de las políticas de escaparate hacia cambios sistémicos que protejan tanto al planeta como a su gente.

Firmantes

FRANÇAIS Déclaration commune : Aligner le « zéro déchet » sur une action climatique ambitieuse en vue de la COP 31

Alors que la Turquie s’apprête à accueillir la COP 31, nous, organisations de la société civile soussignées, saluons la décision de la présidence turque de faire du « zéro déchet » et de la réduction des émissions de méthane issues des déchets des priorités absolues du programme d’action. Nous affirmons que le zéro déchet est une stratégie indispensable pour l’atténuation et l’adaptation au changement climatique, ainsi que pour les avantages connexes, étant donné qu’environ 70 % des émissions mondiales de gaz à effet de serre sont liées à l’économie des matériaux — l’extraction, la production et l’élimination des « objets ». Cependant, nous soulignons que cette priorité doit renforcer, et non remplacer, une feuille de route mondiale contraignante pour l’élimination progressive des combustibles fossiles.

1. Le « zéro déchet » comme stratégie d’élimination progressive des combustibles fossiles

Le « zéro déchet » est l’une des actions centrales pour l’atténuation du changement climatique. Il s’agit d’une vision et d’une feuille de route visant à éliminer les déchets du système grâce à des stratégies qui modifient la manière dont nous produisons et consommons les biens et traitons les matériaux mis au rebut. Cette approche répond aux principes de justice environnementale et mettra fin à terme à l’élimination des déchets dans les décharges et les incinérateurs, tout en maintenant l’économie des matériaux dans les limites planétaires. La production et l’élimination des matériaux — plastiques, ciment, acier, papier et autres — génèrent environ 29 % de l’ensemble des émissions mondiales de gaz à effet de serre, et 99 % des plastiques sont fabriqués à partir de combustibles fossiles. Par conséquent, les politiques de zéro déchet et de réduction des plastiques sont, par définition, des stratégies d’élimination progressive des combustibles fossiles. Un programme ambitieux pour la COP 31 doit inclure des objectifs contraignants visant à plafonner et à réduire la production de plastique, en accord avec le Traité mondial des Nations unies sur les plastiques, afin de garantir que le discours du « zéro déchet » ne serve pas de prétexte à la poursuite de l’expansion pétrochimique.

2. Combler le déficit de responsabilité en matière de méthane et faire progresser les engagements ROW

Si nous saluons l’attention portée par la Turquie au méthane issu des déchets, nous relevons la contradiction qu’il y a à donner la priorité à ce secteur alors que le pays reste l’une des rares grandes économies à ne pas avoir signé le Global Methane Pledge — un déficit de responsabilité important. Pour assurer une présidence crédible de la COP 31, la Turquie doit s’engager à respecter cet engagement et le traduire en actions concrètes et à fort impact. Sa signature de la Déclaration ROW de la COP 29 sur la réduction du méthane issu des déchets organiques témoigne d’un engagement initial, mais une mise en œuvre ambitieuse est nécessaire.

En plus de reconnaître la Déclaration ROW, la Turquie devrait :

• Fixer des objectifs chiffrés de réduction du méthane pour le secteur des déchets, assortis d’étapes intermédiaires claires.
• Intégrer ces objectifs dans ses NDCs.
• Légiférer pour rendre obligatoire le tri à la source et éliminer progressivement la mise en décharge des déchets organiques non traités.
• Mettre en place des cadres de financement et de MRV (mesure, rapport et vérification) dédiés pour soutenir la mise en œuvre et garantir la responsabilité.
• Veiller à ce que la dimension sociale de la gestion des déchets soit respectée, notamment par la reconnaissance officielle, la protection et l’inclusion des ramasseurs de déchets dans la conception et la mise en œuvre des politiques, avec un accès à la formation, à la sécurité et au soutien financier.
• Éviter explicitement les « fausses solutions » à forte intensité carbone telles que le brûlage à l’air libre ou l’incinération des déchets à des fins énergétiques.

Ces mesures peuvent réduire les émissions de méthane du secteur des déchets jusqu’à 95 %, ce qui est bien plus efficace que les solutions technologiques, et garantir que le leadership de la Turquie lors de la COP 31 soit crédible, ambitieux et socialement inclusif.

3. Éviter les voies contre-productives ou à forte intensité carbone

Nous mettons en garde contre les approches politiques qui favorisent les technologies de traitement des déchets à forte intensité carbone sous le couvert de solutions climatiques. Présenter l’incinération (« valorisation énergétique des déchets »), la pyrolyse ou le recyclage chimique comme des stratégies d’atténuation risque de verrouiller des infrastructures à fortes émissions, de créer une dépendance à long terme à l’égard de l’énergie dérivée des combustibles fossiles et de détourner les investissements des solutions en amont. L’incinération est extrêmement coûteuse et représente une utilisation non durable des financements publics et climatiques. Elle génère également des polluants atmosphériques toxiques, notamment des dioxines, des furanes et des particules fines, qui nuisent de manière disproportionnée aux communautés de première ligne et vulnérables, sapent les économies locales de recyclage et de valorisation informelle des déchets, et produisent des cendres résiduelles dangereuses. La COP 31 devrait plutôt donner la priorité à des mesures en amont telles que la prévention des déchets, le détournement des déchets organiques et des pratiques de gestion inclusives, qui réduisent les émissions à la source tout en apportant des avantages sociaux, économiques et environnementaux.

4. Mettre fin au colonialisme des déchets

La Turquie est particulièrement bien placée pour jouer un rôle de premier plan au niveau mondial en matière de solutions « zéro déchet » en mettant fin à son statut de principale destination des exportations de déchets plastiques en provenance de l’UE et du Royaume-Uni. Les déchets plastiques importés sont non seulement en grande partie non recyclables – souvent jusqu’à 50 % –, mais constituent également une source inépuisable de pollution plastique. Lorsqu’ils sont brûlés illégalement, ils produisent du carbone noir, un super-polluant qui accélère le réchauffement climatique, ainsi que d’autres émissions toxiques qui nuisent de manière disproportionnée aux communautés vulnérables. En mettant en œuvre une interdiction totale des importations de déchets plastiques, la Turquie peut donner la priorité à la réduction des déchets au niveau national, renforcer les systèmes de recyclage nationaux, protéger la santé publique et faire preuve de leadership en matière de justice environnementale et d’action climatique.

5. Placer la transition juste au cœur des préoccupations pour les récupérateurs de déchets et autres travailleurs du secteur

La COP 30 a marqué un tournant décisif avec la création d’un mécanisme de transition juste fondé sur les droits, une victoire attendue de longue date pour les travailleurs de l’économie informelle, les communautés et les mouvements sociaux à travers le Sud global. Pourtant, les gouvernements ont laissé sans réponse la question centrale : qui financera la transition ? Sans nouveaux financements publics sous forme de subventions et sans réforme structurelle du système financier mondial, ce mécanisme risque de devenir une nouvelle promesse sans les ressources nécessaires pour rendre justice. L’engagement de la Turquie en faveur du zéro déchet devrait prendre le relais de cet agenda et aller plus loin, en faisant progresser une transformation du secteur des déchets conforme à la CCNUCC et aux principes de justice environnementale.Une véritable approche « zéro déchet » implique que les récupérateurs de déchets et autres travailleurs du secteur soient prioritaires, officiellement reconnus et protégés, car ils sont des acteurs centraux du système de gestion des déchets du pays. Cela passe par la garantie de la sécurité sociale, de la sécurité au travail, d’opportunités d’emploi équitables et d’un revenu décent, et d’une participation significative à la prise de décision pour la nouvelle économie des matériaux.

Conclusion

Nous appelons la présidence et le champion de la COP 31 à présenter une feuille de route climatique unifiée qui combine une élimination progressive et rigoureuse des combustibles fossiles avec une mise en œuvre du « zéro déchet » centrée sur la justice. Toutes les Parties doivent veiller à ce que le label « zéro déchet » ne masque pas des objectifs climatiques peu ambitieux. Le succès de la COP 31 dépendra de la capacité à aller au-delà des politiques de façade pour opérer des changements systémiques qui protègent à la fois la planète et ses habitants.

Signataires Signatories

1000 Grandmothers for Future Generations

Aama Nepal Foundation

AbibiNsroma Foundation 

Agency for Conservation and Development (ACD)

AGIR POUR LA SECURITE ET LA SOUVERAINETÉ ALIMENTAIRE (ASSA)

Allen+

APLOI (The Indonesian Organic Waste Management Association)

ASSOCIATION OF SCRAPS AND WASTEPICKERS OF LAGOS STATE ASWOL 

Association pour la protection de l’environnement banda bitsi 

Bio Vision Africa (BiVA)

Bioenzyme Entrepreneur Academy Of India 

Blue Dalian

Breathe Free Detroit 

CAB

Carbone Guinée 

Carrot Foundation

CEE Bankwatch Network

Centre for Citizens Conserving Environment & Management (CECIC)

Centre For Earth Works (CFEW)

Centre for Environment Justice and Development

Centre for financial accountability 

Centro de Estudios Superiores Universitarios – Universidad Mayor de San Simón (CESU-UMSS)

CESTA AT

Citizen consumer and civic Action Group

Climate Action Network Arab World

Climate Action Network Zimbabwe

Coaction Indonesia

COLECTIVO ACONTRAVIA

Colectivo Acontravia

Dalai Lama Foundation 

Društvo Ekologi brez meja

Ecosoum

Ecoteca NGO

Egyptian Foundation for Environmental Rights – EFER

End Plastic Pollution Uganda 

Environment and Social Development Organization – ESDO

Fair Resource Foundation

Faith and Hope Association

Family Tree Movement Namibia 

Flamingo Chap Chap CBO

Foundation for Environment and Development (FEDEV)

Foundation Milieukontakt Albania

Friends of the Earth – SPZ

Friends of the Earth Cyprus

Front commun pour la protection de l’environnement et des Espaces Protégés (FCPEEP-RDC)

Fundacion Basura

Fundación El Árbol

Fundación Entrejardines 

Future for Future 

GLOBAL 2000

Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA) 

Grambangla Unnayan Committee

GRC

Green Knowledge Foundation 

Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice

Greenpeace Türkiye

Health Environment and Climate Action Foundation (HECAF360)

Health service consumer Rights watch

Hnutí DUHA – Friends of the Earth Czech Republic

Humusz Szövetség

Instituto Pólis (Pólis Institute for Social Policy Studies, Training and Advisory Services)

International Alliance of Waste Pickers

Irrigation Training and Economic Empowerment Organization – IRTECO

Just Transition Alliance

Kalyani Rani Biswas 

KongoGreen 

Korea Zero Waste Movement Network

La Cuica Cósmica

Microplastic Research Group 

Mikroplastik Araştırma Grubu

Miya Ywech 

Mother Earth Foundation (MEF)

MT Plastic Free

NA

Nect Green Code (NGC)

Nipe Fagio

Pacific Environment Vietnam

Pan African Vision for the Environment(PAVE)

Plastic Free Future

Plastic Free Türkiye Platform

Pocasset Pokanoket Land Trust

Polish Zero Waste Association

Prakriti Sanrachna

Prowaste concepts pvt ltd 

Reach-Out Health Awareness Foundation 

Red de Acción por los Derechos Ambientales RADA

Retorna

Rezero

Sanggar Hijau Indonesia

Scuola Agraria del Parco di Monza

Slingshot

Solidarité pour la Protection des Droits de l’Enfant( SOPRODE)

Sustainable Environment Development Initiative 

Sustainable Research and Action for Environmental Development (SRADev Nigeria)

THANAL Trust

The Danish Society for Nsature Conservation

The UMI FUND

United Kingdom Without Incineration Network (UKWIN)

VOICE (Voice Of Irish Concern for the Environment)

VšĮ “Žiedinė ekonomika”

Vukani Environmental Movement 

WALHI

West Berkeley Alliance for Clean Air and Safe Jobs

WIEGO 

WWF-Türkiye

Xpozz India 

Youth Exploring Solutions

ZERO – Association for the Sustainability of the Earth System

Zero Waste Aotearoa

Zero Waste Association of South Africa

Zero Waste BC

Zero Waste Belgium

Zero Waste Canada

Zero Waste Detroit

Zero Waste Estonia SA

Zero Waste Europe

Zero Waste Italy

Zero Waste Ithaca

Zero Waste Lab

Zero Waste Latvija

Zero Waste Nederland

Zero Waste Senegal Association

Zero Waste Society

Zero Waste USA

The post Joint Declaration: Aligning Zero Waste with High-Ambition Climate Action for COP31  first appeared on GAIA.

June 16, 2026 – FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

SUWA Statement on approval of Keg Knoll airstrip in the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness – 6.16.26  Action by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is unnecessary and unlawful 

Contacts:
Grant Stevens, Communications Director, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA); (319) 427-0260; grant@suwa.org

Salt Lake City, UT – Last Friday, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) released a decision authorizing private airplanes to take off and land in the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness by designating the previously unauthorized Keg Knoll backcountry airstrip as open for aircraft use. The airstrip is located on the west side of Labyrinth Canyon and north of Canyonlands National Park. Below is a statement from SUWA Wildlands Director Neal Clark and additional information.  

“Wilderness is a finite resource and should be managed in a way that protects the reasons it’s designated in the first place—the preservation of natural soundscapes, solitude, wildlife habitat, and non-motorized recreational opportunities,” said Neal Clark, Wildlands Director at the Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA). “Unfortunately, the Trump administration BLM seems unable to say no to activities that are fundamentally incompatible with wilderness, including motorized aircraft use. Degrading the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness so a handful of private pilots can land their planes at one more backcountry airstrip is a disservice to the landscape and public lands users seeking a wilderness experience. We’ll be exploring every possible way to right this decision and protect the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness from the impacts of private aircraft use.”

Additional information: 

The Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness was designated by Congress in 2019, as part of the Dingell Act. While the Wilderness Act gives the BLM some discretion to allow (or prohibit) continued use at airstrips that were legally established prior to wilderness designation, it does not allow the agency to authorize aircraft use when the airstrip was not legally open prior to the wilderness designation.   

The BLM Price Field Office’s 2008 management plan—the land use plan in effect when the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness was established—specifically lists five “existing and currently used backcountry airstrips” for continued noncommercial and limited commercial aviation use; Keg Knoll is not on the list. And for good reason, as it was unused and reclaiming at the time. The agency’s 1999 wilderness inventory of Labyrinth Canyon confirms as much, noting “abandoned airstrips” in the Keg Knoll area. 

SUWA’s members sent over 3,000 comments in opposition to the decision.  

### 
The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance (SUWA) is a nonprofit organization with members and supporters from around the country dedicated to protecting America’s redrock wilderness. From offices in Moab, Salt Lake City, and Washington, DC, our team of professionals defends the redrock, organizes support for America’s Red Rock Wilderness Act, and stewards a world-renowned landscape. Learn more at www.suwa.org. 

 

 

The post SUWA Statement on approval of Keg Knoll airstrip in the Labyrinth Canyon Wilderness – 6.16.26  appeared first on Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance.

Peak cofounder and CEO Landon Mossburg told Utility Dive the technology is “purpose-built” for AI data centers and grid-scale applications.

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

Does solar energy need subsidies to compete with fossil fuels?

Unsubsidized utility-scale solar is now generally cheaper than building fossil fuel power plants.

Costs are often compared using “levelized cost of energy,” the average lifetime cost to build and run a power plant divided by the electricity it produces. A 2025 analysis estimates the mean LCOE of utility-scale solar at about $58 per megawatt-hour without subsidies, compared to $79 for new natural gas plants and $128 for new coal. The International Energy Agency reports solar energy is the cheapest source of new electricity generation in most parts of the world.

Solar costs have fallen sharply over the past decade as panel prices have dropped and the industry has grown. Subsidies can further lower costs, but solar is not dependent on them to compete with fossil fuels.

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

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

Sources

International Energy Agency World Energy Outlook 2020

Lazard Lazard Releases 2025 Levelized Cost of Energy+ Report

Reuters Around 90% of renewables cheaper than fossil fuels worldwide, IRENA says

Scientific American Wind and Solar Energy Are Cheaper Than Electricity from Fossil-Fuel Plants

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

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

About fact briefs published on Gigafact

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

By: Restore the Delta

The explosion of Artificial Intelligent (AI) across the country isn’t happening in a vacuum but instead goes hand-in-hand with impacts to water resources and utility bills.  Despite the enormous strain on both our electrical grid and finite water resources, California has established little to no regulatory oversight. In fact, last year, Governor Newsom rejected legislation that would have provided some oversight, stating that the legislation would potentially curtail “the very innovation that fuels advancement in favor of the public good”. As Asm. Papan’s AI Bill package on AI water use – AB 2619 and AB 2469 – moves through the legislature, the question remains whether Governor Newsom will again reject efforts to establish oversight and transparency. 

These protective measures are more necessary than ever. According to a recent Fortune article,  49,000 Lake Tahoe residents are scrambling to find a new power source because their utility company is redirecting electricity capacity to data centers powering the AI boom. Technology over people is happening in real time, with little to slow the onslaught of impacts. 

The Delta, at the heart of California’s water system, is another prime target for the development of AI. To assess the impacts to our ecosystems and communities, Restore the Delta released our new white paper, The Environmental Justice Implications of Artificial Intelligence Infrastructure in the Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta.

Even before the release of our White Paper, AI was making waves in the Delta. When we began this work, possible data center locations in Oakley were being discussed. In March 2026, the Bridgehead Industrial Project, a 164-acre site near the San Joaquin River, originally included data center use before the developer pulled it after significant public pushback. The following month, Oakley became the first Bay Area city to impose a temporary moratorium on new data centers, buying time to study the industry’s energy and water demands.

Just to the north, California Forever’s proposed Suisun City annexation plan has raised alarms that its zoning would allow data centers across nearly all land designations without meaningful public review, despite being marketed primarily as a housing and jobs project.

The Delta is already under extraordinary pressure. The watershed is severely overallocated, numerous native fish populations are in steep decline, and South Stockton and Kings Beach carry some of the highest pollution burdens in the state. AI is yet another existential threat, endangering the long-term viability of the Delta.

A typical 100 megawatt data center consumes approximately 2 million liters of water per day, the equivalent use of about 6,500 households. Unlike residential water use, roughly 80% of that water is lost to evaporation rather than returned to local water systems. Data centers also require uninterrupted 24/7 power, making them unable to reduce usage during peak demand, the exact moments when our grid is most stressed.

The situation in Lake Tahoe illustrates what happens when planning lags behind development. The energy supplier for that region told the local utility it has less than a year to find another power source. The Delta faces a version of that same complexity, multiplied by competing demands from the Delta Conveyance tunnel, carbon storage projects, and new urban development. California is still in the early stages of creating policies specifically designed to address AI infrastructure’s water consumption, constant energy demand, and cumulative community health impacts. 

The window to shape these decisions is right now, before large scale AI development becomes entrenched in the region. We want policymakers, Tribal Nations, environmental justice advocates, and Delta communities to understand the implications of widescale AI development in order to ask the important questions before permits are approved. Oversight and transparency must catch up to development if we are to adequately protect ecosystems and communities. 

Read the full white paper at restorethedelta.org.

As wildfire risk grows, there are increasing calls to “bury the lines.” Undergrounding has its place, but it's not the only answer, writes Cameron Brooks, executive director of Think Microgrid.

More power, cooling and IT equipment is moving outside data halls in a shift that could help “future-proof” computing facilities, a company executive told Facilities Dive.

The lawyer who successfully led a landmark challenge on onshore oil and gas at the Supreme Court was appointed an OBE in the King’s birthday honours.

Estelle Dehon KC (third from left) with campaigner Sarah Finch (third from right) and the Weald Action Group legal team outside the Supreme Court after the landmark judgement on climate emissions, 20 June 2024. Photo: DrillOrDrop

Estelle Dehon KC received the honour for services to environmental law.

She is one of the UK’s leading environmental and climate law barristers.

She was named planning and environment silk of the year in the Chambers UK Bar Awards 2024. She has been on every ENDS Report power list of environmental professionals since 2022 and received a climate law and governance global leadership award at the COP27 climate conference. She was also named environmental/sustainability bar champion of the year at the Legal 500 UK ESG Awards 2024, and barrister of the year at The Lawyer Awards 2025.

Ms Dehon, of Cornerstone Barristers, said yesterday:

“I am absolutely bursting with pride and happiness to receive an OBE. And for services to environmental law! I never even dreamed that such a thing could happen. I am both thrilled and profoundly moved that it has and am also deeply grateful to those who nominated me, who clearly dream bigger than I do.”

Ms Dehon secured what became known as the Finch Ruling at the Supreme Court almost two years ago. The result required decision-makers to take into account carbon emissions from burning onshore oil and gas production.

The decision immediately quashed planning permission at the Horse Hill oil site in Surrey. It led to withdrawal of consent for oil production at Biscathorpe in the Lincolnshire Wolds and expansion of the Wressle oil site in North Lincolnshire.

The ruling also influenced decisions on the Rosebank and Jackdaw oil and gas fields in the North Sea, permission for a new UK deep coalmine, infrastructure developments and industrial-scale agriculture.

Ms Dehon said:

“With greenhouse gas emissions still rising; adaptation still so slow and the degradation of nature continuing apace while being normalised in political speech, it is easy to be demotivated.

“But the legal community has so much ability to effect positive change. Our voices are heard in places of power across society. Now is the time we must use them.”

Last year, Ms Dehon argued in a legal opinion that proposals by Europa Oil & Gas at Burniston qualified as fracking under North Yorkshire’s planning policy. In 2016, she represented Friends of the Earth at the planning inquiry on Cuadrilla’s fracking plans at Preston New Road and Roseacre Wood in Lancashire.

Ms Dehon has been a trustee of the UK Environmental Law Association since 2019 and for three years was a trustee of the Women’s Environmental Network.

Since 2022, she has been co-chair of the Bar Council’s climate crisis working group. In 2023, Ms Dehon founded Cornerstone Climate, a cross-disciplinary centre for climate litigation and advice. She recently led production of The Cornerstone Climate Guide: Key Concepts and Definitions. The guide aimed to promote greater understanding of climate-conscious language and remove barriers to understanding key concepts, legislation and policy.

The project is expected to come online in 2029 and store enough energy to power around 4,275 homes for 10 hours, Salt River Project said.

A barbed wire fence surrounds the forced labor camp in Pahokee, FL, where two workers escaped hidden in the trunk of a car, their escape ultimately leading to the recent forced labor prosecution, US v Moreno. After escaping, the workers reported their experience to the Coalition of Immokalee Workers. The CIW took the case to federal authorities and assisted in the investigation of the successful prosecution. Kroger was found to be linked to the forced labor ring as a buyer of watermelons harvested by workers entrapped by the criminal conspiracy. US Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe for the Middle District of Florida: “The victims in this case were deceived by conspirators and subjected to deplorable conditions while being exploited for greed and profit.” Special Agent in Charge Brett Skiles of the FBI Miami Field Office: “Villatoro Moreno and his co-conspirators lured victims from Mexico with false promises of fair wages and good working conditions. It was all a lie… In addition to harsh and extreme working conditions, the workers were subjected to poor living conditions, charged excessive expenses, and endured humiliating treatment and threats.” US Department of Justice Press Release: “The Palm Beach County Human Trafficking Task Force, which includes the FBI, HSI, and the Palm Beach County Sheriff’s Office investigated the case. The Task Force received assistance from the Department of Labor Office of the Inspector General, the Department of Labor Wage and Hour Division, the U.S. Department of State’s Diplomatic Security Service, (and) the Coalition of Immokalee Workers…”

Since its inception in 2010, the Coalition of Immokalee Workers’ Fair Food Program has brought life-saving human rights guarantees to hundreds of thousands of farmworkers and helped transform the practice of farm labor management on farms from Florida to California. Indeed, the FFP has ushered in nothing short of a human rights revolution in the fields for nearly two decades now, eliminating longstanding abuses in our country’s trillion-dollar food industry ranging from systemic wage theft and deadly working conditions to sexual assault modern-day slavery. 

Along the way, many of the world’s largest retail food brands have joined the Fair Food Program — including household names like McDonald’s, Walmart, and Whole Foods — recognizing the program’s unique power not just to remedy abuses after they have happened, but actually to prevent human rights violations altogether, and so to prevent the full-blown public relations crises that can occur when egregious abuses are connected to popular consumer brands through their supply chains. Here at the FFP, we call that invaluable risk mitigation capacity of the program the “Power of Prevention”, and we are proud not only of the FFP’s immense impact on farmworkers’ lives over the past 16 years, but of its impact on our participating buyers’ and participating growers’ business practices and supply chain management, as well. 

It’s really quite simple: Sometimes the best headline is the headline that never happens, especially when that headline is a US Department of Justice press release connecting yet another brutal forced labor prosecution to your company’s supply chain. And yet…

All too many retail food brands — among them many well-known companies like Publix, Kroger, and Wendy’s — still refuse to join the FFP. Instead, they continue to cling to the long-discredited “Corporate Social Responsibility” playbook, claiming — against ample and painful evidence — that their supplier codes of conduct and occasional social audits are effective and sufficient to address any labor abuses in their suppliers’ operations. As a result, there are still far, far more farmworkers who toil beyond the reach of the Fair Food Program’s powerful protections than there are who harvest our food in the FFP’s environment of dignity and respect.

And that’s why the CIW continues to uncover and help prosecute modern-day slavery cases on non-FFP farms, including the recent case US v. Moreno, which came to light after two workers hid in the trunk of a car driven by a Good Samaritan who helped the workers escape the control of their crewleader and call the CIW to report the rampant abuse and threats they had experienced at the camp. That slavery case cast a national spotlight on the growing issue of forced labor in agriculture, and inspired the CIW’s 5-day, 50-mile march from Pahokee, FL to Palm Beach — home of Wendy’s former board chairman Nelson Peltz. When announcing that the defendant in the case had been sentenced to nearly a decade in prison, the US Department of Labor also disclosed that Kroger, a long-time Fair Food Program holdout, had been buying watermelons from the forced labor operation. 

Today, we want to share an update on that case and, in that context, take a moment to reflect on the FFP’s unique “Power of Prevention”. 

Here below is the latest update from the US Department of Justice on US v. Moreno — including the announcement that Alexander Villatoro Moreno, who was a critical player in the forced labor ring, was extradited from Mexico, pleaded guilty to conspiracy, and just received a 70-month prison sentence:

Mexican National Pleads Guilty to Racketeering Conspiracy Involving the Forced Labor of Mexican Workers

Alexander Villatoro Moreno, age 53, also known as Quichi, pleaded guilty in federal court in Tampa, Florida, to conspiracy under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act. A federal grand jury in the Middle District of Florida had previously returned a six-count indictment against multiple defendants for their roles in the conspiracy, which victimized Mexican H-2A workers who, between 2015 and 2017, had worked in the United States harvesting fruits, vegetables and other agricultural products.

According to court documents, Villatoro Moreno and his co-defendants operated and managed Los Villatoros Harvesting (LVH), a farm labor contracting company, that functioned as a criminal enterprise compelling victims to work in Florida, Kentucky, Indiana, Georgia and North Carolina. Villatoro Moreno and his co-defendants fraudulently recruited Mexican nationals to come into the United States on short-term, H-2A, agricultural visas and misled the United States to secure visas for the victims. Villatoro Moreno and his co-defendants charged workers exorbitant recruitment fees to work for LVH and lied to the victims about how much they would be paid, the hours they would work, the working conditions and the reimbursement they would receive for paying recruitment fees and other expenses. The workers were then compelled to provide long hours of physically demanding agricultural labor, six to seven days a week, for far less pay than they were entitled to under the law.

In addition to the work conditions, Villatoro Moreno and his co-defendants used various coercive means to compel the victims’ labor, including imposing debts on workers; confiscating the workers’ passports; subjecting workers to crowded, unsanitary and degrading living conditions; verbally abusing and humiliating the workers; threatening workers with arrest, jail time and deportation; isolating workers by preventing them from interacting with anyone other than LVH employees; and threatening to physically harm the workers’ family members back in Mexico if the workers failed to comply with their demands.

When officials began investigating, Villatoro Moreno obstructed the federal investigation by helping to prepare false payroll information to conceal underpayments to the workers and distributing fake reimbursement receipts to the victims to make it appear that LVH was complying with the law by reimbursing the workers for their travel-related expenses.

In the course of the investigation, one worker told prosecutors: “All this time, I could not return to Mexico for fear that something would happen to me. That the Villatoros had paid someone to kill me.”   In the press release announcing Villatoro Moreno’s sentencing, representatives from the Department of Justice had this to say:  “The victims in this case were deceived by conspirators and subjected to deplorable conditions while being exploited for greed and profit,” said US Attorney Gregory W. Kehoe for the Middle District of Florida. “Today’s judgment sends a clear message that we will leverage the resources of our law enforcement partners to uphold our nation’s immigration laws and vigorously prosecute those who engage in human trafficking.”   “Villatoro Moreno and his co-conspirators lured victims from Mexico with false promises of fair wages and good working conditions. It was all a lie,” said Special Agent in Charge Brett Skiles of the FBI Miami Field Office. “In addition to harsh and extreme working conditions, the workers were subjected to poor living conditions, charged excessive expenses, and endured humiliating treatment and threats. Not only is this wrong, but it is also against the law. Investigating this case was a team effort. I commend the Palm Beach County Human Trafficking Task Force, the Department of Labor, the Diplomatic Security Service, and numerous workers’ rights groups for their close cooperation.”   “Today’s sentence sends a clear message that those who exploit vulnerable workers and engage in forced labor will face serious consequences,” said Acting Special Agent in Charge Jose R. Figueroa of Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) Miami Field Office. “We are committed to protecting workers, safeguarding the integrity of the H‑2A program, and relentlessly pursuing those who manipulate the immigration system. HSI will continue to leverage partnerships across the government, with private industry, and around the world to combat forced labor and disrupt crimes of victimization…”  Read more of the DOJ press release here    The Power of Prevention

While successful slavery prosecutions of individual farm bosses provide a measure of justice for victims, they are a limited and ultimately insufficient tool if the goal is to end forced labor altogether.

First, prosecutions are inherently backward-looking. By the time a case reaches court, workers have already endured the abuses typical of forced labor operations — physical violence, psychological trauma, sexual abuse, and dangerous or even deadly working conditions. Even when justice is served, it is difficult, if not impossible, to fully repair the harm inflicted on those victims.

A Fair Food Standards Council auditor (left) interviews a worker on an FFP farm

Moreover, the legal framework used in forced labor prosecutions generally targets the employers closest to the workers: crewleaders and farm bosses directly involved in the abuse. Those higher up the supply chain — from farm owners to the retail brands purchasing the produce harvested by exploited workers — almost always emerge unscathed. Though they may have known, or should have known, about the abuse, and though they often benefit indirectly through lower labor costs and lower prices, they rarely face consequences when a crewleader is convicted of forced labor.

Early on in the CIW’s three-decade fight against human trafficking, it became clear that prosecutions alone would never end forced labor. If the movement’s broader goals — ending modern-day slavery in the fields and creating a world without victims — were ever to be achieved, something more was needed. The solution lay in addressing the underlying economics that had made slavery and other widespread farm labor abuses possible for generations.

The incentives were clear. For decades, major food retailers used their enormous purchasing power to push prices lower and lower throughout their supply chains. As farm-gate prices fell, growers struggled to survive on increasingly thin margins, often by suppressing wages and minimizing labor costs. Combined with weak and infrequent enforcement of labor laws, this created a system in which those who violated workers’ rights were effectively rewarded — whether through wage theft, sexual harassment, or forced labor — and rarely punished for their crimes.

As Warren Buffett’s longtime investor partner Charlie Munger famously said, “Show me the incentives, and I’ll show you the outcomes.” That principle applies as much to farm labor management systems as it does to financial markets. When economic pressures encourage abuse and legal protections are weakly enforced, exploitation flourishes. But the reverse is also true. When protecting workers is rewarded, and violations carry meaningful consequences, outcomes change. Abuses decline, accountability increases, and the possibility of a world without victims comes into view.

That is not merely a theory.

Since the launch of the Fair Food Program in 2010, incentives on participating farms have been fundamentally transformed. By leveraging the purchasing power of participating buyers, the FFP rewards growers who comply with its labor standards through continued business and preferential purchasing, while growers who violate workers’ rights risk losing access to major markets.

Just as importantly, the program protects workers who report violations. Retaliation itself is a serious violation that can jeopardize a grower’s relationships with some of the largest food buyers in the world. The result is a powerful system of worker-driven monitoring that ensures abuses are identified quickly and violators face real consequences. As a result, forced labor, sexual violence, and other severe human rights abuses have been effectively eliminated on participating farms for nearly two decades.

That is the “Power of Prevention” in action.

Central to the program’s success are the CIW’s legally binding agreements with participating buyers, who commit to preferentially purchasing from suppliers that comply with the FFP’s labor standards and suspending purchases from those who don’t. These market incentives helped transform Florida’s tomato industry from what federal prosecutors once called “ground zero for modern-day slavery” into what one human rights expert described on the front page of The New York Times as “the best workplace environment in U.S. agriculture.” No comparable system exists elsewhere in American agriculture.

Had the Fair Food Program been operating on the melon farms involved in the U.S. v. Moreno case, its protections and enforcement mechanisms would have dispelled the climate of fear among workers and detected even minor abuses before they escalated into forced labor. Yet buyers of those melons, including Kroger, continue to reject participation in the program. Instead, they rely on a failed model of voluntary standards and social audits that has repeatedly proven incapable of protecting workers or preventing abuse.

That is why nationwide expansion of the Fair Food Program is so urgently needed.

As Fair Food allies, you play an indispensable role in expanding the market power behind the program. By making your voices heard in executive offices and corporate boardrooms, you help pressure companies to take responsibility for labor conditions in their supply chains.  Farmworkers need your continued support to ensure that companies such as Kroger, Publix, and Wendy’s embrace genuine, worker-driven social responsibility and join the Fair Food Program.

Stay tuned for an upcoming digital action where you can help call on more corporate buyers — including Kroger, Publix, and Wendy’s — to join the Fair Food Program.

The South Carolina Public Service Commission dismissed calls from the Sierra Club to impose a cost cap on the Canadys project or require the utilities to commit to retiring coal-fired units.

Three reports published Monday lay out recommendations for development of an offshore transmission system and highlight the potential for high voltage direct current technology.

Dark clouds are gathering over adaptation finance. The US has all but stopped providing it and European countries are slashing their aid budgets to spend more on their militaries. Much of what is flowing comes in the form of loans and doesn’t reach the most vulnerable, as we’ve reported.

Over the years, one bright spark has been the Adaptation Fund and its grants to developing countries for pioneering work in communities. It has allocated $1.6 billion to 226 projects, benefiting 90 million people, its website says. And, while rich nations are failing to give the fund all the money it needs to finance its growing pipeline, new revenues are supposed to come in from the Paris Agreement’s new carbon market, known as Article 6.4.

Back at COP26 in Glasgow, governments agreed that the Adaptation Fund should get 5% of the proceeds from all Article 6.4 carbon credits – other than those based in small islands and least developed countries.

How much money that will amount to is uncertain. It depends on how many projects there are and the price of their credits. 

The fund got over $200 million from a similar share of proceeds under the Kyoto Protocol’s Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), although the price of those credits collapsed. 

While $200 million was a disappointment as ten times that was expected, the Adaptation Fund head Mikko Ollikainen told Climate Home News in Bonn that the sum was “not insignificant”. By comparison, the fund has been seeking $300 million per year from donor governments in recent years.

Hopes are that the CDM’s successor will yield bigger sums for adaptation. But for the fund to get its hands on the share of cash it is expecting from Article 6.4 projects , governments need to agree to transition the fund to “exclusively” serve the Paris Agreement. They are hoping to wrap up those talks in Bonn this week, so that they can rubber-stamp the decision early at COP31.

• Jun 15, 2026 News Bonn Bulletin: Finance dominates discussions in every room Lack of progress on finance issues – including putting a number on the new goal to triple adaptation funding – is causing blockages across negotiating tracks at UN climate talks Read more
• Jun 12, 2026 Sponsored Climate adaptation helps African nations tackle rising conflict over resources The growing overlap between insecurity and climate vulnerability is forcing governments and development agencies to rethink adaptation efforts Read more

It has not been plain-sailing. As small islands’ lead negotiator Anne Rasmussen told a press conference on Tuesday, this transition “is being blocked, frustrating efforts to replenish the fund and ensure that the crucial adaptation finance can flow to those that need it the most”.

This issue, along with other finance complaints, leads small islands “to question whether the implementation of the NCQG [the 2035 finance goal agreed at COP29] is dead on arrival”, she added.

The problem is related to who is considered a developed country at UN climate talks, with the responsibilities for providing climate finance that designation implies.

Traditional donor countries, which have been pushing for years for some wealthier developing countries like Saudi Arabia and China to contribute to climate finance as well, want the Adaptation Fund’s board seats to be split between “developed” and “developing” countries. 

They argue that these are the categories referred to in the Paris Agreement and so are appropriate for a fund that exclusively serves that accord.

Developing countries – which have long opposed any of their members being considered developed – argue that the board seats should continue to be split between “Annex 1” and “non-Annex 1” countries. 

These categories, based on lists of nations drawn up in 1992, are more rigid than “developed” and “developing”. While development status can change over time, you’re either on the Annex 1 list or you’re not.

Ollikainen said a delay in agreement beyond COP31 – a risk if the issue is not resolved here in Bonn – would harm people in the real world where adaptation needs are rising sharply while the money to protect them from worsening climate impacts is not.

“If we don’t address adaptation,” the fund’s head told Climate Home News, “that will lead to loss and damage and that’s going to be even more costlier than adaptation – and the cost will be borne by people who have done least to cause this problem who typically don’t have social safety networks to support them.”

The post Bonn Bulletin: Adaptation Fund stalemate puts people at risk, says head appeared first on Climate Home News.

Headline News:

• “Trump Retreats from Lawsuit Challenging Illegal Wind Ban” • The Trump administration has voluntarily dismissed its own appeal in a lawsuit challenging Donald Trump’s executive order banning wind project development in the US. The judge had ruled the order was “capricious and arbitrary.” This effectively ends the unlawful windpower ban. [CleanTechnica]

CVOW (BOEM-OPA, CC BY-SA 2.0, cropped)

• “Spain’s Renewables Revolution Is Paying Off” • New analysis shows that Spanish households have each saved €10 per month on their electricity bills since the Hormuz strait was effectively closed in March. In the Spanish’s transition to renewable energy, the influence fossil fuels have on the electricity price has been reduced by 75% since 2019. [Euronews]
• “Cuba Quantifies Impact Of US Oil Blockade On Children’s Health And Daily Life” • The survival rate for Cuban children with cancer has fallen from 85% before the US energy blockade began in January to 65%, according to a report from Cubadebate. The report said 100,000 children younger than seven can’t even get a daily liter of milk from the state. [ABC News]
• “Gas Prices Fall Below $4 A Gallon, GasBuddy Says” • After an agreement between the US and Iran, the national average price of a gallon of gas stands at $3.99, marking a decline of more than 9¢ over the past week, according to a GasBuddy post. Gas prices, however, continue to register well above where they stood before the Iran war. [ABC News]
• “Circularity Cuts Cost Of Making Sustainable Aviation Fuel From Bio-Methane” • In recent six-month trial, Circularity Fuels showed that biogas from a California dairy farm manure digester was successfully converted to a drop-in aviation fuel. It meets the ASTM D7566 Annex A1 specifications in use for the jet engines of commercial aircraft. [CleanTechnica]

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

More energy-efficient air-conditioning units could, together, save Indian households ₹69bn ($724m) a year, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief. 

Climate change-induced extreme heat is driving up the use of air conditioning across the country, as people try to cope with record-breaking temperatures. 

This demand, however, is straining the country’s power grid and raising emissions. 

On 21 May 2026, India’s power demand reached a record 270 gigawatts (GW), fuelled by a heatwave sweeping across the country and a surge in air-conditioning demand.

Carbon Brief’s analysis shows that, if the roughly 15m households expected to buy a new air conditioning (AC) unit this year bought a “five-star” rated one instead of a “two-star”, it would cut carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions by nearly 5m tonne (Mt). 

The installation of AC units in India is currently uneven and ongoing challenges remain, predominantly around the cost of the technology. 

Below, Carbon Brief looks at what more energy-efficient models would mean for India’s emissions and household electricity savings, as well as opportunities and barriers to cooling access. 

Record heat

Historically, India has had one of the lowest levels of access to cooling in the world. As the nation continues to see an increasing number of heatwave days, this is shifting.

For example, India saw record-breaking heat in 2024 and nearly 14m air conditioners sold – up from 10m in 2023.

Between 2021 and 2023, AC sales volumes increased by more than 25% year-on-year in India.

While solar power is playing an increasing role in meeting the daytime electricity demand from these units, coal power plays a significant role in powering air conditioners on warm nights.

By 2037, India’s space-cooling demand was expected to grow nearly 11-fold in a business-as-usual scenario compared to 2017, according to the government’s 2019 India Cooling Action Plan (ICAP). 

According to a World Bank study, this would mean a new air-conditioning unit is bought every 15 seconds in India. There would also be a 435% increase in annual greenhouse gas emissions related to air conditioning in the country over the next two decades. 

The chart below shows the ICAP’s estimated rise in air conditioner units in India from 2021 to 2037. The blue line represents a high-growth scenario, while the green line corresponds to a low-growth scenario. 

Residential air-conditioner ownership projections under low (green line) and high (blue line) growth scenarios, according to the India Cooling Action Plan’s projections. Source: ICAP (2019). Growing demand

Despite the upswing in installations over recent years, it remains rare for households to have access to air conditioning in India. 

According to India’s national sample survey in 2020-21, only 4.9% of Indian households owned air conditioning, with ownership concentrated among the urban rich. As of 2024, this had increased to around 8%. 

(Ownership of evaporative air coolers is significantly higher than it is for air conditioning, particularly in the arid north and central Indian states, where humidity is low.)

Dr Nikit Abhyankar, an associate adjunct professor at the Goldman School of Public Policy at the University of California Berkeley, tells Carbon Brief that India is set to add between 100-150m new air conditioners in the next 10 years, which could go up to 200m “if you factor in the crazy heatwaves”. 

According to his research, the two factors that drive “dramatic” sales of ACs are income and extreme temperatures. 

He tells Carbon Brief:

“The moment you cross a specific income threshold, the first appliance you buy is an air conditioner, no matter whether it’s hot or not. And the moment there are extreme temperatures, the next summer, you see a huge wave of new ACs being purchased.”

With that in mind, he says India offers a “classic lock-in opportunity”, since 90% of the air conditioners that will exist in 2040 have yet to be purchased, particularly given the tendency among Indian users to repair and reuse units. Abhyankar continues:

“That’s why making sure that first AC purchase is the most efficient one is very important in India, because that AC is not going out of the market in seven years.”

Energy-efficient units

With the number of air-conditioning units in India on the rise, ensuring they are as energy-efficient as possible could save households money, while cutting emissions and electricity demand. 

India’s Bureau of Energy Efficiency (BEE) mandates star ratings for air conditioners to indicate their efficiency. It uses a metric called the Indian seasonal energy efficiency ratio (ISEER), which is based on an India-specific temperature distribution. 

Ratings range from one to five stars, with the latter being the most energy-efficient. 

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), three-star units “dominate” India’s air-conditioning market, “possibly due to [up-front] cost considerations”, while four- and five-star units account for a minority of sales. 

The chart below shows AC production volumes in India between 2019 and 2023 by energy-efficiency star rating, according to the IEA.  

Annual air conditioner production volumes in India by efficiency rating and fiscal year, 2019-2023. Source: International Energy Agency (2024).

Carbon Brief analysis finds that buying a five-star air conditioner could cut the emissions associated with generating electricity to run the unit by around 300 kilograms (kg) of CO2 per year, when compared to a two-star unit. 

As such, if all 15m air-conditioning units expected to be sold in 2026 were five-star, it could save 5MtCO2 annually. 

This is roughly equivalent to the emissions from an average-sized coal-fired power plant, the analysis shows. 

In a year, the lower electricity demand from more efficient units could mean ₹69bn ($724m) in cost savings for consumers, as shown in the chart below. Each affected household could save ₹4,600 ($48) annually on their bills. 

Running cost (blue) and potential savings (red) of 15m two-star and five-star rated air-conditioning in a year, ₹bn. Source: Carbon Brief analysis.

There are also significant savings from five-star units compared with three-stars, amounting to around 150kgCO2 and ₹2,300 ($24) per household per year.

Carbon Brief’s illustrative analysis is supported by a new working paper from the India Energy and Climate Center (IECC) at UC Berkeley, which looks at the longer-term impact of AC demand on electricity demand and emissions, as well as grid investment costs and consumer savings. 

Released in May 2026, it says that room air conditioners already account for nearly a quarter of India’s peak electricity demand (60-70GW). 

The authors estimate that AC-driven peak power demand could reach 120GW by 2030 and 180GW by 2035, pushing India’s power grid beyond its capacity. They warn:

“Even with all under-construction generation and storage projects online, power shortages are expected as early as 2028.”

Sustained energy-efficiency improvements, however, could reduce this cooling-driven peak power demand by 10GW by 2030 and 47GW by 2035. 

They estimate that these improvements could help avoid nearly $80bn in power infrastructure investments and deliver $9-25bn in consumer savings between 2028 and 2035, while reducing emissions by 12MtCO2 per year by 2030. 

Rolling out five-star units

While there are emissions and cost benefits to five-star air-conditioning units compared to the alternatives, the higher upfront costs can still present a barrier. 

These more energy-efficient units can pay for their higher purchase price over a three-year period, but on average cost ₹5,000 to ₹8,000 ($52-84) more upfront than a three-star unit. 

Researchers at the Indian climate thinktank Sustainable Futures Collaborative (SFC) called on Indian state and national governments to create a “highly-targeted active cooling” programme last year.

They recommended deploying a subsidy or a large-scale purchase programme that allows families to buy energy-efficient air conditioners. This, they said, must be targeted at portions of Indian cities with the highest heat risk, determined by the vulnerability assessments of their heat action plans. 

Climate adaptation researcher at King’s College London and SFC author Aditya Valiathan Pillai tells Carbon Brief: 

“Commit money to air conditioning for the poorest-of-the-poor: subsidise ultra-efficient ACs and electricity, but give them cool air at the cheapest possible, most efficient rate. 

“Because these are the people running the economy, which is not going to function in a heatwave if these people are dying or unable to work.”

Methodology 

Carbon Brief’s analysis is based on official energy consumption, power pricing and emissions data from different ministries and government institutions. 

It uses BEE’s “search and compare” tool to list all five-star and three-star “variable speed” or “inverter” air conditioners, given their enhanced efficiency and ability to regulate humidity.

This was then filtered to air conditioners with a capacity of 1.5t, which studies say are most preferred by Indian households. 

Using the same tool, Carbon Brief then listed all “fixed speed” two-star ACs of a similar capacity (1.45t to 1.55t), given that these account for the majority of two-star ACs available on the market and favoured by renters.

Based on expert estimates, the analysis lists the energy consumption of each of these key categories in kilowatt-hours (kWh) and added 15% to account for losses in power transmission and distribution. 

The carbon intensity of Indian electricity is specified by the CO2 baseline database published by India’s Central Electricity Authority in November 2025.

The number of hours per year a household’s air conditioning runs is estimated at 1,600 hours by the BEE. 

Carbon Brief uses a marginal electricity tariff of ₹10 per kWh to calculate annual electricity consumption costs. 

This is because average electricity tariffs vary significantly from state to state, but especially by energy consumption “slabs”, with AC use pushing bills into higher-tariff rates. 

For instance, in Maharashtra, electricity tariffs for domestic households range from ₹1.52 per unit for below-poverty-line households to ₹16.64 per unit for homes using more than 500 units of electricity. 

Savings from higher energy efficiency, therefore, reduce electricity consumption in the highest electricity tariff block, where rates are the most expensive.

Cooling hours

Air-conditioner usage varies across India’s climatic zones. The ISEER metric that underpins star ratings estimates that, on average, a household air conditioner runs for 1, 600 hours a year. 

This estimate is based on 2014 weather data for 54 cities across India, to see how many hours in a year temperatures exceed 24C. 

Refrigerant emissions

The analysis only accounts for emissions from electricity generation and does not factor in “fugitive” emissions from refrigerant leaks. 

These are significant, given that refrigerants are greenhouse gases that can have hundreds of times more warming potential than CO2. 

According to a study published by climate thinktank iForest last year, Indian households with air conditioning are refilling their refrigerants more frequently than the global average. 

It estimates that greenhouse gas emissions from refrigerant release from India’s air conditioners were 52Mt of CO2 equivalent (CO2e) in 2024, likely to increase to 84MtCO2e by 2035.

Cooling access and population data

Government estimates vary on how many Indian households do not own a single air conditioner, with little publicly available data differentiating between cooling devices and a delayed national census. 

India’s national sample survey, published in 2020-21, is the only one of its kind in recent years to separate air-conditioner ownership from air cooler ownership, estimating that only 4.9% of all Indian households owned an air conditioner. 

EM-DAT: Trump aid cuts could close database storing ‘world’s memory of disasters’

Extreme weather

|

29.05.26

New coal plants hit ‘10-year’ global high in 2025 – but power output still fell

Coal

|

21.05.26

Factcheck: US and Iran are world’s only major emitters without net-zero targets

Factchecks

|

18.05.26

Q&A: How countries got the global ‘net-zero’ shipping deal ‘back on track’

International policy

|

05.05.26

jQuery(document).ready(function() { jQuery('.block-related-articles-slider-block_8f1bba07da04385f97f4b8170f9ebb35 .mh').matchHeight({ byRow: false }); });

The post Analysis: Energy-efficient air conditioning could save Indian homes 69bn rupees a year appeared first on Carbon Brief.

In montane regenerative agroforests of southwestern Yunnan, tea trees grow not in rows, but in relationship. Their trunks and branches are covered in fungi, moss, and orchids as they spread through a layered ecosystem of fruit trees and understory. Birdsong and harvest songs fill the air. Volatile aromatics deepen around us as we gather tender tea buds and glistening leaves, nibbling fruit along the way.

Later, steeping the tea, its bitterness softens into lingering notes of honey at the back of the throat. Twenty years ago, first drinking tea from an agroforest, I realized I was tasting the landscape itself. In that cup was the high elevation, the dance of sun and shade through tree canopy, the mist, the dark living soil, the mulch, the weeds, the pollinators, and the microbes that cover the leaves, all translated into flavor. It also carried the knowledge of the communities who had long stewarded these landscapes through generations of observation, experimentation, harvesting, selection, and care.

Montane Indigenous Akha communities shaped these landscapes within a mosaic of home gardens rich with herbs and vegetables, rice paddies with local landraces, forests filled with wild foods and medicines, orchards, grazing lands, and cultivated fields. These landscapes reflect an understanding of food through relationships across species, seasons, ecosystems, and communities.

What I learned in these communities became a wake-up call for how I understand food and the entire global food and agriculture system. Food revealed itself as ecological and biological exposure, a living translation of biodiversity, climate, soil, microbes, and culture into the molecules that shape flavor, nourishment, memory, and human health.

We experience food as biological exposure through tens of thousands of interacting molecules. Molecules in whole foods carry the memory of ecosystems, farming practices, and cultural histories. Sunlight is remembered in sugars, grasses in the tissues of grazing animals, and microbial communities in the transformation of milk and grain into new flavors and nutrients.

Many of the molecules we cherish for flavor and nourishment evolved first as protection. Bitterness and heat discourage grazing or being fully consumed. Phenolics shield against ultraviolet light. Terpenes summon allies when leaves are under attack. What we experience as aroma, heat, or astringency are the survival strategies of living systems, biochemistry shaped over millions of years to endure stress and change.

Tea plants produce catechins to defend themselves and terpenes to communicate in dynamic environments. These molecules vary with climate, elevation, and agricultural management such as regenerative agroforestry. Humans experience these ecological shifts through flavor, nourishment, memory, culture, and wellbeing. Food is landscape metabolized.

This translation is not limited to plants. High on the Tibetan Plateau in northwestern Yunnan, yaks translate the chemistry of alpine grasses and wildflowers into milk rich with protein and lipid molecules that carry the signature of place and season. Tibetan communities note the shift in milk and butter quality as they herd at higher elevations, with plants getting more bitter and medicinal. Along ancient trade routes, yak butter from alpine pastures was blended with fermented pu-erh tea, bringing together the chemistry of mountain grasslands and tea agroforests in a shared cup.

Along the Pacific coast where I look out today, halibut and rockfish carry the chemistry of kelp forests, smaller fish, and cold ocean upwelling in their tissues, with fats and proteins shaped through phytoplankton blooms and marine food webs.

Through fermentation, bacteria and fungi transform molecules, breaking apart proteins, fibers, and other compounds into forms that are often more digestible, bioavailable, flavorful, and biologically active. These preservation techniques are collaborations across species, with microbes reshaping foods into new flavors, nutrients, and therapeutic attributes.

Science now offers high-resolution tools to see the chemistry behind this ecological exchange and knowledge, but it has always been present, rooted in reciprocity and sensed experience.

Long before laboratories could name the molecules in food, our mouths could taste them.

The molecules of different foods meet within us, shaping our senses, our cells, and our connection to the living world. Molecules that help tea plants survive in agroforests can also help buffer inflammation in our bodies. Our microbiome, the unseen ecological community within, responds to these molecules and sends its own signals through the gut–brain axis, influencing mood, energy, and resilience.

Within our cells, mitochondria translate biomolecules into the energy of life. What began as the plant’s way of surviving, the animal’s way of metabolizing landscapes, and the microbe’s way of transforming matter has co-evolved with human knowledge and culture. Through cultivation, cooking, and fermentation, we learned to partner with these living processes, shaping food even as it shapes us.

We feel this most vividly in intact ecosystems. In regenerative orchards, the air carries the volatile molecules of ripening fruit. On the Tibetan Plateau, yak butter holds the chemistry of alpine herbs. In Montana meadows, wild huckleberries glisten with pigments that shield the fruit from ultraviolet light. Through aroma, texture, and taste, we trace rainfall, altitude, soil health, and stewardship.

To eat is to be in relationship with sun and soil, with farmers and foragers, with microbes and animals, with those before us and those yet to be. The molecules that become our cells once belonged to forests, fields, pastures, and oceans. For a time, we carry those living worlds within us.

We do not exist apart from the living world. Through food, through biology, and through care, we participate in the great reciprocity of life and remember that we belong.

This is the first in a monthly series of essays.

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 Selena Ahmed

The post Op-Ed | Tasting the Landscape: A Love Letter to the Biology of Food and Being appeared first on Food Tank.