News Feeds

A lower-volume frack and well test at the West Newton-A oil and gas site in East Yorkshire could start within three months, the operator revealed today.

In an update, Rathlin Energy said the operations were due to begin in the fourth quarter of 2026.

West Newton-A site in Holderness, East Yorkshire. Photo: DrillOrDrop

But the start date depended on securing additional approvals and on equipment being available, the company said.

The lower-volume frack is also facing a legal challenge at the High Court from a local campaigner.

Before work can begin, passing places must be built on part of the lorry route to the site. This is expected to take four weeks, during which Pasture Lane would be closed.

Rathlin confirmed in the update that it was considering “near-term” plans to use gas from West Newton-A to generate electricity for what it called onsite “computer facilities”.

A major investor has previously said the gas would power bitcoin mining.

Rathlin has permission to generate electricity at West Newton-A but it would need planning permission for the computer facilities.

The update said stimulation modelling for the lower-volume frack had been completed, along with the design of a year-long extended well test (EWT).

Well completion and testing companies had been contacted to determine their availability, it added.

Rathlin said the 12-month extended well test was dependent on the success of the lower-volume frack.

The test would allow it to “assess the extent and performance of the reservoir, providing the essential data required before determining the most appropriate route for full field development”, the company said.

It added:

“Until the reservoir characteristics are fully understood, through an EWT, it is too early to determine the most suitable method for transporting gas to market.

“Rathlin has reviewed several potential options, including a pipeline connection to the National Transmission System or direct supply to local industrial users.”

The update also confirmed:

• Rathlin would establish a community benefit fund before work started
• A new work programme would allow the West Newton licence, PEDL183, to be retained in its current form until June 2030.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Date: June 5, 2026
Contact: Anja Semanco | anja@alaskawild.org | 724-967-2777 

Arctic Refuge Lease Sale Exposes Administration’s Reckless Gamble and the Market’s Clear Rejection 

Anchorage, AK — For the third time, a lease sale in the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge has produced results that fall catastrophically short of what Congress promised the American people when it authorized drilling in one of the nation’s most treasured wild places. 

Today’s sale produced just nine bids from two entities—the Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority (AIDEA) and HEX Energy LLC—neither of which represents the serious industry investment required to bring Arctic Refuge oil to market. Together they generated just $3,741,528 in total revenue—0.37% of the nearly $1 billion proponents claimed would offset the costs to the federal government of the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Overall, all three sales have fallen short of producing even 1% of the total revenue from the 2017 Tax Act, which is split between the federal government and state of Alaska. No major oil company participated. No credible path to the promised revenue exists. 

The pattern is undeniable. The American taxpayers told this bargain was worth opening one of the country’s last intact ecosystems are still waiting for a return that has never materialized—and by today’s results, never will. 

“When Congress passed the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, the American people were told that opening the Arctic Refuge to drilling would generate close to $1 billion in federal revenue,” said Kristen Miller, executive director of Alaska Wilderness League. “Today, the total return remains a fraction of that promise. Economic gain was a false justification to permanently sell off the most ecologically and culturally significant landscapes in the United States. The American people don’t want this, the oil industry doesn’t want this, and our public lands deserve so much better. The Arctic Refuge, traditional homelands of the Gwich’in people, deserves permanent protection.” 

This outcome was foreseeable. The world’s largest banks—Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, and others—declined years ago to finance Arctic Refuge drilling. Major insurers declined to underwrite it. Oil companies with the capital and technical capacity to operate in one of the world’s most demanding environments looked at the cost structures, the logistical challenges, accelerating permafrost instability, and the long-term demand outlook for high-cost Arctic oil—and consistently chose not to bid. 

The Gwich’in Nation Has Opposed This From the Start 

The economic failure of these lease sales cannot be separated from the human cost of pursuing them. The coastal plain—what the Gwich’in people call “the Sacred Place Where Life Begins”—is the calving and nursery ground of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, which the Gwich’in Nation has depended upon for thousands of years for their physical, cultural, and spiritual well-being. 

The Gwich’in were not consulted when Congress opened this land to leasing, and they have opposed drilling at every turn—in Congress, before international bodies, and in the courts. They have been unequivocal: this is not a trade-off they will accept at any price. Given that the economic projections used to override their objections have now proven fiction, the case for continuing to do so has collapsed entirely. 

Three Failed Lease Sales Are Enough 

The Arctic Refuge coastal plain is the calving ground of the Porcupine Caribou Herd, one of the largest remaining terrestrial migrations on earth, and home to polar bears, musk oxen, wolves, Dall sheep, and hundreds of thousands of migratory birds. It is a landscape that cannot be restored once industrial development begins. 

Congress opened this land on the basis of a financial promise it could not keep—a promise that has now failed three times. The legal mandate requiring the administration to continue holding lease sales, regardless of market interest, taxpayer return, or the wishes of the Gwich’in Nation, should be repealed.

###

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: June 5, 2026

June 11 North Omaha Town Hall: Senators Terrell McKinney & Ashlei Spivey to Discuss Data Centers With Guest Jane Kleeb

Omaha – Nebraska State Senators Terrell McKinney and Ashlei Spivey will host a community town hall meeting on Thursday, June 11 to provide an overview of the recent legislative session, along with a discussion about data centers where the Senators will be joined by Bold Nebraska Founder and Executive Director Jane Kleeb. 

• WHAT: North Omaha Town Hall & Data Center Discussion
• WHO: Nebraska State Senators Terrell McKinney & Ashlei Spivey; Bold Founder & Executive Director Jane Kleeb (Free and open to the public)
• WHEN: Thursday, June 11, 6:00 – 7:30 p.m. (Refreshments will be provided)
• WHERE: Nelson Mandela Elementary School, 6316 N. 30th Street, Omaha, NE

In addition to the traditional town halls that Senators Spivey and McKinney hold on a regular basis with their constituents, a discussion will take place on June 11 on LB 1111, a data center bill sponsored by Senators McKinney, Spivey and Machaela Cavanaugh, which was also supported by Bold Nebraska. 

The law holds data centers accountable and provides for transparency that no other state has been able to pass. Jane Kleeb will join the Senators for the data center discussion. Nebraska is already home to more than 30 data center facilities, operated by tech giants including Meta, and Google.

Nebraska is believed to be the first state in the nation to pass a law requiring Community Benefits Agreements for data center projects. A Community Benefits Agreement is an actual contract between the developer and impacted local communities that require the developer to ensure local community members benefit directly from the development activity – so these billion-dollar data center projects are obligated to pay back millions of dollars annually to impacted communities.

Nebraska is also now one of the first states to impose a statutory requirement for data centers to implement decommissioning plans, so that rural communities are not left holding the bag when these massive facilities housing huge amounts of hazardous environmental waste go out of business or are no longer of use.

The public disclosures that data centers in Nebraska are now required to provide include:

• The name of the proposed data center.
• The names of the developers and owners of the proposed data center.
• The physical size of the proposed data center in square feet.
• The location of the proposed data center, including street address and County.
• The annual electricity demand of the proposed data center.
• The annual water usage of the proposed data center.
• The sales and use tax exemptions that the proposed data center utilizes or expects to utilize.
• Any incentive payments for the proposed data center under the ImagiNE Nebraska Act and the Nebraska Advantage Act.
• All energy efficiency, load management, and conservation measures implemented by the proposed data center.
• All commitments by the proposed data center to use renewable energy.
• The service life of the proposed data center.

“My community is being polluted every single day by a coal plant that stays open largely to power data centers. This bill finally forces public disclosure of the electricity and water demands we’ve been demanding — and couldn’t get. It puts people in the driver’s seat with legally binding Community Benefits Agreements and decommissioning plans, so we’re not left cleaning up a corporate mess decades later,” said Nebraska State Senator Terrell McKinney.

“Communities deserve to know basic facts about data centers when deciding what’s best for their towns. Nebraska had zero guardrails on data centers before this law, and now developers must, if a community decides this is right for their town, enter into a Community Benefits Agreement and put a decommissioning plan in place. No data center should be able to run roughshod over a community while making billions of dollars,” said Jane Kleeb, Bold Alliance Founder and Director. “Communities and those who live near these massive projects deserve to generate wealth and be protected from any public health and environmental harms. This law provides guardrails to protect communities and put them first, not big corporations.”

“Ken Winston, Chapter Director of the Nebraska Sierra Club, stated: “We are pleased to see that the Legislature passed LB 1010 on a vote of 49 to zero to establish important guardrails on data centers, including requiring data centers to pay the full cost of electricity and ensuring that no costs are passed on to other retail customers. We greatly appreciate the leadership of Senator Machaela Cavanaugh, Senator Terrell McKinney and Senator Ashlei Spivey in introducing the original legislation and making sure that necessary amendments were added to LB 1010. We want to recognize the importance of requiring data centers to bear all decommissioning costs and requiring them to enter into community benefit agreements with communities affected by the data center. This legislation provides a great opportunity for local communities to tailor their community benefit agreements to meet the needs of their community. This could include projects that mitigate the data center’s use of water or other natural resources, or funding for projects the community cannot otherwise afford such as low-income energy efficiency programs, solar and battery powered community resilience hubs or assistance with affordable housing. These agreements should be funded at a meaningful level and funds should be provided throughout the operational life of the facility because the companies behind data centers are some of the richest corporations on the planet.”

The Bold Energy Builders project organizes unlikely alliances with the goal of justly building more clean energy, providing education, training, legal, communications and organizing support to rural communities who want to see more clean energy built in their towns. At the center of the Energy Builders project is working with local residents to develop Community Benefits Agreements, including an American Energy Dividend to those that live in the viewshed of wind and solar. We believe more money in people’s pockets, while adding more American-made energy on the grid, can change the game in rural America – putting those who live on the land and in our rural towns in the driver’s seat. We are looking at America’s next 100 years of energy.

MEETING REGISTRATION PAGE:
https://actionnetwork.org/events/boldnebraska_northotownhall_june2026 

About Bold Energy Builders
Bold’s Energy Builders Project provides education, training, legal, communications, and organizing support to rural communities that want to see more clean energy built in their towns. (https://boldenergybuilders.us)

About Bold
Bold is a network of “small and mighty” groups in rural states working to protect land and water. We fight fossil fuel projects, protect landowners against eminent domain abuse, and work for clean energy solutions while building an engaged base of citizens who care about the land, water, and climate change. (https://boldalliance.org) 

Artificial intelligence and digital technologies are already transforming food systems and daily lives. For peasants, smallholder farmers, fisherfolk, pastoralists, Indigenous Peoples, women and youth, the stakes are high: these technologies can deepen power concentration, land and resource grabbing and the erosion of sovereignty, excluding the peoples whose knowledge and labour sustain food systems. At the same time, community-led initiatives show how these technologies can support self-determination, peasant and Indigenous knowledge and innovation. Rights-holders must be at the centre of any decision-making on the use of these technologies, and this open consultation is an opportunity to engage. 

The High Level Panel of Experts on Food Security and Nutrition (HLPE-FSN), the independent science–policy body of the Committee on World Food Security (CFS), has published a draft background note on AI, digitalization and data governance for open consultation until 15 June 2026. The note will inform the CFS High-Level Forum (HLF) on 30 June, whose outcomes can contribute to identifying key messages and policy considerations for future discussions or potential workstreams of the CFS.

Read the HLPE-FSN draft note How to participate in the HLPE e-consultation 

Deadline for submissions: 15 June 2026 (23:59 CEST)

The HLPE-FSN is inviting written inputs in English, French and Spanish, regarding the overall orientation of the note and experiences on AI, digitalization and data governance in food systems.

Questions to guide the e-consultation

– Share your feedback on the overall orientation of the note: 

1. Are the issues identified by the HLPE-FSN the most important issues related to Artificial Intelligence, digitalization and data governance affecting food security and nutrition, globally and in specific contexts? 
2. Are there any other key issues that should be added and elaborated? If yes, please provide a justification of why they are important, together with relevant literature and data.

– Share your inputs and experience on Artificial Intelligence, digitalization and data governance in food systems: 

1. Are the issues identified fully capturing the links with food security and nutrition (FSN) outcomes?
2. Is there any aspect of direct or indirect FSN outcome that should be further elaborated?
3. Is there any example or case study that deserves to be mentioned?
4. In particular, do you have examples of effective policies to improve FSN outcomes of the use of Artificial Intelligence, digitalization and data governance in food systems?
5. Is there any missing reference to key literature and data? 

Submit your contribution directly through the HLPE form before 15 June 2026 (23:59 CEST).

Contribute through the CSIPM

Deadline: 10 June 2026.

The CSIPM Data Working Group is coordinating a collective input to this consultation. Join the Working Group and share your inputs by 10 June (five days before the official deadline) so the CSIPM can consolidate a contribution. 

Join the CSIPM Data Working Group 

The post HLPE open consultation on Artificial Intelligence, digitalization and data governance for food security and nutrition appeared first on CSIPM.

Changing of the guard at Ekistica, new directors at Pacific Energy and Marinus Link.Plus movements at Vestas, Fortescue, Powerlink, EnergyCo, WestWind and AEMO.

The post Grid Connections 2026: Who’s going where and doing what in Australia’s green energy transition appeared first on Renew Economy.

Exciting news, patriots! After cancelling his OG concert, Dear Leader will now celebrate our 250th birthday with "the Greatest Rally, EVER!" featuring the "fabulous" 83-year-old Lee Greenwood and “a fine and highly dignified gentleman," himself. Also, for some reason, "prune-face" Bruce Springsteen and a gazillion A-list performers are holding two concerts to honor America's "songs that shaped us." Reviews call it "a rare gift" in music history, but they're all losers and lunatics.

Taking time off from nodding off (again) in a meeting, Trump as predicted has finally cancelled his much-hyped “Freedom 250 concert of has-beens and never-weres after almost all nine acts bailed; poor Vanilla Ice, reportedly the only, desperate act still ready to go on. The concerts were set to kick off his equally-fab-sounding Great American State Fair, a "once in a generation...State Fair like no other" - "Dive into the fun and feel the energy" - hosting carnival rides, "hands-on partner activations" from each state, and daily workshops with titles like Land & Prosperity, Family Life and Community Support, Everyday Health and Well Being with MAHA Monday, and Faith, Values, and Inspiration.

Trump was his usual chivalrous self in defeat after the concert went down in tacky flames. "We don't want singers with no talent, but big fees to put you to sleep," he wrote. "We’ve told them all to stay home." Instead, he giddily announced “a Rally to end all Rallies!" in "magnificent Washington D.C, now totally beautified." Because, "All we want is you, me, a few speakers, and the Greatest Music ever played, the same Music you have listened to for years!" it will feature die-hard Lee Greenwood (again), with "one of the Greatest Hits of All Time," his 1984 God Bless the U.S.A, after which he will introduce "a fine and highly dignified gentleman known as President DONALD J. TRUMP!”

There's more: The "amazing" opera singer Christopher Macchio, who has just 571 listeners on Spotify, will join in. "Not since the legendary Luciano Pavarotti has there been such a voice!” bragged Trump, though Pavarotti’s family has protested his use of the opera great's songs by arguing, "The values of brotherhood and solidarity which Luciano Pavarotti expressed throughout (his) artistic career are entirely incompatible with the worldview offered by Trump.” Also, the U.S. Army Band, Armed Forces Choir and "The President’s Own United States Marine Band" will perform “all your favorite Hits." Observers say the gig "sounds lame as fuck," but MAGA fans who go to every rally "like Deadheads with less weed and more racism" will probs love it.

Amidst other glad fails - even UFC fighters have trashed him with Star Wars rants of "Darth Vader gonna get took (sic) down" - many deem a more apt celebration of America's birthday the June 4 and 5 concerts in New Jersey by Springsteen and many fellow musicians. The guest list is so vast and illustrious - among them, Bon Jovi, Jackson Browne, Rosanne Cash, Kenny Chesney, Tom Morello, Gary Clark Jr., Dion, Dropkick Murphys, Shemekia Copeland, Keb’ Mo’, Nils Lofgren, Valerie June, Darlene Love, Public Enemy, David Sancious, Tony Trischka, Sister Sadie, Mavis Staples, Trombone Shorty, Steve Van Zandt, Jimmie Vaughan, the New Breed Brass Band - it's assumed Bruce called in favors: "They were beckoned, and graciously agreed."

Springsteen and the E Street Band just wrapped their Land of Hope and Dreams Tour - "No Kings" plastered below - in Philadelphia. Celebrating "hope over fear," it featured his most fiery political songs: Born in the USA, Death To My Hometown, No Surrender, Darkness On the Edge of Town, Streets of Minneapolis, Dylan's Chimes of Freedom. The two new concerts, titled Music America: The Songs that Shaped Us, are likewise unabashedly rabble-rousing. Held in Springsteen's Jersey backyard at Monmouth University, they will also launch the new Bruce Springsteen Center for American Music, which aims to preserve the Boss' legacy and offer "a journey through American music history" with ongoing exhibitions, archives and workshops.

This week's concerts, says Robert Santelli, "reflect everything the Center stands for" - the power of "a rich and diverse treasury of American music (to) bring people together (and) the inspiration to think about our shared history in divisive times." Casting a wide and joyful net, artists perform landmark songs from American music - blues, bluegrass, Native, rock, hip-hop, folk, jazz, country, gospel. Tickets are reasonably priced for an intimate venue, and brief narration before each performance offers context to the artist, song, and genre. Thursday night reviews praised "a magical, once-in-a-lifetime moment in music history" and a nod to "how powerful music is in telling our nation’s story." Both concerts sold out.

Bruce and the Dropkick Murphys' rousing rendition of American Land, based on a 19th-century poem by an immigrant steelworker, which asks and celebrates those "who will make his home in the American Land." In brief, all of us.

The McNicholases, the Posalskis, the Smiths, Zerillis, too
The Blacks, the Irish, Italians, the Germans and the Jews
They come across the water a thousand miles from home
With nothing in their bellies but the fire down below.

See on Instagram

For Immediate Release

June 5, 2026

Contact: 

Blake@sunstonestrategies.com, 310-894-6690

 

Phillips 66 Carson Refinery Site Remediation Estimated at Nearly $1 Billion

 

New report reveals Carson community at risk of shouldering millions in cleanup costs

 

Carson, Calif. — A new report from the Asian Pacific Environmental Network puts the cost of cleanup and remediation at the Phillips 66 refinery in Carson at up to $910 million — with no clear plan for who will pay. Advocates say SB 1259 (Blakespeare), the Refinery Transparency Act, would help protect communities from being blindsided by cleanup costs when refineries close.

The Phillips 66 Los Angeles refinery closed its doors at the end of 2025, leaving behind 100 years worth of contamination that could take an estimated 30-40 years to remediate.

“When refineries close in California, they do not give communities like Carson comprehensive plans, timelines, or cost estimates for how to clean-up the mess they’ve left behind. Californians need transparent disclosures so that local communities can plan for the future, and to help make sure that taxpayers are not left paying the clean-up bill.”– Katherine Chu, Asian Pacific Environmental Network (APEN)

Key findings from the report include: 

• Cleanup at the Carson site could cost up to $910 million, based on EPA cleanup benchmarks, California remediation guidance, and comparable refinery cleanup cases.
• Phillips 66 has publicly disclosed only $357 million in estimated decommissioning costs, with an even smaller share – roughly $129 million based on acreage – likely for the Carson refinery site. This leaves a potential funding gap of up to $781 million for the Carson site alone.
• If Phillips 66 doesn’t cover the entire cost of cleanup and remediation, California taxpayers and the City of Carson could be on the hook. 

The report shows similar cases of frontline communities being forced to foot the cost of gas and oil site cleanup, including Carson’s previous Shell Carousel tract where improper cleanup of the former 50-acre tank farm resulted in over $300 million of legal and remediation settlements. The estimates in the report cover the Carson refinery site alone – cleanup costs for both the Carson and Wilmington sites would be far higher.

Read the full report here.

To schedule an interview with the report author or speak to a Carson community member, contact Blake Marquez, Blake@sunstonestrategies.com, 310-897-6690.

###

 

Download the Report

The post Phillips 66 Carson refinery site remediation estimated at nearly $1 billion appeared first on Asian Pacific Environmental Network.

Across North America, a growing wave of data centre development is putting new pressure on electricity systems. The International Energy Agency (IEA) projects that data centres will account for nearly half of US electricity demand growth between now...

Registered nurses at KPC Health’s Orange County Global Medical Center in Santa Ana, Calif. voted overwhelmingly on Thursday, June 4 to join California Nurses Association (CNA), an affiliate of National Nurses United (NNU), the nation’s largest and fastest-growing registered nurse (RN) union. The nurses voted 91 percent in favor of joining the union.

Why factory farms are a major threat to food safety Anthony Lacey June 5, 2026

Every week, federal investigators track between 17 and 36 foodborne illness outbreaks that can cause extreme sickness and even death. Industrial livestock farming, also known as factory farming, is a main cause.

In 2019, the most recent year with complete data, the U.S. saw almost 10 million cases of foodborne illnesses, including almost 1,000 deaths, from E. coli, salmonella and other bacteria, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 

The harmful bacteria can contaminate raw produce like cantaloupe, lettuce, and onions or more highly processed foods like meat, poultry and ice cream.

One cause is the way large factory farms operate, including their management of the waste they generate, says the Food and Drug Administration.

Livestock waste can harbor many different types of bacteria, including a strain of E. coli that is particularly dangerous for humans. When bacteria from animal waste contaminate nearby fruit and vegetable crops, the people who eat them can get seriously sick. 

Bacteria in wildlife waste and human waste sludge can also contaminate food. 

Stronger FDA policies could reduce the number of foodborne illness outbreaks and better protect the health of us all. 

Animal waste is more than a nuisance

Factory farms are large, concentrated facilities and feedlots that produce livestock for meat, eggs and dairy products. 

In the U.S., over 90% of farm animals are raised in these facilities. If you have eaten meat in this country, you’ve almost certainly consumed some from a factory farm. Hundreds, sometimes thousands, of cattle, swine, chickens, turkeys and other animals are raised in large buildings called barns, or open feedlots for cattle.

Lots of animals produce lots of manure. EWG found in 2020 that the animals in Iowa’s largest livestock facilities alone produced nearly 70 times the amount of fecal waste Iowa’s entire 3 million human population generated in the same period. 

That waste is more than an inconvenience. It contains hormones, heavy metals and bacteria, including fecal coliform, E. coli, salmonella and listeria. It can also contain pathogens like giardia and pharmaceuticals such as antibiotics.

How factory farms can cause foodborne illness

There are two main ways bacteria from factory farms ends up on the fruits and vegetables we eat. 

First, manure can contaminate the irrigation canals that run past feedlots, either by washing directly into the water or by blowing in contaminated dust particles from the feedlot through the air. 

Without knowing whether the water is contaminated, produce farmers use it in the canals to irrigate their crops or mix it with pesticides before spraying it on crops.

Second, bacteria-laden dust from feedlots can drift onto nearby fields and settle directly on crops. Though this pathway seems to be less common, it is especially alarming, because dust particles can travel many miles through the air.

Once harvested, contaminated produce can get shipped almost anywhere in the U.S. and beyond – then sold and eaten.

Deadly E. coli outbreak in Arizona

A striking example of how a factory farm likely triggered a major outbreak: the deadly 2018 E. coli contamination of romaine lettuce from Yuma County, Ariz. Five people died and many more were sickened after eating lettuce grown in the region. 

The FDA found that the E. coli strain that originated on lettuce from 36 fields on 23 farms was also found in an irrigation canal near one cattle feedlot: McElhaney Feedyard, a facility located close to much of Yuma County’s lettuce farmland. 

A pool of cattle manure and wastewater at the feedlot sat within just a few feet of an irrigation canal (represented by the blue line), creating a contamination risk. (See Image 1.) 

Image 1. A manure and wastewater pit that is very close to an irrigation canal at McElhaney Feedyard

Source: EWG, from Department of Agriculture National Agriculture Imagery Program, 2021 imagery

The problem isn’t limited to factory farms in Arizona.

It’s a risk wherever these facilities exist, especially in states that grow much of the produce consumed in the U.S. – like California, where farmers cultivate more than one-third of the nation’s vegetables and three-fourths of its fruit. 

A recent EWG analysis found that 42% of California’s large factory farms are located within a quarter-mile of a waterway commonly used for irrigation. Some are only feet away. One cattle feedlot was situated just 35 feet from a canal. 

What the FDA can do to make food safer

Protecting yourself is harder than it sounds. Bacteria can contaminate both organic and conventionally grown produce. And studies show that washing lettuce, for example, does not significantly reduce E. coli – so even careful consumers can still get sick.

That’s why it’s so important for the FDA to protect people from bacterial outbreaks on food.

A practical first step would be to require tests of irrigation water to catch harmful bacteria and prevent it from getting onto crops.

After a series of E. coli outbreaks linked to leafy greens in the early 2000s, the FDA was required to set water safety standards for farms. While these rules, finalized in 2024, require farmers to assess the risks to their irrigation water, they don’t mandate water testing. This gap in oversight leaves farmers to mitigate their risk themselves.  

Other federal agencies, such as the Environmental Protection Agency, could also more rigorously monitor farm manure management.

Foodborne illness is not inevitable. It’s a public health problem the FDA and EPA have the tools to address, preventing millions of illnesses and saving lives.

Areas of Focus Food & Water Farming & Agriculture Factory Farms Farm Pollution California Midwest Authors Anne Schechinger Sarah Reinhardt, MPH, RDN June 9, 2026

A deadly disease. A merciless hunt. With dangers around every corner, Wyoming’s wolves need our protection.

This article In Japan, raves and tea parties become sites of protest was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

Shinjuku Station in Tokyo is the busiest railway station in the world. On a given day, roughly 2.7 million passengers pass through. On March 29, they were joined by a stream of ravers, who danced while holding signs opposing the genocide in Palestine, xenophobia, queerphobia, fascism and war.

Under the slogan “Drop Bass Not Bombs,” thousands danced and waved glow sticks while demanding the resignation of Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, due to the government’s escalating push towards rearmament and close relationship with U.S. President Donald Trump.

The action was organized by Protest Rave, a group of progressive DJs and participants in Japan’s club culture. It’s one of several ways that artists in the country are using their creativity to make people pay more attention to politics. The public demonstration stands out in the country where societal norms and deference toward the government make mass protests and open political debate rare.

#newsletter-block_f8ad4623b7974b81b823d717a6ec7c1c { background: #ececec; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_f8ad4623b7974b81b823d717a6ec7c1c #mc_embed_signup_front input#mce-EMAIL { border-color:#000000 !important; color: #000000 !important; } Sign Up for our Newsletter

We’ll send you a weekly email with the latest articles.

Mars89, a DJ and founding member of Protest Rave, explained the idea behind the action.

“The majority of the Japanese people, they’re not interested in politics,” he said. “We want people to know what’s happening.” 

The choice to hold the protest in the middle of a big city was deliberate, he said. “I hope some people passing on the street when we have the protest start to think about it.”

Artists break the silence

While cultural aversion to  public protest remains a challenge for activists in Japan, the government’s recent efforts to remilitarize have provoked an uptick in political demonstrations.

Right-wing Prime Minister Takaichi, who espouses Japanese nationalism and opposes same-sex marriage, is pushing to revise the country’s pacifist constitution, which was written after World War II to restrict Japan’s participation in war and military alliances. Already she has succeeded at scrapping a longstanding ban on the export of lethal weapons. Much of Japan’s rearmament flows from its relationship with the United States, in which Japan is used as an economic and military foothold for U.S. interests in the Asia-Pacific region. Takaichi has worked to maintain this relationship and build a bond with Trump, even as Trump has insulted Japan.

In response to Takaichi’s militaristic positions and her close relationship with U.S. imperialism, tens of thousands of Japanese people have participated in antiwar protests in recent months. 

A budding protest movement in Japan demonstrates against the right-wing government’s plan for rearmament. (Mars89)

Protest Rave has been publishing interviews from the March 29 action on its Instagram page. Many ravers discuss how the public and inviting character of the rave makes it easier for people to feel they can engage in political discussions and voice their opposition to the government.

One regular participant of Protest Rave is alternative musician Haru Nemuri. “Artistic work exists within the freedom and diversity of expression, which is inherently political,” Nemuri said. “If you ignore politics while being an artist, you’re basically a free rider of that freedom.”

In April, Nemuri began holding “Guerilla Afternoon Tea,” a pop-up action in the form of a public tea party where people are encouraged to connect in community and talk about politics. She did not mince words about Japan’s drive towards rearmament.

“It’s infuriating that the Japanese government has never properly reckoned with its past wrongdoings, and is now reverting to becoming the Japanese Empire all over again,” she said. “The relationship between America and Japan since World War II has always been like that of master and a slave — Trump, the naked king, and Takaichi, the naked slave, are the perfect mirror of that relationship.”

The roots of pacifism

Takaichi is one of the most popular political leaders in the world, reflecting a phenomenon of rising nationalism in Japan. Despite this popularity, her desire to formally revise the country’s constitution has sparked controversy. Many Japanese people hold a strong attachment to the 1947 constitution.

Prior to the war, Japan was a fast-growing empire. The Japanese military, in its quest for expansion, committed atrocities against neighboring countries, including the abduction of thousands of Korean women into sexual slavery and the massacre of Chinese civilians. One of the most horrific aspects of Imperial Japan was Unit 731, an initiative by the empire to conduct biological and chemical experiments on thousands of prisoners of war from many nations.

The nation’s military defeat and the aftermath of the war led Japanese society to rethink the country’s imperial ambitions. The horrific nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the U.S. left Japanese people with a unique understanding of the violence and cruelty that war produces, and many people adopted pacifist attitudes. Antiwar and anti-nuclear sentiments can be found in some of Japan’s most internationally recognized cultural exports, including the original Godzilla franchise and the works of esteemed animator Hayao Miyazaki.

The Japanese constitution, written a year after the bombings, reflects the cultural shift that followed the war. Article 9 states: “Aspiring sincerely to an international peace based on order, the Japanese people forever renounce war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of force as means of settling international disputes. In order to accomplish the aim of the preceding paragraph, land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained. The right of belligerency of the state will not be recognized.”

Takaichi has targeted Article 9, arguing that it should be formally revised. While amending the constitution has proved difficult due to public outrage, the Japanese government already reinterpreted the constitution decades ago to establish and maintain a modern military, under the guise that these forces exist solely for defensive purposes.

Advocates for rearmament also point to the fact that the constitution was shaped by the U.S. at a time when allied forces were militarily occupying Japan. It’s true that following the war the United States used its own military power to shape the new institutions of Japanese society to align with U.S. interests. However, those in Japan who raise the U.S. occupation to justify revising the constitution and rearmament are aligned with the country’s conservative ruling party, which has historically denied or even justified the atrocities carried out by the Japanese Empire.

#support-block_0bd963db2e1c91227ceaff8b6572d483 { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

Waging Nonviolence depends on reader support. Make a donation today!

Donate

Nationalists on social media have also tried to discredit the country’s antiwar protests as not authentically Japanese, pointing to the presence of expats and signs written in English. But as Mars89 sees it, connecting with movements and activists beyond those in Japan is something to embrace.

“We were inspired by the many protests in other countries: the United States, the United Kingdom and Korea as well,” he said. “I think we should unite worldwide. We need to find some way to unite with the protests in other countries.”

Nemuri has also been inspired by movements in other countries and is thinking about how to use her art to foster a stronger culture of political discussion in her country.

“Last year, I saw [Zohran] Mamdani win an election, and their team took to the streets with signs saying, ‘Let’s talk politics,’” Nemuri said. “I’m not a politician, but a musician, and I think I can expand this towards more artistic activities. Drawing from [German philosopher Jürgen] Habermas, I’d love to bring the public sphere, the coffee house, out onto the streets where literally anyone can join.”

This article In Japan, raves and tea parties become sites of protest was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

From time to time, we announce housekeeping items that cover various changes in the Skeptical Science (SkS) web site. Today, it's an important one for all people who are posting comments on our articles: an update to the Comments Policy.

Reasons for the Updates

The Comments Policy is an important document at SkS: not only does it provide guidance for the behaviour of commenters, but it also provides guidance to the moderators on how to deal with comment threads that are starting to go off the rails. The moderation team strives to apply a reasonably uniform level of moderation, and the Comments Policy is the set of rules we follow.

We have been discussing some updates internally over the past few weeks, and now it is time to have the changes go live. The changes have been prompted by a few recent comments that started to use AI to generate text. (We'll stick with the formal definition of AI as "Artificial Intelligence", although I am sure that readers will have their own favorite interpretation.) Moderators have been asking commenters to limit their use of AI, but there is nothing in the previous Comments Policy related to AI. That is now changing.

Essentially all of the previous Comments Policy (archived here) is still in force. There are a few changes in wording, and the order has changed slightly, but if it was in the old Comments Policy, it is in the new one. The updated Comments Policy groups the various policies under six headings, as follows:

• Purpose
• All comments must be on topic
• Speak for yourself and back up your argument
• Civil Conduct
• Account creation and usage
• Summary

The new material falls under the "Speak for yourself and back  up your argument" heading. The main text in that section talks about the  importance of providing links to relevant information, explaining what the reader should find at those sources, etc. SkS is about the science of climate change, and scientific discussion expects references to relevant material and proper citation of sources. Two items from the old Comments Policy are located here: "No sloganeering", and "No link or picture only". But there are two new items of importance, related to copying large blocks of text or images from other sources. The first item covers copying from regular sources such as journals, reports, web pages, etc. The second specifically covers the use of AI-generated text.

Using AI in comments

In essence, when you use AI to generate text and want to add it to a comment, you are no longer speaking for yourself - you are quoting a different source. Proper scientific citation rules require that you indicate that you are quoting a different source, and provide a reference to what that source is. To quote from the updated policy: "Quoting or copying material from other sources without a proper citation constitutes plagiarism, which is not allowed."

The use of AI is not banned, but we are placing strict limits on how it can be used. Full disclosure: after we wrote the new sections of the Comments Policy. we asked the Gemini AI to suggest if there were options to improve the sequence of the various items. Gemini suggested grouping the items into several categories. We had already grouped some items into the "Speak for yourself and back  up your argument" category, but the remaining items were still in a simple list. Gemini suggested grouping the remaining items into a few categories. In the end, we went with different categories (and labels for the categories), but we did find the Gemini suggestion useful.

....and this demonstrates a reasonable use of AI: ask it for help, look at its suggestions, but apply your own judgement to the results. The SkS Comments Policy is an SkS product, and we need to be willing to stand behind it. It is the voice of SkS, speaking to all our readers.

Small change in wording

The astute reader will  notice one key change in the Comments Policy, compared to the old one. In the old policy, we referred to "global warming". In the new one, we refer to "climate change". The second phrase is more all-encompassing with respect to climate science, and makes more sense in the broader view covered here at SkS. Before anyone gets their knickers in a knot over this change, we suggest they read the "Global Warming vs. Climate Change" rebuttal that sits at the number 89 spot on our Global Warming and Climate Change Myths list.

One last point: although "Moderation complaints are always off-topic",  this is one blog post where limited discussion of moderation will be allowed. Behave yourselves, though.

And now, a copy of the full new Comments Policy:

Purpose

The purpose of the discussion threads is to allow notification and correction of errors in the article, and to permit clarification of related points. Though we believe the only genuine debate on the science of climate change is that which occurs in the scientific literature, we welcome genuine discussion as both an aid to understanding and a means of correcting our inadvertent errors.  To facilitate genuine discussion, we have a zero tolerance approach to trolling and sloganeering. To that end:

All comments must be on topic

Comments are on topic if they draw attention to possible errors of fact or interpretation in the main article, or if they discuss the immediate implications of the facts discussed in the main article. However, general discussions of climate change not explicitly related to the details of the main article are always off topic. Moderation complaints are always off topic and will be deleted. To expand on this requirement:

• Make comments in the most appropriate thread.  Some comments, while strictly on topic, may relate to issues discussed in more detail in some other thread.  Extended discussion of those points should be carried out in the more appropriate thread, with link backs to reference the discussion as needed.  Moderator's directions to move discussion to a more appropriate thread should always be followed.
• Comments should avoid excessive repetition. Discussions which circle back on themselves and involve endless repetition of points already discussed do not help clarify relevant points. They are merely tiresome to participants and a barrier to readers. If moderators believe you are being excessively repetitive, they will advise you as such, and any further repetition will be treated as being off topic.
• No copying and pasting earlier comments. Comments repeated from earlier comments (or from other websites) will be moderated. However, short excerpts from earlier comments are accepted if making an on-topic point, preferably with a hyperlink. Note that with each comment, the date/time is a hyperlink. If you link to this URL, clicking on the link will take you directly to that part of the webpage.
• No spamming. Spamming will result in deletion of comments and suspension of the account without warning.

Speak for yourself and back up your argument

When you are posting comments, it is expected that you are speaking for yourself and are willing to back up your argument with relevant information. We encourage you to provide links to relevant scientific papers and reports, images available on the Internet, and sources of information that provide additional detail regarding the points you want to make. You need to explain in your comment why such sources are relevant, and what a reader should expect to find in that source. You are the one making the argument, and the reader should not have to spend large amounts of time trying to figure out your point. As a consequence of this policy, we also state the following:

• No sloganeering.  Comments consisting of simple assertion of a myth already debunked by one of the main articles, and which contain no relevant counter argument or evidence from the peer reviewed literature constitutes trolling rather than genuine discussion. As such they will be deleted. If you think our debunking of one of those myths is in error, you are welcome to discuss that on the relevant thread, provided you give substantial reasons for believing the debunking is in error.  It is asked that you do not clutter up threads by responding to comments that consist just of slogans.
• No link or picture only. Any link or picture should be accompanied by text summarizing both the content of the link or picture, and showing how it is relevant to the topic of discussion. Failure to do both of these things will result in the comment being considered off topic.
• No cutting and pasting of large blocks of text or images from other sources (journal articles, reports, web pages, etc.).  It is reasonable to include one or two paragraphs or images in your comment from a scientific source such as a peer-reviewed paper or report, but this should only represent a portion of your comment.  Provide a link to or a clear identification of the original source - this is the standard approach to scientific citation. Quoting or copying material from other sources without a proper citation constitutes plagiarism, which is not allowed. The reader must be able to find the original source, in order to verify the material. If the source you want to refer to has a lot of material that you think is relevant, provide a summary of what you want the reader to see and provide a link so that the reader can easily access the full material. If you are unwilling or unable to read the source and provide a summary, then there is little reason to think that the source is on-topic or relevant. Moderators may delete such posts as off-topic.
• The above ban on pasting large blocks of text also applies to AI-generated content. If you want to use AI to help you understand the topic, then that is your choice. Keep in mind, however, that AI sources are energy-intensive and you should ask yourself if that cost really provides a value-added contribution to the conversation. AI-generated content should be kept to a minimum, identified as such, with indications of the source and key words or questions used to feed it. As is the case for any other links, images, quotes, etc., provide a summary of the AI content to demonstrate that you understand it and see it as relevant. When you add AI-generated content to your comment, you are no longer speaking for yourself - you are quoting someone (something?) else, and need to cite the source.

Civil conduct

All participants are expected to conduct themselves in a civil manner. More specifically:

• No accusations of deception.  Any accusations of deception, fraud, dishonesty or corruption will be deleted. This applies to both sides. You may critique a person's methods but not their motives.
• No ad hominem attacks. Personally attacking other users gets us no closer to understanding the science. For example, comments containing the words 'religion' and 'conspiracy' tend to get moderated. Comments using labels like 'alarmist' and 'denier' as derogatory terms are usually skating on thin ice.
• No politics. Rants about politics, religion, faith, ideology or one world governments will be deleted. Occasional blog posts on Skeptical Science touch on issues intimately related to politics.  For those posts this rule may be relaxed, but only if explicitly stated at the end of the blogpost.
• No ALL CAPS. You can't have a civil, constructive discussion if you're shouting.
• No profanity or inflammatory tone. Again, constructive discussion is difficult when overheated rhetoric or profanity is flying around.
• No cyber stalking. Posting personal details of another user results in your account being banned from Skeptical Science.
• No dogpiling.  In the interests of civility and to enable people to properly express their opinions, we discourage 'piling on'. If a comment already has a response, consider carefully whether you are adding anything interesting before also responding.  If a participant appears to be being 'dog piled', the moderator may designate one or two people from each side of the debate as the primary disputants and require that no other people respond until further notified. On topic comments on other matters not being discussed by the primary disputants will still be welcome.

Account creation and usage

• No multiple identities.  Posting comments at Skeptical Science should use only one registered screen name. Use of more than one account will result in all accounts being banned.
• You are not allowed to use two different identities at the same time.
• You are not allowed to create a second identity to replace an identity that has had its posting rights revoked due to an inability or unwillingness to follow the Comments Policy.
• Commenters must register a valid email address. To register and confirm a user account at Skeptical Science requires a valid email address. 

Summary

Please note that posting on Skeptical Science is a privilege, not a right. We try to avoid harsh application of the comments policy in the interests of a free flowing discussion, but expect your cooperation in return. If that cooperation is not forthcoming, moderators will resort to a very strict application of the comments policy to your posts, and if persisted with, it will result in deletion of your posts, or the suspension of your posting privileges. If we all followed these guidelines in any discussion, perhaps the world would be a calmer and more constructive place.

The Comment Policy page was already updated on June 4, 2026 in preparation for this housekeeping blog post's publication on June 5. Any comments posted after this announcement will be moderated based on the new Comment Policy.

On June 3, 2026, Audubon gathered conservation leaders, community advocates, and supporters at its annual Environmental Leadership Awards Benefit in Greenwich, honoring Roberta Barbieri with the...

“Management has highlighted [transmission constraints] as a risk factor ... citing behind-the-meter as a potential solution,” said Jefferies equity analyst Julien Dumoulin-Smith.

Ocean and coastal creatures are being put at risk by the spills, noise, dredging and shipping associated with new offshore oil and gas infrastructure, says a new report by a group of environmental NGOs.

The report by 12 environmental groups analysed planned new offshore oil and gas blocks covering 430,000 square kilometres – an area the size of Sweden – in 11 countries.

Blocks in countries such as Kenya, Indonesia and Australia overlap with some of the planet’s hotspots for marine biodiversity, home to mangroves, coral reefs, sea turtles, sharks and whales.

Oil and gas expansion is advancing in spite of the legal protections already in place, the report says, with a third of the area being licensed overlapping with marine and coastal protected areas.

• Jun 4, 2026 Energy China’s carbon emissions rise again as more clean power is wasted The economic powerhouse burned more coal and gas in the first quarter of 2026, despite record wind and solar build-out Read more
• Jun 3, 2026 Finance Investor climate group closes down, blaming “limits” of shareholder activism Canadian campaign group Investors for Paris Compliance shut in May, saying efforts to push companies to tackle climate change have become less effective Read more
• Jun 2, 2026 Energy Santa Marta process can confront trade protection for fossil fuels, experts say Academics at the first fossil fuel phase-out summit urged governments to recognise investor protection treaties as a barrier to the energy transition Read more

“It is alarming to see the research findings and the sheer scale of fossil fuel expansion trajectories threatening the health and future of our shared ocean,” said Tyson Miller, executive director of Earth Insight, one of the environmental NGOs involved in the report.

At the first conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in Santa Marta, around 60 countries floated the idea of creating “fossil fuel-free zones”, which would seek to place limits on coal, oil and gas in areas where development would lead to severe social and environmental harm.

As part of the landmark Kunming-Montreal biodiversity deal, governments have also pledged to protect at least 30% of the planet’s land and marine ecosystems by 2030. This could be used as an opportunity to limit oil and gas expansion in sensitive areas, Miller said.

The report says the findings “reinforce the need for governments, financial institutions and companies to stop funding and supporting offshore oil and gas expansion”, and calls for the creation of fossil fuel-free zones in “high-value marine and coastal areas”.

Oil bidding in biodiversity hotspots

As one of the case studies, Kenya — which is set to host the Our Ocean Conference in Mombasa later this month — has opened 50 offshore oil and gas blocks for bidding in the Lamu Basin, one of East Africa’s marine biodiversity hotspots.

These blocks overlap with all the region’s mangroves and coral reefs, the report says, which provide nursery habitats for fish, sea turtles and the vulnerable dugong.

These ecosystems are already under severe stress from climate change-related ocean heating and increased water acidity and could now face seismic surveys, offshore drilling, dredging, increased shipping traffic, oil spills, chemical discharge and underwater noise pollution.

The government estimates that oil production will start by 2026, aligning with “global best practices”, and has said the Lamu basin has vast “untapped potential”. The country is expected to open bidding for the first 10 blocks by September.

Muturi wa Kamau, network coordinator for the Kenya Oil and Gas Working Group, said in a statement that the country “is preparing to open ecologically sensitive areas for fossil fuel exploration” while positioning itself as a leader in ocean diplomacy.

“The question is: at what cost are we willing to risk these fragile ecosystems and the livelihoods of coastal communities who have depended on them for generations?” Kamau said.

Australia’s Otway Basin

After a four-year pause, Australia — which will act as co-president of the COP31 climate summit — resumed offshore exploration in the Otway Basin last year, with American energy firm ConocoPhillips among the operators approved for exploratory drilling off the country’s southern coast.

The sites under exploration are as close as one kilometre to a series of marine reserves known as sanctuaries for pygmy blue whales, who travel thousands of kilometres to reproduce in those waters. Orange roughy, a deep-sea fish that can live for over 140 years, may also be harmed.

In total, the report analysed new LNG export projects in Argentina, Alaska, Mexico and Tanzania, as well as expanded offshore oil and gas licensing in Australia, Cameroon, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Norway and Trinidad and Tobago.

The post Offshore oil and gas expansion threatens key marine ecosystems, report warns appeared first on Climate Home News.

Although Florida is at “normal risk” for long-term energy adequacy, the unit near Orlando needs to remain online partly to help serve potential data centers in the state, the department said.

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed. 
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This week UK proposes new emissions target

‘ON COURSE’: The UK government has proposed reducing the country’s greenhouse gas emissions to 87% below 1990 levels by 2040, reported the Associated Press. The newswire cited scientists saying that the goal “puts the UK on course to meet its 2050 net-zero target”. To meet this target, the UK would “need to invest around £880bn over 25 years…but doing so would yield benefits worth £1,620bn”, according to an in-depth analysis of the plans by  Carbon Brief.

UPCOMING ‘FLASHPOINT’: The Financial Times noted that, for the target to become “legally binding”, it must be approved by parliament. While the UK’s previous carbon budget “received cross-party support”, this time the proposal is “expected to become a flashpoint among lawmakers”, it added, with both the Conservatives and Reform pledging to “scrap” net-zero policies.

DRIVING FORCE: Separately, a new report by consultancy Confederation of British Industry (CBI) Economics has valued the UK’s “net-zero economy” at more than £100bn a year, reported the Guardian. It added that, by a broad measure, the UK energy transition supports 1.1m jobs and provides “nearly 4% of the UK’s economic output”.

US ‘dismantling’ oceans data

SYSTEMS OFFLINE: The Trump administration is “dismantling” a “$368m deep-ocean observation system” that, among other things, allows scientists to monitor the ocean currents that affect the global climate and understand how the “ocean is absorbing greenhouse gases from the atmosphere”, said the New York Times. Bloomberg reported that Trump’s efforts to close the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), a key climate science research institution, has been “temporarily blocked” by a judge. 

RULE ROLLBACK: The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), an independent body that regulates US securities markets, has proposed repealing the climate-disclosure rule, which “requires some public companies to report their greenhouse gas emissions and the risks they face from global warming”, said the Associated Press. The Trump administration also announced plans to allocate $700m to support “clean, beautiful coal” power and export infrastructure, said BBC News.

Around the world

• EU EXEMPTIONS: The EU will allow member states to breach the bloc’s fiscal rules to “cope with high energy prices stoked by the Iran war”, as long as the measures they use help “accelerate the transition away from fossil fuels”, reported Bloomberg.
• SLOW SPENDING: The German government has only paid out €24bn of the €37bn it was “supposed to disburse” in 2025 from a special fund for infrastructure and “climate neutrality”, reported Clean Energy Wire. 
• URGENT WARNING: UN secretary-general António Guterres said a likely upcoming El Niño weather event must be treated as the “urgent climate warning it is”, said Al Jazeera.
• HOEKSTRA ON COP: The outcomes of many of the most recent COPs have been “underwhelming”, EU climate commissioner Wopke Hoekstra has said, according to Reuters. COPs should be supplemented by “smaller groups…who are willing ​to move faster”, he added.

3,400

The number of excess deaths across India caused by a single day of extreme heat, according to coverage in the Hindustan Times of a new study.

30,000

Excess deaths caused if the extreme heat lasts five days.

Latest climate research

• In a 1.5C warmer world, the timing of floods will shift by more than seven days across half of the world’s landmass | Nature Communications
• Temperature and rainfall together account for more than 13% of methane generated from landfills in Incheon, South Korea | Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics
• The postponed International Maritime Organisation “net-zero framework” could increase biofuel use in shipping to 40% by 2050 | Nature Energy

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

China’s carbon dioxide emissions grew by 2% in the first quarter of 2026 due to a rise in “wasted” wind and solar generation, according to new analysis for Carbon Brief. However, emissions remain below their March 2024 peak, it added.

Spotlight Why China’s solar boom is slowing down

China made headlines in 2025 for installing record levels of solar. But in 2026, new capacity is expected to be lower than last year’s figures. 

This week, Carbon Brief examines what is behind China’s lower 2026 solar additions. 

Solar power has been a major element of China’s renewables buildout since the mid-2010s. 

The country installed 315 gigawatts (GW) of new capacity in 2025, adding more than half of all new solar globally. The year before, it added 277GW.

But the picture in 2026 to date is very different. Installations in March fell 56% year-on-year to 9GW, while new capacity in April totalled 10GW, a 79% drop compared to a year earlier, according to Carbon Brief’s analysis of official data.

Domestic uncertainty

The lower pace in 2026 had been anticipated by analysts.

In previous years, massive solar installations were driven by strong policy support for renewables, including a fixed-price tariff for generators.

In February 2025, the government announced that new solar and wind projects would instead be financed through a new “contract for difference” (CfD)-style system. 

Under the new system, power from a certain amount of renewable capacity will be purchased for a fixed “strike price”, which to date has been far lower than previous guaranteed tariffs. Further projects will need to secure their own contracts on the open market.

While the new system is posing challenges for developers in the short term, it is part of a longer-term shift towards market-driven pricing for renewables, which has already made them cheaper than coal.  

The change led to a rush of new project installations ahead of the June 2025 cut-off date, so that they could fall under the old fixed-price regime.

New solar additions totalled 45GW in April 2025 and 93GW in May 2025, before falling to 14GW in June 2025, according to Carbon Brief analysis of government data.

Additions also spiked in December, in both 2024 and 2025, as developers raced to meet completion deadlines including those under the 14th five-year plan.   

Some reports have attributed the precipitous drop this year to falling demand for solar in China.

But this is a “major oversimplification”, David Fishman, principal at energy consultancy the Lantau Group, wrote on LinkedIn.

The real challenge, he said, is that “developers and banks [are] still figuring out how to finance and build projects without policy-backed revenue guarantees”.

Yang Biqing, energy analyst for Asia at thinktank Ember, agrees, telling Carbon Brief that the new CfD-style system has created “greater uncertainty” for developers, compounded by fierce competition and a growing push for “consolidation” in the industry.

The government set a target for 200GW of new solar and wind capacity in 2026. 

Fishman told Carbon Brief that this will be “difficult” for the government to achieve, though not impossible. Current levels of solar additions – reaching perhaps 120GW for the year – plus an “ambitious” 80GW of new wind power, could help China to hit the target, he said.

Others are more bullish. The China Photovoltaic Industry Association forecasts 180-240GW of new solar in 2026.

But few believe additions will match the breakneck pace of 2025. 

“China’s solar industry is no longer a story of capacity expansion”, said Yang, with officials now “increasingly” focused on integrating current generation into the grid. 

Soaring exports

Meanwhile, China’s solar exports are still going strong.

China exported almost 1.2m tonnes of solar cells in April 2026, according to Reuters. Although down from a record high in March, it represented a 60% rise year-on-year, added the newswire.

This signals solar’s attractiveness globally in the face of rising energy prices caused by the Iran-US conflict, analysts have said. 

High demand for panels has been reported across several continents, including Europe, Asia and Africa. 

For example, in the Philippines, the conflict is “driving” solar uptake, one analyst told the Associated Press, adding:

“People want solar and people want solar now.”

A version of this article is also available on the Carbon Brief website.

Watch, read, listen

EL NIÑO IMPACTS: An interactive piece from BBC News described how the forecasted “super” El Niño could impact global climate and weather in the coming months.

‘CAUTIONARY TALE’: Two researchers wrote in Climate Home News that “Indonesia’s failing Just Energy Transition Partnership is a cautionary tale”.

‘CULTURE WAR’: Time magazine spoke to London mayor Sadiq Khan about how he “survived the climate culture war”.

Coming up

• 8 June: World Ocean Day
• 8-18 June: Bonn climate talks, Bonn, Germany 
• 11 June: Climate Adaptation Innovation in Latin America and the Caribbean webinar, online

Pick of the jobs

• The New York Times, climate policy correspondent | Salary: $124,980-$160,000. Location: Washington DC
• Regulatory Assistance Project, associate, electricity systems and electrification | Salary: €50,000-€60,000. Location: Madrid and remote
• Future Energy Networks, head of policy | Salary: £75,000-£100,000. Location: London and remote

DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

The post DeBriefed 5 June 2026: UK eyes 2040 emissions cut | US ‘dismantling’ oceans research | China’s solar slump appeared first on Carbon Brief.

As the world observes World Environment Day 2026, global attention is increasingly focused on the urgent need for climate action and environmental protection. This year’s theme, “Inspired by Nature. For Climate. For Our Future,” highlights that climate action is not only about reducing carbon emissions, but also rethinking the systems that shape economies, industries, and the relationship between people and the planet. 

In the Dominican Republic, the growing environmental crisis surrounding the Hatillo Reservoir in Cotuí has become a stark example of these challenges. Today, communities once again call attention to recent water contamination, and to demand remediation measures and stronger environmental protections. Their message is clear: protecting the Hatillo Reservoir is not only an environmental priority, but a social and economic necessity.

Communities Sound the Alarm

As the largest freshwater reservoir in the Dominican Republic and the Caribbean, the Hatillo Reservoir is vital for agriculture, ecosystems, and water supply to downstream communities. Yet decades of sediment buildup and the lack of proper maintenance of its dam have contributed to worsening environmental degradation, placing public health and local livelihoods increasingly at risk.

Multiple potential sources of contamination have already been identified, including agricultural runoff and industrial activities. There are three active mines located within the watershed flowing into the reservoir. The Comité Nuevo Renacer (CNR), representing five impacted communities – La Cerca, La Piñita, Las Lagunas, Jobo Claro, and Jurungo – are fighting to be relocated away from industrial mining activities, and argue the numerous potential sources of contamination and associated cumulative environmental impacts reflect a broader trend of environmental management failures in the area. 

Testing Shows Serious Risks 

Public concern intensified in December 2025, when residents living in communities surrounding the reservoir began sharing alarming photos and videos on social media showing that the water had turned a bright green color.  In response, the Ministry of Environment carried out water testing and issued a statement attributing the change in water color to an algae bloom.

Subsequent microbiological studies conducted between December 2025 and January 2026 by the Institute of Microbiology and Parasitology (IMPA) at the Autonomous University of Santo Domingo (UASD), alongside analyses from Franja Laboratory, revealed alarming findings. The results shared publicly by journalist Nairobi Viloria on the programme “Te lo explico” and later reported by Diario Libre, identified high concentrations of bacteria associated with faecal contamination, indicating serious sanitary risks.

The studies also detected Microcystis species, a type of bacteria linked to excessive algae blooms leading to oxygen depletion that can produce potent toxins harmful to human health, livestock, and aquatic life. In addition, other types of microalgae were identified that signal nutrient-rich waters, high organic loads, and ecological imbalance. Together, these findings suggest a reservoir undergoing progressive environmental deterioration. Elevated nitrogen and phosphorus levels were also recorded contributing to harmful algae blooms.

Water in the Presa de Hatillo still has a green tint six months after the initial algae bloom. Credit: Ramón Ventura Heavy Metals Also Present 

Further analysis by Franja Labs revealed elevated concentrations of heavy metals and toxic substances, including nickel, total chromium, manganese, sulphates, and cyanide, with some exceeding established safety thresholds. These results point to multiple pollution sources, likely including mining activities, industrial discharge, agricultural runoff, and urban waste. 

Particularly concerning were nickel levels reaching up to 1,613 mg/L, far above the permissible limit of 0.1 mg/L for surface waters intended to support aquatic life. A 2025 paper published in Environmental Science and Pollution Research also reported elevated levels of copper, arsenic, antimony, aluminum, cobalt, and zinc in the Hatillo Reservoir. 

After reviewing the results tested at Franja Labs, the Dominican Association of Chemical Engineers issued a 20-page report expressing significant concerns over the water quality results and recommending continuous monitoring and testing, including of sediment at the bottom the reservoir, and reclassifying the water quality. 

The Academy of Sciences of the Dominican Republic also issued a public statement urging authorities to take immediate action. According to the statement, the greenish coloration observed in the reservoir may result from a combination of factors, including the intensive use of fertilisers and agrochemicals, the influx of organic matter, reduced water levels during prolonged drought periods, and possible discharges from nearby mining operations.

Communities Respond to Contamination

Beyond the scientific evidence, the environmental crisis surrounding the Hatillo Reservoir has sparked a strong civic response. Residents of Cotuí have mobilised to demand immediate action, voicing concern over the potential toxicity of the reservoir and its impact on health, livelihoods and the environment.

In March 2026, community members gathered nightly in the town park for candlelight vigils culminating in a large popular march on March  20th. Months later, they are still calling for environmental justice and urgent action to protect and restore the Hatillo Reservoir as a vital source of freshwater for the future.  

The post Communities in the Dominican Republic Call for Environmental Accountability on World Environment Day appeared first on Earthworks.