News Feeds

Headline News:

• “Von Der Leyen Tries To Counter Trump With €200 Million Investment In Greenland” • Ursula von der Leyen unveiled a €200 million investment package to back Greenland’s territorial integrity and counter pressure from US President Trump, who has repeatedly threatened to annex the mineral-rich island. The funds will arrive over the next two years. [Euronews]

Nuuk (Quintin Soloviev, CC BY-SA 4.0, cropped)

• “Nepal Holds A Day Of Mourning For Flash Floods Victims, As Rescue Efforts Continue” • Nepal held a day of mourning for the 1,300 known dead in the floods of August 26. Government offices lowered flags and family members carryed out mourning rituals. Rescue efforts are focused on twelve hydropower projects, where about 500 workers may still be trapped. [Euronews]
• “ICCT Says EV Operating Costs Are A Third Lower In Europe” • The International Council On Clean Transportation said in a report that in 2025 operating an electric car in Europe cost one third less than operating a car powered by internal combustion. With higher fuel costs after the US attack on Iran, the disparity could be greater in 2026. [CleanTechnica]
• “Russia Destroys Solar Plants, But Ukrainian Businesses Continue Investing Millions In Green Energy.” • Russian attacks continue to damage Ukraine’s renewable energy infrastructure. Nevertheless, Ukrainian businesses and banks are still moving ahead with millions of euros in new solar and energy storage investments. [Ukraine Business News]
• “Even More Questions Swirl Around Tesla Cybercab Rollout” • When Tesla unveiled its Cybercab robotaxi in Austin, there was a lot of media buzz. However, it seems that a lot of that buzz was the sound of heads being scratched. One of the questions being asked: How many, if any, fleet managers will stock their robotaxi fleets with Cybercabs? [CleanTechnica]

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

This summer was more than uncomfortably hot — it was record-breaking, with many countries reporting their highest average temperatures yet. Western Europe, for example, sweated through five grueling heat waves this year that sucked moisture from the soil, turned vegetation into wildfire fuel, and shrank rivers until the fish ran out of water. Emergency rooms and ambulances were overwhelmed. Early estimates found that at least 35,000 excess deaths were recorded as temperatures soared — and that only accounts for the first four heat waves in about half of the continent.

But all this, the World Health Organization said, was just a “dress rehearsal.” The coming summers are bound to be even hotter. 

Two factors in particular could push global temperatures even higher in the coming years: El Niño and human-caused climate change. El Niño is a climate pattern that brings extra warmth around the globe every two to seven years. We’re in the early stages of the current cycle, which is on track to be the strongest in a millennium. 

And then there’s the problem of Earth’s atmosphere increasingly filling with heat-trapping greenhouse gases. Addressing climate change requires countries to drastically move away from burning fossil fuels and invest in alternative technologies, such as solar and wind power. In 2015, nearly every nation in the world entered a voluntary commitment to try to limit warming to 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above preindustrial levels, with a more ambitious target of 1.5 degrees C (2.7 degrees F). But a new United Nations report released last week found that we are certain to overshoot the latter goal within the next few years. This means that even more severe heat, drought, fire, sea level rise, and glacier loss is headed our way. 

As the effects of climate change and El Niño converge, scientists predict 2027 is very likely to be the hottest year ever recorded.

“There really is nowhere that is terribly well adapted to these very extreme events,” said Kristie Ebi, a lead author of the U.N. report and professor of global health at the University of Washington. Poor countries are the most vulnerable to climate change, but even wealthy countries are failing to adapt fast enough, the U.N. report found.

Some countries have found ways to reduce suffering and death from heat, even as the climate has warmed. After a 2003 heat wave claimed 70,000 lives across Europe, countries took steps to protect people, instituting early warning systems, establishing cooling centers, and helping hospitals prepare. France made an aggressive national plan that mandated air-conditioned rooms in nursing homes, instructed health workers to check in on older and frail people during extreme heat, and developed green spaces in cities to help cool them down. 

The Paris Fire Brigade displays a heatstroke kit to Minister Laurent Nunez and the press in Paris, France, on June 28, 2026, as part of measures to protect the population against the heat wave.
Daniel Perron / Hans Lucas via AFP via Getty Images

“A given heat wave is now actually much less deadly in France than it was before,” said Christopher Callahan, a climate scientist who studies heat, health, and economics at Indiana University. Still, the world is already at 1.4 degrees C of warming and counting, and scientists expect that at some point, “the heat waves will become so intense that they will sort of outstrip that adaptation progress,” he said. If countries continue to adapt to heat at the rate they have in recent decades, it would only prevent about 1 in 10 deaths that would be expected, according to one of his studies.

Ebi said that health officials have failed to keep up with the pace of change, such as more heat waves occurring outside of the traditional mid-May to mid-September season, and have overlooked extreme scenarios such as the record-breaking heat waves seen in Western Europe this summer. “The temperatures were just so high, much higher than the heat wave early warning systems were designed to manage,” Ebi said. 

The fact that the world is struggling to adapt to the amount of warming that’s already arrived is a troubling sign. Studies in recent years have suggested that the threshold at which heat becomes hazardous for the human body is lower than previously thought, with the danger zone starting with temperatures as low as 26 degrees C (79 F) when combined with high humidity. In addition to causing heat stroke, increased temperatures can put lethal amounts of stress on organs such as the heart, lungs, and kidneys.

“When 1.5 was decided, there was an assumption that 1.5 degrees C above preindustrial [temperatures] would be relatively safe,” Ebi said. “And I would say, today, that Europe does not think 1.4 degrees is relatively safe. For most of the U.S., it does not feel like 1.4 is relatively safe.”

A heat wave pushes temperatures in Granada, Spain, past 40 degrees C on July 7, 2026.
Alex Camara / Anadolu via Getty Images

So what will it mean for the world to overshoot its climate goals? The U.N. report warns that there “are no good outcomes above 1.5 degrees C” and the updated best-case scenario for global temperatures ends up peaking at 1.8 C. It lays out potential paths to slowly bring average temperatures back down to safer levels after that peak, but that wouldn’t necessarily mean a return to present-day conditions. At that point, it may be impossible for dead coral reefs to thrive again, or for all the melted ice to be refrozen. But it could still help with extreme heat.

To prepare for hotter conditions, Ebi said it’s important to “stress test” possible disaster scenarios, just as banks and militaries conjure worst-case scenarios to see how they’d play out and better prepare for them. Otherwise, communities will be forced to discover the devastating effects of extreme heat in real time, such as when Portland, Oregon, was struck with 116-degree F temperatures during the heat dome in June 2021. Under those unprecedented conditions, roads buckled, bridges warped, the power cables on the streetcar melted, and the light rail’s overhead copper wires expanded and sagged.

“There are a million different ways in which we can imagine making our society resilient to this kind of threat,” Callahan said, “and we just aren’t there yet.” 

toolTips('.classtoolTips3','Carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and other gases that prevent heat from escaping Earth’s atmosphere. Together, they act as a blanket to keep the planet at a liveable temperature in what is known as the “greenhouse effect.” Too many of these gases, however, can cause excessive warming, disrupting fragile climates and ecosystems.');

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The world is adapting to extreme heat — but not nearly fast enough on Sep 8, 2026.

In an age of brutal philosophies, shrieking media, cold arts, lying politicians, and devouring institutions, Wendell Berry was a hero of an entirely human way of being.

Imagine being able to compost almost everything and keep the majority of the biomass. Imagine, finally, that it only takes a matter of weeks, not months.

Dan Dallas had defended these communities before. The little towns on the Karuk tribal land are nestled in a gorge along the Klamath River, amidst a million-acre wilderness of Northern California conifer and hardwood that makes up the Six Rivers National Forest. This time, August 2023, a fusillade of lightning strikes had ignited the web of steep canyons south of the town of Orleans in two dozen places, and as the fires expanded, they merged.

As an incident commander for the U.S. Forest Service, Dallas wasn’t called up until fires got big. On the drive from Colorado, he considered the recent experiences that had begun to trouble him.

“I’d been to multiple places, two, even three, sometimes four times,” he remembered in a recent interview. On each fire, he’d followed the Forest Service playbook. Keep the fire small. Contain it quickly. Box it in by throwing hardware at it, bulldozing the ridgetops, and dropping fire retardant slurry or water from planes and helicopters. Don’t light the fuse on a megafire that could reach the nearest town. But he was starting to realize: Even if you don’t light the fuse, you still have the bomb.

“Finally, I figured out all I’m doing is deferring risk to this place,” said Dallas, whose day job is director of renewable resources for the Forest Service’s Rocky Mountain region. “I’m going to come back and protect it again.”

When he got to the Six Rivers, he found the local forest supervisor and the Karuk Tribe had been percolating the same idea he had. It had rained in those mountains, and the conditions were mild. Fog was rolling in from the coast in the mornings, settling in the canyon bottoms. “It actually had gone from being fire weather to basically prescribed fire season,” Dallas remembered.

What if, instead of tearing up the Six Rivers to attack this fire, they allowed it to creep along the forest floor as long as they could? There’d be less fuel to burn the next time a fire came through, and it wouldn’t burn as hot even if the weather was bad. Fifty thousand acres of fire; fifty thousand acres less fuel to burn next summer.

Incident commander Dan Dallas gives a briefing on the Divide Complex Wildfire in the Helena-Lewis and Clark National Forest in 2021. Photo courtesy of Brenda Bowen, Rocky Mountain Team 1, Fire Information Officer

The strategy was a success, but a fleeting one. The opportunities to let wildfire do its job are being increasingly extinguished by hotter, drier conditions that last longer throughout the year. The Trump administration has also returned to “full suppression” — shutting down every fire, even when it doesn’t threaten human life and property — after three decades of federal policy that, at least on paper, encouraged a friendlier approach to wildfire.

The problem with putting out all fires, said Dallas, is the same one that troubled him on that drive to California. You’re leaving fuel there that could stoke the next megafire you can’t manage, or even stop. “We keep going back to the same places, and it’s more often that the fires are more severe,” Dallas said. 

Over the past decade, so-called megafires — characterized not only by their size, often bigger than 100,000 acres, but by their severity, speed, and impact — have become more common. They now account for the bulk of the money spent on firefighting, with the federal government spending 10 times more on suppressing wildfires than it did 30 years ago.

This summer’s fire conditions have already been extreme. Nearly 73 percent of the Intermountain West is experiencing severe to exceptional drought, with temperatures breaking records across the country. Add to that last winter’s meager snowpack, which has left forests ready to burn. So far in 2026, the U.S. government has reported more than 53,000 wildfires that have burned over 8 million acres — about 3 million acres more than average over the past decade. 

The onslaught is straining firefighting resources, with many requests for help going unfulfilled. An August 11 memo from the National Multi-Agency Coordinating group, which handles logistics for firefighting across the federal government, warned that “resource availability remains critically low, with commitments approaching all-time peak levels.”

Wildland firefighting is increasingly facing an intractable reality: We’re stuck in a vicious cycle. A doom loop.

In 2013, the U.S. Forest Service quietly convened a panel of futurists to imagine the arc of wildfire over the coming decades. The group included luminaries in futures studies — the science of systematically gaming out distant outcomes — a couple of wildfire experts, and a science fiction writer. 

Over three weeks of conference calls, the futurists grilled the wildfire experts — John Phipps, a regional research station director who helped make national wildfire policy for the U.S. Forest Service, and Sarah McCaffrey, a social scientist with the agency who studied the human aspect of how it worked. Together, the group imagined possible trajectories for the American wildfire saga — carrying it forward beyond the scope of a presidential administration, longer than the span of any individual government career. Where, they asked, was all this really going?

U.S. Forest Service firefighters monitor the Line Fire near San Bernardino, California, in 2024.
Gina Ferazzi / Los Angeles Times via Getty Images

They released their final report, “Wildland Fire Management Futures: Insights from a Foresight Panel,” in 2015. The one big takeaway: We can’t keep doing what we’re doing. “As conditions change over time,” the report reads, “the existing fire suppression approach will fail across the whole range of plausible future conditions.”

If we don’t change course, the futures panel wrote, “risk will continue to escalate until fuel-filled landscapes eventually reset catastrophically.” Translation: Much of the West will burn. Today’s children will see forests converted to grass or shrublands in their lifetimes. Biodiversity will be irreversibly destroyed, along with thousands upon thousands of American homes.

This isn’t pessimism. The science behind it has been well-established for decades. In any combustible ecosystem, fire periodically clears away all but the strongest plants, allowing them to thrive and reproduce. The process enriches the soil and opens the understory to new growth. On the other hand, if you suppress fire on the landscape for a century, as the United States has done, leave trees and brush to pile up in a continent-sized pyre, then heat up the planet and take away the rain, everything’s going to burn at once. Windy, hot days and lightning strikes and accidents are bound to converge, and our expanding settlements are bound to be in the way.

It’s not that firefighting doesn’t work; federal firefighters are able to contain more than 98 percent of wildfires. The vast majority of damage to human infrastructure is done by the 2 percent of ignitions that get away, said Matt Hurteau, a forest ecologist at the University of New Mexico. The top 1 percent are responsible for more than a quarter of the total acreage burned. But those megafires happen under nightmare weather conditions — hot, dry, and windy — and escape control quickly. “There is no doubt that our federal fire suppression apparatus is effective, that’s why we’re in the predicament we’re in,” Hurteau said. “It’s only under the most extreme conditions that things escape, and it’s been that way for decades.”

The more climate change extends the fire season, Hurteau said, the more chances for megafires to start. The more small fires we put out, the more fuel there is for megafires to eat up on the way to our towns. This is what the futures panel meant by “escalate.”

Read Next Welcome to the Pyrocene Stephen J. Pyne

With the build-up of fuels that constant fire suppression causes, their report concluded, “we are self-selecting for fires we cannot control and do the greatest damage.”

Thirteen years after the futures panel, interviews with more than 20 experts in the field of wildland fire — foresters and firefighters and bureaucrats and scientists and even a lobbyist, from varying positions on the political spectrum — painted a stark picture of where our fire policy is taking us. Several of them had the same question: “What the f**k we are doing here?”

The way out of this quagmire is widely agreed upon: Somehow, we have to get rid of all that extra fuel, and once a semblance of balance is restored, make friends with natural, lower-severity ground fires by hardening human communities against them and letting them be. This plan has, in one form or another, been entrenched in federal policy since the mid-90s.

In addition to establishing programs to physically remove extra fuels and clear out forest floors through prescribed burning, that policy has included allowing unplanned wildfires to do the work, as long as it’s safe to do so. In other words, when fires pose a danger to people, including firefighters and the public, they’re generally fought aggressively. Otherwise, fire managers have had the option of allowing them to play their natural role.

Many fire scientists believe that letting more fires run their course in the backcountry, the way Dallas and his colleagues did on the Six Rivers, will have to happen if we’re going to reduce fuels at the necessary scale.

“We keep putting out fires, and we’re going to get bigger and hotter fires,” said Hurteau. “It’s just true. It’s physics and chemistry.”

Dave Calkin, who recently retired from his job as a research forester with the U.S. Forest Service, where he focused on wildland fire risk management, said many fires are “inherently insuppressible”; all you can do is run.

Fires that don’t threaten people, on the other hand, are useful. “The science is clear and has been clear for decades that the answer to the problem is more fire, not less fire,” Calkin said.

A separate camp of foresters believes using wildfires to remove fuel is reckless, given the volatile conditions during fire season, and that the way forward is to clear fuels by loosening environmental regulations and opening public lands much more broadly to “mechanical thinning” — in many cases logging — launching a moonshot effort to revitalize the moribund timber industry in the process.

A member of a local Prescribed Burn Association uses a drip torch to ignite a controlled burn in Angwin, California, last year.
Justin Sullivan / Getty Images

“Because the forests are all clogged up, you can’t use [wild]fire as a maintenance tool,” said Michael Rains, who helped lead the Forest Service across five administrations. “You’ve got to use prescribed fire, and you have to use mechanical treatments. And then one day, hopefully, our forest lands will be in the condition [such that], when a fire starts, we can manage it to let it burn a little longer.”

The Trump administration has sided firmly with Rains’ camp, doubling down on suppressing all wildfires — including those that don’t threaten communities — while also demanding more board feet of lumber coming off public lands. Frank Carroll, a former Forest Service incident commander and a zealous advocate for full suppression, said the decrees are like “trying to steer an aircraft carrier with a canoe paddle.” Still, he believes, they are a start. 

Adam Mendonca, the Forest Service’s deputy director of Fire and Aviation Management, said the agency isn’t anti-fire. “No two ways about it. Science will tell you, you need more fire on the landscape.” But, he said, the agency’s focus is on prescribed fire. 

The Forest Service did about 1.2 million acres of prescribed burning in 2025, down from 2.2 million the year before. (The agency attributes the drop to dangerously dry conditions that spring, particularly in the Southeast where it does most of its burning). Recent research shows that the Trump administration’s efforts to shrink the federal workforce — a ProPublica investigation found that more than a quarter of the Forest Service’s firefighting positions were unfilled as of July 2025 — also contributed to the slower progress on clearing fuels last year.

Mendonca said the Forest Service needs to be doing between two and 10 times more fuels reduction work to turn the tide. “We’re not doing enough,” he said, “but we continue to try to ramp up.”

Prescribed fire offers what the agency has become less tolerant of losing: control. But Tim Ingalsbee, executive director of advocacy group Firefighters United for Safety, Ethics, and Ecology (FUSEE), said a war on wildfire is unwinnable. “We’re just throwing good money after bad in these reactive, siege-like suppression spectacles, versus proactive preparation and treatments within communities.” 

The wildfire doom loop has roots far beyond the current administration, and is fueled by a cycle of perverse incentives. 

One problem, experts say, has to do with how fire-related funding is distributed. Every year in the hot and dry months, Congress authorizes additional funding for emergency wildland fire suppression as needed, not unlike the way it funds a war. The annual expenditure has grown from an average of about $450 million in the 1990s to well over $3 billion in recent years, with $4.3 billion spent in 2021 alone. (Research published earlier this year projected that climate change could push that number to $13 billion by the end of the century.)

“There are no consequences for spending as much money as you possibly can to put that fire out,” said Kelly Martin, a former chief of fire management for two national parks who also served on the congressionally mandated Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission during the Biden administration. When they have airplanes and bulldozers and armies of firefighters at their disposal, she said, federal fire managers are inclined to use them. “There’s not a connection in people’s brains to say, putting that fire out actually does more harm than good in the long term.” 

Crews cut vegetation to widen a fire line for the Oak Fire near Mariposa, California, in 2022.
David McNew / AFP via Getty Images

In contrast, funding for fuel-reduction initiatives like forest thinning and prescribed burns is budgeted, limited, and comes with mountains of paperwork. “Prescribed burning is discretionary — emergency management is not,” said Martin. “So, you end up with this really lopsided scale that tips the scale to the favor of suppression.”

The annual glut also creates an incentive for private firefighting contractors to lobby for as much involvement as possible while the cash is flowing. “I have clients, they’re like farmers,” said Phil Hardy, a Washington lobbyist for the firefighting aviation industry, including retardant and water tankers, which are most effective in suppressing fires while they’re still small. “They make all their money from June to September or October, and then they’ve got to wait all the way until next year to get paid again. By the time fire season starts, they’ve totally wiped out their line of credit.” Hardy said his clients would vastly prefer a steadier cash flow, but Congress only pays when pillars of smoke are looming and it’s too late to do anything but fight like hell. That means that air tankers, which are among the most costly elements of wildland firefighting, are often used even when they’re not especially effective.

A second problem is personnel — fuel-reduction work is often done by the same federal employees who get sent out to fight wildfires. One federal fuels reduction specialist, who asked not to be named because he wasn’t authorized to speak freely, said even experts who are hired to plan and conduct prescribed burns and other fuel-clearing projects often spend up to half the year fighting wildfires. 

“The simple tasks that are supposed to get done to allow these projects to move forward,” he said, “go almost stagnant for like four to six months out of the year.”

Beyond budgets and workforce management and policy memos, there’s a bigger, more emotional machinery at work. After all, fire can destroy homes and take loved ones in the most terrifying ways.

Wildfires are a seasonal spectacle, with journalists dispatched to the firelines like war correspondents reporting from the front, broadcasting images of towering flames and smoking ruins that stoke the feeling in the zeitgeist that everything in the whole world is going to hell. 

“When you see people’s homes burning on the 5 o’clock news and you know people are chasing their horses and their dogs are dying and people are losing their lives,” said Martin, “it’s hard to switch that narrative into something different.”

The fire-as-invader narrative helps drive a kind of patriotic zeal that moves everyone from firefighters to legislators to defend the homeland.

“I hate war analogies when it comes to fire,” said Riva Duncan, president of Grassroots Wildland Firefighters, a nonprofit firefighter advocacy organization. “It’s not a war and firefighters are not soldiers, because I don’t want them to think that their lives are expected to be given for this.”

Mendonca, the Forest Service fire director, agrees — kind of. “We don’t treat fire as though it’s the enemy,” he said. “It’s just, how do we get there in a way that gets us to those desired conditions or outcomes with the highest probability of success for all the values involved.” 

A home burns as flames from the Dixie Fire tear through the Indian Falls neighborhood of unincorporated Plumas County, California, in 2021.
Josh Edelson / AFP via Getty Images

Fire, in other words, is like a wild animal. We don’t hate wild animals, but the closer they get to us the less we feel we can afford the risk of tolerating their presence.

But Calkin said there’s also a bureaucratic momentum to the status quo. “It’s the inherent human bias of like, right now, the easiest thing for me to do would be to make this fire go away,” he said. “It’s really hard for me to make this fire grow in a safe way to get good fuel treatment. And it’s risky. And if something goes bad, I am responsible. You know, if in the future it actually saved something really important, I’d never get credit for it. It’s just easier to kick the problem down the road.”

More fire isn’t the answer in every part of the country. Native plants like sagebrush and saguaro cactus haven’t evolved to burn, but invasive grasses in the Great Basin and Sonoran Desert have brought fire with them. “There are certain places where we have too much fire and we need to try and keep it out,” said Hurteau. And as long as our communities are nestled in burnable ecosystems, they’ll sometimes need to be defended. The question is whether we can find a balance we can live with.

Since that futures panel wrapped up its conference calls in 2013, we’ve had 13 years of one record-breaking fire after another. The image of burning houses is no longer the uncanny experience it was — the slash of bright orange across the country’s front pages is now part of our collective wallpaper. And the ranks of the dispossessed, the evacuated, and the dead have only grown.

Dallas, a practical man, said it would make a big difference if firefighting teams like his were allowed to back off fires, setting low-severity backburns on ground of their choosing so that the wild flames don’t blow through and annihilate everything in their path. “Right now,” he said, “that’s off the table.”

When we spoke in early August, Dallas had just come from a fire in Pagosa Springs, Colorado, that was threatening hundreds of homes. The local forest supervisor called for a Complex Incident Management Team — the big guns — and got a response that’s becoming more common across the country: no one was available. All the teams were on other fires.

“Our system is taxed beyond capacity to respond,” Dallas said. “It’s already falling apart.” 

For every fire he puts out, Dallas knows he’s leaving a tinderbox behind. More and more, he said, he’s finding himself back at the same table, looking at the same map. 

Next time, he could be watching a bigger, more dangerous fire escape his grasp.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline America is losing its war against wildfire on Sep 8, 2026.

Labor activists take steps to preserve the documents and strategies they use today, so future organizers will have a practical guide.

Red Pepper editors pick out the songs and albums that shaped their political imaginations

The post Red Pepper Media’s inspirational tracks appeared first on Red Pepper.

Nama provider sekarang menjadi salah satu informasi pertama saat pengguna membandingkan permainan slot digital. Bukan cuma soal katalog atau popularitas merek, tiap pengembang membawa pendekatan berbeda pada mekanisme, desain antarmuka, tempo permainan, fitur bonus, sampai karakter visual. Perbedaan tersebut membuat provider populer memiliki identitas sendiri di tengah katalog Royalgacor Slot Masa Kini.

Situs Royalgacor dapat menjadi ruang untuk melihat perbedaan tersebut secara lebih terstruktur. Alih-alih menempatkan seluruh permainan dalam kelompok serupa, katalog berdasarkan provider membantu pengguna memahami ciri setiap pengembang. Pragmatic Play, PG Soft, Spadegaming, Joker Gaming, hingga Microgaming memiliki pendekatan tersendiri. Perbandingan akhirnya bergeser dari sekadar mencari nama populer menuju pemahaman tentang gaya permainan.

Royalgacor Provider Populer Memiliki Karakter Berbeda

Popularitas sebuah provider tidak muncul hanya karena jumlah permainan. Konsistensi produk ikut membentuk cara pengguna mengenali suatu studio. Ada pengembang dengan ciri visual kuat, sementara lainnya lebih menonjol melalui mekanisme sederhana atau format permainan ramah perangkat seluler. Royalgacor Provider Populer dapat dikelompokkan berdasarkan karakter tersebut. Cara ini membuat katalog lebih mudah dipahami sekaligus membantu pengguna membedakan permainan tanpa perlu membuka setiap judul satu per satu.

Pragmatic Play Identik dengan Presentasi Dramatis

Pragmatic Play cukup mudah dikenali melalui karakter besar, efek visual ekspresif, serta fitur bonus dengan presentasi mencolok. Gates of Olympus dan Starlight Princess menjadi contoh bagaimana karakter utama dapat berfungsi sebagai identitas sebuah permainan. Pendekatan tersebut membuat produknya terasa kuat dari sisi branding. Pada Royalgacor slot, permainan semacam ini dapat ditempatkan dalam kategori bertema mitologi, karakter ikonik, atau fitur interaktif agar pencarian terasa lebih relevan.

PG Soft Membawa Pendekatan Mobile-First

PG Soft mengambil jalur berbeda. Banyak produknya menggunakan komposisi vertikal, animasi halus, karakter bergaya ilustratif, serta navigasi ringkas. Pendekatan ini cocok dengan kebiasaan pengguna smartphone. Mahjong Ways menjadi salah satu contoh bagaimana tema budaya, simbol, efek transisi, serta mekanisme permainan dapat dirangkai dalam tampilan relatif padat. Dalam perbandingan Royalgacor Slot Masa Kini, PG Soft memiliki posisi kuat pada aspek pengalaman mobile dan identitas visual.

Spadegaming Menawarkan Nuansa Asia Lebih Kental

Spadegaming membawa banyak elemen bernuansa Asia melalui karakter, ornamen, warna, sampai tema cerita. Ciri tersebut membuat katalognya mempunyai identitas berbeda dibanding provider dengan konsep fantasi Barat atau mitologi Eropa. Bagi Situs Royalgacor, perbedaan seperti ini berguna untuk membangun kategori berdasarkan preferensi visual. Pengguna bisa menemukan permainan melalui tema terlebih dahulu sebelum membaca mekanisme, tabel pembayaran, atau fitur khusus.

Joker Gaming Mempertahankan Format Lebih Familiar

Di tengah permainan modern penuh animasi, format sederhana masih mempunyai ruang. Joker Gaming dikenal melalui sejumlah permainan dengan struktur visual relatif mudah dikenali serta navigasi tidak terlalu kompleks. Karakter tersebut menarik untuk dibandingkan dengan provider generasi baru. Royalgacor Provider Populer akhirnya tidak harus diukur melalui kemewahan grafis. Kemudahan membaca simbol, menu, aturan, serta informasi fitur juga menentukan kualitas pengalaman pengguna.

Microgaming Menjadi Pembanding dari Generasi Lebih Lama

Microgaming memiliki sejarah panjang dalam industri permainan digital. Karena itu, portofolionya dapat menjadi pembanding saat melihat perubahan desain slot dari masa ke masa. Perbedaan generasi terlihat pada struktur layar, animasi, karakter, serta cara fitur diperkenalkan. Permainan lama cenderung mengandalkan susunan simbol lebih konvensional. Produk masa kini bergerak menuju presentasi interaktif dengan transisi cepat serta fitur berlapis. Royalgacor Slot Masa Kini dapat memanfaatkan perbedaan tersebut sebagai bentuk pengelompokan katalog. Pengguna tidak hanya melihat permainan berdasarkan urutan rilis, tetapi juga perkembangan konsep dari satu generasi menuju generasi berikutnya.

Perbandingan Provider Tidak Cukup Berdasarkan Popularitas

Jumlah pemain atau ketenaran sebuah judul hanya memberikan sebagian gambaran. Perbandingan lebih relevan perlu melihat beberapa aspek sekaligus, mulai dari desain mobile, keterbacaan informasi, variasi tema, struktur fitur, hingga konsistensi antarmuka. Situs Royalgacor juga perlu memberi konteks mengenai aturan dasar setiap permainan. Provider berbeda dapat menggunakan istilah, simbol khusus, format bonus, serta sistem pembayaran berbeda. Informasi tersebut membantu pengguna memahami produk tanpa bergantung pada klaim seperti “lebih mudah menang” atau “pasti memberi hasil besar”, sebab hasil permainan tidak dapat dinilai hanya dari nama pengembang.

Royalgacor Slot Masa Kini Menunjukkan Arah Industri Lebih Beragam

Persaingan provider sekarang bukan lagi sekadar perlombaan memperbanyak judul. Pragmatic Play membawa presentasi dramatis, PG Soft kuat pada pengalaman mobile, Spadegaming memiliki identitas Asia, Joker Gaming mempertahankan format familiar, sedangkan Microgaming memberikan gambaran evolusi dari generasi terdahulu. Royalgacor Provider Populer dapat memperlihatkan perbedaan tersebut melalui katalog terstruktur. Pengelompokan berdasarkan studio, tema, mekanisme, serta karakter visual memberi nilai lebih dibanding daftar permainan tanpa konteks. Pada akhirnya, Royalgacor slot dapat menjadi tempat untuk membaca perubahan selera pasar secara lebih luas. Provider terus mencari identitas agar produknya tidak tenggelam di antara ratusan pilihan. Bagi Royalgacor Slot Masa Kini, justru perbedaan itulah bagian paling menarik untuk dibandingkan: bukan siapa paling ramai dibicarakan, melainkan bagaimana setiap pengembang membangun pengalaman permainan dengan pendekatan berbeda.

The 'voracious, clandestine' donkey skin trade Channel Comment brendan 8th September 2026 Teaser Media

• A short-term continuing resolution will keep federal transportation funds flowing for the next three months while Congress considers a new five-year bill, but the CR cuts transit funding by 20 percent and passenger rail funding by 81 percent. (Mass Transit, Metro Magazine)
• The federal government continues to spend billions of dollars on highways even though the interstate system is largely complete. Angie Schmitt wonders, what if that money were spent on sidewalks instead? (Strong Towns)
• Miami-Dade Mayor Daniella Levine Cava’s proposed budget would eliminate early-morning bus service, as well as a dozen routes. (Herald)
• More than 4 million people a year would ride light rail along the Atlanta Beltline, according to a new study. But it would cost almost $5 billion, and there is currently no funding. (AJC)
• Maryland is removing bus lanes in Bethesda built during Red Line construction instead of making them permanent. (Fox 5)
• The Seattle DOT is in the process of completing 70 safety projects near schools. (KIRO)
• Despite efforts to protect fish, about 2,000 have died around Sound Transit’s new bridge over Lake Washington. (Axios)
• Pete Buttigieg talked about the Cincinnati streetcar during a recent campaign stop to support Ohio Democratic candidates. (Enquirer; paywall)
• San Antonio installed three new flashing beacons and other pedestrian safety improvements on Pleasanton Road. (Kens)
• A Chicago developer is proposing a new White Sox stadium and a hospital at the site of an Amtrak rail yard. (Trains)
• Auckland is considering congestion pricing. (The Conversation)
• A company in Mexico is producing the opposite of gargantuan American pickups — a tiny electric truck that can haul almost 1,500 pounds and costs just $8,400. (Autoblog)

5 healthier school lunches you can pack in minutes Anthony Lacey September 8, 2026

Food companies sell a lot of pre-packaged lunches wrapped in bright colors, new flavors or other ways to get kids’ attention. In fact, the company behind Lunchables used some of the same research and marketing strategies that boosted tobacco companies’ sales of cigarettes.

The food companies’ goal is keeping kids hooked on their products – not keeping them healthy.

While they’re appealing to parents stretched for time, these pre-packaged lunches are often highly processed. They can contain dozens of ingredients, including food chemicals with potential health harms, and don’t necessarily provide the nutrition kids need.

The good news: You don’t need much extra time in your morning routine to pack something better.

What does a less-processed school lunch actually look like?

Here are five less-processed lunches that you or your kids can build in minutes. 

Image

Crackers and cheese (2 minutes)

• Whole grain crackers like Triscuits
• Cheese
• Roasted seeds (sunflower, pumpkin)
• Clementine
• Cucumber

Image

Hummus and pita (2 minutes)

• Hummus
• Whole grain pita
• Cheese
• Carrots
• Apple

Image

Peanut butter pita (3 minutes)

• Whole grain pita
• Nut butter (sunflower, peanut*)
• Banana
• Popcorn
• Cucumber

* Make sure to check your school’s nut policy.

Image

Tuna plate (4 minutes)

• Whole grain cracker such as Triscuits
• Canned tuna
• Cheese
• Carrots
• Applesauce

Image

Chips and salsa (4 minutes)

• Whole grain chips
• Salsa
• Black beans
• Cheese
• Pear

These combinations are all flexible. Swap in whatever fruits, vegetables or sides – like popcorn, nuts or seeds – you already have on hand. Add a dip or sauce if that encourages your kid to eat healthier food.

And remember that not every single meal has to be perfectly balanced. What matters most is what your kid eats over the course of the day or week, not a single lunchbox.

Other ideas to try

Beans can be a major value-add. They’re affordable, high in protein and fiber, and ready to use straight from the can. Add some chickpeas to a hummus and pita plate, or black beans to chips and salsa, for a nutrition boost.

If your kid likes leftovers, you can also keep things simple and cook one batch of whole grain pasta or rice for the week. Add your choice of vegetables and protein – like cherry tomatoes and cheese cubes in a pasta salad, or frozen edamame in brown rice – to make it a meal. This is also a great place to add some chicken or other meat from last night’s dinner.

If lunch doesn’t feel complete without something sweet, a piece of dried fruit or a handful of chocolate chips makes an affordable treat with far fewer additives than most packaged candy or fruit snacks.

When in doubt, check EWG’s Food Scores for more information on food ingredients, processing and nutrition. Use EWG’s Healthy Living™ app to scan products right on grocery store shelves.

A few foods worth skipping – try these instead

Here are some old favorites that don’t stack up when it comes to nutrition – and what to consider as alternatives.

Processed meat. There’s a reason deli sandwiches didn’t make the cut for less-processed lunches. Despite their popularity, particularly for lunches, processed deli meats like turkey, ham, salami and roast beef have been strongly linked to cancer. 

Cheese, beans, hard boiled eggs, plain yogurt, nuts and seeds all deliver protein without that potential health risk.

Enriched bread. Many kids and adults alike eat a lot of bread, crackers and snacks made with enriched flour, which don’t offer much in the way of real nutrition. It can be hard to find a whole-grain bread without all the additives, despite how many options seem to be available. 

Whole grain pitas and woven wheat crackers tend to be easier to track down and contain some healthy fiber.

Less-processed pantry staples

Keeping a few of these foods on hand can help you pack school lunches and snacks in a pinch.

Produce

• Apples
• Bananas
• Carrots
• Cucumbers
• Pears

Dairy, eggs and refrigerated

• Cheese. Avoid orange powders, sprays and spreads; sticks and bricks are better choices
• Eggs. Use EWG’s meat and dairy label decoder to see what the certifications actually mean
• Hummus. Look for these five ingredients – chickpeas, tahini, salt, oil and lemon juice – plus seasonings like garlic.
• Yogurt. Choose yogurt free of added colors, flavors and sweeteners (including added sugar and artificial sweeteners)

Canned goods

• Black beans. The label should list beans only, or can include some salt
• Chickpeas. The label should say chickpeas (or garbanzo beans) only, and may include some salt
• Salsa. Look for just vegetables, herbs and spices you might use at home

Snacks and pantry

• Applesauce. Skip any added colors, flavors, and sweeteners (including added sugar and artificial sweeteners)
• Chocolate chips. For a sweet treat, look for cocoa butter and five or fewer ingredients total
• Dried fruit. For a sweet treat, stick to just the fruit without added sugar
• Nut butter. Just nuts or seeds with salt – avoid added sugar and hydrogenated oils
• Popcorn. A short ingredient list is the goal: popcorn, and maybe a little oil and salt
• Roasted nuts or seeds. Nuts or seeds and a little salt is all you need
• Whole grain crackers. Look for woven wheat: whole grains and salt, nothing more
• Whole grain chips. Like whole grain corn with some oil and salt, the shorter the ingredient list, the better

Breads and bakery

• Whole grain pita. Look for whole grains and five or fewer ingredients total

Areas of Focus Food Ultra-Processed Foods Women's Health Children’s Health Food Chemicals Authors Sarah Reinhardt, MPH, RDN September 8, 2026

Lock the Gate Alliance has submitted new evidence to the WA Appeals Convenor showing that Texan fracking company Black Mountain Energy’s modelling found that proposed fracking wastewater ponds could overflow in above-average rainfall conditions — which are frequently experienced in the area — posing a contamination threat to the Martuwarra Fitzroy River. 

This is a re-post from The Climate Brink by Andrew Dessler

This is the third and last in our series discussing the use of unadjusted data and how it overstates the warmth of the 1930s over the U.S. See part one and part two for more.

A hall of fame for bad climate plots would definitely include this one:

The plot covers the continental U.S., and it dramatically shows that temperatures in the 1930s were more extreme than those of the present period. The metric plotted, the heat wave index, is constructed as a station?average count of qualifying 4?day warm spells (mean temperature exceeds a local one?in?ten?year threshold) in each year, so higher values mean that heat waves were more frequent in that year.

It was originally published in 1999 and has gone through several iterations, with the one above from an EPA website in 2021.

Don’t take this as criticism of the original paper — it was published in 1999, after all. However, the plot has hung around long past its expiration date and has since become a staple of climate denial. I think it’s time to reconsider what the plot actually tells us.

But is it right?

After reading our previous posts on the heat of the 1930s, you probably already know the answer: this plot is wrong in important ways.

The plot above is constructed from raw, unadjusted station data, which contain significant biases both in the individual station records and in the geographic distribution of the stations.

As we discussed in our previous posts, we can adjust for those biases. Here are the plots with biases removed:

In these plots, I’m using the adjusted and area-weighted GHCN-daily data (described in this post) and the daily Berkeley Earth land data (used in this post).

Both plots show something different than the raw, unadjusted data. The GHCN-daily data show that the most extreme years were 1936, 2023, 1934, 1931, and 2011. In the Berkeley Earth dataset, the most extreme years were 2023, 2011, 1936, 2020, and 1931.

Thus, once you account for biases in the data, you cannot conclude that temperatures during the 1930s over the continental U.S. were more extreme than those of recent years.

Rather, the only fair conclusion is that the last few years have been about as extreme as the hottest years of the 1930s over the continental U.S.

The 1930s were hot, but not because of global warming

Despite this ambiguous answer, we can still learn something from the plot.

First, as we’ve pointed out many times, the heat of the 1930s was regional — it was concentrated in the middle of the U.S. That’s different from today, when extreme temperatures are a global phenomenon.

We understand why this small part of the U.S. was so hot in the 1930s. It was normal climate variability combined with human activities. The relevant human activity was not fossil-fuel combustion but bad farming practices that contributed to the Dust Bowl.

During the early 20th century, aggressive plowing and the replacement of native grasses left Great Plains soils exposed. When drought conditions developed, those degraded soils dried out quickly, reducing evaporation and soil moisture and reinforcing the heat.

This feedback between drought and land degradation amplified temperatures over the U.S. Midwest and helped create the extraordinary heat of the Dust Bowl era seen in the plots above.

A picture is worth 1,000 words, so here’s what Dalhart, Texas looked like in 1938:

Abandoned farm with windmill and farm equipment. Dalhart, Texas. June 1938. Credits: Dorothea Lange; The Library of Congress, Prints & Photographs Division. Source.

Here’s what Dalhart, Texas looks like today from space:

Dalhart, Texas in 2016. Google Earth.

Those circles are the signature of center-pivot irrigation. Irrigation cools the surface, and the expansion of agriculture and irrigation in the central U.S. in the middle of the 20th century played a key role in why heatwaves were low in the middle of the 20th century:

the corrected figure: same data as plotted above, but smoothed with a 10-year centered average

Starting in the 1970s, we see heatwaves trending upward. Unlike the heat of the Dust Bowl in the 1930s, this post-1970 increase is global. This is climate change making heatwaves more extreme.

Conclusions

1. The extreme heat of the 1930s covered a very small part of the planet, the U.S. Midwest. Focusing on just that region is a classic case of cherry-picking.

2. The heat of the 1930s was due to human activity in the form of bad agricultural practices combined with natural variability.

3. Since the 1970s, heatwaves have become more frequent. This differs from the Dust Bowl because it is a global signal, occurring essentially everywhere. This is almost certainly due to greenhouse gas emissions from human activities.

Thus, if you see someone trying to downplay today’s extreme heat by claiming that ‘the 1930s were hotter,’ it’s a scam. Tag it with #1930sScam, hit the share button below, and share the link and the corrected figure.Code to reproduce the figures is here.

Other stuff

My colleague, Prof. Adam Sobel, has a nice post on his substack Deep Convection about km-scale modeling and the state of U.S. climate modeling. You should read it.

 

For a bee or butterfly, even a tiny patch of blooming wildflowers by the side of the road could mean the difference between life and death.

El Seminario internacional basura cero reunió en Chile a representantes de 26 municipalidades y 45 organizaciones de más de 15 países para abordar el potencial de los residuos orgánicos en la reducción de emisiones de metano y la transición hacia modelos de basura cero.

Conversatorio: Cómo dialoga el contexto legal actual con la estrategia basura cero.

Septiembre de 2026—  La gestión de residuos debe dejar de ser entendida únicamente como un problema sanitario y convertirse en una prioridad de la acción climática. Ese fue uno de los principales mensajes del “Seminario internacional basura cero: el rol estratégico de los residuos orgánicos para la acción climática y la democratización de soluciones”, organizado por GAIA, Break Free From Plastic (BFFP) y la Alianza Basura Cero Chile.

El encuentro reunió a 50 representantes de más de 26 municipalidades de Chile, 45 organizaciones provenientes de más de 15 países de América Latina y el Caribe, representantes del sector gubernamental, recicladores de base y académicos, quienes compartieron experiencias sobre políticas públicas, compostaje, reciclaje, reparación y gestión local de residuos.

El metano estuvo en el centro de la discusión. Marcelo Mena, director ejecutivo de Global Methane Hub, destacó que “si bajamos la emisión de metano, la disminución de la temperatura sería prácticamente inmediata”, y planteó que reducir los residuos orgánicos es una de las medidas más eficaces y rentables para avanzar en esta dirección.

Juan Pablo Escudero, investigador del Instituto Emmett de la UCLA, destacó el aporte de las nuevas tecnologías para identificar las fuentes de metano. “La gran acción climática no consiste únicamente en dejar de quemar petróleo. Hay que mirar a la basura”, afirmó.

Conferencia inaugural de Marcelo Mena, Director Ejecutivo Global Methane Hub. Residuos orgánicos: de problema a recurso

Durante el seminario se abordó especialmente el potencial de los residuos orgánicos para producir compost, regenerar suelos y reducir emisiones.

Mariela Pino, campañista en mitigación de metano para GAIA LAC, señaló que “la gestión de residuos ya no es solo una cuestión sanitaria” y que su relación con el cambio climático exige una aproximación distinta. Pino planteó que avanzar hacia basura cero requiere maximizar el reciclaje de materiales orgánicos e inorgánicos, implementar sistemas de recolección diferenciada y separación en origen, y asegurar un financiamiento adecuado.

También destacó la importancia de vincular la gestión de residuos con la protección de los suelos y la producción de alimentos: “Tenemos que ver los residuos no solo como algo sanitario, sino como parte de una economía socioambiental que genera buenos beneficios”, sostuvo.

Las experiencias presentadas mostraron que estas soluciones ya están siendo implementadas. En el municipio Quinta Normal de Chile, por ejemplo, se desarrolla un programa piloto de reciclaje orgánico en ferias libres, mientras que en Melipeuco el municipio trabaja desde 2021 en una estrategia local de basura cero junto a las comunidades.

En tanto, Fértil Compostaje, una empresa familiar campesina de La Araucanía chilena, procesa entre 20 y 30 toneladas de residuos de la industria agrícola para producir compost. Su responsable, Germán Jara, advirtió sobre el deterioro de los suelos agrícolas y afirmó: “No estamos enterrando basura, estamos enterrando la solución para regenerar nuestros suelos”.

Asistentes al seminario en el Aula Magna de la Universidad Católica de Chile. Una transición que debe incluir a los recicladores

El rol de los recicladores de base fue otro de los ejes del encuentro. Soledad Mella, de la Asociación Nacional de Recicladores de Chile, llamó a que la transición hacia sistemas de basura cero incorpore a quienes históricamente han sostenido la recuperación de materiales. “La transición justa no es mover residuos de lugar: es mover poder, inversión y oportunidades hacia quienes sostienen el reciclaje”, afirmó.

Desde Brasil, Roselaine Mendes, secretaria internacional de la Red Latinoamericana y del caribe de Recicladores (RedLacre), destacó la importancia de reconocer económicamente el trabajo de los recicladores. “Solo vivir de la venta de los materiales no es sostenible. Es necesario que recibamos el pago por nuestro trabajo”, señaló.

El seminario también abordó los avances y desafíos de las políticas públicas chilenas, incluyendo la Ley de Responsabilidad Extendida del Productor (REP), la infraestructura para la gestión de residuos orgánicos, la educación ciudadana y la coordinación entre gobiernos nacionales, regionales y municipales.

Magdalena Donoso, coordinadora regional de GAIA y BFFP en América Latina.

Para Magdalena Donoso, coordinadora regional de GAIA y BFFP en Latinoamérica y el Caribe, los avances alcanzados son resultado de la organización y perseverancia de diversos actores. “Las agendas se mueven cuando las voluntades irreductibles deciden organizarse y actuar antes de que el éxito parezca posible, y perseveran porque se niegan a aceptar que aquello que no tiene sentido se siga perpetuando”, afirmó.

El encuentro concluyó con un llamado a fortalecer la colaboración entre gobiernos, municipios, organizaciones sociales, recicladores, comunidades, academia y sector privado para acelerar soluciones locales que permitan reducir emisiones, prevenir residuos y avanzar hacia sistemas de basura cero.

Contactos de prensa: 

Camila Aguilera, GAIA, camila@no-burn.org  | +56 9 8913 6198

María Fernanda Pérez R., BFFP, mafe@breakfreefromplastic.org | +58 424 210 8017

The post Organizaciones, sector gubernamental y recicladores de base llaman a acelerar la gestión de residuos como estrategia frente al cambio climático first appeared on GAIA.

SEC says Queensland state government has deliberate policy to make renewable uninvestable, by scrapping targets, boosting coal and fighting data centres rules.

The post “It’s an ideology:” Queensland LNP accused of deliberate strategy to kill large scale renewables appeared first on Renew Economy.

Smart Energy Council calls for a carbon price to be imposed on coal fired power plants that continue to generate beyond their previously agreed closure dates.

The post Renewables lobby says coal generators should pay carbon price to stay open beyond stated closure dates appeared first on Renew Economy.

A relatively ambitious deal to reduce the shipping industry’s 3% of global emissions now looks more likely after four days of closed-door talks in London, observers say.

The International Maritime Organization (IMO), which oversees the negotiations, said there had been “constructive discussions” and “genuine willingness within the group to make concrete further progress”.

Em Fenton, senior director at the NGO Opportunity Green who attended the talks last week, said they “demonstrated a strong spirit of solidarity in the face of blatant attempts to undermine the credibility, ambition and equity of a hard-fought multilateral agreement”.

After several years of debate, governments provisionally agreed in April 2025 on a “Net-Zero Framework” (NZF) – a series of emissions reduction targets for shipowners aimed at incentivising them to use cleaner fuels, backed up with financial rewards for meeting the targets and fees for missing them.

But in October 2025, after a high-profile intervention by US President Donald Trump and threats of US sanctions and visa restrictions, the US convinced a majority of voting nations to postpone the adoption of the NZF for a year.

UCL analysis found that, of those who expressed a view at last week’s talks, 38 were in favour of an NZF-style solution while only 17 were against. Those opposed are “consistently composed of strongly fossil fuel-aligned governments”.

An observer of the talks, who did not want to be named, said the countries opposed include the US, Russia, India, Thailand, Argentina, Ecuador and Uruguay, as well as eight oil-rich Gulf nations and shipowner-reliant Liberia and Panama. Governments that support an NZF-style deal include China, Brazil, Mexico, Türkiye, Canada, Australia, Chile, nine African nations, most European countries and small islands.

A new framework to tackle shipping emissions could be adopted if two-thirds of countries that are present and signed up to a regulation called Marpol Annex VI – endorsed by just over 100 states – vote in favour of it, as they did in April 2025.

UCL’s analysis said it was “reassuring” that governments which had taken strong positions in the media against the NZF were being more compromising in the negotiations.

Tweaks are probable

While there is majority support for the NZF, UCL said adopting it would be difficult politically. “The process from here could therefore be as much about producing what appears to be a new package, but one that broadly ends up with similar outcomes in relation to objectives,” UCL argued.

But tweaking the NZF, which resulted from years of negotiations, comes with risks, it warned. For example, changes could reduce the new system’s planned support for low-income countries, turning them against it. Fenton said compromising should not mean “abandoning the principle of justice in the maritime transition”.

UCL said the speed at which shipowners must reduce their ships’ emissions or face fees is likely to be reduced in the short-term but raised in the long-term to meet a goal of net zero emissions by mid-century.

• Sep 4, 2026 Justice Palestine: Israel’s bombing has left Gaza vulnerable to climate change With homes, hospitals and water storage destroyed, Palestine’s government says that Gazans have little protection from climate impacts and sets conditional emissions targets Read more
• Sep 3, 2026 Energy More support needed to power Africa’s food systems with renewables, experts say Renewable energy could help African food businesses boost productivity and competitiveness, but the upfront cost, fragmented markets and limited financing stand in the way Read more
• Sep 2, 2026 Finance Loss and damage fund urged to hold crisis meeting on Nepal The new fund is coming under pressure from developing nations to respond quickly to climate disasters rather than just financing longer-term projects Read more

This was a compromise put forward by NZF-supporter Brazil. However, an analysis by the the Institute of Marine Engineering, Science and Technology (IMarEST) has found that this change would lead to more overall emissions than the original NZF trajectory.

UCL has warned it could incentivise liquefied natural gas as a shipping fuel over greener options, which include hydrogen-based methanol and ammonia.

Analysis by UCL and the Rocky Mountain Institute suggests that, while a slower start to the NZF would reduce transport costs in the short term, it would increase them later due to the costs involved in switching the industry over from more polluting fuel to cleaner fuel.

NZF won’t meet emissions goals

IMarEst’s analysis finds that even in its current form – the most ambitious deal on the table – the NZF will not be sufficient for shipping to meet its emissions reduction goals.

It says that only a Pacific proposal to place a levy on ships’ total emissions – rather than just those above a certain level – would meet the industry’s targets to reduce emissions 20% between 2008 and 2030, 70% by 2040 and then reach net zero “by or around, i.e. close to 2050”. This is highly unlikely to be adopted.

Additional talks will be held from November 23-27 and from November 30-December 3 before a potentially final round of official negotiations begins on December 4.

The post London talks raise hopes for green shipping deal appeared first on Climate Home News.

'We need to hold on to hope' Channel News brendan 7th September 2026 Teaser Media

Glyphosate is the most common weed killer in the United States. Known as the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, it’s used so heavily on crops that residues show up in many foods and beverages, including beer. In February, Green America tested five of the most popular beers in the U.S. for glyphosate and aminomethylphosphonic acid (AMPA), a breakdown product of glyphosate. Contamination was detected in every sample, and the highest level measured was 3.33 ng/g (Heineken).

While this concentration is below the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) acceptable levels, even low-level residues matter because pesticide exposure can build up in our bodies over time. Studies have shown that lower-dose, repeated exposures are likely more harmful than acute exposures. Other research has tied glyphosate exposure directly to cancer.

Glyphosate residues in beer alone are concerning because it’s such a popular beverage. However, beer isn’t the only food product that can expose people to glyphosate—it may also be in many other foods and drinks we consume.

Bayer, which acquired Monsanto in 2018, removed glyphosate from its home and garden products after facing tens of thousands of lawsuits filed by farmers and others exposed to glyphosate, claiming that the company didn’t warn them of the potential risk of cancer. One case brought by a farmer who used Roundup for decades and developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) is currently being heard by the Supreme Court.

Despite these clear risks, glyphosate is still used in Monsanto’s agricultural or professional products.

And just last year, the major 2000 study that supposedly demonstrated the safety of glyphosate was retracted for being ghost-written by Monsanto scientists. In the “scathing retraction notice,” Martin van den Berg, toxicologist and co–editor-in-chief of Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, wrote:

The article’s conclusions regarding the carcinogenicity of glyphosate are solely based on unpublished studies from Monsanto, which have failed to demonstrate tumorigenic potential. The handling (co) Editor-in-Chief also became aware that by the time of writing of this article in the journal, the authors did not include multiple other long-term chronic toxicity and carcinogenicity studies, that were already done at the time of writing their review in 1999.

Naomi Oreskes, a historian of science at Harvard University and best-selling author of Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Climate Change, said: “My worry is that people will keep citing it.” She and fellow researcher Alexander Kaurov published a report last year finding that over 800 scientific papers cited the retracted Monsanto study since it was published.

In 2019, the Public Interest Research Group (PIRG) tested 20 beers and wines, 19 of which contained glyphosate. At the time, critics relied on the U.S. EPA’s approved pesticide levels to argue that the contamination was unlikely to affect human health, and that the costs were outweighed by the benefits of “higher yields, economic gains for farmers and a decrease in other more toxic herbicides.” Quoting an industry spokesperson, one article claimed that “an adult would have to drink more than 140 glasses of wine a day” to ingest a dangerous level of glyphosate.

But the EPA does not fully account for cumulative, long-term exposure, nor the potential effects of chemical mixtures over time. The EPA’s position that glyphosate does not pose harmful risks to human health when used according to label instructions has been the subject of sustained criticism, including documented concerns about regulatory capture and industry influence (e.g. Merchants of Poison).

On average, Americans drink 26.5 gallons of beer per year. That high consumption rate and broad reach mean many people are exposed to a substantial cumulative concentration of pesticides in beer. Furthermore, the U.S. is the number 1 exporter of hops (unless you count the EU as a whole) and the U.S. is the number 7 exporter of barley. Given beer’s popularity, this could potentially harm millions of Americans and beer-drinkers worldwide, and pesticides used on beer crops could expose growers, farmworkers, beer producers, local communities, and the environment to toxic pesticides as well.

Many cities, states, and countries have banned glyphosate or are in the process of banning or restricting it, and most health advocates argue that all exposure to pesticides should be minimized. Previous studies have also found that there are many other pesticides besides glyphosate found in beer. Beyond Pesticides found 58 pesticides on barley alone, 22 of which are acutely toxic; 53 are linked to chronic health problems, including cancer; 18 contaminate streams or groundwater; and 49 are poisonous to wildlife.

Companies should set supplier standards, test routinely, and move sourcing away from glyphosate-dependent practices as part of an overall plan to reduce and eliminate toxic pesticides in their supply chains. That means setting up clear deadlines to phase out harmful pesticides from supply chains, starting with high-impact ingredients like barley and hops.

Brewers can also partner with growers to adopt integrated pest management (IPM) and expand organic farming practices, set ingredient standards, ensure complete supply chain transparency and support farmers and farmworkers to move away from glyphosate.

Consumers also hold power, and it starts with building awareness. We can all save beer by contacting brands and local breweries to ask where they source barley and wheat from. Do they restrict pre-harvest glyphosate? Do they test for glyphosate and AMPA?

Consumers can also choose for organic beers, which tend to have the lowest levels of glyphosate and are already working to end pesticide use and improve agricultural practices in the supply chain. Unless they are organic, craft beers can have higher levels of glyphosate and other pesticides because they are unfiltered and unpasteurized, so pesticide components aren’t broken down as much.

Believe it or not, we can all force progress by choosing beer that’s produced with more care for our environment and our health. Start by supporting better agriculture and buying from producers using verified organic and regenerative practices that restrict pesticide reliance. Get to know your local craft brewers and let them know how important their ingredient sourcing is to you. Even large-scale brewers tend to offer a line of organic beers, so buying those products can send a message that more organic beer can lead to greater company profits.

Beer lovers who want to make a difference can also get involved by signing on to Green America’s action to halt the use of toxic pesticides in beer production and supporting policy proposals that lower pesticide residue tolerances and require more robust, independent testing.

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 Amie Johnson, Unsplash

The post Op-Ed | Beer Can Be Saved from Pesticide Contamination. Here’s What Companies and Consumers Need to Do. appeared first on Food Tank.