News Feeds

What if the story we tell ourselves about progress is wrong?

How pronatalist misinformation fuels low-fertility alarmism.

After centuries of dam building, a nationwide movement to dismantle these aging barriers is showing how free-flowing rivers can restore ecosystems, improve safety, and reconnect people with nature.

The soft body of the turtle Channel Comment brendan 9th September 2026 Teaser Media

Dua pemain membuka permainan serupa dengan nilai transaksi berbeda. Satu memakai nominal kecil, sementara pemain lain memasang angka lebih besar. Ketika hasil keduanya bertolak belakang, muncul dugaan bahwa sistem sengaja menaikkan tingkat kesulitan berdasarkan jumlah dana. Dari sinilah anggapan mengenai hubungan Nominal Situs Slot Maxwin dengan algoritma mulai berkembang.

Dugaan tersebut terdengar masuk akal apabila hanya dilihat dari pengalaman singkat. Namun mekanisme permainan digital tidak sesederhana membaca jumlah transaksi lalu mengubah peluang secara otomatis. Algoritma Slot Maxwin pada permainan berbasis RNG bekerja melalui proses perhitungan hasil setiap putaran sesuai konfigurasi game. Nilai taruhan dapat memengaruhi jumlah uang pada hasil tertentu, tetapi bukan berarti tingkat kesulitan otomatis berubah.

Nominal Situs Slot Maxwin Sering Disalahartikan sebagai Pengatur Peluang

Nominal menjadi elemen paling mudah diamati pengguna. Angka terlihat jelas pada layar, berubah setiap putaran, serta langsung berkaitan dengan saldo. Tidak heran apabila bagian ini kerap dianggap sebagai faktor utama saat hasil permainan berubah. Padahal ada perbedaan antara nilai taruhan dan probabilitas. Taruhan menentukan besarnya nilai finansial pada satu putaran. Probabilitas berkaitan dengan struktur matematika permainan, kombinasi simbol, tabel pembayaran, volatilitas, serta konfigurasi sistem. Situs Slot Maxwin pada dasarnya menjadi medium akses menuju permainan dari provider. Jika game memakai sistem RNG, hasil putaran tidak semestinya ditentukan hanya karena pemain menaikkan atau menurunkan nominal.

Nominal Besar Membuat Perubahan Saldo Terlihat Lebih Dramatis

Ada alasan psikologis mengapa nominal tinggi terasa lebih sulit. Ketika nilai per putaran meningkat, perubahan saldo juga berlangsung lebih cepat. Beberapa hasil tanpa pembayaran bisa menciptakan penurunan cukup besar dalam waktu singkat. Situasi tersebut mudah diterjemahkan sebagai peningkatan kesulitan. Padahal mekanisme dasarnya dapat tetap sama. Sebaliknya, nominal kecil membuat perubahan saldo tampak lebih lambat. Durasi bermain dapat terasa panjang sehingga pengguna memperoleh lebih banyak kesempatan melihat variasi hasil. Perbedaan pengalaman ini sering membentuk persepsi keliru mengenai Algoritma Slot Maxwin.

Bagaimana Algoritma Slot Maxwin Membentuk Hasil Putaran?

Permainan slot digital umumnya menggunakan Random Number Generator untuk menghasilkan keluaran secara acak sesuai parameter permainan. Sistem tersebut berjalan pada setiap putaran dan menentukan susunan simbol berdasarkan aturan internal game. Di sisi lain, ada RTP teoretis serta volatilitas. RTP menggambarkan persentase pengembalian secara matematis dalam simulasi jangka sangat panjang, bukan janji hasil pada satu sesi. Volatilitas menjelaskan karakter distribusi pembayaran. Game bervolatilitas tinggi dapat memiliki rentang hasil lebih lebar, sedangkan volatilitas rendah cenderung menghasilkan distribusi berbeda. Karena itu, membahas Algoritma Slot Maxwin hanya melalui nominal transaksi mengabaikan banyak variabel teknis lain.

Perubahan Nilai Taruhan Tidak Sama dengan Perubahan Mesin

Saat pemain berpindah dari Rp1.000 menjadi Rp10.000 per putaran, efek paling nyata terdapat pada nilai uang. Jika kombinasi memberikan pembayaran 20 kali taruhan, hasil finansial tentu berbeda. Namun peningkatan tersebut tidak otomatis membuktikan bahwa sistem masuk ke mode lebih sulit. Pengecualian bisa muncul pada permainan dengan fitur, jackpot, atau syarat tertentu berdasarkan level taruhan. Informasi semacam ini seharusnya tercantum pada aturan permainan. Karena setiap produk memiliki konfigurasi berbeda, pengguna perlu membaca paytable serta informasi fitur daripada menganggap semua game memakai pola identik.

Mengapa Mitos Nominal Mengubah Algoritma Mudah Menyebar?

Pengalaman pribadi memiliki pengaruh besar terhadap cara pemain membaca pola. Seseorang mungkin menaikkan taruhan lalu mengalami beberapa putaran tanpa hasil. Kejadian tersebut kemudian dianggap sebagai bukti hubungan sebab-akibat. Masalahnya, sampel beberapa putaran terlalu kecil untuk menjelaskan sistem probabilitas. Cerita komunitas juga memperkuat kesan tersebut. Pengalaman unik lebih sering dibagikan dibanding sesi biasa. Akibatnya, pengguna melihat kumpulan cerita ekstrem dan merasa pola serupa terjadi secara konsisten pada Situs Slot Maxwin. Bias konfirmasi ikut berperan. Setelah seseorang percaya nominal besar membuat permainan sulit, setiap kekalahan setelah menaikkan taruhan terasa seperti pembenaran. Hasil berbeda sering justru terlupakan.

Situs Slot Maxwin Perlu Memisahkan Fakta Sistem dari Persepsi

Transparansi menjadi bagian penting ketika sebuah platform menyajikan informasi permainan. Situs Slot Maxwin idealnya memberikan akses jelas terhadap aturan, tabel pembayaran, batas taruhan, fitur khusus, serta informasi RTP apabila tersedia dari provider. Informasi tersebut jauh lebih berguna dibanding klaim mengenai nominal tertentu sebagai angka “aman”, “panas”, atau dianggap mampu membuka peluang khusus. Tanpa data teknis dari pengembang, klaim semacam itu tidak cukup kuat untuk dijadikan kesimpulan.

Nominal Situs Slot Maxwin pada akhirnya lebih tepat dipahami sebagai pengaturan nilai finansial per putaran. Besar atau kecilnya angka dapat mengubah kecepatan perubahan saldo dan persepsi risiko, tetapi tidak otomatis menjadi tombol rahasia untuk menaikkan atau menurunkan tingkat kesulitan.

Algoritma Slot Maxwin tetap perlu dibaca melalui mekanisme game, RNG, volatilitas, paytable, fitur khusus, serta parameter dari provider. Memisahkan unsur tersebut membantu pengguna melihat perbedaan antara sistem matematika dan pola semu hasil pengalaman singkat. Dengan begitu, nominal tidak lagi dianggap sebagai bukti bahwa algoritma diam-diam berubah setiap kali angka taruhan dinaikkan.

• Plug-in hybrids emit six times the amount of greenhouse gases than official testing suggests, according to a new European Union study. The auto industry is opposed to regulations that would bring those figures into line with reality. (Transport & Environment)
• Density makes cities more productive, but traffic congestion eats up a lot of those benefits. (Brookings)
• West Coast states are leading the way in exploring new sources of transportation funding to account for more fuel-efficient vehicles and declining gas tax revenue. (Government Technology)
• House Republicans’ proposed five-year transportation funding bill could result in 25 percent cuts for Milwaukee County transit. (Urban Milwaukee)
• In response to outrage from transit advocates, the Houston Metro cut jobs and restructured debt rather than cutting rail and bus service as previously planned. (Chronicle; paywall)
• A new design for Boston’s Blue Hill Avenue keeps a controversial center bus lane while adding more parking, more trees, new sidewalks and a bike path. (WBUR)
• A Montreal study says that investing in transit brings greater economic development benefits than investing in car infrastructure. (Global News)
• A small group of Seattle property owners is out to stop a monorail project by disingenuously asking for expensive “improvements” that drive up the cost and demanding more studies. (The Stranger)
• Amtrak will suspend Virginia-to-D.C. service next month to make critical track upgrades. (Mercury)
• Fort Worth Report lists the most dangerous intersections in the city.
• Drivers killed two pedestrians in Wilmington last week, prompting renewed interest in Vision Zero. (WWAY)
• Darrell Owens delves into the drama over a bike lane in Berkeley that’s been a hot topic on Bluesky. (The Discourse Lounge)
• If you’re in Toronto and want to gawk at some celebs this week, take the King Street streetcar. It’s being rerouted effective Thursday to pass by an international film festival. (blogTO)

For small business owners and aspiring entrepreneurs, the right financing can make all the difference. Unfortunately, not all lenders have your best interests in mind. 

Online lenders often promise fast cash and easy approvals, but those offers can come with high costs and long-term financial stress. Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) like Mountain Association take a different approach, focusing on your long-term success while still delivering financing decisions quickly. 

Predatory Lending vs. Community Lending 

Predatory lenders often market themselves as a solution for businesses that don’t qualify for traditional bank financing. They advertise same-day approvals and minimal paperwork, but those conveniences can come at a steep price. Many charge extremely high interest rates, add hidden fees, or require daily or weekly payments that put pressure on cash flow. 

We’ve seen annual percentage rates (APRs) ranging from 40% to more than 350%. In some cases, business owners end up repaying several times what they originally borrowed, making it harder to invest in growth and build financial stability. As an example, a small business in Leslie County was having to pay $1,300 per week to a predatory lender. 

At Mountain Association, we believe financing should create opportunity, not become a burden. As a CDFI, we work with entrepreneurs who may not qualify for conventional financing and help strengthen local economies across Eastern Kentucky. 

Our loans range from $1,000 to more than $1 million, with interest rates typically between 5% and 9.75% and flexible repayment terms. We also offer solar financing at a fixed 4% interest rate with terms up to 20 years. For loans under $50,000, decisions are often made within 2 to 10 business days once all required information is received. 

More Than a Loan 

One of the biggest differences between Mountain Association and many online lenders is the relationship we build with borrowers. 

While predatory lenders often rely on automated systems and provide little support after approval, our team takes the time to understand your goals, challenges, and opportunities. Whether you’re starting a business, purchasing equipment, expanding operations, or strengthening working capital, we’ll help identify the financing option that best fits your needs. 

Our lending process is transparent and supportive. We’ll explain the terms, answer your questions, and make sure you’re comfortable before moving forward. We also connect entrepreneurs with free business coaching, technical assistance, and additional resources to help build a stronger foundation for success. 

Financing Designed for Growing Businesses 

We also structure loans differently than many traditional and online lenders. 

For larger equipment purchases, we typically pay vendors directly. For smaller purchases, borrowers can submit receipts for reimbursement. This approach often benefits businesses because they only make payments on funds that have actually been disbursed, rather than on the entire loan amount from day one. 

We also prioritize accountability and flexibility. While we offer working capital loans when appropriate, many of our loans are structured around specific business investments. 

Another important difference is our approach to collateral. We work hard to separate business and personal assets and avoid using personal assets as collateral whenever possible. To address collateral gaps, we may utilize a collateral support fund through the Foundation for Appalachian Kentucky or share risk through lending partnerships. 

Work With Us 

We’re proud to offer financing that helps people build businesses, create local jobs, and strengthen their communities. 

If you have a business idea or are ready to grow an existing business, choosing the right lender matters. Mountain Association is committed to providing fair, affordable capital along with the guidance and support entrepreneurs need to succeed. 

Learn more at mtassociation.org/lending 

The post Avoid the Business Debt Trap: Know the Difference Between Predatory and Community Lenders  appeared first on Mountain Association.

Open Letter to the Chair of the Intergovernmental Negotiating Committee on Plastic Pollution

Your excellency, Amb. Julio Cordano,

The release of the Aid to Negotiations marks a key step in the process to develop a legally binding international instrument to end plastic pollution. Unfortunately, rather than bringing the Parties closer to delivering the ambition mandated by the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA) Resolution 5/14, the document raises profound concerns about both its substance and the process by which it was developed.

Your Aid to Negotiations is not a neutral facilitation document. It is a political document that makes choices. These choices consistently favor the lowest common denominator – about what is prioritized, what is sidelined, and what is left unresolved. And time and again, sacrificing the ambition mandated by governments in Resolution 5/14.

The result is deeply troubling: rather than facilitating progress towards an ambitious, fit-for-purpose treaty supported by a majority of countries, as demonstrated in previous rounds of negotiations, the Aid to Negotiations text is an insidious attempt to compromise on the wishlist of a small group of petrostates. 

Rather than helping Parties conclude a treaty capable of truly ending plastic pollution, the document renders ineffective the core elements needed to achieve its objective. It systematically removes obligations to address upstream measures, weakens the financial mechanisms necessary to ensure effective implementation of the instrument, and excessively relies on voluntary, non-binding, nationally determined measures whilst sidelining binding ones. It gives disproportionate weight to positions advanced by a small group of countries that have consistently sought to delay, dilute, and derail negotiations, while disregarding proposals supported by broad majorities of Parties.

Since your assumption of the Chairmanship, observers—particularly those representing the communities most impacted by plastic pollution—have repeatedly been denied access to the process. This has effectively turned what should be an inclusive, transparent, and fair multilateral process into almost a year-long series of closed-door meetings, under the pretext of an informal Member State-led process. The ambiguity in the Rules of Procedure regarding observer participation in informal meetings has been repeatedly invoked to justify our exclusion.  Such restrictions undermine the transparency, inclusivity, and legitimacy of the process. Those living on the frontlines of the plastics crisis cannot be expected to accept decisions being made about their lives, livelihoods and communities from behind closed doors. Yet, we remain attentive, engaged and determined to achieve an ambitious, fit-for-purpose treaty that protects human health and ensures environmental justice to all. The Aid-to-Negotiations text carries a conscious choice. Specifically:

• Conference Room Papers supported by large numbers of ambitious governments on key upstream measures have been ignored, while weaker downstream options championed by a handful of spoiler countries are prioritized
• The text regress us  instead of building on progress achieved over the past five negotiation sessions
• The interpretation of “balance” consistently result in lower ambition
• Texts that have been officially rejected by the International Negotiations Committee at INC-5.2 are considered as references
• Low-ambition text that has not been previously negotiated in the formal INC process, has been introduced

These are not rhetorical questions. They go to the heart of whether this process is still serving the mandate governments agreed to in Nairobi in 2022.

UNEA 5/14 Is Not Open for Renegotiation

There is no legitimate disagreement about the treaty’s purpose. Governments agreed that this instrument must end plastic pollution through a comprehensive approach addressing the full lifecycle of plastics. Yet, the document repeatedly treats upstream obligations as optional, secondary, or politically unrealistic while upending the waste hierarchy and prevention principles.

Plastic pollution does not begin at the waste stage; it begins with fossil fuel extraction, petrochemical production and ever-increasing plastic production. No amount of geopolitical influence can override the prevailing scientific evidence when it comes to reordering the stages of the plastics lifecycle. The science is clear: the plastics crisis must be addressed across its full lifecycle, and no political maneuvering can change that reality. 

Three-quarters of greenhouse gas emissions from primary plastic production occur before polymers are even manufactured. Waste management systems cannot solve a crisis driven by unchecked production. Only around 9% of all plastics ever produced have been recycled. A treaty that does not address production cannot end plastic pollution if  it ignores its primary driver.

Consensus cannot become a Veto

The document also perpetuates another false narrative: that consensus at any cost is necessary for success. It is not.

More than 115 countries support maintaining the ability to adopt decisions by voting after all efforts to reach consensus have been exhausted. This reflects a standard and widely accepted practice under international law. Without this safeguard, an impasse shaped by a handful of minority countries seeking to delay or weaken the treaty could render any progress or achievement supported by the overwhelming majority of governments meaningless.

The climate regime offers a clear warning: overreliance on consensus has delayed, weakened, and postponed critical decisions for decades. The plastics crisis cannot afford to wait 30 years for urgent action. 

Consensus should be the preferred outcome, not a permanent veto for those most invested in preserving the status quo. Consensus is not interchangeable with unanimity.

The document points toward a Framework Convention

The most worrying feature of the Aid to Negotiations is its overall direction. Throughout your communications, you have emphasized that the treaty should be “concise”, “adaptable,” and capable of evolving over time. Taken together with the removal of substantive obligations throughout the document, this suggests a deliberate shift toward a framework convention. A treaty that establishes broad aspirations today while postponing binding and urgent measures until future protocols is spineless. That is not what governments mandated in the UNEA 5/14 Resolution.

Framework conventions delay action, postpone difficult decisions, and require years, sometimes decades, of additional negotiations before meaningful obligations exist, if they are ever achieved. The world does not have that time.

The plastics treaty must include binding global control measures from the outset, supported by annexes that can be strengthened over time by independent, science-based evidence. This is how a treaty can both evolve and remain relevant and effective.

Transparency has been replaced by Opaqueness

The concerns extend far beyond the text itself. The process through which this document has been developed has lacked transparency from the outset – and this deficit has become increasingly pronounced since you assumed the Chairmanship of the Committee.

Governments, rights-holders and observers have no clear understanding of how negotiating advances were discarded, why widely supported proposals disappeared, or on what basis competing options were selected.

A Chair’s document should faithfully reflect Parties’ positions; it should not quietly rewrite them. When choices consistently favor those seeking weaker obligations, confidence and trust in the neutrality of the process inevitably erode.

With a document so consistently aligned with the agenda of countries seeking the weakest possible treaty, it is reasonable to ask: Whose positions is this document actually reflecting and representing?

At every stage of this process, meaningful civil society and rightsholders participation has been systematically sidelined, increasingly reduced to the margins and, in practice, denied altogether. Governments face language barriers that prevent meaningful participation from any non-English-speaking delegation. Indigenous Peoples, waste pickers, frontline communities, women, youth, scientists, and public health experts have repeatedly been prevented from fully and effectively engaging in this process.

In your 4th letter to the Committee, you proposed a new multi-stakeholder action agenda. Observers are not asking for another forum; we are asking to participate in the negotiations and to have the right to engage with our country’s representatives present at the negotiations.

We also reject the false equivalence implied by the term “Observers.” Communities living with plastic pollution are rights-holders. Corporations whose business models depend on expanding plastic production are not. The Tobacco Convention recognized this distinction and succeeded in solving the problem it was intended to address. The Plastics Treaty must do the same.

Leadership requires Upholding the Mandate, not Lowering It

The Committee won’t succeed by producing a document that everyone dislikes equally. Your responsibility is not to protect the comfort and interests of the least ambitious Parties. It is not to make a treaty that is politically convenient for spoiler countries. It is to facilitate negotiations that allow governments to deliver the treaty they were mandated to negotiate.

The Aid to Negotiations does the opposite: it narrows ambition. It privileges obstruction. It weakens obligations. And it risks steering this process toward a treaty incapable of ending plastic pollution.

A Note to Ambitious Countries

We, Observers, recognize that this process has been intense, demanding, and frustrating. Yet, we have not come this far to agree to a text that does not fulfill the mandate of Resolution 5/14. We request that Governments reject any negotiating text that retreats from the agreed mandate.

The world did not launch these negotiations to produce another framework for future discussions. It was launched to end plastic pollution. That remains the benchmark by which this process should be judged.

Civil society will stand with ambitious countries that reject a weak treaty. Your leadership is needed to avoid a catastrophic outcome. No treaty remains a better option than a bad treaty.

We also encourage you to consider negotiating a treaty outside the UN. The UNEP umbrella has consistently failed to deliver a fair process, and unfair processes do not result in strong outcomes. A treaty driven by the ambitious majority, guided by a genuine desire to end plastic pollution and by the power and experience of countries that have demonstrated commitment to the process has a winning chance to deliver the needed outcomes. If you decide to move in the direction of a Coalition of the Willing, civil society will stand firmly alongside you applauding  your braveness, supporting your decisiveness and ready to work with you. 

The post GAIA Response to the Aid to Negotiations first appeared on GAIA.

President Donald Trump and his recently appointed U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Aitkins are proposing to rescind the pay-to-play rule. The rule prohibits investment advisers and their officers from making or soliciting campaign contributions above a small threshold to government officials responsible for awarding investment contracts to those advisers for two years prior or during the contracting period. Craig Holman, Ph.D., government affairs lobbyist for Public Citizen, released the following statement:

“In a stunning and completely out-of-the-blue new proposal, President Trump and SEC Chair Aitkins are seeking to overturn a highly successful and decades-old anti-corruption rule. Trump’s proposal comes on the heels of – nothing. There have been no new problems with the rule and no new reasons for its repeal, though investment advisers have never particularly cared for it. The effort to rescind the pay-to-play rule is simply the latest extension of the Trump administration canceling ethics rules, especially those that get in the way of the rich getting richer.

“Back in 1994, then-SEC Chair Arthur Levitt grew fed up with repeated scandals in which investment advisers appeared to be buying government contracts by making large campaign contributions to those responsible for awarding the contracts. Levitt cracked down on this corrupt practice by banning anything but small de minimis contributions from advisers and their associates to those responsible for awarding government investment contracts, which quickly became known as the ‘pay-to-play’ rule.

“The pay-to-play rule remains on the books today because it works. Repealing it is nothing but the most brazen corruption.”

Center for International Policy Executive Vice President Matt Duss issued the following statement in response to new measures announced by the United Kingdom and other US allies in response to Israeli settlement expansion:

“Banning the import of settlement goods and sanctioning those who facilitate settlement expansion are welcome, if long overdue, steps toward upholding international law, protecting Palestinian national rights, and advancing regional security. Several countries have announced that they will join the United Kingdom in adopting such measures, which we urge them to consistently enforce. We also applaud the UK’s recognition that Israel’s occupation of Palestinian territory is unlawful.

“American lawmakers who seek to uphold the rule of law and pursue a non-violent resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict should welcome these efforts by some of our closest allies. They should call on the US government to adopt these and similar measures, instead of resisting them.

“The decades-long approach of urging Israel to halt settlement expansion, while failing to impose any consequences for it, has been a catastrophic failure. By effectively granting Israel impunity from international consequences, the US has fueled an annexationist movement that openly terrorizes Palestinian communities, forcibly displaces them, and steals their land in full partnership with the Israeli government and armed forces. Make no mistake: Those trying to undermine or penalize the lawful steps rightly taken in response to the occupation are actively abetting this deadly, illegal conquest.”

With prices down, costs up, and trade barriers potentially loosening further, peasant farmers across several provinces are mobilizing in South Korea.

The post South Korea: Peasant Unions Take to the Streets Over CPTPP trade pact and Collapsing Crop Prices appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

Print article Share Article Contents Expand menu

• What happened?
• How did bedrock collapse trigger the flash floods?
• How have temperatures risen in the affected region? 
• How have rising temperatures affected mountain stability?
• How have glaciers retreated in the affected region?
• Can the event be attributed to climate change?

On the morning of 26 August, flash floods surged through a Himalayan border region of Nepal and the Chinese region of Tibet, killing more than 1,300 people, with thousands still missing.

In the days since the floods, scientists have examined satellite imagery, drone footage and seismic data in order to understand and explain the forces behind the event.

While initial theories pinned the flood on a glacial collapse, scientists now understand the event as a “multi-hazard cascade”, which began with a bedrock collapse. 

Some climate sceptics have tried to use this to falsely claim that human-caused climate change had no impact on the event. 

Yet, scientists have noted that, while no formal attribution study has been carried out thus far, warming is making such ice-rock avalanches in the region more likely.

Researchers have highlighted how rapid warming is dramatically reshaping Asia’s high-mountain region – and identified rising temperatures, glacier retreat and permafrost thaw as factors that may have all contributed to the disaster. 

Balendra Shah, Nepal’s prime minister, has called the floods a “serious signal that…the risks we must bear in the Himalayan region are increasing” due to climate change.

Here, Carbon Brief unpacks what scientists currently know about the causes of the catastrophic event and what they can – and cannot – say about the role of climate change. 

• What happened?
• How did bedrock collapse trigger the flash floods?
• How have temperatures risen in the affected region?
• How have rising temperatures affected mountain stability?
• How have glaciers retreated in the affected region?
• Can the event be attributed to climate change?

What happened?

A report published on 28 August by the HiRisk scientific consortium of high mountain experts detailed the events that led to the flash floods.

It said that events were set in motion on 26 August when a mass of bedrock, as well as the glacier ice on top of it, broke off a slope of Langtang-Lirung mountain in the Nepalese Himalaya, plunging from approximately 5,200 metres above sea level to the valley floor at 3,000 metres. 

The landslide shook the ground hard enough that, at 8:37am Nepal local time, the US Geological Survey (USGS) initially reported a magnitude 4.4 earthquake. Later that day, it clarified the shaking was caused by glacier collapse and debris flow, equivalent to a magnitude 5.2 earthquake.

On the valley floor, the melting ice, water and debris slammed into the Lhende Khola river, a high-altitude river that runs along Nepal’s border with China. 

Known downstream as the Bhote Koshi river in Nepal and the Poiqu or Poqu in China, the Lhende Khole feeds a network of rivers across Nepal and the Chinese region of Tibet, including the Trishuli river. (In China, the Lhende Khola is known as the Donglin Tsangpo.)

The designations employed and the presentation of the material on this map do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of Carbon Brief concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Credit: Carbon Brief.

A large “debris” lake was briefly formed on the valley floor. When this lake burst, a wall of water and rock travelled downstream, killing more than a thousand people and destroying settlements, roads, bridges, hydropower plants and border posts across Nepal and Tibet.

HiRisk said that the floodwave travelled down rivers as fast as 30km an hour (around 19 miles per hour) and reached Mugling – a Nepalese town more than 130km downstream – at around 1pm local time.

A separate report from the Center for Land Surface Hazards in the US noted that the flood moved “exceptionally fast, was sediment-laden and extreme in scale”. For example, in the Nepalese municipality of Galchhi, the Trishuli river rose by nine metres in 30 minutes, it said.

Writing in the Conversation, Dr Umesh Haritashya, a glaciologist at the University of Dayton in Ohio, explained that the disaster “wasn’t finished when the first wall of water passed [on 26 August]”. 

#gform_wrapper_5[data-form-index="0"].gform-theme,[data-parent-form="5_0"]{--gf-color-primary: #204ce5;--gf-color-primary-rgb: 32, 76, 229;--gf-color-primary-contrast: #fff;--gf-color-primary-contrast-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-primary-darker: #001AB3;--gf-color-primary-lighter: #527EFF;--gf-color-secondary: #fff;--gf-color-secondary-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-secondary-contrast: #112337;--gf-color-secondary-contrast-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-secondary-darker: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-secondary-lighter: #FFFFFF;--gf-color-out-ctrl-light: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.1);--gf-color-out-ctrl-light-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-out-ctrl-light-darker: rgba(104, 110, 119, 0.35);--gf-color-out-ctrl-light-lighter: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark: #585e6a;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark-rgb: 88, 94, 106;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark-darker: #112337;--gf-color-out-ctrl-dark-lighter: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65);--gf-color-in-ctrl: #fff;--gf-color-in-ctrl-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-in-ctrl-contrast: #112337;--gf-color-in-ctrl-contrast-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-in-ctrl-darker: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-in-ctrl-lighter: #FFFFFF;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary: #204ce5;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-rgb: 32, 76, 229;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-contrast: #fff;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-contrast-rgb: 255, 255, 255;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-darker: #001AB3;--gf-color-in-ctrl-primary-lighter: #527EFF;--gf-color-in-ctrl-light: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.1);--gf-color-in-ctrl-light-rgb: 17, 35, 55;--gf-color-in-ctrl-light-darker: rgba(104, 110, 119, 0.35);--gf-color-in-ctrl-light-lighter: #F5F5F5;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark: #585e6a;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark-rgb: 88, 94, 106;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark-darker: #112337;--gf-color-in-ctrl-dark-lighter: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65);--gf-radius: 3px;--gf-font-size-secondary: 14px;--gf-font-size-tertiary: 13px;--gf-icon-ctrl-number: url("data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg width='8' height='14' viewBox='0 0 8 14' fill='none' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%3E%3Cpath fill-rule='evenodd' clip-rule='evenodd' d='M4 0C4.26522 5.96046e-08 4.51957 0.105357 4.70711 0.292893L7.70711 3.29289C8.09763 3.68342 8.09763 4.31658 7.70711 4.70711C7.31658 5.09763 6.68342 5.09763 6.29289 4.70711L4 2.41421L1.70711 4.70711C1.31658 5.09763 0.683417 5.09763 0.292893 4.70711C-0.0976311 4.31658 -0.097631 3.68342 0.292893 3.29289L3.29289 0.292893C3.48043 0.105357 3.73478 0 4 0ZM0.292893 9.29289C0.683417 8.90237 1.31658 8.90237 1.70711 9.29289L4 11.5858L6.29289 9.29289C6.68342 8.90237 7.31658 8.90237 7.70711 9.29289C8.09763 9.68342 8.09763 10.3166 7.70711 10.7071L4.70711 13.7071C4.31658 14.0976 3.68342 14.0976 3.29289 13.7071L0.292893 10.7071C-0.0976311 10.3166 -0.0976311 9.68342 0.292893 9.29289Z' fill='rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65)'/%3E%3C/svg%3E");--gf-icon-ctrl-select: url("data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg width='10' height='6' viewBox='0 0 10 6' fill='none' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%3E%3Cpath fill-rule='evenodd' clip-rule='evenodd' d='M0.292893 0.292893C0.683417 -0.097631 1.31658 -0.097631 1.70711 0.292893L5 3.58579L8.29289 0.292893C8.68342 -0.0976311 9.31658 -0.0976311 9.70711 0.292893C10.0976 0.683417 10.0976 1.31658 9.70711 1.70711L5.70711 5.70711C5.31658 6.09763 4.68342 6.09763 4.29289 5.70711L0.292893 1.70711C-0.0976311 1.31658 -0.0976311 0.683418 0.292893 0.292893Z' fill='rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65)'/%3E%3C/svg%3E");--gf-icon-ctrl-search: url("data:image/svg+xml,%3Csvg width='640' height='640' xmlns='http://www.w3.org/2000/svg'%3E%3Cpath d='M256 128c-70.692 0-128 57.308-128 128 0 70.691 57.308 128 128 128 70.691 0 128-57.309 128-128 0-70.692-57.309-128-128-128zM64 256c0-106.039 85.961-192 192-192s192 85.961 192 192c0 41.466-13.146 79.863-35.498 111.248l154.125 154.125c12.496 12.496 12.496 32.758 0 45.254s-32.758 12.496-45.254 0L367.248 412.502C335.862 434.854 297.467 448 256 448c-106.039 0-192-85.962-192-192z' fill='rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.65)'/%3E%3C/svg%3E");--gf-label-space-y-secondary: var(--gf-label-space-y-md-secondary);--gf-ctrl-border-color: #686e77;--gf-ctrl-size: var(--gf-ctrl-size-md);--gf-ctrl-label-color-primary: #112337;--gf-ctrl-label-color-secondary: #112337;--gf-ctrl-choice-size: var(--gf-ctrl-choice-size-md);--gf-ctrl-checkbox-check-size: var(--gf-ctrl-checkbox-check-size-md);--gf-ctrl-radio-check-size: var(--gf-ctrl-radio-check-size-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-font-size: var(--gf-ctrl-btn-font-size-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-padding-x: var(--gf-ctrl-btn-padding-x-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-size: var(--gf-ctrl-btn-size-md);--gf-ctrl-btn-border-color-secondary: #686e77;--gf-ctrl-file-btn-bg-color-hover: #EBEBEB;--gf-field-img-choice-size: var(--gf-field-img-choice-size-md);--gf-field-img-choice-card-space: var(--gf-field-img-choice-card-space-md);--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-size: var(--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-size-md);--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-icon-size: var(--gf-field-img-choice-check-ind-icon-size-md);--gf-field-pg-steps-number-color: rgba(17, 35, 55, 0.8);}

PhoneThis field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Free fortnightly newsletter

.preheader p{ margin-top: 0; font-family: 'PT Sans', sans-serif; font-weight: var(--type--3--font-weight--bold); color: var(--button--color); font-size: var(--button--font-size, inherit); } .newsletter-inline{ display: flex; border: solid 1px #333333; padding: 1em; background: #ffffff; } .inline-email{ display:inline-block; margin-right:1em; margin-top:0 !important; margin-bottom:0.5em; } #field_submit{ display:inline-block; margin-top:0 !important; } .gform_wrapper .gfield+.gfield{ margin-top:0 } Email gform.initializeOnLoaded( function() {gformInitSpinner( 5, 'http://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg', false );jQuery('#gform_ajax_frame_5').on('load',function(){var contents = jQuery(this).contents().find('*').html();var is_postback = contents.indexOf('GF_AJAX_POSTBACK') >= 0;if(!is_postback){return;}var form_content = jQuery(this).contents().find('#gform_wrapper_5');var is_confirmation = jQuery(this).contents().find('#gform_confirmation_wrapper_5').length > 0;var is_redirect = contents.indexOf('gformRedirect(){') >= 0;var is_form = form_content.length > 0 && ! is_redirect && ! is_confirmation;var mt = parseInt(jQuery('html').css('margin-top'), 10) + parseInt(jQuery('body').css('margin-top'), 10) + 100;if(is_form){jQuery('#gform_wrapper_5').html(form_content.html());if(form_content.hasClass('gform_validation_error')){jQuery('#gform_wrapper_5').addClass('gform_validation_error');} else {jQuery('#gform_wrapper_5').removeClass('gform_validation_error');}setTimeout( function() { /* delay the scroll by 50 milliseconds to fix a bug in chrome */ jQuery(document).scrollTop(jQuery('#gform_wrapper_5').offset().top - mt); }, 50 );if(window['gformInitDatepicker']) {gformInitDatepicker();}if(window['gformInitPriceFields']) {gformInitPriceFields();}var current_page = jQuery('#gform_source_page_number_5').val();gformInitSpinner( 5, 'http://www.carbonbrief.org/wp-content/plugins/gravityforms/images/spinner.svg', false );jQuery(document).trigger('gform_page_loaded', [5, current_page]);window['gf_submitting_5'] = false;}else if(!is_redirect){var confirmation_content = jQuery(this).contents().find('.GF_AJAX_POSTBACK').html();if(!confirmation_content){confirmation_content = contents;}jQuery('#gform_wrapper_5').replaceWith(confirmation_content);jQuery(document).scrollTop(jQuery('#gf_5').offset().top - mt);jQuery(document).trigger('gform_confirmation_loaded', [5]);window['gf_submitting_5'] = false;wp.a11y.speak(jQuery('#gform_confirmation_message_5').text());}else{jQuery('#gform_5').append(contents);if(window['gformRedirect']) {gformRedirect();}}jQuery(document).trigger("gform_pre_post_render", [{ formId: "5", currentPage: "current_page", abort: function() { this.preventDefault(); } }]); if (event && event.defaultPrevented) { return; } const gformWrapperDiv = document.getElementById( "gform_wrapper_5" ); if ( gformWrapperDiv ) { const visibilitySpan = document.createElement( "span" ); visibilitySpan.id = "gform_visibility_test_5"; gformWrapperDiv.insertAdjacentElement( "afterend", visibilitySpan ); } const visibilityTestDiv = document.getElementById( "gform_visibility_test_5" ); let postRenderFired = false; function triggerPostRender() { if ( postRenderFired ) { return; } postRenderFired = true; gform.core.triggerPostRenderEvents( 5, current_page ); if ( visibilityTestDiv ) { visibilityTestDiv.parentNode.removeChild( visibilityTestDiv ); } } function debounce( func, wait, immediate ) { var timeout; return function() { var context = this, args = arguments; var later = function() { timeout = null; if ( !immediate ) func.apply( context, args ); }; var callNow = immediate && !timeout; clearTimeout( timeout ); timeout = setTimeout( later, wait ); if ( callNow ) func.apply( context, args ); }; } const debouncedTriggerPostRender = debounce( function() { triggerPostRender(); }, 200 ); if ( visibilityTestDiv && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent === null ) { const observer = new MutationObserver( ( mutations ) => { mutations.forEach( ( mutation ) => { if ( mutation.type === 'attributes' && visibilityTestDiv.offsetParent !== null ) { debouncedTriggerPostRender(); observer.disconnect(); } }); }); observer.observe( document.body, { attributes: true, childList: false, subtree: true, attributeFilter: [ 'style', 'class' ], }); } else { triggerPostRender(); } } );} );

He continued that a new “barrier lake” – estimated to hold a few million cubic metres of water – had developed in a location where two rivers meet in Tibet before crossing into Nepal. This lake burst on 28 August and the river rose again, he said. 

On 4 September, the chief of Nepal’s National Disaster ​Risk Reduction and Management Authority, told Reuters that property and infrastructure worth “at least” $2.5bn (£1.9bn) had been lost. Dharma Raj Upreti estimated the cost to build roads and temporary shelters, provide drinking water and ⁠restore power would be around $53m (£39m). 

How did bedrock collapse trigger the flash floods?

In the immediate aftermath of the floods, initial reports suggested that the trigger was a collapsing glacier or earthquake in the high mountains of Nepal.

After confirming that a seismic tremor was as a result of falling rock and ice, the USGS said the trigger was likely a “glacial collapse and debris flow”. This was widely picked up by the media. 

Subsequently, satellite imagery revealed that an “enormous chunk of the mountainous bedrock” beneath the glacier had also given way, reported the New York Times. 

Dr Kristen Cook, a geomorphologist at the Université Grenoble Alpes in France, told the newspaper:

“The rock that the glacier was sitting on collapsed…It was a much larger collapse than we were initially able to see in the satellite imagery.”

The result was a “deluge of rock and ice, which pulverized into mud and water as it surged down the mountainside”, the newspaper said.

Dr Jakob Steiner a geoscientist at the University of Graz in Austria, tells Carbon Brief:

“It was not a glacier that collapsed. It was the mountain below the glacier that collapsed and the glacier had no other chance but to go with it because it was sitting on top of it. 

“The trigger for that is something that we are not 100% certain about, but, in the end, it very much looks like simply a mechanical failure of the rock material because of stressors that have built up over a long period of time.”

Failures of “bedrock” – the hard, solid rock that sits below looser rocks and soil – are an “increasingly common occurrence”, says Prof Bethan Davies, a professor of glaciology at Newcastle University. She tells Carbon Brief:

“These massive landslides occur in mountain regions, commonly following rapid deglacierisation [the melting away of a glacier]. Similar events happened in the Chamoli event in 2021 [in the Indian Himalaya] and in the Blatten landslide last year in Switzerland. They’ve also occurred recently in Alaska.”

With a shift in focus from the failure of a glacier to the bedrock underneath, some climate sceptics seized on the development to falsely claim that climate change had not played any role in the disaster.

These include Dr Matthew Wielicki, recently appointed by the Trump administration to lead the US Global Change Research Program, on Twitter, as well as former Conservative peer and climate-sceptic commentator Matt Ridley in the Spectator. 

However, scientists have highlighted the likely contribution of rapid warming in the region. These factors include the thawing of permafrost and glacier retreat. (For more, see sections below).

Fundamentally, “this would have been a much less significant tragedy if it had been just a rock-slope failure”, notes Davies.

The initial landslide took a mixture of rock and ice into a valley that “contains buried ice” as well, she says, providing the water that “resulted in the hyperconcentrated flow, which took so many lives”.

How have temperatures risen in the affected region? 

Global temperatures have risen by roughly 1.4C since the pre-industrial period. However, this increase is not uniform across the planet, with some regions warming faster than others. 

A study published in Global and Planetary Change in June 2026 investigated changes in the Langtang catchment – a river basin in central Nepal, in which the Langtang-Lirung mountain is located, which eventually drains into the Ganges. Around one-quarter of the area is made up of glaciers.

The paper found that glacial areas of the catchment – found at 4,000 metres above sea level – warmed at 0.31C per decade over 1960-2023. This was “more than three times” the rate observed at a lower elevation weather station, the authors said.

Looking in more detail at the site of the glacial collapse, Dr Robert Rohde, chief scientist for Berkeley Earth, used ERA5 reanalysis data to show how temperature has changed at the 5,200-metre elevation site where the mass of ice and rock broke loose. 

Rohde’s analysis found that June-to-August temperatures have been rising at the site of the glacier collapse since the year 1940, with 2026’s summer the fourth warmest on record, behind 2024, 2025 and 2022. This is shown in the graph below.

Average summer (June-August) temperature at the ice-rock avalanche site over 1940-2026. Data source: Rohde, Bluesky (2026)

Rohde also found that the days leading up to the disaster recorded the hottest August temperatures ever experienced at the site. This is shown in the graph below.

Daily average temperature, from 1 June-1 September, at the ice-rock avalanche site. 2026, 2025 and 2024 are shown in dark, mid and light blue. All other years from 1940-2023 are shown in grey. Source: Rohde, Bluesky (2026)

On social media, Rohde stated:

“Given the warming trend, this Nepali glacier had probably been thinning and weakening for years, or even decades. But it ultimately failed during the warmest week in one of its warmest years on record. It would be a hell of a coincidence if global warming wasn’t at least partially to blame.”

How have rising temperatures affected mountain stability?

Many experts have linked warming temperatures in the region to thawing permafrost – ground that has been frozen for at least two consecutive years, whose thickness ranges from less than one metre to more than a kilometre. 

Steiner is part of a research team that has been using sensors to monitor permafrost in the region since 2014. He tells Carbon Brief that it is “pretty clear” the permafrost has been thawing “very actively” at elevations as high as 5,200 metres above sea level “for many years”. He adds:

“This means that the ground has, over the last decades, moved from being in a solid state into – at least, periodically during the warm season – patchy ground where some is frozen and some isn’t…

“If you have frozen ground next to non-frozen ground, you have dynamics happening between that because there are different densities and there’s movement happening, which is conducive to interventional failure – and that we know from many other cases.”

Davies also points to the “degradation” of perennially frozen ground as a factor in the disaster:

“This permafrost acts as a glue to hold together the rocks and, as it melts, the rock can become weakened.”

Permafrost thaw can also result in saturated ground, says Davies, which adds “pressure in the joints” of rock and can “facilitate” failure. She continues:

“Sources of the water include melting permafrost and meltwater from the overlying glacier. We know that this event happened during a period of warmth, but in the absence of heavy precipitation, pointing to ice melt as the source of water.”

A 2025 study of rock and ice avalanches in High Mountain Asia found that more than two-thirds started in areas “where permafrost is probable”.

How have glaciers retreated in the affected region?

Glaciers – frozen rivers of ice holding three-quarters of the global freshwater supply – are extremely vulnerable to climate change.

In the Himalaya, the rate of glacier retreat has doubled since the late 20th century, according to a 2019 study in Science Advances.

The Global and Planetary Change study found that glacier area loss rates in the Langtang catchment increased more than fourfold from 1964 to 2023 – with melting accelerating after 2000.

It added that glaciers in the region also experienced “fragmentation” and “widespread thinning” over this period.

The study noted that this loss “coincided with elevation dependent warming”.

The figure below provides an overview of glacier loss in the Langtang catchment over 1964-2023, with orange, red and dark red indicating areas of retreat.

In addition, green dots note points of glacier fragmentation, while blue dots show separation and pink show disconnection.

Glacier loss in the Langtang catchment over 1964-2023. Orange, red and dark red indicate areas of retreat. Green dots note points of glacier fragmentation, while blue dots show separation and pink show disconnection. Credit: Silwal et al. (2026)

In comments released by the University of Reading, Prof Maria Shahgedanova, a climate scientist researching climate impacts on mountain glaciers, said that the glacier involved in the floods had “retreated by approximately 450 metres between 1990 and 2020”.

She adds that this “potentially reduce[d] the mechanical support provided by the glacier to the underlying rock slope”.

Speaking to Carbon Brief, Davies reiterates that the retreat of the glacier is “potentially a contributing factor” to the bedrock collapse and subsequent disaster.

This is because the removal of the glacier from the lower slopes leaves the “upper rock slopes less stable”, she says.

The most recent assessment by the International Centre for Integrated Mountain Development said that glaciers in the Hindu Kush Himalaya region are “rapidly shrinking” as a result of climate change. (This region extends 3,500km over Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan, China, India, Myanmar, Nepal and Pakistan.)

It said this loss is threatening the safety of the nearly two billion people, including by increasing the risk of “glacial lake outburst floods” (GLOFs). A GLOF is a sudden and catastrophic release of meltwater from a glacial lake. 

Although this disaster was not caused by a GLOF, it is known that climate change is making such events more likely.

Can the event be attributed to climate change?

In the wake of the flash floods, climate campaigners, media outlets and Nepalese politicians have linked them to human-caused climate change.

However, many climate scientists have cautioned that it is too early to say precisely how climate change impacted the disaster. 

Davies tells Carbon Brief:

“These events happen so quickly that the exact causes and drivers can take a little time to uncover, especially if the event was a surprise and there had been no monitoring system in place.”

When trying to determine the role human-caused climate change played in the intensity or likelihood of extreme weather, scientists turn to the field of “attribution science”. 

To date, no formal rapid attribution study has been produced that attempts to quantify whether – and how – climate change contributed to the event.

Scientists have noted that climate attribution of ice-rock avalanches – which are typically driven by a variety of factors – remains limited, in part because of the lack of a long-term observational record of previous collapses in high mountain areas.

Meanwhile, the studies that do exist stop short of directly linking such disasters to climate change. For example, the authors of a 2021 study into the Chamoli ice-rock avalanche concluded that “we cannot attribute this individual disaster specifically to climate change”. 

However, they added, the “possibly increasing frequency of high-mountain slope instabilities can likely be related to observed atmospheric warming and corresponding long-term changes in cryospheric conditions (glaciers and permafrost)”.

In the aftermath of the disaster, many researchers have similarly highlighted that climate change could not be singled out as the cause of the disaster, even if warming likely increased the probability of its occurrence.

On the Climate Brink substack, Carbon Brief’s climate science contributor Dr Zeke Hausfather noted that a “definitive single-event attribution” of the more recent disaster “may never be possible” due to the “messy causality of rock-ice avalanches”.

However, he added that both the existing scientific literature and “essentially every scientist working on these hazards point in the same direction” – namely, that warming is making such events more likely in the Himalaya.

Steiner tells Carbon Brief it might be possible to attribute different factors that played a role in the disasters to climate change – for instance, the recession of the glacier – but it would be more difficult to do so for the event as a whole.

Part of the reason for this, he says, is that rock failures in this region of the Himalaya have occurred for millennia, well before humans started altering the climate. 

However, he continues:

“The physics of it is not something that has been made possible by climate change. This could have happened without it. But the chance of it happening – and the likelihood of it happening five years after a previous, similar event [in Chamoli] – we, as the scientific community, can be pretty confident about that [being increased because of a changing climate].

“This is because so many of the changes that we know are related to climate change can potentially drive the build-up to eventual failure.”

Ultimately, says Davies, a “careful attribution study is needed, but it is hard to argue that the rapidly warming climate is not having an effect in these regions”. She adds:

“A single event may have multiple drivers, but we are seeing an increase in these events and are likely to see more as the permafrost and glacier melt continues.”

Related Revealed: England’s June 2026 heatwave sparked record demand for ambulances 14.09.2026 Health and society El Niño: Indonesia fire emissions in 2026 ‘on track’ to match record for this century 11.09.2026 El Niño and La Niña Revealed: More than 1,000 NHS operations cancelled due to record UK heatwaves 11.09.2026 Health and society Guest post: How extreme heat is ‘creeping’ from summer into autumn and spring 10.09.2026 Heatwaves

The post Q&A: What can – and cannot – be said about global warming’s role in the 2026 Himalayan floods appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Comandante Tacho, headquarters of the EZLN (Zapatista Army of National Liberation), La Realidad, Lacandon Jungle, Chiapas, México (1996) Photo: Orin Langelle/GJEP

This article Making change from the dirt up was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

Twenty-eight years ago, a group of neighbors in downtown Tucson, Arizona, led by permaculture designer Brad Lancaster, cut curbs in their neighborhood to let rainwater into the verge, where they guerrilla-planted indigenous flora. These and other crimes made their once-barren neighborhood an urban refuge. Then they put on their lobbying hats; today, Tucson’s government gives financial incentives to do what the scofflaws once did illegally.

When I first moved back to Tucson part-time to find good care for my mother, I met David Walker, a friend of Brad’s with another ambitious vision: Use a huge, extremely destructive weed called buffelgrass — imported from Africa by the USDA and Big Cattle, for feed — to make beautiful adobe housing for the unhoused, while paying them to help build it. He imagined a network of brickyards, sponsored by the city and providing not only money but food, music, community and new skills to people in need, and to anyone. 

#newsletter-block_a38e1326bc8767f66615493212057552 { background: #ECECEC; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_a38e1326bc8767f66615493212057552 #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.

This felt like the best idea I’d ever heard, and once my mother was finally in good hands I helped gather a group of university students and others to start making it a reality. Long story short, today we have a functioning prototype brickyard where volunteers — and, soon, a number of unhoused people paid by a local non-profit — pull buffelgrass, mold it with dirt and water into 4-foot-long bricks, eat freshly cooked food and make friends. We’re working towards five buffelgrass-adobe structures, including a low-income row house and two low-income accessory dwelling units, or ADUs, in backyards volunteered by their owners. This isn’t mutual aid, or not only: Once these pilot projects prove viable, we’ll lobby the city to sponsor this kind of low-income housing at scale, for a fraction of the cost of commercial construction and a whole lot more social, ecological and aesthetic benefit. Never having lobbied before, I don’t know all that’s involved, but several city officials have been very supportive, and Brad has given us a good roadmap. 

Escaping the corporate maze

In Tucson, regular people — especially the less privileged — once built their own houses from dirt and plants and water, and could repair them when needed. Then, in the 1960s, the city razed most of downtown, uprooting hundreds of families to make way for a brutalist convention center meant to attract business dollars. Today, what remains of that old adobe neighborhood is one of the most prized parts of the city to live in and homes there command the highest prices. Building adobe structures citywide to serve the unhoused could be a way for the city to make amends for those 1960s-era crimes against people, community and aesthetics. 

Buffelgrass-adobe housing would also be an improvement over commercially built shelters, and not only because they’d be cheaper to build and run and a whole lot nicer to live in: The ways corporations make buildings, even “green” ones, ruin natural landscapes, emit massive carbon and fuel a race to the bottom among providers of raw materials. 

Volunteers pack adobe-coated buffelgrass into brick. (Beihua Guo/Barrio Buffelworks)

In other forms of housing for vulnerable populations, it’s the corporate structure itself that’s the source of the problem — but that, too, could be fairly straightforward to fix, at the municipal level at least. 

When my mother was diagnosed with dementia and keeping her in her home proved untenable, I found a nearby facility that was part of a statewide chain called The Villas. The place was as stately and manicured as its name suggests, but a host of dysfunctions appeared soon enough: neglect of some residents, conflict between staff and management, and so much turnover that I sometimes couldn’t keep track of who the director was, let alone staff. For want of activities, the TV often served as a caregiver. I visited other facilities that looked just as good, but all clearly had the same problems, or worse: one large branch of Atria Senior Living, with more than a billion dollars of revenues yearly, informed me that they didn’t even have a staff nurse for residents and so couldn’t administer medicines on an as-needed basis, for anxiety or anything else. (Atria did not respond by deadline for a comment request for this piece.)

I finally stumbled onto a large independent facility and was able to settle my mother there. This place is owned by a local couple who built it and now help to run it. They don’t advertise, and the building is unimpressive, but the high-ceilinged inside is airy and bright, with big windows everywhere onto a courtyard that — in contrast to the perfunctory runs of some corporate places — is lush and green, with a path that weaves through three distinct zones. It also has chickens and rabbits, plus one gregarious tortoise named Penelope; the owners know animals are good for those with dementia, and to hell with the small extra cost. Besides the full-time medical staff there is also a full-time activities director and a music director, and the TV stays off except for occasional movie nights. The staff changed little in my mother’s last years, and we both formed valuable bonds with several of them.

Local ownership may not guarantee this kind of quality, but I’ve come to believe that corporate ownership guarantees quite the opposite. The hierarchy required to run a chain of facilities manufactures a kind of psychopathy: People at the top, making decisions for profit, are shielded by layers of management from what their decisions might mean. Local owners, by contrast, must face the results of their decisions; to be as cutthroat as chains they’d need to be actual psychopaths — and luckily that’s pretty rare.

To make eldercare less psychopathic at local levels, we could disincentivize ownership of more than one care facility. Getting good-enough city governments to do this would take lots of legwork, but it would be possible. Just as corporate lobbyists work hard to accomplish their aims — like building water-guzzling data centers in the desert near Tucson, against the city’s wishes — regular people can also lobby and win, as Brad and his cohort proved.  

Local change can be deeper change

Back when the Yes Men began in early 2000, we thought the world just needed a few giant tweaks. The final action of our first movie was a fictional mega-tweak: a reform of the World Trade Organization to serve human people instead of big corporate ones. Over the next two decades we never let go of the feeling that change at the top could occur through public pressure, and we communicated that through dozens of actions.

Today, of course, positive change at the federal level is unimaginable in the U.S. At that level, and in some cities and states, progress can only occur through changes in leadership — as has happened in New York City. But in most cities, and many states, the government’s good enough as it is: We just have to use it to fix what’s been broken in better, creative ways. That can also change worlds: Many movements, like women’s suffrage and marriage equality, spread city to city and state to state before changing national policy.

#support-block_eab1e8c9c46d9ae305200da029808894 { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

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

Donate

And who knows? The takeover of farming and manufacturing by big corporations destroyed rural economies, creating deep hardship that a tin-pot wannabe dictator turned into false grievances. Maybe building the muscles we need to declare independence from big corporations could not only help us to solve big problems now, but even help prevent future slides into fascism. That’s just theory; what’s certain is that it’s great fun to get our hands dirty. 

This story was produced in partnership with The Yes Men substack.

This article Making change from the dirt up was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

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

Does hosting wind turbines provide farmers with additional income?

Wind projects provide farmers with substantial economic benefits while allowing most land to remain in agricultural use.

The National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates about 98% of land within a typical wind project remains available for farming, grazing, or other uses.

Meanwhile, farmers who host turbines can receive long-term lease payments that provide additional income and financial stability. One study found that farmers with turbines invested about twice as much in their farms, while 80% had plans for who would take over or inherit the farm, compared with 62% of farmers without turbines.

Compared with the small amount of farmland used by turbines, unmitigated climate change poses broader risks to agriculture through heat, drought, shifting pests, and reduced crop yields.

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

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

Sources

NREL Examining Supply-Side Options to Achieve 100% Clean Electricity by 2035

Handbook of Sustainability and Social Science Research Wind Energy and Rural Community Sustainability

Center for Rural Affairs Navigating Land Leases for Wind and Solar

IPCC Special Report on Climate Change and Land: Chapter 5

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

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

About fact briefs published on Gigafact

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

Chinese industry is beginning to shift from fossil fuels to clean electricity, with wind, solar and batteries progressively displacing coal, oil and gas across the industrial sectors that made the country the world’s factory and largest carbon emitter, a new analysis shows.

Clean electricity met all of China’s demand growth in 2025 and coal generation fell for the first time in a decade, even as electricity demand rose by 5%, the report found.

Despite a rebound in coal power generation in the first half of 2026, the analysis by global energy think-tank Ember found the growth in clean electricity illustrates a longer-term shift: a massive build-out of wind, solar energy and battery storage and deepening electrification of the economy are starting to make a dent in the fossil-fuel energy system supporting China’s industrial base.

China keeps Indonesia’s battery dream afloat but future less certain

The research identifies early signs that a structural transformation of China’s industrial economy from coal, oil and gas to clean electricity is underway, even if changes on the ground are not yet reflected in national data.  

“The energy foundation of the Chinese industrial economy is shifting,” Muyi Yang, a senior energy analyst at Ember and the report’s lead author, told Climate Home News.

“Fossil fuels are progressively being replaced in the many functions they have historically assumed. Because of that, fossil fuel peaking is increasingly coming into view,” he said.

Electrifying industry

Coal generation has stopped growing in 17 of the 26 provinces and regions analysed by Ember between 2021 and 2025. This includes industrial centres such as Hunan in southern China and Shandong – home to energy-intensive industries like cement production. Together, these regions are home to more than half of China’s thermal power capacity.

A greater share of the Chinese economy is now running on electricity than in other major economies, accounting for 29% of final energy consumption in 2024, compared with about 23% in Europe and 21% in the US. Less than half of China’s electricity was generated from coal in the first half of the year.

• Aug 6, 2026 News China’s coal power rebounds as record clean energy goes to waste Long-term contracts guarantee coal plants buyers regardless of demand, crowding out renewables, report finds Read more
• Jun 22, 2026 Comment China’s coal-chemicals boom risks repeating the mistakes of the past By reviving the problematic industry in the name of energy security, China runs the risk of higher emissions, stranded assets and setting back its ambitions as a clean energy leader Read more
• 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

Meanwhile, fossil fuel use has fallen in eight of 11 tracked industrial sectors, declining between 26% and 71% from peak consumption levels across fossil fuel extraction, manufacturing industries such as textiles, machinery and food and beverages, transport equipment and chemical materials.

Earlier this year, German company BASF, the world’s largest chemical producer, opened a new facility in southern China, which is fully supplied by renewable energy. The company said emissions from the site could be 50% lower than conventional petrochemical facilities.

An employee walks near fields of heliostat mirrors at the site of Dunhuang Shouhang 100MW Tower Solar Thermal Power Generation Project, during an organised media tour to Dunhuang Photovoltaic Industrial Park, in Gansu province, China (Photo: REUTERS/Tingshu Wang) An employee walks near fields of heliostat mirrors at the site of Dunhuang Shouhang 100MW Tower Solar Thermal Power Generation Project, during an organised media tour to Dunhuang Photovoltaic Industrial Park, in Gansu province, China (Photo: REUTERS/Tingshu Wang)

In easier-to-electrify sectors such as machinery, electronics and textiles, electricity now supplies about three-quarters of final energy consumption, Ember found.

Fossil fuel use is also showing signs of flattening in the metals smelting and processing sector – one of the most fossil-intensive parts of the economy – offering “encouraging signs” that the transformation is starting to take hold in harder-to-abate sectors, said Yang.

“If that is happening in more and more provinces, and more and more economic sectors that means that fossil fuels are progressively being squeezed out of the energy system,” he said.

“Growing by greening”

China’s vast cleantech manufacturing power has become an engine for growth in its own right, spurring investment, creating jobs and generating export revenues.

Yang described this “growing-by-greening” dynamic as “turning each step of the transition into a source of strength for the next”.

China and Brazil join pledge to triple global nuclear energy capacity

For Li Shuo, director of China Climate Hub at the Asia Society Policy Institute, this is part of what makes China’s lead in manufacturing clean energy equipment “irreversible”, comparing its growth with that of a rainforest, where different parts of the ecosystem thrive by reinforcing one another.   

The early success of deploying wind and solar helped drive down electricity costs, which created favourable conditions for the rapid adoption of electric vehicles (EVs) and in turn boosted demand for batteries that are now critical to balance the grid.

A livestreamer promotes coal during a livestreaming session for Huaze Coal Industry on the Douyin app (Photo:REUTERS/Florence Lo/Illustration) A livestreamer promotes coal during a livestreaming session for Huaze Coal Industry on the Douyin app (Photo:REUTERS/Florence Lo/Illustration)

An oversupply of renewable energy incentivised industrial players to benefit from cheap and readily available clean power generation, encouraging innovative solutions to electrify other parts of the economy. In the transport sector, for example, electrification is moving from passenger vehicles to harder-to-electrify trucks.

This abundance of cheap green energy is also making China competitive in what has long been seen as the anchor of Western competitiveness, Li said.

Stalling fossil fuel use

At the same time, China’s huge legacy fossil fuel generation capacity is still expanding, even as coal power plants are being used less intensively.

China brought 30 GW of new coal power capacity into operation in the first six months of the year and coal-fired generation rose 3% over the same period after local governments fast-tracked coal projects to prevent a repeat of severe power shortages in 2021.

Solar surge kept fossil electricity flat in 2025 as China and India made ‘historic’ shift

A further 274 GW of coal capacity is either under construction or has permits to be built while vast amounts of solar and wind power that could not be absorbed by the grid have gone to waste in the first half of the year.

“This doesn’t mean that the transition is losing steam,” said Yang, arguing that China is now grappling with some of the more complex aspects of the transition.

A recent analysis by the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA) for Carbon Brief found that China’s CO2 emissions from fossil fuels and cement have plateaued for more than two years following a peak in March 2024. Ember found that on a 12-month moving average, coal generation has been stalling since then, following years of continuous expansion.

• Jun 24, 2026 News EU, UK lead push for electrification as “powerful weapon” against fossil fuels A group of dozens of countries seeks to build momentum for a COP31 pledge to electrify 35% of global energy use by 2035 as an alternative to fossil fuels Read more
• Jun 9, 2026 Politics COP31 leaders unveil global targets, with spotlight on electrification Co-hosts Türkiye and Australia want countries to sign on to global targets in three of their priority areas for this year’s COP climate negotiations Read more
• Jul 16, 2026 Comment Africa can lead the Age of Electrification The electrification agenda presents both an extraordinary opportunity for Africa and an immense challenge for the continent Read more

In the second quarter of the year, CO2 emissions fell by 1% after China’s oil consumption plummeted 9% as the US-Iran war prevented the transport of oil cargoes from the Gulf through the Strait of Hormuz.

The electrification of the transport sector, particularly electric trucks, was the biggest driver in displacing oil demand as the conflict in the Middle East accelerated the transition.

A lesson in sequencing

China’s bumpy transition offers a useful lesson for other countries at an earlier stage of their transition, said Xunpeng Shi, president of the Sydney-based International Society of Energy Transition Studies (ISETS), a global network of professionals that shares research and fosters collaborations.  

“Build quickly enough so that clean electricity can start taking over and prepare for the pressure on the fossil system before it arrives, because that is the part nobody has done easily,” he said.

For countries that are heavily reliant on revenue from fossil fuel exports, a peak in Chinese fossil fuel use weakens the assumption of rising demand on which investments have long been made.

“For them, the time to plan for that is now, while the revenues are still there,” he said.

The post China’s industrial engine starts to break its fossil fuel habit appeared first on Climate Home News.

The outbreak of multiple regional wars, the global increase in military spending, and the fractious trade wars in response to Trump’s tariffs are all signs...

The post Canadian nationalism won’t save us from Trump’s aggression; working class struggle will first appeared on Spring.

Safer choices: What to know about eyelash serums JR Culpepper September 8, 2026

.has--background.block-content--type-curated-block-list { padding-top: 3rem; padding-bottom: 3rem; }

Growing demand for the  “clean girl aesthetic” and lightweight, minimalist makeup, has influencers and everyday buyers reaching for eyelash serums.

These lash serums range from prescription, prostaglandin-based medications that grow your lashes to cosmetics with hydrating ingredients that may give your lashes a fuller look.

All that goodness can come with a cost, though: potential exposure to toxic chemicals that could lurk in some products, making it tougher than usual to choose which is best for you.

EWG has done the work for you by finding safer lash serum alternatives that avoid harmful ingredients.

Prostaglandin-based eyelash serums

Prostaglandins are lipids that, similar to hormones, can act like messengers to manage your body’s everyday processes. They are sometimes referred to as “hormone like” chemicals. Some eyelash serums use these chemicals to lengthen lashes’ growth phase. 

One Food and Drug Administration–approved medication for eyelash growth, bimatoprost,  is a prostaglandin derivative. It was originally studied for lowering eye pressure. But scientists noticed patients using the eyedrops were growing longer, thicker eyelashes. After more tests, the FDA approved bimatoprost as an eyelash growth serum, in 2008.

Today you can find cosmetic serums with prostaglandin-like chemicals that are not FDA-approved. These blur the line between drugs and cosmetics because, although sold as personal care products, they may have drug-like effects. 

Eyelids are more sensitive than other parts of your skin, so they’re easily irritated.

Prostaglandin-like chemicals have many adverse side effects, such as darkening of your iris or eyelid, eye irritation and fat loss around your eyes. 

To avoid these ingredients in cosmetics, check lash serum labels for ingredients that end in “-prost” or “-prostone.” If you struggle with lash growth and are looking for clinical results, consult your dermatologist about FDA-approved options before reaching for prostaglandin-based cosmetic products.

Non-prostaglandin eyelash serums

Lash conditioning serums without prostaglandin can also help make lashes look fuller without hormone–like ingredients, though they do not generally grow your lashes. 

Eyelash conditioning serums and even some types of mascara use moisturizing ingredients, vitamins and more to promote lash health. 

Emollients like castor oil are low hazard and can help hydrate or condition lashes. Amino acids like glutamic acid or alanine are also low-hazard serum ingredients that may help strengthen and protect lash structure. 

Still, the eye and the surrounding area are sensitive, so EWG recommends trying a product on a different part of skin first, then applying it only to your lashes. Always avoid getting products in your eye.

We’ve curated a list of EWG Verified® and low-hazard lash serums rated a 1 or 2 – meaning low hazard –  in Skin Deep®, EWG’s free, searchable database of personal care products. Products that bear the EWG Verified® have been evaluated by our scientists and meet our strictest standards of safety and transparency. 

You can find these products in store or online on sites such as Amazon, CVS and Walmart. Scan products for details on the go with our Healthy Living™ app.

EWG Verified® Kleem Organics Eyelash & Eyebrow Enhancing Serum

Available for $29.99.

PURCHASE HERE

View details ATTITUDE Oceanly Mascara + Serum

Available for $27.99 on Amazon.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Cliganic Castor Oil

Available at Target, Walmart and on Amazon for $18.89 .

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details FLORISAN Organic Castor Oil

Available for $27.99 on Amazon.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Cimouy Organic Castor Oil

Available on Amazon for $22.98.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details DIME Eyelash Boost Serum Rating

Available on Amazon for $48.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Rated 1 in Skin Deep Essynaturals Eyelash & Brow Enhancing Serum

Available for $18.95 on Amazon.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Sea-el Skincare, Castor Lash & Brow Serum

Available for $17.49 on Amazon.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Rated 2 in Skin Deep Milani Highly Rated Lash & Brow Serum

Available for $12.99 on Amazon.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Neutrogena Lash + Brow Enhancer Serum

Available at Walmart and on Amazon for $12.97.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Grande Cosmetics GrandeDRAMA Intense Thickening Mascara, Black

Available for $25.99 on Amazon.

PURCHASE ON AMAZON

View details Areas of Focus Personal Care Products Cosmetics Guest Authors Chimdi Ikpe, Science intern September 9, 2026

Union registered nurses at MedStar Washington Hospital Center in Washington, D.C. will hold a community forum on Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2026, to discuss the closure of postpartum unit 5F at Washington Hospital Center, the devastating impact of Medicaid cuts in DC, and building a health care system that works for us all.

After a summer of heatwaves, wildfires and record-breaking temperatures, new polling has revealed the UK public want Burnham’s government to take strong climate action to protect people in schools and hospitals.

The More in Common polling, commissioned by investigative climate non-profit Global Witness, revealed high levels of concern about how extreme heat impacts the NHS’ ability to treat patients (75%) and schools’ ability to teach pupils (63%).

When it came to support for targeted climate interventions, 75% of people supported the installation of solar-powered AC in schools and hospitals.Over two thirds (69%) backed a new legal maximum indoor working temperature of 30 Celsius, while 65% thought councils should be required to open free, cool public spaces with air conditioning during heatwaves (65%).

NHS doctors have told Global Witness that hospital temperatures became so high during this summer’s heatwaves that MRI scanners and CT machines cut out, with waiting times and patient flow affected. Teachers told Global Witness that staff and students fell sick during the extreme heat this summer and reported a lack of clear guidance on school closures or maximum working temperatures.

Global Witness says Andy Burnham should foot the bill for climate adaptation and mitigation by fairly taxing the oil and gas industry, who raked in big windfalls from the Iran war this year, after bumper profits following Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Key polling findings

• 75% of the public were concerned about high temperatures’ impact on the NHS's ability to treat patients
• 63% were concerned about high temperatures’ impact on schools' ability to teach pupils
• 75% support the installation of solar-powered air conditioning in schools and hospitals
• 69% support a new legal maximum indoor working temperature of 30 Celsius
• When asked who should foot the bill to protect Britain from climate change, the two most popular answers were: government and taxpayers, closely followed by multinational oil and gas corporations

Global Witness senior campaigner, Flossie Boyd said:“Our schools and hospitals should be keeping people safe, but this summer many of us lost sleep worrying about our loved ones in baking hot classrooms and wards.

“MRI scanners cut out in the heat, teachers reported classrooms hitting 40 degrees and kids have fallen sick in sweltering school buildings.

“It’s scandalous that as people’s lives were put at risk this summer, the oil giants turbo-charging extreme heat were raking in sky-high profits, pushing for more dirty drilling and lower taxes.

"The climate crisis is here, and bold action is needed to keep people safe. If Burnham wants to stand up for families and working people, he should stand up to oil giants, tax them fairly and use the proceeds to fund the climate preparedness Britain desperately needs – like solar-powered AC to protect the most vulnerable.”

UNISON head of policy Sampson Low said:

"Paramedics, cleaners and other public sector workers have no choice but to carry on when the mercury rises.

"Extreme heat not only brings a rise in demand for care but can also affect the health of staff. What's needed are thresholds based on evidence. This is for jobs where work can't simply stop when a temperature is reached.

"Such an approach would allow employers to bring in measures such as extra breaks, more water and ways to cool the work environment."

Earlier this year, Global Witness sent thermometers to teachers across the UK to measure excess heat in school classrooms during the mid-June heatwave. Several teachers reported temperatures between 30 and 38 degrees - well above the recommended maximum classroom temperature of 26°C set by the National Education Union.

The TUC reignited calls for government to introduce a maximum working temperature this summer, after amber heat alerts in the South of England. They say workers should have the right to stop work if workplace temperatures reach 30C, or 27C for those doing strenuous jobs.