News Feeds

The company that gave up on oil operations in the protected landscape of the Lincolnshire Wolds is now trying to keep the abandoned well pad.

The Lincolnshire Wolds National Landscape at Biscathorpe.
Photo: SOS Biscathorpe

Egdon Resources has applied for planning permission to retain the former Biscathorpe oil compound near Louth, including hardstanding, surrounding earth mounds, security gates and fencing, access track and drain.

It said the site would be used by the landowner, F Wallis & Sons, for agricultural purposes.

Egdon said in a statement that Lincolnshire County Council planners had already “agreed in principle” to the proposal.

A public consultation is now underway. Comments must be submitted to Lincolnshire County Council by the end of this month (Tuesday 30 June 2026).

Egdon announced in December 2025 that it had abandoned an appeal against the refusal of planning permission for oil production and further drilling at Biscathorpe.

The company said in April 2026 it would be decommissioning the oil well at the site.

But this week news emerged about the new plans for Biscathorpe.

Egdon said retaining the well pad would avoid the need for 738 heavy goods vehicle movements over a period of 10 weeks.

But local opponents have said the application, if approved, would save Egdon the cost of restoring the site to farmland, required in a planning permission granted in 2018. It would also turn what had been described as a temporary operation into a permanent development.

Amanda Suddaby, of the local campaign group, SOS Biscathorpe, said:

“While it is unsurprising to us that Egdon would prefer to leave the infrastructure in place rather than incur the cost and effort of restoring the site, we don’t believe those commercial considerations should influence the planning decision.

“The proposal now before the Council risks turning what was presented as a temporary development into a permanent foothold in the landscape.

“Of principal concern is the fact that retaining the wellsite pad keeps alive the possibility of future oil and gas development at Biscathorpe should political, regulatory or commercial circumstances change.

“While no such proposal is currently before the Council, retaining the site would make future development proposals significantly easier.

“Once the site is fully restored, any future developer would need to start again and make an entirely new case for development whereas retaining the infrastructure leaves the door open and preserves a platform for future proposals.”

The Biscathorpe site is in the protected Lincolnshire Wolds National Landscape, the new name for areas of outstanding natural beauty.

A new law requires public bodies to “seek to further” the statutory purposes of Protected Landscapes” when considering planning applications.

Government advice said public bodies should seek to avoid harm and contribute to the conservation and enhancement of the natural beauty, special qualities and key characteristic of protected landscapes”.

Ms Suddaby said:

“For years local communities were assured that this development was temporary and that, once operations ended, the site would be restored to agricultural land. That promise was central to the original planning permission and seemed to offer a guarantee that the development would leave no lasting visual impact on the protected National Landscape.

“Additionally, retaining a substantial area of hardstanding in the National Landscape could encourage other forms of development that would not otherwise arise at this location. However, the over-riding issue is that infrastructure which was expressly permitted on a temporary basis is now being proposed for permanent retention.”

She also said:

“It is troubling that the planning documents state that the principle of retaining the site has already been agreed with County Council officers – even before public consultation.

“If commitments that were central to the original planning permission can be set aside in this way, local residents are entitled to ask what confidence they can ever place in planning conditions intended to protect landscapes and communities.

“This application is ultimately about trust. The original permission was granted on the basis that the development was temporary and the land would be fully restored. The time has come for those commitments to be honoured.”

SOS Biscathorpe is urging residents and supporters of the Lincolnshire Wolds National Landscape to object to the application and call for the site to be restored in accordance with the original planning permission.

The group said the decision on the application would test whether commitments made during the planning process could be relied upon when development proposals were approved.

At the time of writing, there were 12 objections to the new application.

In its supporting statement, Egdon said Nottinghamshire County Council had granted planning permission in 2025 for the retention of another former Egdon wellsite, at Kirklington, near Newark. Since then, Newark and Sherwood District Council have confirmed that two steel framed buildings could be installed on the site without planning permission. (The Kirklington site is not in a National Landscape.)

Egdon also said the Biscathorpe scheme would include planting a 940m2 of native hedgerow around the site area to increase biodiversity and provide visual screening to the fencing. The company said this would achieve the minimum 10% net gain for habitats and hedgerows required by law.

Other abandoned sites

Other recently abandoned oil and gas sites have still not been restored to farmland, as required by conditions in their original applications.

DrillOrDrop is monitoring progress to restore the Broadford Bridge oil site in West Sussex and the Preston New Road shale gas site in Lancashire.

At the Harlequin well site, Radcliffe-on-Trent, Nottinghamshire, the site was turned into a dog exercise track after five planning permissions for exploration expired without a well being drilled.

The National Planning Policy Framework requires mineral planning authorities to “provide for restoration and aftercare at the earliest opportunity, to be carried out to high environmental standards, through the application of appropriate conditions”.

Former Harlequin pad, now covered in artificial grass and used as a dog exercise area.

Union nurses at MedStar Washington Hospital Center (MWHC) in Washington, D.C. are demanding that management stop the planned closure of an entire postpartum unit. The hospital notified the union on May 26, 2026 of its intention to eliminate 11 maternal health beds and displace eight nurses by July 26, 2026, leaving MWHC with one postpartum unit.

This article Two visions of the US will compete at the World Cup was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

Embed from Getty Imageswindow.gie=window.gie||function(c){(gie.q=gie.q||[]).push(c)};gie(function(){gie.widgets.load({id:'X7KS77oeS09TUSm5YDUzXA',sig:'uenPcZZpWTx2Ow0TwtuuFc7x_42LbpEbmfmTltLjQAQ=',w:'594px',h:'409px',items:'2276949828',caption: true ,tld:'com',is360: false })});

As the United States prepares to co-host the 2026 World Cup with Mexico and Canada, the world’s biggest sporting event will unfold in a volatile domestic and international context. Eleven U.S. cities are hosting “the beautiful game” against a backdrop of militarized law enforcement — including over 167,000 Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) arrests in and around the host cities since last January — war with Iran, labor strife, and attacks on civil and political rights. With millions traveling to the region and billions more tuning in, the tournament — coinciding with the U.S.’s 250th anniversary — offers a rare opportunity for diverse sectors to elevate democratic values, expose the Trump administration’s propaganda and make its repression backfire.

Civic leaders in the United States are already capitalizing on this opportunity. A big tent coalition, backed by the Horizons Project that I co-lead — bringing together artists, labor, faith organizations, small businesses, veterans’ groups, legal advocates and youth activists — has launched a No ICE in the Cup campaign to build cross-sector, cross-ideological support for a tournament where all can participate without fear of violence or repression. Other community groups have joined forces on the “Our Copa” campaign, which includes a pledge to stop ICE raids during the World Cup, lift travel bans on Haiti, Iran, Cote d’Ivoire and Senegal, and let fans celebrate safely.   

How autocrats use the World Cup

Governments have long used mega-sporting events to bolster legitimacy, nationalist pride and power. Through “sportswashing,” authoritarian regimes in particular exploit the global spectacle to distract from repression and corruption while presenting an image of competence and national greatness. 

FIFA, which has an extensive record of corruption and human rights controversies, has often enabled these dynamics.In 1978, Argentina’s military dictatorship used the World Cup to present the country as united and orderly while a “Dirty War” saw tens of thousands disappeared, tortured and killed. The regime invested heavily in propaganda while temporarily pausing repression around stadiums and hotels to avoid international scrutiny. A clandestine torture center operated less than a mile from the national stadium, at the Escuela Superior de Mecánica de la Armada (ESMA), where political prisoners could hear cheering crowds during the final match.

Vladimir Putin similarly used the 2014 Winter Olympics and the 2018 World Cup to generate nationalist fervor and bolster domestic support for the annexation of Crimea while obscuring repression at home. Ahead of the 2022 World Cup, Qatar spent over $220 billion on infrastructure to polish its image amid blatant human rights abuses, including migrant worker deaths, labor exploitation and restrictions on LGBTQ+ expression. 

#newsletter-block_b54bfb04f7e82e4592b06965f70069a7 { background: #ECECEC; color: #000000; } #newsletter-block_b54bfb04f7e82e4592b06965f70069a7 #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.

The Trump administration has also turned to sportswashing. Unlike Qatar’s monarchy or the defunct Argentine junta, however, it is much less concerned with its international reputation. Instead, the World Cup offers a way to distract from the economic impact of the Iran War and build support for the administration’s domestic agenda, including restrictions on voting rights. Its coincidence with Trump’s Christian nationalist “Freedom 250” program advances this agenda, even if the tournament’s global, pluralistic character sits uneasily with MAGA’s more xenophobic elements. 

Mega-sporting events thus create a paradox for authoritarian and wannabe authoritarian leaders. On the one hand, they offer an extraordinary opportunity for spectacle, nationalism and financial enrichment. On the other hand, they intensify media scrutiny and pressure from civil society. This creates opportunities for dissent and for movements to mobilize in order to make state propaganda backfire, raising the costs of repression and strengthening democratic forces.

Pro-democracy mobilization at the World Cup

Because the World Cup creates a global media spectacle and often becomes all-consuming for host countries, it creates ideal conditions for public dissent. When Brazil hosted the 2014 World Cup, the tournament became a focal point for mass mobilization amid concerns over corruption, inequality and authoritarian policing. Organizers effectively linked lavish stadium spending to failing public services and condemned police violence under President Dilma Rousseff, helping reshape public debate around democratic accountability.

In Argentina, the Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo mobilized to expose forced disappearances and state terror to domestic and international audiences. They deliberately marched during the tournament near areas frequented by foreign reporters, while human rights groups distributed lists of the disappeared and launched the “Football yes, torture no” campaign.

Recent U.S. football activism has been deeply connected with the politics of authoritarian immigration enforcement. In LA, the Angel City Football Club and Los Angeles Football Club spoke out against ICE during the height of the mass deportations in 2025. 

Stadiums and fan spaces as sites of civic power  

Football culture — with its chanting, parody, songs, costumes and memes — has been key to building civic power and undermining authoritarian narratives. While autocrats use the World Cup to fuse patriotism with regime loyalty, football fans, described as the “largest international social movement,” have used joy, humor and spectacle to expose abuses and build forms of civic pride outside of state control. Matches gather entire communities in stadiums — emotionally charged spaces where even small acts of dissent, such as coordinated chants, banners and silence during national anthems — can have cascading effects.

Protesters flood the Seoul Plaza in South Korea during the 2002 World Cup. (Wikimedia)

Under martial law in Poland, stadiums became centers of anti-communist resistance during the 1982 World Cup. Fans chanted anti-regime slogans and displayed banners for the banned Solidarność trade union, defying threats that their “hooliganism” would be punished by military courts. Football culture helped sustain the Polish opposition’s morale in the face of repression and contributed to the broader civic infrastructure that supported Poland’s 1989 democratic transition. Similar dynamics were visible in Chile under Augusto Pinochet. In South Korea, which co-hosted the 2002 World Cup, millions of red-clad “Red Devils” took part in street cheering, helping normalize large-scale public assembly after decades of authoritarian rule. Their efforts informed later mobilizations, including the candlelight protests that removed President Park Geun-hye.  

American activists have also used humor to mock authoritarian absurdities, such as when President Trump was being awarded the inaugural FIFA peace prize last December in Washington, D.C. In response, residents kicked footballs at a “wall of ICE” while dancers performed nearby. 

Although athletes are technically banned from engaging in political speech at the Olympics and World Cup, they have often used their platform to advance social and political causes. Many are familiar with the 1968 Mexico City Olympics, when U.S. sprinters Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised black-gloved fists on the podium to protest racial injustice. 

During the Qatar World Cup, European teams attempted to wear “OneLove” armbands supporting LGBTQ+ rights; FIFA’s threats only amplified criticism of the federation and Qatar. Iranian players also remained silent during their national anthem in solidarity with protesters after Mahsa Amini’s killing.   Both before and during the 2026 Winter Olympics, multiple Team USA athletes spoke out against ICE policies, including cross-country skiing star and Minnesotan Jessie Diggins, who expressed solidarity with protesters after the killings of Reneé Good and Alex Pretti. 

Activating broad coalitions

Mega-events depend on vast infrastructure, from construction and transit to hospitality and security. This creates leverage for key “pillars of support,” especially labor and business, whose cooperation is essential for the games to run smoothly. This dependence helps explain why labor and human rights issues have been so central to democratic organizing around the World Cup in Qatar, Russia and South Africa. 

No Ice in the Cup organized a soccer tournament on May 31. (Kisha Bari)

More generally, mega-events enable the formation of large, diverse coalitions composed of otherwise unlikely allies. Returning to the example of Brazil, in 2014 activists mobilized a big tent of public transit activists, labor unions, students, favela groups, Indigenous activists and anti-police violence organizations. These disparate groups united around their shared opposition to corruption and “crony capitalism.”   

Today, the global Dignity 2026 Coalition — comprising over 120 civil society organizations, including the AFL-CIO, the ACLU, Human Rights Watch and the NAACP — is pressuring FIFA and the Trump administration to uphold democratic freedoms during the World Cup. AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler called on FIFA leadership to keep DHS and ICE agents out of host cities, while other major unions, such as UNITE Here Local 11 in Los Angeles, have threatened strikes along similar lines. Meanwhile, in partnership with the No ICE in the Cup campaign, local businesses in U.S. host cities have organized a “Welcome Standard” pledge to create safe and welcoming environments for the millions of fans, community members, visitors and workers taking part in the tournament. The active sign-on campaign, which includes legal training and support for local businesses, will channel patrons to participating businesses.  Faith groups have also joined the action, with Interfaith Alliance offering “Preach and Teach” resources for pastors, imams, rabbis and other faith leaders to use during the period of the World Cup. 

Two visions of the US clash

The Trump administration is using the 2026 World Cup to stage a patriotic spectacle that glorifies the president, promotes his policy agenda and showcases America’s 250th anniversary — even as it demonizes those who love football. Indeed, most host cities are home to large immigrant communities who live in fear of racial profiling, inhumane detention and summary deportation. The present moment thus reflects a clash between two visions of the United States: a narrow, exclusionary vision based on white, Christian identity politics, and an inclusive vision reflected in the World Cup itself, one of a pluralistic society shaped by immigration and diversity. 

#support-block_1887800b3a5adb8286e80c763affb071 { background: #000000; color: #ffffff; } Support Us

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

Donate

The World Cup has created a major opening for pro-democracy groups across sectors, geographies and ideologies to unite and ensure that it is not weaponized to advance the administration’s propaganda or anti-democratic agenda. In the United States, where football is gaining in popularity and many fans root for both the U.S. team and their countries of origin, the tournament is a time of sportsmanship and camaraderie. It offers an opportunity to remind fans at home and abroad of the power of ordinary people coming together in joyful competition, the central theme of a recent community youth soccer tournament in New York City.

Finally, the World Cup provides an opportunity to connect the dots between militarized law enforcement and efforts to restrict voting rights. These efforts are especially urgent ahead of the midterm elections; the same coalitions mobilizing around the World Cup can help defend states and localities in the face of federal attacks on free and fair elections. More than ever, ordinary people must insist that “fair play” also applies to how Americans choose their leaders. They can harness the energy and enthusiasm surrounding the World Cup and America’s 250th anniversary to imagine and build a more free and democratic United States. 

This article Two visions of the US will compete at the World Cup was originally published by Waging Nonviolence.

This article is part of Food Tank’s primer series, “Food Tank Explains.” Each installment unpacks the ideas, innovations, and challenges shaping today’s food and agriculture systems, offering clear insights into complex topics. To explore more articles in the series, click here.

Agroforestry is a land management system that integrates trees with crops or livestock, delivering benefits for food security, environmental outcomes, and farm incomes.

Unlike monocultures, where a single crop is grown over large areas, agroforestry allows different biological systems to interact and strengthen one another, mimicking natural ecosystems. Tree roots release carbon into the soil, improving soil health, and reduce erosion by helping to support soil structures. The trees provide fodder for livestock and corridors for wildlife, while the animals enrich the soil and help with seed dispersal.

Canadian forester John Bene coined the term “agroforestry” in 1973, calling for global recognition of the key role trees play on farms. But, according to World Agroforestry (ICRAF), the practice has ancient origins steeped in local wisdom and traditional knowledge from around the world.

East Amazon communities adopted agroforestry 4,500 years ago, according to research published in Nature Plants, cultivating multiple crops alongside edible forest species. Farmers in West Africa have practiced the parkland system, one of the oldest agroforestry techniques, for over 1,000 years, growing crops like millet and sorghum beneath scattered baobabs and shea trees.

Modern agroforestry systems vary widely across regions and communities, reflecting differences in environmental conditions, cultural traditions, available resources, and local needs.

Agroforestry systems can strengthen food security by increasing and diversifying yield and by improving the availability of micronutrient-rich fruits, seeds, and nuts during lean growing periods, Todd Rosenstock, Director of CGIAR Climate Action, tells Food Tank. They can also serve as an important source of income diversification, and help generate sales that enable the purchase of further food products.

A women’s cooperative, founded by a Lenca community in Honduras, grows fair trade organic coffee under fruit-bearing trees like mango, plantain, and jackfruit. This increases crop diversity and yield, providing the cooperative with fruits that they can barter or sell at the market.

Multi-species, multi-storied, and multi-purpose gardens located close to home are common to many parts of Indonesia. Referred to as “home gardens,” these plots were historically producing foods for home consumption. Now, home gardens play a fundamental role in providing income. They are also considered to have the highest biodiversity of any human-created ecosystem.

In South and Southeast Asia, rotational farming is deeply rooted in traditional knowledge, philosophy, and spirituality, and provides a crucial source of livelihood and food security for millions of people. Prasert Tralkansuphakon, Chair of Pgakenyaw Association for Sustainable Development and Inter Mountain People Education and Culture Association in Thailand, describes agroforestry as a means of producing both food and income “in a traditional and innovative way, managed both by humans and nature, or [just] by humans, but in a natural way.”

As farmers face more frequent extreme weather events, some agroforestry systems seek to offer protection while others help improve resiliency. Windbreaks include linear tree plantings that shelter crops and soil from wind, snow, and dust. In silvopasture systems, which integrate trees and livestock, trees provide animals essential shade and shelter from extreme heat.

Karina Gonçalves David, Co-founder of ProNobis Agroflorestal, tells Food Tank that the agroforestry system on her family’s farm helps their crops withstand extreme weather. By forming a protective microclimate, the system shields crops from winter freezes, limits soil erosion, and increases the soil’s water-holding capacity.

And ICRAF research suggests that agroforestry is linked with benefits for planetary health including prevention of both air pollution and heat exposure for farmworkers, and regulation of solar radiation and wind.

To expand agroforestry more widely, researchers suggest pairing locally adapted practices with stronger support systems. CIFOR-ICRAF calls for investments in extension services, market development, and institutional capacity, while Cornell University researchers suggest that integrated landscape management can help align efforts among farmers, researchers, policymakers, and the private sector to address persistent barriers.

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 Christopher Stites

The post Food Tank Explains: Agroforestry appeared first on Food Tank.

The Brattle Group’s report lays out a framework for increasing demand-side resources to mitigate the impacts of load growth, variable renewables and distributed electrification.

On May 16th, 2026, dozens of supporters gathered at the beautiful Oak Hill Farm in Glen Ellen, shared food grown just a few steps from the table, and talked about one of the most pressing challenges of our time: how do we protect our communities from the growing threats of wildfire and extreme heat?

During our traditional Annual Sonoma Leadership Council Luncheon, supporters raised over $150,000, surpassing our goal in 20% and making it one of our best fundraising events ever, to fund climate resilience work underway across the Bay Area. A huge thank you to our incredible host and supporter, Arden Bucklin-Sporer.

The funds raised at the event will go toward concrete, on-the-ground work:

• Expanding wildfire buffer strategies countywide and helping homeowners take proactive mitigation steps.
• Advancing zoning policies that steer development away from the highest-risk areas.
  Strengthening local Fire Safe Councils with coordination and resources.
• Running community workshops that help Southwest Santa Rosa residents recognize heat risks early and protect their health.
• Creating opportunities for young people to take an active role in shaping climate solutions in their own neighborhoods.

We’ve captured some wonderful moments from the day—view event photos here.

Focusing on Solutions for Wildfire Resilience

After years of devastating fires in Sonoma County, the question is no longer whether the threat is real; it’s what to do about it. The Sonoma Luncheon has become a hub for discussing this topic and the cutting-edge solutions that are emerging in the region.

Over the past several years, Greenbelt Alliance partnered with the Sonoma County Agricultural Preservation and Open Space District and local organizations to develop the Interwoven Greenbelt Buffer—a first-of-its-kind, landscape-scale approach to wildfire risk reduction.

Rather than treating parcels of land in isolation, the model uses data and cross-sector collaboration to “weave together” conserved lands, working agricultural lands, and developed neighborhoods into coordinated buffer zones. The goal: reduce wildfire intensity before it reaches homes, protect biodiversity and farmland, and shift communities from reactive disaster response to proactive, landscape-level prevention.

It’s a scalable concept, and one that could serve as a model not just for Sonoma County, but for fire-prone communities across California and the Western US.

Rising Threat of Extreme Heat 

As a major driver of intensifying fires, extreme heat is becoming one of the region’s most dangerous public health threats. Over the past decade, Southwest Santa Rosa alone has seen nearly 10,000 heat-related emergency room visits.

In response, Greenbelt Alliance is partnering with Latino Service Providers to develop a community-led Extreme Heat Action Plan for Southwest Santa Rosa, one of our Resilience Hotspots. The effort, supported by the Governor’s Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation, centers the people most affected—agricultural workers, families, and youth— in designing the solutions. It’s a process built on community knowledge, cultural responsiveness, and local leadership.

Our Marin Resilience Manager Jessie Rountree put it simply at the luncheon: climate solutions aren’t just possible. They’re already happening.

Help Make a Difference

As we look ahead, we invite you to continue standing with us in this critical work. With your support, we can expand these solutions across the region and safeguard the places we all love.

Every year, we host this event for our Sonoma Leadership Council, a group of supporters in the North Bay who donate $1,000 or more annually towards the work we do in the region. Our work would not be possible without our donors, and this is a great opportunity to thank them and help raise funds for ongoing projects in Sonoma County and beyond. If you would like to donate toward our work or join our Sonoma Leadership Council, click here. 

Thank you again to our wonderful supporters for helping us work to build a safer and more resilient Sonoma County! 

 

The post Funding Solutions for Fire and Heat at Sonoma Luncheon appeared first on Greenbelt Alliance.

The Trump administration is redirecting at least $90 million in National Park Service fee revenue toward projects in Washington, D.C., tied to the nation’s 250th anniversary on July 4. According to the Washington Post, the spending includes a $1.6 million fireworks display, more than five times the typical Fourth of July fireworks budget, and roughly $76 million for repairs and “beautification” projects such as work on the Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool.

The money is coming from a portion of park entrance fees that federal law allows the National Park Service to spend outside the parks where the fees were collected. Trump administration officials, including Interior Secretary Doug Burgum, have defended the spending as legal and part of broader efforts to prepare the nation’s capital for President Donald Trump’s America 250 celebrations. But diverting dollars to D.C. will have negative impacts on the rest of the national park system, which faces a maintenance backlog estimated at about $24 billion.

Several park officials told the Post that they had recently been informed there was little or no funding available for projects at their own parks. A letter sent by senior agency officials to staff in April said that parks should not expect any money from a contingency fund to cover unforeseen costs, because that money is being diverted to pay for the nation’s 250th anniversary and projects in D.C.

Quick hits The state of the nation’s public lands

WAMU

We’re having our worst wildfire year in a decade, and it’s probably going to get worse

Outdoor Life

Opinion: Improve county and Forest Service wildfire plans

Missoulian

Trump goes all in on OHV use on public lands, worrying conservationists

GearJunkie | Outdoor Life | Idaho Capital Sun

BLM to hold largest oil and gas lease sale in Colorado history

Capital & Main

Interior department’s slavery exhibit removals probed by court

Bloomberg Law | Courthouse News

Fast-tracked logging project on Yellowstone’s northern border draws pushback

Montana Public Radio | Inside Climate News

Experts are concerned about how staff cuts in public-lands agencies will impact firefighting

KSJD

Quote of the day

At [Backcountry Hunters and Anglers] we advocate for access every single day, but motorization in these backcountry lands is not the same thing as access… Access means conserving access for hunters and anglers in perpetuity for our future generations.”

—Jack Polentes, policy and government relations senior manager for Backcountry Hunters and Anglers, Outdoor Life

Picture This

@COParksWildlife
TFW someone says they want to skip work and go fishing
THIS WEEKEND IS FREE FISHING WEEKEND. On June 6-7, 2026, anyone can fish for free, and the fishing license and Habitat Stamp requirements are waived: https://cpw.info/4u6rbdn

 

Feature image: Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool; Source: Doug Burgum via X

The post Trump and Burgum divert park fees to D.C. ahead of July 4 appeared first on Center for Western Priorities.

The lawsuit calls the deal a “sham settlement agreement to unlawfully cancel an offshore wind lease and redirect the money paid for the lease to a separate, unauthorized use favored by the President.”

We handpick and explain the most important stories at the intersection of climate, land, food and nature over the past fortnight.

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

Key developments Amazon updates

RECORD-LOW LOSS: Amazon deforestation rates have fallen to their lowest level since 2019, according to a report covered by Agence France-Presse. The newswire called the figures “good news” for president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, but said the rate of deforestation is still “breathtaking”, with five trees felled every second, on average. Separately, a report from Rainforest Foundation Norway found that the “currently anticipated growth in Brazilian beef production may lead to deforestation of ~57,000km2 in the Amazon by 2034”.

ROAD AND RAIL: The Brazilian government will invest $75m into a new highway “cutting through the Amazon rainforest”, reported Deutsche-Welle. The Associated Press said the administration also announced an environmental protection plan to “safeguard the forest from potential impacts from the highway”, but added that environmentalists still fear the move “could speed up Amazon deforestation”. Separately, Inside Climate News reported on a Brazilian supreme court ruling that has brought a 965km railway through the Amazon “one step closer to reality”.

BANNED IMAGES: Mongabay reported that “Brazil’s Congress has passed a bill prohibiting environmental agencies from using satellite images to restrict the commercial use of illegally deforested lands”. According to the outlet, supporters say that “satellite-only enforcement infringes upon farmers’ right to a fair defense”, while critics argue that the bill will “weaken environmental protection” and “create unsafe conditions” for Brazil’s federal environmental police. Separately, the Brazilian government has committed more than $600m (£446m) to “foster ecological investment in the Amazon region”, according to the Associated Press. 

El Niño forecast and extreme heat

‘SUPER’ STRESSED: The predicted “super” El Niño event would add stress to an “already dysfunctional and fragile global food system”, wrote the University of Sussex’s Prof Benjamin Selwyn in a commentary in the Conversation. He added that “El Niño alters rainfall, shifts jet streams and raises global temperatures”, all of which could damage harvests this summer. Reuters noted that the forecast for the phenomenon is “particularly worrying”, due to the predicted strength of the event and the contribution of climate change. 

HEAT BURDEN: “Scorching temperatures” in India have “disrupted daily life across several northern states”, said the Washington Post. The outlet added: “Some farmers have switched to nighttime work to avoid scorching temperatures as a heatwave grips large parts of India.” The heatwave is also affecting Nepal, as high temperatures have “added burdens to public health, education, agriculture, livestock, environment, employment and public infrastructure”, reported Nepal News.

‘MIND-BOGGLING’ HEAT: Meanwhile, a “heat dome” over western Europe broke UK temperature records for the month of May. Carbon Brief summarised how the “mind-boggling” heatwave was covered in both national and international press. Agence France-Presse wrote that parts of Italy approved rules limiting work in conditions “with prolonged exposure in the sun” during the hottest part of the day. The newswire added: “Farmers reported accelerated harvests as temperatures went beyond 30C across the region.”

News and views

• SNAKEBITE DANGER: “The risk of snakebites is increasing across the world as reptiles shift their habitats to cope with rising temperatures and growing human pressures,” according to new research covered in the Guardian. It added that human-snake interactions are “forecast to become more pronounced”.
• RICE RISK: “Several parts” of China are experiencing heavy rains early this year, “raising risks for agriculture and disaster management”, wrote Bloomberg. This includes “key grain-producing provinces”, as well as areas that grow rice, vegetables and fruit, added the outlet.
• DATA DROUGHT: Chile’s Quilicura wetland, just north of Santiago, is drying up as “datacentres have drained water from drought-stricken wetlands, consuming billions of litres annually”, said the Guardian. It noted that the area is home to Latin America’s “largest concentration of datacentres”. 
• ACCOUNTING TRICK: A group of scientists have called on the Irish government to reject a proposal that would allow the livestock to use a metric called GWP* to measure methane emissions, reported Inside Climate News. According to the outlet, they warned that this “accounting trick” would “downplay” the industry’s emissions. (See Carbon Brief’s explainer on GWP* for more information.)

Spotlight Three key findings on the state of carbon dioxide removal

This week, Carbon Brief unpacks three key findings from the third edition of the “state of carbon dioxide removal” report. 

Global carbon dioxide removal (CDR) will need to increase fourfold by 2050 if the world is to have a chance of limiting global warming to 1.5C by 2100, said a new report.

Nearly all pathways to meeting the Paris Agreement’s highest ambition of keeping global temperatures to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels in 2100 involve CDR techniques – ranging from tree-planting to sucking CO2 from air with machines.

This is in addition to steep and immediate emissions cuts.

Scientists expect carbon emissions to push warming beyond 1.5C in the decade ahead, meaning that the target can only be achieved via large-scale CDR.

Here, Carbon Brief pulled out three key findings from the third state of CDR report.

‘Novel’ CDR is small, but growing

The report said that, at present, “99.9%” of existing CDR is conventional, land-based techniques, such as tree-planting and ecosystem restoration.

The world currently removes 2.2bn tonnes of CO2 (GtCO2) per year, equivalent to around 5% of gross global CO2 emissions.

The largest contributors to removing CO2 from the atmosphere are China, the US, the EU, Brazil and Russia, largely through tree-planting (afforestation) and forest restoration (reforestation).

“Novel” CDR, such as biochar and direct air capture, currently removes just 2m tonnes of CO2 annually at present, according to the report.

These methods have been growing at a rate of 40% per year – which is “insufficient for the scale-up required to meet the Paris temperature goal”, said the report.

Current ambition will not lead to net-zero

The report examined several scenarios where global temperature rise is limited to “well below” 2C by 2100, including a current ambition scenario and a highest-possible ambition scenario.

The current ambition scenario was based on “nationally determined contributions”, or NDCs, which countries submit periodically to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).

Under this scenario, the report projected a total of 5.9GtCO2 of CDR by 2050 and 12GtCO2 by 2100. This scenario would result in end-of-century warming of 1.7-2.7C. 

Importantly, the report said, current ambition does not result in the world reaching net-zero CO2 levels, “meaning that global temperatures would continue to rise” – albeit more slowly – beyond 2100.

Under the highest-possible ambition scenario, CDR scales up to 8.8GtCO2 by mid-century and 15.3GtCO2 by the end of the century. This results in global temperatures peaking at 1.7-1.8C around 2050 and the world achieving net-zero emissions around that time. 

Reducing emissions now lowers the need for future CDR

While many countries include some amount of CDR in their NDCs, there is currently a large gap between the amount of CDR pledged and the amount that will be needed to limit global temperature rise to 1.5C by the end of the century, said the report.

This quantity is referred to as the “CDR gap” – the difference between what is pledged and what is needed. 

The size of the CDR gap is dependent on both the pledges made by countries and the choice of the “benchmark” scenario against which they are measured.

Current NDCs and other country submissions to the UNFCCC total 2.5GtCO2 per year of removals in 2030 and 3.6GtCO2 per year in 2050. Using the highest-ambition scenario as a benchmark, this gives a CDR gap of 0.3GtCO2 in 2030 and 5.2GtCO2 in 2050, according to the report. 

By comparison, a 10-year delay in implementing ambitious emissions reductions will result in the need to remove at least an additional 150GtCO2 from the atmosphere, compared to the most ambitious scenario.

This Spotlight is adapted from Carbon Brief’s Q&A on the state of CDR report. You can read the article in full here.

Watch, read, listen

‘DEVASTATING’ DATA: Grist reported on a proposed Utah datacentre that could be “devastating” to the ecology of the Great Salt Lake – the largest saline lake in the world. 

ECO-OIL: The Times explained how a new synthetic oil, grown in a lab in north-west England, could be used as a substitute for palm oil. 

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

‘BATTERY COWS’: The Guardian covered work from the Bureau of Investigative Journalism that found a “huge rise” in factory-style dairy farming of “battery cows” in the UK.

New science

• Greenhouse gas emissions from rice paddies have doubled globally over the past six decades | Nature Food
• Climate change will shift the timing and location of hailstorms – increasing the risk of damage to winter crops, such as wheat, but decreasing the risk to summer crops, such as maize | Nature Climate Change 
• Wind turbines in western Europe put more than 100m migratory birds “at risk” of collision annually, but this number can be lowered through limiting energy production at strategic times | Nature Sustainability

In the diary

• 2-5 June: UN expert meeting on food and agriculture | Rome
• 5 June: World environment day
• 8-18 June: Subsidiary body meetings of the UNFCCC | Bonn, Germany
• 15-19 June: Meeting of the parties to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea | New York City
• 16-18 June: Our Ocean Conference | Mombasa, Kenya

Cropped is researched and written by Dr Giuliana Viglione, Aruna Chandrasekhar, Daisy Dunne and Orla Dwyer.  Please send tips and feedback to cropped@carbonbrief.org

The post Cropped 3 June 2026: Highway through the Amazon | El Niño impact | State of CO2 removal appeared first on Carbon Brief.

In a few days, host cities across North America will welcome huge World Cup crowds by pedestrianizing major streets – and in some cases, entire neighborhoods – to keep traffic jams out of the fan parades and festivals associated with the international event.

Boston will not be among them.

On Tuesday, the City of Boston and MBTA announced a compromise plan for managing heavy crowds around South Station that would keep Summer Street open to vehicular traffic on some – but not all – World Cup match days.

Mayor Wu’s administration had been fighting the T to keep Summer Street open to cars and trucks amidst the thousands of soccer fans that are expected to converge at South Station as they wait to board trains to Foxboro.

In the compromise plan announced Tuesday, Summer Street will be pedestrianized between Dorchester Avenue and Atlantic Avenue for eight hours on four match days: Saturday June 13, Friday the 19th, Monday the 29th, and for the quarter-final match on Thursday July 9.

For matches held on Thursday the 16th, Thursday the 23rd, and Sunday the 26th, the city plans to keep the northern lanes of Summer Street open to cars for the convenience of people who desire to drive through thick crowds of soccer fans into one of the most congested districts of the city.

But drivers should be warned: “the direction of travel will be coordinated based on the demands of the respective day and time,” and the city and the T may add “additional temporary traffic restrictions and lane closures to accommodate crowd management,” according to a press release that the MBTA and City of Boston issued yesterday.

Summer Street will also be entirely closed for an indeterminate period on all seven match days “while the MBTA sets up the temporary security screening and queuing space” outside South Station.

Other cities have more serious game plans

Boston’s nearest World Cup peer city, New York, recently announced a major transit-focused transportation plan for match days that will ban private cars and truck deliveries from numerous busy streets around Midtown Manhattan, even though the actual games are happening six miles away in New Jersey.

New York Mayor Zohran Mamdani last week announced that on World Cup match days, the city will expand bus-only lanes throughout Midtown Manhattan and transform 42nd Street – a major cross-town connection – to a bus-only corridor.

In a striking contrast to Mayor Wu’s approach, Mamdani’s administration is also planning to create large car-free pedestrian zones on the streets around Penn Station so that thousands of soccer fans will have plenty of space as they wait for trains to New Jersey.

New York had also previously announced plans to transform 50 streets near schools into car-free “soccer streets” this summer.

In another contrast with Boston, Philadelphia is also coordinating its World Cup traffic planning with its preparations for a surge of tourism for the 250th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence.

Philadelphia will close several Lemon Hill roadways to vehicular traffic for the duration of its World Cup fan festival, and it will also pedestrianize the outer lanes of Benjamin Franklin Parkway, the grand boulevard between Center City and the Philadelphia Museum of Art, for the entire summer.

The city is also pitching in $450,000 to subsidize additional PHLASH bus service between the fan festival in Lemon Hill and the central city.

Even the two World Cup host cities in Texas are taking a more enlightened approach to transportation.

Houston is pedestrianizing roughly 30 blocks of streets in its East Downtown district for daily World Cup “fan festivals” in June and July.

In Dallas, where games will take place in a suburban stadium about 17 miles from the city center, the city will close several downtown streets near its World Cup broadcasting center in the downtown convention center, and on several blocks around the city’s fan festival in the state fairgrounds.

By 2042, DTE expects to have more than 2.9 GW of energy storage on its system, more than doubling its current storage capacity.

Con el objetivo de fortalecer y dar visibilidad a experiencias locales que promueven la prevención y gestión responsable de residuos, la iniciativa Rutas basura cero seleccionó una serie de recorridos presenciales ejecutados por organizaciones locales en distintos países de América Latina. 

La propuesta surge en un contexto de creciente preocupación por la crisis de los residuos y los impactos ambientales, sociales y económicos asociados al actual modelo de producción y consumo. Frente a este escenario, las estrategias de basura cero han demostrado ser una alternativa efectiva para reducir la generación de residuos mediante prácticas de reducción, reúso, reciclaje y compostaje, al tiempo que promueven la justicia ambiental y el fortalecimiento de las economías locales.

En particular, los sistemas de reúso y rellenado están cobrando cada vez más relevancia como soluciones replicables y escalables para avanzar hacia comunidades más saludables y sostenibles. Sin embargo, muchas de estas experiencias continúan siendo poco conocidas fuera de sus zonas, lo que limita su potencial de incidencia y réplica.

Para revertir esta situación, el proyecto Rutas basura cero impulsa recorridos presenciales coordinados por organizaciones locales, que permiten a tomadores de decisiones, representantes de gobiernos, académicos, líderes sociales y otros actores clave conocer de primera mano iniciativas exitosas en funcionamiento.

Las rutas incluyen visitas a proyectos con al menos un año de trayectoria y resultados comprobables, vinculados a prácticas como el rellenado de envases, el lavado y reutilización de utensilios, el compostaje descentralizado y el cooperativismo. Además, cada experiencia es documentada mediante registros audiovisuales que pasan a integrar una base regional de casos de éxito.

La iniciativa busca generar espacios de intercambio entre experiencias consolidadas y actores estratégicos, así como producir materiales que contribuyan a la difusión y sistematización de aprendizajes sobre modelos basura cero en la región.

A continuación, compartimos las organizaciones e iniciativas seleccionadas que forman parte de esta primera edición de Rutas basura cero:

Entrejardines nos lleva a la compostera y huerta comunitaria del barrio La Floresta en Quito, luego pasamos por Pure!, una empresa de turismo que comparte cómo ha adoptado prácticas de reúso y segregación en origen dentro de su oficina, y terminamos en el restaurante Pim’s donde conocemos cómo gestionan sus residuos sólidos y orgánicos. 

La Asociación Defensores Monumento Zona de los Santos, nos muestra cómo están trabajando para preservar una zona de alta biodiversidad a través del manejo de residuos de subproductos de procesos de cultivo de café como el que hacen en CoopeTarrazu y Coopedota. Luego terminamos con una parada en el Centro de acopio Preserve Planet (CAPP) para saber más sobre segregación de residuos y recuperación de tapas de refrescos.

Fundación Lenga nos traslada a la zona más austral del Chile donde iniciamos el recorrido en Compost Coiron y su proyecto de gestión de residuos orgánicos, donde además nos cuentan cómo el turismo influye en el colapso del vertedero municipal de Puerto Natales. En Punta Arenas, conocemos el laboratorio textil Puro Viento, una iniciativa de reuso que utiliza residuos textiles y gigantografías publicitarias para hacer artículos como mochilas, estuches, entre otros. Finalmente, llegamos a Puerto Williams para saber más sobre la iniciativa municipal de gestión de residuos.

The post Rutas basura cero: una iniciativa regional para visibilizar experiencias de reúso y gestión sostenible de residuos first appeared on GAIA.

Constellation Energy will be able to transfer capacity interconnection rights, enabling the nuclear unit to potentially deliver all its power when it restarts, possibly before the end of 2027.

Google has worked to make its data centers flexible, the company’s global head of data center energy told Utility Dive, but it’s often faster and more cost effective to pay other customers to shift their electricity usage.

Each summer, people in mosquito country slather themselves with DEET, or diethyltoluamide, the synthetic liquid widely seen as the most effective mosquito repellent around.

But in some situations, they might be turning themselves into mosquito magnets, according to new research published in the Journal of Experimental Biology.

The discovery makes for interesting insights into why DEET is usually so effective. It’s also a cautionary lesson about nature’s adaptability in the face of human ingenuity, and to not take for granted the promise of such seemingly bullet-proof inventions as DEET.

“We need to understand how mosquitoes keep outsmarting our control strategies,” said Clément Vinauger, a Virginia Tech researcher who took part in the research and has spent years plumbing the behavior of mosquitos.

The stakes are much more than a few scratchy bites. Mosquitoes can spread dangerous blood-borne illnesses including malaria, dengue and yellow fever, killing an estimated 1 million people every year.

The use of DEET has been a mainstay of dealing with these biting insects, usually by spreading it on people’s skin or clothes. But despite its widespread use since its invention in the 1940s, it’s not entirely clear why it works. Does it trigger some kind of irresistible physiological reaction in mosquitoes? Or can insects overcome that response and come to tolerate or even like the smell?

To figure that out, Vinauger and his collaborators took a page from the work of Russian physiologist Ivan Pavlov, who famously showed that he could train dogs to salivate at the sound of a bell, because they had learned to associate it with food.

 

.IRPP_ruby , .IRPP_ruby .postImageUrl , .IRPP_ruby .centered-text-area {height: auto;position: relative;}.IRPP_ruby , .IRPP_ruby:hover , .IRPP_ruby:visited , .IRPP_ruby:active {border:0!important;}.IRPP_ruby .clearfix:after {content: "";display: table;clear: both;}.IRPP_ruby {display: block;transition: background-color 250ms;webkit-transition: background-color 250ms;width: 100%;opacity: 1;transition: opacity 250ms;webkit-transition: opacity 250ms;background-color: #eaeaea;}.IRPP_ruby:active , .IRPP_ruby:hover {opacity: 1;transition: opacity 250ms;webkit-transition: opacity 250ms;background-color: inherit;}.IRPP_ruby .postImageUrl {background-position: center;background-size: cover;float: left;margin: 0;padding: 0;width: 31.59%;position: absolute;top: 0;bottom: 0;}.IRPP_ruby .centered-text-area {float: right;width: 65.65%;padding:0;margin:0;}.IRPP_ruby .centered-text {display: table;height: 130px;left: 0;top: 0;padding:0;margin:0;padding-top: 20px;padding-bottom: 20px;}.IRPP_ruby .IRPP_ruby-content {display: table-cell;margin: 0;padding: 0 74px 0 0px;position: relative;vertical-align: middle;width: 100%;}.IRPP_ruby .ctaText {border-bottom: 0 solid #fff;color: #0099cc;font-size: 14px;font-weight: bold;letter-spacing: normal;margin: 0;padding: 0;font-family:'Arial';}.IRPP_ruby .postTitle {color: #000000;font-size: 16px;font-weight: 600;letter-spacing: normal;margin: 0;padding: 0;font-family:'Arial';}.IRPP_ruby .ctaButton {background: url(https://www.anthropocenemagazine.org/wp-content/plugins/intelly-related-posts-pro/assets/images/next-arrow.png)no-repeat;background-color: #afb4b6;background-position: center;display: inline-block;height: 100%;width: 54px;margin-left: 10px;position: absolute;bottom:0;right: 0;top: 0;}.IRPP_ruby:after {content: "";display: block;clear: both;}Recommended Reading:Which disease that mosquito gives you depends on a landscape's human footprint

 

In a sense, the new experiments took it even a step further. What of an animal could become so conditioned that it would seek out a disgusting physical sensation, such as a terrible smell?

To figure that out, the scientists took laboratory-raised Aedes aegypti mosquitoes, a species that spreads yellow fever and dengue. They enclosed individual insects in a plastic cylinder topped with wire mesh. They lowered a warm bag of sheep blood toward the mesh and watched to see how often a female mosquito tried to poke its proboscis into the bag. Some mosquitoes were tested in a DEET-free setting. Others were offered a blood bag while being perfumed with DEET. In a third version, mosquitoes were allowed to feed on the bag unmolested for 10 seconds, then had DEET wafted into the chamber while feeding for another 10 seconds.

For each version, individual mosquitoes went through their routine three times, to drive home the behavioral lesson.

Then the scientists exposed each trained mosquito to the smell of DEET minus the actual blood bag. Most of the ones that had never encountered DEET before or had a constant dose of the chemical while the blood was presented reacted as we might expect. They showed little interest in feeding.

But the ones that had started feeding and then encountered the DEET smell did the equivalent of Pavlov’s salivating dogs. They acted as if they were going to bite, even when there was no blood bag.

To see if this response could be replicated in a more realistic situation, mosquitoes were exposed to the two hands of scientist Ayelén Nally of the University of Buenos Aires in Argentina. Just one of her hands was doused in DEET. Mosquitoes without any special training all headed toward the DEET-free hand. But more than half the trained mosquitoes showed a preference for the hand covered in the insect repellent. (Nally didn’t shed blood for the experiment – there was a mesh barrier blocking the mosquitos.)

The startling results suggest that rather than a hardwired physical response, the repellent might work because it evokes the smell of natural occurring repellents such as chemicals from a plant, the scientists suggested. “What we are showing is that the mosquito’s brain can rewrite that response based on experience. What the insect has learned matters just as much as what the chemical does,” said Vinauger. “That, I think, is a paradigm shift.”

That doesn’t mean people should toss away their DEET. It’s still highly effective in many cases. “If you’re in tropical regions where disease risk is real, you should use it,” he said.

But people might need to use it more thoughtfully. “Instead of applying a lot at once, you may want to reapply regularly so it’s always active and providing continuous protection,” Vinauger said.

That way, mosquitoes won’t get close enough to take a bite and begin associating the smell with a snack. Because if they do, then you might just be putting on mosquito perfume.

Lazzari, et. al. “Associative learning switches DEET valence from aversive to appetitive in Aedes aegypti.” Journal of Experimental Biology. May 28, 2026.

Image: ©Anthropocene Magazine

By Vanessa Mascia Turri

Naples became one of Europe’s most ambitious experiments in democratic water governance after Italy’s 2011 referendum against water privatisation. Yet bringing water back into public hands did not necessarily redistribute power over how water itself would be governed.

In 2011, after the Italian referendum against water privatisation, Naples became one of the most ambitious experiments in remunicipalised water governance in Europe. The city transformed its water utility into ABC Napoli (Acqua Bene Comune Napoli), a publicly owned entity presented not simply as a return to public management, but as an attempt to implement the “democracy of the commons” theorised by the Italian Forum of Water Movements.

Within this perspective, water was understood not only as a public service, but as a common good whose governance should involve the direct participation of citizens and social movements.

Over the following decade, Naples became a testing ground for a broader political question that has emerged across many remunicipalisation struggles: what happens when the language and practices of the commons enter public institutions? The Neapolitan experience shows that bringing water back into public hands does not automatically democratise its governance. Instead, participation became continuously negotiated and reshaped through political conflict, financial pressures and struggles over who should control public resources.

From water struggles to the democracy of the commons

Since the early 2000s, struggles against water privatisation have connected local mobilisations to broader debates around the commons. Struggles against water privatisation in Europe have often gone beyond opposition to market reforms and increasingly connected demands for public ownership with broader claims around the commons and direct democracy, as explored throughout the Reimagining, remembering and reclaiming water series. In many countries, water movements have challenged not only privatisation, but also the idea that essential services should be governed through technocratic and top-down forms of management, increasingly linking water struggles to broader claims around the commons and direct democracy, as discussed in Transforming capitalism? The role of the commons and direct democracy in struggles against water privatisation in Europe.

In Italy, these debates converged in the Italian Forum of Water Movements, one of the broadest water movements in Europe. As broader discussions around the commons in Italy have shown, these debates extended well beyond water itself and raised wider questions about collective resources, democracy and institutional change. Under the slogan “si scrive acqua, si legge democrazia” (“it is written water, it is read democracy”), the movement argued that remunicipalisation should involve not only public ownership, but also direct civic participation in water governance.

Naples became the most ambitious attempt to translate this political vision into institutional practice.

 

Poster from the 2011 Italian referendum campaign against water privatization reading “Water is not for sale.” Image courtesy of the Forum Italiano dei Movimenti per l’Acqua.

Naples became the most ambitious attempt to translate this political vision into institutional practice.

Yet public and academic debates on remunicipalisation have often focused on privatisation conflicts and legal transitions, paying far less attention to what happens afterwards. How are participatory mechanisms actually organised inside remunicipalised utilities? How much power are institutions willing to share with social movements and citizens once remunicipalisation has taken place?

My article From theory to practice: evaluating civic participation in Naples’ remunicipalised water service examines these questions through the case of ABC Napoli, reconstructing how participation was progressively organised, contested and reshaped during the decade following remunicipalisation.

Participation and the limits of the commons

At the moment of remunicipalisation, Naples faced deteriorated infrastructures, chronic underinvestment and a massive municipal public debt. For many activists of the Neapolitan water movement, remunicipalisation was therefore not only about public ownership, but also about transforming the priorities of water governance through ecological restoration, infrastructural investment and more equitable access to water.

Over the following decade, ABC Napoli experimented with different forms of civic participation. Initially, the municipal government opened the board of directors to representatives linked to the Italian Forum of Water Movements and to environmental associations. Yet local activists who had led the mobilisation against privatisation were largely excluded from these arrangements, generating immediate tensions over who had the legitimacy to participate in the governance of the utility.

The most ambitious participatory experiment emerged with the creation of the Civic Council, a public assembly open to citizens, activists and ABC workers. Meetings were held directly inside the company and addressed issues such as tariffs, infrastructure maintenance, hiring policies and investment priorities. Delegates from the assemblies also participated in discussions with the board of directors, creating one of the most advanced attempts in Europe to institutionalise direct civic participation inside a remunicipalised water utility.

However, participation became far more conflictual once these assemblies started intervening in concrete political and economic questions. Members of the Civic Council promoted long-term infrastructural investments and the recruitment of specialised personnel while defending the financial stability of the utility. According to several interviewees, these priorities increasingly clashed with those of the municipal government, which was more focused on short-term employment policies and the management of public-sector jobs within a broader context marked by debt, unemployment and political pressures surrounding public employment.

These tensions ultimately led to the removal of the board of directors and to the progressive weakening of participatory governance. In the following years, participation increasingly shifted towards weak consultative mechanisms with limited influence over decision-making processes. Many activists gradually distanced themselves from the experiment, while severe financial constraints continued to limit investments in infrastructures and ecological renewal.

Rather than evolving towards deeper forms of democratic governance, the Neapolitan experience progressively revealed the difficulties of institutionalising the “democracy of the commons” within existing municipal structures and political priorities.

Remunicipalisation without democratisation?

Poster from the Italian public water movement following the 2011 referendum campaign, emphasising water as a public right rather than a source of profit. Image courtesy of the Forum Italiano dei Movimenti per l’Acqua.

The experience of ABC Napoli complicates many celebratory narratives surrounding remunicipalisation. Bringing water back into public hands did not automatically redistribute power inside public governance. On the contrary, the Neapolitan case shows how quickly the language of the commons can become absorbed into existing institutional structures once participation starts challenging concrete political and economic interests.

The weakening of participatory governance inside ABC Napoli did not result from a lack of civic mobilisation or technical expertise. Quite the opposite: activists involved in the water movement developed increasingly detailed proposals on tariffs, infrastructures and long-term investments, becoming capable of intervening directly in the governance of the utility. Participation became problematic precisely when it stopped being symbolic and started questioning how public resources, infrastructures and employment should be managed.

In Naples, these tensions unfolded within a broader context marked by public debt, deteriorated infrastructures, unemployment and long-standing systems of political mediation surrounding public-sector employment. Under these conditions, the “democracy of the commons” increasingly collided with the political and administrative logics shaping municipal governance.

More broadly, the Neapolitan experience suggests that remunicipalisation alone cannot democratise essential services without a real willingness from public institutions to share decision-making power. Commons become politically difficult when they move beyond participation as consultation and start demanding participation as co-governance.

Rather than offering a linear model of democratic transformation, Naples reveals the unresolved tensions that emerge when social movements attempt to institutionalise the commons inside existing state structures. The question, then, is not simply whether remunicipalisation is possible, but whether public institutions are truly willing to democratise the power through which public resources are governed.

—

Featured image: Protest sign reading “Public water, public management. Clear?” during a demonstration of the Italian water movement. Photo courtesy of the Forum Italiano dei Movimenti per l’Acqua (acquabenecomune.org).

The post From remunicipalisation to the democracy of the commons appeared first on Undisciplined Environments.

Thin Blue Rage: The Police Countermovement, by Andrew Crosby and Jeffrey Monaghan (Fernwood Publishing, May 2026). The years following the George Floyd rebellions have witnessed...

The post Book Review: “Thin Blue Rage: The Police Countermovement” first appeared on Spring.

The Labour government wants to cut UK greenhouse gas emissions to 87% below 1990 levels by 2040, which it says will deliver £865bn in economic benefits.

The target has been set out in draft legislation for the seventh “carbon budget”, a legally binding limit on emissions during the five-year period from 2038-2042.

The government says this would protect billpayers from “fossil-fuel shocks”, boost energy security, improve quality of life and help tackle climate change, by getting the country on track for net-zero by 2050.

The UK would need to invest around £880bn over 25 years to meet the budget, but doing so would yield benefits worth £1,620bn, according to a government impact assessment.

Pointedly, the government presents these benefits and costs relative to a policy of “no net-zero”, as the opposition Conservatives and hard-right Reform UK have both pledged to abandon the 2050 goal.

The 137-page impact assessment mentions energy security more than 30 times and says the seventh carbon budget would help save £445bn up to 2050 from ever decreasing fossil-fuel imports.

Moreover, the assessment is based on fossil-fuel price projections published in 2024, before the cost of oil and gas surged earlier this year after the effective closure of the strait of Hormuz.

The document says that the UK’s climate goals would be even more beneficial – worth £1,035bn, relative to “no net-zero” – if the country is exposed to “persistently high fossil-fuel prices”.

The seventh carbon budget must be approved by parliament before the end of June and the government must then publish a plan to meet it “as soon as reasonably practicable”.

• What is the UK’s seventh ‘carbon budget’?
• What target is the government aiming for?
• How could the UK meet the seventh carbon budget?
• What are the benefits and costs of reaching this target?
• What happens next?

What is the UK’s seventh ‘carbon budget’?

The UK’s efforts to tackle and respond to global warming are governed by the Climate Change Act, which was passed with near-unanimous cross-party support in 2008, by 463 votes to five.

In 2019, the then-Conservative government amended the Act to set a long-term goal for cutting emissions to 100% below 1990 levels by 2050, known as the net-zero target.

(The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has affirmed that reaching net-zero is the only way to stop global warming from getting worse – and that emissions would need to reach net-zero by 2050 globally to have a chance of limiting the rise in temperatures to 1.5C.)

To stay on track for the 2050 target, the act requires the government to set a series of “carbon budgets”. These are binding limits on the UK’s emissions covering successive five-year periods.

The UK met its first three carbon budgets, covering 2008-2022. It is currently just over half way through the fourth “carbon budget”, covering 2023-2027.

Under the act, the government is required to set the level of the seventh carbon budget, covering 2038-2042, by the end of June this year.

Before setting the budget, the government must take advice from the Climate Change Committee (CCC). In turn, this advice must take into account a range of factors, including the latest scientific evidence, technological trends, the state of the economy and public finances.

No government has ever gone against the advice of the CCC when setting carbon budgets. However, the government could have chosen not to do so, if it had explained why.

What target is the government aiming for?

The CCC recommended last year that the UK should aim to cut its emissions to 87% below 1990 levels under the seventh carbon budget for 2038-2042 – equivalent to a three-quarters reduction on current levels.

The government has followed this advice, setting a draft seventh carbon budget of 535m tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e), some 107MtCO2e per year.

The proposed 2040 target is shown in the figure below, alongside previously legislated budgets and the UK’s international climate pledges for 2030 and 2035 under the Paris Agreement.

UK greenhouse gas emissions including international aviation and shipping (IAS), MtCO2e. Lines show historical emissions (black) and the pathway to reaching net-zero. Legislated carbon budgets levels are shown as grey steps. The first five budgets did not include IAS, but left “headroom” to allow for these emissions (darker wedges). Source: CCC progress reports, Carbon Brief analysis.

In a written statement to parliament, energy secretary Ed Miliband said the target would reduce the UK’s exposure to “volatile international fossil-fuel markets and protect bill-payers”, as well as delivering benefits for jobs, growth, health and the natural environment. Miliband wrote:

“Against the backdrop of heightened geopolitical instability, including the ongoing crisis in the Middle East and its implications for global energy markets, the case for setting a clear and credible long-term pathway for the UK on clean energy and climate action is stronger than ever.”

Echoing a 2023 review commissioned by the then-Conservative government, Miliband also wrote that “clean energy and climate action is the economic opportunity of the 21st century”.

(On the day of the draft budget, the Guardian reported findings that the UK’s “net-zero economy” was worth “more than £100bn a year”, according to consultancy CBI Economics.)

The impact assessment sets out the climate-change “case for action”. It says the “science is clear” that the UK is becoming wetter and warmer, with increasing floods, droughts, heatwaves and wildfires. This is “unequivocally” due to human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. It continues:

“Without action, climate change will continue to endanger the UK’s food and water security, exacerbate global population displacement and pose national security risks.”

The document adds that the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) found the “costs of climate damage are getting higher, while the cost of the net-zero transition is getting lower”.

In its impact assessment, the government also outlines a less ambitious goal to cut emissions to 83% below 1990 levels by 2040 and a tighter target for 89%.

In what may be an attempt to pre-empt future legal challenges (see: What happens next?), the government outlines why it is not choosing to pursue either greater or lesser ambition for 2040.

It says the low end of ambition “increases the risk of underinvestment”, while the highest target could face “deliverability risks [that] may undermine [the UK’s] credibility”.

Note that the sixth and seventh budgets were set in line with the net-zero target, whereas previous budgets were set on a pathway to 80% by 2050 – hence, the step change in the figure above.

The sixth and later carbon budgets include the UK’s share of emissions from international aviation and shipping. These emissions relate to journeys that start or finish at UK ports and airports. Draft legislation to make this change was laid in parliament earlier this year.

The UK’s legally binding climate goals do not include the “imported” emissions associated with the production of goods and services in other countries. Among other reasons, this is because the UK does not have legal jurisdiction over activities taking place outside its borders.

The UK’s imported emissions were growing until around 2008, but have remained relatively flat since then. This means that the UK’s overall “carbon footprint”, including imported emissions, has been falling by a similar amount as the territorial emissions within its own borders.

How could the UK meet the seventh carbon budget?

To date, UK emissions cuts have largely come from the power sector, as the country has stopped burning coal to generate electricity and shifted from gas towards clean power.

In order to meet the seventh carbon budget, the UK will need to cut emissions across the economy. According to the CCC’s advice, the biggest contributions would come from electrifying transport, heat and industry, driven by a massively expanded supply of clean electricity.

It said at the time of its advice:

“In many key areas, the best way forward is now clear. Electrification and low-carbon electricity supply make up the largest share of emissions reductions in our pathway.”

This would mean shifting to electric vehicles (EVs), electric heat pumps and electrified industrial processes on a massive scale, reducing the need for fossil fuels.

Since electrified technologies are far more efficient than those based on fossil-fuel combustion, this shift would also dramatically cut the need for oil and gas imports, the CCC said.

In broad terms, the government backs a similar path to cutting UK emissions through mass electrification. In its release on the seventh carbon budget, it says:

“Half of the UK’s recessions since 1970 have been caused by fossil-fuel shocks. The government is investing in renewable and nuclear energy to get the UK off the rollercoaster of fossil-fuel prices…By 2050, the UK could cut its reliance on fossil fuels from around three quarters of our energy today to around 15%, while avoiding around £445bn in fossil-fuel spending over the next 25 years.”

In its “delivery plan” for the sixth carbon budget, covering 2033-2037, it said roughly a third of UK homes should have heat pumps by 2035 and around half of cars on the road should be EVs.

There is one key difference between the CCC’s suggested approach to meeting the UK’s carbon budgets and that of the government. Specifically, the CCC suggested there would be an important role for behaviour change in relation to diets and efforts to limit the rise in the number of flights.

In contrast, the government has placed much less emphasis on these areas. This means that it relies to a greater extent on expensive technologies that can remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

Despite this context, some right-leaning newspapers have misleadingly focused their coverage on the perceived need to alter diets to meet the seventh carbon budget.

What are the benefits and costs of reaching this target?

The government says that the proposed seventh carbon budget would “deliver the benefits of clean energy and climate action for jobs and growth, health and our natural environment”, as well as aligning with the 1.5C target of the Paris Agreement to “avoid climate disaster”.

Overall, it says that the net-zero target for 2050 “continues to represent value for money, with strong net benefits relative to alternative pathways”.

The detailed impact assessment sets out the benefits and costs of meeting the proposed seventh carbon budget in monetary terms, in line with Treasury guidance under the “green book”.

The results are presented in terms of “net present value” (NPV). This takes into account the human preference for enjoying benefits today, rather than in the future. When measuring NPV, future costs and benefits are “discounted”, to reflect their lower value in the present moment.

Specifically, meeting the proposed seventh carbon budget would have net benefits worth £865bn to the UK, relative to a world where the net-zero target is abandoned and existing technology continues to be used. For example, in this “no net-zero” alternative, gas boilers and petrol cars would be replaced like-for-like when they reach the end of their life.

It says that a lower bill for fossil fuels is a “major component” of the net benefits, with savings reaching £445bn over 25 years if the seventh carbon budget is met, relative to “no net-zero”.

The “vast majority” of these savings result from electrification – in other words, swapping those boilers and petrol cars for heat pumps and EVs.

However, the largest benefit of the proposed budget comes from avoided climate-change damages, which amount to £1,495bn over 25 years, according to the document. This benefit relates to lower UK emissions limiting climate impacts, such as extreme heat and flooding.

The government also acknowledges that significant investments would be required to meet the seventh carbon budget. It puts the cost of these investments at £880bn over 25 years, including financing, relative to the alternative of “no net-zero”.

These benefits and costs of the proposed budget are shown in the figure below. In aggregate, these add up to the headline net benefits of £865bn over 25 years.

Net benefits and costs of meeting the UK’s seventh carbon budget, measured over the period 2025-2050 in present-value terms, £bn. Source: Department of Energy Security and Net Zero.

In addition to the “no net-zero” baseline, the impact assessment compares the proposed budget with a continuation of current policies. The results are directionally similar to, but slightly lower than, the net benefits relative to “no net-zero”.

The document also considers a range of “sensitivities” to explore the impact of higher or lower technology costs and fossil-fuel prices, as well as to consider alternative pathways that use less carbon capture and storage (CCS), fewer EVs or a reduced number of heat pumps.

Finally, the impact assessment also considers the ongoing benefits and costs of meeting the seventh carbon budget when looking out to 2060.

This roughly doubles the net benefits of meeting the target from £865bn by 2050 to £1,520bn by 2060, because the upfront investments yield ongoing savings, such as lower fossil-fuel bills.

Notably, the impact assessment is based on fossil-fuel price projections published in 2024, when the average cost of wholesale gas was around 80p per therm.

These projections envisaged gas prices of 75p/therm in 2025, falling to 70p by 2030. A “high” case, explored in the impact assessment, had prices of up to around 110p/therm.

In reality, prices climbed to around 85p/therm in 2025 and gas is currently trading at 115p, having reached as high as 150p/therm in the immediate aftermath of the US-Israel attack on Iran in February. This was still well below the 640p peak seen during the global energy crisis in 2022.

In the “high” case for fossil-fuel prices – in which prices are below current levels – the net benefit of the seventh carbon budget climbs to £1,035bn over 25 years.

The impact assessment does not consider the potential for “feedback and system loops, which have potential to decrease costs faster than estimated”.

Setting aside the benefits of meeting the UK’s climate goals, the government analysis says that the net investment costs of the transition would be equivalent to around 1.2% of GDP per year, with a range of 0.8-1.6% reflecting uncertainty in fossil-fuel prices and technology costs.

It says that investing 1.2% of GDP in meeting the seventh carbon budget would not mean the UK’s GDP being 1.2% lower. On the contrary, it says the impact on GDP could be positive. It says:

“The investment in home-grown clean energy and electrification and the reduced reliance on fossil fuels has the potential to generate positive impacts on GDP over time.”

It goes on to compare this figure with the cost of the 2022 global energy crisis, which it says hit the economy by around 2-3% of GDP, including taxpayer-funded bill support of £42bn.

Citing recent analysis by the CCC and its own modelling, it says the seventh carbon budget would leave the economy around £90bn better off, if a fossil-fuel price shock were to hit again in 2040.

In addition, the assessment notes figures from the OBR, suggesting that climate damages resulting from global warming of 3C could wipe around 8% off UK GDP.

Notably, the government assessment of net abatement costs is significantly higher than the equivalent figure published by the CCC, of just 0.2% of GDP. It says this reflects two main factors.

First, the government’s reduced emphasis on behaviour change, which as noted above results in a greater need for expensive CO2 removal technologies. Second, it says the CCC “expects a more rapid decline in the costs of technology” than the government assumes.

For example, whereas recent government analysis has assumed that EVs will never be cheaper to buy than petrol cars, the CCC assumes that “price parity” will be reached within a few years. In fact, the latest data indicates that EVs are already cheaper to buy than petrol cars, on average.

.cb-tweet{ width: 65%; box-shadow: 3px 3px 6px #d3d3d3; margin: auto; } .cb-tweet img{ border: solid 1.25px #333333; border-radius: 5px; } @media (max-width:650px){ .cb-tweet{ width:100%; } } What happens next?

Under the Climate Change Act, there is a deadline of 30 June 2026 to legislate for the seventh carbon budget, subject to parliamentary approval.

In setting out the draft target, the UK government has already taken into account the views of the devolved administrations for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. The impact assessment notes that none of them had made “representations” on the level of the seventh carbon budget.

The draft carbon budget legislation is subject to the “affirmative procedure”, which means it must be debated and voted through by both houses of parliament.

For the sixth carbon budget, which was legislated under the then-Conservative government in 2021, this vote took place during the “committee stage”.

The government statement says that its delivery plan for the sixth carbon budget, published in October 2025, will “drive substantial abatement into the carbon budget seven period”. It adds:

“These policies will continue to deliver the bulk of emissions savings needed for carbon budget seven. This provides a strong and credible starting point…reducing delivery risk and giving confidence that the transition can be delivered in an affordable and manageable way.”

Specifically, the impact assessment says that the existing CB6 delivery plan “would get the UK to 84% emissions reduction” by 2040, only just shy of the proposed 87% target.

The government commits to publishing a new delivery plan for the seventh carbon budget “as soon as reasonably practical”, in line with the wording with the Climate Change Act. It says:

“This statutory sequencing recognises the time needed to develop and agree an ambitious and robust package of policies to deliver the target.”

The impact assessment notes that the delivery plan will determine how the UK meets the seventh carbon budget, as well as the implications for different regions and sectors of the UK economy.

Two earlier delivery plans, published by previous Conservative governments, were subject to successful legal challenge in the High Court. These cases, brought by groups including Friends of the Earth and ClientEarth, resulted in the latest delivery plan, published last October.

A separate group, calling itself “Carbon Reckoning”, is attempting to crowdfund a fresh legal challenge to the government’s plans for the seventh carbon budget. In late May 2026, it wrote to Miliband arguing that the 87% by 2040 target “fails to comply with international obligations”.

Q&A: The current state of ‘carbon dioxide removal’ around the world

Negative emissions

|

02.06.26

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

Extreme weather

|

29.05.26

Media reaction: UK and Europe’s ‘mind-boggling’ May heat and climate change

Extreme weather

|

28.05.26

Experts: Why migration is ‘not a failure of adaptation’ in a warming world

Risk and adaptation

|

22.05.26

jQuery(document).ready(function() { jQuery('.block-related-articles-slider-block_aebca9a904f5ba24d99746c2a128f20a .mh').matchHeight({ byRow: false }); });

The post Q&A: How UK’s seventh carbon budget will deliver ‘£865bn’ in economic benefits appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Russian-Speaking Leftists, a group based in Germany, on 19 May published this interview with a socialist activist living in Russia who, they write, “stands for revolutionary defeatism”.[1] I translated it and added the footnotes. SP. Download this article as a PDF Q: Please tell us a little about yourself. A: I am a communist. I […]

The Northern Territory government has granted approval for gas giant Santos to drill 12 fracking wells in the Beetaloo Basin, despite concerns that the project would mainly serve the export market while putting water and environment at risk.