Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

GoGreenNation News

Learn more about the issues presented in our films
Show Filters

In Colorado Town Built on Coal, Some Families Are Moving On, Even as Trump Tries to Boost Industry

The Cooper family has worked in the coal industry in Colorado for generations

CRAIG, Colo. (AP) — The Cooper family knows how to work heavy machinery. The kids could run a hay baler by their early teens, and two of the three ran monster-sized drills at the coal mines along with their dad.But learning to maneuver the shiny red drill they use to tap into underground heat feels different. It's a critical part of the new family business, High Altitude Geothermal, which installs geothermal heat pumps that use the Earth’s constant temperature to heat and cool buildings. At stake is not just their livelihood but a century-long family legacy of producing energy in Moffat County.Like many families here, the Coopers have worked in coal for generations — and in oil before that. That's ending for Matt Cooper and his son Matthew as one of three coal mines in the area closes in a statewide shift to cleaner energy. “People have to start looking beyond coal," said Matt Cooper. "And that can be a multitude of things. Our economy has been so focused on coal and coal-fired power plants. And we need the diversity.” Many countries and about half of U.S. states are moving away from coal, citing environmental impacts and high costs. Burning coal emits carbon dioxide that traps heat in the atmosphere, warming the planet.That's created uncertainty in places like Craig. As some families like the Coopers plan for the next stage of their careers, others hold out hope Trump will save their plants, mines and high-paying jobs. Matt and Matthew Cooper work at the Colowyo Mine near Meeker, though active mining has ended and site cleanup begins in January.The mine employs about 130 workers and supplies Craig Generating Station, a 1,400-megawatt coal-fired plant. Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association is planning to close Craig's Unit 1 by year's end for economic reasons and to meet legal requirements for reducing emissions. The other two units will close in 2028.Xcel Energy owns coal-fired Hayden Station, about 30 minutes away. It said it doesn't plan to change retirement dates for Hayden, though it's extending another coal unit in Pueblo in part due to increased demand for electricity.The Craig and Hayden plants together employ about 200 people.Craig residents have always been entrepreneurial and that spirit will get them through this transition, said Kirstie McPherson, board president for the Craig Chamber of Commerce. Still, she said, just about everybody here is connected to coal.“You have a whole community who has always been told you are an energy town, you’re a coal town," she said. “When that starts going away, beyond just the individuals that are having the identity crisis, you have an entire culture, an entire community that is also having that same crisis.”Coal has been central to Colorado’s economy since before statehood, but it's generally the most expensive energy on today's grid, said Democratic Gov. Jared Polis.“We are not going to let this administration drag us backwards into an overreliance on expensive fossil fuels,” Polis said in a statement. Nationwide, coal power was 28% more expensive in 2024 than it was in 2021, costing consumers $6.2 billion more, according to a June analysis from Energy Innovation. The nonpartisan think tank cited significant increases to run aging plants as well as inflation.Colorado’s six remaining coal-fired power plants are scheduled to close or convert to natural gas, which emits about half the carbon dioxide as coal, by 2031. The state is rapidly adding solar and wind that's cheaper and cleaner than legacy coal plants. Renewable energy provides more than 40% of Colorado’s power now and will pass 70% by the end of the decade, according to statewide utility plans.Nationwide, wind and solar growth has remained strong, producing more electricity than coal in 2025, as of the latest data in October, according to energy think tank Ember.But some states want to increase or at least maintain coal production. That includes top coal state Wyoming, where the Wyoming Energy Authority said Trump is breathing welcome new life into its coal and mining industry.The Coopers have gone all-in on geothermal. “Maybe we’ll never go back to coal," Matt Cooper said. "We haven’t (gone) back to oil and gas, so we might just be geothermal people for quite some time, maybe generations, and then eventually something else will come along.”While the Coopers were learning to use their drill in October, Wade Gerber was in downtown Craig distilling grain neutral spirits — used to make gin and vodka — on a day off from the Craig Station power plant. Gerber stepped over his corgis, Ali and Boss, and onto a stepladder to peer into a massive stainless steel pot where he was heating wheat and barley.Gerber's spent three decades in coal. When closure plans were announced four years ago, he, his wife Tenniel and their friend McPherson brainstormed business ideas.“With my background in plumbing and electrical from the plant it’s like, oh yeah, I can handle that part of it,” Gerber said about distilling. “This is the easy part.”He used Tri-State's education subsidies for classes in distilling, while other co-workers learned to fix vehicles or repair guns to find new careers. While some plan to leave town, Gerber is opening Bad Alibi Distillery. McPherson and Tenniel Gerber are opening a cocktail bar next door.Everyone in town hopes Trump will step in to extend the plant's life, Gerber said. Meanwhile, they're trying to define a new future for Craig in a nerve-wracking time.“For me, my products can go elsewhere. I don’t necessarily have to sell it in Craig, there’s that avenue. For someone relying on Craig, it's even scarier,” he said. Questioning the coal rollback Tammy Villard owns a gift shop, Moffat Mercantile, with her husband. After the coal closures were announced, they opened a commercial print shop too, seeing it as a practical choice for when so many high-paying jobs go away. Villard, who spent a decade at Colowyo as administrative staff, said she doesn't understand how the state can throw the switch to turn off coal and still have reliable electricity. She wants the state to slow down. Villard describes herself as a moderate Republican. She said political swings at the federal level — from the green energy push in the last administration to doubling down on fossil fuels in this one — aren't helpful.“The pendulum has to come back to the middle," she said, “and we are so far out to either side that I don’t know how we get back to that middle.”The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Contributor: The left's climate panic is finally calming down

Millions of Americans may still believe warming exists, but far fewer view it as an imminent existential threat.

Is the American left finally waking up from its decades-long climate catastrophism stupor? For years, climate alarmism has reigned as political catechism: The planet is burning and only drastic action — deindustrialization, draconian regulation, even ceasing childbearing — could forestall certain apocalypse. Now, at least some signs are emerging that both the broader public and leading liberal voices may be recoiling from the doom and gloom.First, recent polling shows that the intensity of climate dread is weakening. According to a July report from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, while a majority (69%) of Americans still say global warming is happening, only 60% say it’s “mostly human-caused”; 28% attribute it mostly to natural environmental changes. A similar October study from the University of Chicago’s Energy Policy Institute found that “belief in human-driven climate change declined overall” since 2017. Interestingly, Democrats and political independents, not Republicans, were primarily responsible for the decline.Moreover, public willingness to countenance personal sacrifice in the name of saving the planet seems to be plummeting: An October 2024 poll from the Pew Research Center found that only 45% said human activity contributed “a great deal” to climate change. An additional 29% said it contributed “some” — while a quarter said human influence was minimal or nonexistent.The moral panic is slowly evaporating. Millions of Americans may still believe warming exists, but far fewer view it as an imminent existential threat — let alone embrace sweeping upheavals in energy policy and personal lifestyle.The fading consensus among ordinary Americans matches a more dramatic signal from ruling-class elites. On Oct. 28, no less an erstwhile ardent climate change evangelist than Bill Gates published a remarkable blog post addressing climate leaders at the then-upcoming COP30 summit. Gates unloaded a blistering critique of what he called “the doomsday view of climate change,” which he said is simply “wrong.” While acknowledging the serious risks for the poorest countries, Gates insisted that humanity will continue to “live and thrive in most places on Earth for the foreseeable future.” He added that “using more energy is a good thing, because it’s so closely correlated with economic growth.” One might be forgiven for suffering a bit of whiplash.The unraveling of climate catastrophism got another jolt recently with the formal retraction of a high-profile 2024 study published in the journal Nature. That study — which had predicted a calamitous 62% decline in global economic output by 2100 if carbon emissions were not sufficiently reduced — was widely cited by transnational bodies and progressive political activists alike as justification for the pursuit of aggressive decarbonization. But the authors withdrew the paper after peer reviewers discovered that flawed data had skewed the result. Without that data, the projected decline in output collapses to around 23%. Oops.The climate alarm machine — powered by the twin engines of moral panic and groupthink homogeneity — is sputtering. When the public grows skeptical, when billionaire techno-philanthropists question the prevailing consensus and when supposedly mainstream scientific projections reverse course, that’s a sign that the days of Al Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth” propaganda documentary and John Kerry’s “special presidential envoy for climate” globe-trotting vanity gig are officially over.Ultimately, no one stands to benefit more from this incipient trend toward climate sanity than the American people themselves. In an era when optimism can be hard to come by, the professed certitude of imminent environmental apocalypse is pretty much the least helpful thing imaginable. If one is seeking to plant the seeds of hope, nothing could be worse than lecturing to the masses that one is a climate change-“denying” misanthrope if he has the temerity to take his family on an airplane for a nice vacation or — egad! — entertain thoughts of having more children. Even more to the point, given the overwhelming evidence that Americans are now primarily concerned about affordability and the cost of living, more — not less — hydrocarbon extraction has never been more necessary.There are green shoots that liberals and elites may be slowly — perhaps grudgingly — giving up on the climate catastrophism hoax to which they have long stubbornly clung. In America’s gladiatorial two-party system, that could well deprive Republicans of a winning political issue with which to batter out-of-touch, climate-change-besotted Democrats. But for the sake of good governance, sound public policy and the prosperity of the median American citizen, it would be the best thing to happen in a decade.Josh Hammer’s latest book is “Israel and Civilization: The Fate of the Jewish Nation and the Destiny of the West.” This article was produced in collaboration with Creators Syndicate. X: @josh_hammer This article generally aligns with a Right point of view. Learn more about this AI-generated analysis The following AI-generated content is powered by Perplexity. The Los Angeles Times editorial staff does not create or edit the content. Ideas expressed in the pieceThe author contends that climate catastrophism has dominated progressive political discourse for decades but is now experiencing a notable decline in public support and credibility. Recent polling demonstrates weakening consensus on climate risks, with only 60% of Americans attributing warming primarily to human causes compared to 28% citing natural environmental changes, while belief in human-caused climate change has declined particularly among Democrats and independents since 2017. The author notes that public willingness to accept personal sacrifices for climate goals has diminished substantially, with only 45% of Americans saying human activity contributed “a great deal” to warming. The author highlights prominent figures like Bill Gates questioning the “doomsday view of climate change” and emphasizing that humanity will continue to thrive, arguing that increased energy consumption correlates with economic growth. The retraction of a 2024 Nature study that had predicted a 62% decline in global economic output by 2100—which peer reviewers found used flawed data—serves as evidence, according to the author, that catastrophic projections lack credibility. The author maintains that climate alarmism has been counterproductive to American well-being, fostering pessimism about the future and discouraging people from having children or pursuing economic development, and that moving away from this narrative will allow policymakers to address concerns Americans prioritize, particularly affordability and cost of living, through expanded hydrocarbon extraction.Different views on the topicScientific researchers have documented substantive health consequences from climate-related extreme events that suggest legitimate grounds for public concern rather than baseless alarmism. A comprehensive peer-reviewed literature review identified extensive evidence linking climate change to measurable increases in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and suicidal ideation following extreme weather events such as heat waves, floods, hurricanes, and droughts[1]. The research demonstrates that approximately 80% of the global population experiences water and food insecurity resulting from climate impacts, with particularly acute effects in rural areas facing drought and agricultural disruption[1]. Scientific studies indicate that anthropogenic warming has contributed to increased frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, with vulnerable populations—including elderly individuals, low-income communities, women, and disabled persons—facing disproportionate risks due to limited access to resources and protection[1]. Rather than representing unfounded catastrophism, documented mental and physical health outcomes following extreme weather suggest that public concern about climate impacts reflects genuine public health challenges warranting policy attention and resource allocation for adaptation and mitigation strategies.

Streets named after birds in Britain on rise as species’ populations plummet

RSPB says growing trend for honouring species that are in decline is not matched by action on conservationBritain’s street names are being inspired by skylarks, lapwings and starlings, even as bird populations decline.According to a report by the RSPB, names such as Skylark Lane and Swift Avenue are increasingly common. Using OS Open Names data from 2004 to 2024, the conservation charity found that road names featuring bird species had risen by 350% for skylarks, 156% for starlings and 104% for lapwings, despite populations of these having fallen in the wild. Continue reading...

Britain’s street names are being inspired by skylarks, lapwings and starlings, even as bird populations decline.According to a report by the RSPB, names such as Skylark Lane and Swift Avenue are increasingly common. Using OS Open Names data from 2004 to 2024, the conservation charity found that road names featuring bird species had risen by 350% for skylarks, 156% for starlings and 104% for lapwings, despite populations of these having fallen in the wild.Between 1970 and 2022 the UK lost 53% of its breeding skylarks, 62% of lapwings and 89% of nightingales. The RSPB’s chief executive, Beccy Speight, said the analysis “shows councils and developers are happy to name streets after the nature we love while efforts to prevent these birds disappearing from our skies remain woefully inadequate”.The 2023 State of Nature report called the UK “one of the most nature-depleted countries on Earth”, and wild bird numbers have plummeted since the 1970s.The RSPB study also found that “meadow” in street names had risen by 34%, though wildflower meadows are down 97% since the 1930s.The RSPB called for the government to do more to support nature, with the planning and infrastructure bill for England entering its final stages. In October it reneged on backing an amendment to the bill calling for swift bricks to be installed in every new home. Swift road names have grown by 58%.The RSPB argued it was “possible and essential” to have a planning system that restores nature, and cited recent research by More in Common that found only 20% of Britons think environmental standards should be weakened to build more houses.Michael Warren, the author of The Cuckoo’s Lea, about the history of birds in British placenames, said: “We love a nature name and developers know it. But the trend for birds in new-build placenames masks the severe detachment many of us suffer from nature, while making it seem like everything is OK.”Warren said placenames once reflected ecological reality, but while “at best” pretty, the modern equivalent was a “deceiving, cheap and easy way to give the impression of addressing nature deprivation without actually doing that”.Speight said: “We deserve to enjoy the sounds of a nightingale in full song or swifts screaming overhead, rather than living in silent streets with ironic names.”skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionDeborah Meaden, an RSPB ambassador, said: “In principle it’s fantastic to see local authorities and business recognising people’s love of nature on new developments, but we need to see tangible action to halt and reverse nature loss.”A spokesperson for the British Trust for Ornithology said its monitoring continued to find worrying declines in bird species. “Once familiar skylarks, nightingales and swifts are becoming less so, in all but name,” they said.

South Australian bus ads misled public by claiming gas is ‘clean and green’, regulator finds

Ads to be removed from Adelaide Metro buses after advertising regulator rules they breach its environmental claims codeSign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereSouth Australia’s transport department misled the public by running ads on buses claiming “natural gas” was “clean and green”, the advertising regulator has found.The SA Department for Transport and Infrastructure has agreed to remove the advertising that has been on some Adelaide Metro buses since the early 2000s after Ad Standards upheld a complaint from the not-for-profit organisation Comms Declare.Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletter Continue reading...

South Australia’s transport department misled the public by running ads on buses claiming “natural gas” was “clean and green”, the advertising regulator has found.The SA Department for Transport and Infrastructure has agreed to remove the advertising that has been on some Adelaide Metro buses since the early 2000s after Ad Standards upheld a complaint from the not-for-profit organisation Comms Declare.The ads have appeared on the side of buses that run on “compressed natural gas”, or CNG. In its complaint, Comms Declare said describing gas as clean and green was false and misleading as it suggested the fuel had a neutral or positive impact on the environment and was less harmful than alternatives.It said in reality gas was mostly composed of methane, a short-lived but potent fossil fuel.The Ad Standards panel agreed the ads breached three sections of its environmental claims code.It said CNG buses were originally introduced to provide more environmentally responsible transport than diesel buses, but transport solutions had evolved dramatically over the past 20 years and now included cleaner electric, hydrogen and hybrid alternatives.Comms Declare said multiple studies from across the globe had found buses that ran on CNG resulted in a roughly similar amount of greenhouse gas emissions being released into the atmosphere as buses that ran on diesel. It highlighted Adelaide Metro was now replacing its bus fleet with electric vehicles that it described as “better for the environment”.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Clear Air AustraliaAdam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisisPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionComms Declare’s founder, Belinda Noble, said the decision was “another warning to any advertisers that want to make claims about gas products being good for the environment”. She said it followed similar rulings against Hancock Prospecting and Australian Gas Networks ads.“Methane gas creates toxic pollution at all stages of its production and use and is a major cause of global heating,” Noble said.Ad Standards said the Department for Transport and Infrastructure had “reviewed the decision and will take the appropriate action to remedy the issue in the near future”.A department spokesperson said it had received a direction from the Ad Standards panel to remove messaging from “a small number” of Adelaide Metro buses.The spokesperson argued that CNG was a “cleaner burning alternative to diesel” when it was purchased, offering about a 13% cut in greenhouse gas emissions and a “considerable reduction in harmful emissions” of carbon monoxide, nitrous oxide and particulates.

Tijuana River sewage still pollutes the San Diego Coast. She’s fighting to clean it up

The Tijuana River’s sewage contamination continues to sicken communities in southern San Diego County. San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre has become a leading force in pushing for binational fixes and emergency funding to protect public health.

In summary The Tijuana River’s sewage contamination continues to sicken communities in southern San Diego County. San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre has become a leading force in pushing for binational fixes and emergency funding to protect public health. Hours after a November storm, the Tijuana River flooded a grove of trees in Imperial Beach, gushed through a row of calverts and exploded into mounds of fetid foam.  This is ground zero for the contaminated river, which sickens thousands of people in southern San Diego County. “The Tijuana River is one of, if not the most polluted, river in the entire United States,” said San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre, who viewed the overflowing river wearing black rain boots and a hot pink respirator mask. “The river is carrying dangerous chemicals, pollutants, pathogens and toxic gases that are impacting South San Diego communities.” The site, known as the Saturn Boulevard hot spot, is part of a system of polluted waterways and failed sewage treatment plants in the cross-border region. In the ocean, the contamination leaves swimmers and surfers with breathing problems, digestive illness and rashes. Unsafe conditions have closed parts of the Imperial Beach shoreline for three years. Last year, researchers discovered that the pollution is airborne as well. Foul-smelling hydrogen sulfide emissions near the river sometimes rise hundreds of times higher than the state’s odor threshold. At those levels the gas triggers headaches, nausea, eye irritation and respiratory distress. And there are other chemicals, viruses and bacteria in the mix.  For children, the effects are worse, said Tom Csanadi, an Imperial Beach physician who has been active in the issue. Their lung surface area to body size is higher, which means they absorb more toxins. Children breathe faster than adults and they’re still growing, so it can affect their body tissues more severely. There are 11 schools within three kilometers of the hot spot. “It could lower IQ, stunt cognitive development,” Csanadi said. As a surfer, activist and elected leader, Aguirre has spent two decades tackling this problem, which she considers one of the worst environmental crises in the country. “She’s been at the forefront of the advocacy side of this for a long, long time, before her political career even started,” said Falk Feddersen, an oceanographer with Scripps Institution of Oceanography who has mapped sewage flows up the coast from Mexico. A cocktail of chemicals While storm water seeped across the road at the hot spot, a swiftwater rescue truck drove through puddles, scanning for stranded motorists. The culverts under the crossing were installed to keep flooding under control, but they also churn the water, spewing noxious gas and other pollutants.  “The unintended consequence is that it’s exacerbating the release of all the molecules and aerosols into the air,” Aguirre said. “It’s literally rocketing them into the environment.” Hydrogen sulfide, with its distinctive rotten egg odor, is an indicator of that toxic brew, said Kim Prather, an atmospheric chemist at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. She raised the alarm about airborne pollution from the Tijuana River last year. Flooding caused by the Tijuana River covers a section of Saturn Boulevard after a rainy day in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Layers of foam caused by sewage and chemicals bubble up along a section of the Tijuana River after a rainy day in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Layers of foam caused by sewage and chemicals bubble up along a section of the Tijuana River after a rainy day in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters “That’s one in a cocktail of thousands of compounds,” she said. “It’s a blessing that it smells. I know it sounds strange, but it tells you to get away.” Aguirre described her own struggles with Tijuana River pollution, including migraines, chest pain, shortness of breath, and waking in the middle of the night to an odor she likened to a “porta potty.” Recent improvements to wastewater treatment plants in the U.S. and Mexico have reduced water pollution by keeping tens of millions of gallons of sewage out of the ocean each day. Aguirre and others celebrate that news, but note the river still contaminates surrounding areas. More big upgrades are in the works on both sides of the border, but fixing the Saturn Boulevard hot spot quickly could offer immediate relief, Aguirre said. “This is a very specific and low hanging fruit that will at least begin to mitigate the amount of gases being released into the air and benefit tens of thousands of people that live here,” she said. Waves of pollution Tijuana River pollution dates back to at least the 1930s, when the U.S. and Mexican governments built the first cross-border sewage plants. As Tijuana’s population soared with its booming industry, the city’s waste outstripped its treatment systems. Plant failures and sewage spills became common in the early 2000s, along with frequent beach closures along the south San Diego coast. That’s when Aguirre encountered cross-border pollution in the surf at Imperial Beach. Growing up in Puerto Vallarta Mexico, she was used to surfing in muddy water after rains, so the discolored waves didn’t seem worrisome.  “I remember going out here in Imperial Beach while the water was chocolate brown, not knowing that it’s nothing like what I was used to, because that was sewage,” she said. She was the only one at the beach that day, except for a man posting signs stating “Clean water now.” He was Serge Dedina, executive director of the environmental group WildCoast, and he enlisted her in the fight against sewage pollution. Aguirre first volunteered for the organization and soon joined its staff. She worked there for more than a decade, while earning a master’s degree in marine biodiversity and conservation at Scripps Institution of Oceanography. At WildCoast she organized a citizens’ group, advocated for improved water testing using DNA analysis, and served on working groups for a binational agreement on cross-border pollution, called Minute 320. When Dedina was elected mayor of Imperial Beach in 2014, Aguirre saw a path to solving the sewage problem. “I thought, well, if he can do it I can do it,” she said. “And I built on the momentum that he was able to create on this issue.” San Diego County Supervisor Paloma Aguirre wears a respiratory filter mask while standing near a section of the Tijuana River in San Diego on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters A warning sign about sewage and chemical contamination is posted along the shore of Imperial Beach on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Aguirre won a seat on the Imperial Beach City Council in 2018 and was elected mayor in 2022, when Dedina left office. With a bigger platform, she called on California and the federal government to declare a state of emergency over the border pollution problem and lobbied to classify the area as a Superfund site. Those efforts haven’t gained traction, but other angles yielded results. Imperial Beach sued the International Boundary and Water Commission with the city of Chula Vista and Port of San Diego in 2018, alleging that it violated the Clean Water Act and other federal laws by failing to control coastal sewage pollution. They settled the lawsuit in 2023 with a promise of more resources and binational cooperation.  “My tenure as mayor of IB really focused on advocating and working in a bipartisan fashion to secure the additional funding that was needed,” to fix cross-border pollution, she said. A person walks their dog near the Imperial Beach Pier in Imperial Beach on Nov. 21, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters Aguirre led delegations of local officials to Washington, D.C. to drum up money for costly infrastructure upgrades needed to get the sewage problem under control. She met with White House officials in both the Biden and Trump administrations, and with lawmakers who had served as Navy SEALS and had experienced the pollution problem at BUD/S, the Navy SEAL training program in Coronado. In July, Aguirre won a special election for an open San Diego County Board of Supervisors seat. She immediately led county plans to study the health effects of cross-border pollution and asked the state for $50 million to fix the Saturn Boulevard hot spot.  “She’s moved a problem that has been stuck, when other people could not,” Prather, the Scripps atmospheric chemist, said. Sewage spills prompt quick fixes The long-standing pollution problem came under new scrutiny in 2017, when a spill from a damaged line in Mexico dumped an estimated 143 million gallons of wastewater into the Tijuana River, sending foul odors wafting through the region. That accident revealed just how dilapidated the aging infrastructure had become. “That’s one of the reasons why things are so horrific, because they’re playing catch up on fixing these things when they have catastrophic failures,” said Feddersen, the Scripps oceanographer. In early 2022, another major spill released hundreds of millions of gallons of sewage-tainted water across the border for two and a half weeks.  That summer, San Diego congress members freed up more than $300 million that had been authorized for wastewater treatment upgrades through the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement. Mexico committed $144 million to replace failing sewage treatment facilities in Tijuana, with an updated treaty between the two countries known as Minute 328. In 2024, the lawmakers persuaded the Biden administration to add another $370 million to repair the aging South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant near the border, Rep. Scott Peters said. After decades of deterioration, major improvements came online this year. The South Bay International Wastewater Treatment Plant, which was barely operable, is now fully functioning and expanded its capacity from 25 million to 35 million gallons of wastewater per day. The project was expected to take two years, but was completed in 100 days, according to the U.S. International Boundary and Water Commission. An aerial view shows a treated wastewater river heading to the Pacific Ocean near Real Del Mar in Tijuana, Baja California, Mexico on Aug. 12, 2025. Photo by Guillermo Arias, AFP via Getty Images By the end of next year that will climb to 50 million gallons per day, with higher capacity for peak wastewater surges. The commission, which manages the wastewater systems, has spent $122 million on the first series fixes, and the full project will cost $650 million. Although the Trump administration has clawed back federal funding for many projects, it has doubled down on the cross-border sewage problem, Aguirre said. In July U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin met with his Mexican counterpart to seal the environmental deal. In April Mexico repaired its Punta Bandera plant, located on the coast about six miles south of the border. The plant had failed completely in 2020 and was dumping raw sewage into the ocean. It now handles 18 million gallons of wastewater per day. That’s a big boost for beach safety, said Feddersen, whose research tracked the flow of sewage in ocean currents and modeled scenarios for reducing it. “The best bang for the buck, the greatest reduction in beach closure and reduction in human illness, was fixing Punta Bandera,” he said. Yet, the Tijuana River still threatens residents in its watershed with untreated sewage and industrial chemicals from maquiladoras in Tijuana. That includes solvents, heavy metals and toxins known as PFAS, or “forever chemicals,” Prather said. “The river right now is a wastewater treatment plant without any processing,” she said. Removing the culverts would eliminate the turbulence that sprays out hydrogen sulfide and other toxins. The county plans to finish a feasibility study on the project by January. That project would keep contaminants out of the air, but not out of the water. Aguirre also wants new infrastructure to clean up the Tijuana River on the U.S. side. The recent binational Treaty, Minute 328, includes that option, and the International Boundary and Water Commission is exploring what it would take to divert and treat the river flows. There’s no funding for the project yet, but Aguirre says it’s on her agenda. “Rivers are diverted up and down,” she said.  “It’s doable. Is it expensive? Yes. Are our lives in South San Diego worth it? Yes.”

Germophobes Can Breathe Easy On Airplanes, In Hospitals, Experts Say

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Dec. 5, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Germophobes can breathe a little easier when visiting a hospital...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Dec. 5, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Germophobes can breathe a little easier when visiting a hospital or taking an airplane trip, a new study says.The ambient air on planes and in hospitals mostly contains harmless microbes typically associated with human skin, researchers reported Dec. 4 in the journal Microbiome.The cutting-edge study analyzed germ samples captured on the outer surface of face masks worn by air travelers and health care workers, researchers said.“We realized that we could use face masks as a cheap, easy air-sampling device for personal exposures and general exposures,” senior researcher Erica Hartmann, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Northwestern University in Evanston, Illinois, said in a news release.“We extracted DNA from those masks and examined the types of bacteria found there,” Hartmann said.Overall, the team analyzed germs drawn from masks worn by 10 air travelers and 12 health care professionals. Travelers turned in their masks following a flight, hospital workers following a shift.Researchers also analyzed germs captured by an aircraft cabin filter that had been used for more than 8,000 hours.Overall, the team found 407 distinct species of microbes.“Somewhat unsurprisingly, the bacteria were the types that we would typically associate with indoor air,” Hartmann said. “Indoor air looks like indoor air, which also looks like human skin.”A few potentially disease-causing germs did show up, but they were in extremely low amounts and without signs of active infection, researchers said.Hartmann’s team came up with the study idea in January 2022, amid the COVID pandemic.“At the time, there was a serious concern about COVID transmission on planes,” Hartmann said. “HEPA filters on planes filter the air with incredibly high efficiency, so we thought it would be a great way to capture everything in the air.”“But these filters are not like the filters in our cars or homes,” Hartmann added. “They cost thousands of dollars and, in order to remove them, workers have to pull the airplane out of service for maintenance. This obviously costs an incredible amount of money, and that was eye opening.”To beef up their project, the team turned to a much cheaper alternative: face masks.They also decided to include hospitals as another study locale.“As a comparison group, we thought about another population of people who were likely wearing masks anyway,” Hartmann said. “We landed on health care providers.”The results indicate that people themselves are the main source of airborne microbes in enclosed settings, and that most of the germs come from people’s skin rather than from any illnesses, researchers said.Although the results show indoor air is relatively safe, researchers noted that infectious germs also spread through other routes — most importantly, touch.“For this study, we solely looked at what’s in the air,” Hartmann said. “Hand hygiene remains an effective way to prevent diseases transmission from surfaces. We were interested in what people are exposed to via air, even if they are washing their hands.”SOURCES: Northwestern University, news release, Dec. 3, 2025; Microbiome, Dec. 4, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Nature recovery plan in England hit by clause allowing contracts to end with a year’s notice

Conservationists say changes, coupled with underfunding, will curb take-up and leave less land protected for natureUK politics live – latest updatesAn ambitious scheme to restore England’s nature over coming decades has been undermined after the government inserted a clause allowing it to terminate contracts with only a year’s notice, conservationists have said.The project was designed to fund landscape-scale restoration over thousands of hectares, whether on large estates or across farms and nature reserves. The idea was to create huge reserves for rare species to thrive – projects promoted as decades-long commitments to securing habitat for wildlife well into the future. Continue reading...

An ambitious scheme to restore England’s nature over coming decades has been undermined after the government inserted a clause allowing it to terminate contracts with only a year’s notice, conservationists have said.The project was designed to fund landscape-scale restoration over thousands of hectares, whether on large estates or across farms and nature reserves. The idea was to create huge reserves for rare species to thrive – projects promoted as decades-long commitments to securing habitat for wildlife well into the future.Conservationists have warned these changes, as well as underfunding, will lead to low take-up and less land protected for nature. They say allowing contracts to be ripped up after a year is unworkable, as it would leave landowners with rewilded land they can no longer farm and too little time to reconvert it.Landscape recovery is the most ambitious part of the environmental land management schemes (Elms), which were introduced by the previous Conservative government to replace EU farming subsidies.Initially, the schemes were to be split into three strands, with landscape recovery receiving a third of the £2.4bn a year funding pot. But this week, the environment secretary, Emma Reynolds, announced the projects would be given only £500m over 20 years.Jake Fiennes, the director of conservation at the Holkham estate, one of the government’s first pilot schemes for landscape recovery in 2022. He has been creating more than 2,000 hectares (4,940 acres) of wildlife-rich habitat along the north Norfolk coast, including restoring wetland that has already attracted thriving bird life such as the return of rare spoonbills.Fiennes said: “£500m over 20 years is sod all. It was supposed to be a third of the [farming] budget – we could have worked with that. If you’re the person in the street, £500m sounds like the most enormous amount of money. But if you understand the environment and food budget is £2.4bn annually, this is a fifth of that over 20 years. A tiny fraction of it for the most ambitious nature schemes.”Spread across the landscape recovery schemes, it will amount to only a few million pounds a year. But what is being asked of the landowners is incredibly expensive and ambitious, Fiennes says.“Some of the pilots are asking so much more than that as they understand the value of land, and if you put it into permanent land use change, you permanently remove its value. Then it’s implementing your scheme, like re-meandering a river and completely redesigning a landscape. That costs money,” he added.The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) has claimed the funding shortfall could be topped up with private investment. However, farmers say this is unlikely while schemes remain vulnerable to being scrapped with only a year’s notice.The president of the National Farmers’ Union, Tom Bradshaw, said: “Defra’s plans for landscape recovery projects under the [environmental improvement plan] involve combining government funding with private investment.“However, experience shows that attracting private investment has been challenging, raising concerns about how farmers can confidently engage their businesses in the projects.”Toby Perkins, the chair of the environmental audit committee, said: “Do the government’s commitments match its ambition? The £500m for landscape recovery is much needed but, at £25m a year, I am very sceptical that it offers anything like adequate funding.”The government’s environmental improvement plan, announced this week, has watered down the overall ambition for nature on farmland.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionAlice Groom, the head of sustainable land policy at the RSPB, said: “In just two years, we’ve gone from needing 65–80% of farmers to manage 10% of their land for nature, to a new target of just 41% of farmers managing only 7%. That is a huge step backwards.“The science is unequivocal: on-farm habitat must be high-quality, the right mix and in the right places to support thriving wildlife populations. Government is simply wrong to suggest that getting 41% of farms to manage 7% of land under almost any [sustainable farming incentive (SFI)] option will be enough. It won’t. And it risks locking in further decline. “The falling numbers of species like corn buntings and turtle doves tell us something deeper that pollinators, beneficial insects, soils and climate-resilient landscapes are under stress.”Farmers and other landowners who signed up to the scheme found that their contracts allowed the government to terminate them for convenience – with no fault attached – with just 12 months’ notice.Fiennes said that he would not sign up to the new schemes yet and hoped to renegotiate with the government.He added: “Some of the legal advice says don’t sign because the government can end the scheme in 12 months. If you’ve done potentially irreversible land use change, you are up a creek without a paddle. Pension funds, banks – if they know there is a commitment from government for a set period, they will top this up, but at the moment it can be struck off in a year.”The nature-friendly farming schemes have been beset by difficulties and delays. Under the Labour government, funding was cut by £100m and the SFI was abruptly frozen, locking farmers out. Ministers say they plan to reopen the SFI in the new year.A Defra spokesperson said: “The £500m for landscape recovery projects is a downpayment which will go a long way to protecting and restoring nature across England.”

Air Pollution Contributing To Clogged Arteries, Study Suggests

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Dec. 5, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Air pollution could be contributing to clogged arteries, a new study...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Dec. 5, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Air pollution could be contributing to clogged arteries, a new study says.People exposed long-term to common air pollutants have an increased risk of advanced heart disease caused by hardened arteries, researchers reported Thursday at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America, in Chicago.Even air pollution levels near or below government standards were associated with early signs of heart disease, researchers found.“Even at low exposure levels, air pollution is associated with more plaque in the coronary arteries,” lead researcher Dr. Felipe Castillo Aravena, a cardiothoracic imaging fellow at the University of Toronto in Canada, said in a news release.Further, the more air pollution a person had been exposed to during their lifetime, the greater the odds that their arteries were clogged, results show.For the study, researchers tracked the heart health and air pollution exposure of more than 11,000 adults treated at three hospitals in Toronto.The team used chest CT scans to look at patients’ heart arteries and estimated their air pollution exposure using environmental data and the patients’ home postal codes.Results showed that for each 1 microgram per cubic meter increase in long-term exposure to particle air pollution, there was:An 11% increase in calcium build-up in the coronary arteries. A 13% greater odds of more arterial plaques. A 23% increased risk of heart disease caused by clogged arteries. Exposure to another form of air pollution, nitrogen dioxide, showed similar trends but with smaller effects, researchers said.There also were differences between men and women, researchers found.“In women, long-term exposure to fine particulate matter was linked to higher calcium scores and more severe narrowing of the arteries,” Castillo said. “In men, higher long-term exposure to fine particulate matter was associated with higher calcium scores and higher plaque burden.”This study couldn’t draw a direct cause and effect link, but only shows an association between air pollution and heart health, researchers noted.More research is needed to understand why air pollution might harm the heart and blood vessels, and to firm up a causal link between the two, Castillo said. “This is one of the largest studies to link long-term gaseous and particulate air pollution at contemporary exposure levels with multiple markers of coronary artery disease assessed by cardiac CT,” senior researcher Dr. Kate Hanneman, a cardiac radiologist and vice chair of research at the University of Toronto, said in a news release.“Heart disease is the number one cause of death globally,” Hanneman added. “The results of this study add to the growing body of evidence that air pollution is a modifiable cardiovascular risk factor and reinforce the need for further research to understand why these associations differ between men and women.”Findings presented at medical meetings should be considered preliminary until they’re published in a peer-reviewed journal.SOURCE: Radiological Society of North America, news release, Dec. 4, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

To Protect Underage Farmworkers, California Expands Oversight of Field Conditions

State agencies to join forces to crack down on child labor violations after Capital & Main found enforcement breakdowns. The post To Protect Underage Farmworkers, California Expands Oversight of Field Conditions appeared first on .

California officials said they are launching new enforcement actions to protect underage farmworkers, including enhanced coordination among two state agencies charged with inspecting work conditions in the fields. The actions follow an investigation by Capital & Main, produced in partnership with the Los Angeles Times and McGraw Center for Business Journalism, which found that the state is failing to protect underage farmworkers who labor in harsh and dangerous circumstances. Thousands of children and teenagers work in California fields to provide Americans with fresh fruit and vegetables. While laborers as young as 12 can legally work in agriculture, many described being exposed to toxic pesticides, dangerous heat and other hazards. The new enforcement efforts will be overseen by the state Labor and Workforce Development Agency, which directs key agencies charged with regulating child labor and worksite safety laws, officials said.  Officials said the state’s Bureau of Field Enforcement, which regulates child labor and wage and hour laws, is developing plans to conduct joint operations with an existing agricultural enforcement task force assigned to the Division of Occupational Safety and Health, known as Cal/OSHA. Inspectors from the two agencies typically perform field operations separately and enforce different laws.  Working together will enable the state to “increase its presence in the fields and its capacity to identify violations,” according to Crystal Young, deputy secretary of communications for the Labor and Workforce Development Agency.  The agency is also overseeing an effort to share data among enforcement teams from departments such as the Agricultural Labor Relations Board, Department of Industrial Relations and Employment Development Department. Sharing information, Young said, will “further bolster our ability to identify potential violations for investigation.” In a written statement, she said that state officials have been actively enforcing child labor rules across all industries, assessing 571 violations that resulted in “millions of dollars in penalties” from 2017 through 2024.  But records obtained under the California Public Records Act for that period show that only a small number of child labor enforcement actions involved the agricultural industry. Just 27 citations were issued for child labor violations to the thousands of agricultural employers across California, the records show. The fines totaled $36,000, but the state collected only $2,814. Jose, seen at 13, picks strawberries in the Salinas Valley.Photo: Barbara Davidson. Cal/OSHA enforcement records show that the agency failed to investigate most complaints about alleged violations of California’s outdoor heat law and reports of outdoor heat injuries, as well as an overall 74% drop in citations issued to agricultural employers for all infractions. The heat law requires employers to provide safety training as well as cool water and shade when temperatures exceed 80 degrees. Worker advocates lauded the plans for increased enforcement as steps in the right direction. But they added that any long-term solutions need to address issues such as low wages and poverty, both of which drive minors to work in the fields to help their families pay rent and put food on the table. “Being able to support farmworker families through a living wage, you know, is one of the ways that we can really address this issue,” said Erica Diaz-Cervantes, 25, a former underage strawberry picker who is now a senior policy advocate for the Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy. With higher wages, “Children won’t have to feel this responsibility to help their family financially by working in the fields,” she added. Other efforts are underway, nationally and in California, to address issues involving underage farmworkers. U.S. Rep. Raul Ruiz (D-Palm Desert) recently reintroduced legislation that would change the federal minimum age for farmworkers from 12 to 14 for most farm jobs, as well as strengthen enforcement and improve nationwide data collection on injuries and fatalities. California requires minors to be 14 years old to work in most instances but allows children as young as 12 to labor up to 40 hours a week in agriculture when school is not in session. Assemblymember Damon Connolly (D-San Rafael) said in a statement that he ordered an audit earlier this year to review issues such as inconsistent enforcement in California’s pesticide regulation process, which is split between local and state agencies. The recently published investigation analyzed more than 40,000 state pesticide enforcement records from 2018 through early 2024 and found piecemeal regulation at the county level. The records showed that businesses operating in multiple counties were not fined for hundreds of pesticide violations — many of them involving worker safety. More than two dozen underage farmworkers and their parents said in interviews that they worked in fields that smelled of chemicals and described feeling sick and dizzy or suffering from skin irritations. The workers and their parents are from families with mixed-immigration status, and Capital & Main has used only their first names.  The audit, expected to be completed next year, “will help us determine whether the need is for additional resources, statutory and regulatory changes, or more vigorous enforcement of existing laws,” said Connolly, who chairs the Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials.  Strawberry pickers, like these in the Salinas Valley, squat and bend over for hours on a summer day. Photo: Barbara Davidson. Connolly and Assemblymember Liz Ortega (D-San Leandro) said that the Department of Pesticide Regulation, which oversees pesticide safety statewide, should develop educational materials for underage workers to inform them about pesticides and how to report problems. Such information has been created for high school students to inform them of general worker rights. “That’s one tool that we can use in agriculture to keep these children safe,” said Ortega, who chairs the Labor and Employment Committee and has held hearings on workplace safety in the fields. A spokesperson for the Department of Pesticide Regulation said the agency has pesticide safety information in multiple languages on its website for all farmworkers but has not created materials for minors. Some of the information is posted in many of the fields.  Underage farmworkers said that such information is badly needed. “Many of us don’t know what pesticides are, how they can harm our health or … what we’re supposed to do to safely work around them,” said Lorena, 17, who has been harvesting strawberries since she was 11 years old in the Santa Maria Valley. She described being exposed to chemicals that caused her eyes to burn and her skin to break out in rashes. “Having all that information in one simple flyer,” she said, “could make it much easier for us to be able to recognize the dangers and know how to protect ourselves. Robert J. Lopez is an independent journalist and fellow with the McGraw Center for Business Journalism.  This story was produced in partnership with the McGraw Center for Business Journalism at the Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism at the City University of New York and was supported by the California Health Care Foundation and the Fund for Investigative Journalism. Copyright 2025 Capital & Main.   Read part one of Capital & Main’s investigation into the health and safety of child farmworkers in California. Lea en español. Read part two: Child farmworkers exposed to toxic pesticides amid lax enforcement. Lea en español.

Georgia hashes out plan to let data centers build their own clean energy

Big companies have spent years pushing Georgia to let them find and pay for new clean energy to add to the grid, in the hopes that they could then get data centers and other power-hungry facilities online faster. Now, that concept is tantalizingly close to becoming a reality, with regulators, utility Georgia Power,…

Big companies have spent years pushing Georgia to let them find and pay for new clean energy to add to the grid, in the hopes that they could then get data centers and other power-hungry facilities online faster. Now, that concept is tantalizingly close to becoming a reality, with regulators, utility Georgia Power, and others hammering out the details of a program that could be finalized sometime next year. If approved, the framework could not only benefit companies but also reduce the need for a massive buildout of gas-fired plants that Georgia Power is planning to satiate the artificial intelligence boom.Today, utilities are responsible for bringing the vast majority of new power projects online in the state. But over the past two years, the Clean Energy Buyers Association has negotiated to secure a commitment from Georgia Power that ​“will, for the first time, allow commercial and industrial customers to bring clean energy projects to the utility’s system,” said Katie Southworth, the deputy director for market and policy innovation in the South and Southeast at the trade group, which includes major hyperscalers like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft. The ​“customer-identified resource” (CIR) option will allow hyperscalers and other big commercial and industrial customers to secure gigawatts of solar, batteries, and other energy resources on their own, not just through the utility. The CIR option isn’t a done deal yet. Once Georgia Power, the Public Service Commission, and others work out how the program will function, the utility will file a final version in a separate docket next year. And the plan put forth by Georgia Power this summer lacks some key features that data center companies want. A big point of contention is that it doesn’t credit the solar and batteries that customers procure as a way to meet future peaks in power demand — the same peaks Georgia Power uses to justify its gas-plant buildout. But as it stands, CEBA sees ​“the approved CIR framework as a meaningful step toward the ​‘bring-your-own clean energy’ model,” Southworth said — a model that goes by the catchy acronym BYONCE in clean-energy social media circles. Opening up the playing field for clean energy The CIR option is technically an addition to Georgia Power’s existing Clean and Renewable Energy Subscription (CARES) program, which requires the utility to secure up to 4 gigawatts of new renewable resources by 2035. CARES is a more standard ​“green tariff” program that leaves the utility in control of contracting for resources and making them available to customers under set terms, Southworth explained. Under the CIR option, by contrast, large customers will be able to seek out their own projects directly with a developer and the utility. Georgia Power will analyze the projects and subject them to tests to establish whether they are cost-effective. Once projects are approved by Georgia Power, built, and online, customers can take credit for the power generated, both on their energy bills and in the form of renewable energy certificates. Georgia Power’s current plan allows the procurement of up to 3 gigawatts of customer-identified resources through 2035. Letting big companies contract their own clean power is far from a new idea. Since 2014, corporate clean-energy procurements have surpassed 100 gigawatts in the United States, equal to 41% of all clean energy added to the nation’s grid over that time, according to CEBA. Tech giants have made up the lion’s share of that growth and have continued to add more capacity in 2025, despite the headwinds created by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress. But most of that investment has happened in parts of the country that operate under competitive energy markets, in which independent developers can build power plants and solar, wind, and battery farms. The Southeast lacks these markets, leaving large, vertically integrated utilities like Georgia Power in control of what gets built. Perhaps not coincidentally, Southeast utilities also have some of the country’s biggest gas-plant expansion plans. A lot of clean energy projects could use a boost from power-hungry companies. According to the latest data from the Southern Energy Renewable Association trade group, more than 20 gigawatts of solar, battery, and hybrid solar-battery projects are now seeking grid interconnection in Georgia. “The idea that a large customer can buy down the cost of a clean energy resource to make sure it’s brought onto the grid to benefit them and everybody else, because that’s of value to them — that’s theoretically a great concept,” said Jennifer Whitfield, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, a nonprofit that’s pushing Georgia regulators to find cleaner, lower-cost alternatives to Georgia Power’s proposed gas-plant expansion. ​“We’re very supportive of the process because it has the potential to be a great asset to everyone else on the grid.” Isabella Ariza, staff attorney at the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign, said CEBA deserves credit for working to secure this option for big customers in Georgia. In fact, she identified it as one of the rare bright spots offsetting a series of decisions from Georgia Power and the Public Service Commission that environmental and consumer advocates fear will raise energy costs and climate pollution.

No Results today.

Our news is updated constantly with the latest environmental stories from around the world. Reset or change your filters to find the most active current topics.

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.