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

Not so Golden Brown: DJ plays 24-hours of No 2s in Lake District sewage protest

Radio host uses chart songs that didn’t quite make top spot to highlight issue of Windermere pollutionIf you Sit Down and wonder why Britain’s streams, rivers and lakes are so filthy, you’re probably Holding Out for a Hero to halt this Scandalous discharge of sewage.Step forward the Lake District Radio DJ Lee Durrant, who will go Radio Ga Ga with a 24-hour live broadcasting marathon on Friday, playing songs that peaked at No 2 in the charts to highlight the ongoing stench of not quite Golden Brown “number twos” floating downstream. Continue reading...

If you Sit Down and wonder why Britain’s streams, rivers and lakes are so filthy, you’re probably Holding Out for a Hero to halt this Scandalous discharge of sewage.Step forward the Lake District Radio DJ Lee Durrant, who will go Radio Ga Ga with a 24-hour live broadcasting marathon on Friday, playing songs that peaked at No 2 in the charts to highlight the ongoing stench of not quite Golden Brown “number twos” floating downstream.If you’re fuming about the injustice of Cry Me a River or Born Slippy being left off the top spot, you may take comfort from pop classics being coopted to fight the injustice of illegal sewage spills, which is risking human health and killing wildlife in the Lake District, despite its status as a national park and world heritage site.“What’s more shocking? Fairytale of New York never making it to Christmas No 1, or United Utilities dumping sewage into Windermere and paying themselves huge dividends?” said Durrant, who begins his broadcasting marathon at 8am on 14 November. “We’re based in the Lake District so we’re passionate about what’s happening to our lakes, but it’s become a wider issue across the country and around the world with sewage-dumping in what we’d assume would be clean waterways.”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 promotionBetween playing number twos with riverine resonances from Take That’s The Flood to Dirty Cash by the Adventures of Stevie V, Durrant will be joined on the community radio station by guests including campaigners from Save Windermere to Surfers Against Sewage, environmental experts and representatives from water companies.Windermere was found to have high levels of bacteria found in human faeces throughout this summer, according to comprehensive analysis of water quality in England’s largest lake. Only 14% of England’s rivers and lakes meet good ecological standards.“I’m sort of looking forward to it and sort of dreading it,” said Durrant of his No 2 marathon. “I’m predicting the witching hour of 3am will be when I’ll struggle. I might need to play some heavy rock to get me through that.”Winds of Change might go down well in the Lakes.

Graeme Samuel calls for Labor to ditch ‘national interest’ workaround for environment laws

Former ACCC chair condemns proposed exemption allowing minister to approve projects that don’t comply with lawGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastThe former competition watchdog chief Graeme Samuel says the government should axe its proposal to allow the environment minister to make decisions in breach of national laws if it is deemed in the “national interest”.Samuel, who led a 2020 review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, also argued a loophole that effectively exempts native forest logging from the laws “shouldn’t be there”. Continue reading...

The former competition watchdog chief Graeme Samuel says the government should axe its proposal to allow the environment minister to make decisions in breach of national laws if it is deemed in the “national interest”.Samuel, who led a 2020 review of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act, also argued a loophole that effectively exempts native forest logging from the laws “shouldn’t be there”.In his written submission to the inquiry, Samuel said “national interest” should instead be incorporated as a consideration in new national environmental standards.He made the comments to a Senate committee examining the Albanese government’s bills to reform national nature laws, which Labor hopes to pass before parliament rises for Christmas.Samuel was also concerned the legislation retained a loophole that effectively exempts native forest logging covered by a regional forest agreement (RFA) from national environmental laws.“I hate the RFA exemption. It shouldn’t be there,” Samuel told the committee.He said if the government did retain it, the agreements “should be governed by a very tough national environmental standard”.Sign up: AU Breaking News emailThe former Howard government environment minister Robert Hill – who introduced the original act – said tighter regulation of land-clearing should be the “highest priority” of the reforms.In his submission to the inquiry, Hill also said that there was “no credible argument” for retaining the logging exemption.What does net zero emissions actually mean? And is it different to the Paris agreement? – videoWhile welcoming the bills as achieving “80% of the aspirations” of a consultative group formed during the review process, Samuel said the government’s proposed national interest exemption could lead to the abuse of the power vested in the minister.Adopting similar language to the former treasury secretary Ken Henry, Samuel warned the exemption could lead to lobbyists seeking favourable decisions.The proposed exemption would allow the minister to approve projects that do not comply with environmental laws if the approval was considered in the national interest.“There’ll be a conga line of lobbyists that will be outside their door saying, ‘Well, look, you just use the national interest exemption’,” he said.“So I would take it out of the legislation and simply say it is now a balancing matter that ought to be taken into account in determining approvals and assessments.”Hill, in a submission co-written with Atticus Fleming, a former deputy secretary of the New South Wales National Parks and Wildlife Service, wrote that the “primary shortcoming” of the existing laws had been their failure to address the impact of land-clearing on Australia’s biodiversity.“Given the impact on biodiversity, and the failure of state governments, the effective regulation of land clearing must be the highest priority for the EPBC Act,” the submission states.Hill and Fleming suggested changes including provisions that would require land-clearing above certain thresholds to be assessed for impacts on threatened species and ecosystems.They also said “there is no credible argument for maintaining a blanket exemption for the logging of native forests” and the bills should be amended to remove it.“Logging operations should be subject to the same rules as mining, agriculture, urban development and so on,” they wrote.

The Dune of Dreams: Upstart League Baseball United Hosts Inaugural Game in Dubai With Its Own Rules

Baseball United has launched its inaugural season in Dubai, aiming to bring baseball to the Middle East

UD AL-BAYDA, United Arab Emirates (AP) — Emerging like a mirage in the desert outskirts of Dubai, a sight unfamiliar to those in the Middle East and Asia has risen up like a dream in the exact dimensions of the field at Yankee Stadium in New York.Now that it's built, though, one question remains: Will the fans come?That's the challenge for the inaugural season of Baseball United, a four-team, monthlong contest that will begin Friday at the new Barry Larkin Field, artificially turfed for the broiling sun of the United Arab Emirates and named for an investor who is a former Cincinnati Reds shortstop. The professional league seeks to draw on the sporting rivalry between India and Pakistan with two of its teams, as the Mumbai Cobras on Friday will face the Karachi Monarchs. Each team has Indian and Pakistani players seeking to break into the broadcast market saturated by soccer and cricket in this part of the world. And while having no big-name players from Major League Baseball, the league has created some of its own novel rules to speed up games and put more runs on the board — and potentially generate interest for U.S. fans as the regular season there has ended. “People here got to learn the rules anyway so we’re like if we get to start at a blank canvas then why don’t we introduce some new rules that we believe are going to excite them from the onset," Baseball United CEO and co-owner Kash Shaikh told The Associated Press. All the games in the season, which ends mid-December, will be played at Baseball United's stadium out in the reaches of Dubai's desert in an area known as Ud al-Bayda, some 30 kilometers (18 miles) from the Burj Khalifa, the world's tallest building. The stadium sits alongside The Sevens Stadium, which hosts an annual rugby sevens tournament known for hard-partying fans drinking alcohol and wearing costumes. As journalists met Baseball United officials on Thursday, two fighter jets and a military cargo plane came in for landings at the nearby Al Minhad Air Base, flying over a landfill. The field seats some 3,000 fans and will host games mostly at night, though the weather is starting to cool in the Emirates as the season changes. But environmental concerns have been kept in mind — Baseball United decided to go for an artificial field to avoid the challenge of using more than 45 million liters (12 million gallons) of water a year to maintain a natural grass field, said John P. Miedreich, a co-founder and executive vice president at the league. “We had to airlift clay in from the United States, airlift clay from Pakistan” for the pitcher's mound, he added.There will be four teams competing in the inaugural season. Joining the Cobras and the Monarchs will be the Arabia Wolves, Dubai's team, and the Mideast Falcons of Abu Dhabi.There are changes to the traditional game in Baseball United, putting a different spin on the game similar to how the Twenty20 format drastically sped up traditional cricket. The baseball league has introduced a golden “moneyball," which gives managers three chances in a game to use at bat to double the runs scored off a home run. Teams can call in “designated runners” three times during a game. And if a game is tied after nine innings, the teams face off in a home run derby to decide the winner. “It’s entertainment, and it’s exciting, and it’s helping get new fans and young fans more engaged in the game," Shaikh said. America's pastime has limited success Baseball in the Middle East has had mixed success, to put a positive spin on the ball. A group of American supporters launched the professional Israel Baseball League in 2007, comprised almost entirely of foreign players. However, it folded after just one season. Americans spread the game in prerevolution Iran, Saudi Arabia and the UAE over the decades, though it has been dwarfed by soccer. Saudi Arabia, through the Americans at its oil company Aramco, has sent teams to the Little League World Series in the past.But soccer remains a favorite in the Mideast, which hosted the 2022 FIFA World Cup in Qatar. Then there's cricket, which remains a passion in both India and Pakistan. The International Cricket Council, the world's governing body for the sport, has its headquarters in Dubai near the city's cricket stadium. Organizers know they have their work cut out for them. At one point during a news conference Thursday they went over baseball basics — home runs, organ music and where center field sits. “The most important part is the experience for fans to come out, eat a hot dog, see mascots running around, to see what baseball traditions that we all grew up with back home in the U.S. — and start to fall in love with the game because we know that once they start to learn those, they will become big fans," Shaikh said. Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Plan for Australia’s largest carbon capture project near Darwin criticised as creating ‘dumping ground’

Climate advocates fear the project, proposed by Japanese oil and gas giant Inpex, would turn the area into the ‘world’s largest carbon dumping ground’Sign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereOil and gas giant Inpex has proposed Australia’s largest carbon capture facility in waters off the Northern Territory, which climate advocates have warned could turn Darwin into a carbon dumping ground.The Bonaparte carbon capture and storage (CCS) project proposes to pipe and store 8m to 10m tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) into an underground aquifer located about 250km offshore west of Darwin, according to documents lodged with the federal environment department. Continue reading...

Oil and gas giant Inpex has proposed Australia’s largest carbon capture facility in waters off the Northern Territory, which climate advocates have warned could turn Darwin into a carbon dumping ground.The Bonaparte carbon capture and storage (CCS) project proposes to pipe and store 8m to 10m tonnes of carbon dioxide (CO2) into an underground aquifer located about 250km offshore west of Darwin, according to documents lodged with the federal environment department.Analysts said those volumes – if achieved – would make it one of the largest CCS projects in the world, while noting that most failed to meet their targets.The Bonaparte project, a joint venture between Inpex, TotalEnergies and Woodside Energy, involved sourcing CO2 from “a range of industrial facilities in the region”, including nearby liquefied natural gas plants, and eventually imports from the Asia Pacific. Carbon emissions would be transported offshore via a pipeline through Darwin harbour. Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletterEnvironmentalists have raised concerns that the project would be used to justify the further expansion of fossil fuels in the territory.Globally, 77 CCS projects were now in operation, capturing about 64m tonnes a year, according to an industry status report.Josh Runciman, the lead Australian gas analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said most CO2 captured by the industry was used for enhanced oil recovery, a way to extract more oil and gas from reservoirs.In practice, he said most CCS projects designed purely to capture and store carbon dioxide had “massively underperformed”, and many ceased operation sooner than intended.Australia now had two commercial scale CCS projects: Santos’s Moomba project in South Australia and Chevron’s Gorgon facility in Western Australia. The Inpex proposal would be much larger.“A 10m tonne per annum target would make this the largest CCS project globally,” Runciman said – but even assuming it reached those targets, that would be a “very small fraction” of the CO2 emissions globally from oil and gas.The Gorgon facility, which started injecting carbon dioxide in 2019, had captured less than half of the volumes it had originally intended, at a cost of more than $200 a tonne, he said.The Guardian contacted Inpex for comment but did not receive a response. In July, the company’s managing director, Tetsu Murayama, said in a statement: “The Bonaparte CCS project could substantially contribute to decarbonising northern Australia and potentially the wider Indo-Pacific region.”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 promotionThe Bonaparte project was one component of larger plans to convert Darwin’s Middle Arm Peninsula into a hub for carbon import and storage, with Dutch company Vopak separately developing a dedicated import terminal for liquefied CO2.Environment Centre NT said the proposals risked turning the Top End into the “world’s largest carbon dumping ground”.The group’s senior climate campaigner, Bree Ahrens, said: “This is a dirty deal to import the world’s pollution, and the Albanese Government needs to rule it out.”The environmental organisation expressed concerns that CCS was being used to greenwash a massive expansion of gas production in the Northern Territory.“Carbon capture and storage is just a fossil fuel industry’s excuse to keep extracting coal and gas while pretending to care about climate change.

Factbox-Highlights of US Framework Trade Deals With Argentina, Ecuador, El Salvador and Guatemala

By Andrea Shalal and Natalia SiniawskiWASHINGTON (Reuters) -The United States on Thursday announced framework agreements with Argentina, Ecuador,...

By Andrea Shalal and Natalia SiniawskiWASHINGTON (Reuters) -The United States on Thursday announced framework agreements with Argentina, Ecuador, El Salvador and Guatemala that will see Washington drop tariffs on imports of some foods and other goods, while those countries will open their markets to more U.S. agricultural and industrial goods.Details will be released in coming weeks after the framework deals are finalized.Following are highlights of the four deals, according to fact sheets and joint statements released by the White House and the countries involved on Thursday:Argentina will provide preferential market access for U.S. goods, including certain medicines, chemicals, machinery, information technology products, medical devices, motor vehicles, and a wide range of agricultural products.Under the deal, Argentina will allow access for U.S. poultry and poultry products, within one year, and simplify red tape for U.S. exporters of beef, beef products, pork, and pork products. Argentina also has agreed not to restrict market access for certain U.S. meats and cheeses.Argentina agreed to step up enforcement against counterfeit and pirated goods; use U.S. or international standards for imports of goods made in the United States, including automobiles; and refrain from imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions or digital services taxes.Argentina agreed to treat U.S. firms fairly in its critical minerals sector, and to adopt a ban on importation of goods produced by forced or compulsory labor.In exchange, the U.S. will remove tariffs on "certain unavailable natural resources and non-patented articles for use in pharmaceutical applications."The countries also committed to improved, reciprocal, bilateral market access conditions for trade in beef.Total two-way trade in goods and services between the United States and Ecuador amounted to approximately $90.4 billion in 2024.Ecuador agreed to remove or lower a range of tariffs on products including tree nuts, fresh fruit, pulses, wheat, wine, and distilled spirits, as well as machinery, health products, chemicals, motor vehicles, and to establish tariff-rate quotas on a number of other agricultural goods.It also agreed to reduce non-tariff barriers for U.S. agricultural goods, including through changes to its licensing systems for food and agricultural products.Ecuador will also accept vehicles and automotive parts built to U.S. motor vehicle safety and emissions standards, as well as U.S. medical devices marketed in the United States, and U.S. pharmaceutical products marketed in the United States.It also agreed to prevent barriers to services and digital trade with the U.S.; refrain from imposing digital service taxes; strengthen enforcement of its labor laws and ban importation of goods produced by forced or compulsory labor.The two countries agreed to strengthen their economic and national security cooperation by taking complementary actions to address non-market policies and cooperating on investment security and export controls, a reference that could refer to China and its non-market policies.In exchange, the U.S. will remove its tariffs on certain qualifying exports from Ecuador that cannot be grown, mined or naturally produced in the United States in sufficient quantities, including coffee and bananas.El Salvador will provide preferential market access for U.S. goods, including pharmaceutical products, medical devices, remanufactured goods and motor vehicles.The country will streamline regulatory approvals, accept U.S. auto standards, simplify certificate of free sale requirements, allow electronic certificates, remove apostille requirements and expedite product registration.El Salvador has committed to prevent barriers to U.S. agricultural products, recognize U.S. regulatory oversight, continue accepting agreed U.S. certificates and not restrict access of meats and cheeses including parmesan, gruyere, mozzarella, feta, asiago, salami, and prosciutto.The country will advance international intellectual property treaties and ensure transparency and fairness on geographical indications.El Salvador will prevent barriers to services and digital trade and support a permanent moratorium on customs duties for electronic transmissions.It has reinforced its commitment to labor rights, environmental protection, and sustainable resource management, including tackling illegal logging, mining, wildlife trafficking and industrial distortions.In return, the United States will remove reciprocal tariffs on certain Salvadoran exports and extend preferences to qualifying CAFTA‑DR textiles. The countries will also strengthen economic and national security cooperation, enhancing supply chain resilience, innovation, and collaboration on duty evasion, procurement, investment security and export controls.Two-way trade in goods and services between the United States and Guatemala totaled almost $18.7 billion in 2024.Under the deal, Guatemala will streamline regulatory approvals, accept U.S. auto standards, simplify certificate of free sale requirements, allow electronic certificates, remove apostille requirements and expedite product registration.The country has committed to prevent barriers to U.S. agricultural products, recognize U.S. regulatory oversight, maintain science- and risk-based frameworks and continue accepting agreed U.S. certificates. Access will not be restricted on common meats and cheeses.Guatemala will strengthen intellectual property protection, implement international treaties, resolve longstanding U.S. Special 301 issues, and ensure transparency on geographical indications.It will facilitate digital trade, refrain from discriminatory digital services taxes, support free cross-border data flows and back a permanent WTO moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions.The country has reinforced commitments to labor rights, environmental protection, and sustainable resource management, including prohibiting goods from forced labor, combating illegal logging, mining, and wildlife trafficking, enforcing forest and fisheries measures and addressing industrial and state-owned enterprise distortions.In response, the United States will remove reciprocal tariffs on certain Guatemalan exports, including products that cannot be grown or produced in sufficient quantities in the United States and qualifying textiles and apparel.(Reporting by Andrea Shalal and Natalia Siniawski; Editing by Lincoln Feast.)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

Texas still needs a plan for its growing water supply issues, experts say

Panelists at The Texas Tribune Festival shared their opinions on what the state should do after voters approved a historic investment in water infrastructure.

Audio recording is automated for accessibility. Humans wrote and edited the story. See our AI policy, and give us feedback. Voters just approved $20 billion to be spent on water supply, infrastructure and education over the next 20 years. That funding is just the beginning, however, and it will only go so far, panelists said during the “Running Out” session at The Texas Tribune Festival.  And in a state where water wars have been brewing, and will continue to do so, the next legislature to take over the Capitol in 2027 will need to come with ideas.  Proposition 4, which will allocate $20 billion to bolster the state’s water supply, was historic and incredible, said Vanessa Puig-Williams, senior director of climate resilient water systems at the Environmental Defense Fund. She wants to see the state support the science and data surrounding how groundwater works and implement best management practices.  “Despite the fact that it is this critical to Texas we don’t invest in managing it well and we don’t invest in understanding it very much at all,” Puig-Williams said. “We have good things some local groundwater districts are doing but I’m talking about the state of Texas.” That lack of understanding was highlighted when East Texans raised the alarm about a proposed groundwater project that would pump billions of gallons from the Carrizo-Wilcox Aquifer.  The plan proposed by a Dallas-area businessman is completely legal, but it is based on laws established when Texans still relied on horses and buggies, state Rep. Gary VanDeaver, R-New Boston said in the panel. In most counties, the person with the biggest and fastest pump can pull as much water from an aquifer as they want, as long as it’s not done with malicious intent. Texas is at a point where it needs to seriously consider how to update the rule of capture because society has modernized, he added. People are no longer pulling water from the aquifers with a hand pump and two inch pipes.  “Modern technology and modern needs have outpaced the regulations that we have in place, the safeguards we have in place for that groundwater,” VanDeaver said. “In some ways we, in the legislature, are a little behind the times here and we’re having to catch up.” The best solutions to Texas’ water woes may not even be found below ground, said panelist Robert Mace, the executive director of the Meadows Center for Water and Environment. Conservation, reuse and desalination can go a long way. In Austin, for example, some buildings collect rainwater and air conditioning condensate. The city also has a project to collect water used in bathrooms, treat it and use it again in toilets and urinals. Texas could also be a leader in the space for desalination plants, which separate salt from water to make it drinkable, Mace said. These plants are expensive, but rainwater harvesting is too. And so is fixing leaky water infrastructure that wastes tens of billions of gallons each year.  “There is water that’s more expensive than that. It’s called no water,” Mace said. “And if you look at the economic benefit of water it is much greater than that cost.” Disclosure: Environmental Defense Fund and Meadows Center for Water & the Environment have been financial supporters of The Texas Tribune, a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization that is funded in part by donations from members, foundations and corporate sponsors. Financial supporters play no role in the Tribune’s journalism. Find a complete list of them here.

‘They’re playing games’: Illinois lawmakers press Trump administration over stalled lead-pipe funding

Congress appropriated $15 billion to replace lead pipes across the country. Is the Trump administration withholding it?

Lead pipes are ubiquitous. At this point, no state has gotten rid of all of its toxic lead service lines, which pipe drinking water to homes and businesses. But some cities like Chicago, New York City, and Detroit, have more lead plumbing than others, and replacing it can cost tens of thousands of dollars. The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Biden-era infrastructure law, promised $15 billion for lead pipe replacements across the country to be disbursed over five years.  But in a letter to the Environmental Protection Agency sent earlier this week, a group of Illinois congressional delegates allege that $3 billion appropriated for lead pipe replacements nationwide for the fiscal year that ended in September has not reached communities yet. They warn that the delay is a “dangerous politicization” that puts children and families at risk. “Federal resources are not partisan tools — they are vital lifelines intended to serve all Americans,” the letter notes. “Using federal funds as leverage against communities based on political considerations represents a dangerous abuse of power that undermines public trust and puts lives at risk.”  The move comes as communities in Illinois, which is among the top five states with the most lead service lines, and across the country are grappling with the overwhelming cost of removing the hazardous metal piping from water systems. The Trump administration has already withheld congressionally appropriated funding for infrastructure and energy projects from Democrat-led states like New York, Colorado, Minnesota, New York, and Massachusetts. Now, lawmakers fear money for lead pipes is stuck in Washington too.  “I think that they’re playing games,” said Representative Raja Krishnamoorthi, one of the lawmakers who led the effort to send the letter. “It feels like it’s targeting blue states or blue cities that might require more of this mitigation than other parts of the country.”  Lead is toxic and dangerous to human health. Lead plumbing can flake and dissolve into drinking water, which can lead to brain damage, cardiovascular problems, and reproductive issues. The EPA advises that there is no safe level of lead exposure. A spokesperson for the federal agency said it is “actively working” on allotments for lead service line replacements. The Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, which is responsible for disbursing the federal funds to local governments, did not respond to a request for comment. The Chicago Department of Water Management said it received $14 million from the Illinois EPA for the 2025 financial year and was approved for $28 million for the next fiscal year.   “The estimated replacement cost for the Chicago region alone is $12 billion or more, and statewide, it could be $14 billion,” Krishnamoorthi said. “Whatever amounts would come to Chicago would not be enough to do the entire job, but the federal component is vital to get the ball rolling.” Chicago has more than 412,000 lead service lines, the most of any city in the country. So far, the city has replaced roughly 14,000 lead pipes at a cost of $400 million over the past five years. That’s due in part to the high cost of replacing lead pipes. In Chicago, a single lead pipe replacement can cost on average $35,000. Federal rules require that Chicago replace all its pipes by 2047, but city officials have cited concerns over the unfunded federal mandate.  “This is impacting people’s health,” said Chakena Sims, a senior policy advocate with Natural Resources Defense Council. “The federal government politicizing access to safe drinking water is an all-time low,” she added. “It’s encouraging to see our Illinois congressional leaders stand up for communities.”   This story was originally published by Grist with the headline ‘They’re playing games’: Illinois lawmakers press Trump administration over stalled lead-pipe funding on Nov 13, 2025.

Labor must not partner with climate vandals on Australia’s new environmental laws | Tim Flannery

If the government cuts a deal with them, it risks repeating the mistakes of the Abbott era, sacrificing progress for politicsThis week the National Liberal Coalition has rewound the clock a decade. When Tony Abbott’s government abolished the Climate Commission in 2013, I knew it was a political act of climate vandalism. Abbott simply didn’t want to hear the facts: that pollution from coal, oil and gas were cooking our planet.For a decade after, denial evolved: from shouting that global heating wasn’t real, to claiming it could be solved later. Continue reading...

This week the National Liberal Coalition has rewound the clock a decade. When Tony Abbott’s government abolished the Climate Commission in 2013, I knew it was a political act of climate vandalism. Abbott simply didn’t want to hear the facts: that pollution from coal, oil and gas were cooking our planet.For a decade after, denial evolved: from shouting that global heating wasn’t real, to claiming it could be solved later.While the LNP wallows in denial, the Albanese government is rewriting Australia’s most important environment law, the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act. It’s critical that the PM doesn’t try to cut deals on this law with the same climate deniers who dismantled Australia’s climate ambition last time.The last few weeks we’ve seen on display a Liberal National Coalition dominated by climate vandals, repulsed by renewables and trapped in a toxic relationship with expensive, polluting coal and gas. For years they have pretended that denial is debate. Now the Liberal party has openly abandoned net zero emissions by 2050 altogether, essentially saying let climate disasters rip, and to hell with our kids. It is the same approach that tore down a carbon price, dismantled the Climate Commission and wasted a decade in which we could have been getting a head start on building Australian jobs in renewables, electric vehicle batteries and green steel.Let’s be clear: there is no credible reason to scrap our net zero target. The Liberal party’s decision would be laughable if it were not such a callous act of recklessness. Reaching net zero by 2050 or before has the overwhelming support of scientists, economists, industry, energy experts and governments around the world motivated by indisputable evidence. A sweeping majority of Australians, alongside peak business and civil bodies, back the target. All that is left is the stubborn ideologues shouting at the tide as it floods their front door.What does net zero emissions actually mean? And is it different to the Paris agreement? – videoTo hand such wreckers a say over the future of Australia’s environment laws would be madness. These are the same forces that unleashed a lost decade of climate inaction. The lesson from that period could not be clearer: when denialists set the terms, progress burns. That failure is only reinforced by the fossil fuel industry’s hold on our politics.For two years Labor has promised that this reform will be a once-in-a-generation fix to Australia’s broken nature laws. The Great Barrier Reef has experienced the sixth mass bleaching event in a decade, but the package will allow new coal and gas projects to be approved without any consideration of their climate impacts. Under the government’s plan, fossil fuel corporations would need to disclose only a fraction of their pollution and an unverified plan to reduce it, and even that information would not be used to influence a decision.The Albanese government has approved 32 new or expanded coal, oil and gas developments, including the North West Shelf expansion, Australia’s most polluting project in a decade. Together, these approvals will pump up to 12.8m tonnes of climate pollution into the atmosphere in Australia, making it harder for Australia to meet its own targets. The global impact is in the order of billions of tonnes of pollution.And 42 more projects are in the pipeline. Many would run well into the second half of this century, some even beyond 2100.Climate pollution is the biggest threat to our reefs, forests and wildlife. Any credible environment law must tackle it at its source. To claim the Safeguard Mechanism will sort it out later is folly. The Safeguard only applies after a project has been approved. It is like letting the arsonist start the fire, then hoping the firefighter can control it later. By then, the damage is under way.We cannot afford more delay. Every fraction of a degree of heating harms our environment – and all of us that rely on it. Every new tonne of pollution makes the task harder. Australia’s laws must ensure that high-polluting projects cannot be waved through.There is a better path. The government can still implement credible reform that increases protection for climate and nature, and without the now rejected ‘climate trigger’. That means three simple things. First, require all projects to fully disclose their climate pollution, including the emissions when fossil fuels are burned overseas. Second, make sure this information is independently assessed and used in decision-making. And third, allow the environment minister to put limits on projects that are incompatible with Australia’s climate targets, policies and international commitments.Canada requires analysis of both direct and downstream emissions. The EU and the UK have similar standards. Last year, the UK supreme court ruled that ignoring the climate impact of new fossil fuel projects was unlawful. Australia is on the frontline of climate damage. We must not be shirkers.When I look back on 2013, what stands out is not just that the Climate Commission was scrapped, but that the science was ignored. A decade later, the same political forces that tore down that work are trying to drag us backwards again. If the government cuts a deal with them, it risks repeating the mistakes of the Abbott era, sacrificing truth for expedience and progress for politics.Australia has a choice. We can keep approving new coal and gas projects that push us further from safety, or we can finally pass a law that protects our magnificent environment, creatures and people.

From nanoscale to global scale: Advancing MIT’s special initiatives in manufacturing, health, and climate

MIT.nano cleanroom complex named after Robert Noyce PhD ’53 at the 2025 Nano Summit.

“MIT.nano is essential to making progress in high-priority areas where I believe that MIT has a responsibility to lead,” opened MIT president Sally Kornbluth at the 2025 Nano Summit. “If we harness our collective efforts, we can make a serious positive impact.”It was these collective efforts that drove discussions at the daylong event hosted by MIT.nano and focused on the importance of nanoscience and nanotechnology across MIT's special initiatives — projects deemed critical to MIT’s mission to help solve the world’s greatest challenges. With each new talk, common themes were reemphasized: collaboration across fields, solutions that can scale up from lab to market, and the use of nanoscale science to enact grand-scale change.“MIT.nano has truly set itself apart, in the Institute's signature way, with an emphasis on cross-disciplinary collaboration and open access,” said Kornbluth. “Today, you're going to hear about the transformative impact of nanoscience and nanotechnology, and how working with the very small can help us do big things for the world together.”Collaborating on healthAngela Koehler, faculty director of the MIT Health and Life Sciences Collaborative (MIT HEALS) and the Charles W. and Jennifer C. Johnson Professor of Biological Engineering, opened the first session with a question: How can we build a community across campus to tackle some of the most transformative problems in human health? In response, three speakers shared their work enabling new frontiers in medicine.Ana Jaklenec, principal research scientist at the Koch Institute for Integrative Cancer Research, spoke about single-injection vaccines, and how her team looked to the techniques used in fabrication of electrical engineering components to see how multiple pieces could be packaged into a tiny device. “MIT.nano was instrumental in helping us develop this technology,” she said. “We took something that you can do in microelectronics and the semiconductor industry and brought it to the pharmaceutical industry.”While Jaklenec applied insight from electronics to her work in health care, Giovanni Traverso, the Karl Van Tassel Career Development Professor of Mechanical Engineering, who is also a gastroenterologist at Brigham and Women’s Hospital, found inspiration in nature, studying the cephalopod squid and remora fish to design ingestible drug delivery systems. Representing the industry side of life sciences, Mirai Bio senior vice president Jagesh Shah SM ’95, PhD ’99 presented his company’s precision-targeted lipid nanoparticles for therapeutic delivery. Shah, as well as the other speakers, emphasized the importance of collaboration between industry and academia to make meaningful impact, and the need to strengthen the pipeline for young scientists.Manufacturing, from the classroom to the workforcePaving the way for future generations was similarly emphasized in the second session, which highlighted MIT’s Initiative for New Manufacturing (MIT INM). “MIT’s dedication to manufacturing is not only about technology research and education, it’s also about understanding the landscape of manufacturing, domestically and globally,” said INM co-director A. John Hart, the Class of 1922 Professor and head of the Department of Mechanical Engineering. “It’s about getting people — our graduates who are budding enthusiasts of manufacturing — out of campus and starting and scaling new companies,” he said.On progressing from lab to market, Dan Oran PhD ’21 shared his career trajectory from technician to PhD student to founding his own company, Irradiant Technologies. “How are companies like Dan’s making the move from the lab to prototype to pilot production to demonstration to commercialization?” asked the next speaker, Elisabeth Reynolds, professor of the practice in urban studies and planning at MIT. “The U.S. capital market has not historically been well organized for that kind of support.” She emphasized the challenge of scaling innovations from prototype to production, and the need for workforce development.“Attracting and retaining workforce is a major pain point for manufacturing businesses,” agreed John Liu, principal research scientist in mechanical engineering at MIT. To keep new ideas flowing from the classroom to the factory floor, Liu proposes a new worker type in advanced manufacturing — the technologist — someone who can be a bridge to connect the technicians and the engineers.Bridging ecosystems with nanoscienceBridging people, disciplines, and markets to affect meaningful change was also emphasized by Benedetto Marelli, mission director for the MIT Climate Project and associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at MIT.“If we’re going to have a tangible impact on the trajectory of climate change in the next 10 years, we cannot do it alone,” he said. “We need to take care of ecology, health, mobility, the built environment, food, energy, policies, and trade and industry — and think about these as interconnected topics.”Faculty speakers in this session offered a glimpse of nanoscale solutions for climate resiliency. Michael Strano, the Carbon P. Dubbs Professor of Chemical Engineering, presented his group’s work on using nanoparticles to turn waste methane and urea into renewable materials. Desirée Plata, the School of Engineering Distinguished Climate and Energy Professor, spoke about scaling carbon dioxide removal systems. Mechanical engineering professor Kripa Varanasi highlighted, among other projects, his lab’s work on improving agricultural spraying so pesticides adhere to crops, reducing agricultural pollution and cost.In all of these presentations, the MIT faculty highlighted the tie between climate and the economy. “The economic systems that we have today are depleting to our resources, inherently polluting,” emphasized Plata. “The goal here is to use sustainable design to transition the global economy.”What do people do at MIT.nano?This is where MIT.nano comes in, offering shared access facilities where researchers can design creative solutions to these global challenges. “What do people do at MIT.nano?” asked associate director for Fab.nano Jorg Scholvin ’00, MNG ’01, PhD ’06 in the session on MIT.nano’s ecosystem. With 1,500 individuals and over 20 percent of MIT faculty labs using MIT.nano, it’s a difficult question to quickly answer. However, in a rapid-fire research showcase, students and postdocs gave a response that spanned 3D transistors and quantum devices to solar solutions and art restoration. Their work reflects the challenges and opportunities shared at the Nano Summit: developing technologies ready to scale, uniting disciplines to tackle complex problems, and gaining hands-on experience that prepares them to contribute to the future of hard tech.The researchers’ enthusiasm carried the excitement and curiosity that President Kornbluth mentioned in her opening remarks, and that many faculty emphasized throughout the day. “The solutions to the problems we heard about today may come from inventions that don't exist yet,” said Strano. “These are some of the most creative people, here at MIT. I think we inspire each other.”Robert N. Noyce (1953) Cleanroom at MIT.nanoCollaborative inspiration is not new to the MIT culture. The Nano Summit sessions focused on where we are today, and where we might be going in the future, but also reflected on how we arrived at this moment. Honoring visionaries of nanoscience and nanotechnology, President Emeritus L. Rafael Reif delivered the closing remarks and an exciting announcement — the dedication of the MIT.nano cleanroom complex. Made possible through a gift by Ray Stata SB ’57, SM ’58, this research space, 45,000 square feet of ISO 5, 6, and 7 cleanrooms, will be named the Robert N. Noyce (1953) Cleanroom.“Ray Stata was — and is — the driving force behind nanoscale research at MIT,” said Reif. “I want to thank Ray, whose generosity has allowed MIT to honor Robert Noyce in such a fitting way.”Ray Stata co-founded Analog Devices in 1965, and Noyce co-founded Fairchild Semiconductor in 1957, and later Intel in 1968. Noyce, widely regarded as the “Mayor of Silicon Valley,” became chair of the Semiconductor Industry Association in 1977, and over the next 40 years, semiconductor technology advanced a thousandfold, from micrometers to nanometers.“Noyce was a pioneer of the semiconductor industry,” said Stata. “It is due to his leadership and remarkable contributions that electronics technology is where it is today. It is an honor to be able to name the MIT.nano cleanroom after Bob Noyce, creating a permanent tribute to his vision and accomplishments in the heart of the MIT campus.”To conclude his remarks and the 2025 Nano Summit, Reif brought the nano journey back to today, highlighting technology giants such as Lisa Su ’90, SM ’91, PhD ’94, for whom Building 12, the home of MIT.nano, is named. “MIT has educated a large number of remarkable leaders in the semiconductor space,” said Reif. “Now, with the Robert Noyce Cleanroom, this amazing MIT community is ready to continue to shape the future with the next generation of nano discoveries — and the next generation of nano leaders, who will become living legends in their own time.”

Montana Sued Over Law That Allows Water Wells for Low-Density, Rural Subdivisions Without Permits

A coalition of cities, agricultural interests and environmental groups is suing Montana over a decades-old law that housing developers have relied on to supply water to low-density residential subdivisions not connected to public water supplies

A broad coalition is suing the state of Montana over its interpretation of a decades-old law that housing developers have long relied on to supply water to low-density residential subdivisions outside public water supplies.At the center of the conflict are “exempt wells,” which earned that moniker shortly after Montana legislators passed a law in 1973 allowing just about anyone to drill a well and pump up to 10 acre-feet of groundwater from it per year without first demonstrating that nearby water users won’t see a decrease in their water supplies. An acre-foot of water is enough to serve two to three households for a year.According to a lawsuit filed Wednesday, approximately 141,000 wells have been drilled using the exempt well law since 1973. More than two-thirds of those wells were drilled to supply homes with drinking water or to water lawns or gardens.The six nonprofit groups and three individual water users argue that the Montana Department of Natural Resources and Conservation, which administers water rights, has authorized “unregulated groundwater development.” Reliable water supplies for those with the oldest water rights and “the integrity of Montana’s water resources” are at stake, the plaintiffs contend.The plaintiffs are asking the Lewis and Clark County District Court to block the state from continuing its “unabated” authorization of exempt wells, which have become developers’ preferred tool to facilitate development on large, rural lots. According to the lawsuit’s analysis of data compiled by Headwaters Economics, more than half of the residential development that happened in Montana between 2000 and 2021 occurred outside of incorporated municipalities.Efforts to revise the exempt well statute have fueled a series of “knock-down, drag-out” fights at the Montana Capitol, including a heated debate earlier this year on a proposal developed by a working group convened by the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation that hit an insurmountable groundswell of opposition before it could clear its first chamber.Housing developers argue the existing loophole offers builders a faster alternative to the state’s lengthy and uncertain permitting process. Developers and other permitting reform advocates say a smoother regulatory process to access what they deem is a small amount of water increases the pace and scale of construction, thereby easing Montana’s housing supply and affordability strains in a state where housing costs have skyrocketed. Opponents counter that hundreds of billions of gallons of water have been unconstitutionally appropriated using exempt wells, and the proliferation of new straws into Montana’s aquifers, paired with the septic systems that frequently accompany them, are drawing down critical water supplies and overloading them with nutrient pollution.The Montana League of Cities and Towns, which represents municipalities that rely on surface water or underground aquifers to meet the needs of homes and businesses served by public water supplies, is the lead plaintiff in the litigation. Other parties to the lawsuit include the Association of Gallatin Agricultural Irrigators, the Montana Farm Bureau Federation, Clark Fork Coalition, Montana Environmental Information Center and Trout Unlimited.In an emailed statement about the lawsuit, Clark Fork Coalition legal director Andrew Gorder argued that the state needs to change its permitting practices to uphold the 1972 Montana Constitution, which “recognized and confirmed” all of the “existing rights to the use of any waters.”“From rapid growth to ongoing drought, Montana’s water resources and water users are facing unprecedented challenges,” Gorder wrote. “The cumulative impact of over one hundred thousand exempt groundwater wells can no longer be ignored. We’re asking the court to conserve our limited water resources and ensure that the constitutional protections afforded to senior water rights, including instream flow rights, are preserved.”Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks, along with groups like Clark Fork Coalition and Trout Unlimited, hold or lease instream flow rights to sustain sensitive fisheries during periods of drought like the ongoing one dropping many western Montana rivers to record-low levels.Plaintiff Kevin Chandler, a hydrogeologist who ranches outside of Absarokee, juxtaposed the process he and his wife, Katrin, went through to obtain and protect the water they use on their ranch with the process afforded to nearby developers of the 67-lot Crow Chief Meadows subdivision.“We did everything the law asked of us to protect our water and our neighbors’ water – collecting data, hiring experts, and working hand-in-hand with the state,” Chandler wrote in the statement. “It’s frustrating to see a subdivision using dozens of exempt wells get approved, when the same development proposing a single shared community well would have been denied. Those community systems are more efficient and safer, and their use can be measured and monitored. The current policy promotes poorly planned development and passes the hidden costs to future homeowners, counties and towns.”A spokesperson for the DNRC declined to comment on the lawsuit.The lawsuit presents four claims for relief, beginning with recognizing the constitutional protections afforded to senior water users and concluding with a constitutional provision protecting Montanans’ right to know what their government is doing and their right to participate in the operation of its agencies. The plaintiffs note that an interim legislative committee has been tasked with digging into the exempt well statute once again. But they don’t appear optimistic that the Legislature will reach a different result when it next convenes in 2027. Despite nearly two decades of studies identifying the consequences of exempt well development and repeated efforts to revise state laws, no meaningful change has occurred, according to the lawsuit.Four of the lawsuit’s plaintiffs — the Montana League of Cities and Towns, Clark Fork Coalition, Montana Farm Bureau Federation and Trout Unlimited — participated in the group that developed Senate Bill 358, which sought to close some of the state’s fastest-growing valleys to additional exempt wells but allow for increased groundwater development across the rest of the state as part of a compromise package. In April, the Montana Senate overwhelmingly rejected the measure.Kelly Lynch, executive director of the Montana League of Cities and Towns, said SB 358’s failure spurred her organization’s decision to move forward with the lawsuit.“We put our hearts and souls into that bill,” she said. “The fact that it failed — it was like, ‘OK, it’s time.’”Lynch added that other Western states have experienced similar pressures on their groundwater supplies and have responded by narrowing the groundwater withdrawal loophole. In those states, she said, the exempt well law is “extremely limited to those situations in which an exemption is truly necessary — not a development pattern that is subsidized by the exemption.”In that lawsuit, District Court Judge Michael McMahon sided with Upper Missouri Waterkeeper and a handful of landowners opposed to the 442-acre Horse Creek Hills subdivision. In his 2024 ruling, McMahon chastised the Department of Natural Resources and Conservation for “torturously misreading its own rules and ignoring Supreme Court precedent” on the cumulative impacts of exempt wells.Asked to respond to this round of litigation, Upper Missouri Waterkeeper Executive Director Guy Alsentzer wrote in an email to Montana Free Press that it’s an encouraging development that builds on the Horse Creek Hills litigation.“The pressure to develop land is unrelenting, and recent history demonstrates the Montana Legislature is plainly incapable of a constitutionally-sound approach to adequately regulating Montana’s water resources,” Alsentzer wrote. “Ideally, this case finishes the battle at-stake in Upper Missouri Waterkeeper v. Broadwater County (aka Horse Creek Hills), and before that in Clark Fork Coalition v. Tubbs: there is no free water for sprawl subdivision development in closed Montana river basins.”This story was originally published by Montana Free Press and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

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.