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.

How Climate Change Is Increasing Landslide Risk Worldwide

News Feed
Tuesday, September 16, 2025

The landslide behind my neighbor’s backyard doesn’t exist—not according to the New York State landslide map or Greene County’s hazard-mitigation plan or the federal inventory managed by the U.S. Geological Survey. But when you’re standing in the middle of the debris field, the violence of the event is still evident 14 years after it occurred. The fan of the landslide, where a surge of boulders and mud blasted the forest open after rushing down the steeper slopes of Arizona Mountain in the Catskills, is about 100 feet wide—an undulating plane of rocks, mangled tree trunks, and invasive plants such as Japanese stiltgrass that thrive in disturbed areas.On a hot July day the seasonal stream that runs through this ravine, named the Shingle Kill, is small enough to step over. When Tropical Storm Irene hovered over these mountains on August 28, 2011, the Shingle Kill swelled like all the otherwise unremarkable streams in the area, frothing downhill in a torrent the color of chocolate milk. This storm was a particularly bad one, dropping up to 18 inches of rain on the northeastern escarpment of the Catskills. Throughout the region explosive rivers eroded their banks, flooding towns and ripping away buildings.The first house the Shingle Kill passes as it emerges into our community belonged at the time to Diane and Ken Herchenroder, who had lived there for nearly three decades. In the past, when the Shingle Kill occasionally raged, they could hear rocks colliding in the streambed. But this time it was louder—and faster.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.From the screened-in front porch of their 1880s colonial, they saw the stream crest its banks. First it took out a 32-foot-long footbridge that connected one side of the property to the other. Then trees started coming downriver, crashing into a culvert at the bottom of the yard. The culvert clogged, washing out the road. Water got diverted across their lawn on one side of the stream, and in the other direction it blew out the garage side door, then the front doors. (Their lawn tractor was found downstream days later.) Diane watched her row of beloved lilac bushes, probably more than 100 years old and 15 feet tall, get ripped from their roots. “They just floated away. And we thought, that’s going to be it,” she recalls. “Then we heard a rumble like a train barreling down the mountain.”Less than 2,000 feet above, in a hollow high on Arizona Mountain, oversaturated soils released themselves into the headwaters of the Shingle Kill, picking up speed and whatever materials the flow encountered as it carved downhill.As the slope flattened out, the landslide blew open the channel and spread out, depositing a wall of uprooted trees just upstream of the house. A slurry of rocks and mud continued flowing, plugging the Shingle Kill streambed all the way to the road, where it was stopped by the debris dam at the culvert.Robert Titus, a retired geology professor, and his wife, Johanna Titus, explored the slide about a month later for their Kaatskill Geologist column in a local newspaper. “We don’t use the words ‘awe,’ ‘awesome’ or ‘awed’ very often; we save them for when they are truly appropriate,” they wrote. “This was one of those times.” They described scenes that were evidence of boulders “floating on the moving muds,” as well as hundreds of “twisted and broken trees” that had been thrown high above the stream bank and were now stranded on top of the ravine. The Tituses recently told me it was unlike anything they had seen before or since.In July 2025, days of heavy rain triggered multiple mudslides and rockslides in New York State's Adirondacks, including this one on Mount Colden. It blocked access to hiking trails in a popular recreation spot in the High Peaks Wilderness area.To this day, the scar where the landslide began is unmissable from miles away.That this landslide didn’t get recorded is somewhat a quirk of disaster recovery. Debris from the slide itself wasn’t the singular cause of damage to any buildings or roads, so there was no financial fingerprint. The slide didn’t injure or kill anyone. Landslides aren’t mapped in the same way that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, for instance, tracks flood zones and inundation risk, and a rate of occurrence can’t be modeled like a flood. Because landslide insurance practically doesn’t exist in most of the country, no one needs the data to assess actuarial risk for homeowners. According to the New York Geological Survey, the vast majority of landslides in the state go unreported.But the Shingle Kill landslide did change the mountainside that day. Joel DuBois, director of the Greene County Department of Soil and Water, visited the site in the days after Irene and reviewed some recent photos of the stream corridor that was affected by the debris flow. “There appear to be a number of cycles of incision and aggradation,” DuBois wrote. “That is to say that channel incision, or down-cutting, results in steeper bank angles and higher bank heights, leaving the adjacent hillsides susceptible to landslide” both during and after flood events. The sediment then flows downstream and accumulates at existing debris dams, which tends to cause channels to migrate laterally, he explained. That too can trigger landslide activity.The area remains vulnerable at a time when landslide risk is expected to increase across much of the northeastern U.S.—as well as a lot of the world. That’s because climate change is causing concentrated bursts of rain that fall over a short period to occur more frequently. Such intense rainfall events are known to be the biggest trigger of landslides.It’s not quite right to say landslides aren’t common in the Catskills, because this superold plateau has been eroding for perhaps a few hundred million years. On a nongeological timescale, though, landslide susceptibility isn’t something many people think about in New York State, and the state geological survey can estimate only that between 100 and 400 occur every year.As warmer temperatures lead to more moisture in the air, climate change is quickly warping that math. In the Northeast, the heaviest rainstorms are now 60 percent heavier than they were in the 1950s, according to the Fifth National Climate Assessment. In a 2023 study, researchers at Dartmouth College found that extreme precipitation in the region will increase by 52 percent by the end of this century, mostly because of a higher number of such events each year. “Our landscape has pretty much been in equilibrium, for the most part, since the glaciers left,” Andrew Kozlowski, a New York State geologist, explained during a 2022 USGS presentation. “With climate change, we may be shifting that equilibrium and throwing all of this completely off balance, and there’s going to be a natural readjustment.”“Landslide” is the broad term for the movement of soils, rocks, and other debris down a slope. There are several different classifications for landslides. Some, like the Shingle Kill debris flow, move far too fast to be outrun. More than any other factor, they are set off by an intense storm. Others, such as rotational slides—backward-curving masses of material that can be hundreds of feet deep—are more sensitive to rainfall over the course of a season. They can move very slowly when a destabilized slope takes months to fail.Landslides can happen pretty much anywhere certain conditions exist but are most common in very steep mountain terrain where plenty of rain falls. In 2024 the U.S. Landslide Susceptibility Index was released and stated that 44 percent of the land in the U.S. could potentially experience landslide activity. Susceptibility is based partly on where landslides have occurred previously, and it wasn’t until the past decade that high-resolution lidar made it possible for states to survey vast swaths of land for evidence and clues. The extent to which states have done so is uneven.Benjamin DeJong, director of the Vermont Geological Survey, says you can think of landslide susceptibility as an inexact recipe. You’re going to need steeper slopes to achieve some kind of baseload that puts weight on the slope. Next, add loose, unconsolidated materials that can become saturated with water. If those saturated materials are overlying or underlying another kind of material that has very different permeability, meaning its ability to take in water, that contrast is a big factor.“By far the year that had the greatest total landslides that I’ve recorded was 2024. Last year was completely off the scale.” —David Petley University of HullThen you look at what’s on the base and on the top of the slope. If the base, or toe, is undercut—by a road, for instance, or a meandering stream—that’s going to make the slope more susceptible. Overloading the top, or head, of a slope with weight also drives it toward failure.The fourth ingredient is the loss of vegetation that helps to hold soils together. In California, for example, this loss happens on a regular cycle with wildfires. Vermont, DeJong says, went through an experiment in the 1800s where “the state tried to turn itself into Scotland by cutting down all the trees and bringing in sheep.” It was a bad idea that caused erosion and mass slope failure everywhere. The state gave up on that plan and allowed the forests to regrow. The last variable is how the slope handles stormwater. With more extreme precipitation events, it doesn’t take much mismanagement of a slope for the heavy weight of rain to concentrate in ways that cause the slope to fail.Geologist David Petley, who writes the Landslide Blog for the American Geophysical Union, has been maintaining a database of deadly landslides worldwide since 2004. He’s seen a clear long-term trend. “But by far—by far—the year that had the greatest total landslides that I’ve recorded was 2024,” he says. “Last year was completely off the scale.” Why? “The most simple hypothesis is that it was the year with the highest-ever global temperature. I do genuinely think it’s that simple.” There’s solid evidence that high atmospheric temperature, and possibly high sea-surface temperatures as well, drove high-precipitation events globally. “Last year I saw an extraordinary frequency of big storms that were triggering hundreds of thousands of landslides,” Petley says. They occurred at different locations all over the world.In the U.S., the remnants of Hurricane Helene, which came ashore in Florida in September 2024, dumped between 20 and 30 inches of water over the mountains of North Carolina. The storm ended up triggering more than 2,000 landslides across the Southeast. According to the USGS, in some cases several smaller mudslides converged into a single channel, burying entire communities in debris. The total number of people killed by landslides specifically, versus by flooding or a combination of the two, is hard to parse. But one storm-triggered mudslide in Craigtown, N.C., swept through a house, killing 11 members of the Craig family for whom the town is named. During the storm, four successive landslides in that valley wiped out the town.In the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina, very old landslides might have been “brought back into activity” during Helene, Petley explains, reactivated by staggeringly intense rain. Scientists at World Weather Attribution pinned that extra intensity on climate change, reporting that it had made the storm’s rainfall throughout the Southeast about 10 percent heavier and the “unprecedented” rainfall totals over three days about 70 percent more likely than they would have been otherwise.In California, where dramatic debris flows have long been a concern, climate change is making matters worse in two ways. Bigger, more destructive wildfires wipe out more of the vegetation that was stabilizing the landscape. And then atmospheric rivers—a newer phenomenon consisting of long, narrow conveyer belts of moisture—arrive, bringing a series of intense rainfall events. Between December 2022 and January 2023 nine back-to-back atmospheric rivers struck California, leading to more than 600 landslides.Climate change is increasing landslide risk globally in other ways. In high mountain regions such as the European Alps and the Himalayas, melting permafrost and retreating glaciers are destabilizing steep slopes. A catastrophic glacier collapse in Switzerland this past summer destroyed an entire village; thankfully officials evacuated people just before it happened, but one person was killed.A section of the Shingle Kill streambed 14 years after a debris flow occurred on Arizona Mountain in New York State's Catskills during intense rain. The southern slope, shown on the left, continues to erode.Petley says the thing that’s surprised him most recently is the speed of change, especially during this past El Niño cycle. Strong rainfall events have always happened occasionally, but suddenly they are happening a lot. “I don’t think I fully understand why we’re seeing such a rapid shift to these events where a heavy rainfall will trigger 2,000 or 3,000 landslides in a relatively small area,” Petley says. In New Zealand in 2023, Cyclone Gabrielle triggered at least 100,000 landslides. Even in regions such as the Himalayas, where the monsoon season is becoming drier overall, the number of landslides is going up because the rainstorms that do arrive are more intense. “I worry a bit,” Petley says, “that the shift is happening so fast and becoming so extreme that in some places the risk is essentially unmanageable.”Vermont, like New York State, got clobbered by Tropical Storm Irene in 2011. DeJong, the Vermont state geologist, describes Irene as a wake-up call. “The mountains,” he says with a degree of irony, “are now where hurricanes come to die.”But it wasn’t until two freak July rainstorms—spaced exactly a year apart, one in 2023 and one in 2024—that the state’s geological survey became alarmed that landslides were going to be a much bigger problem than in the past. Given his experiences with Irene, DeJong expected the July 2023 storm to lead to maybe a handful of slides. Within a month of the storm his team had received more than 70 requests for landslide evaluations. Working on the ground in the aftermath of these two storms made DeJong realize that rainfall events at that scale “are fundamentally altering the landscape in ways that are not immediately recognizable,” he says.Now the four-person Vermont Geological Survey team is working on putting together a landslide-susceptibility map. The goal is to start with a more technical tool for scientists that can be overlaid with forecasts from the National Weather Service, which would create debris-flow forecasts like the ones already produced by the Los Angeles Department of Public Works. If that’s successful, the next step, DeJong says, would be creating a map that’s more accessible to the public, something that a person who’s looking to buy a parcel of land could reference to do some due diligence on landslide risk.But that gets tricky. The city of Juneau, Alaska, carried out a mapping project to evaluate levels of risk, with the aim of incorporating that risk into its land-use planning in 2024. The maps also would have highlighted concerns with existing buildings, though, meaning homeowners identified as living in high-risk areas might see their property values decline. Juneau’s susceptibility map was vehemently rejected by the community last year and was not adopted. In Vermont, as in many places, evidence of slope instability—and even past failures—hardly factors into development or the issuing of building permits.Rising landslide risk in mountainous places also creates a difficult tension about how to adapt to the effects of climate change. Recent disasters have made clear that mountain valleys in certain regions may not be great places to live. In Vermont “we’re losing a lot of housing in our flood corridors—which is a good thing,” DeJong says. “We’re getting people out of harm’s way.” But the state, like many others around the country, has a housing crunch with the need to build more. “When we’ve lost options down in the valleys, that puts a lot of building pressure up onto our slopes,” he explains. “And it’s really hard to make the argument not to do that.” Successfully adapting to one climate effect means running headlong into another.There are many climate-related problems to worry about in my Catskills community: the surging numbers of disease-carrying ticks, the choking out of native plants by invasive species, the hurricane-remnant floods, the decrease in winter snowfall that would replenish the aquifers, the summertime whiplash between deluge and drought. The Shingle Kill landslide wasn’t on my radar as a potential climate problem until a massive, ultraluxury resort and “branded residences” development was proposed for the hillside next to it. The plan calls for building more than 85 new structures totaling 275,593 square feet on a 102-acre site, 45 percent of which is classified as having steep slopes. To do so, developers will have to cut down about 11 acres of trees. The site, like the rest of our hamlet, has no access to municipal water or sewage. In addition to lining ponds for water storage and building a wastewater-treatment plant, a road network will be cut into the mountainside.The public documents for the project do not appear to show that a geologist evaluated whether the weight of all that development, plus the deforestation and excavation during construction, might further destabilize the slopes of the Shingle Kill. Our town planning board approved the project in May 2025 without requiring an environmental impact statement that would have identified and attempted to mitigate the biggest hazards. (I am a member of a community group that is suing our town planning board, arguing it didn’t take a hard look at potentially significant adverse effects to the environment from this project, including on groundwater availability, erosion, flooding and landslide risk.)Recent intense rain events “are fundamentally altering the landscape in ways that are not immediately recognizable.” —Benjamin DeJong Vermont Geological SurveyDiane and Ken Herchenroder’s house wasn’t damaged by the 2011 landslide, but the event did plenty of harm. Much of their property was rearranged by the acute displacement of raging water. The solid plug of rocks and mud, some 10 feet tall, had to be excavated from the streambed. Even once things were fixed, they didn’t want to stay. “We used to listen to the rain and the stream with the windows open, and it was very comforting,” Diane says from their house in New Hampshire, where they moved two years after the storm. “Honestly, after that slide occurred, Ken and I, I would have to say, have a little bit of post-traumatic stress from that.” Diane says her photographs of the landslide are on a CD somewhere; she hasn’t looked at them since. “I don’t really ever even talk about that day,” she says. “It was pretty devastating.”In 2018 Joe Merlino bought the Herchenroders’ former property, where he now lives with his daughter and his mother. A few years ago they had members of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers come assess ongoing erosion along the Shingle Kill. The streambed continues to widen, and a sharp curve just upstream of Merlino’s house means floodwaters could rush right at it. He recalls that in 2021, when Tropical Storm Henri came through the Catskills, boulders smashed against the bridge that provides access between his house and his mom’s trailer. “[The Army Corps] basically told us the erosion is not going to stop,” Merlino says.Merlino often walks along the edges of the fan with his dog, observing the changes to the old debris piles with each storm. The possibility of more landslide activity is never far from his mind, he says, especially with a major development approved for the hillside above his home.I asked him whether he gets scared every time there’s heavy rain. “I come home from work early,” he says, to keep an eye on things and intervene if necessary. A few years ago he moved his daughter’s bedroom to the front of the house, away from the steep pitch of his backyard. “My fear is about my living room, which is in the back and has a lot of glass,” he says. “I watch the water rip around that curve, and one day something is going to come through and take the side of my house right out.”Greene County, where the Merlino family and I both live, is one of the four counties identified by New York State as the most vulnerable to expected annual building loss from landslides in the future. The county has steep escarpments that slope into the Hudson River Valley, which is rich in clays and silts from Glacial Lake Albany, a prehistoric waterbody that drained some 10,500 years ago. “I think we’re going to see a lot more slope failures in some of these populated areas in the Hudson Valley,” Kozlowski, the New York State geologist, said in 2022.Greene County considered landslides a threat back in 2016. In 2023 the county revisited its hazard-mitigation plan; our town, Cairo, was the only municipality out of 19 that did not participate. In the updated plan, the county removed landslides as a hazard, reasoning that they are “unlikely to lead to a disaster.”It’s true that landslides don’t do the same economic harm to our county as flooding and ice storms. But when they do occur, rebuilding is rarely an option. When a family lost their house in the town of Catskill to a landslide after a heavy rain event in May 2024, there wasn’t much anyone could do but condemn the structure.With funding for emergency response and climate resilience endangered at the federal level, is it worth investing in susceptibility maps for landslides that may never occur? Should people hesitate to build on potentially unstable slopes when that’s perhaps less risky than living directly in a flood path?DeJong says these are valid questions, but after his experiences over the past few years, he sees things differently. “We in Vermont have, so far, been incredibly fortunate to not see any fatalities,” he says. He remembers an older couple who were sitting in their house in July 2023 when the slope behind it failed. The structure warped outward, bending absurdly into something “that looked like a fun house falling over on them,” he recalls. Emergency services extracted them relatively unharmed, but DeJong knows it could have been worse. It turned out a lot worse in western North Carolina during Helene, where for years many building codes dismissed the risk of construction on steep slopes.It might take only one bad slide to change people’s minds about the risk. Before 2014, DeJong says, Washington State, much like New England, did not pay much attention to landslides and had no landslide program in its state geological survey. But then a slope in Oso, about an hour outside Seattle, experienced a catastrophic failure, taking out a neighborhood and killing 43 people. The state now takes landslides very seriously.“The Oso slide of New England could be right around the corner,” DeJong says. “People will say, ‘Why didn’t we know about this hazard? X number of people just died.’” He hopes his team can get its landslide-susceptibility maps finished so that when big rainfall events are forecast for the Green Mountains, officials can warn people in especially risky areas. “We’re really trying to switch to being more proactive so that X never becomes a number.”

As warming temperatures bring more extreme rain to the mountains, debris flows are on the rise

The landslide behind my neighbor’s backyard doesn’t exist—not according to the New York State landslide map or Greene County’s hazard-mitigation plan or the federal inventory managed by the U.S. Geological Survey. But when you’re standing in the middle of the debris field, the violence of the event is still evident 14 years after it occurred. The fan of the landslide, where a surge of boulders and mud blasted the forest open after rushing down the steeper slopes of Arizona Mountain in the Catskills, is about 100 feet wide—an undulating plane of rocks, mangled tree trunks, and invasive plants such as Japanese stiltgrass that thrive in disturbed areas.

On a hot July day the seasonal stream that runs through this ravine, named the Shingle Kill, is small enough to step over. When Tropical Storm Irene hovered over these mountains on August 28, 2011, the Shingle Kill swelled like all the otherwise unremarkable streams in the area, frothing downhill in a torrent the color of chocolate milk. This storm was a particularly bad one, dropping up to 18 inches of rain on the northeastern escarpment of the Catskills. Throughout the region explosive rivers eroded their banks, flooding towns and ripping away buildings.

The first house the Shingle Kill passes as it emerges into our community belonged at the time to Diane and Ken Herchenroder, who had lived there for nearly three decades. In the past, when the Shingle Kill occasionally raged, they could hear rocks colliding in the streambed. But this time it was louder—and faster.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


From the screened-in front porch of their 1880s colonial, they saw the stream crest its banks. First it took out a 32-foot-long footbridge that connected one side of the property to the other. Then trees started coming downriver, crashing into a culvert at the bottom of the yard. The culvert clogged, washing out the road. Water got diverted across their lawn on one side of the stream, and in the other direction it blew out the garage side door, then the front doors. (Their lawn tractor was found downstream days later.) Diane watched her row of beloved lilac bushes, probably more than 100 years old and 15 feet tall, get ripped from their roots. “They just floated away. And we thought, that’s going to be it,” she recalls. “Then we heard a rumble like a train barreling down the mountain.”

Less than 2,000 feet above, in a hollow high on Arizona Mountain, oversaturated soils released themselves into the headwaters of the Shingle Kill, picking up speed and whatever materials the flow encountered as it carved downhill.

As the slope flattened out, the landslide blew open the channel and spread out, depositing a wall of uprooted trees just upstream of the house. A slurry of rocks and mud continued flowing, plugging the Shingle Kill streambed all the way to the road, where it was stopped by the debris dam at the culvert.

Robert Titus, a retired geology professor, and his wife, Johanna Titus, explored the slide about a month later for their Kaatskill Geologist column in a local newspaper. “We don’t use the words ‘awe,’ ‘awesome’ or ‘awed’ very often; we save them for when they are truly appropriate,” they wrote. “This was one of those times.” They described scenes that were evidence of boulders “floating on the moving muds,” as well as hundreds of “twisted and broken trees” that had been thrown high above the stream bank and were now stranded on top of the ravine. The Tituses recently told me it was unlike anything they had seen before or since.

Photo of landslide in upstate New York

In July 2025, days of heavy rain triggered multiple mudslides and rockslides in New York State's Adirondacks, including this one on Mount Colden. It blocked access to hiking trails in a popular recreation spot in the High Peaks Wilderness area.

To this day, the scar where the landslide began is unmissable from miles away.

That this landslide didn’t get recorded is somewhat a quirk of disaster recovery. Debris from the slide itself wasn’t the singular cause of damage to any buildings or roads, so there was no financial fingerprint. The slide didn’t injure or kill anyone. Landslides aren’t mapped in the same way that the Federal Emergency Management Agency, for instance, tracks flood zones and inundation risk, and a rate of occurrence can’t be modeled like a flood. Because landslide insurance practically doesn’t exist in most of the country, no one needs the data to assess actuarial risk for homeowners. According to the New York Geological Survey, the vast majority of landslides in the state go unreported.

But the Shingle Kill landslide did change the mountainside that day. Joel DuBois, director of the Greene County Department of Soil and Water, visited the site in the days after Irene and reviewed some recent photos of the stream corridor that was affected by the debris flow. “There appear to be a number of cycles of incision and aggradation,” DuBois wrote. “That is to say that channel incision, or down-cutting, results in steeper bank angles and higher bank heights, leaving the adjacent hillsides susceptible to landslide” both during and after flood events. The sediment then flows downstream and accumulates at existing debris dams, which tends to cause channels to migrate laterally, he explained. That too can trigger landslide activity.

The area remains vulnerable at a time when landslide risk is expected to increase across much of the northeastern U.S.—as well as a lot of the world. That’s because climate change is causing concentrated bursts of rain that fall over a short period to occur more frequently. Such intense rainfall events are known to be the biggest trigger of landslides.

It’s not quite right to say landslides aren’t common in the Catskills, because this superold plateau has been eroding for perhaps a few hundred million years. On a nongeological timescale, though, landslide susceptibility isn’t something many people think about in New York State, and the state geological survey can estimate only that between 100 and 400 occur every year.

As warmer temperatures lead to more moisture in the air, climate change is quickly warping that math. In the Northeast, the heaviest rainstorms are now 60 percent heavier than they were in the 1950s, according to the Fifth National Climate Assessment. In a 2023 study, researchers at Dartmouth College found that extreme precipitation in the region will increase by 52 percent by the end of this century, mostly because of a higher number of such events each year. “Our landscape has pretty much been in equilibrium, for the most part, since the glaciers left,” Andrew Kozlowski, a New York State geologist, explained during a 2022 USGS presentation. “With climate change, we may be shifting that equilibrium and throwing all of this completely off balance, and there’s going to be a natural readjustment.”


“Landslide” is the broad term for the movement of soils, rocks, and other debris down a slope. There are several different classifications for landslides. Some, like the Shingle Kill debris flow, move far too fast to be outrun. More than any other factor, they are set off by an intense storm. Others, such as rotational slides—backward-curving masses of material that can be hundreds of feet deep—are more sensitive to rainfall over the course of a season. They can move very slowly when a destabilized slope takes months to fail.

Landslides can happen pretty much anywhere certain conditions exist but are most common in very steep mountain terrain where plenty of rain falls. In 2024 the U.S. Landslide Susceptibility Index was released and stated that 44 percent of the land in the U.S. could potentially experience landslide activity. Susceptibility is based partly on where landslides have occurred previously, and it wasn’t until the past decade that high-resolution lidar made it possible for states to survey vast swaths of land for evidence and clues. The extent to which states have done so is uneven.

Benjamin DeJong, director of the Vermont Geological Survey, says you can think of landslide susceptibility as an inexact recipe. You’re going to need steeper slopes to achieve some kind of baseload that puts weight on the slope. Next, add loose, unconsolidated materials that can become saturated with water. If those saturated materials are overlying or underlying another kind of material that has very different permeability, meaning its ability to take in water, that contrast is a big factor.

“By far the year that had the greatest total landslides that I’ve recorded was 2024. Last year was completely off the scale.” —David Petley University of Hull

Then you look at what’s on the base and on the top of the slope. If the base, or toe, is undercut—by a road, for instance, or a meandering stream—that’s going to make the slope more susceptible. Overloading the top, or head, of a slope with weight also drives it toward failure.

The fourth ingredient is the loss of vegetation that helps to hold soils together. In California, for example, this loss happens on a regular cycle with wildfires. Vermont, DeJong says, went through an experiment in the 1800s where “the state tried to turn itself into Scotland by cutting down all the trees and bringing in sheep.” It was a bad idea that caused erosion and mass slope failure everywhere. The state gave up on that plan and allowed the forests to regrow. The last variable is how the slope handles stormwater. With more extreme precipitation events, it doesn’t take much mismanagement of a slope for the heavy weight of rain to concentrate in ways that cause the slope to fail.

Geologist David Petley, who writes the Landslide Blog for the American Geophysical Union, has been maintaining a database of deadly landslides worldwide since 2004. He’s seen a clear long-term trend. “But by far—by far—the year that had the greatest total landslides that I’ve recorded was 2024,” he says. “Last year was completely off the scale.” Why? “The most simple hypothesis is that it was the year with the highest-ever global temperature. I do genuinely think it’s that simple.” There’s solid evidence that high atmospheric temperature, and possibly high sea-surface temperatures as well, drove high-precipitation events globally. “Last year I saw an extraordinary frequency of big storms that were triggering hundreds of thousands of landslides,” Petley says. They occurred at different locations all over the world.

In the U.S., the remnants of Hurricane Helene, which came ashore in Florida in September 2024, dumped between 20 and 30 inches of water over the mountains of North Carolina. The storm ended up triggering more than 2,000 landslides across the Southeast. According to the USGS, in some cases several smaller mudslides converged into a single channel, burying entire communities in debris. The total number of people killed by landslides specifically, versus by flooding or a combination of the two, is hard to parse. But one storm-triggered mudslide in Craigtown, N.C., swept through a house, killing 11 members of the Craig family for whom the town is named. During the storm, four successive landslides in that valley wiped out the town.

In the Appalachian Mountains of North Carolina, very old landslides might have been “brought back into activity” during Helene, Petley explains, reactivated by staggeringly intense rain. Scientists at World Weather Attribution pinned that extra intensity on climate change, reporting that it had made the storm’s rainfall throughout the Southeast about 10 percent heavier and the “unprecedented” rainfall totals over three days about 70 percent more likely than they would have been otherwise.

In California, where dramatic debris flows have long been a concern, climate change is making matters worse in two ways. Bigger, more destructive wildfires wipe out more of the vegetation that was stabilizing the landscape. And then atmospheric rivers—a newer phenomenon consisting of long, narrow conveyer belts of moisture—arrive, bringing a series of intense rainfall events. Between December 2022 and January 2023 nine back-to-back atmospheric rivers struck California, leading to more than 600 landslides.

Climate change is increasing landslide risk globally in other ways. In high mountain regions such as the European Alps and the Himalayas, melting permafrost and retreating glaciers are destabilizing steep slopes. A catastrophic glacier collapse in Switzerland this past summer destroyed an entire village; thankfully officials evacuated people just before it happened, but one person was killed.

Photo of landslide in upstate New York

A section of the Shingle Kill streambed 14 years after a debris flow occurred on Arizona Mountain in New York State's Catskills during intense rain. The southern slope, shown on the left, continues to erode.

Petley says the thing that’s surprised him most recently is the speed of change, especially during this past El Niño cycle. Strong rainfall events have always happened occasionally, but suddenly they are happening a lot. “I don’t think I fully understand why we’re seeing such a rapid shift to these events where a heavy rainfall will trigger 2,000 or 3,000 landslides in a relatively small area,” Petley says. In New Zealand in 2023, Cyclone Gabrielle triggered at least 100,000 landslides. Even in regions such as the Himalayas, where the monsoon season is becoming drier overall, the number of landslides is going up because the rainstorms that do arrive are more intense. “I worry a bit,” Petley says, “that the shift is happening so fast and becoming so extreme that in some places the risk is essentially unmanageable.”

Vermont, like New York State, got clobbered by Tropical Storm Irene in 2011. DeJong, the Vermont state geologist, describes Irene as a wake-up call. “The mountains,” he says with a degree of irony, “are now where hurricanes come to die.”

But it wasn’t until two freak July rainstorms—spaced exactly a year apart, one in 2023 and one in 2024—that the state’s geological survey became alarmed that landslides were going to be a much bigger problem than in the past. Given his experiences with Irene, DeJong expected the July 2023 storm to lead to maybe a handful of slides. Within a month of the storm his team had received more than 70 requests for landslide evaluations. Working on the ground in the aftermath of these two storms made DeJong realize that rainfall events at that scale “are fundamentally altering the landscape in ways that are not immediately recognizable,” he says.

Now the four-person Vermont Geological Survey team is working on putting together a landslide-susceptibility map. The goal is to start with a more technical tool for scientists that can be overlaid with forecasts from the National Weather Service, which would create debris-flow forecasts like the ones already produced by the Los Angeles Department of Public Works. If that’s successful, the next step, DeJong says, would be creating a map that’s more accessible to the public, something that a person who’s looking to buy a parcel of land could reference to do some due diligence on landslide risk.

But that gets tricky. The city of Juneau, Alaska, carried out a mapping project to evaluate levels of risk, with the aim of incorporating that risk into its land-use planning in 2024. The maps also would have highlighted concerns with existing buildings, though, meaning homeowners identified as living in high-risk areas might see their property values decline. Juneau’s susceptibility map was vehemently rejected by the community last year and was not adopted. In Vermont, as in many places, evidence of slope instability—and even past failures—hardly factors into development or the issuing of building permits.

Rising landslide risk in mountainous places also creates a difficult tension about how to adapt to the effects of climate change. Recent disasters have made clear that mountain valleys in certain regions may not be great places to live. In Vermont “we’re losing a lot of housing in our flood corridors—which is a good thing,” DeJong says. “We’re getting people out of harm’s way.” But the state, like many others around the country, has a housing crunch with the need to build more. “When we’ve lost options down in the valleys, that puts a lot of building pressure up onto our slopes,” he explains. “And it’s really hard to make the argument not to do that.” Successfully adapting to one climate effect means running headlong into another.


There are many climate-related problems to worry about in my Catskills community: the surging numbers of disease-carrying ticks, the choking out of native plants by invasive species, the hurricane-remnant floods, the decrease in winter snowfall that would replenish the aquifers, the summertime whiplash between deluge and drought. The Shingle Kill landslide wasn’t on my radar as a potential climate problem until a massive, ultraluxury resort and “branded residences” development was proposed for the hillside next to it. The plan calls for building more than 85 new structures totaling 275,593 square feet on a 102-acre site, 45 percent of which is classified as having steep slopes. To do so, developers will have to cut down about 11 acres of trees. The site, like the rest of our hamlet, has no access to municipal water or sewage. In addition to lining ponds for water storage and building a wastewater-treatment plant, a road network will be cut into the mountainside.

The public documents for the project do not appear to show that a geologist evaluated whether the weight of all that development, plus the deforestation and excavation during construction, might further destabilize the slopes of the Shingle Kill. Our town planning board approved the project in May 2025 without requiring an environmental impact statement that would have identified and attempted to mitigate the biggest hazards. (I am a member of a community group that is suing our town planning board, arguing it didn’t take a hard look at potentially significant adverse effects to the environment from this project, including on groundwater availability, erosion, flooding and landslide risk.)

Recent intense rain events “are fundamentally altering the landscape in ways that are not immediately recognizable.” —Benjamin DeJong Vermont Geological Survey

Diane and Ken Herchenroder’s house wasn’t damaged by the 2011 landslide, but the event did plenty of harm. Much of their property was rearranged by the acute displacement of raging water. The solid plug of rocks and mud, some 10 feet tall, had to be excavated from the streambed. Even once things were fixed, they didn’t want to stay. “We used to listen to the rain and the stream with the windows open, and it was very comforting,” Diane says from their house in New Hampshire, where they moved two years after the storm. “Honestly, after that slide occurred, Ken and I, I would have to say, have a little bit of post-traumatic stress from that.” Diane says her photographs of the landslide are on a CD somewhere; she hasn’t looked at them since. “I don’t really ever even talk about that day,” she says. “It was pretty devastating.”

In 2018 Joe Merlino bought the Herchenroders’ former property, where he now lives with his daughter and his mother. A few years ago they had members of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers come assess ongoing erosion along the Shingle Kill. The streambed continues to widen, and a sharp curve just upstream of Merlino’s house means floodwaters could rush right at it. He recalls that in 2021, when Tropical Storm Henri came through the Catskills, boulders smashed against the bridge that provides access between his house and his mom’s trailer. “[The Army Corps] basically told us the erosion is not going to stop,” Merlino says.

Merlino often walks along the edges of the fan with his dog, observing the changes to the old debris piles with each storm. The possibility of more landslide activity is never far from his mind, he says, especially with a major development approved for the hillside above his home.

I asked him whether he gets scared every time there’s heavy rain. “I come home from work early,” he says, to keep an eye on things and intervene if necessary. A few years ago he moved his daughter’s bedroom to the front of the house, away from the steep pitch of his backyard. “My fear is about my living room, which is in the back and has a lot of glass,” he says. “I watch the water rip around that curve, and one day something is going to come through and take the side of my house right out.”

Greene County, where the Merlino family and I both live, is one of the four counties identified by New York State as the most vulnerable to expected annual building loss from landslides in the future. The county has steep escarpments that slope into the Hudson River Valley, which is rich in clays and silts from Glacial Lake Albany, a prehistoric waterbody that drained some 10,500 years ago. “I think we’re going to see a lot more slope failures in some of these populated areas in the Hudson Valley,” Kozlowski, the New York State geologist, said in 2022.

Greene County considered landslides a threat back in 2016. In 2023 the county revisited its hazard-mitigation plan; our town, Cairo, was the only municipality out of 19 that did not participate. In the updated plan, the county removed landslides as a hazard, reasoning that they are “unlikely to lead to a disaster.”

It’s true that landslides don’t do the same economic harm to our county as flooding and ice storms. But when they do occur, rebuilding is rarely an option. When a family lost their house in the town of Catskill to a landslide after a heavy rain event in May 2024, there wasn’t much anyone could do but condemn the structure.

With funding for emergency response and climate resilience endangered at the federal level, is it worth investing in susceptibility maps for landslides that may never occur? Should people hesitate to build on potentially unstable slopes when that’s perhaps less risky than living directly in a flood path?

DeJong says these are valid questions, but after his experiences over the past few years, he sees things differently. “We in Vermont have, so far, been incredibly fortunate to not see any fatalities,” he says. He remembers an older couple who were sitting in their house in July 2023 when the slope behind it failed. The structure warped outward, bending absurdly into something “that looked like a fun house falling over on them,” he recalls. Emergency services extracted them relatively unharmed, but DeJong knows it could have been worse. It turned out a lot worse in western North Carolina during Helene, where for years many building codes dismissed the risk of construction on steep slopes.

It might take only one bad slide to change people’s minds about the risk. Before 2014, DeJong says, Washington State, much like New England, did not pay much attention to landslides and had no landslide program in its state geological survey. But then a slope in Oso, about an hour outside Seattle, experienced a catastrophic failure, taking out a neighborhood and killing 43 people. The state now takes landslides very seriously.

“The Oso slide of New England could be right around the corner,” DeJong says. “People will say, ‘Why didn’t we know about this hazard? X number of people just died.’” He hopes his team can get its landslide-susceptibility maps finished so that when big rainfall events are forecast for the Green Mountains, officials can warn people in especially risky areas. “We’re really trying to switch to being more proactive so that X never becomes a number.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Supersized data centers are coming. See how they will transform America.

These AI campuses consume more power than major U.S. cities. Their footprints are measured in miles, not feet.

Supersized data centers are coming. See how they will transform America.This coal plant in central Pennsylvania, once the largest in the state, was shuttered in 2023 after powering the region for over 50 years.Earlier this year, wrecking crews blasted the plant’s cooling towers and soaring chimneys.Rising from the dust in Homer City will be a colossal artificial intelligence data center campus that will include seven 30-acre gas generating stations on-site, fueled by Pennsylvania’s natural gas boom.December 15, 2025 at 6:00 a.m. EST6 minutes agoShawn Steffee of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers is hopeful.“The closing of the coal plant had been really brutal,” he said. “But this project just took the entire chess board and flipped it.”The Homer City facility will generate and consume as much power as all the homes in the Philadelphia urban area. It is among a generation of new supersized data centers sprouting across the country, the footprints of which are measured in miles, not feet.They are part of an AI moon shot, driven by an escalating U.S.-China war over dominance in the field. The projects are starting to transform landscapes and communities, sparking debates about what our energy systems and environment can sustain. The price includes increasing power costs for everyone and worrying surges in emissions and pollutants, according to government, industry and academic analyses.By 2030, industry and government projections show data centers could gobble up more than 10 percent of the nation’s power usage.Estimates vary, but all show a dizzying rise of between 60 and 150 percent in energy consumption by 2030. On average, they project U.S. data centers will use about 430 trillion watt-hours by 2030. That is enough electricity to power nearly 16 Chicagos.Some forecasts project it will keep growing from there.“These things are industrial on a scale I have never seen in my life,” former Google CEO Eric Schmidt told a House committee earlier this year.Power use by U.S. data centers is growing exponentially, with large forecast uncertaintySource: Washington Post analysis of IEA, BNEF, LBNL and EPRI estimates. Past uncertainty stems from varying inventories of data centers and assumptions about their utilization.Tech companies that once pledged to use clean energy alone are fast reconsidering. They now need too much uninterrupted power, too fast. According to the International Energy Agency, the No. 1 power source to meet this need will be natural gas.“While we remain committed to our climate moonshots, it’s become clear that achieving them is now more complex and challenging across every level,” Google states in its 2025 environmental impact report. The company says meeting its goal of eliminating all emissions by 2030 has become “very difficult.”Data center firms have already approached the Homer City project’s natural gas provider, EQT, seeking enough fuel to power the equivalent of eight more Homer City projects around the country, EQT CEO Toby Rice said in an interview. And EQT is just one of dozens of U.S. natural gas suppliers.What’s at stakeData centers’ surging electricity needs are straining America’s aging power grid and undercutting tech companies’ climate goals.A single supersized “data campus” would draw as much power as millions of homes.The boom is riding on burning huge amounts of planet-warming natural gas, once cast as a transition fuel on the way to a cleaner grid.Not building the projects, however, risks ceding AI dominance to China.Some question if all these gas power plants will be necessary as AI technology rapidly becomes more efficient.“We’ll be shipping more gas than we ever thought,” said Arshad Mansoor, president and CEO of the nonprofit Electric Power Research Institute. “We are even unretiring coal.”Mansoor predicts it will all work out: He and others in the industry foresee the crushing demand leading to swift breakthroughs in clean energy innovation and deployment. That could include futuristic fusion power, they said, or more conventional technologies that capture natural gas emissions.But some are more skeptical. The independent monitor charged with keeping tabs on the PJM power grid — which serves 65 million customers in the eastern U.S. — is warning that it can’t handle more data centers. It urged federal regulators to indefinitely block more data centers on its grid to protect existing customers.Even in cities yearning to become the next data center hub — with unions welcoming the burst of construction jobs and elected officials offering lucrative tax packages — some apprehension remains.“It’s going to be new to everybody,” said Steffee, of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers. “We all have to figure out how to start transitioning into this and what the ripple effects will be.”Homer City offers a glimpse of what is coming nationwide.In the Texas Panhandle, the company Fermi America broke ground this year on what it says will be a 5,800-acre complex of gas plants and giant nuclear reactors that would ultimately feed up to 18 million square feet of on-site data centers. It would dwarf Homer City in energy use.Tech companies are planning data ‘campuses’ that would dwarf existing centersIn Cheyenne, Wyoming, developers are aiming to generate 10 gigawatts of electricity for on-site data centers. That’s enough energy to power every house in Wyoming 20 times over. In rural Louisiana, Meta is building a $30 billion cluster of data center buildings that will stretch nearly the length and width of Manhattan.Such facilities will create a major climate challenge. By the mid 2030s, forecasts show the world’s data centers could drive as much carbon pollution as the New York, Chicago and Houston metro areas combined.Check our workDrone video of the Homer City power plant post-demolition courtesy of Homer City Redevelopment LLC. Photo of the power plant before demolition by Keith Srakocic/AP.The data centers map is based on extracts from datacentermap.com and CleanView. The map showing planned projects includes sites already under construction.The chart showing the aggregate power demand from U.S. data centers averages historical estimates and future projections from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, IEA, BloombergNEF and EPRI.To estimate the power consumption of a data center, The Post assumed a 67 percent utilization rate. For comparison, residential electricity use in various cities was estimated from household counts and state-level per-household averages from the EIA.

Polar bear DNA changing in response to climate change

A new study has found that polar bear DNA might be evolving to help these creatures adapt to the stresses of our changing climate. The post Polar bear DNA changing in response to climate change first appeared on EarthSky.

According to new research, polar bear DNA might be changing to help these creatures adapt to a changing climate. Image via Hans-Jurgen Mager/ Unsplash. EarthSky’s 2026 lunar calendar is available now. Get yours today! Makes a great gift. By Alice Godden, University of East Anglia. Edits by EarthSky. The Arctic Ocean current is at its warmest in the last 125,000 years, and temperatures continue to rise. Due to these warming temperatures, more than 2/3 of polar bears are expected to be extinct by 2050. Total extinction is predicted by the end of this century. But in our new study, my colleagues and I found that the changing climate has been driving changes in polar bear DNA, potentially allowing them to more readily adapt to warmer habitats. Provided these polar bears can source enough food and breeding partners, this suggests they may potentially survive these new challenging climates. Polar bear DNA is changing We discovered a strong link between rising temperatures in southeast Greenland and changes in the polar bear genome, which is the entire set of DNA found in an organism. DNA is the instruction book inside every cell, guiding how an organism grows and develops. In processes called transcription and translation, DNA is copied to generate RNA. These are messenger molecules that transmit genetic information. This can lead to the production of proteins, and copies of transposons, also known as “jumping genes.” These are mobile pieces of the genome that can move around and influence how other genes work. Different regions, different genomes Our research revealed big differences in the temperatures in the northeast of Greenland compared with the southeast. We used publicly available polar bear genetic data from a research group at the University of Washington, U.S., to support our study. This dataset was generated from blood samples collected from polar bears in both northern and south-eastern Greenland. Our work built on a Washington University study which discovered that this southeastern population of Greenland polar bears was genetically different to the north-eastern population. Southeastern bears had migrated from the north and became isolated and separate approximately 200 years ago, it found. Researchers from Washington had extracted RNA – the genetic messenger molecules – from polar bear blood samples and sequenced it. We used this sequencing to look at RNA expression – essentially showing which genes are active – in relation to the climate. This gave us a detailed picture of gene activity, including the behavior of the “jumping genes,” or transposons. Temperatures in Greenland have been closely monitored and recorded by the Danish Meteorological Institute. So we linked this climate data with the RNA data to explore how environmental changes may be influencing polar bear biology. Polar bears face challenging conditions thanks to climate change. But they might be responding to this challenge at a genetic level. Image via Dick Val Beck/ Polar Bears International. Impacts of temperature change We found that temperatures in the southeast were significantly warmer and fluctuated more than in the northeast. This creates habitat changes and challenges for the polar bears living in these regions. In the southeast of Greenland, the edge of the ice sheet – which spans 80% of Greenland – is rapidly receding. That means vast ice and habitat loss. The loss of ice is a substantial problem for the polar bears. That’s because it reduces the availability of hunting platforms to catch seals, leading to isolation and food scarcity. EarthSky’s Will Triggs spoke to Alysa McCall of Polar Bears International on Arctic Sea Ice day – July 15, 2025 – to hear about how the decline in arctic sea ice is affecting polar bears and beluga whales. How climate is changing polar bear DNA Over time, it’s not unusual for an organism’s DNA sequence to slowly change and evolve. But environmental stress, such as a warmer climate, can accelerate this process. Transposons are like genetic puzzle pieces that can rearrange themselves, sometimes helping animals adapt to new environments. They come in many different families and have slightly different behaviors, but in essence are all mobile fragments that can reinsert randomly anywhere in the genome. Approximately 38.1% of the polar bear genome is made up of transposons. For humans that figure is 45%, and plant genomes can be over 70% transposons. There are small protective molecules called piwi-interacting RNAs (piRNAs) that can silence the activity of transposons. But when an environmental stress is too strong, these protective piRNAs cannot keep up with the invasive actions of transposons. We found that the warmer southeast climate led to a mass mobilization of these transposons across the polar bear genome, changing its sequence. We also found that these transposon sequences appeared younger and more abundant in the southeastern bears. And over 1,500 of these sequences were upregulated, meaning gene activity was increased. That points to recent genetic changes that may help bears adapt to rising temperatures. What exactly is changing in polar bear DNA? Some of these elements overlap with genes linked to stress responses and metabolism, hinting at a possible role in coping with climate change. By studying these jumping genes, we uncovered how the polar bear genome adapts and responds in the shorter term to environmental stress and warmer climates. Our research found that some genes linked to heat stress, aging and metabolism are behaving differently in the southeast population of polar bears. This suggests they might be adjusting to their warmer conditions. Additionally, we found active jumping genes in parts of the genome that are involved in areas tied to fat processing, which is important when food is scarce. Considering that northern populations eat mainly fatty seals, this could mean that polar bears in the southeast are slowly adapting to eating the rougher plant-based diets that can be found in the warmer regions. Overall, climate change is reshaping polar bear habitats, leading to genetic changes. Bears of southeastern Greenland are evolving to survive these new terrains and diets. Future research could include other polar bear populations living in challenging climates. Understanding these genetic changes helps researchers see how polar bears might survive in a warming world, and which populations are most at risk. Alice Godden, Senior Research Associate, School of Biological Sciences, University of East Anglia This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Bottom line: A new study has found that polar bear DNA might be evolving to help these creatures adapt to our changing climate. Read more: Polar bears have unique ice-repelling furThe post Polar bear DNA changing in response to climate change first appeared on EarthSky.

Park Service orders changes to staff ratings, a move experts call illegal

Lower performance ratings could be used as a factor in layoff decisions and will demoralize staff, advocates say.

A top National Park Service official has instructed park superintendents to limit the number of staff who get top marks in performance reviews, according to three people familiar with the matter, a move that experts say violates federal code and could make it easier to lay off staff.Parks leadership generally evaluate individual employees annually on a five-point scale, with a three rating given to those who are successful in achieving their goals, with those exceeding expectations receiving a four and outstanding employees earning a five.Frank Lands, the deputy director of operations for the National Park System, told dozens of park superintendents on a conference call Thursday that “the preponderance of ratings should be 3s,” according to the people familiar, who were not authorized to comment publicly about the internal call.Lands said that roughly one to five percent of people should receive an outstanding rating and confirmed several times that about 80 percent should receive 3s, the people familiar said.Follow Climate & environmentThe Interior Department, which oversees the National Park Service, said in a statement Friday that “there is no percentage cap” on certain performance ratings.“We are working to normalize ratings across the agency,” the statement said. “The goal of this effort is to ensure fair, consistent performance evaluations across all of our parks and programs.”Though many employers in corporate American often instruct managers to classify a majority of employee reviews in the middle tier, the Parks Service has commonly given higher ratings to a greater proportion of employees.Performance ratings are also taken into account when determining which employees are laid off first if the agency were to go ahead with “reduction in force” layoffs, as many other departments have done this year.The order appears to violate the Code of Federal Regulations, said Tim Whitehouse, a lawyer and executive director of the nonprofit advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. The code states that the government cannot require a “forced distribution” of ratings for federal employees.“Employees are supposed to be evaluated based upon their performance, not upon a predetermined rating that doesn’t reflect how they actually performed,” he said.The Trump administration has reduced the number of parks staff this year by about 4,000 people, or roughly a quarter, according to an analysis by the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy group. Parks advocates say the administration is deliberately seeking to demoralize staff and failing to recognize the additional work they now have to do, given the exodus of employees through voluntary resignations and early retirements.Rep. Jared Huffman (D-California) said the move would artificially depress employee ratings:“You can’t square that with the legal requirements of the current regulations about how performance reviews are supposed to work.”Some details of the directive were first reported by E&E News.Park superintendents on the conference call objected to the order. Some questioned the fairness to employees whose work merited a better rating at a time when many staff are working harder to make up for the thousands of vacancies.“I need leaders who lead in adversity. And if you can’t do that, just let me know. I’ll do my best to find somebody that can,” Lands said in response, the people familiar with the call said.One superintendent who was on the call, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation, said in an interview that Lands’ statement “was meant to be a threat.”The superintendent said they were faced with disobeying the order and potentially being fired or illegally changing employees’ evaluations.“If we change these ratings to meet the quota and violated federal law, are we subject to removal because we violated federal law and the oath we took to protect the Constitution?” the superintendent said.Myron Ebell, a board member of the American Lands Council, an advocacy group supporting the transfer of federal lands to states and counties, defended the administration’s move.“It’s exactly the same thing as grade inflation at universities. Think about it. Not everybody can be smarter than average. If everyone is doing great, that’s average,” he said.Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association, said in a statement that the policy could make it easier to lay off staff, after the administration already decimated the ranks of the parks service.“After the National Park Service was decimated by mass firings and pressured staff buyouts, park rangers have been working the equivalent of second, third, or even fourth jobs protecting parks,” Pierno said.“Guidance like this could very well be setting up their staff to be cannon fodder during the next round of mass firings. This would be an unconscionable move,” she added.

Coalmine expansions would breach climate targets, NSW government warned in ‘game-changer’ report

Environmental advocates welcome Net Zero Commission’s report which found the fossil fuel was ‘not consistent’ with emissions reductions commitments Sign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastThe New South Wales government has been warned it can no longer approve coalmine developments after the state’s climate agency found new expansions would be inconsistent with its legislated emissions targets.In what climate advocates described as a significant turning point in campaigns against new fossil fuel programs, the NSW Net Zero Commission said coalmine expansions were “not consistent” with the state’s legal emissions reductions commitments of a 50% cut (compared with 2005 levels) by 2030, a 70% cut by 2035, and reaching net zero by 2050.Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletter Continue reading...

The New South Wales government has been warned it can no longer approve coalmine developments after the state’s climate agency found new expansions would be inconsistent with its legislated emissions targets.In what climate advocates described as a significant turning point in campaigns against new fossil fuel programs, the NSW Net Zero Commission said coalmine expansions were “not consistent” with the state’s legal emissions reductions commitments of a 50% cut (compared with 2005 levels) by 2030, a 70% cut by 2035, and reaching net zero by 2050.The commission’s Coal Mining Emissions Spotlight Report said the government should consider the climate impact – including from the “scope 3” emissions released into the atmosphere when most of the state’s coal is exported and burned overseas – in all coalmine planning decisions.Environmental lawyer Elaine Johnson said the report was a “game-changer” as it argued coalmining was the state’s biggest contribution to the climate crisis and that new coal proposals were inconsistent with the legislated targets.She said it also found demand for coal was declining – consistent with recent analyses by federal Treasury and the advisory firm Climate Resource – and the state government must support affected communities to transition to new industries.“What all this means is that it is no longer lawful to keep approving more coalmine expansions in NSW,” Johnson wrote on social media site LinkedIn. “Let’s hope the Department of Planning takes careful note when it’s looking at the next coalmine expansion proposal.”The Lock the Gate Alliance, a community organisation that campaigns against fossil fuel developments, said the report showed changes were required to the state’s planning framework to make authorities assess emissions and climate damage when considering mine applications.It said this should apply to 18 mine expansions that have been proposed but not yet approved, including two “mega-coalmine expansions” at the Hunter Valley Operations and Maules Creek mines. Eight coalmine expansions have been approved since the Minns Labor government was elected in 2023.Lock the Gate’s Nic Clyde said NSW already had 37 coalmines and “we can’t keep expanding them indefinitely”. He called for an immediate moratorium on approving coal expansions until the commission’s findings had been implemented.“This week, multiple NSW communities have been battling dangerous bushfires, which are becoming increasingly severe due to climate change fuelled by coalmining and burning. Our safety and our survival depends on how the NSW government responds to this report,” he said.Net zero emissions is a target that has been adopted by governments, companies and other organisations to eliminate their contribution to the climate crisis. It is sometimes called “carbon neutrality”.The climate crisis is caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases being pumped into the atmosphere, where they trap heat. They have already caused a significant increase in average global temperatures above pre-industrial levels recorded since the mid-20th century. Countries and others that set net zero emissions targets are pledging to stop their role in worsening this by cutting their climate pollution and balancing out whatever emissions remain by sucking an equivalent amount of CO2 out of the atmosphere.This could happen through nature projects – tree planting, for example – or using carbon dioxide removal technology.CO2 removal from the atmosphere is the “net” part in net zero. Scientists say some emissions will be hard to stop and will need to be offset. But they also say net zero targets will be effective only if carbon removal is limited to offset “hard to abate” emissions. Fossil use will still need to be dramatically reduced.After signing the 2015 Paris agreement, the global community asked the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess what would be necessary to give the world a chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C.The IPCC found it would require deep cuts in global CO2 emissions: to about 45% below 2010 levels by 2030, and to net zero by about 2050.The Climate Action Tracker has found more than 145 countries have set or are considering setting net zero emissions targets. Photograph: Ashley Cooper pics/www.alamy.comThe alliance’s national coordinator, Carmel Flint, added: “It’s not just history that will judge the government harshly if they continue approving such projects following this report. Our courts are likely to as well.”The NSW Minerals Council criticised the commission’s report. Its chief executive, Stephen Galilee, said it was a “flawed and superficial analysis” that put thousands of coalmining jobs at risk. He said some coalmines would close in the years ahead but was “no reason” not to approve outstanding applications to extend the operating life of about 10 mines.Galilee said emissions from coal in NSW were falling faster than the average rate of emission reduction across the state and were “almost fully covered” by the federal government’s safeguard mechanism policy, which required mine owners to either make annual direct emissions cuts or buy offsets.He said the NSW government should “reflect on why it provides nearly $7m annually” for the commission to “campaign against thousands of NSW mining jobs”.But the state’s main environment organisation, the Nature Conservation Council of NSW, said the commission report showed coalmining was “incompatible with a safe climate future”.“The Net Zero Commission has shone a spotlight. Now the free ride for coalmine pollution has to end,” the council’s chief executive, Jacqui Mumford, said.The state climate change and energy minister, Penny Sharpe, said the commission was established to monitor, report and provide independent advice on how the state was meeting its legislated emissions targets, and the government would consider its advice “along with advice from other groups and agencies”.

Nope, Billionaire Tom Steyer Is Not a Bellwether of Climate Politics

What should we make of billionaire Tom Steyer’s reinvention as a populist candidate for California governor, four years after garnering only 0.72 percent of the popular vote in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, despite obscene spending from his personal fortune? Is it evidence that he’s a hard man to discourage? (In that race, he dropped almost $24 million on South Carolina alone.) Is it evidence that billionaires get to do a lot of things the rest of us don’t? Or is it evidence that talking about climate change is for losers and Democrats need to abandon it?Politico seems to think it’s the third one: Steyer running a populist gubernatorial campaign means voters don’t care about global warming.“The billionaire environmental activist who built his political profile on climate change—and who wrote in his book last year that ‘climate is what matters most right now, and nothing else comes close’—didn’t mention the issue once in the video launching his campaign for California governor,” reporter Noah Baustin wrote recently. “That was no oversight.” Instead, “it reflects a political reality confronting Democrats ahead of the midterms, where onetime climate evangelists are running into an electorate more worried about the climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance than a warming atmosphere.”It’s hard to know how to parse a sentence like this. The “climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance” is, indisputably, a climate issue. Renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, and home insurance is spiking because increasingly frequent and increasingly severe weather events—driven by climate change—are making large swaths of the country expensive or impossible to insure. The fact that voters are struggling to pay for utilities and insurance, therefore, is not evidence that they don’t care about climate change. Instead, it’s evidence that climate change is a kitchen table issue, and politicians are, disadvantageously, failing to embrace the obviously populist message that accompanies robust climate policy. This is a problem with Democratic messaging, not a problem with climate as a topic.The piece goes on: “Climate concern has fallen in the state over time. In 2018, when Gov. Gavin Newsom was running for office, polling found that 57 percent of likely California voters considered climate change a very serious threat to the economy and quality of life for the state’s future. Now, that figure is 50 percent.”This may sound persuasive to you. But in fact, it’s a highly selective reading of the PPIC survey data linked above. What the poll actually found is that the proportion of Californians calling climate change a “very serious” threat peaked at 57 percent in 2019, fell slightly in subsequent years, then fell precipitously by 11 points between July 2022 and July 2023, before rising similarly precipitously from July 2024 to July 2025. Why did it fall so quickly from 2022 to 2023? Sure, maybe people stopped caring about climate change. Or maybe instead, the month after the 2022 poll, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, the most significant climate policy in U.S. history, and people stopped being quite so worried. Why did concern then rise rapidly between July 2024 and July 2025? Well, between those two dates, Trump won the presidential election and proceeded, along with Republicans in Congress, to dismantle anything remotely resembling climate policy. The Inflation Reduction Act fell apart. I’m not saying this is the only way to read this data. But consider this: The percentage of respondents saying they were somewhat or very worried about members of their household being affected by natural disasters actually went up over the same period. The percentage saying air pollution was “a more serious health threat in lower-income areas” nearby went up. Those saying flooding, heat waves, and wildfires should be considered “a great deal” when siting new affordable housing rose a striking 12 percentage points from 2024 to 2025, and those “very concerned” about rising insurance costs “due to climate risks” rose 14 percentage points.This is not a portrait of an electorate that doesn’t care about climate change. It’s a portrait of an electorate that may actually be very ready to hear a politician convincingly embrace climate populism—championing affordability and better material conditions for working people, in part by protecting them from the predatory industries driving a cost-of-living crisis while poisoning people.This is part of a broader problem. Currently, there’s a big push from centrist Democratic institutions to argue that the party should abandon climate issues in order to win elections. The evidence for this is mixed, at best. As TNR’s Liza Featherstone recently pointed out, Democrats’ striking victories last month showed that candidates fusing climate policy with an energy affordability message did very well. Aaron Regunberg went into further detail on why talking about climate change is a smart strategy: “Right now,” he wrote, “neither party has a significant trust advantage on ‘electric utility bills’ (D+1) or ‘the cost of living’ (R+1). But Democrats do have major trust advantages on ‘climate change’ (D+14) and ‘renewable energy development’ (D+6). By articulating how their climate and clean energy agenda can address these bread-and-butter concerns, Democrats can leverage their advantage on climate to win voters’ trust on what will likely be the most significant issues in 2026 and 2028.”One of the troubles with climate change in political discourse is that some people’s understanding of environmental politics begins and ends with the spotted owl logging battles in the 1990s. This is the sort of attitude that drives the assumption that affordability policy and climate policy are not only distinct but actually opposed. But that’s wildly disconnected from present reality. Maybe Tom Steyer isn’t the guy to illustrate that! But his political fortunes, either way, don’t say much at all about climate messaging more broadly.Stat of the Week3x as many infant deathsA new study finds that babies of mothers “whose drinking water wells were downstream of PFAS releases” died at almost three times the rate in their first year of life as babies of mothers who did not live downstream of PFAS contamination. Read The Washington Post’s report on the study here.What I’m ReadingMore than 200 environmental groups demand halt to new US datacentersAn open letter calls on Congress to pause all approvals of new data centers until regulation catches up, due to problems such as data centers’ voracious energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and water use. From The Guardian’s report:The push comes amid a growing revolt against moves by companies such as Meta, Google and Open AI to plow hundreds of billions of dollars into new datacenters, primarily to meet the huge computing demands of AI. At least 16 datacenter projects, worth a combined $64bn, have been blocked or delayed due to local opposition to rising electricity costs. The facilities’ need for huge amounts of water to cool down equipment has also proved controversial, particularly in drier areas where supplies are scarce.These seemingly parochial concerns have now multiplied to become a potent political force, helping propel Democrats to a series of emphatic recent electoral successes in governor elections in Virginia and New Jersey as well as a stunning upset win in a special public service commission poll in Georgia, with candidates campaigning on lowering power bill costs and curbing datacenters.Read Oliver Milman’s full report at The Guardian.This article first appeared in Life in a Warming World, a weekly TNR newsletter authored by deputy editor Heather Souvaine Horn. Sign up here.

What should we make of billionaire Tom Steyer’s reinvention as a populist candidate for California governor, four years after garnering only 0.72 percent of the popular vote in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, despite obscene spending from his personal fortune? Is it evidence that he’s a hard man to discourage? (In that race, he dropped almost $24 million on South Carolina alone.) Is it evidence that billionaires get to do a lot of things the rest of us don’t? Or is it evidence that talking about climate change is for losers and Democrats need to abandon it?Politico seems to think it’s the third one: Steyer running a populist gubernatorial campaign means voters don’t care about global warming.“The billionaire environmental activist who built his political profile on climate change—and who wrote in his book last year that ‘climate is what matters most right now, and nothing else comes close’—didn’t mention the issue once in the video launching his campaign for California governor,” reporter Noah Baustin wrote recently. “That was no oversight.” Instead, “it reflects a political reality confronting Democrats ahead of the midterms, where onetime climate evangelists are running into an electorate more worried about the climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance than a warming atmosphere.”It’s hard to know how to parse a sentence like this. The “climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance” is, indisputably, a climate issue. Renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, and home insurance is spiking because increasingly frequent and increasingly severe weather events—driven by climate change—are making large swaths of the country expensive or impossible to insure. The fact that voters are struggling to pay for utilities and insurance, therefore, is not evidence that they don’t care about climate change. Instead, it’s evidence that climate change is a kitchen table issue, and politicians are, disadvantageously, failing to embrace the obviously populist message that accompanies robust climate policy. This is a problem with Democratic messaging, not a problem with climate as a topic.The piece goes on: “Climate concern has fallen in the state over time. In 2018, when Gov. Gavin Newsom was running for office, polling found that 57 percent of likely California voters considered climate change a very serious threat to the economy and quality of life for the state’s future. Now, that figure is 50 percent.”This may sound persuasive to you. But in fact, it’s a highly selective reading of the PPIC survey data linked above. What the poll actually found is that the proportion of Californians calling climate change a “very serious” threat peaked at 57 percent in 2019, fell slightly in subsequent years, then fell precipitously by 11 points between July 2022 and July 2023, before rising similarly precipitously from July 2024 to July 2025. Why did it fall so quickly from 2022 to 2023? Sure, maybe people stopped caring about climate change. Or maybe instead, the month after the 2022 poll, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, the most significant climate policy in U.S. history, and people stopped being quite so worried. Why did concern then rise rapidly between July 2024 and July 2025? Well, between those two dates, Trump won the presidential election and proceeded, along with Republicans in Congress, to dismantle anything remotely resembling climate policy. The Inflation Reduction Act fell apart. I’m not saying this is the only way to read this data. But consider this: The percentage of respondents saying they were somewhat or very worried about members of their household being affected by natural disasters actually went up over the same period. The percentage saying air pollution was “a more serious health threat in lower-income areas” nearby went up. Those saying flooding, heat waves, and wildfires should be considered “a great deal” when siting new affordable housing rose a striking 12 percentage points from 2024 to 2025, and those “very concerned” about rising insurance costs “due to climate risks” rose 14 percentage points.This is not a portrait of an electorate that doesn’t care about climate change. It’s a portrait of an electorate that may actually be very ready to hear a politician convincingly embrace climate populism—championing affordability and better material conditions for working people, in part by protecting them from the predatory industries driving a cost-of-living crisis while poisoning people.This is part of a broader problem. Currently, there’s a big push from centrist Democratic institutions to argue that the party should abandon climate issues in order to win elections. The evidence for this is mixed, at best. As TNR’s Liza Featherstone recently pointed out, Democrats’ striking victories last month showed that candidates fusing climate policy with an energy affordability message did very well. Aaron Regunberg went into further detail on why talking about climate change is a smart strategy: “Right now,” he wrote, “neither party has a significant trust advantage on ‘electric utility bills’ (D+1) or ‘the cost of living’ (R+1). But Democrats do have major trust advantages on ‘climate change’ (D+14) and ‘renewable energy development’ (D+6). By articulating how their climate and clean energy agenda can address these bread-and-butter concerns, Democrats can leverage their advantage on climate to win voters’ trust on what will likely be the most significant issues in 2026 and 2028.”One of the troubles with climate change in political discourse is that some people’s understanding of environmental politics begins and ends with the spotted owl logging battles in the 1990s. This is the sort of attitude that drives the assumption that affordability policy and climate policy are not only distinct but actually opposed. But that’s wildly disconnected from present reality. Maybe Tom Steyer isn’t the guy to illustrate that! But his political fortunes, either way, don’t say much at all about climate messaging more broadly.Stat of the Week3x as many infant deathsA new study finds that babies of mothers “whose drinking water wells were downstream of PFAS releases” died at almost three times the rate in their first year of life as babies of mothers who did not live downstream of PFAS contamination. Read The Washington Post’s report on the study here.What I’m ReadingMore than 200 environmental groups demand halt to new US datacentersAn open letter calls on Congress to pause all approvals of new data centers until regulation catches up, due to problems such as data centers’ voracious energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and water use. From The Guardian’s report:The push comes amid a growing revolt against moves by companies such as Meta, Google and Open AI to plow hundreds of billions of dollars into new datacenters, primarily to meet the huge computing demands of AI. At least 16 datacenter projects, worth a combined $64bn, have been blocked or delayed due to local opposition to rising electricity costs. The facilities’ need for huge amounts of water to cool down equipment has also proved controversial, particularly in drier areas where supplies are scarce.These seemingly parochial concerns have now multiplied to become a potent political force, helping propel Democrats to a series of emphatic recent electoral successes in governor elections in Virginia and New Jersey as well as a stunning upset win in a special public service commission poll in Georgia, with candidates campaigning on lowering power bill costs and curbing datacenters.Read Oliver Milman’s full report at The Guardian.This article first appeared in Life in a Warming World, a weekly TNR newsletter authored by deputy editor Heather Souvaine Horn. Sign up here.

Suggested Viewing

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.