G2. Local Greens

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

File:  ltr to Congress, 76 scientists 2012.pdfResource Type: Letters

Dear friends, 

Restore the Delta’s Delta Science Program officially wrapped up its summer water quality monitoring at the end of September. Since 2022, our water quality monitoring program includes:

• Recording water temperatures and weather conditions
• Testing for harmful algal blooms (HABs)
• Assessing salinity levels

New this year, in collaboration with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (Region 5 of the State Water Board), we added E. coli collection and sampling to our regular monitoring routine. With the introduction of golden mussels into the Delta via Rough and Ready Island and the added E. coli sampling, we have a few new topics to cover, and we want to help break them down.

1. First off, let’s talk about HABs and what our monitoring teams observed in the field.

A bit of positive news for the community: We didn’t see much bloom activity at all this summer; otherwise, you would’ve heard from us earlier this summer through social media to exercise caution while recreating. While there were small traces of blooms, which looked like small flakes in the water at Buckley Cove in Stockton, the blooms posed no threat to recreation due to the low quantities and lack of toxin concern. The lack of HABs may have come as a surprise to many, given that we experienced very hot periods this summer, and HABs thrive in warm water. However, California did experience a wet water year, which kept consistent flows in the San Joaquin River during the hottest periods, according to the few flow monitors near Stockton on the California Data Exchange Center (CDEC). We hope to see this trend continue, but there are concerns with the introduction of golden mussels and a potential interaction with HABs proliferation.

2. Golden mussels were first detected in the Delta in October of 2024 at Rough and Ready Island, near Stockton; learn more about them from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife here.

Within the 2 years that golden mussels were introduced into the Delta, they have spread across California’s water system, with potential to impact drinking water systems across the state. In the field this year, our team observed that the waterways are very clear, so much so that our team was able to see the bottom of the water bodies clearly, which we haven’t been able to do before. What might this have to do with golden mussels? Well, golden mussels are filter feeders, and they have been spotted in large clusters around a majority of the sites that RTD’s monitoring team has been sampling. Although filtering can seem like a great thing because clear water must mean the water is clean, that’s not necessarily the case. One problem is that as golden mussels filter, they release nutrients like phosphorus and nitrogen, which HABs thrive on (Zhang et al. 2024). There’s also the concern of how this clearer water may affect wildlife species within the different water columns – a certain level of turbidity is important for species survival.  Golden mussels are a problem that we don’t fully understand yet, which is why we are glad that Assembly Member Rhodesia Ransom was able to secure 6 million dollars for management and response from State Water agencies.

3. Sampling E. coli levels throughout the Delta this summer.

Overall, much of Stockton fell below the recreational E. coli threshold, but throughout different times of the season, two sites became areas of concern. For one week in June, the Mormon Slough had levels that tripled the recreational-concern threshold of 320 MPN (MPN, the most probable number, is a measure for E. coli). The main concern we saw was at the end of Yosemite Lake on the Smith Canal, at American Legion Park, where many people fish.  The E. coli levels were at their worst, recorded at 8 times the 320 MPN threshold at one point. These levels eventually declined to 2-4 times the threshold in May through July. The levels continued to fluctuate, dropping below recreational levels before spiking to 8 times the threshold again in mid-September. These numbers were a cause for concern, especially for those fishing at American Legion Park and pets that roam the surrounding neighborhood.

Our team would like to acknowledge that this work does not get done without the support we receive. The collaboration with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board on both the HABs and E. coli testing supplies was pivotal in helping us to maintain our testing.  

We also couldn’t have gotten this work done without the help of our Climate Water Advocates, who quickly adapted to the new monitoring procedures. Although Summer has come to an end, we hope to continue addressing water quality issues with our monitoring programs and to keep our Delta communities informed.

• View this testing season’s recorded E. coli data here.
• Stay up to date with statewide HABs reporting, including the data we have collected, available here.

References: 

Zhang, J., Xu, M., & Yang, Y. (2024). Assessing the effects of environmental factors on filtration rate of golden mussel (Limnoperna fortunei). Ecological Indicators, 158, 111544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolind.2024.111544

Top Reasons to Oppose CO2 Injection Wells in Nebraska:

• Property Rights
• CO2 Leaks and Safety
• Drinking Water Endangerment
• Aquifer Contamination Risks
• Increased Energy Costs
• 45Q Tax Credit $$$ Giveaway

The “Carbon Capture” Scheme

• Can seek to use eminent domain to acquire “pore space” underneath landowners’ property to inject CO2 under their homes
• CO2 is a toxic asphyxiant. A pipeline rupture can spread a lethal plume of CO2 over two miles, displacing oxygen.
• CO2 can escape along injection or monitoring wells, abandoned wells, or through cracks in the caprock. There is no guarantee that CO2 can be permanently sequestered for hundreds of years without it leaking. If it leaks, it can contaminate drinking water with heavy metals.
• CCS increases water use by up to 55% for each capture site. Much of this is used for cooling
• Carbon capture requires 13-44% more energy, increasing electricity costs by 25-50%
• CCS requires tax credits (“45Q”) in order to be economically viable, equating to hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars given away

Bold Alliance was an original signatory to a 2024 letter, “EPA Must Immediately Stop CO2 Injection Wells to Protect Public Safety and Drinking Water,” that calls on EPA to suspend permits for injecting carbon dioxide (CO2) underground, permitting of new CO2 injection wells, approval of primacy applications for CO2 injection wells, and to direct states with primacy over injection wells to halt injections and permitting of wells.

Our demands in the letter stemmed from:

1) multiple leaks of CO2 and equipment failures at the Archer Daniels Midland (ADM) facility in Decatur, Illinois;

2) new information about an increase in non-compliance violations in Texas Class II wells starting in 2011;

3) a higher percentage of Class II Texas CO2 injection wells that have failed one or more mechanical integrity tests when these wells are compared to other Class II wells; and

4) findings at EPA that steel used for well construction at the ADM site, and others around the country, is prone to corrosion in CO2 injection wells.

The events at the ADM facility have brought to light systemic problems with CCS technology and its regulation, raising serious concerns that CCS is neither safe nor viable. Reported failures at monitoring and detection systems due to corrosion and the migration of CO2 outside the intended storage zone expose multiple levels of failure. What is perhaps more concerning is that EPA has identified that injection wells around the country have the same design and material flaws that led to corrosion at at least one of ADM’s leaking wells, raising concerns that CO2 injection wells could very well be leaking significant quantities of CO2 into groundwater and the atmosphere.

Aquifer & Drinking Water Contamination

The threat to drinking water and public health posed by CO2 injection wells cannot be overstated given that leaks from the injection of CO2 into underground saline formations can migrate into overlying freshwater aquifers and be released into the atmosphere.

Once CO2 dissolves in water, it forms carbonic acid, which lowers the pH of the water, eroding and corroding rock and well equipment, and mobilizing toxic metals such as lead, arsenic, and mercury. These metals are particularly concerning for drinking water sources near injection sites.

CO2 Pipeline & Equipment Ruptures

The release of CO2 into the atmosphere adversely impacts our climate. Even at relatively low concentrations, it can impair cognitive, cardiovascular, neurologic, hearing, and vision function through asphyxiation and toxicity as was, in part, demonstrated by a CO2 pipeline rupture in Satartia, Mississippi that sent dozens of people to the hospital and highlighted the challenges to first responders needing to respond to CO2 releases into the atmosphere.

Earthquakes

Another serious concern associated with CO2 sequestration is induced seismicity from injecting CO2 underground, which can cause fractures and re-activate faults, either of which can result in additional pathways for CO2 migration.

Scientists have expressed concern that injecting larger volumes of CO2, at higher pressures and for longer duration associated with CCS has an even higher probability of inducing earthquakes. But, U.S. EPA Class VI permitting does not address induced earthquakes.

Lack of Proper Regulation & Oversight

In combination with malfunctioning equipment, the injections can create unpredictable and widespread impacts from leaks on the water we drink and the air we breathe. EPA’s oversight of carbon dioxide injection wells is lacking in general, and is highlighted by the lack of transparency and oversight relating to these well failures.

These concerns are not limited to Class VI wells like the one operated by ADM, but extend to Class II wells, a much larger universe of thousands of potential injection sites across the country used to extract oil. The practice of injecting CO2 into these wells carries many of the same risks associated with Class VI wells used for CCS; however, the regulations governing Class II wells are less stringent, posing an even greater risk of leaks.

The risks associated with carbon capture and storage, particularly the injection of CO2 into Class II and Class VI wells, are too great to ignore. The recent events at the ADM facility in Decatur are a warning sign that current regulatory practices are inadequate.

45Q Tax Credit for Carbon Capture is an $800 Billion Giveaway

A blank check that increases the federal deficit: The 45Q program that is the financial lynchpin for these Carbon Capture and Storage projects has no financial cap making it an unlimited tax dollar giveaway. The Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis studied announced CCS projects and found that, if all these projects are constructed, 45Q tax credit claims between now and 2042 would total approximately $835 billion. If Congress extends the 45Q tax credit to allow continued use of these facilities beyond their first 12 years of operation, the total call on federal dollars could be in the trillions.

 

 

Nebraska Seeking “Primacy” From U.S. EPA to Regulate CO2 Injection Wells

Nebraska has applied to the U.S. EPA to take over the regulation, including granting of permits and monitoring of CO2 injection wells in the state. If the EPA grants Nebraska’s application, that would mean the Nebraska Department of Water, Energy & Environment (DWEE NE) would instead be tasked with oversight of the entire process.

CO2 Threats to Nebraska: Aquifer Contamination

There are currently applications pending for carbon injection wells in some far western Nebraska panhandle counties, a location that also includes the High Plains Aquifer and secondary aquifers:

High Plains Aquifer Secondary Aquifers in Nebraska

CO2 Threats to Nebraska: Earthquakes

University of Nebraska: Seismicity in Nebraska and adjacent states: The historical perspective and current trends

“A sudden spike in earthquake events has been observed in central Nebraska. Since April 2018, 26 earthquakes with equivalent moment magnitudes from 2.7 to 4.1 occurred, clustered tightly in Custer County. A similar cluster of 24 earthquakes with equivalent moment magnitudes from 2.6 to 3.7 occurred in Jewell County in northern Kansas in 2017. We have compiled an earthquake database for Nebraska and parts of adjacent states from different sources to determine whether these recent earthquake spikes are consistent with historic seismicity. We identified two historic earthquake clusters occurring in our study area. The first contained 32 events and was active in Red Willow County in southwestern Nebraska from 1977 to 1982. As it coincides spatially with the Sleepy Hollow oil field, it may be related to enhanced oil recovery from that field, although it is also located at the edge of the Chadron-Cambridge Arch. The second historical earthquake cluster is located in Pawnee and Richardson counties in southwestern Nebraska and includes eight earthquakes with equivalent moment magnitudes of 2.3 to 2.8 that occurred in a period from 1982 to 1989 over the Nemaha uplift and appear to be related to the Humboldt fault. We note an increase in both maximum magnitude, as well as in the cumulative seismic moment per cluster with time.”

Induced Earthquakes
Injection of CO2 also can induce earthquakes large enough to damage the wellbore or break the caprock. We know injecting produced water from oil and gas production far below groundwater or aquifers causes earthquakes:

• 5.2 M earthquake in TX in November 2023, the 4th largest in the state.
• At least 10 earthquakes occurred in OK on the same day in January 2024, the largest of which was 4.3.

Scientists have expressed concern that injecting larger volumes of CO2, at higher pressures and for longer duration associated with CCS has an even higher probability of inducing earthquakes. But, U.S. EPA Class VI permitting does not address induced earthquakes.

“Orphaned” oil & gas extraction wells

Abandoned wells – another path for leakage
There are thousands of oil and gas wells across central and southern Illinois. This map shows only “orphaned wells” – unplugged wells – which total over 4,000.  The Illinois Department of Natural Resources says they believe there are more than 32,000 oil & gas wells in Illinois, but acknowledges they don’t know where all of them are:

• Old wells can provide a pathway for CO2 to escape containment and rise to the surface.
• Even “plugged wells” are at risk – carbonic acid can erode cement.

An old well released CO2 near a Wyoming school in 2017, requiring evacuation & school shutdown for months.

Out of Sight, Out of Mind?
Supercritical CO2 is highly pressurized. Once injected underground, it moves both laterally and vertically, putting pressure on weak spots of the containment area.

We don’t have a lot of history to show success:

• It took 27 years before a CCS project in Norway began to leak and cause concern 

• ADM has been sequestering CO2 for 12 years, but it is a small project storing an average of just 420,000 tons each year since 2016 (less than 1/2 of what was promised).

Projects in Illinois now being reviewed by the U.S. EPA are nearly 100 times the size of ADM’s Decatur project. One Earth Sequestration LLC’s application shows it’s project would be 23 times the size.

How can we be sure CO2 won’t leak? We can’t.

The post Don’t Let Nebraska Become a CO2 Waste Dump appeared first on Bold Nebraska.

Agreement hides largest costs to North Carolinians and rebates upfront expenses to the tech billionaires

Last week, Duke Energy gained deceptive headlines and gushing praise after claiming its recent deal with tech oligarchs would protect other customers from the costs of providing power to controversial new A.I. data centers. In truth, the agreement cleverly excludes billions in coming expenses for new power plants to fuel these massive developments.  

The arrangement deals only with upgrades to grid equipment such as power lines and poles – not expensive new generating facilities. Duke says that data center developers would “pay” upfront for the grid upgrades, but the deal only involves letters of credit – or guarantees to Duke that developers would pay if they break their contracts. Otherwise, costs would be borne by other customers. 

Duke Energy also misled the public by framing the issue as a done deal – a wonderful one for data centers! – just because the Charlotte-based corporation reached agreement with the tech billionaires. In reality, the Commission still has a say, and the courts might also become involved. 

On top of it all, the negotiations locked out many interested parties by being announced and held within another ongoing Utilities Commission proceeding. Even a Utilities Commissioner, Donald van der Vaart, said that the process was exclusive and not an “adequate vehicle” for resolving the critically important issue.

This is one of Duke Energy’s biggest scandals ever. It seeks to paper over two of the public’s biggest concerns: that Duke Energy and A.I. data centers are driving up power bills and massively expanding fossil fuels – even as 2026 continues breaking records for cascading climate disasters in the US and across the world.

Duke Energy has claimed that its massive planned expansion of fracked-gas-fired power plants is to serve all customers, but NC WARN has proven that the demand for new plants is coming from the very data centers that Duke Energy spends millions to recruit.

NC WARN filed a demand on October 1 for all records from the Governor’s Office and Commerce Department pertaining to their assistance to Duke Energy in recruiting the data centers. 

Last week, NC WARN launched a statewide petition drive calling on Gov. Josh Stein to use his authority and political power to implement a 2-year moratorium on data centers. 

The Governor helped fuel the data center frenzy and massive backlash. Now, it’s on him to freeze current data center development and protect North Carolinians from further backroom scheming.

###

Now in its 38th year, NC WARN is building people power in the climate and energy justice movement to persuade or require Charlotte-based Duke Energy – one of the world’s largest climate polluters – to make a quick transition to renewable, affordable power generation and energy efficiency in order to avert climate tipping points and ongoing rate hikes. 

The post Duke Energy’s Latest Lie: Backroom Deal “Protects” Other Customers from A.I. Data Center Costs — NC WARN News Release appeared first on NC WARN.

The Cobbs Creek Community Greening Plan Steering Committee is seeking proposals from qualified consultants and planning firms to help develop a community-led greening plan for Cobbs Creek Park, its trail system, and surrounding neighborhoods in West and Southwest Philadelphia.

The plan will focus on:

• Restoring and protecting the park and watershed
• Improving park access and maintenance
• Expanding environmental education and programming
• Strengthening community stewardship

The selected consultant will work with residents, community organizations, and City agencies to develop a plan that identifies priority projects, funding opportunities, and strategies for long-term implementation.

The project is supported by funding from the William Penn Foundation, with Clean Air Council and the Water Center at Penn serving as administrative partners.

Important Dates

Deadline for Written Questions: October 16, 2026 at 11:59 p.m. ET

Proposal Submission Deadline: October 30, 2026 at 11:59 p.m. ET

Interested in submitting a proposal?

Review the full Request for Proposal for qualifications, scope of work, and submission requirements.

VIEW THE FULL RFP

Long before we strung together the words “national wildlife refuge,” people were already paying attention to what made Alaska’s northeastern corner extraordinary. They saw a landscape where rivers ran wild from the Brooks Range toward the Arctic Ocean, where vast herds of caribou moved across the tundra with the seasons, and where the coastal plain provided essential habitat for polar bears, migratory birds and countless other species. For the Gwich’in people, who have lived across what is now northeastern Alaska and northwestern Canada for generations, this landscape is also home—and the Porcupine Caribou Herd that migrates through it is central to their culture, food systems and way of life. 

That relationship with the land goes back thousands of years. Gwich’in communities have followed the seasonal movements of the Porcupine Caribou Herd across the region, relying on caribou for food and passing knowledge about the animals and their habitat from one generation to the next. The herd’s journey between its wintering grounds and calving grounds on the Arctic coastal plain is one of the great migrations of the North, and for the Gwich’in, the coastal plain is more than important wildlife habitat. It is sacred ground—a place where the caribou give birth and begin the next generation. 

That deep relationship is part of what makes the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge so extraordinary. The Refuge is not an empty wilderness waiting to be discovered or developed. It is a living landscape that sustains people and wildlife together, as it has for generations. 

The story of the Refuge is also part of a much larger American idea: that there should be places set aside not for development, but for wildlife. The National Wildlife Refuge System began in 1903, when President Theodore Roosevelt established Florida’s Pelican Island as the nation’s first wildlife refuge to protect birds from plume hunting. Over the decades that followed, the system grew into a network of hundreds of refuges protecting habitat across the country, from coastal wetlands and grasslands to forests, rivers and Arctic tundra. 

These places serve a simple but increasingly important purpose. Wildlife needs somewhere to live, and people need healthy lands and waters that can sustain them. 

For migratory species, that need is especially clear. A bird may spend one season in Alaska and the next thousands of miles away in another state or another country. A caribou herd may travel hundreds of miles across its range in search of food and suitable conditions. Protecting the places these animals depend on means recognizing that wildlife does not live according to the boundaries we have drawn on a map. 

The Arctic Refuge is one of the clearest examples of what that kind of protection can make possible. In 1960, President Dwight Eisenhower established the 8.9-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Range after years of advocacy from conservationists including Olaus and Mardy Murie, who understood that the region’s extraordinary wildlife and wilderness values deserved lasting protection. Twenty years later, Congress passed the Alaska National Interest Lands Conservation Act, dramatically expanding the protected area and creating the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge we know today. 

At nearly 20 million acres, the Arctic Refuge is larger than many U.S. states. Its landscape stretches from the Arctic Ocean across the Brooks Range and into boreal forests, encompassing mountains, rivers, wetlands and the coastal plain. It provides habitat for the Porcupine Caribou Herd, polar bears, muskoxen, Dall sheep, wolves and hundreds of species of birds, including migratory birds that travel thousands of miles to reach Alaska each year. 

For the Gwich’in, protecting this landscape has always been inseparable from protecting the caribou and the future of their communities. The Porcupine Caribou Herd ranges across Alaska and Canada, crossing an international border that means little to the animals themselves. Its annual migration has sustained Gwich’in communities for generations, and the health of the herd remains closely tied to the health of the lands and waters it travels through. The Gwich’in have therefore been among the strongest and most enduring voices defending the Arctic Refuge’s coastal plain from oil and gas development. Their opposition is rooted not only in concern for a particular ecosystem, but in a relationship with the land and caribou that reaches back thousands of years. 

That history matters because the Arctic Refuge is not simply a place we protect for wildlife that people might someday come to see. It is a place where wildlife continues to sustain human communities, where Indigenous knowledge and traditions remain alive, and where the relationship between people and the land is still visible across the landscape. 

Today, that relationship faces growing pressure. The Arctic Refuge has been targeted for oil and gas development for decades, and efforts to industrialize the coastal plain continue despite the risks to wildlife, ecosystems and the people who depend on them. Yet the reason the Refuge exists in the first place has not changed. This is a place where caribou need room to migrate, where polar bears need habitat to den, where migratory birds return each summer, and where Gwich’in communities maintain a relationship with the land that has endured for generations. 

National Wildlife Refuge Week is a chance to celebrate that idea. Across the country, refuges give wildlife habitat to survive while protecting the lands and waters that sustain communities. They preserve places that might otherwise be lost and maintain the ecological connections that stretch far beyond the boundaries of any single refuge. 

And nowhere is that responsibility more visible than in Alaska. 

The Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is part of a much larger story about what we choose to protect and what we choose to pass on. Its future belongs in the hands of the people, communities and wildlife who depend on it—not the oil companies that have spent decades trying to industrialize it. 

When we protect the Arctic Refuge, we are protecting more than a spectacular landscape. We are giving caribou room to migrate, birds a place to return, bears a place to raise their young and Gwich’in communities the opportunity to continue a relationship with the land that has sustained their people for generations. 

That is worth celebrating this National Wildlife Refuge Week and worth protecting for generations to come. 

Photo credit: Dave Shreffler

It has been a hard-fought year for Alaska’s public lands, and few places have felt the pressure more intensely than the Western Arctic. 

Stretching across more than 23 million acres of federal public land, what is formally known as the National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska (NPRA) is one of the largest expanses of public land in the country. It is also one of the most ecologically important places in the Arctic, supporting caribou herds, migratory birds, fish, polar bears, and other wildlife, as well as the Alaska Native communities whose cultures, livelihoods, and traditions are deeply connected to these lands and waters.  

For decades, the NPRA—or what we call the Western Arctic—has been a place where the public has fought to balance the demands of development with the extraordinary ecological and cultural values of the region. 

This year, that balance has been under relentless pressure. 

The Lease Sales 

In March, the Administration held an oil and gas lease sale in the Western Arctic that was devastating to witness. Industry showed up with the money and interest to claim huge portions of this public landscape, with more than 1.3 million acres ultimately leased.  

Familiar names were among the bidders, including ConocoPhillips, which has previously talked about pursuing a “smaller footprint” in Alaska and has relinquished leases in the Western Arctic in the past. ExxonMobil also bid on tracts along the shores of Teshekpuk Lake, one of the most important and ecologically sensitive places in the entire Western Arctic. The largest spender at the sale was Repsol, a foreign Spanish oil company. 

For a region so often invoked in conversations about American energy independence, it is worth taking a close look at who is actually lining up to develop these public lands, and who stands to benefit from doing so. The companies placing bids may have different histories and different corporate strategies, but they share an interest in securing access to some of the most consequential public lands in the Arctic.  

You can read more details in our press release here.  

For those of us who care deeply about public lands, the lease sale was a crushing day. These places are more than mere acreage or parcels available for companies to acquire. The Western Arctic is a landscape of extraordinary scale and ecological importance, and decisions made there reverberate far beyond the boundaries of individual lease tracts. 

But we did not let the lease sale silence us. 

Instead, Alaska Wilderness League and our supporters launched a corporate accountability campaign aimed directly at the companies that had chosen to pursue oil and gas development in the Western Arctic. Thousands of people took to social media to make their views known, flooding corporate accounts with comments and questions and demanding that these companies answer for their plans in the Arctic. It was one way for people across the country to remind these corporations that public lands come with a public interest — and that the American people are paying attention to what happens on them. 

We’re still bringing that energy. Unfortunately, so is Big Oil. 

Opening The Door Wider 

In July, the Bureau of Land Management proposed another major change that could have consequences across the Western Arctic. The proposal, developed with significant input from the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, would make it easier for companies to advance development projects in the Western Arctic while limiting opportunities for public oversight and participation. 

The proposal comes with the familiar trappings of public engagement: a 60-day comment period, public meetings, and virtual hearings. Those opportunities matter, and people across the country have made use of them. But the substance of the proposal raises much larger questions about what meaningful public participation looks like when the rules governing development are being rewritten to make development easier in the first place. 

The Western Arctic deserves careful review of major projects because the stakes are enormous. The region contains wetlands, rivers, lakes, coastal areas, migration routes, and critical habitat that sustain wildlife and communities across the Arctic. Changes to the way development is reviewed can affect far more than a single project or lease block, particularly when they reduce opportunities to evaluate cumulative impacts and hear from the people who know these lands best. 

So we showed up. 

Members of the public packed hearings and meetings, submitted comments, and made their voices heard. More than 80 people testified during the public hearings, calling in from across the country — from Alaska to Maine and communities in between. Their messages varied, but the concern was unmistakable: decisions about the future of the Western Arctic deserve meaningful public scrutiny, and people expect the federal government to listen before making changes that could shape this landscape for decades. 

Those comments have been submitted to the Bureau of Land Management, and the public comment period remains open through November 9. 

If you haven’t yet weighed in, you can take action here. 

A Familiar Playbook 

The proposed BLM rule is only one piece of a much larger effort to change how development happens in the Western Arctic. 

The Administration has also moved toward codifying a categorical exclusion for certain exploratory activities in the Western Arctic, a step that could allow these efforts to move forward without undergoing the full environmental review typically required under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 

Environmental review is one of the primary ways the public gets to understand what a proposed project could mean for wildlife, habitat, communities, and the broader landscape before decisions are made. It provides a process for identifying impacts, considering alternatives, and bringing information into the public record. 

Eliminating that review means reducing opportunities to ask hard questions before bulldozers, roads, drill rigs, and other industrial infrastructure arrive. 

Taken together, these changes point toward a broader shift in how the Western Arctic is being managed. Longstanding safeguards are being reconsidered or dismantled, opportunities for public participation are being narrowed, and the rules governing development are being rewritten in ways that could make it easier for industry to move forward. 

The Western Arctic has spent decades at the center of debates about how much development is appropriate on public lands and where the lines should be drawn to protect places that are especially important for wildlife and communities. Those debates are not going away, but neither should the public’s role in them. 

This is Public Land 

It can be easy, after another lease sale or another proposed rule change, to feel overwhelmed by the sheer number of threats facing Alaska’s public lands. But the scale of the challenge is also a reminder of why public engagement matters. 

The Western Arctic belongs to all of us. 

It belongs to the people who live closest to it and depend on its lands and waters. It belongs to the caribou that travel across it, the birds that migrate thousands of miles to reach it, and the fish and other wildlife that depend on its interconnected wetlands, rivers, lakes, and coastal waters. And as public land, it belongs to the millions of Americans who may never set foot in the Arctic but still have a stake in what happens there. 

That public interest deserves a voice in every decision that shapes the future of this extraordinary place. 

Sometimes that means showing up when the government hands us the microphone. Sometimes it means creating enough public pressure that decision-makers have to listen. Sometimes it means holding corporations accountable for the choices they make on public lands. And sometimes it means doing all three at once. 

The fight for the Western Arctic has been long, and this year has brought more than its share of difficult days. But across the country, people continue to speak up for these lands. They are submitting comments, showing up at hearings, calling out corporate actions, and reminding decision-makers that the Western Arctic is worth protecting. 

We are deeply grateful to everyone who has stood with us through this fight. 

There is still a long road ahead, and there is still plenty of work to do. But we’re here for it — and we’re not going quietly. 

Photos: © Florian Schulz / visionsofthewild.com

Bold is offering local organizers the opportunity to host their own phone banks for our endorsed candidates, and providing our hosts with a “Phonebank ToGo” kit that includes t-shirts, stickers, buttons, and gift cards to buy snacks for your phone bankers!

Fill out the form below to organize your Phonebank ToGo and Bold will arrange to drop off your supply basket. 

Phonebank ToGo Supply Kit includes: 

• Instructions
• Invitation graphic to share on social media
• BOLD Shirts for you and your pals
• Gift card for Dinner and or Snacks
• Gift Card for Butterfly Bakery
• Stickers and Pencils
• Thank you gift for the PhoneBank ToGo Host

How to Organize Your Phonebank ToGo:

1. Choose a BOLD Endorsed Candidate to host a phonebank for:
   Brian Seck
   SuAnn Witt
   Rick Vest
   George Dungan
   Sean Flowerday
   Jess Goldoni
   Carol Blood
   Sara Kohen
   Cindy Johnson
   Cindy Maxwell Ostdiek
2. Pick your date and time!
3. Invite your friends. (This is a virtual phone bank, so you can phone bank from anywhere.)
4. Submit t-shirt sizes for you and all your volunteers on the form
5. We will deliver your PhoneBank ToGo supply basket

Loading…

The post Be a BOLD Volunteer: Host a Phonebank appeared first on Bold Nebraska.

The company running the West Newton oil and gas operation in East Yorkshire has failed to file its annual accounts on time.

Extract from Companies House listing for Rathlin Energy (UK) Limited 13/10/26

The latest financial figures from Rathlin Energy (UK) Limited were 13 days overdue today.

Companies House said the accounts for the year should have submitted by 30 September 2026 for the year up to 31 December 2025.

Previous Rathlin accounts have been filed by the deadline.

Rathlin Energy operates two sites in Holderness: West Newton-A and West Newton-B.

The company has given notice of plans to start lower-volume fracking at West Newton-A and an extended well test before the end of the year.

Pre-operational conditions for the planning permission, including passing places on the lorry route, have now been met.

But a local campaigner has filed a legal challenge against the Environment Agency (EA) over its approval of a permit for the fracking operations.

He is also seeking an interim injunction to halt the work until the EA case has been decided.

Companies Houses fines firms that are up to one month late or more with their accounts.

Rathlin Energy is a subsidiary of Reabold Resources and classified as a private company. The fine for private companies that are up to one month late is £150, rising to £1,500 for more than six months late.

By KAY MATTHEWS

Making a movie about the Hermit’s Peak/Calf Canyon Fire is not for the weak of heart. Untangling the tension between those who suffered so much destruction and those, namely the US Forest Service, that caused that suffering, requires courage and tact. Fortunately, a talented filmmaker named Hillary Bachelder has both, and her film, “Burn, Scar,” is an achingly fair and honest assessment of what happened. The first showing in New Mexico will be at the Santa Fe Film Festival, October 15. Starting Friday, October 30, the film will show in Las Vegas at the Indigo Theater, 5 pm and 7:45 pm with multiple showings throughout the week. Tickets are available at Indigo Theater.

In April of 2022 a prescribed fire set by the Forest Service near Hermit’s Peak in Mora County jumped its perimeter boundary. Soon after, a previously prescribed burn in a nearby canyon that had smoldered under the winter snows erupted into a fire that joined the fire near Hermit’s Peak. In total, what became known as the Hermit’s Peak/Calf Canyon Fire burned 341,471 acres and destroyed 903 structures in Mora, San Miguel, and Taos counties.

Before I continue with this review, I have a disclaimer. I contributed some of the video footage and photos used in the film and know many of the people who are featured and interviewed, including Antonio “Ike” DeVargas, about whom I wrote a book. Hopefully that adds to, rather than detracts from, the review.

This film rests on the shoulders of the narrators Bachelder chose to tell the story. It begins in 2022, when the fires erupted, and ends in 2025, when Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)money finally compensates many of those who lost their homes and livelihoods.

Here are the protagonists:

• Ernie is a handsome cattle rancher and acequia mayordomo who simmers with anger over the impacts of the fire and the negligence of the Forest Service.
• Martin, a gentle man, works to rebuild his grandparents’ house and fence his cows (whom he names), waiting for FEMA reimbursements while he goes into debt.
• Dennis is the Santa Fe National Forest Fire Ecologist who takes responsibility for the fire but is adamant that fire will always be part of the landscape and needs to be managed
• Angie is the District Ranger at Canjilon and works with the people of Rio Arriba County to integrate thinning and prescribed fire into the community after the fire
• Antonia is an Albuquerque lawyer who comes back to her el norte home to help everyone file their claims with FEMA for compensation
• Moises is a Rio Arriba County Commissioner who opposes the proposed thinning and prescribed burning on the land near his home in Canjilon
• Ike is the longtime activist who founded La Raza Unida Party in Rio Arriba County and the small logging company La Companía de Ocho.

These people take us through story as the fire erupts and spreads to the communities. The film’s footage of the blaze is unsettling, as acres and acres of trees are scorched and homes burned to the ground. The Forest Service is omnipresent, holding uncomfortable meetings with community members. At one of those on the Pecos/Las Vegas Ranger District the district ranger says, “We take full responsibility” for the fires and when Dennis apologizes, he’s asked why anyone should trust the Forest Service. He answers, “Because the alternatives aren’t very good.” At a meeting on my district, the Camino Real, the district ranger is confronted by a hostile audience, one of whom says, “We don’t want fire and we don’t agree with our government.” The ranger tells her the Forest Service is obligated to do what is needed to protect her community.

Three months after the fire, 90 percent contained, Antonia Roybal Mack enters the narrative, evacuating her grandmother’s house for fear of flooding as the rains have arrived and the floods caused by the burn scar begin. The film shows water rising to the doorstep of homes, roads washed away, and acequias filled with mud and debris. Antonia becomes a stabilizing figure in the film with her lawyerly competence and understanding of the emotions of those who have lost so much. The US Senate appropriates the FEMA budget to support the fire victims. Antonia: “It’s my job to represent people against FEMA. There is an enormous amount of distrust of the federal government.”

Five months after the fire started it’s 100 percent contained. Dennis is profiled as a lifelong fire fighter who works his way up into fuels and fire ecology to dismantle the Smokey Bear mythology that all forest fires need to be extinguished. One hundred years of this policy is what has left the forests overgrown, diseased, and prone to massive fires. Dennis is one of my favorite figures in the film: obviously very sincere in his acceptance of responsibility but also a little pugnacious in his determination to pursue policy that he believes is essential to forest management. His language is blunt and his hurt is heavy.

Ernie’s hurt is also a large component of the film. The shots of him at his acequia meeting—held outside—are painful as he fields questions from his fellow parciantes trying to parse FEMA regulations. They ask about what will happen when the acequias flood next year and the year after that during the monsoons. Will FEMA be back to help them then? It’s a revealing moment when a FEMA representative shows up to try to explain how to log on to the portal to begin the process and Bachelder films only his back. It’s also telling that there is only one parciante younger than Ernie (who looks to be in his thirties or early forties) who takes over Ernie’s mayordomo position.

One year after the fire Martin is living in a FEMA trailer with a generator his only source of heat, at $30 a night for gas. He’s selling wood to made a little money while waiting for FEMA to reimburse him for all the money he’s spent fixing the house and his road. He ends up having to sell his cows as he can’t afford to borrow any more. Although his life is more difficult than Ernie’s, he seems less angry, maybe just more resigned, in the quotidian grind of the life he’s been dealt.

Moises and Ike appear in the film in juxtaposition. While their values aligned for many years, they were estranged by the time the film was made. They both speak about the loss of the land grants to unscrupulous speculators like attorney Thomas Catron and eventually the government, who Ike says his grandfather referred to as “Los Americanos.” They both were in the front lines in the 1960s and 70s Chicano movement. Moises participated in the raid by Reies Lopez Tijerina on the Rio Arriba County Courthouse and was, with Ike, an active member of La Raza Unida that brought down Emilio Naranjo, the despotic ruler of Rio Arriba County. Bachelder includes footage of Ike from the Danny Lyon film “Little Boy” in La Raza protests and at home in Servilleta Plaza with his young son, Antonio. Ike was the founder of La Companía de Ocho, a small logging company, and fought many battles with the Forest Service, that favored corporate logging, and urban environmentalists, who were opposed to any logging on public lands. Sam Hitt, founder of Forest Guardians, who went head-to-head with Ike throughout the 1990s, is filmed opposing a 2024 Santa Fe Watershed restoration project in a meeting where Dennis has this to say: “We know what works but none of that shit matters without public buy in.”

Ike and Moises’s assessments of the fire and its aftermath reveal their divergent paths, however. Moises thinks the thinning project near Canjion cut too many trees and he doesn’t want to see any prescribed burning. Angie, the district ranger, whose lovely green eyes are captured by the camera’s closeups, hopes to change his mind. She’s trying to implement new policies, like the leñero mayordomo projects from the east side of the Carson that have successfully recruited community people as sawyers to cut their own small allotments in restoration projects. But Moises pushes the Rio Arriba County Commission to block her efforts. He bluntly says, “I think all them people who started these fires should be accused of crimes.” Filmed at home, Angie agonizes over what happened during the fire but stays true to the science she knows is needed to protect the forests in the future. “Were we broken before, yeah, we were broken before, but perhaps in this new world we’re in there will be a remaking.”

It takes me a minute to realize it’s my voice asking Ike a question back in the 1990s after the environmentalists’ lawsuits shut down his logging company: “Do you still think the Forest Service is primarily responsible for mismanagement of the forests in northern New Mexico.” He answers in the affirmative. But the film then fast forwards to an interview just before he died in 2024 where he provides a measured analysis of the relationship between the communities and the Forest Service today: the land grants are not going to be given back to the people and the Forest Service has the ability to manage the forests with the communities foremost in mind.

The movie ends three years after the fire, but I won’t write a wrap-up and spoil it for those who haven’t seen the film. What I can say is that Bachelder has beautifully crafted it to reflect the emotional and moral complexity of this amazing film. I haven’t used the term beautiful before, but that word describes both the aesthetics of the film—the way Bachelder zooms in with facial close-ups to emphasize emotionally charged moments—and the grace with which every opinion, argument, and complaint is granted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gualala Redwood Timber’s 375-acre Noce Timber Harvest Plan (THP 1-26-00147-SON) is located in northern Sonoma County, east of the South Fork Gualala River and north of Annapolis Road, near Noce Road. The South Fork Gualala River, Wheatfield Fork of the Gualala River, and Buckeye Creek receive drainage from the proposed timber harvest plan.

Noce Timber Harvest Plan documents

Submitted on October 7, 2026

Noce THP Section 1 – [5 MB, 10 pages] Legal description: Cover pages, signatures.

Noce THP Section 2 – [49 MB, 111 pages] Operations: Silviculture, yarding, erosion hazard rating, winter operations, roads & landings, watercourse & lake protections, alternative watercourse & lake protections (in lieu of standard rules), biological resources, maps.

Noce THP Section 3 – [18 MB, 37 pages] Supporting materials: General site description, analysis of alternatives, variable retention, discussion and justification of use of ground based equipment on unstable areas, seasonal road construction, alternative watercourse and lake protection practices, instream activities requiring CDFW approval.

Noce THP Section 4 – [81 MB, 158 pages] Cumulative Impacts: Past, present and future projects, assessment of cumulative watershed effects, soil productivity, biological resources, recreational, visual, traffic, greenhouse gas impacts, wildfire risks.

Noce THP Section 5 – [155 MB, 239 pages] Attachments: Including soil erosion hazards, Erosion Control Plan, roadwork, stream reports, botanical surveys, Northern Spotted Owl information.

Noce THP Section 6 – [1 MB, 1 page] Archeological information: (confidential)

All documents regarding this logging plan are available in the new CalTREES system.

Unfortunately, CalTREES is not easy to use, so FoGR has compiled some
basic instructions for use of CalTREES to help you navigate the system.

To download additional documents for this logging plan,
if you want to follow the back & forth as agencies ask questions and the RPF replies,
visit the Noce THP page on the CalTREES website.

Below are instructions on how to submit comments during the public comment period.

To submit your comments on a logging plan, email your comments to: santarosapubliccomment@fire.ca.gov
or send your comments via U.S. Mail to:

Forest Practice
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection
135 Ridgway Ave.
Santa Rosa, CA 95401

In the subject line of your email message, or at the top of your letter,
be sure to reference the THP number and name, for example:
THP 1-26-00147-SON “Noce”

Editor’s Note: I’m reposting this article, with permission, from New Mexico Water Advocates by Gillian Gonda, a board member of the Advocates. She tells the sad story of the water situation in Placitas, where she grew up. I’ve known Gillian since she was a kid: I lived in Placitas for 20 years, as an irrigator in the village and then as a well owner in the Tunnel Springs area where we had one well go dry. We’re experiencing this crisis all over New Mexico. La Jicarita will soon publish an article about the situation in the Upper, Middle, and Lower Rio Grande by Water Advocates Director Norm Gaume. 

The Double Life of Las Acequias de Placitas

October 7, 2026 Gillian GondaClimate Impact, Culture and Community

Irrigation season has long ended in the small village of Placitas, New Mexico, cut prematurely due to lack of water. Now its residents think about what might happen this winter—and what will happen next summer.

In Placitas, that question carries a distinct weight because the Placitas acequia leads an unusual double life. 

I grew up in Placitas and used to help irrigate as a child, watering the many fruit trees on our property using the village acequia system. Obviously much more than a ditch, an acequia is a communal water sharing system that binds a community, generates goodwill, communication among neighbors, and care of the whole. As a young girl, I didn’t really know anything about that, but I loved watching the water come down the ditches—sometimes I’d race it, watch it pool into the trees, and divert it from this ditch to that one. I ran around chasing water and eating whatever fresh fruit I could find. I also didn’t know that this water was doing more than giving me all the apricots I could eat.

Las Acequias de Placitas is one of only two or three hybrid acequia/domestic water systems in the state. It is fed by springs from the Sandia Mountains and is primarily an acequia for irrigation, but roughly 175 homes in the village also rely directly on the same springs and a piping network for their household water.

Leading a double life means carrying double the burden when drought strikes.

Due to a dry 2025-26 winter and very little snowpack—affecting all of the state, because aridification is here—the mountain springs on the north side of the Sandias that feed Las Acequias did not replenish enough. That is why the irrigation season had to end early, and why water had to be turned off daily for the village from 9 PM to 4 AM and again from 1 to 4 PM so the tanks could replenish. No joke. When there’s no water, there’s no water.

Managing a dual-purpose system like this is a LOT. There are only a few people on the board, and they have to track overuse, illegal use, and lack of payment, as well as constant communication during times of restriction. For a small community, it can certainly be a challenge. Learn more about this unique acequia from its current leadership in this video produced by Placitas resident and student Elliott Wessely that captures both the mechanics of the acequia and its vital role as a living tradition built on cooperation, shared responsibility, and community resilience in the face of ongoing drought. 

The author’s mother preparing for irrigation earlier this year.

Rain did finally arrive, bringing a lot of moisture all at once. The deluge arrived a tad too late for most of the fruit trees, but it was appreciated nonetheless. Any drop that touches this dry dirt matters. 

Were we ready?

Did we catch enough of that rainwater in barrels and cisterns to help supplement our watering, so we aren’t putting as much burden on a domestic system already stretched thin? In New Mexico, paying attention to how and when you use water NOW (and reducing your use when possible) will help prepare you for restrictions that aren’t a question of if, but when, as the residents of Placitas well know. Yet relying on individual actions and living year-to-year on the hope of a wet winter is not a solid plan. Hope can support us as we build resiliency, but hope is not water management.

What places like Placitas—and communities across our entire basin—desperately need is real, proactive water planning, focused on mitigating current and growing water scarcity statewide, at both the regional and state levels. We need our state agencies and regional water planning councils (once formed) to have the resources, hydrologic data, and funding in place so communities aren’t left scrambling in the dry years. When a system that feeds both orchards and kitchen sinks runs low, we shouldn’t have to guess what comes next. Having the resources and framework to know how to respond beforehand is how we protect our drinking water, agricultural water, and our culture.

Now, with the ditches still damp from recent rain, Placitas residents turn to the high crest of the Sandias. We wonder what this winter will bring, hoping for the best while knowing all too well what happens if the peaks stay bare. As lawmakers prepare for the upcoming legislative session, that hope turns toward the Roundhouse—that our leaders will finally step up and do the right thing by fully funding our state water planning efforts.

Gillian Gonda is a New Mexico Water Advocates board member and Apricot lover currently living in Santa Fe, New Mexico.

 

The SFPUC has inflated its water demand projections for years, starving fish and riparian ecosystems. The Sierra Club is fighting back. sf-liana Fri, 2026-10-09 14:02 By Mark Shahinian

The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) has, for years, over-projected its water needs and used those over-projections to starve the environment of water. Today the Sierra Club SF Bay Chapter is asking a judge to put a stop to that cycle. The Sierra Club has filed a petition asking a judge to invalidate the San Francisco Public Utility Commission’s 2025 Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP).

This flawed demand forecast is a big reason the SFPUC argues it can take more and more water from the Bay-Delta and rivers, even if its customers don’t end up using that water. The plan’s demand forecast is not supported by the utility’s own records, by facts, or by logic. The graph below shows the SFPUC pattern of over-projection that the Sierra Club is seeking to change:

The SFPUC uses two sets of books

When it comes to demand forecasts, the SFPUC keeps two sets of books. It has one demand forecast that shows ever-increasing demand for water. That’s the one that guides its operations and causes it to hoard water behind its dams (including Hetch Hetchy) just in case its fanciful forecasts ever materialize. This forecast means in dry years, little water flows downstream to feed the ecosystem the Tuolumne river sustains. At the same time, the SFPUC’s finance team has an entirely different forecast that it uses to predict what it will charge customers for water in the next decade. The finance forecast, presented last February, shows roughly flat water demand. 

It’s not against the law to have two different forecasts. It is against the law to have an alternative forecast that your state-mandated UWMP water demand report neither acknowledges, nor explains.

An agency does not get to choose an audience and then choose a number to match it without disclosure. The California state agencies that set future water policies, bondholders, and ratepayers read these documents.  They are all entitled to a detailed explanation in the UWMP of how and why the SFPUC uses two sets of numbers.

The assumptions run up the score

To arrive at its inflated demand forecast—SFPUC water deliveries have declined 28% in the past 25 years, but the forecast somehow arrives at a 13% increase over the next 25 years—the SFPUC has used a set of assumptions that willfully ignore facts and logic. These assumptions are not supported by evidence and push the demand model they are using to achieve the higher demand the SFPUC wants to show:
The model assumes San Francisco reaches 100 percent housing occupancy by 2030. The city has never reached 100 percent occupancy, as “vacant” includes second homes and homes up for sale or rent. Census data put occupancy near 88.5 percent in 2024, and the occupancy trend has been down, not up.

• The model assumes new multifamily units use as much water as old ones. However, the SFPUC’s own data show new multifamily units use ~25 percent less water.
• The model assumes conservation programs stop producing savings in 2030 or 2035, and so savings from conservation programs are less than 1% of water use by 2050. Yet the agency has no plan to shut those programs down.
• The model assumes water and wastewater rates never outpace inflation after the mid-2030s. Yet the agency has plans for a large capital buildout in exactly that time frame that would push up costs.

Every one of these choices pushes projected demand up. Not one pushes it down. That is not forecasting – that is using your assumptions to run up the demand numbers. The inflated numbers end up costing both the environment and ratepayers.

Who pays for the gap

Inflated demand numbers underpin the SFPUC’s argument that it cannot spare water for the San Francisco Bay Delta. They are the numbers the utility uses to starve the ecosystem of water. The SFPUC’s water planners think over-projecting demand keeps water users safe. In fact, they’re just using the environment as their buffer.

Ratepayers are also on the hook. The SFPUC is building a $400 million headquarters for its water department while customer rates climb 25 percent between 2026 and 2028. An inflated demand forecast gives planners permission to keep spending. The bill arrives as a rate increase.

What we are asking for

We are asking the court to force the SFPUC to set the plan aside and revise it. We want a demand forecast supported by facts. We want a straight explanation of how two forecasts from the same agency, published months apart, reached quite different conclusions. We have raised all of this with the Commission in writing and in person. We raised it more than once. The Commission adopted the plan anyway, so unfortunately we are left legal action as our only remaining option.

We are not asking a court to stop water deliveries or threaten San Francisco’s water supplies. We are asking for a defensible, transparent demand number so that we can all properly plan for ecosystem health and for a future of affordable water.

“The Hub” is a weekly round-up of transportation related news in the Philadelphia area and beyond. Check back weekly to keep up-to-date on the issues Clean Air Council’s transportation staff finds important.

Week Without Driving ended this week but keep fighting for freedom of transportation for all! Sign up with Transit For All PA! for more information.

Image Source: KYW News

Metro Philadelphia: SEPTA universal student fare cards could carry hefty cost for Philadelphia – Current SEPTA Student Fare cards are only available for students in grades 7 through 12 who live at least a mile and a half away from their school. The cards can only be used between 5:30 a.m. and 8 p.m. during the school year, meaning cards are not valid on weekends, holidays, or over the summer. Expanding the cards to give students unrestricted transit access could cost up to $64 million a year. Philadelphia school board officials testified that they would support the expansion initiative if there was a dedicated funding source. Fare cost can be a significant barrier to accessing opportunities for students and families.

Image Source: CBS Philadelphia

CBS Philadelphia: Here’s when the 2nd Pennsylvanian Amtrak route will start – The second daily round trip from Pittsburgh to New York City will be added next month, with stops including Harrisburg, Philadelphia, and a dozen others. Amtrak ridership has grown 20% since 2019, and the demand for more service was a driving factor in this route, which begins on November 18.

Image Source: The Inquirer

The Inquirer: Accelerate to the modern SEPTA the region deserves – The infrastructure in Philadelphia, specifically in Center City, offers millions of people commuting options to the largest employment hub in the region. However, relying on infrastructure from a century ago is limiting where SEPTA can grow. SEPTA’s recently- released Accelerate plan offers better connectivity with Regional Rail, more trips offered on subways and buses, but the piece missing from this improvement plan is dedicated and secure funding.

Other Stories

Philadelphia Today: Borski Park Reconnects Bridesburg With the Delaware River

WHYY: What should Philly’s streeteries look like? The city wants your input

Philly Voice: These Philly walking groups help people boost their fitness and mental health, and they welcome others to join

The Inquirer: Roxborough’s Shawmont Station, a 200-year-old railroad depot, is slated to become a train museum

CBS Pittsburgh: Southwest adding 3 nonstop destinations from Pittsburgh International Airport next summer

Billy Penn: ‘One-shot Mar’ crowned Philadelphia’s best parallel parker

A new Community Greening Plan is coming to the Cobbs Creek Watershed, and community members will play a central role in shaping it.

A greening plan is a community-driven process where residents help shape a park plan designed to expand, restore, and maintain green spaces within a neighborhood. 

Residents and local organizations will help define the vision, identify sites, and set priorities, rather than receiving a fully baked plan from outside experts. To ensure that the process of creating this plan is community-led and reflects neighbors’ visions, there will be stipends available for people to be Community Greening Liaisons.  

Why Cobbs Creek, and Why Now?

Other parks and watersheds across the city have greening plans that unlock funding for access, recreation, conservation, and stewardship. Cobbs Creek doesn’t have one. Neighbors deserve a clean, safe, well-maintained park. Pollution, water quality, illegal dumping, invasive species, and safety concerns all deserve real attention and real investment.

Community leaders and organizations have been caring for Cobbs Creek for years. Future visions of the land should be built around them. City projects are being planned in and around Cobbs Creek. Greening plans give the community a voice in those decisions.

Community Greening Priorities

• Park and creek restoration and stewardship
• Maintenance and illegal dumping
• Forming a resident-led park organization
• Programming and education
• Environmental justice and park resources advocacy

Become a Community Greening Liaison

To make sure the planning process reflects the experiences and priorities of people who live in the surrounding communities, Community Greening Liaisons will serve as a connection between residents and the planning process.

Liaisons will:

• Gather input from neighbors
• Carry community recommendations forward
• Share updates as a trusted community voice
• Connect residents with opportunities to get involved

Residents of Overbrook Park, Carroll Park, Haddington, Cobbs Creek, Kingsessing, Paschall and Elmwood Park are encouraged to apply. The application deadline is Nov. 1.

Interested in becoming a Community Greening Liaison, or know someone who would be a good fit?

Apply to become a Community Greening Liaison

Governor Newsom recently vetoed SB 872, the Delta Levees and Canal Subsidence Fund, missing a critical opportunity to protect the state’s water resources and Delta communities..

The Governor’s veto message pointed to more than $170 million allocated for repairing levees, aqueducts, canals and other projects, calling SB 872 “unnecessary”, but the state’s own data emphasizes the gaps in funding urgently needed to protect the Delta estuary.

Morgen Snyder, Director of Policy and Programs at Restore the Delta, told CBS News, “The funding in the budget, while incredible and much needed, is sort of a drop in the bucket compared to what overall repairs are needed.”

In a CalMatters piece, Rachel Becker highlights the estimated $3.3 billion cost needed to repair the 1,100 miles of federal and non-federal levees. According to the Delta Stewardship Council, without these improvements, “$22 billion in assets and over $5 billion in annual economic activity” are at risk of flooding by 2085.

The bill would have also funded necessary land subsidence repairs to the State Water Project. CalMatters cites a state report that found subsidence could cut water deliveries by almost 90% in the next 17 years, while the California Department of Water Resources estimates that fixing the damage to the State Water Project’s infrastructure could cost nearly $4 billion.

Coverage in the Lodi News similarly highlights how the Governor’s veto represents yet another example of prioritizing the Delta Conveyance Project over preventing emergencies and protecting Delta ecosystems and communities. 

SB 872 garnered unanimous support in the Legislature, bringing together Northern and Southern California legislators, environmental groups, and water interests to protect critical water infrastructure. 

As Restore the Delta’s Executive Director Barbara Barrigan-Parrilla said, “Not only did Governor Newsom veto a much needed bill to bring Delta levees to the necessary standards to deal with climate change, he vetoed funding for fixing existing conveyance for the State Water Project.” 

News Roundup:

• Newsom vetoes Delta levees bill as El Niño winter looms. CalMatters.
• Newsom vetoes bill aimed at funding Sacramento-San Joaquin delta levee repairs, water infrastructure. CBS News. 
• Levees, vetoed legislation and what comes next: Newsom rejects funding bill as both sides debate best path forward. The Lodi News.  
• Newsom vetoes bill intended to shore up Delta levees. The Lodi News.
• Newsom rejects long-range water solution for Delta, aqueduct. The Manteca Bulletin.
• Newsom vetoes Delta levees bill as El Niño winter looms. News from the States.
• As El Niño approaches, Newsom vetos bill aimed at protecting California levees from flooding. Planetizen News.
• Gov. Newsom Vetoes Important California Water Bill, Despite Unanimous Passage by Legislature. California Globe.
• Solano-supported Delta levee repair legislation vetoed. The Daily Republic.
• Newsom vetoes historic Delta levees bill as El Niño winter looms. The Stockton Record.

Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin previewed the Agency’s imminent proposal to weaken critical protections from oil and gas pollution.  

The 2024 Methane Rule is a landmark EPA regulation designed to sharply curb methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions from oil and fracked gas operations. Methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, is a leading contributor to climate change.

The rule, which was developed with significant input from advocates, the oil and gas industry, investors, health experts, and elected officials, provided commonsense measures to protect public health and reduce methane waste. These measures include standards to monitor and repair leaks, the phase-out of routine flaring, and the replacement of process controllers with non-emitting alternatives.  

President Trump and Administrator Zeldin’s unlawful delay of the implementation and enforcement of the Methane Rule, and now their proposal to roll it back, is a continued attack on the well-being of all Americans. Pennsylvanians in particular will be harmed by the reconsideration of the Methane Rule.  

The Commonwealth is the second-largest producer of gas, and over 1.5 million Pennsylvanians live within just half a mile of active oil and gas infrastructure. It is more important now than ever that states act. Governor Shapiro’s recent announcement to develop state rules that reduce methane emissions is a key step to protecting residents. 

“EPA’s mission is to protect human health and the environment, yet it continues to stray further from that goal,” said Alice Lu, policy analyst with Clean Air Council. “The latest proposal to roll back methane standards is an affront to the health of Pennsylvanians. This rule was the result of years of advocacy and, for impacted residents and advocates, is more than just another regulatory action. It is a way of holding oil and gas operators accountable for their wasteful practices and ensuring residents are protected from the industry’s dangerous pollution.” 

NC WARN today launched a statewide petition drive calling on Gov. Josh Stein to use his authority and political power to implement a 2-year moratorium on data centers. This move reflects the accelerating public backlash against the surge of A.I. data centers now notorious for air, water and noise pollution.

Stein has helped fuel the data center frenzy even as the public has learned about a host of harms when their communities are targeted for the sometimes massive projects, and even as A.I. has become a national pariah.

Now, it’s on the Governor to begin making amends. He must freeze current data center development, halt the secret scheming by data center proponents and establish a first-ever, transparent and fair decision-making process that prioritizes the interests and voices of targeted communities.

In June NC WARN began calling on Stein to stop Duke Energy and state officials from quietly strategizing to recruit the noxious plants. And NC WARN’s attorney has begun the steps necessary to require the Governor and Commerce department to release all public records showing their involvement in this burgeoning statewide scandal.

We and allies will use the petition to further press Gov. Stein to side with the public instead of A.I. developers and Duke Energy.

###

Now in its 38th year, NC WARN is building people power in the climate and energy justice movement to persuade or require Charlotte-based Duke Energy – one of the world’s largest climate polluters – to make a quick transition to renewable, affordable power generation and energy efficiency in order to avert climate tipping points and ongoing rate hikes.

The post Statewide Pressure on Governor for 2-Year Freeze on Data Centers — NC WARN News Release appeared first on NC WARN.