News Feeds

The Association of Canadian Early Learning Programs (ACE), a lobby organization that acts as the mouthpiece for-profit child care operators, has released a new proposal...

The post For-profit operator lobby group seeks to undermine $10-a-day child care again first appeared on Spring.

This week on Talking Headways, we’re joined by Stephanie Dockery of Bloomberg Philanthropies to discuss the foundation’s third Public Art Challenge. Dockery considers how bus art gains cult followings, how artists use temporary installations to attract attention in their respective cities, and what happens after those projects disappear.

Listeners have three ways of following the conversation: The audio player embedded below; a full (albeit AI-generated) transcript; and further down the page, a partial, human-edited transcript.

Jeff Wood: Thinking about the Hawaii bus, one thing that was interesting to me is that a lot of agencies are having trouble with their funding, and a lot of times for the buses, they’ll try to do wraps, and the wraps are advertising.

And I find it really great that instead of just putting advertising on your bus, you could actually put an art installation on your bus. There’s some frustrations with covering the windows, which I know a lot of transit advocates have. But the Hawaii bus was actually done very tastefully in terms of not covering up all the windows.

Stephanie Dockery: Yes, we follow all parameters with bus shelters and buses on not covering the windows, not covering the sides of the glass panels in the case of our Houston project. With our project in Philadelphia, which is a poetry project that’s responding to gun violence, Healing Verse Germantown, they are working not only with the Department of Transportation, but with the advertising agency and putting art in the panel of the bus shelters where advertising typically goes.

So now we have murals in a space where there’s typically advertising. So to your point —yes, we should absolutely be using art, and it was so smart of the teams to identify that as an opportunity for them.

Wood: I just find it very refreshing just because everything seems to be commoditized these days. A lot of folks are trying to advertise, and, and for good reason, obviously. The transit agencies need money. But at the same time, maybe that’s why the buses have maybe a little bit more of a following — because it isn’t the typical bus covering that you usually see.

I’m wondering how much of the art we should expect people to understand right away versus how much should be explained. I’m curious about how people come to it or how they experience it when they see it.

Dockery: That’s a great question. People absolutely happen upon the work. People go to the work on purpose. We are doing so much work with all of the teams to help promote [the art], whether it’s on their website, on our guide. We have created maps for all of the cities so they can share those with their constituencies, so they can actually see all of the sites. We have signage at all of the sites that explicitly talks about what the project is, what the installation is.

We have to be really deliberate and not expect or assume that people know what the work is, and that’s kind of the great thing about public art, especially if it’s in a vacant lot in a place where you’re not expecting to see anything, let alone something beautiful. And people get arrested by the installations and question why they’re there and, you know, start questioning why we don’t have more, which is a great question.

Wood: Excellent question.

Dockery: We do a lot of communications both on the press side and the onsite marketing, and then with social media to help let people know that the work is there because it’s for a pretty finite period. Some work is a performance, so that’s quite fleeting. Some work is up for a year.

So we’re just really communicating those timelines, what the work is, who the artists are, and expressing that this is a collaborative team. People should know that this is great work that their cities have done for them. So the cities are behind us and have brought together these nonprofits and artists. We also have an app called Bloomberg Connects, which is a free digital guide available to cultural organizations.

And on our Public Art Challenge guide, we have all of the cities listed and have built out their projects, both images and descriptions. So that’s a place where the projects can live in posterity since they are temporary in nature.

If you can’t afford to live, what does democracy actually offer you?

It’s a question sitting just beneath the surface of many political debates right now. For people struggling to get by, the idea of protecting democracy can feel abstract at best, disconnected at worst. And even in more progressive spaces where democracy is treated as urgent, it’s often framed as a parallel concern — something to defend alongside economic issues, rather than through them. As Raj Patel puts it, people are increasingly being asked to accept a kind of tradeoff: focus on affordability now, and worry about democracy later. If the system hasn’t delivered for working people, it’s not hard to see why some might question whether it’s worth defending at all.

At the Bioneers Conference 2026, labor organizer Saru Jayaraman, policy expert Angela Glover Blackwell, and journalist Raj Patel took that tension head-on — and flipped it.

This Isn’t What Democracy Is Supposed to Do

For decades, Angela Glover Blackwell has worked across issues such as housing, transportation, and environmental justice, but over time, she came to see a deeper pattern behind them all. “It is the failure to understand, to lean into, and to make real the promise of democracy that has kept us from solving these problems.” For Blackwell, democracy is not just a process of voting or representation — it has a stronger purpose. “It is co-governance for human flourishing,” she says. “That’s all it is.”

That definition reframes the entire conversation. If democracy exists to support human flourishing, then it cannot be separated from the conditions in which people live. As she puts it, “You can’t have human flourishing if the people aren’t putting in their two cents…if they’re not telling you what they need.” And yet, the version most people experience falls far short. “The reason that democracy has been so feeble,” she argues, “is because it has always tried…to function for a few, not for the all.”

That gap — between what democracy promises and what it delivers — doesn’t just shape outcomes. It shapes expectations. As Patel observes, participation often becomes “an exercise in which we are being trained to expect less.”

What It Feels Like When Democracy Fails

While Blackwell frames the broader vision, Jayaraman grounds it in day-to-day realities. “We’ve been fighting on affordability for decades,” she says, “and the response we’ve gotten…from people with power is: That’s cute. That’s sweet. But we are here to save democracy.” In her work organizing restaurant workers, she has seen how economic pressure reshapes who gets to participate — and how. “Democracy doesn’t work when the majority of people are unable or terrified to come speak up, and then a minority of people are paid to come speak for their bosses.”

She describes a dynamic in which workers are often pressured by employers to attend meetings and oppose wage increases, and in some cases show up to testify in legislative hearings as well. Meanwhile, those who actually need higher wages often can’t risk being visible. “They’re working three jobs and terrified…of showing up with their name and their face.”

In that context, calls to “protect democracy” can feel hollow. Even within the Democratic Party—where support for wage increases is often assumed—Jayaraman argues that meaningful progress is frequently blocked or diluted. “My experience of democracy,” she says, “is Democrats blocking wage increases…because we have not created the consequences for those Democrats.”

The Mistake We Keep Making About Affordability

What the panel makes clear is that affordability and democracy are not separate issues; they are the same fight. Blackwell is direct: “The affordability problem is that we, as a nation, have not invested in human flourishing.” Focusing only on prices — on eggs, gas, rent — misses the deeper issue. “If we think we can separate the absence of a vibrant democracy from the suffering that is happening in this country,” she says, “we don’t understand what democracy was for.”

Jayaraman pushes the same point from another angle, noting that even progressive conversations about affordability often avoid the most obvious lever. “Why are none of even the most progressive people talking about…raising wages?” she asks. “Life will never be affordable unless people have enough money in their pockets.” And beyond economics, she emphasizes what low wages actually do: “When they are paid as little as $2 or $3 or even $15… it devalues who they are. Every worker has value and skill…And everybody…wants to feel like they are contributing to meaning.”

Across both perspectives, the argument converges: Affordability is not just about costs. It’s about dignity, participation, and whether people have the capacity to engage in public life at all. That raises a deeper question: What do we actually mean when we say something is “affordable”? As Patel points out, “There’s a difference between cheap and affordable.” Cheap, he argues, is often “a way of displacing one cost onto someone else…usually the working class and the rest of the web of life.”

What a Real Democracy Would Require

If current systems fall short, what would it actually look like to get this right? Jayaraman’s answer is simple and concrete: “In a real democracy, workers would be able to have one job instead of three. They could show up…They could overpower any lies…And they would be listened to.” That vision ties material conditions directly to political power. Without time, stability, and security, participation becomes limited to those who can afford it.

Blackwell echoes this, emphasizing that democracy must be judged by how it works for those most impacted. “Democracy only functions when it can function for those who have been most marginalized in society,” she says. “That is the mark of a great democracy.” She points to a familiar example: curb cuts in sidewalks, originally designed for people with disabilities but now used by everyone. “When we solve problems with nuance and specificity…thinking about those who have been rendered most vulnerable…the benefits cascade out to everybody.” Building a democracy that works for the most vulnerable, in other words, isn’t a niche goal. It’s the foundation of one that works at all.

Raising Expectations Is the Strategy

So what does it take to move from theory to action? For Jayaraman, it starts with refusing to accept the limits of what feels politically possible. “For so long our side has settled,” she says. “We negotiate against ourselves before we even get in the room. We need to say…what we actually need. Nobody wants less than what they need.”

That’s the logic behind the Living Wage for All campaign she describes, which pushes for significantly higher minimum wages across cities and states. But the strategy is not just about policy — it’s about participation. “If we can give people some hope…they will show up, they will participate,” she says. “Maybe it will get them to one job, and then they can engage on all the issues we want them to engage on.”

Blackwell points to a broader shift that has to happen alongside it. “What we need is transformative solidarity.” Not a transactional version — “you sign my petition, I’ll show up for your march” — but something deeper. “Your issue is my issue,” she says, “because I can’t have the world that I want to live in if all of these things are not addressed.”

Participation Depends on Capacity

Throughout the conversation, there is a clear push to expand what counts as democratic participation. “I get so tired of democracy being either vote or run for office,” Jayaraman says. She points to how, in many places throughout the world, democratic participation extends well beyond voting alone. Ballot initiatives, organizing, public debate — these are all part of democratic life. But they depend on something more fundamental: people having the capacity to engage.

And that brings the conversation full circle. “The glimpse of what happened during the pandemic is the answer,” Jayaraman says — not as a model to replicate, but as a moment that revealed what becomes possible when people have more time, stability, and leverage. During that period, even amid widespread disruption and loss, millions of workers left their jobs, wages rose in some sectors, and many people had more space to organize and engage. “It gives us a glimpse of what could happen if Americans could have one job.”

The post What’s Standing in the Way of Civic Participation — and How to Change It appeared first on Bioneers.

Medium- and heavy-duty fleet electrification in California and Georgia could reduce residential rates modestly, E3’s analysis found, but proactive, measured investments in grid upgrades are essential.

As Shell announces bumper Q1 profits of $6.9 billion, new analysis from Global Witness reveals that six of Europe’s leading oil majors – bp, Shell, TotalEnergies, Eni, Equinor and Repsol – have recorded the highest quarterly profits since 2022, when they reaped the benefits of the fallout from Russia’s war on Ukraine.

In the first quarter of 2026, the combined $21.7 billion* in quarterly profits recorded by bp, Repsol, TotalEnergies, Eni and Equinor was 43% higher than the same period last year, reflecting a significant windfall from volatile oil prices caused by the US-Israel war in Iran.

According to Global Witness’ analysis of quarterly filings, these six fossil fuel giants have not collectively generated this much money since Q4 2022. The three biggest European majors - Shell, BP and TotalEnergies - have earned $252 billion since the 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

Global Witness head of news investigations Patrick Galey said: “As lives are destroyed through war and people everywhere fear rising bills, it’s galling to see oil giants like Shell raking in obscene amounts of money.

“Sadly, we all know this isn’t the first time oil giants have cashed in from war - when Russia invaded Ukraine 4 years ago, our energy bills spiralled as fossil fuel firms raked it in.

“And now we’re seeing the same pattern repeat itself: the combined profits of Europe’s six biggest oil firms were up by 43% compared to the same period last year. These are clearly the spoils of war.

“It’s time to break free from the fossil fuel doom loop – we need robust taxes on big polluters to insulate households from price shocks and to fund a cheaper, cleaner, more stable energy future for all.”

In April, analysis by Global Witness and the Guardian found that the world’s top 100 oil and gas producers banked more than $30m every hour in excess profit in the first month of the US-Israeli war on Iran, with the conflict pushing up oil prices above $100 (£74) a barrel in March.

Although US oil majors Chevron and ExxonMobil are yet to cash in on the windfall from higher prices thanks to stalled deliveries and supply disruptions in the region, European majors like bp and TotalEnergies are already enjoying a boon from higher prices thanks to their substantial trading operations, which allows them to monetize market volatility.

The shareholders in these companies stand to gain considerably from these profits. The three largest European supermajors – bp, Shell, and TotalEnergies, rewarded shareholders a combined $10 billion in Q1 2026 – since the war in Iran that sent oil prices spiralling began.

Chemicals play a critical, though often overlooked, role in modern society. They provide many of the key building blocks for the construction industry, support agriculture by increasing crop yields, and offer novel materials for a range of products from automobiles to new energy technologies. In fact, chemicals are everywhere, present in 96% of manufactured goods, including 75% of the energy technologies that will be needed to navigate the energy transition.

While chemicals are deeply embedded in modern society, it is equally important to acknowledge the challenges they pose. Among these are the need to reduce reliance on fossil inputs, develop better end-of-life management for chemical products, and lower emissions even as production is projected to grow up to 43% by 2050. More effort is needed across all these fronts, but addressing the 2 billion metric tons — or roughly 5% of global greenhouse gas emissions — from chemical production annually requires particularly urgent action given the long timelines to commercialize new production methods.

Despite these challenges, technologies are emerging to enable low-emissions chemicals production. While many of these technologies show technical promise, few have moved beyond the pilot or early demonstration phase. Scale-up of these technologies is often not held back by technical feasibility so much as by commercial barriers, including uncertainty about demand for low-emissions products and risk-aversion among participants spread across long and complex chemicals value chains.

Clear demand signals from companies that use chemicals in their products and novel mechanisms to bridge chemicals value chains are critical to overcoming these roadblocks and unlocking investment. The Center for Green Market Activation (GMA) and RMI are actively working to establish demand signals by aggregating buyers of low-emissions chemicals and by developing a book and claim system to enable chemical producers to transact directly with downstream companies that have committed to lowering supply chain emissions and are willing to pay a premium to do so.

The Challenge of Decarbonizing Chemicals Production

Scaling low-emission technologies in the chemicals sector is uniquely challenging. Chemical production assets are highly capital-intensive, with investment horizons that span decades. Existing plants, many of which are fully depreciated and can produce at a low marginal cost, leverage processes that have been optimized over many years and produce at enormous scale. The result is constant cost pressure that reinforces the competitiveness of conventional production methods. As a result, even when low-emission alternatives exist, buyers and suppliers alike often default to the legacy status quo.

The diversity of chemical products — and the resulting complexity of value chains required to produce them — results in an additional challenge. Unlike other industries with relatively standardized products, the chemical sector encompasses thousands of molecules, intermediates, and derivatives. This often results in long value chains with multiple layers of intermediaries separating a primary chemicals producer, generally responsible for the majority of emissions, from the better-known companies at the end of the value chain that have made net-zero commitments and are closer to consumer demand. In the middle are specialized producers of intermediate chemicals or products that often operate with thin margins and limited visibility.

In this environment, intermediate producers operating with thin margins have few incentives to source lower-emissions, higher-cost inputs unless they have certainty that their customers are willing to pay an equivalent price premium. The result is an enormous coordination challenge. Multiple parties within a value chain must simultaneously close both procurement and offtake contracts at a material premium to market prices. And all of this needs to occur at a volume that gives the primary chemical producers certainty that customers will pay a premium for most of their output over an extended time horizon. While this may be possible in rare cases where large buyers directly purchase from primary chemical producers, it will be all but impossible in most chemical value chains.

Leveraging Novel Mechanisms to Catalyze Investment

Breaking the deadlock requires both credible demand for low-emissions chemical products and mechanisms to bridge companies across long, complex value chains. GMA and RMI believe that two critical interventions, pursued in tandem, have the potential to address these challenges and unlock investment in low-emissions chemical production: demand aggregation and book and claim.

Demand aggregation is the first necessary intervention. As in many industrial sectors, low-emissions production will come at a price premium, particularly given that novel technologies often operate at small scale and with less historical process optimization than their fossil-intensive counterparts. While new technologies have the potential to decrease costs as they scale, the ability to achieve initial traction in highly price-sensitive markets is often a challenge for these production methods. The presence of buyers willing to purchase at a premium is a critical proof point for projects seeking capital to invest in low-emissions production.

But why is it necessary for multiple buyers to act together in order to provide this proof point? Because chemical assets operate at such a significant scale and because their lifetimes are so long, the purchasing volume required to unlock investment in a new facility can be enormous. By pooling demand, multiple buyers can provide the necessary volume to support an investment decision, thereby decreasing the cost and risk that any individual company would otherwise have to take on.

In cases where physical offtake of low-emission chemicals is constrained, Book and claim systems provide a mechanism to aggregate larger demand volumes through the use of Environmental Attribute Certificates (EACs). Under this chain of custody approach, chemical producers generate an EAC for each unit of low-emission product, such as a ton of ethylene, that reflects the reduced emissions intensity associated with production. This certificate is then sold separately from the physical product, which continues through the value chain as a traditional commodity with a baseline emissions intensity. This separation enables chemical producers to receive revenue from EAC sales to cover the premium associated with low-emission production, providing the financial certainty needed to finance capital-intensive projects. At the same time, buyers gain verifiable, traceable progress toward climate commitments through certificates that are independently verified and tracked through a registry system.

The result is three benefits that can dramatically alter the viability of low-emissions production:

1. Value Chain Bridging: Perhaps the most significant impact of book and claim systems is the ability for interested parties to transact efficiently. By enabling standardized transactions between downstream brands willing to pay for value chain decarbonization and upstream producers that most heavily influence emissions, the challenge of aligning multiple intermediaries around price and volume in complex value chains can be avoided.
2. Geographic Aggregation: Book and claim provides an additional benefit, particularly in the early innings of the net-zero transition when access to low-emissions products remain Creating an EAC distinct from the physical product means that a producer is no longer constrained to finding customers willing to pay a premium for a low-emissions product near its production plant. Instead, they can sell the physical product locally at commodity prices and cover the green premium by selling an EAC to any downstream user of the product, regardless of geography.
3. Product Aggregation: By focusing a book and claim system on high-value chemicals, a third benefit can be realized. A traditional demand aggregation approach would need to find buyers procuring identical products. However, book and claim enables demand aggregation across any product that contains a particular molecule. For example, demand for low-emissions ethylene can be aggregated across apparel companies using polyester for textiles, pharmaceutical companies sourcing polyethylene for syringes, and personal care companies using multiple types of plastic for everyday household goods. By focusing on a common and consistent upstream input, substantially more demand can be aggregated and transacted in a single procurement.

Given the immense challenges associated with decarbonizing chemical production, leveraging novel mechanisms to catalyze investment in low-emissions production will be essential. Combining demand aggregation with book and claim in the form of a buyers alliance for EACs offers a unique opportunity to reduce risk for both buyers and suppliers, while driving real investment decisions.

GMA and RMI’s Low-Emissions Chemicals Initiative

An emerging initiative from GMA and RMI to procure low-emissions high-value chemicals leverages these approaches to tackle emissions in the chemicals sector. Multiple downstream brands that use chemicals in their products have come together to procure environmental attributes for low-emissions ethylene, with plans to expand this approach to other molecules in the future. In the process, they will provide demand certainty for low-emissions projects while simultaneously finding a pathway to address upstream Scope 3 emissions that had previously been out of reach due to complex, multi-tiered value chains.

Prior efforts from GMA and RMI to pool advanced commitments for low-emissions products in heavy industry sectors have demonstrated how aggregated demand can generate confidence for suppliers and investors. Sectoral buyers alliances such as the Sustainable Aviation Buyers Alliance (SABA), managed by Environmental Defense Fund, GMA, and RMI, have shown how standardized frameworks and collective purchasing can accelerate the deployment of next-generation technologies. Launched in 2021, this effort has evolved from one-year advanced commitments to purchase bio-based sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) to a scaled marketplace and targeted 5+ year offtakes at scale for next generation fuels.

Without credible demand signals and effective mechanisms to translate that demand into firm offtake agreements, the transition will stall. GMA and RMI are working to bring these pieces together—aggregating demand and developing mechanisms to more efficiently enable offtake—to ensure that novel pathways to produce low-emission chemicals are developed. Together with active engagement from buyers and support from the broader ecosystem, these actions can provide the demand certainty needed to unlock investment and enable the chemical sector to accelerate its transition to a net-zero future.

If you are interested in learning more about the GMA-RMI low-emissions chemical procurement spotlighted in this article, please reach out to chemicals@rmi.org,

 

The post Harnessing Green Demand to Drive Sustainable Chemicals Production appeared first on RMI.

The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed the Farm, Food, and National Security Act of 2026, bringing the country one step closer to a new Farm Bill.

After fierce debates over issues including the year-round sale of E15—a fuel blend of 15 percent ethanol—and pesticide provisions, reports emerged that the vote on the legislation would be delayed. But lawmakers were able to reach a consensus and passed the Bill with a bipartisan vote of 224-200. 

Anti-hunger advocates had hoped the House would revisit changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) seen in the tax and spending bill last summer, but those have remained in place. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that one in eight participants will lose access to some food relief as a result. 

“People don’t understand how bad it’s going to be,” Kathleen Merrigan, Executive Director of the Swette Center for Sustainable Food Systems at Arizona State University, tells Food Tank. Across her home state of Arizona, food pantries are already seeing lines grow longer. But because the worst won’t be felt for months to come, it will likely take a while for the effects to sink in. “A lot of people who are going out to vote in November won’t realize that the safety net is pulled out from under them.”

Representatives did, however, remove a provision designed to shield pesticide manufacturers from health-related lawsuits tied to their products. 

“I don’t like a lot of what’s in this Farm Bill. It doesn’t excite me,” Merrigan tells Food Tank. “But I have to say that pesticide victory was sweet.” The Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement likely played a role in this win, she acknowledges.

“We’re seeing this pesticide issue being a tipping point right now in food and agriculture policy,” Merrigan says. “And a lot of this has really bubbled up through the MAHA movement.”

From here, the Senate will take up the Farm Bill, with a markup expected in late May or early June. If they succeed in passing the legislative package, it will be the first Farm Bill since 2018. “They typically are on an every five year timeline,” Merrigan explains. “We’re very much overdue at this point.”

But Merrigan believes that a new Farm Bill isn’t something to celebrate if it’s compromised, and she hopes that lawmakers will act to protect farmers and eaters. “I would say the costs of having success in the Farm Bill—if the Farm Bill looks like what just passed in the House—is not worth it. We need to stand tall.”

Listen to the full conversation with Kathleen Merrigan on Food Talk with Dani Nierenberg to hear more about what else may change with this legislation, the impending impacts of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s reorganization plans, and what lies at the heart of a successful Farm Bill. 

Articles like the one you just read are made possible through the generosity of Food Tank members. Can we please count on you to be part of our growing movement? Become a member today by clicking here.

Photo courtesy of James Baltz, Unsplash

The post What the House Farm Bill Means for SNAP, Pesticides, and U.S. Food Policy appeared first on Food Tank.

During the month of April, La Via Campesina once again strongly raised the memory, resistance, and hope of peasants within the framework of the International Day of Peasant Struggles, commemorated every April 17. This year, we marked 30 years since the Eldorado do Carajás Massacre.

The post 2026 | April News Wrap: Updates from LVC members worldwide appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.

The UK has avoided the need for gas imports worth £1.7bn since the start of the Iran war, as a result of record electricity generation from wind and solar, reveals Carbon Brief analysis.

The surge in wind and solar output is cutting the need for gas-fired generation, which has been nearly a third lower than last year and fell to record lows in both March and April 2026.

The figure below shows that wind and solar have generated a record 21 terawatt hours (TWh) on the island of Great Britain since the end of February 2026, when the US and Israel first attacked Iran.

Monthly generation from wind and solar in terawatt hours on the island of Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales), which has a separate electricity system from the island of Ireland, including Northern Ireland. Source: National Energy System Operator (NESO) and Carbon Brief analysis.

Amid another fossil-fuel price crisis, the record wind and solar output since the start of the Iran war avoided the need to import 41TWh of gas – roughly 34 tankers of liquified natural gas (LNG).

Importing those 34 tankers of LNG would have cost around £1.7bn, given the high gas prices triggered by the conflict.

At the same time, record wind and solar helped to cut electricity generation from gas by around a third year-on-year to the lowest levels ever recorded for the months of March and April, as shown in the figure below.

Monthly generation from gas in terawatt hours on the island of Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales), which has a separate electricity system from the island of Ireland, includingNorthern Ireland. Source: National Energy System Operator (NESO) and Carbon Brief analysis.

Together, wind and solar have generated more than twice as much electricity as fossil fuels over the period since the Iran war began. The country’s electricity mix has now flipped: a decade ago, fossil fuels were generating more than four times as much electricity as wind and solar.

Indeed, wind and solar have generated more electricity than fossil fuels for a record 15 months in a row. As shown in the figure below, this included a full winter season for the first time in 2025-26.

Monthly generation from fossil fuels (red) vs wind and solar (blue) in terawatt hours on the island of Great Britain (England, Scotland and Wales), which has a separate electricity system from the island of Ireland, includingNorthern Ireland. Source: National Energy System Operator (NESO) and Carbon Brief analysis.

This meant that gas was setting the price of electricity roughly 25% less often in both March 2026 and April 2026 than in the same month in 2022, when fossil-fuel prices spiked after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

April 2026 also marked a series of other records for the GB electricity system.

For half an hour between 15.30 and 16:00 on 22 April, a record 98.8% of the electricity feeding into the country’s main “transmission” grid came from zero-carbon sources, according to the National Energy System Operator (NESO).

In addition, solar generation hit a series of new record-highs, ultimately reaching 15.4 gigawatts (GW) on the afternoon of 23 April. Wind set a new record of 23.9GW on 25 March.

Q&A: How the UK government aims to ‘break link between gas and electricity prices’

Renewables

|

21.04.26

Clean energy pushes fossil-fuel power into reverse for ‘first time ever’

Renewables

|

21.04.26

Analysis: Record wind and solar saved UK from gas imports worth £1bn in March 2026

Renewables

|

02.04.26

Analysis: How ‘plug-in solar’ can save UK homes £1,100 on energy bills

Renewables

|

02.04.26

jQuery(document).ready(function() { jQuery('.block-related-articles-slider-block_138d1da831ec165efc1f6aea3711d732 .mh').matchHeight({ byRow: false }); });

The post Analysis: Wind and solar have saved UK from gas imports worth £1.7bn since Iran war began appeared first on Carbon Brief.

Every year, the forestry and timber industries produce vast quantities of tree bark as a byproduct. Most of this material is burned, discarded, or left to decompose. At the same time, there is an urgent need to develop scalable and affordable technologies to capture carbon dioxide.

“Our research brings these two issues together through a simple but impactful idea, transforming waste into a resource,” says Suresh Bhargava, director of the Centre for Advanced Materials and Industrial Chemistry at RMIT University.

Bhargava and his colleagues have converted the bark of the eucalyptus tree into a porous carbon material that can help clean water, filter air and capture carbon dioxide. They reported their simple two-step method in a paper published in the journal Biomass and Bioenergy.

Porous carbon materials, which contain a sophisticated network of pores, are already used in filtration and gas treatment systems. Their pores capture contaminants or targeted molecules as water or air pass through. But, says Bhargava, “conventional methods for producing porous carbon materials are often energy-intensive, requiring high temperatures and multiple processing steps, which limits scalability.”

The RMIT team developed a simple and scalable synthesis approach to make their carbon filter from eucalyptus bark. They first make a carbon-rich material called a hydrochar by heating wet bark at low temperature under pressure. Then they physically mixed the hydrochar with zinc chloride.

 

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

 

This results in a highly porous carbon material with a surface area of approximately 2,210 square meters per gram of the material. The porous material captures around 7 millimoles per gram of CO₂, placing it among competitive carbon capture materials, Bhargava says.

“The choice of eucalyptus bark is both practical and scientifically grounded,” he adds. Eucalyptus bark is a widely available, low-cost resource. Australia is home to more than 900 species of eucalyptus and related trees, and eucalyptus is also cultivated widely around the world.

The bark contains lignin and cellulose that lead to the formation of stable carbon frameworks with well-developed porosity. Compared to other biomass sources, it produces materials with higher surface area and better CO₂ adsorption performance.

The abundance of the raw materials and the simplicity of the synthesis process makes this approach inherently scalable. The researchers are now trying to evaluate long-term durability, regeneration, and performance under real operating conditions. And they are seeking industry collaborations to explore commercialization opportunities.

“While further work is needed to evaluate long-term durability and large-scale deployment,” says Bhargava, “this study provides a clear pathway toward more sustainable and economically viable carbon capture technologies.”

Source: Pallavi Saini et al. Sustainable valorisation of eucalyptus bark waste into microporous carbon materials for efficient CO2 capture. Biomass and Bioenergy, 2026.

Photo by David Clode on Unsplash

Headline News:

• “AI Data Centers Need Big Batteries But Lithium Isn’t Fit-For-Purpose” • As AI-driven data centers scale, the grid challenge is no longer simply how much electricity they consume. Their demand is unpredictable, coming in bursts. They need a system with enough buffering for sudden power surges and dips. They are hard on lithium-ion batteries. [CleanTechnica]

Google data center in Oregon (Tony Webster, CC BY-SA 2.0)

• “German Parliament Rejects Return To Nuclear Power” • The Bundestag rejected returning to nuclear energy as an alternative to overcome fuel-related crises, most notably the war with Iran and tensions in the Middle East. The Committee on Economic Affairs and Energy said that the proposal to return to peaceful nuclear reactors was rejected. [Gulf Times]
• “How Do Solar Batteries Work And Are They Worth The Investment?” • With the war on Iran, home-grown renewables help cushion European households from fossil fuel shocks. The UK is the latest European country to greenlight the commercial sale of plug-in solar panels. Interest in batteries has grown apace. Battery costs have fallen 90% since 2010. [Euronews]
• “Sierra Club Endorses Tom Steyer For California Governor” • The Sierra Club has announced its endorsement of Tom Steyer for Governor of California. Doing so, it is backing a candidate with a long record of investing in climate solutions, taking on Big Oil, and helping build the coalitions needed to win significant environmental fights. [CleanTechnica]
• “IEEFA Warns Germany Over Hydrogen Costs” • Germany risks overbuilding its hydrogen network and wasting tens of billions of euros by relying on overoptimistic hydrogen demand projections, research from the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis shows. It says German hydrogen demand is likely to fall short of official projections. [reNews]
• “700 MW Power Link Celtic Between France and Ireland Progressing” • Construction of the planned Celtic Interconnector power link between France and Ireland continues to advance on both sides. With the start of key infrastructure works in Brittany, the 700 MW large-scale project is entering a new phase in its implementation. [Renewable Energy Industry]

For more news, please visit geoharvey – Daily News about Energy and Climate Change.

Scientists are increasingly worried that a vast system of ocean circulation, which delivers warmth to northern Europe and impacts climate globally, is at risk of collapse. Mounting evidence suggests it may be nearing a tipping point, though the research is far from certain.

Read more on E360 →

As global oil prices rocket due to the closure of the Strait of Hormuz, traditional jet fuel has become hard to come by and has nearly doubled in price, leading airlines across much of the world to raise ticket prices or cancel flights.

While greener fuels produced from plants or green hydrogen remain more expensive, the cost gap has narrowed and experts told Climate Home News that this could boost demand in the struggling sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) industry.

Matt Ridley, sustainability and innovation director at the OneWorld airline alliance told Climate Home News that “higher jet fuel prices narrow the green premium, reinforcing the role of SAF in cutting lifecycle emissions while reducing exposure to volatile fossil fuel markets.”

Marie Owens Thomsen, chief economist and sustainability lead at the International Air Transport Association (IATA), a trade group for airlines, said the world is currently seeing “the highest jet fuel prices that we’ve ever had in the history of jet travel”.

• Jun 18, 2025 What is Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF)? Sustainable Aviation Fuel (SAF) is seen as the main way to decarbonise air travel – but is it as green as its backers claim? Read more
• Jun 18, 2025 Aviation’s Green Dream Is the world’s big idea for greener air travel a flight of fancy? Suspicions of fraud, ‘ridiculous’ data and a dearth of supplies – our investigation exposes the flaws in the airline industry’s big green hope: sustainable aviation fuel Read more
• Jun 18, 2025 Aviation’s Green Dream Air travel’s ‘holy grail’: Jet fuel made from CO2 and water prepares for take-off Synthetic jet fuel companies think they have the answer to tackling aviation emissions despite concerns about the cost of producing energy-hungry e-SAF Read more

The problem predates the war but has been worsened by it, she said, adding that as demand for oil-based products like diesel has declined because of the electrification of road transport, many of the oil refineries that produce jet fuel were struggling to make a profit.

The crisis could “wake people up” to the problem of depending on “oil monopolies in the Middle East”, she said, adding that ramping up SAF production is critical for energy security.

“Khaki is the new green”

Some in the military sector seem to be taking note. Rheinmetall, a long-term supplier of the German air force, has partnered with a company called Ineratec which is developing technology to produce e-SAF based on hydrogen. And during the Biden administration, the US Department of Defense invested $65 million in an American e-SAF startup called Air Company.

Summing up the changing reasons for interest in SAF, Marcella Franchi from SAF producer Haffner Energy told the SAF Investor Summit in February that “khaki is the new green”. Speaking before the US bombed Iran, she gave the example of Canada, which she said is pursuing SAF production to avoid reliance on oil-based jet fuel from its “very unsettling neighbours”.

Since conflict has flared in the Middle East, Susan van Dyk, a former academic turned SAF consultant, told Climate Home News that a temporary narrowing of the cost gap is not, by itself, enough to make SAF take off. But the energy crisis may push governments to support SAF, she said.

The European Union and the UK have both mandated that, from January 2025, fuel suppliers at their airports must blend at least 2% SAF with oil-based kerosene. The blending requirement will gradually increase to reach 32% in the EU and 22% in the UK by 2040.

But, at least before the latest oil crisis, the EU and UK faced pressure from some airline and fossil fuel executives to water down these rules. The uncertainty these calls have created is damaging investment in production, SAF producers have said.

Book and claim

Speaking at the SAF Investor Conference in February, African airline executives and SAF producers said the design of the EU and UK mandates hinders non-European producers from contributing.

Under current rules, the SAF has to be physically delivered to planes at EU and UK airports to count towards the mandate, which favours SAF produced in or close to European airports – even though the raw materials to make it, such as waste oil, are often imported from regions like Southeast Asia.

Wakina Mutembei, Kenya Airways’ sustainability and innovations lead, told the conference that the EU and UK should adopt what is known as a book-and-claim system, where SAF supplied to planes outside of Europe can count towards a fuel supplier’s compliance with the EU and UK’s mandates.

Wakina Mutembei speaks at the SAF Investor conference in London (Photo: SAF Investor)

This would be a “business opportunity”, she told the London audience, to use abundant Kenyan crops and used cooking oil and lower production costs “to produce SAF that is cheaper for the European market and the UK market”.

“If we are all complaining that the cost of SAF is higher, why not go to a market where it’s cheaper to produce it?” she asked, noting that this would create jobs in Africa and earn foreign currency.

Francis Mwangi, senior engineer at Kenya’s Civil Aviation Authority, told Climate Home News in an interview that if SAF is produced in Africa “you might find that, even relatively, the price might not be as far from the normal Jet A1 [oil-based jet fuel]”.

IATA’s Thomsen also called for a book-and-claim system, saying it “is definitely a way of making this teeny-tiny, bespoke, private-deal kind of market grow into a global market” by removing geographical constraints.

Shipping SAF long distances to be pumped into planes is inefficient, she said, adding that “without book and claim, this market will not scale”.

The post Oil crisis could boost struggling sustainable aviation fuel industry appeared first on Climate Home News.

Regulator says surge in home battery and rooftop PV installations puts the 82 pct renewables target back in reach because it reduces the burden on large scale projects.

The post “Blows your mind:” Regulator says boom in home batteries and PV puts 82 pct renewables within reach appeared first on Renew Economy.

Frontline leaders from across the country are calling on The Home Depot to lead the industry away from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic, highlighted in a new “photo quilt” unveiled by Toxic-Free Future and partners nationwide. 

The post Groups call on The Home Depot to phase out PVC plastics ahead of shareholder meeting appeared first on Toxic-Free Future.

The post The Geothermal Supply Chain Is America’s to Gain — or Lose appeared first on RMI.

Flooding across northern Michigan last month pushed rivers to record levels, testing the limits of the state’s aging dams so severely that officials in one city nearly ordered evacuations as water threatened to spill over the top of a key barrier — a close call that highlights the growing risk that intensifying storms pose to similar infrastructure around the country.

Nationwide, the average dam is 64 years old and most were built for rainfall patterns that no longer reflect today’s changing climate. Thousands are classified as high hazard, meaning their failure could result in the loss of life. Dam safety experts say inspections are uneven and improvements often underfunded.

More than half of Michigan’s dams are beyond their 50-year design life, and the risks became clear as snowmelt and weeks of heavy rain swelled rivers. Rising water came within 5 inches of flowing over Cheboygan Dam in Cheboygan, a city of about 4,700 people, on April 16. In Bellaire, officials deployed about 1,000 sandbags to shore up a century-old dam.

“This needs to be considered not the worst we can experience. This needs to be considered as typical of the future,” said Richard Rood, a professor emeritus at the University of Michigan who studies climate change.

There are about 92,000 dams in the United States. About 18 percent are considered high-hazard. The Association of State Dam Safety Officials estimates repairing all of these aging structures will cost more than $165.2 billion. In Michigan, that estimate is $1 billion.

Communities facing these risks are left with difficult choices. Given the cost of repairing and upgrading dams to withstand stronger storms, removing them is often cheaper. That can reduce long-term risk and restore rivers to a more natural state. But it often faces resistance from property owners and communities with economies built around the reservoirs those dams created.

As floodwaters recede across Michigan, local leaders, dam safety advocates, and experts are renewing calls to bolster safety regulations and deal with aging dams.

Bellaire Dam in Bellaire, Michigan, on April 13, 2026.
Austin Rowlader / IPR News

Bob Stuber, executive director of the Michigan Hydro Relicensing Commission, considers the April flooding a wake-up call and believes the solution is clear: upgrades where feasible and removal where it makes sense. 

“I think every opportunity we have to remove an aging dam, we should take advantage of it because it’s not going to get better,” he said. “It’s just going to get worse.”

Officials in Traverse City came to that conclusion in 2024 and removed the Union Street Dam along the Boardman-Ottaway River as part of a decades-long restoration project that includes FishPass, which will allow key species to pass while blocking harmful invaders like sea lamprey. Engineers said that removal and upgrade most likely reduced flooding impacts when waters surged to near-record levels last month, falling just short of a 500-year flood.

“Upstream would have been under 2 more feet of water, which would have been quite devastating,” said Daniel Zielinski, a principal engineer for the Great Lakes Fishery Commission. “We actually had a really great stress test of the system. It functioned really well.” 

Removals are increasing across the country, according to data from American Rivers. Since 2000, more dams have come down than gone up, and that pace is accelerating as aging infrastructure, safety concerns, and environmental benefits reshape how communities weigh their value. 

In northern Michigan, conservation groups like Huron Pines help dam owners make that decision. It has managed nine removals in the last 13 years and has seen growing interest after the recent flooding, said Josh Leisen, a senior project manager for the organization. Removal reconnects river ecosystems and eliminates the need for expensive upkeep of aging structures, he said.

“There are costs associated with repair and there are risks associated with having a dam,” Leisen said. “Even if it seems to be in good condition, you get extreme weather events like we just had.”

Removing dams is not always straightforward. Beyond the technical challenges, many communities are reluctant to give up the lakes and waterfronts those structures create.

“There’s this emotional attachment to that impoundment,” said Daniel Brown, a climate resilience strategist at the Michigan-based Huron River Watershed Council.

In other cases, dismantling isn’t practical. Some dams provide electricity or drinking water, linking them to local economies and infrastructure. “[Removal] is not really something that’s on the table because they are connected in this very practical way,” Brown said.

Still, Brown said, there are limits to how much aging structures can be adapted to a warming world. “[A dam] is this very long-term, huge, expensive infrastructure that you’ve put on the landscape that’s going to stay there. And that is not how climate change or nature or rivers behave,” Brown said.

Dismantling dams, like upgrading them, can come with steep costs. The Boardman-Ottaway River project — which removed three dams in the largest removal effort in state history — cost $25 million. Huron Pines is managing the removal of Sanback Dam in Rose City next month, at an estimated cost of $4 million.

Half of the expense is funded through a grant program from the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, or EGLE, launched in response to the 2020 Edenville Dam failure which overwhelmed the downstream Sanford Dam. The twin catastrophes forced the evacuation of more than 10,000 residents, destroyed thousands of homes, and flooded ecosystems in a disaster that investigators later found was avoidable. The $44 million state program funded several dam removals, upgrades, and engineering studies before it ended last year. 

Neil Hawk and his wife Dawn take a rowboat out to a residential part of Sanford, Michigan, to inspect the damage to their neighborhood following extreme flooding throughout central Michigan in May 2020.
Matthew Hatcher / Getty Images

Federal funding is available through programs administered by agencies such as FEMA or U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. But those resources fall short of the estimated $165.2 billion needed to address the issue, and some are at risk of elimination.

State governments regulate roughly 70 percent of the dams in the United States, with the federal government regulating hydropower dams and providing funding and guidance. This means inspection standards, regulations, enforcement, and resources can vary widely.

In Michigan, about 1,000 dams fall under state oversight, while 99 hydroelectric dams are overseen by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. The remaining 1,500 are smaller barriers that don’t fit the criteria for state regulation, according to the Michigan Dam Inventory.

Now, state officials are renewing calls for more money and stronger regulations. “Dam safety may be an issue that isn’t partisan,” said Phil Roos, director of EGLE.

Proposed state legislation would bolster inspection rules, address private ownership, update design standards, and create more funding opportunities for upgrades or removals. “It’s so important to our state that we can come together, and whether it’s passing the legislation that was proposed, or improving procedures, or ultimately funding,” Roos said.

Michigan state Senator John Damoose has expressed concern about private dam ownership since the close call at Cheboygan Dam, which is under both state and private control. About 75 percent of the dams Michigan regulates are privately owned.

“Somebody made a point, ‘Well, we can’t have private companies owning these things.’ I tend to believe in private ownership but they might be right,” Damooose said during a Traverse City roundtable discussion on dam safety.

It’s not just a Michigan issue. Most dams in the United States are privately owned, meaning responsibility for maintenance, upkeep, and potential failure falls on individuals, not governmental agencies, according to the Association of State Dam Safety Officials. 

Climate change is expected to bring more frequent and intense storms. As the world warms, the atmosphere holds more moisture, fueling more intense precipitation, according to Rood at the University of Michigan.

Recent flooding “has shown an incredible vulnerability,” he said. “[Dams] are either going to have to be removed or reengineered. Or they’re going to become a set of slowly unfolding failures.”

Luke Trumble, chief of dam safety for Michigan, said the state is already dealing with conditions that many dams were never designed to withstand.

“It’s a little bit of a misconception that if we fix the dam issue, there’ll be no more flooding,” Trumble said. “There’s still going to be flooding on rivers whenever we get rain like this, or rain on snow.

“What we can do with dam safety legislation is help ensure that flooding is not made worse by a dam failure,” he said.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Close calls at Michigan’s dams are a climate warning to America on May 7, 2026.

As the harmful effects of social media platforms have become undeniable, the exciting promise of a globalised public square has given way to growing anxieties over uncontrolled digital addiction. Children, with their hyperactive cerebral reward system, are especially vulnerable to algorithms designed to grab users’ attention at any cost. A number of countries, both within and outside Europe, are weighing whether to ban minors from social media. However, some argue that such restrictions will not solve the problem.

This article is part of the Green European Journal’s upcoming print edition on demographic futures, out in early June. Subscribe now and get it delivered straight to your door.

Social media has shaped generations in ways both exciting and unsettling. For Guilherme Alexandre Jorge (24 years old, member of Volt Europa in Portugal) and Anna Mazzei (23 years old, member of the Italian Young Greens), it began as a gateway to knowledge and connection. Jorge joined Twitter at 15: “I started following people, then exploring what different topics meant, and I started becoming more aware of issues both globally and locally.” Mazzei, who began using social media at 14, followed pages run by younger creators rather than traditional media, finding them more engaging. “Once I got into activism,” she recalls, “it was also a way to see who shared my views and to follow green activists in Italy and abroad. It helped me to feel part of something”.  

More than a decade ago, social media was largely celebrated as a portal to a globalised world: fast access to news, digital encounters with loved ones abroad, and communities bound by shared interests. In 2010, Facebook’s founder, Mark Zuckerberg, was named Time’s Person of the Year, emblematic of the promise of this new digital era. Those years now feel distant, and social media has gone from being seen as a revolutionary communication tool to being treated by courts and regulators as a system that maximises attention through aggressive algorithms at the expense of users’ mental health. In 2026, Zuckerberg is more likely to make headlines for legal cases and fines imposed on his company, Meta. 

Over 90 per cent of Europeans see an urgent need to protect children online.

According to the 2025 Eurobarometer, over 90 per cent of Europeans see an urgent need to protect children online, citing its negative impact on mental health (93 per cent), cyberbullying (92 per cent), and the importance of restricting access to age-inappropriate content (92 per cent). In response to citizens’ concerns, governments have begun taking action. In December 2025, Australia became the first country globally to enforce a law banning access to social media for users under 16, requiring platforms to implement age detection systems. In Europe, France has passed legislation restricting access for minors under 15 unless parental consent is provided, while Spain is currently advancing a law to ban access for those under 16, with mandatory platform-based age verification. Other countries, including Portugal, Germany, Norway, and Italy, rely primarily on parental consent models for regulating minors’ access.  

The European Parliament, too, overwhelmingly backs restricting children’s access to social media. At the end of 2025, it passed a non-binding resolution stating that minors shouldn’t access social media before the age of 16, although parents could give consent from age 13. While the document has no legal force, it places political pressure on the European Commission, which now holds the power to turn these recommendations into actual EU legislation. 

Digital drug 

These developments respond to growing concerns among experts, teachers, and families about excessive smartphone use and the risks social media poses to young people, particularly in terms of mental health, exposure to harmful content, and cyberbullying. While there is broad, across-the-board agreement that social media presents a genuine and pressing challenge, there is far less consensus on how best to address it. Some advocate strict measures like age-based bans, whereas others favour solutions centred on education, digital literacy, and platform accountability, reflecting broader tensions between protection and autonomy and differing views on who should bear responsibility. Consequently, the measures banning social media use for minors have sparked scepticism and debate over whether such restrictions address the root of the problem or merely act as a partial and potentially ineffective fix, raising broader questions about enforcement, privacy, and the role of platforms themselves.  

Right before it proposed the law to restrict access in November 2025, the Government of Spain presented the most comprehensive research worldwide on the impact of technology on childhood and adolescence. The study “Childhood, Adolescence, and Digital Wellbeing”, published by Red.es, UNICEF Spain, the University of Santiago de Compostela, and the General Council of Colleges of Computer Engineering, gathers the voices of nearly 100,000 children and adolescents in Spain. According to the research, 41 per cent of children have their own smartphone at age 10, and 76 per cent by age 12. Nearly 20 per cent of boys and girls aged 10 to 20 say they spend more than five hours a day on social media on weekends, and intensive use is associated with higher anxiety, lower quality of life, and greater exposure to harassment, cyberbullying, or digital control in romantic relationships.  

Further evidence suggests that by delaying the introduction of smartphones to children until they are 13 or 14 – rather than at 10.8 years, which is the average age in Spain – problems such as video game addiction, exposure to sexting and pornography, and contact with strangers are reduced by half.  

“The scientific evidence we have shows that the increasingly early introduction of smartphones, and social media in particular, into the lives of minors is not harmless. It takes away more than it gives,” summarises Antonio Rial, co‑leader of the national study, senior lecturer in social psychology at the Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, and a leading expert on adolescent behaviour, digital media, and non‑substance addictions.  

The adolescent brain, with a hyperactive reward system and still-immature executive control, is highly vulnerable to social media mechanisms designed to capture users’ attention at all costs. Anna Lembke, one of the first researchers to document this effect, wrote in her 2021 book Dopamine Nation: “The smartphone is the modern-day hypodermic needle, delivering digital dopamine 24/7 for a wired generation.” 

In other words, parents have good reasons to worry. María Gijón, author of Tú puedes dejar tu móvil si sabes cómo (“You Can Quit Your Phone if You Know How”, 2026) and mother of a 12-year-old, directs the Madrid branch of Adolescencia Libre de Móviles (“Smartphone-Free Adolescence”). The movement began in 2023 with a conversation among concerned mothers in a park in Barcelona’s Poblenou district, and has since grown into a nationwide initiative. Its goal is to bring families together around delaying smartphone use for children. “The idea is that if we all agree to give them later, it becomes easier to resist the social pressure we used to feel to hand over a smartphone at age 12,” Gijón explains. The association, unsurprisingly, supports the Spanish government’s proposed measures to limit minors’ access to social media. 

Gijón believes that minors and adolescents don’t use their phones for activities like learning how to play the piano or studying three languages. “Those cases are a needle in a haystack,” she explains: “What we are talking about here is public health, and in public health we have to focus on the majority.” Rial and Gijón both emphasise that banning social media use for minors under 16 will particularly protect economically vulnerable families, whose children tend to use digital devices more excessively than others. While digital addiction is a global problem that does not differ by socioeconomic status, race, or gender, not every child has the opportunity to attend a good school where they can be guided in the proper use of technology. “The lower the socioeconomic level, the greater the misinformation and, likely, the greater the harm. This makes preventive action through legislation even more necessary,” says Rial.  

The expert´s position is clear: social media should be illegal for minors, just as alcohol and tobacco are. “For once and for all, policymakers have sided with minors, who need to be protected. They have sided with families, who need support and guidance. And they have called out the tech industry, making it clear that the greatest share of responsibility lies with them, not with the children or their families,” he says.  

Disease and cure 

As governments move to regulate platforms, the tech industry has responded shrewdly, flooding public discourse with content that highlights the benefits of social media and presents digital education as the primary solution to mitigate its shortcomings. But there have also been experts who, despite criticising the way these platforms operate, oppose measures that restrict minors’ access, arguing that the cure may be worse than the disease. 

Those who believe minors should retain access argue that social media provides adolescents with information, connection, and role models they might not encounter in their family or school environments. For many marginalised groups, these social platforms have served as a vital space for self-expression and finding community. “If we pursue bans without exploring alternatives, we end up depriving them of participation in public life, as well as a wide range of opportunities for connection and learning,” says Marta G. Franco, a journalist, social media expert, and author of Las redes son nuestras (“Social Media Is Ours”), who describes herself as “citizen of the internet since 1999”. 

Alexandra Geese, a Green member of the European Parliament who works on digital issues, agrees: “We shouldn’t punish kids instead of the platforms. A ban should address specific social media platforms that don’t comply with the rules for the protection of minors.” At the same time, she says, “We should support initiatives to build a better internet. They could offer safe spaces for kids and should not be affected by a ban.” 

Franco points out that despite growing calls to restrict social media, government officials continue to rely on these platforms for real-time information. She notes, for instance, that following a major train accident in January, the Spanish Minister of Transport shared live updates on rail services via Twitter, underscoring the state’s dependence on social media as an instant communication tool. 

Moreover, critics warn that bans would undermine efforts to enhance youth engagement in politics. Mazzei points to a paradox: if 16-year-olds are allowed to vote, as is the case in a growing number of European countries, does it make sense to restrict their access to information on social media until then? 

Franco also cautions against drawing sweeping conclusions from studies. While youth anxiety and depression increased around the same time social media became widespread, between 2010 and 2015, other factors – such as the global economic crisis – may have contributed to that outcome. Franco adds that in the United States, where many of these studies originate, screenings began to be conducted among adolescents around the same time, potentially creating the impression of a surge in mental health issues. “Just because two things happen at the same time does not necessarily mean one causes the other. It is even worth asking whether the reverse could be true: that psychological problems may lead to increased social media use,” she notes. 

If 16-year-olds are allowed to vote, as is the case in a growing number of European countries, does it make sense to restrict their access to information on social media until then? 

Rial disagrees: “Levels of anxiety, somatisation, and depression triple, and the risk of suicide quadruples among adolescents who clearly show a pattern of maladaptive social media use. Could it be that a young person with emotional deficiencies, or an existing mental health problem, is more likely to develop maladaptive social media use? Of course. The relationship is bidirectional, but that does not exclude the existence of the first direction.”  

Like Rial, Franco is critical of digital spaces created by private companies and designed to extract maximum profit from our data, and in her work, she advocates for alternative environments that foster healthier interactions. However, she thinks banning access altogether means throwing out the baby with the bathwater. 

Asking the right question 

Nicoletta Prutean, Senior Governance Analyst at the Centre for Future Generations (CFG) and an expert in brain science and psychology, works on shaping policies to safeguard mental health in the era of technological acceleration. She believes that age-based restrictions are a political response to an ill-posed question. “The question ‘does social media harm mental health?’ sounds to me very much like asking ‘does food harm physical health?’ Food can be good, but also bad.” In her view, the right approach is to ask which features in the design of social media are harmful. “The answers would be the recommender system features, the interface features, the infinite scrolling, the autoplay, the variable rewards that exploit our attention capacity and our reward sensitivity,” she notes. Disregarding the fact that the problems of social media are at the design level risks leaving us vulnerable to new technologies – such as generative AI – that may replicate those features. “If we keep focusing just on social media as a whole and not on the mechanisms, we will miss other technologies where these mechanisms are even stronger.”  

Current EU legislation specifically addresses the features of digital platforms that are known to disrupt mental health. “The Digital Service Act (DSA) looks at the right objects, it acknowledges that the design of the systems has a very important role to play and has a financial penalty,” Prutean explains. In February, The European Commission disclosed preliminary DSA findings about TikTok, concluding that its addictive features – such as infinite scroll, autoplay, and highly personalised recommendations – may violate the law by failing to mitigate risks to users’ wellbeing. If confirmed, TikTok could face fines of up to 6 per cent of its global annual turnover, the DSA’s maximum for serious violations. 

Disregarding the fact that the problems of social media are at the design level risks leaving us vulnerable to new technologies – such as generative AI – that may replicate those features. 

Geese also calls for targeting specific platform practices. “Rather than discussing a general social media ban, we should single out problematic practices like algorithms privileging borderline content, targeting, and addictive features. On the basis of the Digital Services Act, the European Commission could already enforce better rules for social media.” 

However, Prutean argues, both the measures restricting minors’ access to social media and the DSA overlook the broader spectrum of mental wellbeing. The former reduces it to the absence of pain: “Being healthy mentally also means being empowered, for example. We shouldn’t hope for future generations just to not be depressed or anxious; we should hope for more.” In the case of the DSA, she notes that harm often occurs long before a clinical pathology emerges. “This is not clearly explicit [in the legislation]. Broadening the definition of mental harm and providing scientific evidence and benchmarks would make these laws more enforceable. The reference to mental health is there, but the threshold for what constitutes harm is just not very clear, making enforcement difficult.”  

For Franco, “It’s somewhat paradoxical that we are constantly hearing calls to create new laws, while at the same time Spain is one of the countries [along with Germany and France] supporting the deregulation of data protection laws through the Digital Omnibus, which is currently being debated in the European Commission.” She notes that Spain is also behind in transposing the DSA, which mandates the establishment of a national authority for its implementation. 

Holding platforms accountable 

A central challenge of measures restricting minors’ access is the age verification system. Australia’s world‑first ban has struggled in practice: the law does not mandate specific technology, leaving platforms to choose their methods. While millions of underage accounts have been closed, many minors remain active because verification tools are imperfect and platforms allow multiple workarounds. In contrast, Spain (and more broadly, the EU) is developing a privacy‑preserving protocol by which users would hold a cryptographic credential – similar to a digital ID – that proves their age without revealing personal details. Stored in a digital wallet, the credential is presented securely to platforms, which learn only that the user meets the age requirement, not their full identity. 

While Gijón stresses the need to accompany restrictions with an effective age verification system that ensures compliance from platforms (including through penalties severe enough to deter rule-breaking) and prevents minors from easily circumventing the measures, Franco is wary of the risk of online activities being tracked to users’ legal identity. She warns: “No matter how much we are told that it will be handled in a way that doesn’t involve sharing our identity with the platform, any data we leave behind is extremely risky and can potentially be captured in some way.” Geese has similar concerns: “It is vital that no additional data – and in particular, no biometric data – is used. Biometric data can be used for sexualised images or for political surveillance many years later.” 

The people interviewed for this article offered different solutions for the social media problem, but they all agreed on two points: that the way social media is currently designed does not exclusively affect minors, and that major tech companies should be held accountable. Jorge notes that while limiting minors’ screen addiction would bring clear benefits, the issue cannot be framed as affecting children alone, and that is why intervention needs to focus on the algorithms that drive compulsive engagement. “I’m 24 now and I am still glued to my phone,” he says. Mazzei, meanwhile, highlights the importance of enabling young people to participate in a digital society, even as she warns against an “unmanaged algorithm”. She does not take a firm position on the debate, but cautions against outright bans, suggesting that “banning” may be the wrong approach: “Maybe restricting or moderating access is better.” 

Rial, meanwhile, situates the debate within a wider democratic concern, asking: “If we look at the problem deeper, this is a question about the quality of democracy. Studies in the US show that 80 per cent of hate speech is driven by just 20 per cent of users or accounts. What happens with that?” 

The digital space, once celebrated as a democratic public forum, today resembles more a shopping mall than a town square. The alternative, Franco argues, lies in fostering different digital environments: “This means greater public collaboration with companies and citizens to build digital spaces based on open-source software and other guiding principles.”  

While such collaboration is attempted, “the mental, physical, and social health of children and adolescents continues to decline,” Gijón worries. “Technology is advancing far faster than legislation, and the only way to protect minors – who lack the capacity to self-regulate in the face of addictive designs or tools – is to delay their age of access.”  

Joie Chowdhury is senior attorney and climate justice and accountability manager at the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) and Jule Schnakenberg is director of World’s Youth for Climate Justice (WYCJ).

A resolution that will come before the UN General Assembly (UNGA) later this month brings a reckoning for multilateralism: will governments stand behind international law or not? 

On May 20, UN member states will consider a resolution to welcome and operationalise the International Court of Justice’s historic Advisory Opinion (ICJ AO) on states’ obligations in respect of climate change, which clarified that they have binding legal duties to prevent and repair climate harm. 

Translating that clarity into action should be straightforward. That the resolution is instead contested exposes efforts to evade responsibility. Those most responsible for the crisis will often be the first to resist accountability – that’s predictable, but it’s not acceptable. 

• Apr 30, 2026 News Santa Marta summit kick-starts work on key steps for fossil fuel transition The conference offers some 60 nations help to develop roadmaps to shift their economies away from coal, oil and gas, and make international trade green Read more
• May 6, 2026 Investigations How Shell is still benefiting from offloaded Niger Delta oil assets Shell used its exit from onshore operations in Nigeria to boost its climate credentials, but new reporting shows that the firm continues to trade oil from its former business Read more

At a time when multilateral cooperation is under strain, the resolution’s backing by a strong majority of countries, or its passing by consensus, holds power. It would send a clear signal: governments remain committed to the rule of law and to collective action to protect the climate, a shared foundation on which all life depends.

State of play

Led by Vanuatu, with support from a core group of diverse countries including the Netherlands, Kenya, Sierra Leone, Singapore, Barbados, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Palau, Jamaica, the Philippines and Burkina Faso, the resolution, now open for co-sponsorship, has already secured broad cross-regional backing – especially from countries at the sharp edge of climate change. 

The final text of the draft resolution faithfully reflects the full breadth of legal obligations articulated in the advisory opinion. It affirms the imperative of a just transition away from fossil fuels, the stability of legal entitlements for countries facing sea-level rise, and the duty to provide full reparation for climate-related harm under international law. It also underscores the centrality of equity and provides for structured follow-up for implementation, including a report on ways to do that from the UN Secretary-General.

While the final resolution text could have gone further on critical justice dimensions, it reflects a carefully balanced outcome, integrating diverse perspectives emerging from the genuine engagement of over a hundred states.

Vanuatu pushes new UN resolution demanding full climate compensation

In negotiations, resistance tracked a familiar set of arguments to protect fossil fuel interests and evade accountability. Many of the usual suspects – polluters with disproportionately high historical and current responsibility for the climate crisis, including major oil producers – have engaged actively, but with the aim of weakening the authority of the Court’s opinion, or references to fossil fuels in the resolution. 

There is still time for things to shift. For the incoming COP presidencies of Australia, Türkiye and Ethiopia, and European states that profess their climate leadership, positioning on this resolution is a litmus test of their commitment to ensuring that climate action accords with the law. 

Closing the accountability gap 

Claims from countries with a disproportionate share of emissions that the resolution duplicates existing processes, particularly under the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), miss the point. The climate treaty regime has yet to deliver accountability. It has not delivered on ambition, nor on the imperative to phase out fossil fuels, and certainly not on tackling loss and damage. The draft resolution text explicitly seeks to ensure coordination, coherence and complementarity with existing processes, while closing the accountability gap.

Assertions that the resolution “reinterprets” or “goes beyond” the advisory opinion similarly ring hollow. This is standard UN practice: General Assembly resolutions give effect to legal norms clarified by the Court. The text does not create new law; it reflects existing obligations in the Court’s own terms. 

ICJ ruling expected to shape US climate lawsuits in defiance of Trump

It is also important to be clear: the advisory opinion itself stands as the most authoritative clarification of international law on climate change. Its weight or persuasiveness does not depend on this resolution. Since its delivery, it has been taken up by courts and policymakers worldwide. What is at stake is not whether states will act, but whether they will do so in good faith or under mounting pressure. 

Consensus carries weight

The advisory opinion carries exceptional legitimacy: requested through a resolution adopted by consensus, following legal proceedings with record participation, and delivered unanimously. Against this backdrop, there is no credible basis for opposing a resolution that seeks to welcome and advance the AO.

Consensus would send a powerful message of states’ commitment to climate action and the rule of law, but the resolution does not require unanimity to pass. As precedents show, including the Ghana-led General Assembly resolution recognising the transatlantic slave trade as a crime against humanity, global majority support can carry decisive weight, even in the face of resistance from powerful states.

From the outset, the ICJ advisory opinion process has been driven and deeply shaped by youth leadership, and responding to their call now requires completing the task the General Assembly set for itself in 2023 by requesting an advisory opinion from the ICJ.

A vote for climate justice

In a powerful poem, Pacific environmental advocate Dylan Kava writes:

“….They call it negotiation.
We know it as survival.
While they draft options
our coastlines disappear…”

The survival and dignity of people facing escalating climate harm is not a matter of political convenience. It is a matter of existing law; a matter of political responsibility, moral courage and actual leadership. 

We urge all member states to support the resolution as presented on May 20, with a view to adoption by consensus. History will not judge those in power by how forcefully they defended the status quo, but by whether they rose to meet a crisis that threatens us all. 

The post ICJ follow-up resolution is a test of climate leadership at the UN appeared first on Climate Home News.

Right to repair legislation is currently being presented in the Manitoba Legislature, and though the bill is Manitoba-specific, it carries significance for farmers across the country.

The post Canada: How Manitoba’s new right to repair legislation could work for farmers appeared first on La Via Campesina - EN.