

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Shaye Wolf, Center for Biological Diversity, (415) 632-5301
The Arctic sea ice has reached the
third-lowest level ever recorded, and up to 200 walruses, which appear to be
mostly new calves and yearlings, have been reported dead near Icy Cape on the
north coast of Alaska - further evidence of global warming's brutal
transformation of the Arctic. Although the cause of the walruses' death has not
been confirmed, young walruses are vulnerable to being trampled to death in
stampedes when disappearing sea ice forces walruses to come ashore in large
numbers.
The National Snow and Ice Data Center
announced today that the Arctic summer sea-ice reached a minimum of 5.10 million
square kilometers (1.97 million square miles) on September 12, making 2009 the
third-lowest year on record behind 2007 (1.65 million square miles) and 2008
(1.74 million square miles).
"The deaths of these walruses is another
wake-up call that we will lose the Arctic if we continue on our current course,"
said Shaye Wolf, a biologist with the
Center for Biological Diversity. "Every moment that Washington delays in taking strong action on climate
change, it robs the walrus, the Arctic, and
Arctic people of a future."
The rapid melting of sea ice due to climate
change is forcing the Pacific walrus, a well-known resident of the Arctic seas
between Alaska and Siberia, into a land-based existence for which it is not
adapted. In 2007, the early and extensive disappearance of summer sea ice pushed
females and calves onto the Russian and Alaskan coasts in abnormally dense
herds. Russian biologists reported that 3,000 to 4,000 walruses, mostly young
animals, died in 2007 after being crushed to death in stampedes. Last week, U.S.
Geological Survey researchers reported a large herd of 3,500 walruses on shore
near Icy
Cape, as sea ice
disappeared over their foraging grounds.
The walrus, whose scientific name means
"tooth-walking sea horse," uses the ice as a platform from which to forage for
clams and mussels in the relatively shallow waters over the continental shelf.
Female walruses and their calves follow the sea ice year-round and rely on the
safety of ice floes for nursing their calves and as essential resting platforms
between foraging bouts, since they cannot continually swim. All Pacific walruses
are dependent on sea ice for breeding activities in winter.
On September 8, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service announced it would conduct a full status review to determine whether the
Pacific walrus warrants the protections of the Endangered Species Act. The review must be completed by
September 10, 2010 under a court-ordered settlement in a case brought by the
Center for Biological Diversity to compel a response to its scientific petition
to protect the walrus.
The polar bear has also become an icon of
global warming as the melting of its sea-ice habitat causes individual bears to
drown, starve, and even resort to cannibalism. The Polar Bear Specialist Group now
classifies eight of the world's polar bear populations, including both of
Alaska's
populations, as declining.
In May 2008, the Fish and Wildlife Service
listed the polar bear throughout its range as "threatened," also in response to
a petition and lawsuit from the Center.
The Center is currently challenging the failure to list the polar bear as
"endangered" based in part on U.S. government studies showing a
more than 77-percent chance of extinction for two-thirds of the world's polar
bears by mid-century, even under sea-ice projections that underestimate the rate
of sea-ice loss. In 2007, there was
less ice in the Arctic than more than half the
world's leading climate models project will occur in 2050.
This summer, as the sea ice melted, the
House of Representatives passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act or
ACES. Senators Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., and John Kerry, D-Mass., are scheduled
to introduce the Senate version of this legislation later this month.
"The climate bill needs to be significantly
strengthened," said Wolf. "The
House legislation would not save the polar bear and the walrus and would give us
less than a 50/50 chance of achieving the greenhouse gas reductions scientists
say are necessary to head off devastating climate change. We can't flip a coin
with the fate of the planet."
The Center for Biological Diversity is advocating for
a bill that sets an overall cap on atmospheric carbon dioxide levels of no more
than 350 parts per million, consistent with the best available science; works
with, rather than replaces, the Clean Air Act, which has successfully reduced
air pollution for 40 years and is one of our most powerful tools in fighting
global warming; and that eliminates or greatly reduces offsets and other
loopholes.
"The Arctic
is the Earth's early warning system," said Wolf. "If Congress and the Obama
administration begin deep and rapid greenhouse pollution reductions now, we can
still avert some of the most serious global warming impacts. But the rapid change underway in the
Arctic shows that time is running perilously short."
Current sea ice data is available at https://nsidc.org/arcticseaicenews/
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252Alphabet, Google's parent company, is contributing $22 million to the president's ballroom project.
The US Justice Department has reportedly given the tech behemoth Alphabet a green light to acquire the cybersecurity firm Wiz after it was revealed that the Google parent company donated to President Donald Trump's $300 million ballroom project.
The merger deal is valued at over $30 billion and would mark Alphabet's largest acquisition to date, even as the company faces antitrust cases at the state and federal level. Wiz CEO Assaf Rappaport announced the Justice Department's decision on Wednesday at an event hosted by the Wall Street Journal.
The DOJ approval came after Bloomberg reported in June that the Justice Department's antitrust arm was reviewing whether Alphabet's acquisition of Wiz would illegally undermine competition. The following month, the Justice Department ousted two of its top antitrust officials amid internal conflict over shady corporate settlement deals.
Lee Hepner, an antitrust attorney and senior legal counsel for the American Economic Liberties Project, called the DOJ's clearing of Alphabet's Wiz acquisition "the kind of blunt corruption that most won't notice."
Hepner observed that news of the approval came shortly after the White House released a list of individuals and corporations that have pumped money into Trump's gaudy ballroom project. Google—which also donated to Trump's inauguration—was one of the prominent names on the list, alongside Amazon, Apple, and other major corporations.
Google is reportedly funneling $22 million to the ballroom project.
"These giant corporations aren't funding the Trump ballroom debacle out of a sense of civic pride," Robert Weissman, co-president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, said earlier this week. "They have massive interests before the federal government and they undoubtedly hope to curry favor with, and receive favorable treatment from, the Trump administration."
"Millions to fund Trump's architectural whims are nothing compared to the billions at stake in procurement, regulatory, and enforcement decisions," he added.
According to a Public Citizen report published Monday, two-thirds of the 24 known corporate donors to Trump's ballroom project—including Google—are beneficiaries of recent government contracts.
The group's leader called for rejecting "attempts to curtail funding for renewable energy projects" along with "the bullying efforts by the USA and others to weaken policies and regulations to combat climate change."
Nearly 10 months after President Donald Trump ditched the Paris Agreement for a second time, a leading human rights organization on Wednesday urged the remaining parties to the landmark treaty to defy his dangerous example when they come together next week for the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Belém, Brazil.
"Amnesty International is urging governments to resist aligning with the Trump administration's denial of the accelerating climate crisis and instead demonstrate true climate leadership," said the group's secretary general, Agnès Callamard, in a statement. "In the face of President Trump's rejection of science coupled with the intensified lobbying for fossil fuels, global leaders must redouble their efforts to take urgent climate action—with or without the US."
Callamard, who plans to attend COP30, stressed that "the global climate crisis is the single biggest threat to our planet and demands a befitting response. The effects of climate change are becoming more pronounced across the whole world. We confront increasingly frequent and severe storms, wildfires, droughts, and flooding, as well as sea-level rise that will destroy some small island states."
"COP30 in Brazil presents an opportunity for collective resistance against those trying to reverse years of commitments and efforts to keep global warming below 1.5°C," she continued, referring to a primary goal of the Paris Agreement. "The fact that levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere soared by a record amount last year should ring alarm bells for world leaders at COP30."
Further elevating fears for the future, the UN Environment Programme warned Tuesday that Paris Agreement parties' latest pledges to cut greenhouse gas emissions—officially called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs)—could push global temperatures to 2.3-2.5°C above preindustrial levels, up to a full degree beyond the treaty's key target for this century.
Greenpeace demands world leaders agree on a global response plan at #COP30 as a new major UN report warned the global temperature is projected to rise to 2.3-2.5°C above pre-industrial era global temperatures, putting the Paris Agreement limit of 1.5°C at risk in the short-term.
[image or embed]
— Greenpeace International 🌍 (@greenpeace.org) November 4, 2025 at 11:20 AM
Oil Change International highlighted in a report released last week that the United States—which is responsible for the biggest share of planet-heating pollution since the Industrial Revolution—plus Australia, Canada, and Norway are now "overwhelmingly responsible for blocking global progress on phasing out oil and gas production."
The group's global policy lead, Romain Ioualalen, said that "10 years ago in Paris, countries promised to limit warming to 1.5°C, which is impossible without putting an end to fossil fuel expansion and production. The rich countries most responsible for the climate crisis have not kept that promise. Instead, they've poured more fuel on the fire and withheld the funds needed to put it out."
"The fact that a handful of rich Global North countries, led by the United States, have massively driven up their oil and gas production while people around the world suffer the consequences is a blatant mockery of justice and equity," Ioualalen added. He called on governments attending COP30 "to deliver a collective roadmap for equitable, differentiated fossil fuel phaseout dates, and address the systemic barriers preventing Global South countries from transitioning to renewable energy, including finance."
Some experts are concerned that Trump—who's pursuing a pro-fossil fuel agenda that includes but is far from limited to exiting the Paris Agreement—may interfere with the talks, even though a White House official confirmed to Reuters last week that he doesn't plan to send a delegation to Belém.
The official said that Trump made his administration's views on global climate action clear in his September speech at the UN General Assembly—during which the president said the fossil fuel-driven crisis was "the greatest con job ever perpetrated on the world," and the scientific community's predictions about the global emergency "were wrong" and "were made by stupid people."
Pointing to Trump's global tariff war that was debated before the US Supreme Court on Wednesday, the official added that "the president is directly engaging with leaders around the world on energy issues, which you can see from the historic trade deals and peace deals that all have a significant focus on energy partnerships."
As CNN reported Tuesday:
This practice of linking trade and climate so closely is an innovation of the Trump administration, said Kelly Sims Gallagher, dean of the Fletcher School at Tufts University who worked on US climate negotiations with China for the Obama administration.
In the absence of US leadership, she said that China, which is the world's top emitter, may seek to assume more of a prominent, steering role at the talks. The European Union is also likely to take a strong role, though internal rifts have emerged within the EU regarding how aggressively to cut its own emissions.
While Gallagher and other experts who spoke with CNN don't necessarily expect that COP30 will feature the same kind of disruptive behavior that Trump engaged in during last month's International Maritime Organization meeting to delay a new set of global regulations to slash shipping industry emissions, they acknowledged that it is possible. Already, the Tufts professor suggested, Trump's abandonment of the Paris treaty appears to be having an impact.
"I think there's an undeniable fact, which is that with the US withdrawal for a second time, it's definitely seeming to undermine ambition," Gallagher said. "I think it's just getting harder to make the case that global ambition is going to rise without pretty substantial engagement from the United States."
Despite not sending a high-level delegation to the COP30 Climate Summit in Brazil, the presence of the US will still be felt by negotiators there. The US will be the elephant in the room, and could seek to disrupt the talks from afar, depending on how they're trending... www.cnn.com/2025/11/04/c...
[image or embed]
— Andrew Freedman (@afreedma.bsky.social) November 4, 2025 at 9:42 AM
Callamard argued Wednesday that those attending COP30 "must push back against attempts to curtail funding for renewable energy projects and resist the bullying efforts by the USA and others to weaken policies and regulations to combat climate change."
"Humanity can win if states commit at COP30 to a full, fast, fair, and funded fossil-fuel phase-out and just transition to sustainable energy for all, in all sectors, as recently confirmed by the International Court of Justice's recent advisory opinion," she said. "These commitments must go hand-in-hand with a significant injection of climate finance, in the form of grants, not loans, from states that are the worst culprits for greenhouse gas emissions."
"Crucially, states must take steps to protect climate activists and environmental defenders," the Amnesty leader added. "This is the only way to secure climate justice and protect the human rights of billions of people."
According to an annual Global Witness report published in September, at least 142 people were killed and four were confirmed missing last year for "bravely speaking out or taking action to defend their rights to land and a clean, healthy, and sustainable environment," bringing the total to at least 2,253 land defenders slaughtered or disappeared since the group started tracking such cases in 2012.
“To limit new weapons development in China or Russia, one of the best things the US can do is maintain the taboo on testing and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," said one expert.
More than a dozen US senators on Wednesday urged President Donald Trump to abort plans for a resumption of nuclear weapons testing, a call that came as Russian President Vladimir Putin directed his senior officials to draft proposals for possible new nuke tests in response.
“We write to you today to express grave reservation about any action to resume nuclear weapons testing," 14 Democratic senators led by Sens. Jacky Rosen (D-Nev.) and Martin Heinrich (D-NM), ranking member of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, said in a letter to Trump.
"We request that you personally provide clarification," the lawmakers added. "The decision to resume nuclear weapons testing would be geopolitically dangerous, fiscally irresponsible, and simply unnecessary to ensure the ability of the United States to defend itself."
Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.)—who signed the letter—also introduced emergency legislation last week aimed at preventing Trump from resuming nuclear weapons tests.
Although no country is known to have tested a nuclear weapon since North Korea last did so in 2017, Trump last month ordered the Pentagon to prepare for a resumption of reciprocal testing.
“The United States has more Nuclear Weapons than any other country,” Trump falsely wrote on social media. “Because of other countries testing programs, I have instructed the Department of War to start testing our Nuclear Weapons on an equal basis.”
TASS reported Wednesday that Putin instructed the Russian Foreign Ministry, Defense Ministry, intelligence agencies, and civilian bureaus to submit proposals "on the possibility of preparing for nuclear weapons tests" in the event that other countries resume testing.
Russia has not tested a nuclear weapon in its modern history. The former Soviet Union's final nuclear test took place in 1990 and the successor Russian state has adhered to a moratorium ever since.
Last week, Congresswoman Dina Titus (D-Nev.) introduced a bill to prohibit new US nuclear weapons testing. Titus accused Trump of putting "his own ego and authoritarian ambitions above the health and safety of Nevadans."
Supporting Titus' bill, Tara Drozdenko, director of the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a statement Wednesday that “there is no good reason for the United States to resume explosive nuclear testing and it would actually make everyone in this country less safe."
"We have so much to lose and so little to gain from resuming testing," she continued. "New explosive testing by the United States would be to make a political statement, with major consequences: It would shatter the global freeze on nuclear testing observed by all but North Korea and give Russia, China, and other nuclear powers the green light to restart their own nuclear testing programs."
“The United States has not conducted a nuclear detonation test since 1992," Drozdenko noted. "Even those advocating for testing acknowledge there is no scientific need to test to maintain the US nuclear arsenal. In fact, Energy Secretary Chris Wright recently said that the updated systems can be tested without conducting full nuclear detonations."
“To limit new weapons development in China or Russia, one of the best things the US can do is maintain the taboo on testing and ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty," she added. "This treaty with on-site verification measures would be the best way to ensure that countries are not clandestinely testing nuclear weapons.”
The United States and Soviet Union came dangerously close to nuclear war on multiple occasions during the Cold War, most notably amid the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis and, later, during then-President Ronald Reagan's first administration in the early 1980s.
Weeks after becoming the first country to develop nuclear weapons in 1945, the United States waged the world's only nuclear war, dropping atomic bombs on the defenseless Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki and killing hundreds of thousands of people, mostly civilians.
According to the International Campaign for the Abolition of Nuclear Weapons, Russia leads the world with 5,449 nuclear warheads in its arsenal, followed by the US with 5,277 warheads, China with around 600, France with 290, and the United Kingdom with 225. Four other nations—India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea—also have nuclear arsenals of between 50-180 warheads each.