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.
"This vote will authorize the fossil fuel industry's continued destruction of habitat and landscapes that are critical for wildlife to survive."
The Republican-controlled US Senate voted Thursday to scrap a Biden-era policy that protected millions of acres in the Alaskan Arctic from fossil fuel drilling, even as the government shutdown continued with no end in sight.
The final vote on the resolution, led by Sen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska), was 52-45, almost entirely along party lines. Sen. John Fetterman (D-Pa.) was the only Democrat to join Republicans in voting for the measure, which aims to use the Congressional Review Act to revoke a 2022 Biden administration decision protecting swaths of the Western Arctic.
The resolution still must pass the House, which is also controlled by Republicans.
Athan Manuel, director of the Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said the vote shows that President Donald Trump and his Republican allies are "exploiting" the prolonged shutdown to "hand over our public lands and wild places to corporate polluters."
"Donald Trump's government shutdown has dragged on for nearly five weeks, and what is the top priority for Congressional Republicans? Opening up the western Arctic to oil and gas drilling, not funding services or making sure our military is paid?" said Manuel. "It's shameful."
Robert Dewey, vice president of government relations at Defenders of Wildlife, warned that "this vote will authorize the fossil fuel industry's continued destruction of habitat and landscapes that are critical for wildlife to survive."
The Senate vote comes days after Trump's Interior Department, led by billionaire drilling enthusiast Doug Burgum, wrenched open all 1.56 million acres of the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas leasing.
Trump campaigned on a pledge to accelerate climate-destroying fossil fuel drilling and openly promised oil and gas executives that he would move swiftly to gut regulations in exchange for their financial support in the election.
One estimate released in the wake of the election found that oil and gas interests spent nearly $450 million to boost Trump and Republican candidates and bolster their legislative priorities on Capitol Hill.
Andy Moderow, senior director of policy at the Alaska Wilderness League, said in a statement that Thursday's vote "is yet another reminder that the Trump administration and its allies in Congress are prioritizing profits for oil executives and billionaires over the basic needs of hardworking Americans."
"A fair billionaire tax could fund climate flood prevention, clean air, green cities, affordable housing, and nature protection," said one Greenpeace campaigner.
As Hurricane Melissa leaves a trail of destruction in the Caribbean and the world prepares for the next United Nations climate summit, campaigners this week are demanding taxes to make the superrich pay for creating a better future for all, including by transitioning away from planet-wrecking fossil fuels to renewable energy.
An Oxfam International report released Tuesday found that consumption-based carbon emissions of the richest 0.1% of the global population surged by 92 tonnes between 1990 and 2023, while CO2 pollution from the poorest half of humanity grew by just 0.1 tonnes.
The following day, the UK government released a new climate action plan for the next 12 years. The country aims to decarbonize its electricity supply by 2030 and reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. The climate group 350.org responded by urging Chancellor Rachel Reeves to introduce a tax on ultrawealthy individuals and polluting companies.
"Ordinary people are already paying the price for a crisis they didn't cause—from failed harvests here in the UK to devastation from Hurricane Melissa overseas," 350.org UK campaigner Matilda Borgström said in a statement. "The government's plan will only work if it is funded fairly.
"There's more than enough wealth in this country to pay for affordable clean energy, warm homes, and secure jobs," Borgström argued. "The question for Rachel Reeves is simple: Whose side is she on, ordinary people or the superrich?"
BREAKING: 80+ young people are outside the Treasury right now to tell Rachel Reeves: make tax the super-rich PAY UP - or step down.This Budget, it's time for Reeves to pick a side: us or the billionaires. For wealth taxes to fund investment in a better future.
[image or embed]
— Green New Deal Rising (@gndrising.bsky.social) October 27, 2025 at 5:56 AM
Meanwhile, Greenpeace on Thursday took aim at the wealthiest person on the planet, Elon Musk. As of Thursday, his estimated net worth is $472-490.2 billion, though he could become the world's first trillionaire if shareholders of electric vehicle giant Tesla approve his proposed CEO pay package next week.
Noting Tesla's annual general meeting on November 6, Greenpeace called on governments "to lay the ground for a global tax reform" negotiations for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, scheduled to start in Nairobi, Kenya on November 10—the same day the climate summit, COP30, is set to begin in Belém, Brazil.
"Instead of enabling one person to become a trillionaire, governments should unlock that same scale of wealth—the $1.7 trillion, which a billionaire and multimillionaire tax could generate per year globally—to protect lives and secure our common future," said Fred Njehu, Greenpeace Africa political lead for the Fair Share campaign, in a statement.
"A fair billionaire tax could fund climate flood prevention, clean air, green cities, affordable housing, and nature protection," Njehu noted. "There is no lack of money, only a failure to make the richest of the rich pay their fair share. Governments must act on behalf of the majority of people and listen to what many economic experts suggest: Tax the superrich and their polluting corporations to finance a fair green transition."
A UN synthesis report published Tuesday shows that governments' climate plans, officially called nationally determined contributions, would cut emissions by just 10% by 2035 compared to 2019 levels, dramatically short of what is needed to meet the Paris Agreement's goal of keeping global temperature rise this century at 1.5°C above preindustrial levels.
"There is little mistaking the potential of the wealth tax to serve as a financial engine for environmental initiatives," Amir H. Khodadadi, an Iranian developmental economist focused on climate policy and green technology, wrote Wednesday for Earth.org. "Theoretically, a properly designed wealth tax could redistribute wealth and underwrite everything from renewable energy infrastructure to strategies for climate adaptation."
"Reality, however, is a good deal trickier," Khodadadi acknowledged. "As attractive as it is from those standpoints, using a wealth tax for climate action raises some very thorny questions about equity, effectiveness, and possible unintended consequences that will need to be thoughtfully weighed."
A report co-author at the Center for Biological Diversity warned that President Donald Trump "is determined to feed the voracious AI vortex with more dirty fossil fuels that harm the whole world."
Experts around the world have expressed a wide range of concerns about rapidly advancing artificial intelligence, particularly its impact on the planet, and a report released Wednesday details how fossil fuel-powered data centers for the AI industry in the United States are "threatening to sabotage the country's already faltering climate goals."
President Donald Trump "is determined to feed the voracious AI vortex with more dirty fossil fuels that harm the whole world," said Jean Su, energy justice director at the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and co-author of the report, Data Crunch: How the AI Boom Threatens to Entrench Fossil Fuels and Compromise Climate Goals.
"This report shows how the US is about to set off an explosion of dirty data center emissions, entrenching more fossil fuels when we need their rapid phaseout," she continued. "We need meaningful guardrails at every level to ward off this huge threat to our air, water, and climate—and guard against energy price spikes for consumers."
Specifically, the report shows that "the projected AI surge, set to be powered primarily by fracked gas, could account for 10% of the economy-wide emissions and 44% of the power sector emissions allowable to meet the US 2035 climate target, or nationally determined contribution (NDC)."
"Feeding data centers with fossil fuels is taking the climate crisis we have now and blowing it up like the Incredible Hulk."
"Because of expected fossil fuel-reliant AI data center growth," the report warns, "all other electricity-consuming sectors would need to increase their carbon emissions cuts by 60% to keep pace with the US 2035 NDC."
NDCs are countries' commitments to cut greenhouse gas emissions as part of the Paris Agreement, which the US president ditched, again, after returning to office early this year, having campaigned on promises to "drill, baby, drill." In preparation for COP30—the United Nations climate summit in Brazil next month that the Trump administration does not plan to attend—the UN announced Tuesday that governments' latest NDCs are, overall, dramatically inadequate to meet the Paris goals.
In addition to attacking the limited climate progress that the United States made under his predecessor, Trump is pushing for unfettered AI development—which will require several new unpopular, power-sucking data centers. Polling published last week by the Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research and the Energy Policy Institute at the University of Chicago found that 71% of US adults are somewhat, very, or extremely concerned about the environmental impacts of AI.

Already, "the US disproportionately holds the planet's highest concentration of data centers and is the greatest contributor of AI climate pollution," the CBD report points out. "Without significant changes, US data center expansion is completely incompatible with the 2035 US climate goal, jeopardizing the world's chances of avoiding the worst consequences of climate change and staying within the Paris Agreement target of 1.5°C of global warming."
As John Fleming, a report co-author and scientist at CBD's Climate Law Institute, put it, "Feeding data centers with fossil fuels is taking the climate crisis we have now and blowing it up like the Incredible Hulk."
"A gas-fed AI boom is going to hurdle us past any chance of keeping to our climate goal or maintaining a safe and healthy future for our planet," he added. "To the extent that data center buildout is needed at all, it should be powered only by clean, renewable energy."

The report highlights that "if the projected AI surge were instead powered fully by renewables, it would account for only 4% of the power sector emissions and a negligible amount of the economy-wide emissions allowable to meet the United States' 2035 climate target."
"Guardrails are needed at global and national levels to curb data centers' immense climate emissions," the report stresses, "including adoption of a public interest framework on permitting decisions and requiring onsite and distributed renewable energy and storage for power generation."
"The very richest individuals in the world are funding and profiting from climate destruction, leaving the global majority to bear the fatal consequences of their unchecked power."
A report released Tuesday showed that the wealthiest people on the planet are disproportionately fueling the climate emergency that is intensifying weather catastrophes like Hurricane Melissa, which slammed Cuba on Wednesday after leaving a trail of devastation in Jamaica.
The Oxfam International report, titled Climate Plunder: How a Powerful Few Are Locking the World Into Disaster, features updated figures showing that the consumption-based carbon emissions of the richest 0.1% of the global population grew by 92 tonnes between 1990 and 2023, while the emissions of the poorest half of humanity grew by just 0.1 tonnes.
"A person from the world's richest 0.1% emits over 800kg of CO2 every day. Even the strongest person on earth could not lift this much," the report notes. "In contrast, someone from the poorest 50% of the world emits an average of just 2kg of CO2 per day, which even a small child could lift."
"A person in the top 0.1% emits more in a day than a person in the poorest 50% emits all year," the report adds.
The destruction caused by Hurricane Melissa—the most powerful storm on Earth this year and the strongest to ever hit Jamaica—underscored the extent to which vulnerable nations are bearing the brunt of a crisis they did little to cause as wealthy countries and individuals continue to spew planet-warming emissions with abandon.
Jamaica, where the true extent of the damage from Melissa is only just beginning to emerge, is responsible for an estimated 0.02% of global greenhouse gas emissions, according to the latest available data.
"The climate crisis is an inequality crisis," said Oxfam executive director Amitabh Behar. "The very richest individuals in the world are funding and profiting from climate destruction, leaving the global majority to bear the fatal consequences of their unchecked power."
"We must break the chokehold of the super-rich over climate policy by taxing their extreme wealth."
Oxfam's report was published less than two weeks before the start of COP30 in Belém, Brazil, where world leaders will gather once again to weigh climate solutions after years of failing to reach an agreement to curb fossil fuel production and use.
In its new report, Oxfam implores governments to target the emissions of the ultra-wealthy, including through "climate-specific taxes" such as "frequent flyer levies and taxes on luxury travel."
"It is a travesty that power and wealth have been allowed to accumulate in the hands of a few, who are only using it to further entrench their influence and lock us all into a path to planetary destruction," said Behar. "We must break the chokehold of the super-rich over climate policy by taxing their extreme wealth, banning their lobbying, and instead put those most affected by the climate crisis in the front seat of climate decision-making."