5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Climate
Hottest Year Ever Recorded Set to Arrive by 2030, Warns New UN Report
The lead author of the new report noted that predicted weather patterns could mean the record is shattered as soon as next year.
May 28, 2026
Global temperates are likely to hit their highest average level ever within the next four years, according to a report published Thursday by the United Nations' World Meteorological Organization.
Overall, WMO's report projects an 86% chance that the world will experience its warmest year ever between 2026 and 2030, with a 91% chance that "the global mean near-surface temperature will temporarily exceed 1.5°C above the 1850-1900 average levels for at least one year between 2026 and 2030."
Exceeding temperatures from the pre-industrial average by 1.5°C "risks unleashing ever more severe climate change impacts and extreme weather, and decreases adaptation option," the report notes.
Leon Hermanson, lead author of the report, said there's a good chance that 2027 will break all-time temperature records set in 2024 given that meteorologists are predicting an El Niño weather pattern to develop this summer and continue through the end of this year.
One particularly troubling finding in the report is that "Arctic temperatures over the next five extended northern hemisphere winters (November-March) are predicted to be 2.8°C above average temperatures for 1991-2020, an anomaly more than three and half times that of global mean temperature anomaly over the same period."
These higher Arctic temperatures mean likely further reductions in ice in the Barents Sea, Bering Sea, and Sea of Okhotsk, the report warns.
Simon Stiell, executive secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, said in a Thursday interview with The Guardian that Europe's current heatwave is a preview of what's to come the longer the global climate crisis goes unaddressed.
"Protecting human lives, businesses and economies from extreme heat and the many other soaring costs of climate change is core business for every nation," said Stiell, "and it starts with kicking the fossil fuel addiction much faster."
Keep Reading
Show Less
They're Called 'Super Pollutants'—And Trump's EPA Wants to Expose You to More of Them
"EPA owes it to Americans to put people’s health first—not give hidebound corporations more time to keep using outdated chemicals," said one critic.
May 21, 2026
In a reversal of his past position and what critics are calling yet another betrayal of his "Make America Healthy Again" campaign pledge, US President Donald Trump announced Thursday that his administration is loosening limits on so-called "super pollutant" hydrofluorocarbons used in air conditioners and refrigerators at the expense of the environment and climate.
Trump and Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin spun the move as a measure that will "save American families and businesses more than $2.4 billion" by revising "costly overreaching restrictions" imposed during the Biden administration "limiting the type of refrigerants American businesses and families can use."
"Today, the Trump EPA is fulfilling President Trump’s promise to lower costs and is fixing every problem we can under the authority Congress gave us," Zeldin said. "Our actions allow businesses to choose the refrigeration systems that work best for them, saving them billions of dollars. This will be felt directly by American families in lower grocery prices.”
Grocery prices have continued to rise during Trump’s second term, driven by the administration's erratic trade wars and actual war on Iran. Critics of Thursday's move argue that it will do little to reduce consumer costs, while increasing pollution and health risks for American families.
“It’s nice that they are paying attention to affordability, but if they want to make a difference, it’s tariffs and the Iran War," Ryan Young, a senior economist at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a libertarian think tank, told NOTUS, estimating that the move would save consumers about $2 per year.
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) are called “super pollutants” because they trap far more heat in the atmosphere than carbon dioxide, even though they are emitted in much smaller quantities. They were originally introduced to replace ozone-depleting chemicals like chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) that ravaged the ozone layer.
However, scientists soon realized that HFCs are extremely powerful greenhouse gases in their own right. As air conditioning use and demand grows worldwide, so has HFC use.
As the EPA's own website acknowledges on its "Operation: Disrupt HFCs" webpage:
HFCs are potent greenhouse gases... with high global warming potential. HFCs are commonly utilized as refrigerants, aerosol propellants, foam blowing agents, solvents, and fire retardants across residential, commercial, and industrial applications. The major source of HFC emissions is their use as refrigerants—for example, in air conditioning systems in both vehicles and buildings. Emissions occur during manufacturing, as well as through leaks, servicing, and disposal of equipment containing HFCs.
Former EPA Assistant Administrator Joseph Goffman said in a statement Thursday that "families are already stretched thin by high grocery bills and everyday expenses, and weakening safeguards on these super-polluting refrigerant chemicals isn’t going to change that."
"Even manufacturers are saying this delay likely won’t lower prices for consumers because supplies of these chemicals are already being phased down in favor of cleaner, innovative replacements," he added.
Stephen Yurek, president and CEO of the Air-Conditioning, Heating, and Refrigeration Institute (AHRI)—an industry lobby—warned that the "reckless" new policy could actually cause refrigerant prices to increase.
“This rule works against basic supply and demand,” Yurek said. “By extending the compliance deadline, the EPA is maintaining and even increasing demand in the market for existing refrigerants while supply continues to fall under the AIM Act."
The American Innovation and Manufacturing (AIM) Act of 2020, bipartisan legislation signed by Trump during his first term, directed the EPA to "phase down the production and consumption of listed HFCs in the United States by 85% by 2036" and "facilitate the transition to next-generation technologies that do not rely on HFCs."
As of this year, more than 170 countries—including the United States—plus the European Union have ratified the Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol, the main global agreement to phase down HFCs.
Yurek explained that "instead of falling, refrigerant prices are likely to rise, resulting in higher service costs, and higher costs for consumers."
Addressing the EPA's reversal on HFCs, Goffman said, "All this action does is slow the shift to cleaner technologies while risking continued releases of climate super pollutants and leaving families to face the much greater costs and health threats of dangerous climate change."
"EPA owes it to Americans to put people’s health first—not give hidebound corporations more time to keep using outdated chemicals," he added. "Americans deserve affordable groceries that don’t come at the expense of the strong safeguards they count on to keep our families safer, not sicker.”
The EPA move comes amid mounting calls by over 160 civil rights, environmental, faith, health, and labor groups to fire Zeldin over his agency's deregulation spree.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Ocasio-Cortez Corners EPA Administrator on Water Quality Near Data Centers
Ocasio-Cortez recently met with families in Morgan County, Georgia who said a nearby Meta data center had degraded their local wells and "now rely on bottled water to drink and prepare meals."
May 21, 2026
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez on Wednesday confronted a Trump Environmental Protection Agency official about the impact of artificial intelligence data centers on Americans' drinking water.
During a hearing held by the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) grilled EPA Assistant Administrator for Water Jessica Kramer about whether the Trump administration had looked into complaints from communities across the US about nearby data centers causing a decline in water quality.
Kramer indicated that she was aware of the complaints being made about data centers' water usage, but said she hadn't heard anything about their negative impact on water quality.
At this point, the New York Democrat discussed a recent trip she made to Morgan County, Georgia, where local residents said that their tap water had turned brown since tech giant Meta began building a massive data center campus nearby.
"They are clear-cutting forests and began heavy construction, including blasting," Ocasio-Cortez said. "And families in the area are starting to see not only their water pressure decrease... but their appliances have all stopped working because it is decimating their water quality. They now rely on bottled water to drink and prepare meals, and nearby residents' water bills are expected to increase by 33%."
Ocasio-Cortez then pulled out a jar of brown water that she had taken from a local tap in Morgan County to demonstrate the severe decline in quality.
"The only difference between clear water and this was that data center," she said. "This wasn't just one well. This wasn't just one family's situation. This is what the drinking water now looks like next to that data center."
EXCLUSIVE: @AOC calls for a congressional investigation into the impact of data centers.
We took her to meet residents in a Trump +50 county in Georgia whose well water was polluted by Meta’s massive data center.
“That absolutely merits...national congressional investigation." pic.twitter.com/VS7I38MzAB
— More Perfect Union (@MorePerfectUS) May 18, 2026
Ocasio-Cortez pressed Kramer about whether the Trump EPA was planning to investigate whether data centers were causing mass degradation of water throughout the country.
"As soon as I get back into my office, I will be looking into exactly what you just talked about," replied Kramer. "Because anywhere, whatever type of construction it is, it is a priority to ensure that water quality standards established by EPA are being met. So we'll be looking into that."
Earlier this year, Ocasio-Cortez joined with Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) to introduce a bill that would impose a nationwide moratorium on AI data center construction "until strong national safeguards are in place to protect workers, consumers, and communities, defend privacy and civil rights, and ensure these technologies do not harm our environment."
At the same time, Leading the Future—a super political action committee backed by venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz, Palantir co-founder Joe Lonsdale, and other AI heavyweights—is spending at least $100 million in the 2026 midterm elections to elect lawmakers who aim to pass legislation that would set a single set of AI regulations across the US, overriding any restrictions placed on the technology by state governments.
Keep Reading
Show Less
Trump's Iran War Has Already Cost Americans Over $40 Billion Extra on Gas and Diesel
"This data shows that energy price shocks function as an economy-wide, unacknowledged tax on households, with costs comparable to large federal programs and policies," said the Climate Solutions Lab director.
May 18, 2026
An analysis released Monday by Brown University researchers shows President Donald Trump's illegal war on Iran has cost American consumers over $40 billion more at the fuel pump since late February.
Iran has responded to the US-Israeli aggression by restricting ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz, which has limited the trading of fertilizer and fuel. The International Energy Agency's executive director warned Monday that the world only has weeks' worth of oil reserves left.
With the trade route largely closed, including during the current ceasefire, fuel prices around the world have soared. As of Monday, the average price for a gallon of gasoline in the United States was $4.515. Brown's Climate Solutions Lab and Costs of War Project have launched an online tool to track the rising costs for US consumers.
So far, according to the tool, price hikes tied to the war have cost Americans over $41.9 billion extra for diesel ($18.66 billion) and gas ($23.28 billion), based on prewar data, or an average of more than $320 per US household.
"This data shows that energy price shocks function as an economy-wide, unacknowledged tax on households, with costs comparable to large federal programs and policies," said Jeff Colgan, director of the Climate Solutions Lab, in a statement.
The new research brief from Brown highlights how that money could have been spent to improve Americans' lives. For example, that $40 billion "could pay for the entire federal Bridge Investment Program announced in 2024 to repair, restore, and modernize over 10,200 of the nation's bridges."
The full figure also exceeds "the estimated cost of completely redoing the US air traffic control system ($31.5 billion)," the brief states. It's also two times the cost of the Biden administration's proposed electric vehicle charging and electrification programs ($18.9 billion).
"Rising fuel costs are just one of the many financial costs of this war," noted Costs of War director Stephanie Savell. "Official estimates of Iran War costs are just scratching the surface of the actual burdens Americans will face because of it."
Researchers, policymakers, and other critics have been sounding the alarm about the various costs of Trump's war—including human lives lost, infrastructure damage in the Middle East, and rising prices around the world—throughout the conflict.
Earlier this month, a report from the office of US Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) projected that if gas prices remain at their current level, it will cost Americans an extra $73.06 per month, or $876 per year, to fill up just one vehicle.
An analysis published Friday from the liberal think tank Center for American Progress stressed that the increased fuel and fertilizer prices are hitting rural families and farmers—which are key to Trump's base—particularly hard.
Globally, during the first month of the war, consumers and businesses lost up to $111.6 billion due to rising fuel prices, according to the climate group 350.org—which emphasized that its estimate did not account for "wider knock-on effects, such as rising fertilizer and food costs, declines in economic output and employment, or broader inflation driven by fossil fuel price volatility."
"Over $100 billion has gone straight into the pockets of fossil fuel companies," 350.org chief executive Anne Jellema said at the time, "while families struggle to afford energy and basic necessities."
In his public comments, the president has repeatedly made clear that he does not care about how his war impacts the public. Last week, when asked about how much "Americans' financial situations" were on his mind as he tries to negotiate an end to the conflict, Trump said, "Not even a little bit."
Keep Reading
Show Less
Most Popular