

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.

Aaron Huertas, Assistant Press Secretary
202-331-5458
ahuertas@ucsusa.org
Technology available today could dramatically reduce big-rig-truck
fuel consumption and emissions that cause global warming and smog,
according to a new report released today by the Union of Concerned
Scientists (UCS). A major side benefit: Truckers would save
significantly on fuel costs.
"Truckers can make relatively simple modifications to their rigs,
save themselves a lot of money over the long run, and save all of us
from pollution," said report author Don Anair, a UCS senior vehicles
analyst. "We have the technology today to get this done."
UCS released the report one day before the California Air Resources
Board (CARB) is expected to issue two new draft rules for trucks
registered in California as well as those entering the state. The first
rule would require trucks to reduce global warming emissions with
off-the-shelf efficiency technology. The second would require truckers
to install filters or upgrade their engines to reduce smog-forming and
particulate matter emissions. The board is expected to vote on each
measure in mid-December after a 45-day public-comment period.
The rules would help the state meet its
global-warming-emissions-reduction and air-quality goals. Trucks
account for approximately 7 percent of global warming emissions in
California and the nation at large. In California, trucks are the
largest of source of smog-forming nitrogen-oxide emissions (30 percent)
and diesel particulate matter (45 percent). The rules also would have
an impact on the rest of the country: Some half a million trucks from
out of state pass through California annually.
CARB's proposed global warming pollution measure for trucks is one
of nine early action measures the board has identified as part of its
implementation plan for the state's landmark global warming law. If
CARB requires trucking companies and independent truck owners to take
full advantage of global-warming-pollution-reduction technology
available today, the report concludes, it would:
REPORT RECOMMENDS AERODYNAMIC IMPROVEMENTS, BETTER TIRES
When traveling at highway speed, a typical truck uses half the
energy from burning diesel fuel just to overcome drag. Equipment that
allows air to pass over the tractor and trailer more easily will
dramatically reduce fuel use. Such equipment could include:
Tires also play a critical role in fuel economy. Replacing two-tire
sets on trailers with wider, single tires and heavy steel wheels with
light-weight aluminum wheels, among other improvements, can boost fuel
economy as much as 5 percent.
For a typical, new long-range truck traveling more than 130,000
miles per year, available technology could reduce fuel use more than 12
percent. That would translate to annual savings of more than 2,000
gallons of diesel fuel each year and a net profit of $30,000 during the
truck's first 8 years, the average time such a vehicle will spend doing
long-distance trips. After 8 years, long-range trucks are typically
sold into medium or short-range service. Overall, long-range trucks
account for 35 percent of diesel fuel use in California and typically
average 6 to 6.5 miles per gallon.
"The average big-rig truck currently is burning 20,000 plus gallons
of diesel fuel per year," Anair said, "so installing available,
efficient technology on new tractors and trailers is a clear win-win
for reducing emissions and saving money."
RULES SHOULD COVER NEW TRUCKS AND RETROFITS
Besides recommending that new tractors and trailers feature this
technology, it pointed out that retrofitting tractors and trailers
already on the road also can significantly cut global warming emissions
and save truck owners money. Retrofitting existing trucks as old as 12
years with a full package of available fuel-efficient technology still
would provide tractor-trailer owners lifetime cost savings. With trucks
beyond 12 years of age, truck owners could benefit by installing a more
modest upgrade package.
For fleet owners, a full technology package would produce cost
savings for trucks and trailers as old as six years. The difference
between the two cost-benefit analyses is due to the fact that trucking
companies typically own 2.5 trailers for every tractor. The report
assumes their initial investment in fuel-efficient technology would be
greater than owners of single tractor-trailers.
The report's analyses are based on a diesel fuel price of $3.24.
Anair noted that if diesel prices increase over time, technology
packages would produce greater overall savings and even older vehicles
would realize net savings. Reducing fuel use can lower operating costs
for truckers, thereby lowering shipping costs for retailers and
consumers. Trucks are expected to drive 21.3 billion miles on
California's highways in 2020, a 33-percent increase from today's 15.9
billion miles.
"Trucks present a huge opportunity to make big cuts in global
warming pollution," said Anair. "The sooner we start, the more money
truck owner will save and the faster we get on the road to meeting
California's global-warming-reduction goals."
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.
"Maine does not need a senator who signs the checks and hopes for the best from Donald Trump," said one Democratic US Senate candidate.
Two days after a federal immigration agent fatally shot 26-year-old Johan Sebastián Guerrero in Biddeford, Maine, the state's Republican senator, who voted earlier this year to fund US Immigration and Customs Enforcement without requiring reforms, refused to say she regrets the vote.
Prem Thakker of Zeteo News approached Senate Appropriations Committee Chair Susan Collins at the Capitol on Wednesday with a polite but direct question.
"Hi senator, how are you?" Thakker began. "I was wondering, do you regret giving ICE more money, given the killings, including the one in your state?"
Collins, who was waiting for an elevator with an aide, did not reply, while her staffer asked what outlet Thakker was with before saying the senator had to leave.
As Collins approached the elevator, Thakker repeated the question: "No regrets?"
Watch @prem_thakker ask Sen. Susan Collins if she regrets funding ICE given its recent killings, including of 26-year-old Maine resident Joan Sebastian Guerrero. Collins defends herself, saying it went to bodycams & training. ICE wasn’t wearing bodycams when they killed Guerrero. pic.twitter.com/hl8FYYyBMq
— Zeteo (@zeteo_news) July 15, 2026
The senator did not directly answer the question, but suggested she stood by her vote in April to provide ICE and Customs and Border Protection with $70 billion for the next three years—without agreeing to guardrails Democrats had demanded following the killings of at least four people since the beginning of 2026 and the deaths of dozens of people in ICE detention and during deportation operations in 2025.
She referred to "money I got for body-worn cameras and training"—but as Thakker pointed out, that money didn't stop agents from killing Guerrero on Monday morning.
"They didn't wear cameras though, did they, Senator?" asked Thakker as the elevator doors closed.
Guerrero, who reportedly had legal status in the US and was married with a 3-year-old daughter, was killed in his vehicle Monday morning. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) said ICE had been “conducting targeted surveillance on the last known address of an illegal alien with a final order of removal,” and details that have emerged since the shooting suggest Guerrero was not the person agents were looking for.
DHS said Guerrero "attempted to flee the scene" and bullet holes were seen in the windshield of Guerrero's car. ICE agents are trained never to shoot into a moving car, but they have in several recent cases, including the killings of protester Renee Good in Minneapolis in January and immigrant Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston last week.
Fleeing a scene is also not considered grounds for the use of force, according to the Department of Justice.
Nirav Shah, who is running to be the Democratic US Senate candidate in Maine, noted that Collins' call for ICE to suspend its use of vehicle stops was ineffectual, with President Donald Trump ordering the stops to continue on Wednesday.
"That is the entire measure of her influence in Washington," said Shah. "Sen. Susan Collins can't stop Trump, and she's too weak to stand up to him—period."
"Susan Collins funds ICE and has given them a blank check," he added. "Maine does not need a senator who signs the checks and hopes for the best from Donald Trump. It needs one who will end ICE's rampage and abolish it."
Democratic US Senate candidate Troy Jackson also condemned Collins for helping Trump enact his "deadly, racist, and authoritarian agenda."
"Mainers won't forget," he said.
"You refuse to answer a basic question about who won a presidential election, but you asked to lead America's intelligence community?"
Sen. Jon Ossoff on Wednesday put President Donald Trump's nominee to be the next director of national intelligence on the spot by asking him about the results of the 2020 presidential election.
During a confirmation hearing before the Senate Intelligence Committee, Ossoff (D-Ga.) asked Jay Clayton, nominated by Trump to replace former DNI Tulsi Gabbard, who won the 2020 election.
"I'm not going to do this with you," Clayton replied.
Sen. Ossoff asks Trump's Director of National Intelligence nominee who won the 2020 election. pic.twitter.com/J3u5mqHqTt
— Ossoff's Office (@SenOssoff) July 15, 2026
"This is a job interview," Ossoff said. "We have established that you have an obligation to be honest and forthright with the committee, yes? You do have an obligation to honest and forthright with the committee?"
"Yes," Clayton said.
"Who won the 2020 election?" Ossoff pressed.
"Like I said, I'm not going to get into that with you," Clayton said.
After former President Joe Biden won the 2020 election, Trump refused to concede, told multiple lies to sow doubt about the results, tried to enlist officials including Georgia Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger and former Vice President Mike Pence to illegally overturn it, and then incited a violent riot at the US Capitol when those efforts failed.
Ossoff told Clayton that he would keep asking him about the 2020 election results because "you're not being honest and forthright with the committee."
"I'm not going to engage in the theater," Clayton shot back.
After being pressed by Ossoff again, Clayton simply sat in silence, which appeared to make the Georgia Democrat incredulous.
"You refuse to answer a basic question about who won a presidential election," Ossoff said, "but you asked to lead America's intelligence community? Isn't it humiliating to be unable to answer this question, to have to indulge the president's delusions?"
"We know, you know, everybody in this room knows the truthful answer to that question," Ossoff continued. "Why can you not give it?"
Sean Vitka, executive director for Demand Progress, said after the hearing that Clayton's refusal to answer Ossoff's question was disqualifying.
"Clayton’s trainwreck hearing showed us that he is willing to deny objective reality to avoid upsetting the president," Vitka said. "Someone like that must not be allowed to be the director of national intelligence, who wields vast power and must lead the intelligence community with nonpartisan integrity and independence from political pressure."
Vitka added that Democrats serving on congressional intelligence committees need to understand "the clear danger someone like Clayton would pose as Trump’s point man on government surveillance."
One critic noted that Sahrawis "are beaten, arbitrarily arrested, and have their equipment confiscated for trying to make their own films of life under occupation."
Sahrawi activists and filmmakers are leading renewed calls to boycott the big-screen adaptation of Homer's ancient Greek epic The Odyssey over filmmaker Christopher Nolan's decision to shoot the film in the Western Sahara, whose people have suffered Moroccan occupation for over half a century.
"It is deeply disturbing that while Sahrawi journalists are imprisoned for exposing abuses, an international film production can use our homeland as a cinematic backdrop without addressing the reality of the occupation," Sahrawi journalist and filmmaker Mamine Hachimi told Middle East Eye (MEE) in an interview published on Wednesday.
Hachimi, who co-directed the short documentary Three Stolen Cameras about the oppression of people who document human rights crimes committed by Moroccan occupiers, told MEE's Alex MacDonald that calls to boycott The Odyssey—which was filmed in the Western Saharan city of Dakhla and opens on Friday—"is not a campaign against cinema or artistic freedom, it is a call for ethical responsibility."
"Two of my colleagues, Abdallah Lhafaouni, who is serving a life sentence, and Bachir Khadda, who is serving a 20-year sentence, are political prisoners simply because they documented human rights violations in occupied Western Sahara," Hachimi said.
Another Sahrawi filmmaker, Mohamedsalem Werad, told MEE that "choosing to film in occupied Western Sahara was not a politically neutral production decision—it meant operating with the permission of the occupying power in a territory where the Sahrawi people have long been denied the opportunity to exercise their right to self-determination."
"A boycott sends a clear message that filmmakers cannot expect audiences to overlook decisions that risk legitimizing an occupation," he added.
Sarah Yerkes, a senior fellow in the Middle East Program at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, wrote last week that The Odyssey "has a colonialism problem."
"For Morocco, the territories that make up Western Sahara are referred to as the 'southern provinces' and are an indisputable part of the kingdom," Yerkes noted. "But... Dakhla is part of what is considered the occupied and non-self-governing Western Sahara under existing international law."
"The Sahrawi people, who are indigenous to the region and currently have no meaningful self-determination, have not consented to the film’s production—and the Moroccan government is reaping the rewards at their expense," she added.
The renewed calls to boycott The Odyssey follow last year's appeal, led by the Western Sahara International Film Festival and signed by hundreds of artists, journalists, activists, and other human rights defenders, urging Nolan, Universal Pictures, and producers of the film "to break their silence and cease to be accomplices to Morocco’s 50-year illegal occupation."
The government of the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which claims sovereignty over Western Sahara but is not recognized by the United Nations, has also condemned what it called "an attempt to film a cinematic work in occupied Dakhla, considering it a violation of international legitimacy and the ethics of cultural and artistic work."
Morocco has occupied Western Sahara since 1975, when Spanish forces withdrew from their former colony in the dying days of longtime dictator Francisco Franco's regime. Moroccan warplanes bombed Sahrawis, many of whom fled into neighboring Algeria as the government under King Hassan II orchestrated a “Green March” of hundreds of thousands of Moroccan civilians into the phosphate- and fishery-rich territory.
Western Sahara is today known among locals and human rights advocates as “Africa’s last colony.” Moroccan forces have brutally oppressed the Sahrawi people under their rule, severely restricting freedom of expression, movement, association, and the press, and utilizing arbitrary arrest and torture as tools of repression, according to human rights groups.
Moroccan occupation forces also built a 1,700-mile mostly sand wall to keep Algerian-backed Sahrawi militants led by the Polisario Front out of the territory, while denying people inside their occupied homeland a United Nations-backed referendum they’ve been awaiting for decades.
During his first term, US President Donald Trump recognized Moroccan sovereignty over Western Sahara, essentially in exchange for Morocco’s decision to normalize relations with Israel under the Abraham Accords.