

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.

Molly Dorozenski, Greenpeace U.S., (646)862-1509
Lisa Manley, The Coca-Cola Company, (404) 676-4571
Days before the United Nations summit on climate change begins in Copenhagen, The Coca-Cola Company and its bottling partners today announced that 100 percent of their new vending machines and coolers will be hydrofluorocarbon-free (1) (HFC-free) by 2015. Coca-Cola is committing to use its scale to aggregate demand and encourage supply as a means of accelerating the transition to HFC-free refrigeration equipment. This announcement is a direct result of work with Greenpeace that began in 2000, and a demonstration that phasing out the use of HFCs is a tangible and near-term action corporations can take to protect the climate.
The transition to HFC-free refrigeration will reduce the equipment's direct greenhouse gas emissions by 99 percent. A recent peer-reviewed report by top scientists shows that HFCs will be responsible for between 28% and 45% of carbon-equivalent emissions by 2050 if society reduces carbon dioxide while leaving HFCs unchecked. Eliminating HFCs in the commercial refrigeration industry would be equivalent to eliminating the annual greenhouse gas emissions of Germany or Japan.
"Climate change is real and the time to act on solutions is now," said Muhtar Kent, Chairman and CEO of The Coca-Cola Company. "Greenpeace has played a critical role in raising our awareness about the need for natural refrigeration. Our announcement today demonstrates a commitment to use our influence in the marketplace to drive innovation and help shape a low-carbon future."
This step by Coca-Cola will help accelerate a market shift in commercial refrigeration away from HFCs. The Coca-Cola Company has invested more than $50 million in research and development to advance the use of climate-friendly cooling technologies. In 2010, The Coca-Cola Company and its bottling partners will purchase a minimum of 150,000 units of HFC-free equipment, effectively doubling the current rate of purchase to enable alignment with an interim goal to purchase 50 percent of all new coolers and vending machines without HFCs by 2012.
The Company and its bottling partners have approximately 10 million coolers and vending machines in place today around the world, comprising the largest element of the Coca-Cola system's total climate impact. As a result of the commitment to eliminate the use of HFCs in this equipment, carbon emission reductions will exceed 52.5 million metric tons over the life of the equipment - the equivalent of taking more than 11 million cars off the road for one year.
"We welcome Coca-Cola's commitment to help tackle climate change; large enterprises have both an opportunity and responsibility to change the game and Coca-Cola's action leaves no excuse for other companies not to follow," said Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director, Greenpeace International.
Coca-Cola currently utilizes two HFC-free solutions. Hydrocarbon refrigeration is used in smaller refrigeration equipment and carbon dioxide (CO2) is used in larger equipment. CO2 is a safe, reliable and energy efficient alternative with positive characteristics as a refrigerant. It does not deplete the ozone layer and it is 1,430 times less damaging to the climate than a typical HFC.
Already, as a direct result of Coca-Cola's supply chain engagement, a major supplier has communicated its intention to build a dedicated CO2 compressor production facility, helping to meet the growing demand for HFC-free refrigeration options throughout the industry.
"Addressing climate change requires leadership and collaboration," said Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. "Just days away from the negotiations in Copenhagen, this announcement by Coca-Cola and Greenpeace demonstrates that investments in low-carbon technologies can make business sense."
This announcement is a direct result of discussions with Greenpeace that began in the run-up to the 2000 Sydney Olympics. Greenpeace challenged Coca-Cola to go HFC-free in all of the equipment it supplied to the Games. By the Torino Games in 2006 and the Beijing Games in 2008, the Company was using all HFC-free technology at Olympic venues. For the past five years, the relationship between Greenpeace and Coca-Cola has become increasingly cooperative as both sought a cost-effective alternative to HFCs.
"At Coca-Cola, we are deploying our scale and working with suppliers to deliver cost effective alternatives to HFC, for us and for others." said Rick Frazier, Vice President, Supply Chain, The Coca-Cola Company.
"Greenpeace increasingly works with businesses to make fundamental manufacturing and sourcing changes by connecting regulation, economies of scale and supply chain security," said Amy Larkin, Director of Greenpeace Solutions. "Coca-Cola's commitment today runs ahead of regulation and takes some fear out of rapid change."
Coolers and vending machines impact the climate in three ways: through direct energy use (operating the machine), through chemicals used in the machine's insulation foam, and by leakage or improper end-of-life disposal of the refrigerant gas used in the cooling system. In addition to its refrigerant gas commitment, Coca-Cola developed a proprietary energy management system (EMS) that delivers energy savings of up to 35 percent and has placed over 1.7 million of these units around the world. In 2006, the Company completed the transition to HFC-free insulation foam for all new purchases of refrigeration equipment. Together, HFC-free insulation and HFC-free refrigerant will generate 99 percent fewer direct greenhouse emissions than traditional equipment.
Notes to Editor
Notes to editors:
Dr. Gerd Leipold will take interviews on behalf of Greenpeace International for this announcement. Kumi Naidoo took over from Dr. Leipold on November 15, 2009. Dr. Leipold should be referred to as former Greenpeace International Executive Director.
1. HFC's were invented to replace the ozone-depleting chemicals, CFCs, but have a very high global warming impact. Scientists have projected that we need to cap greenhouse gas emissions within the next decade, then rapidly reduce emissions by mid century to stabilize the atmosphere and avoid dangerous climate change. Uncontrolled HFC consumption and emissions growth would make it much more difficult to reach those goals. Yet alternatives for virtually every application of HFC exist today.
2. Natural refrigerants, as the name suggests, are refrigerants that occur in nature that can be used in refrigerators and air-conditioners. They don't significantly harm the ozone layer or the climate, they are often cheaper and more energy efficient than their fluorinated-gas (F-gas) counterparts, and they have been proven to work in virtually all applications. The three main natural refrigerants in use are hydrocarbons, ammonia and carbon dioxide.
3. For more information on Greenpeace's F-Gas work, go to:
www.greenpeace.org/F-gases. In the early 1990s, Greenpeace set out to find climate-friendly alternative technologies, convinced that there was a way to avoid the HFC route proposed by the chemical industry. The result was the creation of GreenFreeze technology (3) which is now used in over 350 million domestic refrigerators
worldwide. Greenpeace open-sourced the GreenFreeze technology, that uses hydrocarbons. The organisation then marketed, gathered orders, and pre-sold 70,000 refrigeration units (in three weeks) for an East German manufacturer in order to make the retooling of its factory worthwhile. Since March 15, 1993, when the first GreenFreeze refrigerator rolled off the assembly line, 350 million units have been sold in Europe, Russia, Asia and South America by leading brands including Whirlpool, Bosch, Panasonic, LG, Miele, Electrolux, and Siemens. Greenpeace's achievement was recognized by the United Nations Environment Program in 1997, when GreenFreeze received the prestigious UNEP Ozone Award. Greenpeace has received no financial remuneration or royalty for developing the product.
4. To maintain absolute independence, Greenpeace does not accept money from companies, governments or political parties. The organization depends on the donations of its supporters to carry on its nonviolent campaigns to protect the environment.
Greenpeace is a global, independent campaigning organization that uses peaceful protest and creative communication to expose global environmental problems and promote solutions that are essential to a green and peaceful future.
+31 20 718 2000The administration is "now acknowledging what economists and business leaders have told us from the beginning: that tariffs are driving up prices," said one journalist.
Although President Donald Trump didn't actually confess that his global trade war is driving up the cost of groceries for Americans, he did finally drop his dubiously named "reciprocal" tariffs on key imports on Friday.
According to a White House fact sheet, Trump's new executive order ends his tariffs on beef; cocoa and spices; coffee and tea; bananas, oranges, and tomatoes; other tropical fruits and fruit juices; and fertilizers.
The New York Times had reported Thursday that "the Trump administration is preparing broad exemptions to certain tariffs in an effort to ease elevated food prices that have provoked anxiety for American consumers."
The reporting drew critiques of the administration's economic policies, including from members of Congress such as Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.), who said that "Trump just admitted it: Americans are footing the bill for his disastrous tariffs."
"While this move may alleviate some of the cost increases Trump caused, it will not stop the larger problems of rising inflation, business uncertainty, and economic damage done by Trump's crazy tariff scheme."
Also responding to the Times reporting, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote on social media Friday: "After months of increasing grocery prices, Donald Trump is finally admitting he was wrong. Americans are literally paying the price for Trump's mistakes."
More lawmakers and other critics piled on after Trump issued the order. CNN's Jim Sciutto said: "Trump administration now acknowledging what economists and business leaders have told us from the beginning: that tariffs are driving up prices."
MeidasTouch and its editor in chief, Ron Filipkowski, also called out the president on social media, with the outlet sarcastically noting, "But Trump said his tariffs don't raise prices."
OR, Trump Admits His Tariffs Caused Grocery Prices to Rise.
[image or embed]
— Ron Filipkowski (@ronfilipkowski.bsky.social) November 14, 2025 at 5:52 PM
Congressman Don Beyer (D-Va), who serves on the House Ways and Means Subcommittee on Trade, said in a Friday statement that "President Trump is finally admitting what we always knew: His tariffs are raising prices for the American people."
"After getting drubbed in recent elections because of voters' fury that Trump has broken his promises to fix inflation, the White House is trying to cast this tariff retreat as a 'pivot to affordability,'" Beyer said, referencing Democrats who won key races last week, from more moderate Mikie Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger, the incoming governors of New Jersey and Virginia, to democratic socialist Mayors-elect Zohran Mamdani of New York City and Katie Wilson of Seattle.
In addition to those electoral victories for Democrats, last week featured a debate over Trump's trade war at the US Supreme Court. According to Beyer: "The simple truth is that Republicans want credit for something they think the Supreme Court will force them to do anyway, after oral arguments before the court on Trump's illegal abuses of trade authorities went badly for the administration. Trump is still keeping the vast majority of his tariffs in place, and his administration is also planning new tariffs in anticipation of a Supreme Court loss."
"The same logic—that Trump's tariffs are driving up prices on coffee, fruit, and other comestibles—is equally true for the thousands of other goods on which his tariffs remain," he continued. "While this move may alleviate some of the cost increases Trump caused, it will not stop the larger problems of rising inflation, business uncertainty, and economic damage done by Trump's crazy tariff scheme."
"Only Congress can do that, by reclaiming its legal responsibility under the Constitution to regulate trade, and permanently ending Trump's trade war chaos," he stressed. "All but a handful of Republicans in Congress are still refusing to stand up to Trump, stop his tariffs, and lower costs for the American people, and unless they find a backbone, our economy will continue to suffer."
Huh. Trump dropped the tariffs on coffee, beef, and tropical fruit to LOWER PRICES. I thought other countries paid for those?
— Angry (@angrystaffer.bsky.social) November 14, 2025 at 5:50 PM
As the Associated Press noted Friday, "The president signed the executive order after announcing that the U.S. had reached framework agreements with Ecuador, Guatemala, El Salvador, and Argentina designed to ease import levies on agricultural products produced in those countries."
Trump's order also came just a day after Democrats on the congressional Joint Economic Committee released a report showing that US families are paying roughly $700 more each month for basic items since Trump returned to office in January—with households in some states, such as Alaska and California, facing an average of over $1,000 monthly.
The president has floated sending Americans a $2,000 check, purportedly funded by revenue collected from his tariffs, but as Common Dreams reported Wednesday, economist Dean Baker of the Center for Economic and Policy Research crunched the numbers and found that the proposed "dividend" doesn't add up.
"After over two years of slaughter, forced starvation, and mass atrocities in Gaza, the global consensus is clear: The Israeli government has committed genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza."
Congresswoman Rashida Tlaib and 20 Democratic colleagues on Friday introduced legislation that would officially recognize Israel's 25-month war on Gaza as a genocide, a move that came as Israeli forces continued killing Palestinians in the coastal strip and violating a tenuous ceasefire with Hamas.
Tlaib (D-Mich.)—the only Palestinian American in Congress—introduced H.Res. 876, which, if passed, would "officially recognize that the state of Israel has committed the crime of genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza" and affirm that it is official US policy to "prevent and punish the crime of genocide, wherever it occurs."
“The Israeli government’s genocide in Gaza has not ended, and it will not end until we act," Tlaib said in a statement Friday. "Since the so-called ‘ceasefire’ was announced, Israeli forces haven’t stopped killing Palestinians."
According to Gaza's Government Media Office (GMO), Israel has violated the ceasefire agreement 282 times as of November 10, 2025—exactly one month after the US-brokered truce took effect. Alleged violations include airstrikes resulting in massacres, shootings of civilians, property demolitions, and raids beyond the ceasefire's "yellow line" buffer zones.
GMO says Israeli forces have killed least 242 Palestinians and injured more than 620 others during the truce.
This, in addition to the at least 249,000 Palestinians who have been killed or wounded by Israeli forces since October 2023, including upward of 10,000 people who are missing and presumed dead and buried beneath the ruins of Gaza, which could take decades to clear. Around 2 million Palestinians have been starved, sickened, and forcibly displaced. Many others have been arbitrarily imprisoned, tortured, and allegedly subjected to rape and other sexual abuse.
"After over two years of slaughter, forced starvation, and mass atrocities in Gaza, the global consensus is clear: The Israeli government has committed genocide against the Palestinian people in Gaza," Tlaib noted.
She continued:
Palestinians in Gaza have attested to this genocide for over two years and it has been concluded by the United Nations Independent International Commission of Inquiry, the International Association of Genocide Scholars, and highly respected international, Palestinian, and Israeli human rights organizations such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Doctors Without Borders, Al-Haq, the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights, Al Mezan Center for Human Rights, B’Tselem, Physicians for Human Rights Israel, the Lemkin Institute for Genocide Prevention, Forensic Architecture, and the University Network for Human Rights.
The resolution calls for the United States to "respect its obligations under the Genocide Convention by employing all means reasonably available to it to prevent and punish the crime of genocide."
These include:
“Impunity only enables more atrocity," Tlaib warned. "As our government continues to send a blank check for war crimes and ethnic cleansing, Palestinian children’s smiles are extinguished by bombs and bullets that say made in the USA."
"To end this horror, we must reject genocide denial and follow our binding legal obligations under the Genocide Convention to take immediate action to pursue justice and accountability to prevent and punish the crime of genocide," she added. "We must hold individual perpetrators and complicit corporations to account. We must stop sending weapons to a genocidal military. We must follow international law and use all means available to us, including sanctions, to bring this genocide to an end.”
Despite existing laws prohibiting US assistance to foreign security forces that commit gross human rights violations, the United States—which grew into a world power in part via genocide of Indigenous Americans—has provided arms and diplomatic cover to the perpetrators of genocides in Paraguay, Guatemala, Bangladesh, East Timor, Kurdistan, and Gaza over the past half-century, while turning a blind eye to other genocides.
Under the Biden and Trump administrations, the US has provided Israel with more than $20 billion in armed aid while thwarting efforts to end the genocide by vetoing numerous United Nations Security Council ceasefire resolutions.
The Trump administration has also slapped sanctions on ICC judges after the tribunal issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza, including murder and forced starvation.
Trump has also targeted individuals and nations who seek justice for Palestinians, acknowledge the Gaza genocide, or recognize Palestinian statehood.
Tlaib's resolution is co-sponsored by Democratic Reps. Becca Balint (Vt.), André Carson (Ind.), Greg Casar (Texas), Maxine Dexter (Ore.), Maxwell Alejandro Frost (Fla.), Jesús "Chuy" García (Ill.), Al Green (Texas), Pramila Jayapal (Wash.), “Hank” Johnson Jr. (Ga.), Ro Khanna (Calif.), Summer Lee (Pa.), Jim McGovern (Mass.), Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (NY), Ilhan Omar (Minn.), Mark Pocan (Wis.), Ayanna Pressley (Mass.), Delia Ramirez (Ill.), Lateefah Simon (Calif.), Nydia Velázquez (NY), and Bonnie Watson Coleman (NJ).
The resolution—which is unlikely to get through the Republican-controlled Congress—is also endorsed by more than 100 organizations.
“This resolution is an important step towards recognizing Israel’s actions against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip for what they are—genocide," Amnesty International Middle East and North Africa advocacy director Elizabeth Rghebi said in support of the measure.
"The US ratified the Genocide Convention which imposes a duty on states to prevent and punish the crime," Rghebi added. "Amnesty International calls on all members of Congress to urgently support this resolution and ensure the US begins taking the actions necessary to prevent and punish Israel’s genocide in Gaza."
Beth Miller, political director at Jewish Voice for Peace Action, said that “for over two years, the US has been a full partner in the Israeli government’s genocide against Palestinians. Presidents and members of Congress have denied and erased Israel’s ongoing atrocities in Gaza, shielded Israel from accountability in the international arena, and attempted to dehumanize Palestinians."
"Congresswoman Tlaib and the original co-sponsors joining her on this historic resolution are making clear that this complicity must come to an end," Miller added. "These representatives are heeding the call of the overwhelming majority of Americans who want to see an end to his genocide and a halt to US support for war crimes."
A letter implored the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to "stand up to the executive order’s marching orders to 'promote' nuclear power."
A series of nuclear power-related executive orders issued by President Donald Trump seek to legitimize people's "suffering as the price of nuclear expansion," said one expert at Beyond Nuclear on Friday, as the nongovernmental organization spearheaded a letter to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and top Trump administration officials warning of the public health risks of the orders.
More than 40 civil society groups—including Physicians for Social Responsibility (PSR), Sierra Club, Nuclear Watch South, and the Appalachian Peace Education Center—signed the letter to the commission, calling on officials not to revise the NRC's Standards for Protection Against Radiation, as they were directed to earlier this year by Trump.
"NRC has not made a revision yet, and has been hearing that the Part 20 exposure (external only) should be taken from the existing 100 mr [milliroentgen] a year, per license, to 500 mr a year, and in view of some, even to 10 Rems [Roentgen Equivalent Man], which would be 100 times the current level," reads the letter.
In 2021, noted PSR, the NRC "roundly rejected" a petition "to raise allowable radiation exposures for all Americans, including children and pregnant women, to 10 Rems a year."
The revision to radiation limit standards would result in anywhere from 5-100 times less protection for Americans, said the groups, with 4 out of 5 adult males exposed over a 70-year lifetime developing cancer that they otherwise would not have.
"Radiation is dangerous for everyone,” said Amanda M. Nichols, lead author of the 2024 study Gender and Ionizing Radiation. “[Trump’s] executive order will allow the industry to relax the current standards for radiological protection, which are already far from adequate. This will have detrimental health consequences for humans and for our shared environments and puts us all at higher risk for negative health consequences. ”
The change in standards would be even more consequential for women, including pregnant women, and children—all of whom are disproportionately susceptible to health impacts of ionizing radiation, compared to adult males.
"Radiation causes infertility, loss of pregnancy, birth complications and defects, as well as solid tumor cancer, leukemia, non-cancer outcomes including cardiovascular disease, increased incidence of autoimmune disease, and ongoing new findings.”
In Gender and Ionizing Radiation, Nichols and biologist Mary Olson examined atomic bomb survivor data and found that young girls "face twice the risk as boys of the same age, and have four to five times the risk of developing cancer later in life than a woman exposed in adulthood."
Despite the risks to some of the country's most vulnerable people, Trump has also called for a revision of "the basis of the NRC regulation," reads Friday's letter: the Linear No Threshold (LNT) model, the principle that there is no safe level of radiation and that cancer risk to proportional to dose.
The LNT model is supported by decades of peer-reviewed research, the letter states, but one of Trump's executive orders calls for "an additional weakening of protection by setting a threshold, or level, below which radiation exposure would not 'count' or be considered as to have not occurred."
The Standards for Protection Against Radiation are "based on the well-documented findings that even exposures so small that they cannot be measured may, sometimes, result in fatal cancer," reads the letter. "The only way to reduce risk to zero requires zero radiation exposure."
Trump's orders "would undermine public trust by falsely claiming that the NRC’s radiation risk models lack scientific basis, despite decades of peer-reviewed evidence and international consensus supporting the LNT model," it adds.
The signatories noted that the US government could and should strengthen radiation regulations by ending its reliance on "Reference Man"—a model that the NRC uses to create its risk assessments, which is based on a young adult male and fails to reflect the greater impact on infants, young children, and women.
“Newer research has shown that external radiation harms children more than adults and female bodies more than male bodies," reads the letter. "Existing standards should therefore be strengthened to account for these life-stage and gender disparities… not weakened. Radiation causes infertility, loss of pregnancy, birth complications and defects, as well as solid tumor cancer, leukemia, non-cancer outcomes including cardiovascular disease, increased incidence of autoimmune disease, and ongoing new findings.”
Olson, who is the CEO of the Generational Radiation Impact Project, which also helped organize the letter, warned that "radiation causes cancer in women at twice the rate of adult men, while the same exposure in early childhood, will, across their lifetimes, produce seven times more cancer in young females, and four times more in young males.”
The groups emphasized that "executive orders do not have the power to require federal agencies to take actions that violate their governing statutes, nor to grant them powers and authorities that contradict those governing statutes. The NRC needs to stand up to the executive order’s marching orders to 'promote' nuclear power—a mission outside its legal regulatory mandate under the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 and the concurrent amendments to the Atomic Energy Act."
Federal agencies including the NRC, they added, "should not favor industry propaganda asserting that some radiation is safe over science-based protection of the public. This is a deliberate subversion of science and public health in favor of corporate interests."