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.
Expert contacts:
Dr. Alexander Gershenson, EcoShift, (831) 824-4326, agershenson@ecoshift.com
Dr. Dustin Mulvaney, EcoShift, (831) 247-3896, dmulvaney@ecoshift.com
Taylor McKinnon, Center for Biological Diversity, (801) 300-2414, tmckinnon@biologicaldiversity.org
Marissa Knodel, Friends of the Earth, (202) 222-0279, mknodel@foe.org
Communications contact: Kate Colwell, (202) 222-0744, kcolwell@foe.org
Ending new fossil fuel leasing on lands and offshore areas controlled by the U.S. government would keep up to 450 billion tons of greenhouse gases from polluting the atmosphere, according to a first-of-its-kind analysis by EcoShift on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of the Earth released today.
The analysis, The Potential Greenhouse Gas Emissions of U.S. Federal Fossil Fuels, models the life-cycle greenhouse gas pollution that would result from developing federally-controlled coal, oil shale, natural gas, crude oil and tar sands on public lands and offshore ocean areas under government control.
Allowing these publicly owned fossil fuels to be developed would cripple the U.S.' ability to meet its obligations to avert the worst effects of the global climate crisis, the report finds.
"The facts have been increasingly clear for a long time, and we believe that this analysis finally puts the issue of continued development of federal fossil reserves to rest. We cannot afford to continue ignoring reality," said EcoShift Principal Dr. Alexander Gershenson.
Among the key findings:
"Our climate can't afford the pollution from more federal fossil fuel leasing," said Taylor McKinnon with the Center for Biological Diversity. "The natural place for President Obama to start leading the global fight to keep fossil fuels in the ground is on our public lands and oceans."
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projects that maintaining a good chance of avoiding 2degC warming by century's end requires limiting global emissions to about 1390 Gt CO2e (or 1000 Gt CO2). Emissions from unleased federal fossil fuels exceed U.S. emissions quotas for maintaining only a 50 percent chance of avoiding 2degC of warming. The potential emissions of unleased federal fossil fuels are entirely precluded after factoring in the emissions of developing non-federal and already leased federal fossil fuels.
"Our government has already leased more public fossil fuels than can safely be burned," said Marissa Knodel, climate campaigner at Friends of the Earth. "Each new lease puts us farther down the path toward climate catastrophe, and is a direct contradiction to the president's pledge to attack the climate crisis head-on."
Federal agencies do not track or report the nationwide cumulative greenhouse gas emissions that result from federal leasing of fossil fuel reserves. Likewise, they do not assess the potential emissions of remaining fossil fuel resources and reserves.
"This analysis shows that the U.S.' remaining federal fossil fuels contain vast potential for greenhouse gas pollution," said EcoShift Principal Dr. Dustin Mulvaney. "To our knowledge, this is the first-ever attempt to understand the pollution potential of the publicly-owned fossil fuels that the federal government controls."
Download a copy of the report here.
Download a fact sheet here.
Friends of the Earth fights for a more healthy and just world. Together we speak truth to power and expose those who endanger the health of people and the planet for corporate profit. We organize to build long-term political power and campaign to change the rules of our economic and political systems that create injustice and destroy nature.
(202) 783-7400Sixty percent of respondents blamed the energy demand of large users like AI data centers for higher household electricity costs.
It's been two weeks since Big Tech companies gathered at the White House to sign a nonbinding pledge saying they will not pass on higher utility costs to consumers as the rapid build-out of energy-intensive artificial intelligence data centers sends electricity bills skyrocketing—but polling out Wednesday showed a majority of Americans reject President Donald Trump's plan to leave corporations responsible for tackling the affordability crisis.
Those same companies, said most respondents to a survey by Data for Progress and Groundwork Collaborative, are responsible for higher costs that have hit households across the country, and can't be trusted to ensure life is more affordable for families.
Instead, said 61% of respondents, "cracking down on price gouging" from both utility and energy companies would be the most effective way to lower the cost of electricity. In comparison, just 35% said building more energy infrastructure to meet demands was the answer to high costs.
While Trump has been forced in recent weeks to acknowledge that "energy demands from AI data centers could unfairly drive up" people's energy costs, as he admitted in his State of the Union address while announcing AI companies would sign his "ratepayer protection pledge," the president has largely deflected blame regarding the affordability crisis—or denied its existence altogether.
Trump claimed at a rally in Kentucky last week that "the economy is roaring back," even as his $1 billion-per-day, unprovoked war on Iran inflamed tensions across the Middle East and drove up oil prices.
Groundwork said in its analysis of the poll that following Trump's announcement of the ratepayer protection pledge, "Americans reject this reliance on corporations to do the right thing."
Elizabeth Pancotti, managing director of policy and advocacy for Groundwork Collaborative, said that "utility prices are up and consumers know the truth: These price increases are being driven by corporate greed and unchecked AI data center growth."
Trump has pushed to accelerate the construction of new data centers by fast-tracking the permitting process.
Two-thirds of those surveyed said their monthly electricity payments have gone up in the past year, with nearly a quarter of respondents saying they had increased by "a lot." More than 40% of people said they are now paying between $101-$200 per month for electricity.
As Common Dreams reported last November, Trump's demand for AI companies to build massive, energy-sucking data centers in communities across the US has been linked to rising costs of consumers, with the average overdue balance on utility bills surging by 32% in the last three years and states with high concentrations of AI data centers seeing electricity prices skyrocket by as much as 16% from 2024-25.
Sixty percent of respondents told Data for Progress and Groundwork Collaborative that the energy demand of large commercial users like AI data centers is to blame for higher consumer prices, and the same percentage of people also blamed high compensation for utility company executives. Sixty-three percent of those polled said high profits for utility companies and their investors were to blame.
Joint Economic Committee Democrats revealed Tuesday that the average annual US electric bill increased by $110 last year.
A 2022 analysis by Accountable.US found that the nine largest US energy utility companies raked in nearly $14 billion in combined profits in the first three quarters of that year and handed out $11 billion to shareholders while tens of millions of households struggled with rising utility bills.
Nearly 60% of the 1,149 people polled by the two progressive think tanks also said the public sector must take a leadership role on providing energy, "because the public sector doesn't collect profits and can pass on savings to customers," and 60% said the public sector should be responsible for upgrading and modernizing the electric grid because it is a "public resource that should serve all Americans equally, not generate profits for shareholders."
Alex Jacquez, chief of policy and advocacy for Groundwork and a former Biden administration official, said the poll revealed that "the people believe in public power."
The groups also polled respondents on their opinions of "energy superusers," including cryptocurrency companies, AI data centers, and AI firms.
Crypto companies were the least popular, with 54% disapproving compared to 26% who approved. Voters disapproved of AI data centers by a 16-point margin and AI companies in general by an 8-point margin.
Nearly two-thirds said they believe new AI data centers would raise their energy costs, and voters across the political spectrum opposed new data centers in their communities.
Grassroots efforts have taken off in states including Michigan, Wisconsin, and New Jersey as community members have rejected the construction of data centers on the grounds that they would consume massive amounts of water as well as electricity, threaten jobs, and take up space that could otherwise be used for affordable housing and small businesses.
"Voters feel ripped off by the corporations who hold their utilities hostage and are calling on lawmakers to put an end to the profiteering racket," said Pancotti. "It’s time for regulators and policymakers to answer the call to protect working families from predatory utility corporations and Big Tech.”
"All of Beirut shook," said one resident who was forced to take shelter in the city after an Israeli displacement order forced her from her home in the suburbs.
An Israeli airstrike totally demolished a large apartment building in central Beirut on Wednesday, following a night of attacks on densely populated residential areas, several of which reportedly came without warning.
Videos shared to social media and by local media outlets show the 10-story building, located in the Bachoura neighbourhood in central Beirut, suddenly collapsing into rubble in the early hours of the morning after being struck with a missile.
Israeli authorities issued a forced displacement order to residents of the building over social media around 4 am local time, roughly an hour before the strike. It warned residents of buildings in the Bachoura area that they were "located near Hezbollah facilities" and needed to move at least 300 meters away.
Israel has claimed the building was used by the militant group Hezbollah to stash large sums of money, but has provided no evidence publicly.
Citing Lebanon's Health Ministry, the Associated Press reported that at least four people were wounded in the attack, which sent emergency teams rushing to the scene through a plume of black smoke.
Residents of the collapsed apartment building have taken to social media to describe their horror at seeing their home suddenly destroyed.
"I am a US citizen and surgeon who took care of the Boston Marathon bombing victims in 2013," said Haytham Kaafarani, a professor of surgery at Harvard Medical School. "I paid for seven years to own a small apartment in downtown Beirut for my three kids to enjoy summers there. Today, Israel reduced my dream home to rubble, with American weapons, paid by my taxes."
Another professor, Bilal R. Kaafarani, who teaches chemistry at the American University of Beirut, said something similar.
"Israel demolished the building I have an apartment in. It took 22 years of my work here and 20 years of my wife’s work to own this apartment," he said. "This madness has to stop."
The attack came after a night of intense airstrikes upon civilian areas in Lebanon's capital, which reportedly came without warning in the middle of the night and into the early morning.
According to Lebanese authorities, at least 20 people were killed in a series of attacks on Beirut and the southern and eastern parts of the country, while dozens more were injured.
Lebanon's health ministry reported that more than 900 people have been killed and 2,200 injured in Israel's latest round of attacks in Lebanon, which began on March 2 after Hezbollah retaliated against the US-Israeli war in Iran.
The attacks beginning Tuesday night came less than a day after Volker Türk, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, warned that "deliberately attacking civilians or civilian objects amounts to a war crime,” noting that hundreds of homes and other civilian infrastructure, including health facilities, had been destroyed by prior Israeli attacks in Beirut.
Israel has issued evacuation orders that have forced more than 1 million Lebanese people from their homes as part of an expanding ground invasion into southern Lebanon.
Sara Saleh, a 29-year-old taking shelter in a nearby school after being forced from her home in Beirut's southern suburbs, told the Agence France-Presse that she and her family "were asleep" when Israel's warning came down early Wednesday morning. She said they were left to flee for safety in their pajamas.
She said the attack on the apartment "was terrifying... all of Beirut shook." Speaking with a face mask to protect herself from dust kicked up by the demolished building, she said her sister's children "started crying and panicking, it was heartbreaking."
The mass displacement of civilians in Lebanon and Iran has been met with increasing criticism from UN experts and human rights organizations.
As reports of the apartment bombing rolled in, Philippe Lazzarini, the commissioner-general of the UN agency for Palestinian Refugees (UNRWA), said that "international law is being openly ignored" and that "impunity reigns and disproportionate actions are being normalized amid the escalating conflicts in the Middle East."
"It is a vicious circle," he said. "The more violations, the stronger the culture of impunity becomes."
One expert warned of a "direct hit on consumer prices" if the Iran war persists.
President Donald Trump's unprovoked and unconstitutional war against Iran has already been raising gas prices for US drivers, and could soon raise the cost of food both in the US and all over the world.
NBC News reported on Tuesday that the price of diesel fuel has now soared above $5 per gallon for the first time since December 2022. If the price of diesel remains high, the report explained, it will raise the price of all goods delivered by trucks throughout the US, including food.
Paul Dietrich, chief investment strategist at Wedbush Securities, told NBC News that diesel prices will become a "direct hit on consumer prices" if they remain elevated, as "groceries get more expensive, delivery costs rise, and household budgets are tightened."
"Diesel is what moves the real economy," explained Dietrich. "It hauls the food, the packages, the building supplies, and the inventory sitting on store shelves."
The cost of diesel isn't the only factor that could spike food prices, as the Iran war has also put a strain on fertilizer that farmers need to grow crops.
Al Jazeera reported on Wednesday that there is growing concern that the rising price of fertilizer caused by the closure of the Strait of Hormuz could lead to a global food crisis.
As Al Jazeera explained, almost half of the global supply of urea, the most commonly used fertilizer, is shipped from Middle Eastern nations through the Strait of Hormuz.
With the strait closed by Iran in response to US and Israeli attacks, Al Jazeera wrote, "urea export prices from the Middle East have surged by about 40%, rising from just less than $500 to a little more than $700 per metric ton as of last Friday."
Al Jazeera also cited an estimate from data and analytics firm Kpler projecting that up to one-third of the global fertilizer trade could be disrupted if the strait remains closed for a prolonged period.
Carl Skau, deputy executive director and chief operating officer of the World Food Program, warned on Tuesday that the Iran war could push millions of people into extreme hunger should it persist.
"If this conflict continues, it will send shockwaves across the globe, and families who already cannot afford their next meal will be hit the hardest," said Skau. "Without an adequately funded humanitarian response, it could spell catastrophe for millions already on the edge."
WFP said the disruption in fertilizer markets offers "the most recent proof that conflict is the number one driver of hunger."
"Conflict forces people from their homes, destroys infrastructure, fuels inflation, and wipes out jobs," said the agency. "All of this makes it nearly impossible for people to find or afford enough food to survive. And children are always hit hardest: A child living in a country ravaged by conflict is more than twice as likely to be malnourished and out of school than their peers in peaceful settings."
Warnings about the war's impact on the price of food come as the US economy is showing signs of accelerating inflation.
As reported by CNBC on Wednesday, wholesale prices in February surged by 0.7%, more than double economists' consensus estimate of 0.3%.
On a year-over-year basis, wholesale prices rose by 3.4% in February—the highest increase in a year.
Spikes in wholesale prices, which reflect the amount that firms pay for inputs for their products, typically also lead to increased consumer prices, as companies pass on their cost increases to customers.
"The report suggests that pipeline inflation pressures remain persistent, particularly on the services side, complicating the Fed’s path as it weighs how long to keep interest rates elevated," CNBC noted.