

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.

Bill Snape, Center for Biological Diversity, (202) 536-9351, bsnape@biologicaldiversity.org
Sarah Burt, Earthjustice, (415) 217-2055, sburt@earthjustice.org
Garrett Blad, SustainUs, (513) 808-6395, garrett.blad@sustainus.org
Thirty-eight environmental, public-health and community groups today called on the Senate to reject a bill provision that would lift the ban on civilian supersonic flight over U.S. soil. As today's letter notes, the provision would boost the return of luxury supersonic planes projected to burn five to seven times more fuel per passenger than typical airliners.
"Resurrecting these flying gas-guzzlers would cause the aviation industry's already massive climate damage to skyrocket," said Bill Snape, senior counsel at the Center for Biological Diversity. "Supersonic planes are a gratuitous luxury for the super-rich and a dirty burden for everyone else. This bill would clear the runway for their comeback."
Because the loud sonic booms from aircraft breaking the sound barrier harm people and wildlife, a 1973 Federal Aviation Administration regulation banned civilian flight at supersonic speeds over U.S. soil, restricting supersonic speed to travel over the ocean. Section 5017 of the 2018 Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Act, a bill pending in Congress, would reverse that protection.
Quiet efforts to build the high-speed planes are again underway, despite the Concorde's flop decades ago. Boom Supersonics is developing an airliner it says could fly commercially by 2023. Supersonic business jets are in development by Spike Aerospace and Aerion Supersonic with the goal of being in service by the mid-2020s.
A return of supersonic aircraft threatens to greatly worsen aviation's contribution to the climate crisis. A recent analysis by the International Council on Clean Transportation found that new commercial supersonic planes will likely emit 70 percent more carbon dioxide than comparable new subsonic airplanes will be allowed to emit.
New supersonic airliners will also likely exceed international subsonic limits for nitrogen oxides by 40 percent, according to the analysis. Exposure to nitrogen oxides is linked to respiratory disease, heart attacks and strokes.
"Supersonic planes might help the one percent zip around the world faster, but they would jeopardize my generation's shot at inheriting a livable planet," said Garrett Blad, executive coordinator of SustainUs. "With the Trump administration killing climate protections left and right, a return of these dirty planes is the last thing we need."
International aviation is among the fastest-growing sources of greenhouse gas pollution. Even without supersonic aircraft, the industry is already expected to generate 43 metric gigatons of CO2 through 2050, consuming more than 4 percent of the world's remaining carbon budget, according to a Center report.
"At a time when we need to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from aviation, not increase them, incentivizing commercial use of supersonic aircraft is a huge step in the wrong direction," said Sarah Burt, an attorney at Earthjustice.
Supersonic planes' potential return comes as the Trump administration pushes forward proposals to roll back pollution rules for power plants and vehicles, the nation's two largest sources of greenhouse gases.
At the Center for Biological Diversity, we believe that the welfare of human beings is deeply linked to nature — to the existence in our world of a vast diversity of wild animals and plants. Because diversity has intrinsic value, and because its loss impoverishes society, we work to secure a future for all species, great and small, hovering on the brink of extinction. We do so through science, law and creative media, with a focus on protecting the lands, waters and climate that species need to survive.
(520) 623-5252"If G7 countries are serious about stabilizing the market, they need to stop protecting profits and start taxing companies which fuel the climate crisis."
Campaigners with the global climate movement 350.org argued Tuesday that Group of Seven countries "must tax fossil fuel windfall profits" from price hikes related to the US-Israeli war on Iran.
"Wars expose a deep flaw in our energy system: When prices spike, fossil fuel companies stand ready to cash in while households and businesses struggle," said the group's global campaigns manager, Clémence Dubois, in a statement. "That's not just market volatility, it's the result of governments allowing fossil fuel companies to keep the power to shape the energy system and pass the costs onto everyone else."
In addition to the US, the G7 includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and the United Kingdom. Dubois declared that they all "must stop reinforcing this model with fossil fuel tax cuts that only inflate corporate earnings. Cutting fossil fuel taxes during a crisis is not a relief for families, it's a subsidy for companies that are already enjoying windfall profits."
"The right response is a strong windfall tax, which should be redirected to support households and accelerate the transition to clean energy that reduces our dependence on the very fuels driving both climate disruption and global instability," she stressed, just days after new research revealed that the pace of global heating from fossil fuels has accelerated over the past decade.
While advocates have long called for taxing oil and gas companies to pay for a swift transition to clean power and the impacts of the climate emergency on communities around the world, the Trump administration and Israel's assault on Iran has generated fresh demands for an urgent transition away from dirty energy.
The US and Israel have bombarded civilian infrastructure, including Iranian oil facilities, sending clouds of smoke and black droplets falling over Tehran. Iran has threatened to fire upon ships crossing through the Strait of Hormuz, a crucial pathway for both oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG) between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman.
The shutdown of both the key waterway and Qatari liquefied natural gas facilities damaged by Iranian attacks has sent oil prices soaring and led to estimates that US LNG companies could soon see $20 billion in monthly windfall profits, as they direct exports to the highest bidders.
As Politico reported: "News early Monday that the United States and other G7 countries were discussing a possible coordinated release of oil from their strategic petroleum reserves halted a panic-driven market spike that briefly pushed US oil to nearly $120 a barrel overnight. The French government later in the morning walked that back, saying the G7 was 'not there yet' as far as tapping oil stockpiles."
Speaking in Cyprus on Monday, French President Emmanuel Macron said that "we are in the process of setting up a purely defensive, purely escort mission, which must be prepared together with both European and non-European states, and whose purpose is to enable, as soon as possible after the most intense phase of the conflict has ended, the escort of container ships and tankers to gradually reopen the Strait of Hormuz."
Meanwhile, Fanny Petitbon, 350's France country manager, said Tuesday that "releasing emergency oil reserves is just a Band-Aid on a gaping wound. If G7 countries are serious about stabilizing the market, they need to stop protecting profits and start taxing companies which fuel the climate crisis."
"Working people shouldn't be paying the price while oil majors treat the war in the Middle East like a winning lottery ticket. We need the G7 to step up and establish a windfall tax now to put those profits back into the pockets of the people," Petitbon asserted. "The French government, as president of the G7, must also confront the elephant in the room—the urgent phaseout of fossil fuels. It can no longer look away from the reality, which is that we cannot stay addicted to oil and gas."
Among the countries significantly impacted by the Strait of Hormuz closure is Japan, which relies on the route for around 70% of its oil and 6% of its LNG imports, according to Reuters. Masayoshi Iyoda, a 350 campaigner for the country, said that "Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi has moved to calm fears over rising energy and food prices, but reassurances and stopgap measures like releasing oil reserves are not enough."
"Fossil fuel companies are cashing in on this crisis. A windfall tax on polluting industries would make them pay by taking responsibility, not ordinary families already stretched by years of stagnant wages and price surges due to climate impacts," Iyoda continued, before looking toward Takaichi's planned meeting with US President Donald Trump next week.
"We urge her to reconsider Japan's alignment with the Trump administration's fossil fuel agenda," the campaigner said. "The attack on Iran has shown, once again, how that agenda means prosperity for oil and gas corporations, and higher bills for everyone else. Accelerating a just transition to renewable energy and phasing out fossil fuels is Japan's best option to secure affordable and sustainable energy based on democracy and peace."
"We’re entering an even more dangerous moment," said foreign policy expert Matt Duss.
President Donald Trump may believe that his unprovoked and unconstitutional war with Iran is "very complete, pretty much," but one foreign policy expert thinks that is highly wishful thinking.
Matt Duss, executive vice president at the Center for International Policy and former foreign policy adviser to Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), argued in a Tuesday social media post that the negative consequences of Trump's attack on Iran are just starting to be felt, with no option for a quick ending.
"We’re entering an even more dangerous moment," Duss wrote, "as the stupidity of this war becomes undeniable even to its supporters, who realize they’re about to be revealed as morons yet again and are desperate to turn this into something they can spin as a win. Their only option is escalation."
Shortly before Duss offered his analysis of the situation, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth held a news conference in which he dialed up belligerent rhetoric against Iran while declaring the war "a laser-focused, maximum-authority mission, delivered with overwhelming and unrelenting precision."
Hegseth is serving a buzzword salad this morning: "Overwhelming and unrelenting precision. No hesitation. No half measures. As President Trump declared yesterday, we're crushing the enemy is an overwhelming display of technical skill and military force" pic.twitter.com/WQ19jkPpJB
— Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) March 10, 2026
"No hesitation, no half measures," Hegseth continued. "As President Trump declared yesterday, we're crushing the enemy in an overwhelming display of technical skill and military force."
Hegseth's bluster did not impress Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), who vowed on Tuesday to drag Hegseth before the Senate to answer questions about the war, which the president launched early on a Saturday morning without any authorization from the US Congress.
"I'm joining together with my allies in the United States Senate to use the leverage we have to force a debate and a vote in the Senate on the authorization of war," Murphy said. "I think if the Senate took that vote, it would fail, and that would allow us to stop this illegal, disastrous war in Iran."
Murphy went on to note that "the Constitution is crystal clear" that Trump does not have the power to unilaterally declare war, even though that is precisely what he did less than two weeks ago.
"You should be furious about that," Murphy said, "because this is maybe the most dangerous thing a president can do: Send your sons and daughters to die overseas without your consent."
A group of us in the Senate are demanding public hearings on Trump's disastrous war with Iran with Secretary Hegseth and Rubio. And we've introduced a half dozen war powers resolutions to force the Senate to vote every day on the war if the hearings don't happen. pic.twitter.com/UayrSfoJEb
— Chris Murphy 🟧 (@ChrisMurphyCT) March 10, 2026
Murphy's statement earned kudos from Duss, who promoted his message on social media.
"This is the way," wrote Duss. "No business as usual."
Father Pierre al-Rahi stayed in his southern town to help support parishioners who were unable to flee Israeli's attacks.
Pope Leo XIV was among those expressing grief Monday over the killing of Father Pierre al-Rahi, a Maronite Catholic priest, in an Israeli strike in the southern Lebanese town of Qlayaa, days after he had insisted on staying in the region despite evacuation orders, in order to care for residents there.
Agence France-Presse reported that it was unclear why Israel targeted a home where a couple lived in Qlayaa at about 2:00 pm Beirut time on Monday. Up to now, Israeli forces had largely left the community untouched in their attacks on Lebanon in retaliation against Hezbollah, which has launched rockets at Israel in response to the Israeli-US war on Iran in recent days.
After a first strike was launched by a tank, wounding the owners of the house, al-Rahi was among the neighbors who rushed to the scene to help the residents. The priest was injured in a second strike and later died at a hospital from his injuries. Several other civilians were also wounded in the attack.
The pope expressed "profound sorrow for all the victims of the bombings in the Middle East over the last few days—for the many innocent people, including many children, and for those who were providing them with aid, such as Father Pierre El-Rahi, a Maronite priest killed this afternoon in Qlayaa."
Al-Rahi, who was 50, was killed days after speaking publicly in support of Lebanese civilians who are "defending our lands."
"As our forefathers said, we are only defending our land," said al-Rahi of the community members who were staying in the southern town in defiance of Israeli demands that the evacuate. "We are defending ourselves peacefully. None of us carry weapons. We carry nothing but the weapons of peace, goodness, love, prayer, and more prayer."
"That's why we want to preserve the fact that we are here on our land today," said the priest.
Three days ago, Father Pierre Al-Rai, the parish priest in the village of Al-Qlayaa in southern Lebanon, welcomed the Lebanese government’s recent decision declaring that any military or security activity outside the authority of the state is illegal—referring to the government’s… pic.twitter.com/BhxIk1rcGd
— Ihab Hassan (@IhabHassane) March 9, 2026
One Lebanese commentator said al-Rahi was "a priest with prayers. Murdered in broad daylight."
Israel's military has been bombing what it claims are Hezbollah strongholds in southern Lebanon over the past week, and civilians have reported that residential areas are increasingly being targeted.
Qlayaa Mayor Hanna Daherl told Asia News that Israel claimed "there were fighters in the house, but that's not true. These are lies."
"Inside, there were only the residents of the house and people from the village who came to help the wounded," said Daher.
Israel demanded last week that residents of southern Lebanon—where about 200,000 people live—immediately leave and head north of the Litani River, but al-Rahi was among many clergy members who said they would stay to support civilians who couldn't leave their homes.
Aid to the Church in Need International told OSV News that "despite the growing insecurity in southern Lebanon, many priests and religious sisters have chosen to remain with their communities. Many Christian families have also stayed in their villages, unwilling to abandon their homes, land, and livelihoods."
Father Toufic Bou Merhi, a parish priest of two communities in the area, told EWTN News that fleeing the region would mean “living on the street or trying to rent a house, but people can’t afford it.”
He said the killing of al-Rahi has deeply impacted the local Catholic community, whose members are "weeping over the tragedy and, at the same time, are very afraid."
"Until now, people didn’t want to leave their homes in Christian villages, but in this situation, everything has changed,” Bou Merhi told EWTN News.
The French charity L'Oeuvre d'Orient, which supports Christians in the Middle East, condemned "in the strongest possible terms these acts of war, which aim to destabilize all of Lebanon and kill innocent civilians."
"The death of a priest who refused to leave his parish is yet another escalation of senseless violence," said the group. "L'Oeuvre d'Orient also denounces the risk of annexation and the disappearance of villages south of the Litani River, particularly historic Christian villages."
The Lebanese Health Ministry said Sunday that at least 394 people, including 42 women and 83 children, had been killed in Lebanon by Israeli forces since they began retaliating against Hezbollah.