

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.

New research released today by Ship It Zero coalition members Stand.earth and Pacific Environment takes an in-depth look at four major retail companies that import goods into the United States -- Walmart, Target, Amazon, and IKEA -- and maps their often-hidden relationships with the fossil-fueled cargo carriers they hire to transport their goods. The groundbreaking analysis, titled "Shady Routes: How Big Retail and their Carriers Pollute along Key Ocean Shipping Corridors", was released on Cyber Monday, in a year that promises to mark a shift to e-commerce shopping unlike anything the world has ever seen.
Amid an ongoing global shipping crisis spurred by increased consumer demand fueled by the COVID-19 pandemic, retail brands and cargo carriers have reported record-breaking profits. These new findings reveal close relationships between major retailers and the cargo carriers transporting consumer goods, and how that partnership showcases possibilities for both sectors to address the growing demand for zero-emissions cargo shipping. The report shows the routes favored by the four companies, the emissions impacts of those routes, and how the ongoing cargo shipping backlog has saddled U.S. port communities with increasing rates of pollution.
Among the thousands of retailers moving goods into the U.S. via cargo ships, the retail companies in the report are some of the top importers, comprising 7% of the total estimated U.S. imports in 2020, with Walmart and Target in first and second place, respectively. The goods imported to the U.S. between 2018-2020 by these four companies alone accounted for an estimated 20 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (CO2e), as much as the annual emissions from five coal-fired power plants.
"Pandemic-fueled demand increases, record-breaking profits, and the supply chain crisis reveal the current maritime shipping system is ripe for transformation. There is ample room for retail brands and cargo carriers to absorb the cost of transitioning to fossil-free, zero-emissions shipping and deliver healthier air to our port communities and a livable climate future. Retail companies can choose to be industry leaders and early adopters of zero-emissions technology, or they can put short-term profit over public health and the climate by making empty commitments that put off action on climate change until it's too late," said Kendra Ulrich, Shipping Campaigns Director at Stand.earth.
WEST COAST SHIPPING ROUTES HAVE OUTSIZED POLLUTION BURDEN
The report reveals the Transpacific routes between China and the ports of Los Angeles, Long Beach, San Diego, Seattle, and Tacoma were the largest share of the combined carbon emissions of the four companies, accounting for an estimated 21% of emissions between 2018-2020. The use of these Transpacific routes presents particular problems for West Coast port communities saddled with increasing rates of pollution, thanks to the constant presence of ships idling nearby. This is especially true in Seattle and Tacoma in Washington state, where imports were up over 40% in 2020 versus 2019, fueled by the backlog at California ports.
"Target and Amazon have played an outsized role in the current congestion and pollution crisis at the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. As Target faces a swell of demand in places like California and a doubling of its digital sales, and as Amazon increases its control over its own gas-guzzling shipment and parcel delivery, it is past time to hold these retailers accountable for their responsibilities at the ports. Both companies will continue to favor West Coast routes, which means they'll also keep clogging West Coast ports, spewing cancer-causing emissions and threatening our climate future," said Dawny'all Heydari, Ship It Zero Campaign Lead at Pacific Environment.
In contrast, the research found IKEA is increasingly transporting goods from China to Europe via rail routes, then on cargo ships from Europe to East or Gulf Coast ports, as part of a strategy to reduce the company's carbon emissions from its shipping.
CARGO CARRIER RELATIONSHIPS REVEALED
The report reveals strong relationships between Walmart, Target, Amazon, and IKEA and the world's 15 largest cargo carriers -- including CMA CGM, Maersk, MSC, Evergreen, Cosco, Yang Ming, Hapag-Lloyd, and Amazon's non-vessel operating common carrier, AMZD -- and how that partnership showcases possibilities for both sectors to address the growing demand for zero-emissions cargo shipping. The top 15 carriers account for 97% of the total emissions in the report, indicating these four retail giants rely almost exclusively on the same cargo carriers.
Maersk, Hapag-Lloyd, and CMA CGM reported over $3 billion USD in profits in the first half of 2021, an estimated 2500 percent increase over the first half of 2020. Walmart, Target, and IKEA are also spending money on chartered shipping, a costly and unusual move that reveals a willingness to spend more to get products to market.
"Major cargo carriers are lagging in moving towards zero emissions, citing that costs have been prohibitive. Container industry profits are unprecedentedly strong, consumers support clean shipping, and the technology is available. There are no longer any excuses left to set goals to meet zero emissions for 2030. Retail companies looking to achieve climate goals must engage with cargo carriers that will give them zero-emission freight options to get their goods to market," said Madeline Rose, Climate Campaign Director at Pacific Environment.
Walmart, the number one importer of goods in the U.S., topped the report with the highest volumes traded and the most emissions. The study also reveals Walmart relies heavily on one ocean carrier, CMA CGM, the biggest polluter among all carriers in the report. CMA CGM accounted for more than two thirds of Walmart's ocean shipping emissions in 2020 and one third of the ocean shipping emissions across all four companies -- as much as the next four carriers combined.
Major cargo carriers are increasingly aligning their operations with the demands of retail customers, by providing more end-to-end distribution services as consumer demand shifts to e-commerce and consumers require more warehousing and last mile services rather than brick and mortar stores. CMA CGM and Hapag-Lloyd recently stated their capacity priority is for long-term customers, including clients like Walmart looking for integrated supply chain solutions. By chartering its own private carrier, Amazon is also exerting unique control over its supply chain and appears to be consolidating control rapidly.
"Major retail companies and cargo carriers are flush with cash from pandemic-driven record breaking profits and are tightening their already close relationships. This is an unprecedented opportunity for retail brands and cargo carriers to work together to immediately reduce their maritime emissions from their existing container fleet and build zero-emissions shipping into their growth model," said Ulrich.
SHIPPING INDUSTRY'S POLLUTION PROBLEM
The global shipping industry accounts for 3% of global climate emissions, more than global air travel. If shipping were a country, it would be the world's sixth largest climate polluter. But since maritime shipping negotiated itself out of the U.N. Paris Agreement, the effort to reduce emissions in the industry has been slower than in other sectors.
Approximately 90% of the world trade is transported by sea, and current business-as-usual scenarios project emissions will grow up to 50% over 2018 levels. While the International Maritime Organization noted increased ship size and operational improvements aimed at creating better fuel efficiency have resulted in a decrease in emissions intensity, annual absolute emissions are still increasing.
But the message is starting to sink in, and new commitments from retailers and governments are putting pressure on the industry. At COP26, Amazon joined the First Movers Coalition to help commercialize emerging technologies to decarbonize heavy industries including ocean shipping, and committed to moving 10% of its freight on zero-emissions ships by 2030. Also at COP26, governments and CEOs launched the Clydebank Declaration to establish green shipping corridors among some of the busiest maritime shipping routes. And in October, Amazon and IKEA helped launch coZEV, a retailer-led initiative to move 100% of products off of fossil-fueled maritime cargo ships by 2040.
"Until recently, the massive climate and health-harming emissions from the cargo shipping industry have sailed under the radar. But consumers, corporations, and governments are waking up to the massive climate impact stemming from goods being shipped across our oceans. Reducing, and ultimately eliminating, maritime emissions will not happen without bold commitments and concrete actions from the companies paying for cargo carriers to transport their goods. The retail brands that fill our homes and lives with their products bear a direct responsibility for the pollution their supply chains create, and for taking the necessary actions to demand a transition to zero-emissions shipping this decade," said Ulrich.
SHIP IT ZERO COALITION
The Ship It Zero coalition is calling on retail companies to address their cargo shipping pollution impacts in the following ways:
Stand.earth (formerly ForestEthics) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with offices in Canada and the United States that is known for its groundbreaking research and successful corporate and citizens engagement campaigns to create new policies and industry standards in protecting forests, advocating the rights of indigenous peoples, and protecting the climate. Visit us at
"Every day that we do nothing, 11 more Lebanese children are killed or injured by the Israeli military in this US-supported invasion."
House Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries helped Republicans tank Rep. Rashida Tlaib’s war powers resolution to limit US military involvement in Lebanon on Thursday, holding up the effort to curb the conflict for at least another several weeks.
Despite Israel’s invasion of Lebanon pushing deeper, with more than 3,500 people killed and 1.2 million displaced since early March, the Michigan Democrat's resolution was defeated in a 324-92 vote, with a large number in her own party joining Jeffries (D-NY) and the Republican majority against it.
In a joint statement shortly ahead of the vote on Tlaib's resolution, House Minority Leader Jeffries of New York, along with Whip Katherine Clark (D-Mass.), and Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar (D-Calif.), said: “We stand with the Lebanese people, the government of Lebanon, and the Lebanese Armed Forces in their efforts to live peacefully and defeat Hezbollah." The statement included no mention of Israel.
The lawmakers said they’d support a different resolution introduced by Tlaib on Wednesday, which was crafted in tandem with Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-NY), the ranking Democrat on the House Foreign Affairs Committee.
That resolution likewise required President Donald Trump to remove US forces “from any hostilities in Lebanon” within seven days of passage. But it also added the caveat that it could not be construed to "prevent or limit security cooperation with the Lebanese Armed Forces."
Jeffries, Clark, and Aguilar said, "There are no US servicemembers involved in combat operations or hostilities in Lebanon."
However, supporters of Tlaib's original measure have noted that the US military is heavily involved in Israel's actions in the country without having boots on the ground.
"The US is actively cooperating with Israel on coordinating strikes, intelligence sharing, and planning, including Trump green-lighting major attacks on Lebanon multiple times," Janet Abou-Elias, a researcher at the Democratizing Foreign Policy Project at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Common Dreams.
While the resolution's passage wouldn't "end US involvement overnight," she said, "it fundamentally changes the landscape of accountability" by giving opponents of US collaboration a legal mechanism to conduct oversight.
And while the resolution would not cut off US military aid to Israel, Abou-Elias said Israel could continue its occupation "only for a limited period of time" without US assistance.
"Israel would be absorbing losses while also draining its broader manpower and firepower reserves," she said. "At some point, the cost-benefit of continuing their occupation without US support would shift."
Because war powers resolutions are privileged, they can be forced to a vote even without approval from the Republican majority.
However, committees are given 15 days to act before a resolution is forced onto the floor, followed by three days for a House vote. This means it could take until June 21 for the new version to pass. The Senate would also have to pass it, and it would then take another week to go into effect.
"The people of Lebanon can't wait another month for Congress to act," Tlaib said on social media following news that the proposal would be voted down. "Every day that we do nothing, 11 more Lebanese children are killed or injured by the Israeli military in this US-supported invasion. Congress must pass today's Lebanon war powers resolution."
Abou-Elias said that despite the setback, Tlaib's introduction of the measure was not a wasted effort.
"Even if the resolution doesn't pass today, the vote forces every representative on record on the US participation in the attacks on Lebanon," she said. "That alone has value."
Though resolution failed, proponents of the measure championed the 92 lawmakers who did vote in favor.
“Congress’s failure to act has thus far enabled multiple Israeli invasions of Lebanon and war crimes against Lebanese civilians,” said Beth Miller, political director of Jewish Voice for Peace Action, in a statement. “Tonight’s vote demonstrated that a growing block of members of Congress are beginning to listen to their constituents. Americans don’t want the US involved in atrocities against Lebanese, Palestinians, Iranians, or anyone. This vote is just the beginning, and we will continue to organize until all of Congress acts to end these atrocities.”
"The reality is that 4.5 million people were kicked off the program to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy," said US Rep. Shontel Brown.
Rep. Shontel Brown on Thursday confronted US Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins for her past boasts about kicking millions of Americans off food assistance.
During a House Agriculture Committee hearing, Brown grilled Rollins for saying it was "good news" that 4.5 million fewer people are now enrolled in the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP) than before President Donald Trump took office last year.
"The reality is that 4.5 million people were kicked off the program to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy," said Brown. "Families and children are not leaving the SNAP program because they are doing better."
Rep. @ShontelMBrown: Recently, you described it as good news that roughly 4.5 million people have been moved off SNAP. The reality is that 4.5 million people were kicked off to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy. They are not doing better--
Rollins: They are. pic.twitter.com/qcB2WlAHLv
— Headquarters (@HQNewsNow) June 4, 2026
"They are," Rollins replied, without citing any evidence.
"They are being forced off because of eligibility changes, new administrative barriers, and states preparing for the enormous cost shift that they know is coming," Brown shot back. "And you know this. So I'm really struggling to understand why you think pulling the rug out from under children, seniors, veterans, and families that have fallen on hard times [is] good news."
Rollins then baselessly claimed that all of the people who had been removed from SNAP had been added to the program fraudulently, including "200,000 dead people."
The Associated Press last month published a fact check that examined a similar Rollins claim about the number of people removed from food assistance over the last year, and determined that the most likely culprit were changes made to the program by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, a 2025 budget law that slashed funding to SNAP by $186 billion over a decade.
"What we’ve seen in terms of the data is that the trend in participation declines seems to be related to the program being harder to access,” Roger Figueroa, an assistant professor at Cornell University, explained to the AP.
“Warner’s opposition to Bill Pulte masks the fact that he is still the Democrats’ chief advocate for handing over unchecked spying powers to the Trump administration," said one progressive campaigner.
The watchdog group Demand Progress on Thursday warned that the Senate Intelligence Committee's top Democrat is attacking civil liberties by collaborating with Republicans and the Trump administration to renew warrantless spying powers—even as he sounds the alarm over President Donald Trump's appointment of unqualified loyalist Bill Pulte as acting director of national intelligence.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) is pressing Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) to use his influence to persuade Trump to reconsider appointing Pulte—a private equity firm founder and homebuilder who is currently director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) and chairman of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac—to the top intel post, which current Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard will officially vacate on June 30.
Warner this week called out Pulte's lack of relevant experience, as well as his "eagerness to use the authorities of government to pursue political retribution" against a number of Trump’s political foes for politically motivated mortgage fraud investigations.
However, critics including Demand Progress have pointed out Warner's critical role in whipping Democratic support for renewing Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), which allows the US government to collect electronic communications of noncitizens located outside the United States without a warrant. Experts note that Americans’ data is also swept up during such surveillance, and civil society groups and some lawmakers from both parties have demanded reforms to prevent further abuse by federal agencies.
Section 702, which was reauthorized for two years in 2024, is set to expire next week. There is a legislative battle between lawmakers and intelligence officials who want to extend Section 702 largely intact—the so-called "clean" reauthorization backed by Trump and his allies—and privacy-focused legislators from both parties who want reforms, especially a requirement for warrants before searching Americans' communications.
A three-year proposal passed by House lawmakers in April did not include a warrantless requirement.
“Sen. Warner’s opposition to Bill Pulte masks the fact that he is still the Democrats’ chief advocate for handing over unchecked spying powers to the Trump administration," Demand Progress executive director Sean Vitka said Thursday. "Pulte obviously must go, but he’s also proof that this administration is eager and willing to use the Office of the Director of National Intelligence as a weapon."
"If Trump pulls Pulte, he can easily appoint another eager goon to fill the slot," Vitkaco stressed. "By focusing on Pulte and not broader reforms, Sen. Warner is not standing up for Americans or the Constitution, he is disguising his work to engineer warrantless mass surveillance against us."
"We know this because he’s been doing it publicly for months," he added. "An unprecedented, bipartisan movement is demanding privacy reforms, but Sen. Warner’s machinations threaten to derail this progress and hand Trump the surveillance powers he needs to threaten Americans and democracy itself for the rest of his administration.”
Demand Progress said that Warner "has conspicuously failed to join the chorus of Democrats and Republicans calling for reforms to FISA that would protect privacy and democracy itself."
"Warner, who is negotiating with Republicans and the Trump administration to renew FISA, has only commented on how bad Pulte is and notably stopped short of saying anything about FISA reform," the group continued. "This is particularly telling considering Warner’s history of promising future reforms to get FISA renewed and failing to deliver."
Demand Progress contrasted Warner's actions with those of his fellow Democrats, including Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, who explicitly called for “reforms to ensure Americans’ privacy and rights are protected.”
Senate lawmakers could hold an initial procedural vote on extending Section 702 as soon as Thursday, with just a simple majority needed for the measure to advance. Future votes would require the support of 60 senators in order to avoid a Republican filibuster.
Elizabeth Goitein, co-director of the Liberty and National Security Program at the Brennan Center for Justice, warned Wednesday in a social media thread that the Section 702 extension supported by Trump, his Republican allies in Congress, and Warner "doesn’t just fail to curb warrantless domestic spying, it actually expands the government's ability to use 702 against Americans."
"Trump’s allies and Warner have produced a bill that purports to include reforms, but that makes no change whatsoever to existing standards and procedures for conducting backdoor searches, let alone a warrant requirement," she continued.
A "backdoor search" occurs when the government collects information about a US citizen when the surveillance was originally authorized for foreign targets and the government did not obtain a warrant before collecting the communications.
"These 'backdoor searches' are an affront to the Fourth Amendment," Goitein asserted. "They have led to widespread abuses, including FBI searches for the communications of members of Congress, campaign donors, journalists, and protesters across the political spectrum."
"There is broad bipartisan support in Congress for requiring the government to get a warrant before accessing Americans’ communications obtained under Section 702," she continued. "This reform has twice passed the House, and 76% of Americans support it."
"Unsurprisingly, Trump and his allies in Congress oppose this reform," Goitein wrote. "What’s more surprising is that key Democratic surveillance hawks, including Mark Warner and [Rep.] Jim Himes [D-Conn.], have teamed up with the Trump camp to ensure that his administration has continued warrantless access."
"Even more disturbing is the provision titled 'Restriction on Use of United States Person Information Acquired Under Section 702 in Criminal Prosecutions,'" she said. "Notwithstanding the Orwellian title, this provision actually *removes* existing restrictions on such use.
"Any member who is concerned with Pulte’s appointment should be aghast at the prospect of handing this administration warrantless access to Americans’ private communications and expanding its power to use those communications against Americans in court," Goitein added. "There is only one way senators can force leadership to permit amendment votes or otherwise negotiate: vote NO on the procedural motion that will take place in the coming days. Senators who support reform are the majority; they have real leverage. They must use it."
The Brennan Center for Justice and Demand Progress were among dozens of civil society groups that on Monday sent a letter to congressional leaders urging them to "not abandon Americans' constitutional rights" and "reject any extension that does not include key bipartisan reforms that would protect Americans' privacy and civil rights and liberties."