

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.

Natasha Léger, Citizens for a Healthy Community, (970) 399-9700, natasha@chc4you.org
Melissa Hornbein, Western Environmental Law Center, (406) 471-3173, hornbein@westernlaw.org
Jeremy Nichols, WildEarth Guardians, (303) 437-7663, jnichols@wildearthguaridans.
Climate, conservation, and community groups from across the country filed administrative protests today challenging the Biden administration's plans to resume oil and gas leasing in June, saying the president should end new leasing to heed his own climate goals while protecting communities, water and wildlife.
The June lease sales, which follow the administration's brief pause on new oil leasing, involve 144,000 acres in Wyoming, Colorado, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma and Utah, with a majority of acres in Wyoming.
Today's protests say the U.S. Bureau of Land Management isn't legally required to conduct lease sales and that its plans fail to prevent climate pollution and harm to people and the environment. The leasing plans also ignore the incompatibility of federal fossil fuel expansion with the U.S. goal of avoiding 1.5 degrees Celsius of global warming, the groups say.
The protests, which cite harm to people, air, water, public land and wildlife like the embattled greater sage grouse and other endangered species, call for a halt to federal fossil fuel leasing and a nationwide programmatic environmental review to align federal fossil fuel management with the goal of avoiding climate change's most catastrophic effects.
Several analyses show that climate pollution from the world's already-producing fossil fuel developments, if fully developed, would push warming past 1.5 degrees Celsius, and that avoiding such warming requires ending new investment in fossil fuel projects and phasing out production to keep as much as 40% of developed fields in the ground.
Thousands of organizations and communities from across the United States have called on President Biden to halt federal fossil fuel expansion and phase out production consistent with limiting global warming to 1.5deg Celsius.
The administration's promised comprehensive climate review of the federal oil and gas programs under Executive Order 14008 culminated in a Black Friday report that mentioned climate only twice and proposed modest royalty rate increases and other changes that presume no end to federal oil and gas leasing. The Biden administration approved more drilling permits in 2021 than President Trump did in the first year of his presidency, according to federal data analyzed by the Center for Biological Diversity.
Climate pollution from federal fossil fuels is hastening the extinction crisis while impacting communities nationwide with extreme weather, wildfires, regional aridification and river drying, droughts, heat waves and rising seas. Federal fossil fuel extraction disproportionately harms Black, Brown and Indigenous communities.
The June lease sales come amid record oil and gas industry profit-taking. The watchdog organization Accountable.US reported in February that Shell, Chevron, BP and Exxon made more than $75.5 billion in profits in 2021 -- some of their highest profits in the past decade. Major oil companies also reported billions in profits in the first quarter of 2022.
Statements from Protesting Groups:
"Montana is in the throes of major climate change impacts, including less water in our rivers, more intense wildfires across the state, and a prolonged and an intense drought over much of our landscape," said Derf Johnson, staff attorney with the Montana Environmental Information Center. "The Biden administration's decision to continue leasing our public lands for fossil fuel extraction flies in the face of his stated goal to reduce emissions and address the climate crisis."
"The West is on the verge of another Dust Bowl. We are in the nation's climate hotspot, disproportionately impacted by climate change, having warmed double the global average, more than 2 degrees Celsius," said Natasha Leger, executive director, Citizens for a Healthy Community. "Climate leadership means ending new oil and gas leasing that just locks in more climate catastrophe. A lease sale in areas that have already warmed 1.5 degrees Celsius is beyond reckless."
"In spite of candidate Biden's promises to ban new oil and gas extraction on federal lands, his administration is doing the opposite," said Daniel E. Estrin, general counsel and advocacy director for Waterkeeper Alliance. "If stopping catastrophic climate change is truly a key administration priority, it's irrational to lease nearly 150,000 additional acres of public lands to Big Oil. We again call on the president to keep his promises, and for his administration's actions to match its climate messaging."
"Tens of thousands of people have spoken up against drilling on public lands. And now it's up to the BLM to listen and put an end to leasing once and for all," said Dan Ritzman, lands, water and wildlife director at the Sierra Club. "For far too long our public lands have been monopolized by the oil and gas industry, leaving behind toxic pollution in their wake, harming local communities, wildlife, and our special places. As we come dangerously close to reaching the 1.5C threshold, it is critical we keep fossil fuels in the ground. It's time for our public lands and waters to be part of the climate solution, not the problem."
"Only raising royalty rates ignores the quarter of all U.S. climate emissions caused by fossil fuel extraction on public lands, as well as the climate costs shifted onto society," said Nicole Ghio, senior fossil fuels program manager at Friends of the Earth. "If Biden wants to be a real climate leader, he must keep his promise to end new oil and gas drilling, not turn over more public lands to Big Oil when there is no legal obligation to do so."
"Avoiding catastrophic climate change requires no more fossil fuel expansion anywhere, starting now, including on public lands," said Taylor McKinnon with the Center for Biological Diversity. "Each new oil lease is a choice for more megafires, drier rivers, worsening heat waves and hastened extinctions. The president should use his power to keep his climate promise and end fossil fuel leasing on public lands and waters."
"Selling public lands to the oil and gas industry is absolutely, 100% guaranteed to keep fueling the climate crisis," said Jeremy Nichols, climate and energy program director for WildEarth Guardians. "President Biden's belief that we can open the door for more fracking and protect our climate is simply out of touch with truth, reality and what's right."
"Public lands and minerals should be managed for the public benefit, not to maximize the profits of fossil fuel corporations," said Erik Molvar, executive director of Western Watersheds Project. "Wildlife from sage grouse to elk and pronghorn are harmed by drilling on public lands, and so is the global climate, so one necessary solution to both the climate crisis and the biodiversity crisis is to stop leasing the public's minerals to fossil fuel corporations. The highest and best use of federal coal, oil, and gas deposits is to keep them safely sequestered underground."
"The Administration's attempt to take a more nuanced approach to federal fossil fuel development may be politically convenient, but it ignores scientific reality: for a 50/50 shot at avoiding the 1.5degC threshold, nearly 40% of currently-producing or under-construction fossil fuel reserves must stay in the ground" said Melissa Hornbein, senior attorney at the Western Environmental Law Center. "Even if that 40% is kept underground, our odds of staying below 1.5degC are worse than a game of Russian Roulette. Why is the government rigging this dangerous game of speculation in favor of the oil industry, when a livable climate is at stake? The science is clear: there is simply no room for additional oil and gas leasing."
WildEarth Guardians protects and restores the wildlife, wild places, wild rivers, and health of the American West. Driven by passion, we've tackled some of the West's most difficult and pressing conservation challenges over the past three decades. We've celebrated small victories (banning leghold trapping in the state of Colorado), monumental triumphs (ending logging on more than 21 million acres in the Southwest), and everything in-between.
(206) 417-6363The new data comes as Tesla is removing human safety monitors from its driverless taxi fleet.
Proponents of driverless cars often tout them as a safer alternative to cars with human drivers—but such claims don't appear to be holding up so far in the case of Tesla's Robotaxis.
A Monday report from Elektrek found that Tesla Robotaxis are crashing much more frequently than cars driven by humans, as the company has now reported eight crashes of its driverless taxi fleet in Austin, Texas to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration since July.
Elektrek also crunched some numbers based on data released by Tesla last month and estimated that the Tesla Robotaxis are involved in a crash for every 40,000 miles they drive. For comparison, the publication reported, cars driven by humans crash about once every 500,000 miles, meaning the Robotaxis so far have crashed 12.5 times more frequently than human-driven cars.
All of the Robotaxi crashes so far have occurred with human safety monitors—who have been trained to take control of the car in the event of a software error—present in the vehicles.
This is significant because, as TechCrunch reported on Monday, Tesla is starting to send out its Robotaxi fleet without safety monitors.
TechCrunch noted that "the removal of the human safety monitors brings the company a critical step closer to its goal of launching a real commercial Robotaxi service," but also said it "will most likely ramp up the scrutiny on Tesla’s ongoing testing in Austin, doubly so when the company starts offering rides in the empty cars."
Tesla's bet on Robotaxis has grown more important given that its vehicle sales in the US and around the world have been dropping significantly so far this year, in part due to a boycott campaign inspired by outrage over CEO Elon Musk's support for far-right political parties.
According to a report from Reuters, the most recent data from car software company Cox Automotive shows that US Tesla sales dropped to a four-year low last month. The news agency also pointed out that Tesla now "is offering financing deals as low as 0% on the Standard Model Y," which is "a sign of weak demand."
"AI toys are not safe for kids," said a spokesperson for the children's advocacy group Fairplay. "They disrupt children's relationships, invade family privacy, displace key learning activities, and more."
As scrutiny of the dangers of artificial intelligence technology increases, Mattel is delaying the release of a toy collaboration it had planned with OpenAI for the holiday season, and children’s advocates hope the company will scrap the project for good.
The $6 billion company behind Barbie and Hot Wheels announced a partnership with OpenAI in June, promising, with little detail, to collaborate on "AI-powered products and experiences" to hit US shelves later in the year, an announcement that was met with fear about potential dangers to developing minds.
At the time, Robert Weissman, the president of the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, warned: “Endowing toys with human-seeming voices that are able to engage in human-like conversations risks inflicting real damage on children. It may undermine social development, interfere with children’s ability to form peer relationships, pull children away from playtime with peers, and possibly inflict long-term harm."
In November, dozens of child development experts and organizations signed an advisory from the group Fairplay warning parents not to buy the plushies, dolls, action figures, and robots that were coming embedded with "the very same AI systems that have produced unsafe, confusing, or harmful experiences for older kids and teens, including urging them to self harm or take their own lives."
In addition to fears about stunted emotional development, they said the toys also posed security risks: "Using audio, video, and even facial or gesture recognition, AI toys record and analyze sensitive family information even when they appear to be off... Companies can then use or sell this data to make the toys more addictive, push paid upgrades, or fuel targeted advertising directed at children."
The warnings have proved prescient in the months after Mattel's partnership was announced. As Victor Tangermann wrote for Futurism:
Toy makers have unleashed a flood of AI toys that have already been caught telling tykes how to find knives, light fires with matches, and giving crash courses in sexual fetishes.
Most recently, tests found that an AI toy from China is regaling children with Chinese Communist Party talking points, telling them that “Taiwan is an inalienable part of China” and defending the honor of the country’s president Xi Jinping.
As these horror stories rolled in, Mattel went silent for months on the future of its collaboration with Sam Altman's AI juggernaut. That is, until Monday, when it told Axios that the still-ill-defined product's rollout had been delayed.
A spokesperson for OpenAI confirmed, "We don't have anything planned for the holiday season," and added that when a product finally comes out, it will be aimed at older teenagers rather than young children.
Rachel Franz, director of Fairplay’s Young Children Thrive Offline program, praised Mattel's decision to delay the release: "Given the threat that AI poses to children’s development, not to mention their safety and privacy, such caution is more than warranted," she said.
But she added that merely putting the rollout of AI toys on pause was not enough.
"We urge Mattel to make this delay permanent. AI toys are not safe for kids. They disrupt children's relationships, invade family privacy, displace key learning activities, and more," Franz said. "Mattel has an opportunity to be a real leader here—not in the race to the bottom to hook kids on AI—but in putting children’s needs first and scrapping its plans for AI toys altogether.”
"With the average home sales price having already risen by 31%—or over $120,000—since 2020, this tariff-induced change could put homeownership further out of reach for millions of Americans," warns a new report.
After campaigning last year on reducing the cost of living and as he attempts to claim progressive Democrats' push for affordability as his own, President Donald Trump's policies have been directly linked to making life more expensive for people across the US—and along with electricity, healthcare, and groceries, housing costs are set to rise, according to a new analysis out Tuesday, which examines the impact of Trump's tariffs.
The Center for American Progress (CAP) found that the impact on home construction materials by Trump's tariffs could force builders to scale back significantly over the next five years, reducing new home construction by 450,000 homes through 2030.
According to the analysis, the average cost of building a home in the coming years will increase by $17,500 if current home building rates continue.
"With the average home sales price having already risen by 31%—or over $120,000—since 2020, this tariff-induced change could put homeownership further out of reach for millions of Americans," said CAP.
Trump's tariffs are as high as 50% for some countries, and some of the highest levies have been imposed on key building materials, including lumber, copper, aluminum, and steel products. Imports of upholstered products and kitchen cabinets are set to face tariffs that could increase by up to 50%.
The tariffs were unveiled amid a growing housing affordability crisis, with the number of available homes falling short by 2 million units or more, according to some estimates.
Following the Great Recession, home construction has not returned to pre-2008 levels and the country requires "sustained, above-average construction rates to correct" the persistent underbuilding, according to CAP.
"Yet the Trump administration’s tariff policies are pushing home building in the opposite direction by raising construction costs, which will slow new construction activity, raise costs, and worsen housing affordability," reads the report by Cory Husak, Natalie Baker, and Mimla Wardak.
The analysis found that while Trump has insisted that the tariffs will target the countries that import goods to the US, but as with groceries—which have gone up in price by up to 40% at some stores—the levies on home building materials are projected to ultimately impact American families who are already struggling to afford healthcare and other essentials.
The tariffs are expected to add $27 billion to the annual cost of constructing new homes by 2027, effectively raising the cost of building a new home by about 3.3%.
🚨Hot off the presses 🚨 New tariffs are going to kill 450,000 homes over the next 5 yearsTariffs on lumber, steel, cabinets, vanities, copper add an average $17,500 to the cost of building a new home. Yearly home losses will soon total 100k per year-www.americanprogress.org/article/trum...
[image or embed]
— Corey Husak (@chusak.bsky.social) December 16, 2025 at 1:08 PM
From 2030 onward, the number of new homes being built is expected to be down by 100,000 yearly.
"This would be equivalent to eliminating 6 percent of the homes constructed in the five years from 2020 to 2024," said CAP.
If home building falls as CAP projects, the cost of construction will rise to $18,500 per home in 2028, CAP projected.
“Families are already struggling to afford a place to live, and the administration is adding fuel to the housing costs fire,” said Husak, director of tax policy at CAP. “These tariffs are a tax on builders and aspiring homeowners, raising construction costs, slowing the pace of new building, and pushing homeownership even further out of reach for millions of Americans.”
The group urged the federal government to act to stop the tariffs from continuously "driving up construction costs, slowing homebuilding, and worsening the nation’s already severe housing shortage."
"Building new housing supply is crucial to solving the housing shortage," said CAP, "and canceling tariffs on homebuilding materials is a necessary step to bring more housing online and improve housing affordability."