June, 01 2022, 08:08am EDT
As the UN commemorates 50 years since the first international summit on the environment, a new report exposes the critical dangers that fossil fuels pose to all 17 sustainable development goals.
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.

As the UN commemorates 50 years since the first international summit on the environment, a new report exposes the critical dangers that fossil fuels pose to all 17 sustainable development goals.
As the UN commemorates 50 years since the first international summit on the environment, a new report exposes the critical dangers that fossil fuels pose to all 17 sustainable development goals.
The report, coined Fuelling Failure: How coal, oil and gas sabotage all seventeen Sustainable Development Goals, finds that oil, gas and coal production and emissions are a primary threat to our water, health, biodiversity and ability to provide economic and energy security. It calls for an international framework with binding commitments that constrain fossil fuel production globally, one that complements existing pledges to cut emissions, reverse biodiversity loss and curtails pollution which the world fails to meet due to their rampant fossil fuel production.
The report, which is draws on more than 400 academic articles, civil society reports and case studies, acknowledges that "the exploration, extraction, refining, transportation and combustion of oil, gas and coal is making it impossible for the global community to meet the SDGs, threatening lives and livelihoods, and the ability of the planet to sustain human wellbeing". Today's most pressing crises - from poverty, world hunger, health and conflict - are all made increasingly difficult in a warming world.
Co-author Freddie Daley, Research Associate at the University of Sussex, said: "2030 is a line in the sand for the health of our planet and its people. By 2030, humanity needs to have halved global emissions, while at the same time achieving all 17 SDGs. This is an impossible endeavour without concerted global efforts to constrain and phase out fossil fuel production in a fast, fair and equitable manner, with the wealthy nations that continue to benefit from fossil fuelled economic growth leading the way. This research lays out the incompatibility of sustainable development and fossil fuels - and what is at stake if we fail to address unchecked fossil fuel expansion."
Current international climate agreements primarily focus on emissions reductions and make no mention of fossil fuels. The international framework required to align efforts to achieve the SDGs with ending the era of fossil fuels could take the form of a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, which has garnered support in cities around the world and amongst leading parliamentarians, scientists, academics and faith leaders.
Tzeporah Berman, Chair for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative and Stand.earth International Programs Director, said: "Fossil fuel addiction poisons every earnest attempt we make to tackle the sustainable development and climate agendas. Despite a robust pile of evidence that fossil fuels are core to our problems, governments are not moving and international cooperation is lacking. We have the solutions at hand but the obstacle is a lack of political courage. Bold new ideas like the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty are necessary to revive our living systems and take them off life support."
The paper was produced by researchers at the University of Sussex on behalf of the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative and key civil society partners with expertise across the SDGs: 350.org, ActionAid, REN21, Stand.earth, Health Care Without Harm, CAN South Asia, UNRISD, Food and Water, Rapid Transition Alliance, Leave It In the Ground Initiative, GAIA, CAN International, Center for Biological Diversity, Stamp Out Poverty, MOCICC, Power Shift Africa, WECAN and Asian Peoples' Movement on Debt and Development.
The full report is available online as well as the executive summary. The paper will be presented at a virtual public event ahead of the Stockholm+50 conference on Wednesday, 1st June, 9.30am-10.30am CEST.
Kjell Kuhne, founder of the Leave It In The Ground Initiative (LINGO), said: "In the early 2020s, we are moving into the fossil endgame. Because we have delayed it for so long, we will need to play it much faster now. Everyone should get ready for a rapid transition ahead - either as an active driver and participant, or as a fossil age relic to be washed away by the new times."
Teresa Anderson, global lead on climate justice for ActionAid International, said: " Drought in the Horn of Africa means that 20 million people are currently at risk of famine. The world's food systems are struggling to cope with the rising temperatures and haywire weather patterns caused by fossil-fuelled climate change. Farmers are no longer able to predict when rains will come, and are struggling to grow enough food for their families and communities. We're now at the point where we have to choose between fossil fuels and food security, because an overheating planet will not be able to feed humanity."
Josh Karliner, International Director of Program and Strategy at Health Care Without Harm, said: "Civilization has two paths before it. We can either collectively continue our addiction to fossil fuels thereby undermining public health and the natural systems that support life on the planet, throwing the SDGs out the window along the way. Or we can kick the fossil fuel habit and organize a just transition to clean, renewable energy systems that will help foster healthy people on a healthy planet, thereby giving us a fighting chance to meet the Sustainable Development Goals. The health of future generations depends on our action today."
Wenonah Hauter, executive director of the environmental advocacy organization Food & Water Watch, said: "This comprehensive report from the Fossil Fuel Treaty Initiative makes abundantly clear what we've been warning for years: There is no viable solution to the climate crisis that can include continued reliance on fossil fuels. In spite of real progress made on many sustainable development goals around the world, the ultimate success or failure in our mission to maintain a livable climate for future generations depends on transitioning fully to clean, renewable energy now."
Mariel Vilella, Director of GAIA's Global Climate Program, said: "The fossil fuel industry is using a false "net zero" narrative to justify investing billions to increase plastic production, with low income communities and communities of colour suffering the worst impacts. This needs to stop: both the SDGs and the Paris Climate Agreement are being actively undermined by this suicide mission to produce more plastic waste."
Mohamed Adow, director of Power Shift Africa, said: "The fossil fuel industry is built on servicing extractive systems and has left communities - especially those in Africa - vulnerable to socio-economic and ecological traps, shocks and under development. Fossil fuels are undermining sustainable development in many ways, including fuelling catastrophic extreme weather impacts on our people's lives and livelihoods. To achieve sustainable development, we need to see a rapid and urgent shift away from fossil fuel investments and increased financing of people-centred, community-owned, decentralized and distributed, accessible, resilient, and affordable renewable energy systems, particularly for the vulnerable sections of the society in Africa."
Osprey Orielle Lake, Founder/Executive Director of the Women's Earth and Climate Action Network (WECAN), Steering Committee member for the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty, said: "Globally women are strategizing and working to accelerate our collective efforts to halt the worst impacts of the climate crisis, stop extractivism at the source, and protect our lands, forests, water, and global climate for current and future generations. Studies worldwide demonstrate that women are essential to resolving multiple interlocking crises. Women's leadership and solutions are vital to ending the era of fossil fuels and pushing forward innovative solutions, like the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty which ensures an end to sacrifice people and sacrifice zones, and the protection of our global communities and ecosystems."
Paul Ladd, Director of UNRISD, said: "This important and timely report sheds light on a simple truth: The continued reliance on fossil fuels is not compatible with sustainable development. Unpacking a wealth of information and data, it showcases the many ways in which fossil fuel extraction and use undermine sustained progress across the range of SDGs. We must do everything we can in order to accelerate a low-carbon transition that is built on principles of equity, justice and inclusion."
Jean Su, director of The Centre for Biological Diversity, said: "Every day that we burn fossil fuels is one more day that we're undermining these goals for a sustainable, livable planet. The first step to fighting the extinction of countless species and the scourge of global poverty is to turn off the spigot of dangerous fossil fuels. That's the only way we can build a just, peaceful future that protects the dignity of humanity and all life on Earth."
Lidy Nacpil, Coordinator for Asian Peoples' Movement On Debt And Development, said: "This report makes clear that fossil fuels are weapons of mass destruction. In the Global South, the extraction and burning of fossil fuels threatens millions of lives through devastating climate impacts while dependence on fossil fuels locks countries into increasing cycles of debt, fuelling poverty and undermining education, jobs and health. Already more than 200 parliamentarians, led by representatives from the Global South, have joined a global call for a Fossil Fuel Free Future to break this cycle of debt and destruction. We need international cooperation on a global just transition from fossil fuels to make this future a reality."
David Hillman, Director of Stamp Out Poverty, said: "The catastrophic warming of our planet through the relentless burning of fossil fuels is devastating the lives and livelihoods of people now. Between the tropics, particularly, populations are at the sharp end of increasingly violent storms and crop-destroying droughts. Impacts to food and water security are causing poverty to rise with previous progress on the SDGs going into reverse. There is only one way to break this cycle, we need to stop using fossil fuels. There simply is no time to lose."
Mahir Ilgaz, Associate Director, Global Policy and Campaigns for 350.org: "This report demonstrates once again that there can be no fossil fuel based development, and any energy system based on fossil fuels is bound to failure while also damaging our health, prosperity, and environment. The false dependencies created by the fossil fuel industry are entirely of their own making and avoidable. As the energy transition progresses, dependence on fossil fuels as the main sources of our energy mix will have an additional effect on our economies, as these investments lose their value. Fossil fuels are not only destroying our climate but they are also undermining our right to development through the appropriation of resources that should be going to clean and just development for all."
##
About the Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative
The Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty Initiative is spurring international cooperation to end new development of fossil fuels, phase out existing production within the agreed climate limit of 1.5degC, and develop plans to support workers, communities and countries dependent on fossil fuels to create secure and healthy livelihoods.
The proposed Treaty draws on lessons from global efforts to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and ban ozone depleting chemicals, landmines and other threats to humanity. It will advance action under three pillars:
350 is building a future that's just, prosperous, equitable and safe from the effects of the climate crisis. We're an international movement of ordinary people working to end the age of fossil fuels and build a world of community-led renewable energy for all.
"Trump’s attempt to impose a documentary proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab," said one plaintiff in the case.
A federal judge on Friday permanently blocked part of President Donald Trump's executive order requiring proof of US citizenship on federal voter registration forms, a ruling hailed by one plaintiff in the case as "a clear victory for our democracy."
Siding with Democratic and civil liberties groups that sued the administration over Trump's March edict mandating a US passport, REAL ID-compliant document, military identification, or similar proof in order to register to vote in federal elections, Senior US District Judge for the District of Columbia Colleen Kollar-Kotelly found the directive to be an unconstitutional violation of the separation of powers.
“Because our Constitution assigns responsibility for election regulation to the states and to Congress, this court holds that the president lacks the authority to direct such changes," Kollar-Kotelly, an appointee of former President Bill Clinton, wrote in her 81-page ruling.
"The Constitution addresses two types of power over federal elections: First, the power to determine who is qualified to vote, and second, the power to regulate federal election procedures," she continued. "In both spheres, the Constitution vests authority first in the states. In matters of election procedures, the Constitution assigns Congress the power to preempt State regulations."
"By contrast," Kollar-Kotelly added, "the Constitution assigns no direct role to the president in either domain."
This is the second time Kollar-Kotelly has ruled against Trump's proof-of-citizenship order. In April, she issued a temporary injunction blocking key portions of the directive.
"The president doesn't have the authority to change election procedures just because he wants to."
"The court upheld what we've long known: The president doesn't have the authority to change election procedures just because he wants to," the ACLU said on social media.
Sophia Lin Lakin of the ACLU, a plaintiff in the case, welcomed the decision as “a clear victory for our democracy."
"President Trump’s attempt to impose a documentary proof of citizenship requirement on the federal voter registration form is an unconstitutional power grab," she added.
Campaign Legal Center president Trevor Potter said in a statement: "This federal court ruling reaffirms that no president has the authority to control our election systems and processes. The Constitution gives the states and Congress—not the president—the responsibility and authority to regulate our elections."
"We are glad that this core principle of separation of powers has been upheld and celebrate this decision, which will ensure that the president cannot singlehandedly impose barriers on voter registration that would prevent millions of Americans from making their voices heard in our elections," Potter added.
Two federal courts ruled Friday that the White House must release contingency food assistance funds, but officials have suggested they will not comply with the orders.
Though two federal judges ruled on Friday that the Trump administration must use contingency funds to continue providing food assistance that 42 million Americans rely on, White House officials have signaled they won't comply with the court orders even as advocates warn the lapse in nutrition aid funding will cause an unprecedented child hunger crisis that families are unprepared to withstand.
The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is planning to freeze payments to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program on Saturday as the government shutdown reaches the one-month mark, claiming it can no longer fund SNAP and cannot tap $5 billion in contingency funds that would allow recipients to collect at least partial benefits in November.
President Donald Trump said Thursday that his administration is "going to get it done," regarding the funding of SNAP, but offered no details on his plans to keep the nation's largest anti-hunger program funded, and his agriculture secretary, Brooke Rollins, would not commit on Friday to release the funds if ordered to do so.
"We're looking at all the options," Rollins told CNN before federal judges in Massachusetts and Rhode Island ordered the administration to fund the program.
The White House and Republicans in Congress have claimed the only way to fund SNAP is for Democratic lawmakers to vote for a continuing resolution proposed by the GOP to keep government funding at current levels; Democrats have refused to sign on to the resolution because it would allow healthcare subsidies under the Affordable Care Act to expire.
The administration previously said it would use the SNAP contingency funds before reversing course last week. A document detailing the contingency plan disappeared from the USDA's website this week. The White House's claims prompted two lawsuits filed by Democrat-led states and cities as well as nonprofit groups that demanded the funding be released.
On Thursday evening, US Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) addressed her followers on the social media platform X about the impending hunger emergency, emphasizing that the loss of SNAP benefits for 42 million Americans—39% of whom are children—is compounding a child poverty crisis that has grown since 2021 due to Republicans' refusal to extend pandemic-era programs like the enhanced child tax credit.
"One in eight kids in America lives in poverty in 2024," said Jayapal. "Sixty-one percent of these kids—that's about 6 million kids— have at least one parent who is employed. So it's not that people are not working, they're working, but they're not earning enough."
"I just want to be really clear that it is a policy choice to have people who are hungry, to have people who are poor," she said.
Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, an economist at Georgetown University, told The Washington Post that the loss of benefits for millions of children, elderly, and disabled people all at once is "unprecedented."
“We’ve never seen the elderly and children removed from the program in this sort of way,” Schanzenbach told the Post. “It really is hard to predict something of this magnitude."
A Thursday report by the economic justice group Americans for Tax Fairness (ATF) emphasized that the impending child hunger crisis comes four months after Republicans passed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which slashed food assistance by shifting some of the cost of SNAP to the states from the federal government, expanding work requirements, and ending adjustments to benefits to keep pace with food inflation.
Meanwhile, the law is projected to increase the incomes of the wealthiest 20% of US households by 3.7% while reducing the incomes of the poorest 20% of Americans by an average of 3.8%.
Now, said ATF, "they're gonna let hard-working Americans go hungry so billionaires can get richer."
At Time on Thursday, Stephanie Land, author of Class: A Memoir of Motherhood, Hunger, and Higher Education, wrote that "the cruelty is the point" of the Trump administration's refusal to ensure the 61-year-old program, established by Democratic former President Lyndon B. Johnson, doesn't lapse for the first time in its history.
"Once, when we lost most of our food stamp benefit, I mentally catalogued every can and box of food in the cupboards, and how long the milk we had would last," wrote Land. "They’d kicked me, the mother of a recently-turned 6-year-old, off of food stamps because I didn’t meet the work requirement of 20 hours a week. I hadn’t known that my daughter’s age had qualified me to not have to meet that requirement, and without warning, the funds I carefully budgeted for food were gone."
"It didn’t matter that I was a full-time student and worked 10-15 hours a week," she continued. "This letter from my local government office said it wasn’t sufficient to meet their stamp of approval. In their opinion, I wasn’t working enough to deserve to eat. My value, my dignity as a human being, was completely dependent on my ability to work, as if nothing else about me awarded me the ability to feel satiated by food."
"Whether the current administration decides to continue to fund SNAP in November or not, the intended damage has already been done. The fear of losing means for food, shelter, and healthcare is the point," Land added. "Programs referred to as a 'safety net' are anything but when they can be removed with a thoughtless, vague message, or scribble from a permanent marker. It’s about control to gain compliance, and our most vulnerable populations will struggle to keep up."
On Thursday, the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) expressed hope that the president's recent statement saying the White House will ensure people obtain their benefits will "trigger the administration to use its authority and precedent to prevent disruptions in food assistance."
"The issue at hand is not political. It is about ensuring that parents can put food on the table, older adults on fixed incomes can meet their nutritional needs, and children continue to receive the meals they rely on. SNAP is one of the most effective tools for reducing hunger and supporting local economies," said the group.
"Swift and transparent action is needed," FRAC added, "to restore stability, maintain public confidence, and ensure that our state partners, local economies and grocers, and the millions of children, older adults, people with disabilities, and veterans who participate in SNAP are not left bearing the consequences of federal inaction."
"Our message for ICE is simple: Get the hell out," said Evanston, Illinois Mayor Daniel Biss.
Officials in Evanston, Illinois are accusing federal immigration officials of "deliberately causing chaos" in their city during a Friday operation that led to angry protests from local residents.
As reported by Fox 32 Chicago, Evanston Mayor Daniel Biss and other local leaders held a news conference on Friday afternoon to denounce actions earlier in the day by US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and US Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officials.
"Our message for ICE is simple: Get the hell out of Evanston," Biss said during the conference.
In a social media post ahead of the press conference, Biss, who is currently a candidate for US Senate, described the agents' actions as "monstrous" and vowed that he would "continue to track the movement of federal agents in and around Evanston and ensure that the Evanston Police Department is responding in the appropriate fashion."
As of this writing, it is unclear how the incident involving the immigration officials in Evanston began, although witness Jose Marin told local publication Evanston Now that agents on Friday morning had deliberately caused a car crash in the area near the Chute Elementary School, and then proceeded to detain the vehicle's passengers.
Videos taken after the crash posted by Chicago Tribune investigative reporter Gregory Royal Pratt and by Evanston Now reporter Matthew Eadie show several people in the area angrily confronting law enforcement officials as they were in the process of detaining the passengers.
“You a criminal!” Evanston residents angrily confront immigration agents pic.twitter.com/t7jVaC4czq
— Gregory Royal Pratt (@royalpratt) October 31, 2025
Another video of ICE grabbing at least two people after a crash on Oakton/Asbury in Evanston
Witnesses say at least three were arrested by Feds pic.twitter.com/DStgCrKWTA
— Matthew Eadie (@mattheweadie22) October 31, 2025
The operation in Evanston came on the same day that Bellingcat published a report documenting what has been described as "a pattern of extreme brutality" being carried out by immigration enforcement officials in Illinois.
Specifically, the publication examined social media videos of immigration enforcement actions taken between October 9 to October 27, and found "multiple examples of force and riot control weapons being used" in apparent violation of a judge's temporary restraining order that banned such weapons except in cases where federal officers are in immediate danger.
"In total, we found seven [instances] that appeared to show the use of riot control weapons when there was seemingly no apparent immediate threat by protesters and no audible warnings given," Bellingcat reported. "Nineteen showed use of force, such as tackling people to the ground when they were not visibly resisting. Another seven showed agents ordering or threatening people to leave public places. Some of the events identified showed incidents that appeared to fall into more than one of these categories."