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.
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.
"Ultimately, if this rule is finalized, human health will suffer, and taxpayers will be left with the cost of cleaning up their rivers and drinking water."
Amid mounting calls for the removal of US Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin, the EPA chief on Thursday announced proposed changes to coal ash rules, which critics blasted as another gift to polluters at the expense of public health.
Officially called coal combustion residuals (CCR), "coal ash—the toxic byproduct of burning coal—contains hazardous pollutants, including arsenic, boron, cadmium, chromium, lead, radium, and selenium, which are linked to serious health harms such as cancer, heart disease, and brain damage, among other lasting impacts," noted the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
Specifically, as The Associated Press reported, the EPA "proposed easing standards for monitoring and protecting groundwater near some coal ash sites, rolling back rules forcing the cleanup of entire coal properties instead of just places where ash was dumped. The revisions would also make it easier to reuse coal ash for other purposes."
While Zeldin claimed the "commonsense changes to the CCR regulations reflect EPA's commitment to restoring American energy dominance, strengthening cooperative federalism, and accommodating unique circumstances at certain CCR facilities," Environmental Protection Network's Marc Boom responded that "letting companies avoid cleaning up waste sites that may be leaching toxic metals into groundwater and nearby waterways, while weakening protections and accountability, is not common sense."
"EPA's top priority should be protecting people's health, not sacrificing it for corporate expediency," argued Boom, senior director of public affairs at the group, which is made up of former agency staff. "EPA may call these safeguards 'impractical,' but anyone living downstream of coal ash sites holding thousands of tons of waste knows that requiring cleanup and monitoring is a necessary and basic standard."
NRDC senior attorney Becky Hammer called the pending rollback just "the latest in a long, long, line of Trump administration giveaways to fossil fuels industries," which have also included repealing EPA rules that targeted chemical pollution from coal-fired power plants, declaring a national energy emergency, and scrapping the 2009 "endangerment finding" that underpins all federal climate regulations.
Other advocacy organizations were similarly critical of Thursday's announcement. Daniel Estrin, Waterkeeper Alliance's general counsel and legal director, pointed out that "coal ash is contaminating water at nearly every active and retired coal plant in the US."
"By gutting these safeguards, EPA is abandoning its duty to protect impacted communities by allowing preventable contamination of our rivers, lakes, streams, and groundwater," he said. "The longer the coal industry is allowed to delay closing and cleaning up its toxic waste sites, the more difficult and costly it becomes to fix the damage. By failing to enforce the law, EPA is letting polluters continue harming people and wildlife without accountability."
Like Estrin and Hammer, Earthjustice senior counsel Lisa Evans framed that proposal as "yet another handout to the coal power industry at the expense of our health, water, and wallets," and warned of the dangers of delaying closure and cleanup. She said that "ultimately, if this rule is finalized, human health will suffer, and taxpayers will be left with the cost of cleaning up their rivers and drinking water."
Although "the Trump administration just took a sledgehammer to the health protections in place for toxic coal pollution," Evans added, "Earthjustice has successfully defended these safeguards in court and will do so again."
Nick Torrey, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, which has secured commitments to clean up over 270 million tons of coal ash in US communities, similarly said that "doing the bidding of industrial polluters instead of protecting ordinary families and clean water is shameful, but we are ready to keep fighting against coal ash pollution."
"Letting coal-burning utilities set the agenda has been a disaster for communities across the South, resulting in coal ash spills and hundreds of families forced to live on bottled water for years under the threat of coal ash pollution," Torrey highlighted. "The Trump administration and coal ash polluters want to take us back to the bad old days of arsenic, lead, and mercury from coal ash contaminating our water."
In addition to facing a flurry of lawsuits over policies prioritizing the climate-wrecking fossil fuel industry—whose campaign cash helped President Donald Trump return to the White House last year—the administration has recently been hit with demands to remove Zeldin from more than 160 advocacy groups and nearly 300 health experts.
"This EPA's actions to put polluters first, at the expense of our health, are dangerous and will be deadly," states the health experts' open letter, organized and released Thursday by the Climate Action Campaign. "Administrator Zeldin has abandoned his sworn duty and must be held accountable for his agenda."
“America’s small businesses, workers, and families are really feeling pain at the pump—all thanks to Trump’s illegal war on Iran,” the Massachusetts Democrat said.
An analysis published Thursday by the office of US Sen. Ed Markey estimates that the average American motorist will pay nearly $1,100 extra for gasoline in 2026 due to President Donald Trump's war of choice on Iran.
"The data highlights a worsening affordability crisis, with the average American family facing an annual increase of $1,096 this year if gas prices remain at $4.14 per gallon—a shocking increase of $1.16 per gallon since Trump launched his war on Iran in February," Markey's (D-Mass.) office said.
"These numbers are likely an underestimate," the analysis notes. "Many analysts predict gasoline prices will rise higher without a permanent end to the war. Instead of investing in energy independence, Trump has done everything in his power to destroy American-made affordable clean energy... and double down on the fossil fuels that are now skyrocketing in price."
"As Americans pay more at the pump, fossil fuel industry executives profit," Markey's office said. "During Trump’s first year in office, the five largest oil companies—ExxonMobil, Chevron, ConocoPhillips, Shell, and BP—made more than $75 billion dollars in profits."
Fossil fuel interests spent $445 million to help elect Trump and other Republicans in 2024. And while some Big Oil executives are reportedly upset that the ceasefire agreement with Iran apparently includes Iranian control of the Strait of Hormuz and the power to charge tolls to tankers passing through the vital waterway, industry executives sold a reported $1.4 billion in shares before and during the war that they may subsequently buy back during market dips fueled by the volatility caused by Trump's actions.
“America’s small businesses, workers, and families are really feeling pain at the pump—all thanks to Trump’s illegal war on Iran," Markey, the ranking member of the Senate Small Business and Entrepreneurship Committee, said in a statement introducing the analysis. "Instead of delivering real relief to the American people, Trump is doubling down on his reckless economic policies, which are only driving up energy prices, enriching his oil and gas buddies, and worsening the affordability crisis for everyone else."
“In uncertain times like these, gas prices go up like a rocket but come down like a feather," he added. "This administration must get serious about alleviating the crisis he alone created, or risk further throttling families’ finances and putting even more pain on Main Street.”
A Pew Research Center survey published earlier this week revealed that gas prices are Americans' biggest concern about the Iran War, with 69% worried about higher fuel costs. By comparison, 61% said they were concerned about sending ground troops to invade Iran, 59% fretted over high casualties among US troops, and 56% said they fear a terror attack on the United States.
This isn't the first time that Markey has shined a spotlight on the economic harm to American families caused by the actions of a president who campaigned upon core promises of lower consumer prices—including gasoline—and no new wars. Last month, Markey asked the Bureau of Labor Statistics to “immediately undertake and publish a comprehensive analysis of the likely consumer price impacts” of the war over the next 6-12 months.
Our nation is at a moral crossroads.Trump asked Congress for over 1 trillion to fund the Department of Defense and his war of choice. To get it, MAGA Republicans want to defund childcare. Healthcare. Education. I won't stand for that.
[image or embed]
— Ed Markey (@edmarkey.bsky.social) April 9, 2026 at 3:31 PM
Markey's analysis came on the same day that the National Priorities Project at the Institute for Policy Studies published a report estimating that the average American taxpayer gave $4,000 to the federal government last year “for militarism and its support systems."
That cost is likely to rise even further if Congress approves Trump's request for a record $1.5 trillion US military budget for the next fiscal year.
"Civilians in Lebanon are already paying an unbearable price with children, health workers, and journalists amongst those killed—the latest attacks will only escalate this devastating human toll," said one campaigner.
Humanitarian campaigners, civil rights defenders, and progressive members of Congress were among those calling on the Trump administration to pressure Israel to stop bombing Lebanon after Israeli airstrikes killed or wounded more than 1,400 people—many of them civilians—on Wednesday.
In what Amnesty International called an "unprecedented escalation," the Israel Defense Forces said it carried out the “largest coordinated wave of strikes” of its renewed war on Hezbollah in Lebanon. Around 100 sites in the country were bombed in one 10-minute period alone in what the IDF dubbedr "Operation Eternal Darkness."
Lebanese officials said that at least 303 people were killed and 1,165 others wounded by Israeli strikes on Wednesday, the deadliest day of attacks since Israel resumed bombardment of Lebanon and likely since it started bombing its northern neighbor after the Hamas-led Palestinian attack of October 7, 2023.
While Lebanese authorities do not break down casualties according to combatant status, officials and residents of the capital city of Beirut said that civilians were the main victims of Wednesday's bombings, which targeted apartment towers and other civilian structures in numerous densely populated urban areas.
One witness, a woman named Fatima, told Amnesty International what she saw in the immediate aftermath of an IDF strike on a building across the street from her home in Beirut's Salim Salam neighborhood.
“It was apocalyptic," she said. "Bodies on the ground. Blood everywhere. I saw countless wounded adults and children. I walked further but it was the same scene in the other neighborhoods too. I did not know where to go. I just walked aimlessly trying to get as far as possible. It was a nightmare.”
Dr. Firass Abiad, a surgeon and wformer Lebanese health minister, told The Guardian that American University of Beirut Medical College, where he works, received about 70 patients at the same time, a situation he said was intentionally caused by Israel "to flood the health system."
“There was a 90-year-old who I just left a bit ago. He passed away from his wounds," he said. "There was nothing we could do. These are civilians who, without any warning, their whole apartment building was flattened. So you can imagine the severity of injuries that we’re getting.”
Shaden Fakih, a 24-year-old calisthenics trainer, described trying to find his friend who was inside a building when it was bombed. He couldn't locate his friend, but he was seen carrying an elderly woman from the rubble.
"There’s no Hezbollah here, the Israelis are just getting happy when they bomb people, it’s not about Hezbollah," Fakih said in an interview with The Guardian. “Just stop bombing us. If you want to kill Hezbollah, go for it, but don’t kill civilians, because you’re creating anger in us against Israel and we will have to act like Hezbollah just to defend our country. But I don’t want to do that, I just want to live in peace."
“It’s been the worst day since the war started," he added. "And what I’m most sad about is that my pretty Lebanon, our beautiful Lebanon, soon it will all be brought down to the ground.”
As Common Dreams reported, Israeli strikes have wiped out entire families in Lebanon and Iran. In Gaza, more than 2,700 families have been erased from the civil registry.
Responding to Wednesday's attacks, Amnesty International Middle East and North Africa regional director Heba Morayef said that “just hours after the world cautiously welcomed news of a US-Israeli ceasefire with Iran, in Lebanon the nightmare for civilians has become more terrifying."
“Even before today’s attack... more than 1,500 people had been killed and over a million people displaced from their homes across the country," Morayef continued, referring to Israel's bombardment of Lebanon after Hezbollah began launching rockets and drones southward in solidarity with Palestinians in Gaza. Israel's genocidal assault on Gaza has left more than 250,000 Palestinians dead, injured, or missing.
"Civilians in Lebanon are already paying an unbearable price with children, health workers, and journalists amongst those killed—the latest attacks will only escalate this devastating human toll," Morayef added. "These attacks are a reminder that states must immediately halt the transfer of arms and weapons to Israel given the overriding risk that they will be used to commit serious violations of international humanitarian law."
The Washington, DC-based Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) said in a statement late Wednesday, “Once again, Israel’s genocidal government is trying to derail a ceasefire and ensure peace does not succeed by slaughtering innocent civilians."
"The Trump administration must stop them from carrying out this brutal plan," the group added. "Israel has demonstrated time and again that it cannot be trusted to abide by peace agreements. It is time for our government to cut all support for Israel’s atrocities.“
These and other groups, as well as governments in the Mideast and beyond, and US progressives, are demanding that Lebanon be included in the ceasefire. Although Israel agreed to the truce, the government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu—who is wanted by the International Criminal Court for alleged crimes against humanity and war crimes in Gaza—asserts that the deal does not include Lebanon.
Iran categorically rejects Israel's claim and is using its leverage over the Strait of Hormuz to pressure Israel to reconsider its stance.
Some US progressives called for President Donald Trump to pressure Israel to stop attacking Lebanon, and for a suspension of American arms transfers to the IDF.
"It is unconscionable we continue to provide aid to Israel as they continue to murder civilians and violate international law in Lebanon, Gaza, and the West Bank," Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) said Thursday on Bluesky. "No more money to Israel’s genocidal apartheid regime."