

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 by 350.org shows that on top of soaring energy bills, fossil fuels cost households an additional $12 trillion a year in taxpayer handouts, health impacts and extreme weather damage – equivalent to a $23 million a minute “gift to Big Oil” that costs each person on Earth $1,400 per year.
In the report “Out of Pocket: How Fossil Fuels are Draining Households and Economies,” 350.org recalculated IMF estimates on fossil fuel subsidies, uncovering what fossil fuels actually cost society and what governments spend to keep production flowing. These hidden costs – totalling $12 trillion annually [1] – are “silently siphoning trillions away from household budgets and draining state coffers” while a handful of big corporations make windfall profits from the war in South West Asia.
The report highlights that:
As decision-makers from over 50 countries gather for the first international conference on a fossil fuel phase-out in Santa Marta, Colombia this week, 350.org said that leaders have an unprecedented opportunity to put the world on the right path. “Decades of delay have turned every oil price spike into a household emergency and every climate‑fuelled disaster into another withdrawal from the savings of the world’s poorest communities,” the group said.
350.org is calling on governments to:
Using case studies from Asia, Africa, and the Caribbean, the report also highlights how an alternative energy system is already being shaped. From community‑owned grids, Indigenous‑led wind projects, subnational 100% renewable commitments, and regional subsidy reforms, the great power shift from fossil fuels to people‑centered renewables has already begun.
Bill McKibben, climate activist and 350.org founder said:
“A building El Niño means 2026 and 2027 will set new global temperature records, and that will offer yet more chaos, and yet more reminders that it is the poorest people on earth who must bear most of the cost of this ongoing tragedy. We have a narrow path out of these crises, and that path has been illuminated by the bombs from this misbegotten war. It would be a waste and a sin not to seize this moment.”
Anne Jellema, 350.org Chief Executive said:
“The economic case for fossil fuels has not just weakened, it has collapsed. Climate chaos and volatile oil prices have pushed ordinary people to a breaking point: unable to afford food, transport, housing or healthcare. Leaders must acknowledge the real costs of fossil fuels and redirect public money where it belongs — into making clean energy a right, not a privilege.”
Hala Kilani, Head of Energy Diplomacy, REN21 said:
“Renewables are not controlled by a few fossil fuel exporting countries. It is abundant, distributed, and affordable. It can stabilize costs and be deployed locally, empowering communities rather than concentrating power. It is a peace, development, and justice solution. It’s high time we transition to reliable, affordable renewable energy.”
Hilda Flavia Nakabuye, Founder of Fridays for Future Uganda said:
“African families are paying for fossil fuels three times over: through taxes, through rising living costs, and through worsening climate disasters. The fossil fuel system is not a distant global issue; it is something people experience in their daily lives. Public resources are being drained to support this system, while wealth is extracted and exported. We must ensure that polluters pay for the damage they have caused to our communities over generations. We must shift investment towards a system that reduces costs for households, strengthens resilience, and prioritizes the people.
Jan Rosenow, Professor of Energy and Climate Policy at Oxford University said:
“This crisis is a stark reminder of just how risky it is to rely on fossil fuels, with around 80 percent of global energy still coming from them and driving the instability we see today. We should be focusing on long-term solutions rather than applying short-term sticking plasters to a much deeper problem. Price volatility is not a flaw in the fossil fuel system; it is a built-in feature. The real question is not what the energy transition will cost us, but what it will cost if we fail to act.”
Muhammad Mustafa Amjad, Program Manager for Renewables First Pakistan said:
“The system is structured in such a way that fossil fuels continue to benefit, even as cleaner and cheaper alternatives become available. Pakistan has imported less fossil fuel but ended up paying more, which shows how deeply flawed the system is. We learned how to build an energy system around fossil fuels, and now we must learn how to build one around renewables. This transition is no longer just about economic growth; it is about human survival.Solar energy is not only a source of clean power, but also a driver of economic stability.”
Executive summary of the report
Notes to Editor:
[1] (a) ~$11.4 trillion in underpriced fossil fuel costs — including explicit government subsidies, climate damages, air pollution, and road externalities — recalculated from IMF data using peer-reviewed US EPA damage models; plus (b) ~$700 billion in production-side support to fossil fuel producers tracked by the OECD across 52 countries.
[2] The IMF’s climate damage figure rests on a carbon price — US$85 per tonne of CO2 — that represents the cheapest possible price to keep warming below 2°C, not the actual damage fossil fuels cause. Using the peer-reviewed damage models that now underpin the US Environmental Protection Agency’s official social cost of carbon, 350.org recalculated those figures for 186 countries.
[3] Social costs of fossil fuels not accounted for by IMF estimates, as calculated by 350.org
[4] This 350.org analysis calculates the losses from price spikes using weighted oil and gas price averages for the period, combined with global consumption levels. It does not yet include wider knock-on effects such as inflation, decline in economic outputs and unemployment.
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.
"The EPA's silence leaves families in the dark and falls far short of its responsibility to protect public health," said the Environmental Working Group's president.
Just days before the US Supreme Court is set to hear arguments related to glyphosate's health risks, the Environmental Working Group on Tuesday sued the Trump administration for unlawfully delaying its response to an EWG petition seeking stronger restrictions on "the most widely used herbicide in the United States and globally."
The filing at the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit calls out the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for failing to act on evidence that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto's Roundup, "is exposing infants and young children to harmful levels through everyday foods."
EWG and its co-petitioners filed a formal administrative petition under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act in 2018, during President Donald Trump's first term, and amended it the following year. They want the EPA to revoke or modify the glyphosate policy for oats, so it's stricter, and restrict its use as a pre-harvest drying agent.
"Congress required EPA to ensure that pesticide residues in food are safe, with particular protection for children," the new filing states. "Yet, more than seven years after being presented with substantial scientific evidence that the current tolerance for glyphosate in oats may not meet that standard, EPA has failed to make any final, reviewable determination."
EWG president and co-founder Ken Cook declared in a Tuesday statement that "parents shouldn't have to second-guess whether everyday foods like cereal and snack bars are putting their children at risk of cancer."
"The EPA's silence leaves families in the dark and falls far short of its responsibility to protect public health," he continued. "It's time for the agency to stop stalling and do its job."
The World Health Organization's International Agency for Research on Cancer classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic" to humanity over a decade ago, while the EPA has repeatedly claimed that it is not likely to cause cancer in humans despite mounting research, the recent retraction of a landmark study on the pesticide's supposed safety, and legal battles between patients and Bayer, which bought Monsanto in 2018.
Next week, the nation's top court is set to hear arguments in a case that, as EWG warned Tuesday, "could have sweeping implications for whether farmers and consumers can keep pursuing lawsuits for harms linked to glyphosate, and whether states can require warning labels on glyphosate products."
The Wall Street Journal noted Monday that while the company continues to insist on glyphosate's safety, it "wants anyone with a claim to join the settlement" negotiated with a team of lawyers representing around 40,000 claimants that "would bring Bayer's total price tag to resolve the Roundup litigation to roughly $22 billion."
Despite Trump and Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s campaign promise to "Make America Healthy Again," the administration has notably sided with Bayer in the case before the Supreme Court, and the president in February even issued an executive order mandating the production of glyphosate.
"If anyone still wondered whether 'Make America Healthy Again' was a genuine commitment to protecting public health or a scam concocted by President Trump and RFK Jr. to rally health-conscious voters in 2024, today's decision answers that question," Cook said at the time. "It's a shocking betrayal to all of us but especially the people who live and work near farm fields where glyphosate is used."
Still, EWG is plowing ahead with its legal action, arguing that "the EPA has a clear legal duty to act on this petition, and it has simply refused to do so," as the group's general counsel and COO, Caroline Leary, put it. "This kind of delay has real consequences for families who rely on the agency to ensure children are not exposed to toxic farm chemical residues like glyphosate."
"This is exactly the kind of situation where courts are meant to step in," Leary added. "The EPA cannot avoid its responsibilities simply by doing nothing."
"We must imagine a transformed and transformative human rights vision for the world that we are becoming, not merely defend human rights in terms of the world we once were."
Opening Amnesty International's annual report on human rights around the globe on Tuesday, the group's secretary general named the leaders of two powerful countries as being at the forefront of a push for a "predatory alternative world order."
While the US and Israel are viewed as two of the world's leading democracies, said longtime human rights advocate Agnes Callamard, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu have spent the past year promoting "a global environment where primitive ferocity" is flourishing.
"Throughout 2025, voracious predators stalked through our global commons, hulking hunters plundering unjust trophies," wrote Callamard in the preface to the report, "The State of World's Human Rights."
"Political leaders like Trump, [Russian President Vladimir] Putin, and Netanyahu, among many others, carried out their conquests for economic and political domination through destruction, suppression, and violence on a massive scale," she added.
The report was published nearly two months after the US and Israel began attacking Iran in an unprovoked war—violating international law, including the United Nations Charter, according to legal experts. A temporary ceasefire deal was struck nearly two weeks ago, and Trump said Tuesday that he is unwilling to extend the truce and expects "to be bombing" Iran again soon if a permanent deal isn't reached.
More than 3,300 people have been killed in Iran since the US and Israel began the war, while the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) have also killed at least 2,294 people in Lebanon as it wages what it says are attacks on the Iran-aligned group Hezbollah—an assault that has displaced about 1.2 million people, representing more than 20% of Lebanon's population, and included attacks on schools, healthcare facilities, and journalists.
Israeli officials have said they are using Gaza as a "model" for the IDF's assault on Lebanon. Israel's US-backed war on Gaza began in October 2023 in retaliation for a Hamas-led attack, and has killed more that 72,000 Palestinians, including at least 777 people since a ceasefire was agreed to in October 2025. Leading human rights groups including Amnesty as well as Holocaust scholars have said the war on Gaza is a genocide, and South Africa has filed a genocide case at the International Court of Justice (ICJ). The International Criminal Court (ICC) issued a warrant for Netanyahu's arrest, accusing him of war crimes and crimes against humanity in Gaza.
In addition to waging war on Iran, in the past year the Trump administration has invaded Venezuela and abducted President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, accusing them of drug trafficking; bombed more than 50 boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing at least 180 people in an operation officials have also claimed is aimed at stopping the drug trade; and imposed an oil blockade on Cuba while threatening military intervention there.
Meanwhile, the White House has slashed foreign aid spending, threatening millions of lives worldwide, as well as investments in domestic social programs, as it's pushed to further increase the United States' astronomical military budget.
"The predatory world order discards racial and gender justice, mocks women’s rights, declares civil society a common enemy, and rejects international solidarity," wrote Callamard. "It directs an unprecedented hike in military investments, enables unlawful arms transfers, and imposes sweeping cuts to international aid budget, risking millions of avoidable death and decimating thousands of organizations working for human rights, sexual and reproductive rights, or press freedom."
Callamard warned that far too many world leaders—confronted with superpowers that "recklessly poured" accelerants over "dry kindling" and took "sharp U-turns... away from the international order that had been imagined out of the ashes of the Holocaust and the utter destruction of world wars"—either appeased Trump and Netanyahu over the past year, attempted to imitate their authoritarian tendencies, or "ducked for cover under their shadow."
She noted that a "handful chose to stand up to them," such as Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez, who refused to allow the US to use its airspace and military bases for the Iran war, and countries that joined South Africa's genocide case at the ICJ.
But overall, Callamard wrote, "one firebreak after another was breached: through complicity in, or silence about, the commissions of genocide and crimes against humanity; and through imposition of crippling sanctions against those working to deliver justice. That’s how 2025 will be remembered: for its bullies and predators; for the pouring of the politics of appeasement onto burning betrayals of international obligations; for self-defeatism; for states playing with a fire that threatens now to burn us all and scorch the future too, for generations to come."
Callamard emphasized that around the world in 2025, countries showed that "predatory" leaders can still be held accountable and that "reports of the death of the international rule-based order are greatly exaggerated":
Rodrigo Duterte, former president of the Philippines, was handed over to the ICC under a warrant for the crime against humanity of murder. In the First Committee of the UN General Assembly, 156 states voted for negotiations on an international instrument on autonomous weapons systems. In July, the EU extended the scope of goods covered by its pioneering Anti-Torture Regulation. Significant progress was made in 2025 towards a binding UN tax convention. At COP30, civil society and trade union pressure helped adoption of a Just Transition Mechanism for the protection of workers and communities as countries shift to clean energy and a climate-resilient future. The International Court of Justice and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights issued advisory opinions affirming state human rights obligations to respond to climate damage. Colombia and the Netherlands agreed to co-host the First International Conference on Transitioning Away from Fossil Fuels in April 2026. Countrywide strikes and actions by dockworkers mounted in France, Greece, Italy, Morocco, Spain, and Sweden disrupted arms shipment routes to Israel. The governments of Belgium, Bolivia, Canada, Colombia, Cuba, Honduras, Malaysia, Namibia, Slovenia, South Africa, and Spain committed in 2025 to modify or halt arms trade with Israel. Women gained expanded abortion rights in Denmark, the Faroe Islands, Norway, Luxembourg, and Malawi. In Nepal, a youth-led uprising against corruption toppled the government.
Those victories, suggested Callamard, don't change the fact that the world is now facing a "challenging moment, threatening to destroy all that was built up over the last 80 years."
"Today 'still we rise' means focusing on what must be defended as a matter of priority and at all costs, not only for the sake of our human rights but those of future generations too," said Callamard. "In our resistance, we must also clearly identify what must be disrupted as a matter of absolute priority, among the tsunami of laws, policies, and practices unleashed by predatory state and nonstate actors."
"We must imagine a transformed and transformative human rights vision for the world that we are becoming, not merely defend human rights in terms of the world we once were," she wrote. "Together, we must then lead that transformation into existence, with all our creativity, determination, and resilience."
A UN official said a proposal to provide food, water, medicine, and shelter to tens of millions of those facing war and poverty could have been funded “in less than a fortnight of this reckless war.”
US President Donald Trump’s war in Iran is costing nearly $2 billion per day, according to a Harvard analysis based on estimates from the Pentagon. The head of the United Nations’ humanitarian agency said the money could instead be used to save more than 87 million lives around the world.
Tom Fletcher, the undersecretary-general for humanitarian affairs and emergency relief coordinator at the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA), spoke at Chatham House on Monday about a “cataclysmic” funding crisis for the UN, in large part due to the termination of billions of dollars in funding from the US and other major powers such as the UK. Fletcher said his agency has seen its budget cut by around 50%.
"We're already overstretched, underresourced, and literally under attack," Fletcher said, citing the more than 1,000 humanitarians who have been killed in conflicts around the world over the past three years.
The Iran war, launched at the end of February by the US and Israel, Fletcher said, has stretched UN budgets even further, both by causing chaos within Iran and Lebanon—where more than 5,000 people in total have been killed, including thousands of civilians, and more than 4 million displaced collectively—but also by creating economic upheaval that has exacerbated crises elsewhere.
"You have the [Strait] of Hormuz—fuel prices up 20%, food prices up almost 20%, our humanitarian convoys blocked," Fletcher said. "We've had to take those convoys by air and by land. And the impact, which I think we'll be feeling for years, of those price rises on Sub-Saharan and East Africa, pushing way more people into poverty."
Fletcher said that just a fraction of what the US has spent waging the war could have been used to provide a full year of funding for a plan he laid out in January to provide lifesaving food, water, medicine, and shelter to those in dozens of countries facing war and poverty.
“For every day of this conflict, $2 billion is being spent. My entire target for a hyper-prioritized plan to save 87 million lives is $23 billion," he said. "We could have funded that in less than a fortnight of this reckless war. Now, of course, we cannot.”
Beyond the financial toll, he said, US actions may have done irreparable damage to the authority of international humanitarian law and to UN bodies tasked with enforcing it.
He noted the dramatic increase in the number of humanitarian workers killed around the world over the past three years. According to a UN report earlier this month, of the more than 1,010 of them who were killed in the line of duty, over half were killed during Israel's genocide in Gaza and escalating attacks in the West Bank.
"A thousand dead humanitarians in three years," Fletcher said. "When did that become normal?"
He called out the UN Security Council, where the US is one of the permanent members with veto power, for its weak responses to the killing of humanitarians and other flagrant violations of the laws of war.
"Don't just give us a generic statement where you say humanitarian workers should be protected," he said. "Make the phone call, call out the people killing us, stop arming those who are doing it."
He said "big powers" view geopolitics in a highly "transactional" way and do not use the Security Council as a mechanism for defending international humanitarian law.
"I wouldn't have thought I'd need to say that a couple of years ago, that the Security Council should be defending international humanitarian law, and yet here we are," he said.
He said that Trump’s recent violent rhetoric toward Iran—which again verged into outright genocidal territory over the weekend when he pledged to “blow up the entire country” with overwhelming attacks on civilian infrastructure—has only further corroded international law.
“The idea that suddenly it’s okay to say, ‘We’re going to blow stuff up,’ ‘We’re going to bomb you back to the Stone Age,’ ‘We’re going to destroy your civilization,’ that kind of language is really dangerous,” Fletcher said. “It gives more freedom to all the other wannabe autocrats around the world to use that sort of language.”
But he said the aggression of the US and its allies has also made the world more warlike and less "generous," leading countries to put more money into defense that could otherwise go toward alleviating global suffering.
"Whether you're making the cuts [to UN funding] for ideological reasons or because you're too busy bombing someone else or because now you feel more insecure at home and so you have to invest more of your money in defense and less in generosity," he said, "all of that ultimately has an impact on the over 300 million people that we're here to serve."