SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
pollution
Trump 'Environmental Destruction Agency Continues Its Rampage' With Methane Pollution Rollback
"This giveaway to fossil fuel executives is foolish and shortshsighted, and reveals who the Trump administration really works for—its political donors," said one campaigner.
Oct 07, 2026
The US Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday announced plans to further weaken federal protections against methane pollution from oil and gas operations, prompting environmental advocates to accuse the Trump administration of once again putting fossil fuel interests ahead of public health and the climate.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin made the announcement during the New Mexico Oil and Gas Association’s annual meeting in Santa Fe. The EPA said it will propose changes to the Biden administration's 2024 oil and gas rules in the coming days, claiming the proposed rollback will save $45 billion in regulatory costs.
The proposal's changes include rescinding the Biden-era Super Emitter Program, which allows third parties to identify major methane leaks and require companies to address them.
“The Trump EPA is days, not weeks, away from announcing our proposal for the second part of the oil and gas reconsideration," Zeldin said in a statement. "Americans must be able to afford to heat their homes in the winter and fill up their car and drive to work. They can’t do that when the people producing the energy are weighed down by unnecessary burdens."
The biggest factor driving high US gasoline prices right now is the global oil supply shock caused by President Donald Trump's illegal war of choice on Iran.
Environmental and climate groups disputed Zeldin's framing.
"Trump’s Environmental Destruction Agency continues its rampage by torching limits on superheating methane, some of the last remaining protections against climate-heating pollution,” said Maggie Coulter, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity's Climate Law Institute.
“This move will compound the climate chaos we see mounting all around us in deadly heatwaves, floods, and storms," she added. "Vulnerable communities will be exposed to worse smog and intensified respiratory pollution, increasing kids’ asthma and other health harms. We’ll fight this disastrous rollback with everything we’ve got.”
Today, EPA Admin. Zeldin announced a rollback of federal rules that ensure oil and gas operators don't pollute our air. This decision clearly shows that Trump is putting polluters first over the wellbeing of the American people. #Methane
[image or embed]
— Conservation Voters New Mexico (@protectnm.bsky.social) October 7, 2026 at 10:01 AM
Dr. Rev. Jessica Moerman, president and CEO of the Evangelical Environmental Network, said that “families in oil and gas country should not have to wonder what is leaking from the wells and equipment near their homes, churches, and schools."
"The plan to weaken methane pollution protections means this worry remains a reality," she added. "Leaking methane is not only a wasted product. The same leaks can carry benzene and other harmful pollutants linked to cancer and birth defects into the air that children and seniors breathe."
Methane—which has more than 80 times the warming power of carbon dioxide during its first two decades in the atmosphere—is emitted during the production and transportation of oil, gas, and coal, as well as from municipal landfills and livestock.
"Any proposed rollback to the federal methane rule is a slap in the face to families who are exposed to oil and gas pollution where they live, work, and play,” Celerah Hewes, senior manager for state field campaigns at Moms Clean Air Force, said in a statement.
Hewes continued:
For over a decade, Moms Clean Air Force has been fighting for methane protections for our families—and we were making progress. Today’s announcement from EPA is a massive blow to the efforts to safeguard our children’s health and our climate. Over 900,000 comments were submitted to the Federal Register in support of the commonsense methane pollution protections that EPA finalized in 2024, including many from the moms, dads, and caregivers with Moms Clean Air Force.
"Now communities across the country will once again have to show up and demand EPA provide strong federal methane pollution standards that protect families from this known public health threat and climate super pollutant," she added. "It is outrageous that we have to fight so hard just for our children's right to breathe clean air."
Lauren Pagel, senior policy director at Earthworks, alleged that "by rolling back commonsense methane standards, the Trump administration has once again chosen polluters over people, sacrificing the health of communities living next to extraction and our climate to make even more money for fossil fuel billionaires."
“While families struggle with the high cost of living, everything Trump and his oil and gas company cronies do makes life harder for everyday people—including making the air we breathe dirtier," she continued.
“The Trump administration is delivering dirtier air, more pollution, and greater risks for communities in order to boost Big Oil’s profits," Pagel added. "It’s time for states to step up and do what the White House won’t: Put people first, hold polluters accountable, and cut methane pollution to protect health and climate.”
While running for reelection on a “drill, baby, drill” energy platform, Trump reportedly promised Big Oil executives that he would eviscerate climate regulations enacted by the Biden administration if they gave $1 billion to his campaign. Fossil fuel interests spent nearly $450 million during the 2024 election cycle on campaign contributions, lobbying, and efforts supporting Republican causes and candidates, including Trump.
EPA signaled it is going to propose weakened #methane regulations for oil and gas, including for low-producing wells, which are responsible for almost half of the sector’s methane emissions despite producing less than 5% of the country’s oil and gas.www.catf.us/2026/10/epa-...
[image or embed]
— Clean Air Task Force (@cleanaircatf.bsky.social) October 7, 2026 at 1:59 PM
Environmental Defense Fund associate vice president of energy transition Jon Goldstein said: "At a time when Americans are facing high energy costs, EPA should not give oil and gas companies more room to waste a domestic resource... Rolling back these safeguards would mean more wasted energy, more methane pollution, and greater health risks for communities living near oil and gas operations.”
Natural Resources Defense Council senior strategist David Doniger accused the EPA of "trying to give a free pass to the worst actors in the oil and gas industry."
"Many companies had already complied with these rules, but a few rogue actors refuse to check for leaks or monitor their equipment adequately," he explained. "Those deadbeats would get bailed out by this action."
“Methane leaks are the dumbest kind of pollution because the industry is losing the very product it is selling," Doniger continued. "That’s what made the standards so cost-effective: Checking for leaks means the industry has more gas to sell."
“These leaks are not just bad for the climate, they result in more smog and cancer-causing pollution for nearby communities," he added. "But with his announcement today, Lee Zeldin made clear that oil companies come first, while protecting families from toxic pollution and the ravages of extreme weather is not on this administration’s agenda.”
Mahyar Sorour, who heads Sierra Club's Beyond Fossil Fuels Policy program, noted that “it took many years and carefully considered input from health experts, community advocates, and even the oil and gas industry itself to craft the achievable, commonsense methane standards."
"Yet, the Trump administration, with pockets lined by the biggest polluters, has unceremoniously worked to roll back this and other standards meant to protect our health and safety," Sorour added. "This giveaway to fossil fuel executives is foolish and shortsighted, and reveals who the Trump administration really works for—its political donors.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump Administration Sued Over 'Callous Giveaway to Big Oil and Big Auto'
One environmental advocate said the Trump administration's rollback of fuel efficiency standards "will mean wasted gas, more air pollution, and higher costs for Americans who are already struggling with high fuel prices."
Oct 02, 2026
A coalition of environmental groups filed a lawsuit Friday seeking to block the Trump administration's rollback of fuel efficiency standards, which they called a "giveaway" to the oil and auto industries.
Earlier this week, the US Department of Transportation finalized a rule weakening Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which require automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of their vehicles each year.
The Biden administration required annual fuel-efficiency improvements aimed at bringing the average for new vehicles to 50.4 miles per gallon by 2031. Under the Trump administration’s new rule, the 2031 requirement would fall below the 35.4 mpg already achieved by the 2024 fleet, according to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's (NHTSA) own analysis.
NHTSA estimated that as a result of the rule change, Americans will consume roughly 122 billion more gallons of gas by 2050 than they would have under the old standards, increasing average lifetime fuel costs by more than $1,600 per vehicle—more than the roughly $1,300 the administration has claimed they'll save on average in upfront vehicle costs.
It is also projected to add about 1 billion additional metric tons of CO2 emissions by 2050 compared with retaining the previous standards—equivalent to more than six months' worth of emissions from the entire US transportation sector.
“Oil companies will profit from less efficient cars, but drivers will take a hit to their wallets and our kids will breathe dirtier air," said David Pettit, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s (CBD) Climate Law Institute. "We’ll all pay the price for more tailpipe pollutants spewing everywhere from playgrounds to wild places. We’re asking the courts to put a stop to this callous giveaway to Big Oil and Big Auto.”
CBD was joined by the Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, Public Citizen, and Sierra Club, which filed a petition on Friday to ask an appeals court to review the rule change. They argue that the rollback is illegal because federal law requires NHTSA to set fuel-economy standards at the “maximum feasible” level manufacturers can achieve.
“The Trump administration’s rollback will mean wasted gas, more air pollution, and higher costs for Americans who are already struggling with high fuel prices,” said Andy Su, senior transportation attorney at Environmental Defense Fund. “We’re going to court to oppose this dangerous U-turn away from decades of successful work to make our cars more efficient and less expensive to drive.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dear Pete Heg-Trash
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has repeatedly attacked anonymous complaints while presenting his campaign against what he considers politically correct military culture as a return to strength, yet there is nothing strong about creating more fear around reporting abuse, harassment, or misconduct.
Oct 02, 2026
Nothing taught me more about the danger of silence in the military than surviving rape twice while wearing the uniform of the country I volunteered to serve, because I learned firsthand how quickly an institution built around honor, courage, and loyalty can become terrifying when the person who has been violated must decide whether speaking up will cost them even more.
Our service members understand that fear, which is why attacks on anonymous reporting should alarm anyone who actually cares about protecting the people who serve.
Being able to report misconduct without immediately exposing yourself can mean the difference between speaking and staying silent when rank, retaliation, career consequences, and the instinct to protect the institution are stacked against you.
Let us stop calling silence discipline, stop calling environmental disregard strength, and stop pretending accountability somehow makes our military weaker.
Once those protections are weakened, the misconduct does not magically disappear; the person experiencing it simply has fewer safe ways to expose it.
Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has repeatedly attacked anonymous complaints while presenting his campaign against what he considers politically correct military culture as a return to strength.
Yet there is nothing strong about creating more fear around reporting abuse, harassment, or misconduct, especially inside an institution where power and rank shape nearly every part of a service member’s life.
I call that feeding the conditions where rape culture survives, because I know personally what happens when silence becomes easier for an institution than accountability.
Survivors should never have to prove their toughness by enduring abuse quietly.
Disregard for accountability also appears in Hegseth’s approach to another responsibility the military cannot escape: what it does to the land, water, and communities where it operates.
In his own words, “No more climate change worship,” but treating environmental responsibility as weakness ignores the damage military activity has already left behind in American communities.
Service members and Mother Earth have something painful in common: Both have been expected to absorb damage in the name of a mission and remain silent about the scars.
Pollution from military operations has contaminated land and groundwater on Guam, the island where I was born, where decades of military activity have left contamination near an aquifer our people depend upon for drinking water.
Our community here in Tucson knows another version of that story, with PFAS contamination threatening groundwater and military facilities, including Davis-Monthan, identified among the sources requiring investigation and cleanup.
Strength cannot mean demanding unlimited sacrifice from people, communities, and the planet while treating accountability as an inconvenience.
As a veteran, a survivor, and someone born on an island carrying the environmental scars of America's military presence, I cannot separate these issues, because both force us to confront what happens when powerful institutions decide that accomplishing the mission matters more than acknowledging who or what gets harmed along the way.
Bodies can be raped, land can be violated, water can be poisoned, and although those harms are not identical, they grow from a dangerous belief that something valuable can be used, damaged, and discarded because those holding power have decided the cost is acceptable.
Let us stop calling silence discipline, stop calling environmental disregard strength, and stop pretending accountability somehow makes our military weaker.
Enough: No service member, no community, and no piece of Mother Earth should ever be treated as disposable.
xoxo, military members & Mother Earth
P.S. Read the first letters of each paragraph.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Consumers Will Pay the Price': Fury as Trump Pushes Through Rule Change to Make Vehicles Less Efficient, More Polluting
"Oil companies will get a windfall from gutting the fuel economy standards, but the rest of us are going to be handing over more of our hard-earned paychecks to fill up the tank," said one environmental lawyer.
Sep 28, 2026
Scientists and environmental advocates are warning that the Trump administration's rollback of fuel economy standards for cars and trucks will not only lead to more pollution but also hurt cash-strapped consumers already reeling from gas price spikes.
The administration announced on Monday that it was weakening the Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards, which require automakers to increase the fuel efficiency of their vehicles each year.
Biden administration rules required a 2% annual increase in fuel-efficiency standards, with the goal of bringing most vehicles to an average of 50.4 miles per gallon by 2031. Under President Donald Trump, the annual target has been reduced to just a 1% improvement each year, meaning five years from now the average car would be required to get just under 34.9 mpg.
The Department of Transportation, which finalized the rule, has argued that efficiency standards put an unnecessary burden on carmakers and has projected that lowering them will “reduce the average cost of a new vehicle by $1,300 for American families" and "save the American people $138 billion over the next five years."
Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy described the Biden-era increase as one that "forced automakers to produce more expensive electric vehicles that American families didn’t want."
But Dave Cooke, senior vehicles analyst for the Union of Concerned Scientists’ (UCS) Clean Transportation Program, argues that rather than being a benefit to consumers, “the federal government’s decision to gut fuel economy standards is a handout to automakers and oil companies that will strap American consumers already struggling with an affordability crisis.”
His group has estimated that since CAFE standards were first introduced in 2010, they have saved auto owners about $321 billion at the gas pump. And over just the past seven months, during which Trump's war with Iran has caused gas prices to soar around the country, UCS estimates that consumers have saved $32 billion.
"Any small reduction in upfront vehicle costs will be outweighed by higher fuel expenses," Cooke said.
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) itself estimated in an impact analysis for the rule days ago that, as a result of the rule change, Americans will consume roughly 122 billion more gallons of gas than they would under the 2024 standards, resulting in average lifetime fuel costs of more than $1,600 more per vehicle—more than the administration estimates consumers will save by buying cheaper cars.
Transportation already accounted for about 17% of average US household spending in 2024, the latest year for which the Bureau of Labor Statistics has published data. Meanwhile, as the war with Iran has driven up costs, oil companies are reporting record profits. The top eight brought in nearly $93 billion in earnings in the second quarter of this year alone, according to an analysis by The Guardian.
"Oil companies will get a windfall from gutting the fuel economy standards, but the rest of us are going to be handing over more of our hard-earned paychecks to fill up the tank," said Atid Kimelman, an attorney at the NRDC.
Americans won't just spend more money; they'll also produce way more planet-heating greenhouse gases. The standards being rolled back were projected by NHTSA to prevent about 659 million metric tons of carbon dioxide, 825,000 metric tons of methane, and roughly 24,000 metric tons of nitrous oxide emissions through 2050.
The Center for Biological Diversity pointed out that the US is already the world's largest oil guzzler, accounting for 20% of global use, and that transportation is the No. 1 consumer of that oil.
"This move spells short- and long-term disaster for people’s health, the planet, and even US automakers who’ll sit on the sidelines while clean cars advance around the world," said Dan Becker, the director of the group's Safe Climate Transport Campaign. "This standard was the biggest single step any nation has taken to save gas, money at the pump, and auto pollution.”
Matthew Davis, vice president of federal policy for the League of Conservation Voters, emphasized that fuel efficiency standards are popular with the American public. A nationwide survey last month by the Global Strategy Group found that 73% of voters nationwide said they'd support "reestablishing fuel efficiency standards for cars and trucks."
"It is no secret that Trump promised handouts to Big Oil in exchange for campaign spending," Davis said, "and he is delivering for those billionaire CEOs and polluters while he hurts working families, American manufacturing competitiveness, public health, and the environment at every turn.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
AI's Mad Money Is Profiting From Death in Iran and Gaza
An Anthropic researcher, Jacob Coxon, warned that AI “could kill us all by the end of the decade.” However, AI lethality is here now.
Sep 20, 2026
AI is the road to mad money in the US, according to the business press. How mad is this money? Let’s turn to the Forbes 400 list of the wealthiest people in America.
The bar to join this list has never been higher, at $4.4 billion now. That’s an increase of $600 million, 60% of $1 billion, versus the past year. Living large has never been so, well, large.
Nice work if you can get it, no? In a capitalist society, the accumulation of such mind-boggling wealth is the highest priority for the ruling class. In 2026, the AI mad money grab is on.
Silicon Valley is a part of—not apart from—Uncle Sam’s military machinery,
US pre-tax corporate profits hit an annualized $4.8 trillion in the second quarter of 2026, according to the Bureau of Economic Affairs, 18% of national income. That’s the biggest share of profits in the national income since just after World War II.
What about labor’s share of national income? Well, national income from benefits and wages has dropped to 60%, the lowest share in seven decades. Credit AI and corporate pricing power, a euphemism for monopoly control of the supply of a commodity.
AI is no benign thing that enables billionaires’ wealth. In fact, AI has grabbed much attention since an Anthropic researcher, Jacob Coxon, warned that AI “could kill us all by the end of the decade.” However, AI lethality is here now.
Take the Israeli military, with the financial and political backing of Uncle Sam, using AI to maim and murder Palestinian civilians in Gaza. For these victims, Israel’s use of AI is rampant, according to author Chris de Ploeg in his new book, The Exterminating Empire: Capitalism’s War on Life from Palestine to the Burning Planet (Monthly Review Press, 2026).
Further, de Ploeg writes: “Gaza has been turned into the world‘s largest death camp ever to have existed. The murders are carried out, industrially, with bombs and algorithms."
He continues: “Think of the infamous 'Operation Lavender,' in which suspected militants, based on nothing more than an AI algorithm, are deliberately bombed when they are at home with their family, not on the battlefield. The structural murder of entire families—nearly three thousand multigenerational bloodlines wiped off the face of the Earth—can easily be explained by AI.”
Israel wages digital genocide against Palestinians.
We turn to the US war of aggression against Iran. “AI targeting system doubles pace of US strikes in Iran,” reads a March 25 headline in the Arizona News. “The US military says it hit about 1,000 targets in Iran during the first 24 hours of attacks, double the number struck during the 2003 'shock and awe' campaign in Iraq."
“The difference, according to the Pentagon, is artificial intelligence. The Pentagon’s Maven Smart System uses AI to process data from sensors, satellite imagery, and other sources to enable rapid targeting decisions. What once took hours or days now takes minutes, according to military officials.”
Silicon Valley is a part of—not apart from—Uncle Sam’s military machinery, as Malcom Harris details in Palo Alto: A History of California, Capitalism, and the World (Back Bay Books/Little, Brown and Company, 2023). In brief, the ruling class owns AI and the media, and the political duopoly reflects the owners' view that grabbing market share and profits is primary for society. Empathy and solidarity are signs of weakness.
What is (not) to be done concerning Big Technology? Consider the view of House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.). He favors a hands-off approach, dismissing federal policies to regulate AI. He shared the sentiment with Jake Tapper of CNN.
According to Rep. Johnson: “If Congress just races in and does some sort of emergency session to try to regulate AI, we will lose the race to China, and that is a threat to every single American. So, we’ve got to have balance. We’ve got to have steady hands at the wheel.”
The China threat is alive and well. The message is clear. Be afraid, not of unregulated AI, but China, which happens to be the manufacturing power of the world. Thus bringing AI under public control is a low priority, politically speaking, for Rep. Johnson.
Establishing how to achieve an outcome of public control is an agenda that threatens private profits. Americans opposing the building of AI data centers that destroy the environment near their communities are putting their lives and those of neighbors first.
Just ask the people living near an Equinix Data Center that spilled 5,500 gallons of diesel fuel into Anderson Creek, a mudflat that ebbs and flows with the tides, in Secaucus, New Jersey recently.
Ben Dziobek is the executive director of The Climate Revolution Action Network, a Gen Z environmental activist group in New Jersey.
“The spill was indicative of a larger problem that municipalities can approve data centers,” according to him, “but we really cannot guarantee where the pollution is gonna go. And it is way too early to tell if there's been serious damage. The Department of Environmental Protections' findings that nothing has been harmed as of yet is a procedural way to say they found nothing that is dead in the ecosystem."
"It’s gonna take some time to understand, and this is just all the more reason why we need a statewide moratorium on building new AI data centers in New Jersey for three years. AI is the most complex technology in the whole world, and is running these data centers. Yet a computer glitch at the AI data center in New Jersey spilled diesel fuel into our wetlands.”
And as the Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans shows, AI is also the road to super wealth. For example, the list has “15 of the 34 new names (and nearly 60% of all newcomers' wealth) coming from the sector—mainly from AI giants or AI-related ventures.”
AI mad money is a public enemy stateside and abroad.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Working-Class Taxpayers Subsidize Billionaires' Climate-Killing Private Jets: Report
"It’s time to stop making taxpayers subsidize luxury private jet travel and use our resources to green other industries," said one of the report's authors.
Sep 18, 2026
A handful of the world's wealthiest people are traveling aboard some of the planet's most polluting vehicles while receiving substantial public subsidies, according to a new report documenting how taxpayers and commercial airline passengers are funding billionaires' private jet lifestyles due to corporate lobbying, tax breaks, and other policies.
The Institute for Policy Studies' (IPS) "High Flyers 2026: The High Cost of Private Jet Excess," released on Friday, notes that only about 256,000 people around the world—roughly 0.003% of the global population—fly on private jets. Yet these ultrawealthy travelers account for a disproportionate share of aviation activity while paying a fraction of the taxes that fund air traffic infrastructure.
According to the report—which is co-authored by Chuck Collins, Omar Ocampo, Kalena Thomhave, and Emily Wagner—private jets and charter services account for roughly 16% of flight operations handled by the US Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), while noncommercial private jets account for about 7% of airspace activity.
NEW: Private jet travel — the most ecologically destructive form of transportation — is increasing among the wealthiest 0.003% of people. Taxpayers and commercial flyers are subsidizing it.It's time to tax this reckless consumption. REPORT:
[image or embed]
— Institute for Policy Studies (@ips-dc.org) September 18, 2026 at 6:05 AM
However, private jets contribute less than 0.6% of the taxes flowing into the Airport and Airway Trust Fund, which helps finance FAA operations.
"We all pay for the harms of private jet excess," the report states. "US taxpayers and commercial air travelers subsidize the luxury private jet transportation sector. Private jets fail to pay their fair share of their use of airspace and the costs of their carbon pollution, shifting the burden to everyone else."
The disparity is particularly stark when the climate consequences of private aviation are taken into account. IPS found that a passenger traveling by private jet is responsible for roughly 10 to 14 times the emissions of a passenger on a commercial airline and around 50 times those of a passenger traveling the same route by rail. On some low-carbon rail systems, the disparity can exceed 200-fold.
"Private jets are the super-polluters. On a warming planet, private jet operations are indefensible," the report's authors wrote. "Private jets account for a small sliver of aviation activity, but they are the most polluting form of transport and represent the fastest-growing segment of aviation emissions."
The report also found that at least half of private jet operations are for recreational, vacation, and personal luxury travel.
"The ultrarich and greedy corporations are private jet-setting at the expense of the rest of us," Collins told The Guardian on Friday. "The rest of us should not have to pay for the luxury excess of the private jet billionaire class."
The report comes amid increasing criticism of tax policies that have made private aircraft particularly lucrative investments for wealthy Americans. Last year, US President Donald Trump signed legislation permanently implementing 100% bonus depreciation for qualifying business assets, allowing full tax deductions for certain purchases—including private aircraft—in the year they are acquired.
In a May opinion piece published by Common Dreams, Collins and Wagner slammed what they described as "a massive tax break for billionaires and centimillionaires that use the most polluting form of transportation on the planet."
A corporation that buys a $50 million private jet could potentially deduct the entire purchase price from its taxes in the year of acquisition, meaning "ordinary taxpayers pick up the tab for the private jet industry and billionaire high flyers," according to Collins and Wagner.
The Trump administration has also recently declined to close another tax loophole benefiting wealthy private jet users. A proposal by Democratic senators would have changed the rules governing the so-called Standard Industry Fare Level method for calculating the taxable value of personal flights aboard corporate aircraft. The lawmakers argued that the system allows wealthy executives to substantially undervalue their personal use nof company jets.
"While working families struggle to afford groceries, housing, and gas," Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) said earlier this month, the Trump administration "focuses on tax breaks for billionaires—including tax breaks for private jets. What a disgrace."
The private jet industry has also benefited from efforts to shield aircraft owners from scrutiny. Earlier this year, House Republicans sought to restrict government use of flight tracking data that can help identify privately owned aircraft for taxation purposes.
“Oh look—Republicans helping private-jet billionaires avoid paying taxes," Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) quipped in June. "If only they worked that hard for consumers.”
IPS noted the private aviation industry's substantial political influence. The National Business Aviation Association spent approximately $2 million lobbying for the sector in 2025, including on policies concerning tax breaks and private flight secrecy.
The report's authors list policy changes they say would help "decarbonize private jet users' indefensible behavior."
"A luxury tax of 10% on used jets and 5% on new jets could have raised more than $3 billion in 2025, funds that could be invested in sustainable ground transportation," they asserted.
"Congress should strip a private jet tax avoidance provision from the pending air traffic safety legislation, the ALERT Act," the authors argued.
The report also calls for:
- Stopping another pending private jet tax break;
- Repealing accelerated bonus depreciation of private jet purchases and passing the End Subsidies for Private Jets Act;
- Increasing taxes on private jet fuel;
- Rolling back secrecy provisions; and
- Ending funding and construction of new private jet infrastructure.
“Since we first released our analysis on the costs of private jet travel to taxpayers and the planet in 2023, we’ve seen a shocking and irresponsible rise in the use of private jet travel,” Ocampo said in a statement.
“Unfortunately, the private jet lobby has worked hard to lower the tax obligations of the ultrawealthy," he added. "Meanwhile, the aviation industry pushes false solutions on the climate crisis. It’s time to stop making taxpayers subsidize luxury private jet travel and use our resources to green other industries.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Trump EPA Accused of Endangering Public as Study Highlights 'Hidden Health Costs' of Data Centers
The Environmental Protection Network listed actions "that could increase pollution-related health risks, weaken protections that would otherwise reduce those risks, or shift more costs onto families and communities."
Sep 10, 2026
As President Donald Trump claims that US communities fighting against artificial intelligence data centers are promoting "poverty, crime, and squalor," a Thursday report details how his administration "is weakening or proposing to weaken pollution and permitting safeguards" for such facilities, to the detriment of public health.
The Environmental Protection Agency's "mission is to protect human health and the environment," notes the new report. "Yet Administrator Lee Zeldin has made turning the United States into the 'AI capital of the world' a pillar of EPA's work."
"The Hidden Health Costs of AI Data Centers"—from the Environmental Protection Network (EPN), which is made up of hundreds of former EPA staffers—documents "at least 30 federal actions since January 2025 that could increase pollution-related health risks, weaken protections that would otherwise reduce those risks, or shift more costs onto families and communities."
As the document details: "17 of the 30 explicitly cite or target AI or data centers in the action itself or in an agency statement specifically describing or justifying that action. The remaining 13 affect how data centers are powered, what pollution safeguards apply, how projects are approved, or how federal requirements are enforced."
The report points to the EPA policy that "made it easier for some long-idled facilities to restart without triggering the major air-permitting requirements," as well as its proposed elimination of federal carbon pollution standards for fossil-fueled power plants and some outstanding state clean-air requirements for areas that failed to meet ozone standards.
The publication also notes the EPA's extended deadlines for several coal-plant wastewater requirements, newly regulated coal-ash units, the 2024 oil and gas standards, and for states to submit plans to reduce visibility-impairing pollution. The agency further interpreted a policy on nonemergency backup generator use that it framed as a move supporting AI and data centers.
It's not just the EPA. The US Department of Energy "authorized grid use of backup generation at data centers and other major facilities during emergencies," the report explains, while the Army Corps of Engineers "expressly named data centers as examples of commercial development covered by" a streamlined water permit.
The race for AI data center growth shouldn’t mean weaker safeguards on pollution. Former EPA official Walter Mugdan explains why strong enforcement matters when families’ health is at risk.What’s being weakened? Read the full report at the link in the comments.
[image or embed]
— Environmental Protection Network (@enviroprotnet.bsky.social) September 10, 2026 at 4:39 PM
"No study has yet calculated the combined health effects of these actions, but the direction is clear," the report says. It cites a study from this year that estimates air pollution related to data centers "could impose roughly $11.7 billion to $20.9 billion in annual public health costs by 2028," and "contribute to roughly 600,000 asthma symptom cases and 1,300 premature deaths."
Dan Costa, who spent about 35 years at EPA studying the impact of air pollution on human health and led its national research program on air quality, climate, and energy, said that "the existing health study gives us a picture of the potential health burden under particular data-center growth and emissions scenarios."
"But it does not estimate the additional health effects of the 30 federal policy actions EPN documents," he stressed. "That is the analysis EPA should be doing now: Measuring what these sources actually emit, modeling both local and regional air-quality effects, and translating those changes into health impacts."
In addition to laying out the Trump policies and their risks, the publication highlights how his agenda on AI data centers conflicts with voters' wishes. An April poll conducted by YouGov for EPN found that:
- Just 16% of US voters support making the United States the "AI capital of the world" an EPA priority;
- 69% of voters are highly concerned about fast-tracking data centers without usual safeguards;
- 85% of voters say Trump should be tougher on corporations that violate environmental laws; and
- by an 8-1 margin, voters say the EPA should prioritize people's health over reducing pollution regulations.
"You would think a build-out of this magnitude would mean more vigilance from EPA: stronger safeguards to make sure companies control their pollution, more science to understand what this scale will bring, and more monitoring," said Dr. Lynn Goldman, a pediatrician and former EPA assistant administrator. "Instead, EPA and other federal agencies are doing the opposite."
The EPN report was published amid mounting calls for Congress to rein in artificial intelligence development in the wake of Jacob Coxon, a researcher at Anthropic who previously worked at OpenAI, quitting, and spotlighting fears within the industry that the rapidly advancing technology "could kill us all by the end of the decade."
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) have introduced legislation that would permanently ban the development of "superintelligent" AI until a federal body is created to regulate it—and, according to polling results published on Wednesday by Data for Progress, 68% of likely voters in the United States support that proposal.
Sanders has also partnered with Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (D-NY) for the Artificial Intelligence Data Center Moratorium Act, which would pause construction on the facilities "until strong national safeguards are in place to protect workers, consumers, and communities, defend privacy and civil rights, and ensure these technologies do not harm our environment."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Investigation Exposes Massive New Jersey Data Center Operating Army of Polluting Generators Without Permits
“It seems that this industry, in particular, values speed to market more than almost anything else."
Aug 27, 2026
A joint investigative report published by Floodlight and The Guardian on Thursday revealed that one of the largest planned artificial intelligence data centers on the East Coast is operating dozens of gas-powered generators without permits in a possible violation of federal law.
Using a thermal drone to take footage of the Microsoft-backed DataOne facility in Vineland, New Jersey last week, Floodlight determined that the data center was operating 45 generators at once.
The investigation noted that the generators were operating roughly one mile from two different schools, and that the gas-powered generators used as the facility "emit substantial amounts of health-harming air pollution linked to asthma, heart attacks, and even premature death."
Bruce Buckheit, who previously served as air enforcement chief at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), told Floodlight that DataOne is likely violating federal law with its unpermitted generators, and he said the government should make the facility pay a fine for "illegal emissions."
Buckheit added that DataOne's apparent disregard for regulations appeared to be a common trait in the AI industry.
“It seems that this industry, in particular, values speed to market more than almost anything else,” he said.
A New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection spokesperson told Floodlight that the agency is investigating DataOne's use of gas generators but has yet to reach "a full compliance determination."
Local residents told Floodlight that they have for months complained about the nonstop humming produced by the facility, which they suspect is being caused by the generators.
"It's just constant," resident Andrew Groetsch told Floodlight of the noise coming from the facility. "It never goes away."
DataOne, which is projected to cover 2.5 million square feet upon its completion, has long been controversial.
In an interview with NBC Philadelphia published earlier this month, Vineland resident Peggy Schumacher said that the noise from the data center has gotten so bad that it's making her neighborhood "unlivable."
"We are a mile away," Schumacher explained, "and the vibration in our house is horrible now."
Fellow Vineland resident Tallis West offered a similar description of living near DataOne in an interview with CBS News published in May.
"Outside is not even enjoyable to sit outside because of the noise sometimes," West said. "We can't enjoy being outside anymore."
Despite the objections of many local residents, the Vineland Planning Board earlier this month voted to approve the second phase of construction at the facility.
The tech industry's rapid buildout of AI data centers is getting major pushback from voters across the US, as residents issue complaints about both pollution and energy consumption that has been raising their utility bills.
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) earlier this year proposed a moratorium on new data center construction.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Nearly 100 Groups Urge Congress to Reject GOP-Led Attacks on Clean Air Protections
If lawmakers pass four Congressional Review Act resolutions, the coalition warns, "families will experience consequences," from further strained household budgets to breathing toxic air.
Aug 24, 2026
Dozens of organizations focused on consumer advocacy, the environment, health, science, and more came together on Monday for a letter urging the Republican-controlled US Congress to vote down four resolutions attacking clean air protections.
Signed by 95 groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice Action, Physicians for Social Responsibility, Progressives for Democracy in America, Public Citizen, and Sierra Club, the letter takes aim at four resolutions recently introduced by Republicans under the Congressional Review Act (CRA).
The CRA allows lawmakers to overturn rules and regulations issued by federal agencies—and has already been used by Big Oil-backed President Donald Trump and his allies in Congress to roll back policies aimed at limiting pollution.
After Trump returned to power last year, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) transmitted to Congress three emission waivers that the Biden administration granted to California, which led to CRA resolutions that lawmakers passed and the president signed—measures condemned at the time as his "latest betrayal of democracy" and a gift to polluters.
This past June, the Trump EPA announced that it was submitting four more to Congress, resulting in new resolutions that, as the letter notes, "seek to overturn four long-standing Clean Air Act preemption waivers that states rely on to protect the health and safety of their residents (HJRes. 202/SJRes 206, HJRes. 205/SJRes. 207, HJRes. 211/SJRes. 208, HJRes. 214/SJRes. 205)."
As the letter details, these resolutions target waivers for:
- Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission standards for passenger cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty vehicles that the auto industry has already been complying with since 2009;
- Smog-forming pollutant and GHG emissions limits for light-duty vehicles that the auto industry has already been complying with since 2015 (Advanced Clean Cars I (ACC I) program);
- The 2022 reinstatement of the 2013 ACC I waiver (after the EPA unlawfully purported to withdraw it in 2019); and
- The Small Off-Road Engine (SORE) amendments, which set exhaust standards for garden equipment and other polluting small engines in California (and cannot be adopted by other states).
These waivers "are essential for saving families money and protecting air quality," and "given the affordability crisis facing millions of people today, it would be a disastrous waste of time and resources to attempt to nullify" them, the letter argues. "Vehicles and off-road engines currently in use already meet the standards that Congress is attacking—and these standards mean that our cars, trucks, and off-road engines cost less at the gas pump and that our air is cleaner. There's nothing to fix."
While votes for the resolutions are not yet planned, the coalition warned that "if Congress attempts to improperly block the implementation of these long-established state standards, families will experience consequences," from breathing toxic air to further straining household budgets as "gas prices are skyrocketing" thanks to Trump's illegal war on Iran.
Already, "more than 152 million people live in counties with unhealthy levels of ozone or particulate pollution," the groups noted, citing the American Lung Association (ALA). "Smogforming pollution from combustion cars, trucks, lawn mowers, and leaf blowers can worsen asthma, decrease lung function, and lead to premature death, particularly in children and the elderly."
"Fine particulate matter (PM2.5) from transportation is singlehandedly responsible for up to 20,000 premature deaths each year," they continued. "All of these burdens disproportionately affect communities of color and low-income communities who are more likely to live near major trucking routes and transportation hubs."
Pointing to the ALA's 2025 and 2026 reports that "document a stark reversal forcing more people to live in counties graded 'F' for ozone pollution," the letter stresses that "the waivers are more essential than ever. These improper CRA resolutions threaten the ability of states to take action to protect their residents from harmful air pollution and its negative public health impacts."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Overflowing Bins in Bethlehem Tell a Bigger Story
They are telling the story of a city under pressure, a story of institutions struggling to maintain essential services, a story of workers trying to do their jobs under increasingly difficult circumstances.
Aug 23, 2026
The world knows Bethlehem as the city of the Nativity. It is a city of churches, olive groves, ancient stone streets, and a history that attracts pilgrims and visitors from across the globe. For many, Bethlehem symbolizes peace, hope, and human resilience.
Yet in recent weeks, another image has emerged. Overflowing garbage containers. Piles of waste left uncollected for days. Unpleasant odors drifting through neighborhoods. Stray dogs searching through torn plastic bags. Flies, rodents, and growing public concern about health and sanitation.
For residents, these scenes are disturbing. For visitors, they are difficult to reconcile with the image of one of the world's most recognized and beloved cities. But the garbage accumulating in Bethlehem's streets is not the real story. It is merely the most visible symptom of a much larger crisis. The question is not why a container is overflowing. The question is what happened to the system behind it.
At first glance, it may seem like a simple municipal problem. A shortage of fuel. A broken truck. Workers on strike. Delayed collection rounds. The reality is far more complicated.
The environment does not understand politics. It understands only what we do—or fail to do—to protect it.
Waste management depends on an entire chain of institutions, workers, vehicles, roads, fuel supplies, disposal facilities, municipal revenues, and public cooperation. When enough pressure is placed on that chain, it begins to break. And in Bethlehem, pressure has been building for years.
The city has suffered repeated economic shocks. The tourism sector, once a major source of income, was devastated by the Covid-19 pandemic. Before it could fully recover, the war and the broader economic crisis brought new hardships. Businesses struggled. Workers lost jobs. Household incomes declined. Many families found themselves prioritizing food, rent, and basic necessities over municipal fees.
As revenues declined, local institutions found it increasingly difficult to sustain essential services. At the same time, operational costs continued to rise. Fuel became more expensive and, at times, harder to secure. Vehicles required maintenance. Equipment aged. Service providers struggled to balance growing needs with shrinking resources.
The crisis does not stop there.
Road closures, military gates, and movement restrictions have increasingly complicated daily life throughout Bethlehem Governorate. What should be a routine collection route can suddenly become longer, slower, or more expensive. A delayed truck today may become an overflowing container tomorrow.
Even the final destination of the waste is not immune from these pressures.
The Al-Minya landfill, which serves communities in southern parts of the West Bank, represents a critical component of the region's waste management system. Any disruption affecting access, transportation, security, or operations along this chain eventually reaches the streets of Bethlehem and surrounding communities.
The result is a problem that residents experience every day. A container left uncollected. A street corner filled with waste. A smell that lingers in the summer heat. A growing sense that something is no longer working as it should.
When waste accumulates, the consequences extend beyond appearance.
Overflowing garbage attracts stray dogs, insects, rodents, and other disease vectors. It increases environmental risks and can create fire hazards during hot weather. It affects public health, community well-being, and the quality of life in neighborhoods already facing multiple challenges.
This is why waste management should never be viewed as a secondary service. It is not simply about removing garbage from the street. It is about protecting public health. It is about preserving human dignity. It is about maintaining the environmental quality of cities and communities. It is also about protecting the people who perform this difficult work.
One night, at around 2:00 am in the morning, I drove into Bethlehem to take my wife to catch an early bus to Allenby Bridge Boarder with Jordan. While most of the city slept, sanitation workers were already on the streets. Wearing reflective orange uniforms, they swept roads, emptied containers, and loaded waste onto trucks. Few residents would ever see them. By sunrise, most traces of their work would have disappeared.
Their presence reminded me that waste management is not an abstract system. It depends on real people working under difficult conditions, often exposed to hazards that most citizens never think about.
But workers alone cannot solve this crisis, neither can municipalities, nor can citizens. Responsibility is shared.
Citizens must reduce the waste they generate, support cleaner public spaces, and contribute to the sustainability of essential services whenever possible.
Municipalities and service providers need stronger planning, better resource management, and long-term financial stability.
National institutions must support local governments struggling under extraordinary economic and political pressures.
And international partners should recognize that environmental services are not luxuries. They are fundamental to public health, social stability, and human dignity.
There is another reason this issue deserves greater attention. Pollution does not recognize borders. Smoke from burning waste does not stop at a checkpoint. Contaminated water does not respect political divisions. Air pollution travels wherever the wind takes it.
The environment does not understand politics. It understands only what we do—or fail to do—to protect it. That is why environmental protection requires cooperation, shared responsibility, and long-term vision.
Bethlehem does not simply need more garbage trucks or more containers. It needs investment in sustainable solutions. It needs stronger institutions. It needs public awareness. It needs serious efforts to reduce waste generation, expand reuse and recycling, and create economic opportunities through a circular economy approach.
Most importantly, it needs recognition that environmental challenges are not isolated technical problems. They are deeply connected to economic conditions, governance, public services, and the daily lives of ordinary people.
The overflowing containers seen today across Bethlehem are telling a much bigger story. They are telling the story of a city under pressure, a story of institutions struggling to maintain essential services, a story of workers trying to do their jobs under increasingly difficult circumstances, a story of economic hardship, environmental vulnerability, and a community searching for sustainable solutions.
And perhaps they are also reminding us of something simple: Garbage does not appear overnight. Neither do environmental crises. Both are the result of problems left unresolved for too long.
If Bethlehem is to remain the beautiful city that the world knows and cherishes, addressing those problems can no longer wait.
Keep ReadingShow Less
See More
Most Popular
To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good.
News & Opinion
Trending
Common Dreams, Inc. Founded 1997. Registered 501(c3) Non-Profit
Privacy Policy