Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

As the UK prepares its next carbon budget, what needs to be included?

News Feed
Friday, February 21, 2025

Labour will next week be confronted with stark policy choices that threaten to expose the fault lines between the Treasury and the government’s green ambitions, as advice for the UK’s next carbon budget is published.Plans for the energy sector, housing, transport, industry and farming will all be called into question in a sweeping set of recommendations for how the UK can meet the legally binding target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.Ministers will be given hundreds of pages of advice on steps they need to take for an expected reduction of emissions to about a quarter of today’s levels by 2040. The seventh carbon budget, which will be published on Wednesday, is the latest in a series stretching back to 2008.The timeframe for this advice goes far beyond the usual political horizon: the budget will set carbon levels from 2038 to 2042. But the Climate Change Committee, the statutory adviser under the Climate Change Act, is expected to warn that the UK is already falling badly behind.Although the CCC cannot prescribe policy, it can make recommendations and set out the limits within which the government can act – for instance, if airports are expanded and people take more flights, there will need to be much deeper cuts to carbon elsewhere in the economy.For that reason, the advice is likely to make uncomfortable reading for senior ministers. Green campaigners and businesses have grown increasingly alarmed at the rhetoric from sections of the cabinet, which has sometimes seemed to pit economic growth against environmental aims.Doug Parr, the chief scientist at Greenpeace UK, warned of a “growth at all costs, growth is king narrative” that was painting climate and nature concerns as a hindrance.Some recent decisions – to greenlight a new runway at Heathrow, and to continue subsidising the tree-burning power station Drax, albeit at a lower rate than before – have been protested against. Far worse has been the rhetoric: Rachel Reeves, the chancellor the exchequer, alarmed many when she said planning reforms would let developers “focus on getting things built and stop worrying over the bats and the newts”.A recent decision to continue subsiding the tree-burning Drax power station cast doubt on Labour’s green credentials. Photograph: Gary Calton/The ObserverYet the economic arguments for climate action are clear and well established. Mike Childs, the head of science, policy and research at Friends of the Earth, said: “The cost to the global economy [of failing to control temperature rises] could reach $38tn a year, according to research published in 2024. In the UK, about 6.3 million households are currently at risk of flooding, which could rise to around 8 million by 2050, according to the Environment Agency. It is not just economically prudent to invest in reducing carbon emissions – it would be extreme economic folly not to do so.”Several other big decisions are still in play, including regulations on housebuilders to make new-build homes low-carbon, and a review of nature and farming regulation. But most divisive of all is likely to be the decision over new oil and gas fields in the North Sea, many of which – including one of the biggest, Rosebank – are already in the licensing system. As Labour’s manifesto commitment was to award no new licences without revoking current ones, some in government are arguing for Rosebank to go ahead.Pitting green as the antithesis to growth also risks alienating business, says Rachel Solomon Williams, the executive director at the Aldersgate Group of companies that push for a green economy. “To create a strong and resilient economy we need to be taking the lead in the low-carbon sectors that will drive sustainable growth in the future,” she said. “Businesses across the country want to see a regulatory and policy landscape that rewards ambition and innovation in the private sector, rather than a race to the bottom.”With the UK well off track to meet its current carbon budgets, more action will be needed in the short and longer term, in every sector of the economy, involving changes to nearly every aspect of our lives from how we live at home to how we get around, what we work on and what we eat.Ministers must set the seventh carbon budget by the end of June 2026. They are likely to accept the recommended overall carbon target, but the detailed policy advice will be up for grabs. A spokesperson for the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero said: “We are committed to meeting our ambitious targets. Britain is back in the business of climate leadership because the only way to protect current and future generations is by becoming a clean energy superpower and leading global climate action.”EnergyIf the government meets its target of decarbonising the electricity system almost completely by 2030 – a very large “if” – that will not be the end of the story. Electricity supply must roughly double from current levels to meet future demand. Ed Matthew, the director of the UK programme at the E3G thinktank, said: “The power system is key because both heating and transport and about two-thirds of industry will need to be electrified. The 2030 target is really just the start of the electrification journey.”Grid upgrades will be needed, along with more focus on demand management, and storage will be key. E3G is calling for more investment in hydrogen, which can be stored in solid or liquid form for producing energy on demand.HomesHome heating makes up roughly 18% of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, largely from using gas. By the 2040s, most homes will need to be using heat pumps, but their takeup has so far been stubbornly slow. Last summer, only about 250,000 homes were using heat pumps.They are more expensive to install than gas boilers, and are still not as cheap to run as they should be, because the way the UK’s electricity market works makes electricity much dearer compared with gas. There are even question marks over whether new homes will be built with heat pumps under forthcoming building regulations called the “future homes standard”.Ed Miliband, the energy and net zero secretary, sounded lukewarm on the technology recently when he told a select committee: “I am very wary of saying that we will stop people having gas boilers at a point when we cannot guarantee that heat pumps will be cheaper for people.”Yet there are currently no real alternatives to mass heat pump installations if the UK is to be weaned off gas. The CCC is expected to make this point forcefully.IndustryGiving up fossil fuels in industry will require far more electrification and investment in new technologies, such as electric arc furnaces for steel-making; hydrogen for use in chemicals, plastics and fertilisers; and low-carbon versions of cement. For some industries, the only option will be carbon capture and storage, to which the government will devote more than £20bn in the next two decades.All of this will require investment, but few private sector companies are taking the steps needed. Some are likely to be waiting to see what help the government might offer; others may be in engaged in a game of chicken, trying to bully ministers into watering down the UK’s net zero commitments.Williams, of the Aldersgate Group, said: “By making clear that it’s firmly committed to rapid decarbonisation, the government will provide much-needed economic certainty that will ultimately drive investment and generate prosperity.”TransportFrom 2035, it will be impossible to buy a new petrol or diesel car. Most of the UK’s 30 million strong fleet is likely still be reliant on fossil fuels for some years after, however. Electric vehicles are also no panacea: they still produce significant air pollution and are becoming heavier along with conventional cars.If decarbonisation targets are to be met, people will need to use public transport far more in future. This should also stimulate economic growth – according to the National Infrastructure Commission, the UK lags badly behind other European countries in the availability of public transport in many of its major regional cities, and this is a major brake on productivity.Although the government has begun to take the railways back into public ownership, returned bus services to regulatory oversight and backed an Oxford-Cambridge corridor, there is little sign of the joined-up national public transport strategy and investment in local networks such as trams that experts say is needed.FarmingHooting tractors jamming Whitehall in protest at the removal of inheritance tax breaks have set the tone for this government’s relationship with farmers. Yet farmers are vital to any net zero strategy, to grow more trees, preserve and re-wet peatlands, and reduce the increasing share of emissions from agriculture – which has already overtaken electricity and will be the biggest source of greenhouse gases in just over a decade, according to analysis from the Energy Climate Intelligence Unit.Methane, a powerful greenhouse gas of which animal manure is a leading source, must be tackled as a matter of urgency if the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate breakdown.Farmers, who have been protesting against the removal of inheritance tax breaks, are vital to any net zero strategy. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPAAction is also in farmers’ own interests, according to Tom Lancaster, an analyst at the ECIU. “Farming is the sector perhaps most exposed to the risks of climate change. We’ve just seen one of the worst harvests in decades in the UK, as farmers battled through the wettest 18 months on record and relentless winter rainfall, made worse by climate change,” he said. “We will only see more terrible harvests and flooded and drought-stricken farms in the future if we don’t do more now to move faster towards net zero.”Behavioural changeThe last government refused to countenance any message that people would have to adapt their behaviour in order to bring down carbon emissions. But all the analysis from the CCC so far shows that without changing consumption, it will not be possible to create the low-carbon society needed. This need not be drastic, and it would be good for us: walking more, cycling where possible, taking public transport instead of the car, and eating less meat would all improve most people’s health.Getting that message across will face deep-seated obstacles, however, including accusations of nanny state-ism – and Keir Starmer’s claim that carbon targets can be reached “without telling people how to live their lives”. Childs, at Friends of the Earth, said proving the benefits was key: “The policy pathway for meeting our carbon budget must not only be robust enough to achieve them – it must also make people’s lives tangibly better, if the mandate for change is to remain strong.”

Expert recommendations will impact plans for energy, housing, transport industry and farming for decadesLabour will next week be confronted with stark policy choices that threaten to expose the fault lines between the Treasury and the government’s green ambitions, as advice for the UK’s next carbon budget is published.Plans for the energy sector, housing, transport, industry and farming will all be called into question in a sweeping set of recommendations for how the UK can meet the legally binding target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. Continue reading...

Labour will next week be confronted with stark policy choices that threaten to expose the fault lines between the Treasury and the government’s green ambitions, as advice for the UK’s next carbon budget is published.

Plans for the energy sector, housing, transport, industry and farming will all be called into question in a sweeping set of recommendations for how the UK can meet the legally binding target of net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.

Ministers will be given hundreds of pages of advice on steps they need to take for an expected reduction of emissions to about a quarter of today’s levels by 2040. The seventh carbon budget, which will be published on Wednesday, is the latest in a series stretching back to 2008.

The timeframe for this advice goes far beyond the usual political horizon: the budget will set carbon levels from 2038 to 2042. But the Climate Change Committee, the statutory adviser under the Climate Change Act, is expected to warn that the UK is already falling badly behind.

Although the CCC cannot prescribe policy, it can make recommendations and set out the limits within which the government can act – for instance, if airports are expanded and people take more flights, there will need to be much deeper cuts to carbon elsewhere in the economy.

For that reason, the advice is likely to make uncomfortable reading for senior ministers. Green campaigners and businesses have grown increasingly alarmed at the rhetoric from sections of the cabinet, which has sometimes seemed to pit economic growth against environmental aims.

Doug Parr, the chief scientist at Greenpeace UK, warned of a “growth at all costs, growth is king narrative” that was painting climate and nature concerns as a hindrance.

Some recent decisions – to greenlight a new runway at Heathrow, and to continue subsidising the tree-burning power station Drax, albeit at a lower rate than before – have been protested against. Far worse has been the rhetoric: Rachel Reeves, the chancellor the exchequer, alarmed many when she said planning reforms would let developers “focus on getting things built and stop worrying over the bats and the newts”.

A recent decision to continue subsiding the tree-burning Drax power station cast doubt on Labour’s green credentials. Photograph: Gary Calton/The Observer

Yet the economic arguments for climate action are clear and well established. Mike Childs, the head of science, policy and research at Friends of the Earth, said: “The cost to the global economy [of failing to control temperature rises] could reach $38tn a year, according to research published in 2024. In the UK, about 6.3 million households are currently at risk of flooding, which could rise to around 8 million by 2050, according to the Environment Agency. It is not just economically prudent to invest in reducing carbon emissions – it would be extreme economic folly not to do so.”

Several other big decisions are still in play, including regulations on housebuilders to make new-build homes low-carbon, and a review of nature and farming regulation. But most divisive of all is likely to be the decision over new oil and gas fields in the North Sea, many of which – including one of the biggest, Rosebank – are already in the licensing system. As Labour’s manifesto commitment was to award no new licences without revoking current ones, some in government are arguing for Rosebank to go ahead.

Pitting green as the antithesis to growth also risks alienating business, says Rachel Solomon Williams, the executive director at the Aldersgate Group of companies that push for a green economy. “To create a strong and resilient economy we need to be taking the lead in the low-carbon sectors that will drive sustainable growth in the future,” she said. “Businesses across the country want to see a regulatory and policy landscape that rewards ambition and innovation in the private sector, rather than a race to the bottom.”

With the UK well off track to meet its current carbon budgets, more action will be needed in the short and longer term, in every sector of the economy, involving changes to nearly every aspect of our lives from how we live at home to how we get around, what we work on and what we eat.

Ministers must set the seventh carbon budget by the end of June 2026. They are likely to accept the recommended overall carbon target, but the detailed policy advice will be up for grabs. A spokesperson for the Department of Energy Security and Net Zero said: “We are committed to meeting our ambitious targets. Britain is back in the business of climate leadership because the only way to protect current and future generations is by becoming a clean energy superpower and leading global climate action.”

Energy

If the government meets its target of decarbonising the electricity system almost completely by 2030 – a very large “if” – that will not be the end of the story. Electricity supply must roughly double from current levels to meet future demand. Ed Matthew, the director of the UK programme at the E3G thinktank, said: “The power system is key because both heating and transport and about two-thirds of industry will need to be electrified. The 2030 target is really just the start of the electrification journey.”

Grid upgrades will be needed, along with more focus on demand management, and storage will be key. E3G is calling for more investment in hydrogen, which can be stored in solid or liquid form for producing energy on demand.

Homes

Home heating makes up roughly 18% of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions, largely from using gas. By the 2040s, most homes will need to be using heat pumps, but their takeup has so far been stubbornly slow. Last summer, only about 250,000 homes were using heat pumps.

They are more expensive to install than gas boilers, and are still not as cheap to run as they should be, because the way the UK’s electricity market works makes electricity much dearer compared with gas. There are even question marks over whether new homes will be built with heat pumps under forthcoming building regulations called the “future homes standard”.

Ed Miliband, the energy and net zero secretary, sounded lukewarm on the technology recently when he told a select committee: “I am very wary of saying that we will stop people having gas boilers at a point when we cannot guarantee that heat pumps will be cheaper for people.”

Yet there are currently no real alternatives to mass heat pump installations if the UK is to be weaned off gas. The CCC is expected to make this point forcefully.

Industry

Giving up fossil fuels in industry will require far more electrification and investment in new technologies, such as electric arc furnaces for steel-making; hydrogen for use in chemicals, plastics and fertilisers; and low-carbon versions of cement. For some industries, the only option will be carbon capture and storage, to which the government will devote more than £20bn in the next two decades.

All of this will require investment, but few private sector companies are taking the steps needed. Some are likely to be waiting to see what help the government might offer; others may be in engaged in a game of chicken, trying to bully ministers into watering down the UK’s net zero commitments.

Williams, of the Aldersgate Group, said: “By making clear that it’s firmly committed to rapid decarbonisation, the government will provide much-needed economic certainty that will ultimately drive investment and generate prosperity.”

Transport

From 2035, it will be impossible to buy a new petrol or diesel car. Most of the UK’s 30 million strong fleet is likely still be reliant on fossil fuels for some years after, however. Electric vehicles are also no panacea: they still produce significant air pollution and are becoming heavier along with conventional cars.

If decarbonisation targets are to be met, people will need to use public transport far more in future. This should also stimulate economic growth – according to the National Infrastructure Commission, the UK lags badly behind other European countries in the availability of public transport in many of its major regional cities, and this is a major brake on productivity.

Although the government has begun to take the railways back into public ownership, returned bus services to regulatory oversight and backed an Oxford-Cambridge corridor, there is little sign of the joined-up national public transport strategy and investment in local networks such as trams that experts say is needed.

Farming

Hooting tractors jamming Whitehall in protest at the removal of inheritance tax breaks have set the tone for this government’s relationship with farmers. Yet farmers are vital to any net zero strategy, to grow more trees, preserve and re-wet peatlands, and reduce the increasing share of emissions from agriculture – which has already overtaken electricity and will be the biggest source of greenhouse gases in just over a decade, according to analysis from the Energy Climate Intelligence Unit.

Methane, a powerful greenhouse gas of which animal manure is a leading source, must be tackled as a matter of urgency if the world is to avoid the worst ravages of climate breakdown.

Farmers, who have been protesting against the removal of inheritance tax breaks, are vital to any net zero strategy. Photograph: Tolga Akmen/EPA

Action is also in farmers’ own interests, according to Tom Lancaster, an analyst at the ECIU. “Farming is the sector perhaps most exposed to the risks of climate change. We’ve just seen one of the worst harvests in decades in the UK, as farmers battled through the wettest 18 months on record and relentless winter rainfall, made worse by climate change,” he said. “We will only see more terrible harvests and flooded and drought-stricken farms in the future if we don’t do more now to move faster towards net zero.”

Behavioural change

The last government refused to countenance any message that people would have to adapt their behaviour in order to bring down carbon emissions. But all the analysis from the CCC so far shows that without changing consumption, it will not be possible to create the low-carbon society needed. This need not be drastic, and it would be good for us: walking more, cycling where possible, taking public transport instead of the car, and eating less meat would all improve most people’s health.

Getting that message across will face deep-seated obstacles, however, including accusations of nanny state-ism – and Keir Starmer’s claim that carbon targets can be reached “without telling people how to live their lives”. Childs, at Friends of the Earth, said proving the benefits was key: “The policy pathway for meeting our carbon budget must not only be robust enough to achieve them – it must also make people’s lives tangibly better, if the mandate for change is to remain strong.”

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

The UK Says at an Energy Summit That Green Power Will Boost Security, as the US Differs

Britain has announced a major investment in wind power as it hosts an international summit on energy security

LONDON (AP) — Britain announced a major investment in wind power Thursday as it hosted an international summit on energy security — with Europe and the United States at odds over whether to cut their reliance on fossil fuels.U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the government will invest 300 million pounds ($400 million) in boosting Britain’s capacity to manufacture components for the offshore wind industry, a move it hopes will encourage private investment in the U.K.’s renewable energy sector.“As long as energy can be weaponized against us, our countries and our citizens are vulnerable and exposed,” U.K. Energy Secretary Ed Miliband told delegates.He said “low-carbon power” was a route to energy security as well as a way to slow climate change.Britain now gets more than half its electricity from renewable sources such as wind and solar power, and the rest from natural gas and nuclear energy. It aims to generate all the U.K.’s energy from renewable sources by 2030.Tommy Joyce, U.S. acting assistant secretary of energy for international affairs, told participants they should be “honest about the world’s growing energy needs, not focused on net-zero politics.”He called policies that push for clean power over fossil fuels "harmful and dangerous," and claimed building wind turbines requires "concessions to or coercion from China" because it supplies necessary rare minerals.Hosted by the British government and the International Energy Agency, the two-day summit brings together government ministers from 60 countries, senior European Union officials, energy sector CEOs, heads of international organizations and nonprofits to assess risks to the global energy system and figure out solutions. Associated Press writer Jennifer McDermott contributed to this story. ___The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Steelhead trout rescued from Palisades fire spawn in their new Santa Barbara County home

After a stressful journey out of the burn zone in Malibu, the endangered trout have spawned in their adopted stream in Santa Barbara County.

Wildlife officials feared critically endangered steelhead trout rescued from the Palisades fire burn scar might not be up for spawning after all they’d been through over the last few months.After their watershed in the Santa Monica Mountains was scorched in January, the fish were stunned with electricity, scooped up in buckets, trucked to a hatchery, fed unfamiliar food and then moved to a different creek. It was all part of a liberation effort pulled off in the nick of time. “This whole thing is just a very stressful and traumatic event, and I’m happy that we didn’t really kill many fish,” said Kyle Evans, an environmental program manager for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, which led the rescue. “But I was concerned that I might have just disrupted this whole months-long process of getting ready to spawn.” Steelhead were once abundant in Southern California, but their numbers plummeted amid coastal development and overfishing. A distinct Southern California population is listed as endangered at the state and federal level. (Alex Vejar / California Department of Fish and Wildlife) But this month spawn they did.It’s believed that there are now more than 100 baby trout swishing around their new digs in Arroyo Hondo Creek in Santa Barbara County.Their presence is a triumph — for the species and for their adopted home.However, more fish require more suitable habitat, which is lacking in Southern California — in part due to drought and the increased frequency of devastating wildfires. Steelhead trout are the same species as rainbow trout, but they have different lifestyles. Steelheads migrate to the ocean and return to their natal streams to spawn, while rainbows spend their lives in freshwater.Steelhead were once abundant in Southern California, but their numbers plummeted amid coastal development and overfishing. A distinct Southern California population is listed as endangered at the state and federal level.The young fish sighted this month mark the next generation of what was the last population of steelhead in the Santa Monica Mountains, a range that stretches from the Hollywood Hills to Point Mugu in Ventura County. They also represent the return of a species to a watershed that itself was devastated by a fire four years ago, but has since recovered. It’s believed that there are now more than 100 baby trout swishing around their new digs in Arroyo Hondo Creek in Santa Barbara County. (Kyle Kusa / Land Trust for Santa Barbara County) The Alisal blaze torched roughly 95% of the Arroyo Hondo Preserve located west of Santa Barbara, and subsequent debris flows choked the creek of the same name that housed steelhead. All the fish perished, according to Meredith Hendricks, executive director of the Land Trust for Santa Barbara County, a nonprofit organization that owns and manages the preserve.“To be able to … offer space for these fish to be transplanted to — when we ourselves had experienced a similar situation but lost our fish — it was just a really big deal,” Hendricks said. Arroyo Hondo Creek bears similarities to the trout’s native Topanga Creek; they are both coastal streams of roughly the same size. And it has a bonus feature: a state-funded fish passage constructed under Highway 101 in 2008, which improved fish movement between the stream and the ocean.Spawning is a biologically and energetically demanding endeavor for steelhead, and the process likely began in December or earlier, according to Evans.That means it was already underway when 271 steelhead were evacuated in January from Topanga Creek, a biodiversity hot spot located in Malibu that was badly damaged by the Palisades fire.It continued when they were hauled about 50 miles north to a hatchery in Fillmore, where they hung out until 266 of them made it to Arroyo Hondo the following month.State wildlife personnel regularly surveyed the fish in their new digs but didn’t see the spawning nests, which can be missed. VIDEO | 00:16 Steelhead trout in Arroyo Hondo Creek in Santa Barbara County Steelhead trout in Arroyo Hondo Creek in Santa Barbara County. (Calif. Dept. of Fish & Game) Then, on April 7, Evans got a text message from the Land Trust’s land programs director, Leslie Chan, with a video that appeared to show a freshly hatched young-of-the-year — the wonky name for fish born during the steelheads’ sole annual spawn.The following day, Evans’ team was dispatched to the creek and confirmed the discovery. They tallied about 100 of the newly hatched fish. The young trout span roughly one inch and, as Evans put it, aren’t too bright. They hang out in the shallows and don’t bolt from predators.“They’re kind of just happy to be alive, and they’re not really trying to hide,” he said.By the end of summer, Evans estimates two-thirds will die off. But the survivors are enough to keep the population charging onward. Evans hopes that in a few years, there will be three to four times the number of fish that initially moved in.The plan is to eventually relocate at least some back to their native home of Topanga Creek.Right now, Topanga “looks pretty bad,” Evans said. The Palisades fire stripped the surrounding hillsides of vegetation, paving the way for dirt, ash and other material to pour into the waterway. Another endangered fish, northern tidewater gobies, were rescued from the same watershed shortly before the steelhead were liberated. Within two days of the trouts’ removal, the first storm of the season arrived, likely burying the remaining fish in a muddy slurry. Citizen scientists Bernard Yin, center, and Rebecca Ramirez, right, join government agency staffers in rescuing federally endangered fish in the Topanga Lagoon in Malibu on Jan. 17. (Christina House / Los Angeles Times) Evans expects it will be about four years before Topanga Creek is ready to support steelhead again, based on his experience observing streams recover after the Thomas, Woolsey, Alisal and other fires. There’s also discussion about moving around steelhead to create backup populations should calamity befall one, as well as boost genetic diversity of the rare fish.For example, some of the steelhead saved from Topanga could be moved to Malibu Creek, another stream in the Santa Monica Mountains that empties into Santa Monica Bay. There are efforts underway to remove the 100-foot Rindge Dam in Malibu Creek to open up more habitat for the fish.“As we saw, if you have one population in the Santa Monica Mountains and a fire happens, you could just lose it forever,” Evans said. “So having fish in multiple areas is the kind of way to defend against that.”With the Topanga Creek steelhead biding their time up north, it’s believed there are none currently inhabiting the Santa Monicas. Habitat restoration is key for the species’ survival, according to Evans, who advocates for directing funding to such efforts, including soon-to-come-online money from Proposition 4, a $10-billion bond measure to finance water, clean energy and other environmental projects.“It doesn’t matter how many fish you have, or if you’re growing them in a hatchery, or what you’re doing,” he said. “If they can’t be supported on the landscape, then there’s no point.”Some trout will end up making their temporary lodging permanent, according to Hendricks, of the Land Trust. Arroyo Hondo is a long creek with plenty of nooks and crannies for trout to hide in. So when it comes time to bring the steelhead home, she said, “I’m sure some will get left behind.”

Chicago Teachers Union secures clean energy wins in new contract

The Chicago Teachers Union expects its new, hard-fought contract to help drive clean energy investments and train the next generation of clean energy workers, even as the Trump administration attacks such priorities. The contract approved by 97% of union members this month represents the first time the union has…

The Chicago Teachers Union expects its new, hard-fought contract to help drive clean energy investments and train the next generation of clean energy workers, even as the Trump administration attacks such priorities. The contract approved by 97% of union members this month represents the first time the union has bargained with school officials specifically around climate change and energy, said union Vice President Jackson Potter. The deal still needs to be approved by the Chicago Board of Education. If approved, the contract will result in new programs that prepare students for clean energy jobs, developed in collaboration with local labor unions. It mandates that district officials work with the teachers union to seek funding for clean energy investments and update a climate action plan by 2026. And it calls for installing heat pumps and outfitting 30 schools with solar panels — if funding can be secured. During almost a year of contentious negotiations, the more than 25,000-member union had also demanded paid climate-educator positions, an all-electric school bus fleet, and that all newly constructed schools be carbon-free. While those provisions did not end up in the final agreement, leaders say the four-year contract is a ​“transformative” victory that sets the stage for more ambitious demands next time. “This contract is setting the floor of what we hope we can accomplish,” said Lauren Bianchi, who taught social studies at George Washington High School on the city’s South Side for six years before becoming green schools organizer for the union. ​“It shows we can win on climate, even despite Trump.” The climate-related provisions are part of what the Chicago Teachers Union and an increasing number of unions nationwide refer to as ​“common good” demands, meant to benefit not only their members in the workplace but the entire community. In this and its 2019 contract, the Chicago union also won ​“common good” items such as protections for immigrant students and teachers, and affordable housing–related measures. The new contract also guarantees teachers academic freedom at a time when the federal government is trying to limit schools from teaching materials related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. “Black history, Indigenous history, climate science — that’s protected instruction now,” said Potter. Chicago Public Schools did not respond to emailed questions for this story, except to forward a press release that did not mention clean energy provisions. Training Chicago’s students for clean energy jobs The union crafted its proposals based on discussions with three environmental and community organizations, Bianchi said — the Southeast Environmental Task Force, People for Community Recovery, and ONE Northside. The Southeast Environmental Task Force led the successful fight to ban new petcoke storage in Chicago, and the group’s co-executive director Olga Bautista is also vice president of the 21-member school board. People for Community Recovery was founded by Hazel Johnson, who is often known as ​“the mother of the environmental justice movement.” And ONE Northside emphasizes the link between clean energy and affordable housing. Clean energy job training was a priority for all three of the organizations, Potter said. Under the contract, the union and district officials will work with other labor unions to create pre-apprenticeship programs for students, which are crucial to entering the union-dominated building trades to install solar, do energy-efficiency overhauls, and electrify homes with heat pumps and other technology. The contract demands the district create one specific new clean energy jobs pathway program during each year of the four-year contract. It also mandates renovating schools for energy efficiency and installing modern HVAC systems, and orders the school district to work with trade unions to create opportunities for Chicago Public Schools students and graduates to be hired for such work. “The people in the community have identified jobs and economic justice as being essential for environmental justice,” said Bianchi. ​“I’ve mostly taught juniors and seniors; a lot expressed frustration that college is not their plan. They wish they could learn job skills to enter a trade.” Chicago schools progress on solar, energy efficiency, and electrification Installing solar could help the district meet its clean energy goals, which include sourcing 100% of its electricity from renewables by this year. The district has invested more than $6 million in energy efficiency and efficient lighting since 2018, and cut its carbon dioxide emissions by more than 27,000 metric tons, school district spokesperson Evan Moore told Canary Media last fall as contract negotiations were proceeding. The schools are eligible for subsidized solar panels under the state Illinois Shines program, and they can tap the federal 30% investment tax credit for solar arrays, with a new direct-pay option tailored to tax-exempt organizations like schools.

Costa Rica Proposes Strict Penalties for Illegal National Park Entries

Costa Rica is cracking down on illegal entries into its national parks and protected areas, citing dangers to visitors and environmental harm. Franz Tattenbach, Minister of Environment and Energy (MINAE), has called on lawmakers to approve a bill imposing fines of up to ¢2.3 million (approximately $4,400) on individuals and tour operators who access these […] The post Costa Rica Proposes Strict Penalties for Illegal National Park Entries appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Costa Rica is cracking down on illegal entries into its national parks and protected areas, citing dangers to visitors and environmental harm. Franz Tattenbach, Minister of Environment and Energy (MINAE), has called on lawmakers to approve a bill imposing fines of up to ¢2.3 million (approximately $4,400) on individuals and tour operators who access these areas without authorization. Over 500 unauthorized entries into Costa Rica’s 30 national parks and reserves, have been reported so far this year. High-risk areas like Poás, Turrialba, Rincón de la Vieja, and Arenal volcanoes are frequent targets, where illegal tours bypass safety protocols. Unscrupulous operators promote these “exclusive” experiences on social media, often lacking insurance, safety equipment, or trained guides. “These operators abandon clients if intercepted by authorities, leaving them vulnerable in hazardous areas,” Tattenbach said. Poás Volcano National Park, closed since March 26 due to seismic activity and ash emissions, remains a hotspot for illegal tours. The proposed bill, under discussion by MINAE and the National System of Conservation Areas (SINAC), would introduce fines ranging from ¢1.3 million to ¢2.3 million ($2,500 to $4,400) for unauthorized entry, targeting both operators and participants. If a rescue operation is required, involving the Costa Rican Red Cross or MINAE personnel, an additional fine of ¢2.3 million ($4,400) could be imposed. Current laws penalize illegal entry under Article 58 of Forestry Law 7575, with three months to three years in prison, but enforcement is inconsistent. The new bill aims to strengthen deterrence. “These hikes involve steep slopes, toxic gases, and the risk of volcanic eruptions, which can be fatal,” Tattenbach warned, citing the 2017 Poás eruption that closed the park for over a year. Illegal entries also threaten Costa Rica’s biodiversity, which includes 5% of the world’s species. Unauthorized trails disrupt ecosystems and increase risks of poaching, according to Jorge Mario Rodríguez, Vice Minister of Environment. The Volcanological and Seismological Observatory of Costa Rica (OVSICORI) monitors volcanic activity to inform park closures, but illegal tours undermine these safety measures. Increased Surveillance SINAC, the Costa Rican Fire Department, Red Cross, and Police Force will intensify surveillance going forward, targeting high-risk national parks and roadways to prevent unauthorized access, wildlife extraction, hunting, and trade in protected flora and fauna. “These operations safeguard our natural heritage and ensure visitor safety,” Tattenbach said. SINAC’s year-round efforts have intercepted numerous illegal tours in 2025. Visiting Parks Safely: MINAE and SINAC urge visitors to use authorized operators and purchase tickets via the SINAC website or park entrances. Guided tours, available through platforms like Viator or Get Your Guide, offer safe experiences in parks like Manuel Antonio or Corcovado. Tourists should check park statuses before planning visits, as closures due to volcanic activity or weather are common. “Respecting regulations protects both you and Costa Rica’s natural treasures,” Rodríguez said. Preserving Ecotourism: As the proposed bill awaits Legislative Assembly review, MINAE urges compliance to maintain Costa Rica’s status as a global conservation leader. For updates on the bill or park regulations, visit MINAE’s Website The post Costa Rica Proposes Strict Penalties for Illegal National Park Entries appeared first on The Tico Times | Costa Rica News | Travel | Real Estate.

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.