nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope

The Heat Is the Story—Climate Change Is the Cause

 

As extreme heat forces Fourth of July and America 250 celebrations to cancel or scale back across the country, the real story isn’t the weather—it’s the accelerating climate crisis reshaping American life.

Joshua Scheer,July 4, 2026, https://scheerpost.com/2026/07/04/the-heat-is-the-story-climate-change-is-the-cause/

The climate crisis has become so normalized that much of the corporate media now reports its consequences while refusing to name their cause.

We recently highlighted this failure through FAIR’s incisive analysis, Covering the Impact of Climate Change—Without Mentioning Climate Change.” This latest reporting from USA Today does exactly what FAIR warned about.

Across the United States, Fourth of July and America 250 celebrations are being canceled, postponed, or scaled back because temperatures have become simply too dangerous. More than 120 million Americans are under extreme heat warnings. Another 62 million are under heat advisories. Parades have been canceled after floats were already lined up. Historic celebrations in Philadelphia have been abandoned. Fireworks have been delayed, festivals shut down, and even events on the National Mall now require cooling tents, misting stations, hydration centers, and emergency precautions just to proceed.

And yet the story is framed as though this were simply an unfortunate spell of bad weather, It isn’t this is what climate change looks like in real time.

According to the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, extreme heat is becoming both more frequent and more intense as the planet warms. What was once considered unusual is increasingly becoming routine. The organization notes that U.S. cities experienced an average of just two extreme heat events per year in the 1960s. Between 2010 and 2020, that number had risen to ten. At the same time, the nation’s heat-wave season has expanded by 46 days.

The trend is accelerating. The year 2024 was the hottest ever recorded globally, and the last decade has been the warmest on record. Looking ahead, the Fifth National Climate Assessment projects that much of the United States will experience 15 to 30 additional days above 95 degrees each year if global temperatures rise by 2 degrees Celsius. In some states, including Florida, that increase could reach 50 additional days annually.

Extreme heat is already the deadliest weather-related hazard in the United States, killing more Americans each year than hurricanes, floods, or tornadoes. Heat-related deaths have risen by more than 50 percent since 2000, while prolonged high temperatures increase the risk of cardiovascular disease, respiratory illness, kidney damage, and heat stroke. Older adults, children, outdoor workers, and low-income communities without reliable access to cooling face the greatest risks.

The consequences extend far beyond public health. Extreme heat strains the electric grid as air-conditioning demand surges while reducing the efficiency of power lines and power plants. It damages crops, stresses livestock, worsens drought, fuels larger wildfires, and intensifies the urban heat island effect, making many cities several degrees hotter than surrounding areas.

Against that backdrop, the cancellation of parades, fireworks, festivals, and outdoor gatherings across the country is not simply a holiday inconvenience. It is another visible reminder that climate change is reshaping everyday American life.

Yet too much media coverage still treats these events as if they were disconnected episodes of bad weather. When hundreds of Independence Day celebrations are canceled because it is unsafe to be outside, the story is not simply that it is hot. The story is why it is hot—and why these dangerous heat waves are becoming America’s new normal.

The economic costs of climate change are no longer theoretical—they are arriving in real time.

As seen by a recent July 1st Wall Street Journal analysis argues that extreme heat has become a chronic drag on the global economy, disrupting everything from construction and transportation to agriculture, public events, and energy systems. As temperatures soar across the United States ahead of the Fourth of July holiday, more than 150 million Americans have been placed under heat alerts, while Europe continues to experience deadly temperatures that the World Health Organization estimates contributed to roughly 1,300 excess deaths in a single week.

Read more: The Heat Is the Story—Climate Change Is the Cause

The article notes that economists are increasingly treating climate change not as a distant environmental concern but as a central economic force. George Buckley, chief European economist at Nomura, told the Journal that climate change is becoming impossible for economists to ignore, comparing it to other long-term structural challenges such as aging populations. What once appeared to be an issue for future generations is now affecting quarterly growth, inflation, productivity, and government budgets.

Extreme heat carries immediate economic consequences. Outdoor construction slows or stops altogether. Transportation systems are disrupted as rail lines, roads, and infrastructure strain under prolonged high temperatures. Schools close, public events are canceled, and businesses lose productivity as workers are forced indoors or face dangerous working conditions. While some sectors—such as movie theaters and air-conditioning manufacturers—may temporarily benefit, economists emphasize that these isolated gains are dwarfed by the broader losses.

The financial toll is already measurable. Research cited by the Journal estimates that last year’s European heat waves and floods caused approximately $43 billion in economic damage. Allianz modeling suggests that if years of record-breaking heat become the norm, some countries could lose between 5 and 7 percent of their gross domestic product over a five-year period. Those losses come not only from reduced economic output but also from mounting public expenditures to repair damaged infrastructure, strengthen emergency services, and retrofit schools and public buildings with cooling systems.

The article also highlights another consequence often overlooked in public debate: inflation. Extreme heat damages crops, reduces agricultural yields, and pushes food prices higher. One study found that Europe’s 2022 heat wave added roughly two-thirds of a percentage point to food-price inflation. As these events become more frequent, economists warn that climate-related inflation will become harder for central banks to dismiss as temporary, complicating efforts to stabilize prices and manage economic growth.

Perhaps the most significant conclusion is that climate disasters no longer arrive as isolated emergencies. Repeated heat waves compound one another. Construction projects delayed by one event are interrupted again weeks later. Infrastructure weakens under repeated stress. Emergency services remain stretched. Businesses and governments find themselves spending more simply to maintain existing systems rather than investing in future growth.

For years, climate change was framed primarily as an environmental issue. Increasingly, even the financial press is recognizing that it is also an economic one. Every canceled festival, delayed construction project, damaged harvest, overloaded power grid, and record-breaking electric bill represents another reminder that the costs of a warming planet are no longer hypothetical. They are already being paid.

When Americans can no longer safely celebrate Independence Day outdoors because of relentless, life-threatening heat, that is not merely a weather story—it is one of the defining climate stories of our time. Every article that catalogs canceled events without confronting the underlying cause helps normalize what should instead shock us.

Journalists rightly ask who is responsible after floods, hurricanes, or wildfires devastate communities. Why should record-breaking heat be treated any differently? Reporting the consequences while refusing to name the crisis leaves readers informed about the symptoms but blind to the disease.

The cancellations themselves are news. The real story is why they are becoming the new normal.

The climate crisis is no longer something our children will inherit. It is something we are living through right now. It is changing how we work, where we live, what we grow, how much we pay for food and energy, and now even how we celebrate.

The tragedy is not only that the planet is warming. It is that too many of our institutions—including much of the corporate media—continue to describe the symptoms while refusing to confront the disease. By treating record-breaking heat as another unfortunate weather event instead of what it is—a predictable consequence of decades of fossil fuel dependence and political inaction—they normalize a catastrophe that should be demanding urgent action.

Perhaps the most patriotic act today is not waving a flag while pretending everything is normal. It is refusing to accept that this is normal at all. The greatest threat to America’s future is not acknowledging the climate crisis—it is continuing to look away from it. Until we are willing to name the problem honestly, we will never summon the courage to solve it.

May we never forget this moment. And to those of us in the older generations: we cannot pretend this crisis belongs only to the young. People are already dying from extreme heat and the accelerating impacts of climate change—that is a documented fact. The greatest burden, however, will fall on those who must live with the consequences long after today’s leaders are gone.

If we continue down this path, future generations may well look back and ask why we accepted a slow-moving catastrophe that unfolded in plain sight. Nuclear war remains one of humanity’s greatest fears because of its speed and devastation. Climate change is different. It kills more slowly, more unevenly, and often out of the headlines—but it is no less real for those already suffering its consequences.

The question is no longer whether the crisis has arrived. It has. The only question that remains is whether we will finally find the courage to act before today’s warning becomes tomorrow’s irreversible tragedy.

May we never forget Zach from the DNC and the Hilary post election meeting in which he said

“Why should we trust you as chair to lead us through this?” two people in the room told The Huffington Post. “You backed a flawed candidate, and your friend [former DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz] plotted through this to support your own gain and yourself.”

“You and your friends will die of old age and I’m going to die from climate change. You and your friends let this happen, which is going to cut 40 years off my life expectancy,” he said, according to the report.

While Zach was booed and repeatedly told to sit down, he refused to back down, continuing to call Brazile “part of the problem.”

It all leads back to the same moral failure we have witnessed with Gaza, the drive toward war with Iran, and now the climate crisis. On genocide, too many Democratic leaders have not merely been silent—they have been complicit. They have armed it, funded it, defended it, excused it, and attacked those who dared to call it by its name.

That same cowardice runs through their response to war and climate catastrophe. Again and again, Democratic leaders offer speeches about democracy and humanity while backing policies that destroy both. They condemn cruelty when it is politically convenient, but when real power demands a choice, too many choose donors, weapons manufacturers, fossil fuel interests, and empire over human life.

As we honor Ron Kovic, Mike Prysner, and now Zach, we are reminded that conscience rarely comes from the people sitting comfortably in power. It comes from those willing to speak the truth even when party leaders, pundits, and careerists tell them to sit down.

We need more people in positions of power with that courage. Because when leaders fund genocide, march us toward war, and ignore a climate crisis already killing people, they are not simply failing us. They are helping lead us toward death.

History will not remember their carefully worded statements. It will remember whether they stood against genocide, war, and climate collapse when it mattered.

July 9, 2026 Posted by | climate change, USA | Leave a comment

We’re being asked to save two buckets of water a day. Meanwhile data centres drink a town’s worth

England is heading for a 5bn-litre daily water shortfall by 2055 – so why is the government fast-tracking one of the most water-hungry industries there is, and letting it keep its consumption private, asks campaigner Adele Walton


Adele Walton
, Jul 8, 2026,
https://www.thenerve.news/p/adele-walton-heatwave-data-centres-water-shortage?utm_source=www.thenerve.news&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_campaign=farage-under-fire-tuesday-edition&_bhlid=8b1d393304f745e4dafb1328c154dd5ec4a3e882

Lying on my bedroom floor in front of a fan with a wet flannel on my head, desperately trying to cool down in the middle of the UK’s historic heatwave last month, I couldn’t stop thinking about one thing. Data centres. 

Every time I had a cold shower for a temporary relief, I was haunted by the knowledge that AI data centres are already gobbling up millions of litres of water that they require for cooling, and I became fearful of a day where I might turn on the tap and not be able to get a drop. I would go to my local park to seek shade and a cool breeze to no avail and have pressing visions of superscale data centres that endlessly whir and hum and churn out emissions. This is dystopian, but it’s not unrealistic. Lying on my bedroom floor in front of a fan with a wet flannel on my head, desperately trying to cool down in the middle of the UK’s historic heatwave last month, I couldn’t stop thinking about one thing. Data centres. 

Every time I had a cold shower for a temporary relief, I was haunted by the knowledge that AI data centres are already gobbling up millions of litres of water that they require for cooling, and I became fearful of a day where I might turn on the tap and not be able to get a drop. I would go to my local park to seek shade and a cool breeze to no avail and have pressing visions of superscale data centres that endlessly whir and hum and churn out emissions. This is dystopian, but it’s not unrealistic. 

England is predicted to reach water shortages of 5bn litres a day by 2055. Data centres are increasingly becoming one of the most water-intensive forms of infrastructure and the AI hype is rapidly exacerbating the speed at which our natural resources get stolen by Big Tech. Research by the campaign group Global Action Plan reveals that 84% of projected data centre developments in the UK are expected in areas already water-stressed or projected to be water-stressed by 2040. 

What makes this even more scandalous is the fact that the UK government classified data centres as critical infrastructure in September 2024, ranking them as important as essential services such as water, energy and even emergency services systems. Far from proceeding with caution, the government is bending over backwards to appease AI companies and attract their investment, at the expense of our planet. 

Andy Burnham’s recent appointment of James Purnell – the former chief executive of corporate lobbying firm Flint Global, whose clients included Apple, Google, Amazon and other tech giants – as his chief of staff highlights the revolving-door relationship between lobbyists and government. The EU, which had previously seemed to be taking a stronger stance on regulating the AI industry, is caving in to pressure, and is already preparing to water down plans to rate data centres on energy and water use, after pressure from tech lobby groups.

It’s vital that the next prime minister prioritises public need over private greed if we are to avoid heading straight into a climate crisis sponsored by Silicon Valley

How can we trust that our government will act in our interests when they consistently prioritise Silicon Valley’s financial motives? Eager to position itself as a global leader in the space race unfolding across the AI industry, the UK government is fast-tracking £14bn of private investment into data centres and AI growth zones. 

Quite frankly, it’s insulting that the government has launched their biggest ever campaign to encourage the British public to reduce water usage in a heatwave, while charging full steam ahead with data centre expansion. The government campaign urges Brits to cut their daily use by 28 litres; meanwhile, hyperscale data centres consume the equivalent of 10,000 people’s daily needs in a single day. Time and time again, the onus is put on individuals to make lifestyle changes that will barely make a dent, while tech corporations are given a get-out-of-jail-free card by our governments. 

As it stands, data centres are not required to disclose their water usage, and tech companies that do consistently underestimate their environmental impact. In May, Google’s developers were found to have understated by a factor of five the carbon emissions of two proposed AI data centres in Essex, again highlighting the lack of transparency within the industry. This is why climate charities and local communities are calling for a moratorium on all new data centre developments until necessary environmental regulations are in place. Our politicians ought to be managing data centre development, making decisions that protect our communities from the extractive nature of the AI boom. 

Just a few weeks ago, I helped organise a protest at London’s historic Truman Brewery venue on Brick Lane with Pull The Plug and Global Action Plan, because while the AI hype was being championed locally at the SXSW festival, lots of people weren’t aware of the current plans to turn part of this popular social and creative hub into a data centre. AI data centre development is being rushed through, right under our noses, while we get no say in where they’re built, what resources they access and how they’ll affect our lives. But now, the difficulty of just existing in a heatwave makes the need to push back against AI data centre development in the UK more urgent.

It’s vital that the next prime minister prioritises public need over private greed if we are to avoid heading straight into a climate crisis sponsored by Silicon Valley. Unquestioned AI expansion is directly in conflict with the planet’s limits, and the burden of political shortsightedness will fall on us if our government presses on – manifesting in unbearable temperatures, water and energy scarcity, and loss of life. Across the political spectrum the general public want stronger regulation of AI; politicians ought to see taking a bold stance on AI governance as a political opportunity, not a problem.

Adele Walton is a journalist and online safety campaigner. She is the author of Logging Off: the Human Cost of our Digital World and co-founder of Logging Off Club


July 9, 2026 Posted by | secrets,lies and civil liberties, UK, water | Leave a comment

Scottish climate campaigners condemn new nuclear power plans.

By Nan Spowart, 5 July 26

CLIMATE activists have poured scorn on the UK Government’s attempts to foist new
nuclear power stations on Scotland. Last week saw the publication of a
report by Great British Energy Nuclear, ordered by Energy Secretary Ed
Miliband, which identified multiple sites in Scotland which could be used
for new reactors.

However, this will not fix the energy crisis Scots are
facing, according to climate campaigners, and also flies in the face of
Scottish Government policy which is firmly against new nuclear. Arguments
against new nuclear power stations include their huge expense, the amount
of time it takes before they are operational and the problems regarding
waste disposal.

“Instead of sinking billions of pounds into nuclear
power, investment should be channelled into renewable energy and other
projects that tackle climate change and benefit society,” said Fraser
Sutherland, coalition manager for Stop Climate Chaos Scotland. “We must
ensure Scots get their fair share of the wealth that comes from our natural
resources by increasing community and municipal ownership of renewables
schemes and building a solid Scottish manufacturing industry for the
sector.”

He pointed out that while nuclear power is often described as
“clean”, this ignores the climate emissions and resources used in
construction and operation of the plants. “Additionally, there are
significant uncertainties and lack of long-term plans relating to the
disposal of radioactive waste and decommissioning, meaning these reactors
are not a sustainable solution to our energy needs,” said Sutherland.

 The National 5th July 2026, https://www.thenational.scot/news/26253766.scottish-climate-campaigners-condemn-new-nuclear-power-plans/

July 9, 2026 Posted by | UK | Leave a comment

As in Gaza, the Israel-Lebanon ‘peace’ agreement is designed to fail


Qassam Mijaddi, Mondoweiss,Thu, 02 Jul 2026 ,
https://www.sott.net/article/507264-As-in-Gaza-the-Israel-Lebanon-peace-agreement-is-designed-to-fail

Israel’s conditioning of its withdrawal from southern Lebanon on the disarmament of Hezbollah mirrors its strategy in Gaza:

Insist on terms that are impossible to implement to justify its constant state of war.

Israel has finally reached an agreement to end its war on Lebanon after ambassadors from both countries signed a “framework” agreement in Washington, D.C. last week that laid out conditions for Israel’s phased withdrawal from southern Lebanon. There’s just one problem: the party that signed the deal from the Lebanese side isn’t the same party doing the fighting, and the terms of the withdrawal are conditioned on the disarmament of the very party that wasn’t a part of the negotiations to begin with.

As a result, it’s hardly surprising that a section of the Lebanese political establishment regards the U.S.-brokered trilateral agreement with skepticism. The agreement ostensibly charts a pathway to ending Israel’s war, but conditioned on Hezbollah’s disarmament — and without it being a part of the agreement. Instead, the agreement calls on the Lebanese army to disarm the group, a feat which the Israeli army itself has been unable to achieve.

So the question becomes: whywould Israel insist on terms that make the entire agreement impossible to implement? The answer becomes clearer when considering Israel’s treatment of Gaza’s so-called “ceasefire.”

Israel has conditioned its withdrawal from Gaza on the total disarmament of Hamas and every other faction in Gaza. Such a condition, even if Hamas were willing to implement it, is practically impossible given the ubiquitous presence of arms in Gaza and the presence of Israeli-armed gangs. But as has been pointed outthe impracticality of these terms is a trap meant to ensure Israel’s continued occupation of most of the Strip.

When we examine the contents of the recent agreement between Israel and Lebanon, it’s hard not to reach the same conclusion.

What’s in the agreement?

The agreement stipulates the end of the state of war between Israel and Lebanon and the formation of a task force to begin the drafting of a comprehensive peace accord. But more immediately, the agreement introduces a particular framework for how Israel would withdraw from occupied Lebanese territory.

Israel’s withdrawal, which would ostensibly be accompanied by the redeployment of the Lebanese army in all of Lebanon’s territory, starting with two “pilot zones,” is all hinging on the Lebanese army disarming “non-government groups” — mainly Hezbollah — and dismantling their military infrastructure. In exchange, the agreement previews a package of U.S. economic aid to Lebanon aimed at reconstruction and boosting the country’s economy, and the creation of a special “security coordination team” between Israel and Lebanon, supervised by the U.S. This is the part of the agreement that is being publicly celebrated. But there is more.

According to Israel’s Channel 12, the agreement includes a secret security annex, as later confirmed to the media by sources close to the Lebanese government, that would give Israel “freedom of military action” within the area still occupied by Israel. According to the leaked information, the annex also ties Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanese territory to the success of the disarmament process, rather than according to a fixed timetable.

The terms of the agreement — both the public part and the leaked annex — explain the polarized reaction from Lebanese political forces.

A recipe for internal bloodshed

Lebanese President Joseph Aoun has hailed the U.S.-brokered framework as a “major diplomatic achievement” and a first step toward restoring Lebanon’s full sovereignty. The head of the right-wing Phalange party, Sami Gemayel, a prominent opponent of Hezbollah, called the agreement “an achievement” that “guarantees the monopoly of arms by the state.”

But other parts of the Lebanese political landscape, including allies with Hezbollah, blasted the agreement as unworkable. The speaker of the Lebanese parliament, Nabih Berri, described the agreement as “dictations” by the U.S., while a leading member of the Lebanese Communist Party, Hanna Ghareeb, rejected it as “a step towards normalization” of relations with Israel. Walid Jumblatt, the Druze leader and former head of the Progressive Socialist Party, slammed the agreement as “trilateral in form but unilateral in substance,” adding that it ignored the 1949 armistice agreement with Israel, which he argued weakens Lebanon’s position and legitimacy. Most importantly, the party directly concerned by the agreement, Hezbollah, categorically rejected it.

Hezbollah’s secretary-general, Naim Qassem,said that the agreement is a “concession over Lebanon’s sovereignty,” stressing that conditioning Israel’s withdrawal from Lebanon on the disarmament of Hezbollah “crosses all red lines” and “legitimizes the occupation of Lebanese lands for many long years to come.” Qassem declared that Hezbollah did not recognize the agreement and considered it void, calling on the Lebanese state to back down.

Lebanese critics of the agreement have also warned that the stipulation calling on the Lebanese army to disarm Hezbollah directly is a recipe for internal conflict and would result in intra-Lebanese bloodshed.

Even Israeli critics have pointed out the fact that Hezbollah, which has remained intact as a fighting force in the face of Israel’s military pressure, would be put in a position to consolidate itself regardless of what Israel does: if Israel withdraws from Lebanon,Hezbollah will claim victory and use it as an argument to keep its arms,and if Israel does not withdraw,Hezbollah will claim that it needs to keep its arms to push Israel out.

In other words, since the agreement sidelines Hezbollah and makes the Lebanese state the main actor, implementing the agreement appears impossible without devolving into something resembling a civil war. The Lebanese state might give Israel all the security guarantees that it demands on paper, but neither Israel nor the Lebanese state has been able to wrest any such concessions from Hezbollah.

So while the rhetorical concessions made to Israel are politically significant (given that they are made by the Lebanese state), they have no apparent way of being implemented on the ground.

This discrepancy, then, might indicate that the entire agreement was designed to fail. This becomes easier to understand once we look at where Israel has tried such agreements elsewhere. And one doesn’t need to look very far.

The Gaza déjà vu

When the ceasefire agreement in Gaza was reached last October, it stipulated three phases for Israel’s withdrawal from the Strip, which was supposed to be accompanied by an increase in the entry of humanitarian aid and the start of reconstruction. Only the first phase was partially implemented, with Israel withdrawing its forces to the so-called “Yellow Line” that divided Gaza roughly in half. Israel has since conditioned its move to the second phase on the full disarmament of Hamas and other resistance groups in Gaza — an almost identical arrangement to the Lebanon agreement. And just like in Lebanon, the Gaza ceasefire terms, as originally conceived in Trump’s 20-point plan, remained deliberately vague on what disarmament would look like, making it easy for Israel to claim at any time in the future that the conditions for disarmament haven’t been met.

During recent months, Israel has shifted toward pushing for a maximalist vision of disarmament, which first surfaced last March during direct talks between the head of Trump’s “Board of Peace,” Nikolay Mladenov, and Palestinian factions in Gaza. In subsequent talks, Mladenov issued an ultimatum to Hamas and other Palestinian factions that Gaza must be fully disarmed as a precondition for Israeli withdrawal and the beginning of reconstruction, down to the last rifle and pistol.

Hamas leaders have since characterized Mladenov’s conditions as an almost verbatim repetition of Israel’s maximalist terms, regarding Mladenov as a biased and compromised actor.

Such a demand is impossible to meet due to the ubiquity of light personal weapons in Gaza, which are privately owned by families and clans, while several factions other than Hamas are also in possession of light weapons. Moreover, Gaza’s Israeli-backed militias are heavily armed and have vowed to destroy Hamas, meaning that any voluntary disarmament would leave the group vulnerable to its rivals and result in chaos and a security vacuum. For Israel, chaos and internal Palestinian strife would be a welcome consequence that allows it to maintain the occupation of Gaza indefinitely.

Even if Hamas were to attempt to comply with these terms, Israel could easily claim the inevitable continuation of light weapons possession in Gaza as evidence that Hamas has not fulfilled its end of the bargain.

Meanwhile, Israeli forces continue to demolish Palestinian homes and other structures in the part of Gaza that they directly control, which now comprises over 65% of the Strip, destroying any chance of Palestinians returning.

It’s almost as if, in both Lebanon and Gaza, the impossibility of implementing the agreements is the point: Israel uses the lack of disarmament as the pretext to continue occupying Lebanese and Palestinian territory, and it justifies its constant state of war with the need to disarm Hezbollah and Hamas.

For Netanyahu, who is months away from elections and whose chances of winning remain uncertain in the polls, continued war is a political necessity.

July 9, 2026 Posted by | Israel, politics international | Leave a comment

Clearwater ship has been ejected from 250 Hudson sail by US government

Joyce Hanson, 4 July 26

Clearwater was told they MUST REMOVE THE BANNERS before we re-enter the inner NY harbor to return to our berth in Brooklyn. At that point we will be a private vessel (no longer part of Sail250), Sail 250 will be over, yet the US Govt will still be afraid of our message. 

On the Hudson River Sloop Clearwater as part of the Sail250 parade, we have been TURNED AROUND by the US Coast Guard and removed from the parade. 

Threatened with arrest if we did not comply!  This decision was not made by the organizers of Sail 250, but by the USGovt. 

I guess our banners are scary.  They say: “Indigenous Rights – Racial Justice  – Climate Solutions” on the starboard side, and “Save the Clean Water Act” on the port side.

Now (11:45) ordered to remain south of the Verezzano Bridge until 15:00. We are forbidden to enter the “security zone” of the Sail 250, so we’re sailing around Gravesend Bay. 

July 9, 2026 Posted by | Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Local protests derail US data centre ‘monstrosity’ backed by Wall Street giant

 Local protesters have hailed victory after a US investment giant abandoned
plans for a data centre “monstrosity” that would have been built on the
edge of a historic battlefield in Virginia. QTS, which is owned by Wall
Street investor Blackstone, dropped a proposal for what would have been the
world’s largest data centre after a wave of protests and local lawsuits.
The termination represents a landmark win for local activism as protesters
across the US attempt to turn the tide against AI data-centre construction
projects worth hundreds of billions of dollars.

 Telegraph 3rd July 2026,
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2026/07/03/local-protests-derail-us-data-centre-monstrosity/

July 9, 2026 Posted by | business and costs | Leave a comment

Can provocative climate messaging on OnlyFans cut through social media’s noise?

by Jessica Riches, July 2, 2026, https://www.positive.news/environment/can-provocative-climate-messaging-on-only-fans-cut-through-social-medias-noise/

A climate narrator is using OnlyFans to reach new audiences in unlikely places. It turns out, people listen

As part of a climate communications project, I joined OnlyFans. It wasn’t a publicity stunt, it was an attempt to answer a question that sits at the heart of my work: if the climate crisis is one of the defining issues of our time, why do so many people still tune out?

My job is to help ordinary people understand existential risks to humanity in a way that does not make them want to switch off. Some people wonder why that job needs to exist at all. If terrible things are coming, surely humanity should respond at the level of the risk?

Sadly, humans are not rational, and fossil fuel companies have preyed on that knowledge for decades. Since the industry first learned of its own polluting powers, it has spent tens of billions of dollars trying to influence public opinion, lobby governments and spread climate doubt among ordinary people.

If that bored you, there’s a reason for that. I just shared alarming facts with no emotional experience, no solution, no way through. And you do not know me, so why should you listen?

The human brain is not built to absorb warnings about slow-moving, existential threats when they come with no clear route out, so turning away is not irrational, it is protective. What a lot of people never hear is that there is a lot we can do, both to stop the climate crisis getting worse and to adapt to what has already happened. Part of my work is finding new ways to share that information, and to cut through the confusion created by fossil fuel billionaires.

That is where Headline Newds came from. Some of the most intimate parasocial relationships that exist right now, especially among people climate communications often fail to reach, are on OnlyFans, the online subscription platform favoured by adult content creators. So what would happen if we worked with comedy and OnlyFans stars to communicate urgent climate science, political context and solutions to people who usually scroll past this stuff?

It turns out, people listen. We’ve had millions of views on our videos, and in my DMs I hear from men who are dismayed by our governments’ response to the climate crisis, scared for the future of ocean life and angry about the lies they have been fed by corporations for years. Many are lonely, or grew up in a generation where expressing emotion was punished, and most have never had climate messaging reach them in a way they connected with.

That is the impact of meeting people where they are, rather than where the climate sector wishes they were. Story and entertainment can help complex messages land because our brains lower their defences when they are immersed in rich worlds, humour and emotional character journeys. But we are also living in a different information economy, where influencers shape what people believe every day. A 30-second political aside in a gaming stream can be far more persuasive than a political ad, while right-wing political content now dominates the influencer ecosystem.

We would have reached even more people if the accounts of all our creators had not been shadowbanned by Instagram, which means the algorithm will not recommend their content to non-followers because it may be deemed “offensive”. Content moderation has an important role to play, particularly on platforms used by children, but it is striking what is deemed dangerous. 

Most have never had climate messaging reach them in a way they connected with

The policing of women’s bodies has stopped us reaching wider audiences, yet there is still more stigma attached to showing human flesh, and celebrating the most natural instincts of desire and connection, than there is to destroying the earth for profit. As a white middle-class woman with a ‘real’ job that nobody understands, I am largely protected from that stigma, and I joined OnlyFans myself as a message to the climate communications industry that we have to try everything and be everywhere if we want to cut through a media ecosystem designed to suppress us.

I might not be providing the type of comfort people are used to finding on OnlyFans, but I can tell them that the apocalypse they are used to seeing is not inevitable. We know how to survive the impacts that we are too late to reverse and, more importantly, we know how to stop it getting worse. What we have to do now is dismantle the systems that politicians, fossil fuel billionaires and the media they own have built to protect the status quo and prevent meaningful climate action.

July 9, 2026 Posted by | climate change | Leave a comment

Dunfermline MSP speaks out at possible Longannet nuclear site

By Hannah Emma Shedden, 3rd July, https://www.dunfermlinepress.com/news/26250982.dunfermline-msp-speaks-possible-longannet-nuclear-site/

Ms Somerville has now written to the UK’s Minister of State for Energy, Michael Shanks, urging him to remove the site from consideration.

July 9, 2026 Posted by | politics, UK | Leave a comment