By 2045, there will be 130 million people who migrated because of desertification, and out of them, 60 million will come from south of the Sahel and Africa.
The Trump administration is reviving efforts to overturn the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's endangerment finding, a rule that compels the agency to regulate greenhouse gases as harmful pollutants, despite legal and industry resistance.
The endangerment finding, established in 2009, legally requires the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Overturning it would weaken climate policies.
The fossil fuel industry and conservative allies have long fought the rule but failed in court. Even business groups that once opposed it now see climate regulations as inevitable.
Legal experts say reversing the rule would be difficult, given past U.S. Supreme Court rulings and the overwhelming scientific evidence supporting the need for climate action.
Key quote:
“It’s a finding about greenhouse gasses based on science. It will be hard to convince a court — even a court with Republican-appointed judges — that the science somehow isn’t there to support this finding.”
— Jody Freeman, director of the Environmental & Energy Law Program at Harvard Law School
Why this matters:
The endangerment finding is the legal backbone of federal climate regulations in the United States. Issued by the EPA in 2009, it determined that greenhouse gases pose a danger to public health and welfare, giving the federal government authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate emissions. If that finding were to be eliminated, the federal government would lose its most powerful tool for curbing climate pollution. Without this authority, regulations on power plants, vehicles and industrial emissions could be stripped away, leaving states to navigate a fragmented regulatory landscape.
The Senate has confirmed former New York congressman Lee Zeldin as the new head of the Environmental Protection Agency, signaling a shift in federal environmental policy as the Trump administration moves to scale back regulations and shrink the agency's workforce.
Zeldin, a Trump ally with limited environmental experience, was confirmed 56-42 with support from three Democrats. His appointment is in keeping with the administration’s broader effort to weaken regulations seen as burdensome to industry.
The EPA has already begun restructuring under Trump, including offering “deferred resignation” packages to employees and firing scientific advisors from key regulatory committees.
Trump has also moved to freeze federal funding under Biden’s climate law, stalling billions in clean-energy grants, while industry groups praise Zeldin’s confirmation as a win for deregulation.
Key quote:
“I have nothing against Lee Zeldin personally, but the likelihood of him standing against that fossil fuel bulldozer that is coming at him is essentially zero.”
— U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, D-RI
Why this matters:
While industry groups celebrate their new ally at the helm, environmental advocates warn that this could mean more rollbacks on air and water protections — setting the stage for years of legal battles.
European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is pushing to simplify environmental reporting laws, a move critics say could weaken European Union climate policies.
The European Commission plans to reduce reporting obligations for companies under its environmental rules, aiming to ease compliance costs and boost economic competitiveness.
The proposal targets laws requiring businesses to report greenhouse gas emissions, water usage and supply chain impacts, with potential revisions to the EU Taxonomy for green investments.
Environmental groups warn that scaling back these regulations could undermine the EU Green Deal and set a precedent for further deregulation.
Key quote:
“This could be an extremely problematic precedent” and a possible “first step in the deregulation wave across Europe.”
— Tsvetelina Kuzmanova, Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership
Why this matters:
The EU has long been at the forefront of climate regulation, with policies that often set the standard for other nations. A rollback now could signal a retreat from that role, raising questions about whether other global powers might follow suit. With key environmental goals on the line, the outcome of this debate could shape the future of corporate climate responsibility far beyond Europe’s borders.
A proposed California law would hold fossil fuel companies financially responsible for climate change-related disasters, aiming to shift costs from homeowners and insurers to the industry.
State Sen. Scott Wiener introduced a bill on Monday to make oil and gas companies liable for damages from climate change, similar to how utilities are held responsible for wildfires sparked by their equipment.
The legislation would allow California’s last-resort insurance provider to sue fossil fuel companies to recover costs instead of passing them on to consumers.
The proposal follows worsening wildfires in California, with insurers pulling back from the market due to escalating disaster costs.
Key quote:
“By forcing the fossil fuel companies driving the climate crisis to pay their fair share, we can help stabilize our insurance market and make the victims of climate disasters whole.”
— Scott Wiener, California state senator
Why this matters:
California is grappling with a troubling nexus of climate-driven disasters and their cascading impacts on its economy, particularly in the insurance sector. Wildfires, droughts and flooding have grown more severe and frequent in recent years, pushing insurers to either raise premiums or pull out of the market altogether. Homeowners are left scrambling for affordable coverage, and some are being forced to turn to California’s high-risk insurance pool — a last-resort option with steep costs. Proponents argue that shifting some financial responsibility onto polluters could alleviate the burden on taxpayers and homeowners while reducing the fossil fuel industry’s sway over climate policy.
A new analysis links the extreme dryness fueling this month’s Los Angeles wildfires to climate change, making such conditions 35% more likely and increasing fire-prone days in the region.
Wildfires in Los Angeles have burned 50,000 acres, killed at least 28 people and destroyed 16,000 structures, with climate change increasing the likelihood of the extreme drought that fueled them.
A study by World Weather Attribution found Southern California now has 23 more fire-prone days annually, with worsening "weather whiplash" alternating between wet growth seasons and prolonged drought.
The Santa Ana winds, which helped spread the fires, are not caused by climate change. Human development in fire-prone areas and ignition sources like electrical lines also contribute to wildfire risk.
Key quote:
“Drought conditions are more frequently pushing into winter, increasing the chance a fire will break out during strong Santa Ana winds that can turn small ignitions into deadly infernos.”
— Clair Barnes, researcher at World Weather Attribution, Imperial College London Centre for Environmental Policy
Why this matters:
With climate change extending drought conditions, Los Angeles and other fire-prone areas face more frequent and severe wildfires. Communities rebuilding must adapt to a hotter, drier future, but fireproofing homes and infrastructure is costly. Without significant emissions cuts, fire risks will continue to grow.
An Israeli man facing extradition to the U.S. claims in court filings that Exxon Mobil and lobbying firm DCI Group were involved in a hacking campaign targeting climate advocates.
Court filings from Amit Forlit, an Israeli citizen charged with hacking, allege that Exxon and DCI Group commissioned efforts to steal information from environmental activists involved in climate lawsuits against oil companies.
The U.S. government is seeking Forlit’s extradition, linking him to a broader hacking ring that targeted climate activists from 2012 to 2019. Exxon and DCI deny involvement.
Documents obtained through the hacking were used in Exxon’s legal defense against lawsuits seeking damages for climate-related impacts.
Key quote:
“Perpetrators are rarely caught in hacking cases, so we feel fortunate that people are being held to account for these crimes apparently committed on behalf of Exxon by surrogates all the way from Washington to Israel to India and back.”
— Kert Davies, Center for Climate Integrity
Why this matters:
Allegations that ExxonMobil and a lobbying firm linked to the oil giant supported hacking efforts have raised fresh concerns about corporate interference in climate litigation. If the claims hold up, they could suggest a broader pattern of attempts to undercut legal challenges aimed at holding fossil fuel companies accountable for their role in climate change. The outcome of these cases could set precedents with massive financial consequences, making them some of the most consequential litigation efforts in recent history. Whether or not Exxon is found to have played a role, the controversy highlights the increasingly aggressive tactics in the fight over who should pay for the costs of a warming world.
President Trump’s executive order halting offshore wind projects threatens thousands of manufacturing jobs, with most supply-chain investments located in Republican congressional districts.
Over 64% of offshore wind supply-chain investments, totaling $3.4 billion, are in Republican districts, yet Trump’s order pauses new leases, permits and loans for wind energy.
The freeze could stall manufacturing contracts in 40 states, including projects in Texas, Ohio and Wisconsin, where companies are adapting oil industry technology for wind energy.
Union leaders and lawmakers warn that Trump’s stance may hinder U.S. clean energy manufacturing, potentially benefiting China’s dominance in the sector.
Key quote:
“I thought that a lot of these Republican governors and senators would tell [Trump] not to kill this stuff. … I don’t wish any community to suffer job losses like ours just did.”
— Jim Pimental, president of the Southeastern Massachusetts Building Trades Council
Why this matters:
Offshore wind energy has rapidly emerged as a cornerstone of the clean energy transition, offering a powerful tool to combat climate change while bolstering economic growth. The industry has already created thousands of jobs in construction, engineering and maintenance, particularly in coastal communities, and is poised to expand further as the U.S. races to meet ambitious renewable energy targets. But regulatory delays, political opposition and supply chain challenges could impede the sector’s growth, leaving local economies vulnerable and reducing opportunities for job creation.
Prisons, jails and detention centers are placed in locations where environmental hazards such as toxic landfills, floods and extreme heat are the norm.
