Get the best positive, solutions-oriented stories we've seen on the intersection of our health and environment, FREE every Tuesday in your inbox. Subscribe here today. Keep the change tomorrow.
President-elect Donald Trump has nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an outspoken critic of corporate influence in health and environmental policy, as Secretary of Health and Human Services. What could it mean for public health?
Kennedy aims to overhaul U.S. health regulations, targeting corporate influence over food, chemical and vaccine safety.
He plans to push for bans on pesticides, genetically modified organisms and certain food additives, challenging the current regulatory stance.
Known for vaccine skepticism, Kennedy calls for reassessing vaccine safety approvals, a position that has raised alarm among health experts.
Key quote:
“When we talk about making America healthy, we really have to talk about corporate capture and the way that large corporations have captured our governmental agencies.”
— Jeff Hutt, spokesperson for the Make America Healthy Again PAC
Why this matters:
Kennedy’s proposed regulatory shifts could reshape public health protections, influencing the safety of food, drugs and vaccines. While he claims it’s about transparency, his position has alarmed health experts who argue it could dismantle trust in health institutions, undermine hard-won public health victories and leave the U.S. in regulatory limbo. Read more: Peter Dykstra: WTF RFK Jr.?
Katharine Hayhoe, a climate scientist and Christian, calls for unity and hope in addressing climate issues, emphasizing that fear will hinder, not help, the climate fight.
She believes addressing climate change requires multi-faceted solutions that bring health, economic and environmental benefits, arguing that collaboration is essential.
Drawing from her faith, Hayhoe explains that resilience, empowerment and love for others should guide responses to climate challenges.
Key quote:
“A hurricane does not knock on your door and ask you which political party you’re registered with before it destroys your home.”
— Dr. Katharine Hayhoe, chief scientist, The Nature Conservancy
Why this matters:
After the recent election, Hayhoe is offering a message that’s a mix of pragmatic hope and call-to-arms unity. In her view, climate action should reflect a love for the world and each other, with the message that if we can pull together—scientists, doctors, advocates, parents, everyone—we can build a stronger, healthier and more sustainable future.
Donald Trump’s campaign pledge to end offshore wind development through an executive order could be blocked by legal challenges, but his administration could still create significant delays for the industry.
Trump’s proposed executive order to halt offshore wind development would likely face legal challenges and delays.
Experts say that Trump’s administration could slow offshore wind growth by halting new lease sales and delaying federal permits, increasing financing costs.
Offshore wind has drawn billions in U.S. investments, though the sector remains vulnerable to policy shifts and cost inflation.
Key quote:
“There’s a sense that this change will bring a lot of regulatory uncertainty at the federal level.”
— Jeremy McDiarmid, Advanced Energy United
Why this matters:
Offshore wind is a critical resource for U.S. coastal states aiming to reduce carbon emissions. If Trump follows through on his threat to hinder the sector, it could stall efforts to reach state and federal clean energy targets, affecting job growth, energy costs and climate goals.
U.S. diplomats, with support from ClimeCo and other companies, have negotiated a reduction in nitrous oxide emissions at Chinese chemical plants, a major win in the battle against climate super pollutants.
ClimeCo, a Pennsylvania-based company, has partnered with four Chinese factories to nearly eliminate nitrous oxide emissions, a potent greenhouse gas from nylon production.
Nitrous oxide has 273 times the warming potential of carbon dioxide and is the third largest contributor to climate change, behind carbon dioxide and methane.
Emission reductions from the Chinese plants could cut the equivalent of 45 million metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, likened to removing 11 million cars from the road.
Key quote:
“That is over 50 coal-fired power plants’ worth of emissions every year, year on year, that we simply can get at by working together.”
— Rick Duke, the U.S. deputy special envoy for climate
Why this matters:
Reducing nitrous oxide emissions from industrial sources could prevent millions of premature deaths linked to air pollution. These efforts highlight the potential for public-private partnerships in tackling super pollutants that drive global warming.
Despite Shell’s court victory in overturning a ruling to cut emissions, legal experts say climate lawsuits against corporations are likely to increase.
A Dutch court ruled in Shell’s favor, overturning a 2021 mandate requiring the oil giant to reduce emissions by 45% by 2030.
The court acknowledged that Shell, as a major oil company, has a responsibility to reduce emissions but declined to impose specific legal targets.
Experts say this decision still paves the way for future litigation, as courts may hold companies accountable for emissions under evolving European Union regulations.
Key quote:
“The court makes it abundantly clear that not only countries, but also companies, have a responsibility to reduce their emissions in line with the Paris climate agreement.”
— Roger Cox, attorney for Milieudefensie
Why this matters:
As climate change worsens, corporate emissions are increasingly under scrutiny. Legal precedents like this may pressure firms to align with global climate goals or face rising legal risks, especially as new regulatory frameworks come into play.
New York’s unseasonable November wildfires, fueled by severe drought and high temperatures, signal a troubling shift in the region’s climate resilience.
Fires erupted in New York’s Prospect Park and the New York-New Jersey border, reflecting an unusual spread of wildfires across the Northeast.
Severe drought and record high temperatures in October have created dry, fire-prone conditions across the region.
Climatologists warn that elevated temperatures through the fall exacerbate water scarcity and wildfire risk in areas unaccustomed to such extremes.
Key quote:
Climate change “is no longer theoretical or a distant threat, an abstract one. It is not something that happens in the future here. It is not something only happening in places far away from where we live. All weather is now being affected.”
— Aradhna Tripati, climate scientist at UCLA
Why this matters:
The East Coast, traditionally humid and fire-resistant, faces intensifying droughts and wildfire risks that challenge water resources and public safety. As climate change disrupts seasonal norms, communities must adapt to new hazards previously limited largely to more arid regions.
An ongoing drought, the worst in a century, has pushed 27 million people in southern Africa to the brink of starvation, with failed crops and depleted food supplies affecting entire communities.
Southern Africa faces a severe drought caused by El Niño, devastating crop yields and accelerating food scarcity.
The World Food Programme (WFP) estimates 21 million children in the region are malnourished, while 27 million people lack reliable food access.
Rising temperatures and erratic rainfall, likely due to climate change, worsen agricultural conditions, leading to extended hunger seasons and economic distress.
Key quote:
“If you look at rainfall patterns, if you look at drought patterns within the region, we cannot point to any other factor than climate change.”
— Eric Perdison, WFP southern Africa director
Why this matters:
This drought highlights the immediate impact of climate change on food security and rural communities in vulnerable regions. As extreme weather patterns become more frequent, millions face intensified hunger and instability, underscoring the need for global action and local support to prevent widespread suffering.
A massive push for hydrogen energy is one of the first test cases of new federal environmental justice initiatives. Communities and advocates so far give the feds a failing grade.
El impulso masivo a la energía del hidrógeno es la primera prueba de fuego de las nuevas iniciativas federales de justicia medioambiental. Hasta ahora, comunidades y activistas le dan una pésima calificación al gobierno federal.
