War impacts us in many more ways than we realise. When conflicts erupt, people suffer immediately. Civilians lose their lives, families flee their homes, and communities are torn apart. But wars also send shockwaves far beyond the front lines: through our energy systems, our economies, and the climate.

Right now, we’re watching this unfold in real time. A few weeks ago, on 28 February 2026, the United States and Israel launched military strikes on Iran, triggering a rapid escalation across the Southwest Asia (the Middle East)*. Iran struck back at US bases, Gulf states, and oil infrastructure across the region — and declared the Strait of Hormuz closed to shipping. This region sits on more than half the world’s oil reserves. What happens there doesn’t stay there. Within days, the price of oil and gas across the world was in chaos, and everyone everywhere started footing the bill.

What is the Strait of Hormuz and why is it so important?

The Strait of Hormuz is a narrow strip of sea between Iran and Oman. It connects the Persian Gulf to the Gulf of Oman and rest of the world’s oceans. It is only about 33 km wide at its narrowest point: roughly the sort of distance you could cycle in an hour.

But its size is deceptive. The strait carries one-fifth of all the oil consumed globally every day, as well as large quantities of gas. Oil and gas from Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Kuwait, and the UAE must pass through it before reaching the rest of the world. Any disruption like conflict, attacks, or blockades can instantly shake energy supply worldwide.

The Gulf of Oman connects the Arabian Sea with the Strait of Hormuz. Photo: picture alliance/dpa/NASA/The Visible Earth

Following the strikes on 28 February, Iran shut down the strait, not by a formal blockade but through military actions and threats which have made the strait too dangerous for most commercial vessels and caused major disruption to global oil shipping in March 2026.  Around 1000 vessels, including over 400 oil tankers, are currently backed up or waiting near the Strait of Hormuz. Oil traffic has dropped by approximately 70%. Roughly $20 million barrels of oil per day are now off the market, which around 20% of energy the world consumes. Iran also struck a major refinery in Saudi Arabia and a gas facility in Qatar, taking about 20% of the world’s natural gas supply offline.  

Analysts warn that if the strait stays closed, oil could spike to $150 a barrel. Every time that number goes up, your bills go up too. 

How this conflict is hitting our household bills

In the first week after the conflict began, Europe effectively paid around €1.4 billion extra for gas, according to new analysis by 350.org. Gas prices jumped from around €30 per megawatt hour to nearly €50 — a spike driven purely by market fear about supply disruptions. For households and businesses already struggling with high living costs, these spikes translate quickly into higher bills and deeper economic pressure.

Oil prices also spiked around 8% in a single day. By the end of that week, oil had surged 36% to over $90 a barrel. Diesel prices in Europe doubled. Jet fuel prices in Asia rose by nearly 200%.

Europe is not alone. Around 84% of the oil that flows through the Strait of Hormuz goes to Asia, meaning more import-dependent countries are now all facing supply disruptions. In India, restaurants are warning of shutdowns as governments ration gas. Thailand has suspended civil servant travel. The Philippines and Vietnam have introduced workplace measures to cut energy use. 

Fossil fuels are driving both this conflict and the climate crisis

While the conflict continues and fuel prices spike, the deeper crisis keeps accelerating. Fossil fuel-induced global warming has nearly doubled in pace since 2015 — rising from about 0.2°C per decade to roughly 0.35°C per decade. At this rate, the world could breach 1.5°C of warming within just a few years. New research also suggests sea levels may be significantly higher than previously estimated. All these changes will (and already) have significant impacts on our lives and livelihoods.

The fossil fuelled system driving geopolitical instability is the same one pushing us toward climate breakdown.

The real lesson from the Strait of Hormuz

The Strait of Hormuz shows us something we already knew but perhaps keep forgetting: fossil fuels are not just dirty. They are dangerous. They tie the price of heating or cooling your home to wars you have no say in. And they give enormous power to whoever controls the pipelines, the tankers, and the chokepoints.

Oil tankers pass through the Strait of Hormuz, prior to the conflict. Photo: REUTERS/Hamad I Mohammed

Renewable energy offers a fundamentally different way of powering our world. Locally-led solar and wind systems cannot be blockaded at sea. They do not spill into oceans. They do not tie your energy bills to conflicts happening thousands of kilometres away. And once built, renewables provide energy for decades while fossil fuels must be burned and re-supplied every day. They are a long term solution for stability and lower prices. 

Every step away from fossil fuels is a step away from the instability and wars that come with them.

*The conflict is first and foremost a human tragedy. As violence escalates in the region, we mourn the lives lost and stand with the communities whose homes and futures are being shattered.

The post All you need to know about the Strait of Hormuz appeared first on 350.

This is a guest article written by Mariel Vilella, Director Global Climate Program at the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives, which supports local environmental justice efforts around the world to end waste pollution and implement regenerative zero waste solutions.

Around the world, momentum is growing to tackle the waste crisis in ways that also confront climate change, protect health, and strengthen local economies. This shift reflects a simple truth: the future of waste is not burning, it is prevention, reuse, recycling, and composting.

Recent reporting by the BBC described waste incineration as the dirtiest form of energy generation in the United Kingdom, reinforcing long-standing scientific and community concerns. Far from being a clean solution, waste-to-energy (WTE) incineration accelerates climate pollution, destroys valuable resources, and locks cities into outdated systems just when a circular, low-carbon transition is most urgent.

Burning waste drives the climate crisis

Incinerators convert nearly all carbon in discarded materials directly into CO₂, releasing it immediately into the atmosphere. Plastics, derived from fossil fuels, are especially harmful: burning one metric ton of plastic waste produces about 1.43 metric tons of CO₂-equivalent, even when energy is recovered.

Rather than reducing emissions, WTE reinforces the same linear model responsible for environmental breakdown, resource extraction, overproduction, and overconsumption. It delays the systemic change required to meet global climate goals.

The WTE incineration industry often portrays criticism of their facilities as emotional or ideological rather than science-based. This is an old-fashioned tactic to undermine the real concerns people have and the growing body of scientific evidence showing just how problematic burning waste is.

Incineration plant converts the waste into ash, flue gas and heat. Source: Trish Walker/Flickr

Lock-in that blocks the circular economy

Large incinerators require enormous and continuous waste streams, often 100,000 tonnes or more every year for decades, to remain financially viable. The United Nations Environment Programme warns that such investments can create long-term lock-in, discouraging waste prevention, reuse, and recycling while even pushing municipalities to import waste to keep facilities running.

Several high-income regions that heavily invested in incineration, across Europe and parts of Asia—now face overcapacity, stranded assets, and slowed progress toward resource efficiency, often so-called circularity. These experiences show that burning waste is not a bridge to sustainability, but a barrier.

Toxic pollution and hidden costs

Incineration does not eliminate waste, it transforms it into toxic air pollution and hazardous ash. Between 25% and 30% of burned material remains as contaminated residues that must be landfilled under strict controls. Monitoring near incinerators has revealed dangerous dioxin contamination in soil, vegetation, and food sources, with public health authorities in parts of France warning residents not to consume locally produced eggs due to toxic exposure.

These burdens fall disproportionately on marginalized communities, raising profound environmental justice concerns. For example, in the UK, waste incinerators are three times as likely to be located in the most deprived and ethnically diverse areas, raising fears about air quality and the health of vulnerable people. This pattern is not unique to the UK; around the world, wealthier neighborhoods rarely have incinerators at their doorstep, while poorer communities bear the brunt of the pollution and risks.

Expensive energy that wastes resources

Despite being framed as energy infrastructure, WTE is inefficient and costly:

• Electricity generation efficiency typically reaches only 20–30%, meaning it produces power at less than half the efficiency of coal-fired and modern natural gas power plants.
• Incinerators contribute around 1% of Europe’s total energy demand.
• Valuable materials, and the energy embedded in producing them, are permanently destroyed.

In many lower-income countries (e.g. Ethiopia), high organic moisture content makes incineration technically unreliable, leading to failed or underperforming projects. Far cheaper and more effective climate solutions already exist.

A just transition means choosing zero waste

A truly sustainable waste and climate strategy must also deliver a just transition. In contrast to that, waste-to-energy incineration displaces the livelihoods of waste pickers and recycling workers, especially across the Global South, where millions depend on materials recovery for income, but also in the Global North, where reuse, repair, and recycling create far more employment than disposal.

By destroying recyclable materials and centralizing waste management, incineration replaces many community-based jobs with fewer capital-intensive roles. Zero waste systems do the opposite, expanding dignified work in collection, sorting, composting, reuse, and recycling while strengthening local economies and delivering rapid climate benefits.

This is why movements led by the Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives and Zero Waste Europe are calling for:

• An end to new incineration projects
• Accountability for the toxic impacts of existing facilities
• Public investment in prevention, reuse, and recycling
• Policies that prioritize zero waste solutions and just transition for workers’ rights

Our campaigns and research make clear that burning waste undermines climate action, public health, and economic justice, while zero waste delivers benefits across all three.

Free plough on landfill site image, public domain CC0 photo. Photo: rawpixel.com

The global shift is already underway

Governments, cities, and communities are increasingly moving beyond incineration toward circular, low-carbon waste systems. Financial frameworks in Europe are withdrawing sustainability recognition from waste burning, while zero waste cities worldwide are demonstrating faster emissions cuts, more jobs, and healthier neighborhoods without destroying resources.

The path forward

Waste-to-energy incineration belongs to the past. Zero waste belongs to the future.

Choosing zero waste means:

• Cutting climate pollution quickly
• Protecting communities from toxic exposure
• Creating far more jobs and fairer livelihoods
• Breaking the cycle of extraction and waste

Most importantly, it ensures the transition to a low-carbon world is just, inclusive, and truly sustainable.

The solution is already in our hands.

The post Zero waste is the real climate solution, not waste incineration appeared first on 350.

When we wrote about the five ways Big Oil is trying to stop us last year, we told you about lawsuits, jailings, corporate capture of climate talks, violence against frontline defenders, and a misinformation machine in overdrive. Since then, the attacks have escalated. But so have we. Here’s the latest — and why, despite everything, we are more defiant than ever.

The $345 Million SLAPP Against Greenpeace

Let’s pick up where we left off i.e. on the most brazen legal attack on the climate movement in recent memory.

In March 2025, a North Dakota (United States) jury ruled that Greenpeace must pay Energy Transfer (ET), the corporation behind the destructive Dakota Access Pipeline, a staggering US$660 million. It was a number designed to do one thing: destroy one of the most powerful environmental organizations in the world, and send a message to every activist watching.

This is what’s known as a SLAPP: a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation. SLAPPs are notorious lawsuits that are not about winning in court. They are about burying nonprofits and activists in legal fees, pushing them toward bankruptcy, and ultimately silencing dissent. The absurdity of this particular case speaks for itself. Greenpeace is being held liable for peacefully protesting the Dakota Access Pipeline in solidarity with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, whose water supply is threatened by the pipeline’s crossing of the Missouri River upstream from their reservation. 

To this day, the Dakota Access Pipeline does not have full legal authority to operate and was previously delayed by decisions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Yet Greenpeace has been ordered to pay hundreds of millions of dollars in damages to Energy Transfer. A proportion of this penalty stems from something as simple as co-signing a letter — alongside 500 other groups — that echoed findings published in United Nations reports.

Last week, the court upheld parts of that verdict, and ordered Greenpeace to pay ET US$345 million. Although the total was reduced from USD$660 million after the judge dismissed several elements of the original jury award, it still is an enormous, unjust sum with no sound basis in law.  

This is Big Oil’s playbook: when you can’t win the argument, weaponize the law.  Speaking out is not a crime. But it is being treated like one.

This is everyone’s fight

SLAPPs are not just a threat to Greenpeace. They are a threat to free speech, democratic debate, and public participation itself. Every day, journalists, activists, human rights defenders and even everyday people face lawsuits simply for doing their jobs: exposing wrongdoing, standing up for communities, telling the truth. These legal attacks are designed to protect profits, drain time, money, and morale, to scare people into silence and to push critical voices out of public life.

When corporations can sue environmental groups into oblivion for signing a letter, for standing with Indigenous communities, for peaceful protest — every one of us who has ever spoken out against power is at risk. Public participation is the backbone of democracy. We need laws that protect those who speak truth to power, and we need to enforce them.

Fighting back

Greenpeace is not backing down, and we’re supporting them. They are:

• appealing the judgment in the North Dakota Supreme Court, and pushing for a new trial in the United States. 
• And in Europe, Greenpeace International has taken the fight directly to Energy Transfer — filing the first ever test case of the EU’s new anti-SLAPP directive in a Dutch court in Amsterdam. The EU anti-SLAPP directive was designed to stop exactly this kind of foreign corporate interference, and this case will help determine whether that protection has teeth. The next hearing is scheduled for April 2026

Energy Transfer’s SLAPPs are part of a wave of abusive lawsuits filed by Big Oil companies like Shell, Total, and ENI against Greenpeace entities in recent years. But the wins are already stacking up! Greenpeace France defeated TotalEnergies’ SLAPP in March 2024, and Greenpeace UK and Greenpeace International forced Shell to abandon its SLAPP entirely in December 2024. In Paris, France’s first ever climate trial against a multinational oil company is now underway, with a ruling against TotalEnergies expected in June — another sign that the legal tide is turning.

Big Oil is not invincible! When we stand together, we win.

With free speech and peaceful protest under increasing pressure, Greenpeace USA lit up Houston’s landmarks with striking projections calling for resistance and solidarity. Photo: © Greenpeace

The playbook doesn’t stop at lawsuits

Lawsuits aren’t the only weapon in Big Oil’s arsenal. While they fight critics in court, they are running an equally aggressive campaign to control the narrative outside of it. A report from December 2025 examining over 300 climate-related advertisements from the world’s four biggest oil and gas companies between 2000 and 2025 found a consistent pattern: for 25 years, these corporations have been deceptively portraying themselves as climate leaders while simultaneously expanding fossil fuel production and failing to meaningfully cut their emissions. This is greenwashing on an industrial scale — and it has been deliberate, sustained, and calculated. In fact, just this month, after devastating floods in Mozambique affected over 700,000 people, TotalEnergies announced a donation of food and hygiene kits worth around $500,000 — less than one dollar per person affected. Meanwhile, the same company is leading a $20 billion LNG gas project in northern Mozambique expected to produce up to 4.5 billion tonnes of carbon pollution over its lifetime — more than the entire EU emits in a year. This is plain and simple climate impunity, dressed up as generosity. Profits are privatised; the damage is borne by ordinary people.

What you can do right now

Big Oil wants us divided, drained, and silent as they continue padding their wallets and destroying our planet, health and livelihoods. Here is how we refuse:

• Stand with Greenpeace. Their legal fight is our fight. Support them as they appeal. Every voice, every donation, every shared post tells Energy Transfer that intimidation is backfiring. Sign this open letter. 
• Spread the truth. The Dakota Access Pipeline has no legal authority to operate. Five hundred organizations signed that letter. Share these facts. Disrupt their narrative. #TimeToResist 
• Keep showing up. In the streets, online, at town halls, at the ballot box. The climate movement has faced setbacks before. We have always come back stronger.
• Demand governments make polluters pay: Higher taxes on polluting fossil fuel giants will help keep their power in check, unlock billions for the energy transition, and help the most vulnerable communities bear the cost of climate destruction they did nothing to cause. Sign the petition. Call your representative. Tell them: no more free passes for Big Oil.

© Gosse Bouma / Greenpeace

The post This is bigger than Greenpeace appeared first on 350.

Global energy markets are once again on edge, with Donald Trump recently suggesting the conflict could last “four weeks,” volatility has returned to oil and gas markets at speed. Whether that timeline proves accurate or not, traders are already pricing in the risk of prolonged disruption,and households may soon feel the consequences.

In the past 48 hours, European gas prices have surged by 25% in a single day, reflecting immediate supply fears and extreme volatility. Europe is particularly exposed: gas storage levels sit at roughly 30% capacity following winter, making prices more sensitive to geopolitical shocks than in other regions.

Oil markets are also tightening. Global crude prices have climbed 9–10% in recent days, adding fresh inflationary pressure across economies already struggling with high living costs. The impact is not confined to Europe. If the conflict persists, LNG and gas markets in Asia and other import-dependent regions are likely to follow, with further price spikes possible as supply chains come under strain.

At the heart of the crisis is a chokepoint of global energy trade. Iran holds the world’s third-largest oil reserves, and the Strait of Hormuz carries roughly one-fifth of global oil and gas supply. Any disruption there reverberates worldwide,from wholesale markets to petrol stations to supermarket shelves.

For fossil fuel producers, however, volatility can mean profit. If prices continue to climb, we are likely to see a new wave of windfall profits across the oil and gas sector. The financial burden of those profits will ultimately land on the kitchen tables of ordinary households through higher energy bills, more expensive transport and rising food prices.

We have seen this dynamic before. In 2022, energy and food price shocks triggered by the war in Ukraine pushed more than 70 million people into poverty within just three months, according to the United Nations Development Programme. 

The lesson  is stark: when fossil fuel markets spike, it is the most vulnerable who pay first and hardest.

Oil-producing countries are attempting to calm markets. OPEC+ has announced plans to raise output. But many analysts view the move as largely symbolic,insufficient to offset sustained supply disruption if the conflict deepens or shipping routes remain constrained.

The current crisis underlines a deeper structural problem and the situation exposes the “horrendous costs” of fossil fuel dependence. When a single geopolitical flashpoint can destabilise energy security worldwide, it raises urgent questions about resilience.

Renewable energy offers domestically generated, stable power less vulnerable to global shocks. While the transition requires upfront investment, it reduces exposure to precisely the kind of conflict-driven volatility now rippling through markets.

The immediate outlook remains uncertain. Much depends on the duration and geographic spread of the conflict. But the direction of travel is clear: if the war continues, fossil fuel prices are likely to rise further,alongside significant windfall profits for producers.

The post War-driven energy shock will push fossil fuel prices, driving up household costs.  appeared first on 350.

We’re barely two months into 2026, and the fossil fuel crowd has been loud.

In January, the Trump administration launched military strikes against Venezuela, captured its President, and declared to seize control of the country’s vast oil reserves. And it’s systematically dismantling every climate commitment the U.S. has made — from gutting the scientific basis for regulating greenhouse gas pollution to withdrawing from the Paris Climate Agreement (again). Want to track the damage in real time? We’ve got you covered.

At the same time, the effects of fossil fuels are fast catching up with all of us. 2025 was the third consecutive hottest year on record, a first in human history. January 2026 alone saw unusually extreme weather: heatwaves scorched Australia, floods devastated Southern Africa and Indonesia, winter storms paralyzed Europe and North America, and record snowfall buried Japan.

But here’s what the drill-baby-drill crowd doesn’t want you to see: the world is turning a corner, and leaving behind fossil fuels. Africa just recorded its fastest solar growth ever. China’s clean energy now drives a third of its entire economic growth. Europe is planning massive wind energy expansion. Colombia and the Netherlands are leading global efforts in ending fossil fuels for good. And that’s because being fossil free is the smart choice and people everywhere are demanding better.

So this is it. 2026 is the year we stop managing crises after crises and start ending their cause. No more drilling. No more delays. No more excuses.

Fossil fuels need an expiration date, and we’re here to set one. At 350.org, this is our singular mission this year. The fossil fuel mercenaries may be loud. But we are louder — and we are not going anywhere.

Movement Updates Discover our latest actions demanding climate solutions & energy justice 

Ensuring Brazil takes real, inclusive action to end fossil fuels

Last year we helped win support from many countries to phase out fossil fuels at UN climate talks (COP30) in Brazil. The good news is that Brazil is already working on a national roadmap to end fossil fuels for good! Now we’re pushing to make sure this roadmap is real, fair, and people-centered. So we brought together 114 civil society organizations to send an open letter to COP30 President André Corrêa do Lago, calling for the roadmap that is transparent, protected from fossil fuel influence, and co-created with Indigenous Peoples, frontline communities, and workers. Skip to the climate jargon section to learn more about fossil fuel roadmaps!

Building local power to tax the ultra-rich in France

After national lawmakers blocked a 2% wealth tax on the super-rich last year, we moved to towns and cities, where political pressure grows fastest. With municipal elections near, we’re organizing mayors and candidates to back taxing the ultra-wealthy to fund climate action and essential services. 50 mayors are already on board! We also launched the “A Budget for My Town – #ShareYourLoaf” campaign with webinars and a fun baguette action in Paris asking people how they want their town’s budget to be spent. In Marseille, we helped communities challenge candidates on housing, transport, food, and climate through a public debate.

Building people power across elections, media, and courts in Japan

During the national elections this month, we hosted an emergency online briefing with 35 participants to connect elections to climate, sharing practical ways to influence candidates and policy. After the vote, we met in Tokyo for a democracy workshop, building skills in lobbying, storytelling, and media engagement. We’re also pressuring the media to cover climate change as a core election issue- our petition calling on outlets to stop ignoring climate during elections has passed 1,333 signatures and is now being used to push editors directly. We’re also supporting a climate justice lawsuit demanding stronger government action before 2030 to protect lives and livelihoods, with 450+ plaintiffs already involved.

Supporting communities in securing their energy future in Africa

Across Uganda and Tanzania, we launched a manifesto created by 4,000+ people in 10 districts being impacted by the EACOP pipeline, laying out clear demands for justice, repair, and energy democracy to political candidates. In parallel, we’re backing real, people-centered clean energy solutions. In Jonahkrom, a small farming community in Ghana, locals have long faced limited access to reliable electricity. So 350 Ghana mobilized funds and resources to build a Solar Kiosk and install solar streetlights. The community-led solar hub now provides lighting, phone charging, and study space, helping students learn at night, traders extend business hours, and improving community safety.

Solidarity in times of disaster

As climate disasters intensify, we’re standing with communities across the Caribbean, Pacific, and Asia. Months after hurricane Melissa in Jamaica, our Caribbean Climate Network is supporting grassroots relief led by Plakortis, helping families still in need of shelter, food, and school supplies. During Australia’s extreme January heatwave, we amplified frontline voices calling for protection and action. During heavy flooding in Sumatra, Indonesia, our petition backed by 5,000 people demanding polluters pay helped push the government to revoke permits for 28 extractive companies and sue 6 more.

Climate Jargon Unpack the terms & concepts being used by climate activists & experts

Fossil Fuel Phase-Out Roadmap

A Fossil Fuel Phase-Out (FFPO) Roadmap is a plan for how and when countries will stop producing and using coal, oil, and gas, in line with climate science — while rapidly scaling up clean, affordable, renewable energy.

You’re going to hear this phrase a lot in 2026. And that’s a good thing.

At COP30 in Belém, Brazil, last November, 80+ countries backed building this kind of roadmap under the name Transition Away From Fossil Fuels (TAFF), a shared pathway to wind down fossil fuels in a fair and orderly way. Translation: governments finally admitted that vague promises aren’t enough anymore.

While the TAFF didn’t make it into the final COP commitment text due to fierce opposition from a few countries, signs of follow-through are showing up. As you read above, Brazil is already developing its own national phase-out roadmap. And Colombia is co-hosting the world’s first international conference on moving away from fossil fuels this April in Santa Marta (where you’ll see us too!) to create a global, concrete, and actionable roadmap.

Bottom line: There’s no credible climate plan without phasing out fossil fuels. FFPO Roadmaps are how “end fossil fuels” becomes real, but they must be done in a way so as not to replicate harms of the past and to bring real benefits to local, frontline and Indigenous communities.

Community Spotlight Be inspired by stories & interviews of real people who are fighting for a just energy transition

Renewable Rundown Get informed on big numbers, key facts and important news     

Don’t yet believe me that this is the year to end fossil fuels? Well, here is some further proof:

1. Clean energy is now getting more money than fossil fuels: The International Energy Agency says around $2.2 trillion went to clean energy in 2025, double of what went into oil, gas, and coal.
2. Investors are turning toward clean energy: Most big investors are planning to increase investing in renewables because fossil-heavy assets are not the smart economic choice anymore.
3. Courts are starting to hold polluters accountable: Around the world, judges are ruling that governments and companies have a legal duty to protect people from climate harm, including the landmark opinion by the International Court of Justice in 2025 confirming governments’ climate obligations.

Continue reading here for more reasons why the future will be fossil free.

Your Power Support us in demanding real climate action

There is no credible climate strategy that doesn’t start with ending fossil fuels. Over 80 countries are already moving to phase out coal, oil, and gas but many, including Canada, Japan, Indonesia, South Africa, and Türkiye are still hesitating.

Indigenous Peoples march to demand phase out of fossil fuels at COP30 in Belem, Brazil, November 2025. Photo: Hugo Duchesne 

Sign the petition to push more governments to step up and commit to ending fossil fuels forever.

Energize Build your skills to tackle the climate crisis and widen our movement

Change is brought on ideas, stories, and imagination. If you’re looking to go deeper on climate justice this month, whether on your commute, at the gym, or curled up with a book — here are some powerful reads and listens from organizers, thinkers, and storytellers helping shape the future we’re fighting for.

Books to read: 

• We Will Be Jaguars — Nemonte Nenquimo (with Mitch Anderson): An Indigenous-led call to defend land, culture, and life itself — fierce, intimate, and impossible to ignore.
• The Next Great Migration — Sonia Shah: A radical reframe of migration as natural, necessary, and essential for survival in a warming world.

 ‍ Podcasts worth your time: 

• Drilled — hosted by a team of climate journalists, its investigative storytelling that exposes how the fossil fuel industry knowingly fuelled the climate crisis — and how they’re still trying to delay action today.
• The Nature of Us — Big-picture conversations on climate, culture, and what it really means to live well on a changing planet.

The post Our Power News – So, what happens in 2026? appeared first on 350.

Last week, TotalEnergies announced a donation of food and hygiene kits to communities affected by devastating floods in Mozambique. Framed as an act of corporate responsibility, the company presented this support as proof of its commitment to people facing climate-driven disasters.

But let’s be clear: this is not climate justice. It is climate impunity, disguised as generosity.

A small donation doesn’t undo the destruction

The company’s contribution, worth around $500,000, amounts to less than one dollar per person for the more than 700,000 people affected by flooding. Families who have lost their homes, farmland, livestock, and livelihoods are being offered symbolic relief from a corporation whose core business model is driving the very crisis destroying their lives.

TotalEnergies is leading a $20 billion liquefied natural gas project in Cabo Delgado, northern Mozambique. This project has already displaced communities, intensified insecurity, and locked the country into decades of fossil fuel dependence. Over its lifetime, the project is expected to produce 3.3 to 4.5 billion tonnes of carbon pollution  more than the yearly emissions of every EU country added together.It was suspended after violent attacks in 2021 and has now been restarted, despite serious human rights and environmental concerns.

At the same time, Mozambique is on the frontlines of the climate emergency. Floods, cyclones, droughts, and extreme heat are becoming more frequent and more deadly. Over 450,000 hectares of farmland have been destroyed. Hundreds of thousands of animals have died. Communities are being pushed deeper into poverty.

The aerial view of the flooded village in Mozambique after a cyclone. Credit: Getty Images/iStockphoto

$500,000 in humanitarian aid cannot outweigh the harm these projects cause. Limited investments in renewables or selective humanitarian gestures are often presented as evidence of transition, while overall fossil fuel expansion continues. This pattern, sometimes described as transition-washing, allows companies to preserve social licence while delaying the structural changes that climate science requires. And Mozambique is just one among many examples.  And yet despite overwhelming harm, the companies like Total, who are most responsible for fuelling this crisis continue to extract massive profits. This is the pattern we see everywhere: profits are privatised and protected, while the damage is socialised and borne by ordinary people

Climate disasters are not unexpected side effects of fossil fuel extraction. They are foreseeable, scientifically documented consequences of continued oil and gas expansion.

For decades, companies like TotalEnergies have known that their products destabilise the climate. They have funded misinformation, lobbied against regulation, and delayed action while expanding production. When a fossil fuel company offers emergency aid after a climate disaster, it is responding to harms that are built into its own business model.

Polluters must pay, not pretend

What Mozambique needs, and what communities across the Global South are demanding are not occasional donations, dependent on corporate goodwill. They need guaranteed, predictable, and adequate funding for loss, damage, and adaptation.

That is why 350.org and our partners are calling for binding climate levy and damage contribution mechanisms. These would require major polluters to pay, in proportion to their emissions and profits, into global funds that support communities before and after disasters. In other words: the costs must be upstreamed.

Instead of communities paying with their lives, land, and futures, polluters must pay as part of doing business.

This is the principle behind “Make Polluters Pay.” And it is the only fair response to a crisis they helped create. Today (19th of February) sees the opening of France’s first major climate trial against an oil and gas multinational, as proceedings begin at the Paris Court of Justice.

Since 2020, a coalition of advocacy organisations, Notre Affaire à Tous, Sherpa, France Nature Environnement  alongside the City of Paris, has asked French courts to require TotalEnergies to drastically cut its greenhouse gas emissions and reduce hydrocarbon production. 

As one of the world’s largest historical emitters and among the top global oil and gas companies, TotalEnergies continues to plan production growth of around 3% per year, while maintaining the majority of its investments in fossil fuels until at least 2030. The company is linked to dozens of major new fossil fuel projects worldwide, despite clear scientific consensus that no new expansion is compatible with limiting warming to 1.5°C.A ruling in this case could mark a turning point, helping shift climate litigation from a focus on governments alone to cases capable of reshaping the business models of the world’s largest fossil fuel companies. What the Paris court decides may influence similar cases far beyond France.

Beyond promises: ending fossil fuels for real

A genuine phase-out is not a distant net-zero pledge. It is a planned and enforceable decline in fossil fuel production, starting immediately and continuing year after year.

According to the joint analysis by 350.org and Observatoire des multinationales in “This is what a total phase-out looks like,” ending fossil fuel expansion requires more than voluntary commitments. It requires governments to reclaim control over companies whose business models depend on continued extraction.

That means binding regulation aligned with climate science, strict limits on new approvals, and mandatory production decline pathways. It means removing shareholder primacy from decisions that determine the fate of communities. And where companies refuse to comply, governments must be prepared to use public-interest tools — including stronger regulatory intervention or public control — to redirect corporate capacity toward renewable energy and climate repair.

Phase-out also means accountability for past harm. Transparency through independent climate and human rights audits, and enforceable contributions toward loss and damage, are essential. Stopping future extraction does not erase decades of damage already inflicted.

Responsibility means:

• • Ending new oil and gas projects
  • A binding production decline plan with annual reduction targets
  • Full transparency on climate & environmental impacts
  • Ending fossil fuel lobbying and political interference
  • Redirecting capital expenditure from fossil expansion to renewable energy at scale
  • Mandatory contributions into global loss and damage mechanisms proportional to emissions and profits
  • Respecting community land and consent rights
  • Supporting a just transition to renewable energy
  • Being held legally and financially accountable for climate harm

Locals stand outside TotalEnergies in Kenya to demand an end to fossil fuel projects. Photo: 350.org

Thats why 350.org has launched our petition, momentum is building to finally move beyond coal, oil, and gas. The shift now underway internationally recognises that voluntary corporate pledges are insufficient. Governments are increasingly acknowledging that fossil fuel phase-out must be coordinated, binding, and enforceable, not left to corporate discretion. More than 80 countries are now working together on concrete plans to phase out fossil fuels and accelerate clean energy. This is exactly the kind of leadership that communities on the frontlines have been demanding for decades.

A critical international meeting in Colombia this April could help turn these commitments into binding action. If governments step up, it could mark the beginning of the end for fossil fuels, while speeding up the affordable renewable solutions that cut energy bills, create jobs, and protect our shared future.

Some major emitters, including Canada, Japan, Indonesia, South Africa, and Türkiye, have yet to join this effort. They must do so.  The choice before us is stark. We can allow companies like TotalEnergies to continue profiting from destruction while offering token gestures in return. Or we can seize this moment to build a system where polluters pay, communities are protected, and clean energy serves the public good.

The post Greenwashing in plain sight appeared first on 350.

Crossposted from the Daily Observer
Written by Amanullah Porag, 350 Bangladesh Coordinator and Youth for NDCs Founder/Executive Director 

The Bangladesh Nationalist Party’s (BNP) victory in the country’s first democratic elections in 17 years was built on promises to restore democracy, stabilize the economy, and reform governance. But the new government has another urgent mandate: to protect people from a climate crisis that has driven at least 10 million Bangladeshis from their homes. For us, climate protection is a matter of national survival. With a staggering two-thirds of the country less than 15 feet above sea level, it is estimated that by 2050, one in seven people in Bangladesh will be displaced by climate change. For many years, I’ve worked with farmers who have lost their lands and homes because of encroaching sea waters. Most of them are forced to eke out a living in the sweltering streets of Dhaka, or else migrate abroad. We went to the polls hoping to correct past injustices-not just political corruption, but also systemic injustices that determine who suffers when floods destroy homes, when heatwaves turn factories into boiling rooms, when rising seas swallow farmland.

The BNP’s campaign manifesto included surprisingly clear environmental commitments: a “National Green Mission” that includes 25 million trees over five years, green jobs for youth, and a concrete target of 20% renewable electricity by 2030. Especially for a youth electorate starved of change, those green commitments matter. The question now is whether these promises will survive the BNP’s contact with power. A 20% renewable energy target by 2030 is not insignificant. If achieved, it can begin to transform an energy sector too long dominated by mega fossil fuel projects that have left people stranded with costly, unreliable electricity they can’t afford, and the country with debt it can’t pay. Unfortunately, the BNP also emphasized oil and gas exploration and refinery expansion as part of Bangladesh’s energy security measures. If the new government continues to lean into fossil fuels, it will fall prey to the same corrupt forces that doomed the nation. It should instead reform procurement, modernize grid infrastructure, and dismantle distortions that locked Bangladesh into expensive power deals.

Sure, planting trees is a good policy. But climate justice requires more. It means protecting coastal communities without displacing them for infrastructure projects. It means ensuring river erosion victims receive rehabilitation, not just temporary relief. It means designing urban heat action plans that protect workers and low-income communities. It means ending environmentally destructive projects that undermine long-term resilience. Bangladesh does not fall short on climate rhetoric, but on implementation failures. If the BNP wants to redefine governance, climate policy is where that promise will be tested most visibly. In its first 100 days, the new government must demonstrate its seriousness in addressing the energy and climate crisis that is eroding our capacity for progress.

First, it must audit all existing power purchase agreements and move to lower electricity prices. Second, it must revise the energy master plan, aligning it with climate science, economic rationality, and a just transition framework. Third, it must operationalize the national climate plan-moving beyond targets to delivery strategies, budget alignment, and accountability mechanisms. The greatest risk now is complacency. Governments often begin with reformist language but gradually slide into short-term stabilization politics, negotiated deals, and environmentally risky mega-projects justified in the name of development. We cannot allow that to happen again.

This is not yet a moment for antagonism. Youth activists, climate researchers, policy practitioners, and civil society are not adversaries of the newly elected government. Many of us have worked on climate governance and adaptation planning long before this election. If the BNP is serious about its green commitments, climate advocates stand ready to support with research, monitoring, implementation, and community engagement. But support does not mean silence. It means measurable progress, transparency, and accountability. It means speaking up when commitments drift.

The BNP’s victory reshaped the political landscape. Now it must decide whether it will reshape Bangladesh’s climate trajectory. This government has inherited more than power. It has inherited responsibility in one of the most climate-exposed countries on Earth. The elections are over-but Bangladesh’s climate test has just begun.

The post Climate change is a key challenge for Bangladesh’s new government appeared first on 350.

People wade through the floodwater in the aftermath of flash floods at Tukka village, Central Tapanuli, North Sumatra province, on December 2, 2025.  Photo: YT HARIONO / AFP via Getty Images

What does show up is Indonesia’s 5.11% GDP growth in 2025, a number widely deemed as proof the country was thriving. Ironically, the 51.8 trillion rupiah ($3.2 billion) the government is spending to rebuild what the floods destroyed is not really registered as a loss, in the language of economics. Recovery from massive destruction now counts as progress, as long as money changes hands.

This is a core flaw at the heart of how we measure progress in our current global economic and political systems. And now a new study involving 68 climate scientists from 12 countries, reveals we’ve been drastically underestimating the economic toll of climate change.

What we actually mean by “growth”

We hear about progress and economic growth constantly. From headlines to election promises and budget announcements. It’s presented as proof a country is doing well, and if the country is doing well, our lives must be improving too.

In practice, growth actually measures almost entirely one number: GDP, or gross domestic product. It adds up the total value of goods and services produced in a country over a given period. When GDP rises, businesses are assumed to be producing more, hiring more workers, paying more wages. When it falls in hard times, like during the 2009 global financial recession and COVID-19., companies cut back, jobs vanish, incomes shrink.

This pattern has made GDP become the dominant yardstick of success. Governments pursue it, economists track it, politicians campaign on it. What began as a technical economic measure has become shorthand for whether a society is moving forward or falling behind.

Which means key government decisions including budgets, rest on economic models built around the GDP. These models shape how much governments spend on healthcare, housing, schools, transport, climate action and other public services to make life better for ordinary citizens. 

But…the calculations are wrong

Despite their widespread use, economists have long acknowledged that GDP doesn’t measure wellbeing, health, inequality, or quality of life, the actual, vital indicators that show whether people are doing well.

Now, a study led by the University of Exeter has revealed that these models have an additional, critical blind spot: they fail to account for the cascading shocks of climate change which are the extreme events and tipping points that can rapidly unravel livelihoods, infrastructure, and entire economies.

Most economic models treat climate damage as slow, gradual, manageable. They focus on global average temperatures, which are projected to rise steadily from around 1.2°C of heating today toward 2°C in coming decades, and estimate damages based on those smooth trends.

But that’s not how climate impacts unfold in the real world.

Climate change doesn’t raise your local temperature by 1.5°C and wait politely for you to adapt. It floods your city on a Tuesday in March. It burns your forest in a week. It kills your crop in a single heatwave while economists debate smooth curves and average temperatures.

The study shows that we and the systems we rely on suffer most from such sudden shocks and local and regional disasters, not from small, gradual shifts in global average temperaturs. A sudden flood destroys crops, leading to food prices spiking. Power stations go offline so factories shut down. Heatwaves overwhelm hospitals and workers fall ill. Roads and ports close, breaking supply chains. One shock triggers another in what the researchers call “cascading failures.”

A million deaths can look like growth if you measure it so

Going a step further, the study also argues that GDP-based metrics give a fundamentally warped picture of progress because they miss what matters most to people: lives, health, ecosystems, social stability. In fact, after disasters, GDP can even rise because rebuilding and emergency spending count as ‘economic activity’. Destruction can register as success, and this is dangerous. 

For instance, in the US, climate-related costs – including disaster recovery, repairs, and surging insurance premiums- are responsible for $7.7 trillion, or 36%, of the country’s GDP since 2000, meaning a significant chunk of what we call “growth” is actually disaster recovery spending.

LAKE LURE, NORTH CAROLINA – SEPTEMBER 28: The Rocky Broad River flows into Lake Lure and overflows the town with debris from Chimney Rock, North Carolina after heavy rains from Hurricane Helene on September 28, 2024, in Lake Lure, North Carolina. Approximately six feet of debris piled on the bridge from Lake Lure to Chimney Rock, blocking access. (Photo by Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images)

What broken models actually cost us

By missing the cascading failures and compounding shocks that define climate risk, today’s economic models create a false sense of safety. Precise-looking numbers incentivise governments and investors into delaying action — playing down impacts, skipping hard choices, and chasing short-term wins like political successes over long-term protection for citizens. Meaning we skip early planning and investment. We leave people unprotected. Governments underfund prevention while spending vastly more on disaster response after it’s too late.. For example, Hurricane Maria killed nearly 3,000 people in Puerto Rico in 2017 and caused $90 billion in damage. The island had received minimal pre-disaster mitigation funding because models suggested the risk was manageable. Pakistan’s 2022 floods displaced 33 million people and caused $30 billion in damage; early warning infrastructure that could have saved lives had gone unfunded for years.

Destroyed homes and vehicles sit in floodwaters after Hurricane Maria in this aerial photograph taken above Hamacao, Puerto Rico, on Monday, Sept. 25, 2017. Photo: Alex Wroblewski/Bloomberg

By the time governments react, lives are already lost, damage costs have skyrocketed, and recovery drags on for years while displaced families wait for aid that’s never sufficient. Prevention looks expensive until disaster strikes, but when it does then recovery costs six times than what prevention would have required. And this is crucial extra public money that could have been spent on schools, hospitals, housing, and the basic services communities need to thrive.

The consequences of this miscalculation are staggering. The study’s findings reveal that missing catastrophic shocks and cascading failures could lead to GDP losses as high as 50% between 2070 and 2090–losses that don’t appear in the models guiding policy decisions today.

The alternative already exists 

If growth is supposed to mean progress, then our metrics must reflect the conditions that make life better — safety, health, stability, and jobs. And there are ways to measure these conditions directly: is housing affordable? Do people have access to clean air and water? Are we prepared for climate disasters?

The pieces for such a different approach are already in place. UN Secretary-General António Guterres has warned that the world’s accounting systems fail to place real value on the environment, and that the global economy must stop rewarding pollution and waste disguised as production and growth.

Around the world, governments, economists, governments and researchers are testing and developing alternative measures of progress that incorporate long and healthy life indicators including environment and social factors like the Human Development Index and Genuine Progress Indicator, inclusive wealth measures that track natural and human capital alongside economic production, and emerging climate-risk-adjusted indicators like Climate Risk Index designed to reflect the he human and economic toll of extreme weather that existing models ignore.

What’s needed now is for decision-makers to abandon the incomplete and dangerous models currently shaping vital societal decisions that don’t serve the world we live in now, and move toward more realistic and inclusive measures that also account for the reality of the climate crisis. Investors, too, should recognize that every dollar flowing into fossil fuel infrastructure today accelerates the very shocks that will destroy portfolio value tomorrow.

Indonesia’s GDP may be rising, but families are still repaying loans for harvests that have drowned. India is losing more people to pollution each year while economists celebrate a ‘booming’ economy. These oppositions may have found a place in our current accounting systems, but they mustn’t in our real lives.

Sources:

1. The public is losing patience with promises of economic growth – Public Finance, July 2025. https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/opinion/2025/07/public-losing-patience-promises-economic-growth
2. GDP Over Breath: How Systemic Failure Chokes India’s $5 Trillion Dream – ESG News, January 16, 2026. https://www.esgnews.earth/latest-news/gdp-over-breath-how-systemic-failure-chokes-indias-5-trillion-dream/16263.html

1. Indonesia Expects $3 Billion Rebuild After Deadly Floods – Insurance Journal, December 8, 2025. https://www.insurancejournal.com/news/international/2025/12/08/850172.htm
2. Mortality in Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria – The New England Journal of Medicine. https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMsa1803972

The post Why climate change is making us re-think growth and progress appeared first on 350.

The climate crisis doesn’t always arrive as a sudden headline-grabbing disaster. Sometimes, it creeps up quietly: in shrinking rivers, failing wells, and communities being forced to “use less” of what they barely have. But make no mistake: what looks like scarcity is actually theft. Theft of a stable climate. Theft of reliable rainfall. Theft of the water systems that have sustained life for millennia.

A new report from the UN University Institute for Water, Environment and Health (UNU-INWEH) “Global Water Bankruptcy: Living Beyond Our Hydrological Means in the Post-Crisis Era”  warns that the world has entered an era of “global water bankruptcy.” It means we are using and damaging freshwater systems faster than nature can replenish them and in many places, the damage is irreversible.

This is what the climate crisis looks like when it hits the systems that sustain life. And it’s being driven by the same forces destroying our climate: fossil fuel extraction, industrial agriculture, and an economic system that treats nature as an infinite resource to exploit for profit.

From “Crisis” to “Bankruptcy”. What’s the difference?

For decades, policymakers and researchers have described global water challenges as a “water crisis” or “water scarcity.” But scholars have long warned that this crisis framing fails to capture the reality of long-term, structural decline. The word “crisis” sounds temporary. Bankruptcy means something more permanent and more concerning. It describes a system that’s been used up so badly that it can no longer simply bounce back.

The UNU report documents a scale of loss that makes this distinction unavoidable:

• Roughly 70% of the world’s major aquifers (underground layers of rock and soil that store water) are in long-term decline. 
• Rivers that once flowed to the sea now run dry for months each year. 
• Over half of the world’s large lakes have lost water since the early 1990s. 
• The world has lost an estimated 410 million hectares of natural wetlands over the past five decades, nearly the size of the entire European Union. These were ecosystems that once stored water, buffered droughts, and regulated local climates.

Perhaps most alarming, the world has lost more than 30% of its glacier mass since 1970. These “frozen water towers” once released meltwater during dry seasons, sustaining billions of people. Their disappearance is the liquidation of nature’s water savings account — with no mechanism for repayment.

Almost all the world’s glaciers are shrinking and fast. Credit: Copyright 2011 Michael C Smith

Bankruptcy essentially means you can’t restore what’s been permanently lost. Compacted (squeezed out) aquifers can never store water again. Extinct species don’t return. Glaciers that took millennia to form won’t regrow in our lifetimes.

Fossil Fuels > The Climate Crisis > Water Collapse

Water bankruptcy is being locked in by climate breakdown, which in turn is driven overwhelmingly by the burning of fossil fuels i.e. coal, oil, and gas. Here’s how climate change is destroying our water systems:

• Rising temperatures intensify the water bankruptcy spiral: Every fraction of a degree of global warming increases evaporation from soils, rivers, and reservoirs. Hotter air sucks moisture from the land, turning what would have been manageable dry spells into devastating droughts. The report documents how drought is increasingly “anthropogenic”, meaning it’s not just about lack of rainfall, but about human-caused warming, land degradation, and over-extraction combining to create permanent water deficits.

An Indian man takes bath under the tap of a water tanker on a hot day in Ahmadabad, India. Heat wave conditions prevailed as temperature rises in many parts of India. (AP Photo/Ajit Solanki)

• Extreme rainfall creates the cruel paradox – floods without recharge: At the same time, climate change is intensifying rainfall. Storms arrive in violent bursts that flood cities and wash water away before it can infiltrate soils. More than half of global agricultural land is now moderately or severely degraded, meaning it cannot absorb and store water. Communities experience the cruel paradox of flooding and water shortage in the same year or sometimes in the same month.

• Melting glaciers: short-term surge, long-term catastrophe: Glacier melt illustrates the danger of mistaking short-term increases for security. As glaciers melt faster, rivers may briefly swell. But once glaciers shrink past critical thresholds, dry-season flows collapse permanently. For the 1.5 to 2 billion people who depend on glacier-fed river systems such as the Indus, Ganges-Brahmaputra, and Andean rivers, this means water supplies that sustained entire civilizations are disappearing.

• Industrial agriculture and extractive industries devour and pollute water: Around 70% of global freshwater withdrawals go to agriculture, much of it for water-intensive monocultures in regions that cannot sustain them. Meanwhile, mining, fossil fuel operations, and industrial pollution render vast volumes of remaining water unusable. Water may still exist on paper, but functionally it is gone, too contaminated for drinking, farming, or healthy ecosystems.

The Human Cost: Who’s Paying?

The scale of water bankruptcy is quite extensive and ever- growing: 

• Nearly 4 billion people experience severe water scarcity at least one month per year
• 2.2 billion people still lack safely managed drinking water
• 3.5 billion lack safely managed sanitation
• Over 1.8 billion people were living under drought conditions in 2022-2023
• Drought-related damages cost over $307 billion per year worldwide — more than the annual GDP of three-quarters of UN member states.

But statistics only tell part of the story. Water bankruptcy shows up in daily realities no one should have to face. Farmers watch wells fail after generations of reliability and go into debt drilling deeper into aquifers that will soon collapse. Girls walk farther for water instead of attending school. Informal settlement residents pay more for less reliable water from tanker trucks while wealthy neighbourhoods maintain green lawns. Entire communities are forced to move as water sources disappear. Rising food prices as irrigation fails and harvests decline, pushing the poorest households into deeper poverty and hunger. 

Young women and girls carry water in Nigeria. Credit: Flickr

And here’s the brutal irony: the communities facing water bankruptcy today are often those who’ve contributed least to the climate crisis but are protecting the water systems everyone depends on like Indigenous water guardians stewarding watersheds, small-scale farmers practicing sustainable agriculture and communities resisting extractive industries and defending rivers from pollution.

Their knowledge and their resistance are being ignored while their water is being stolen by the same systems driving climate chaos.

The Fossil Fuel Era Has to End Now

Every year governments delay ending coal, oil, and gas, ordinary people pay the price, not in abstract climate targets, but in higher food prices, worsening health, lost livelihoods, and growing insecurity. Water bankruptcy is another consequence that makes those costs impossible to ignore.

The solution is not complicated. End fossil fuel expansion. Phase out coal, oil, and gas. Invest in clean energy and resilient, public, community-led water systems. Set binding limits on industrial water extraction. Align climate policy with the reality that there is no livable future without functioning water systems.

What happens next depends on whether leaders continue protecting polluters or finally choose people, justice, and a livable planet.

Sources

• Global Water Bankruptcy Report – UNU-INWEH (2026)
• Fossil Fuels Did This: How the Industry Drives Drought – 350.org
• The Planetary Boundaries Framework – Stockholm Resilience Centre
• Water Conflict Chronology – Pacific Institute
• UN 2023 Water Conference Outcomes

The post Water bankruptcy: how fossil fuels are destroying the world’s water supply appeared first on 350.

This is a guest article written by Jean McLean, Director of Engagement at the Green Economy Coalition (GEC), a global movement for green and fair economies.

Results from the Green Economy Coalition’s latest Global Green Attitudes Survey reveal a loud and consistent demand: People around the world, want more radical and transformative government action – not just on the environment, but on the economic systems driving the climate and nature breakdown.

And they don’t just want small “green tweaks” either, they want economies reshaped to serve the people and the planet, not pollution and profit.

Despite today’s shaky politics, the survey, which polled over 10,000 people across 10 countries, is clear: support for climate action is strong across countries and income levels. What’s missing now isn’t public backing, its political courage.

A tougher political context, but public support for climate action hasn’t weakened

Compared to the same survey in 2024, the political and economic context has become even more challenging. Since our first wave of research, the cost-of-living crisis has continued to bite. Trump’s re-election has emboldened right-wing populists and their pro–fossil fuel agenda, while “green hushing” has crept into government, corporate, and even civil society spaces, with sustainability quietly reframed, deprioritised, or hidden.

Yet even in this climate of economic anxiety and political retrenchment, our survey found that the public has not turned away from environmental action. Instead, people increasingly recognise that today’s economic model is failing them as well as the planet — driving inequality, locking in pollution, and leaving households exposed to rising costs and environmental risk.

And crucially, the survey shows just how deep that support runs: 84% of people globally would choose stronger environmental protection even at the cost of slowed economic growth.

People want a real change in the system, not just a tweak 

The polling reveals a powerful and consistent message: people want governments to lead a systemic economic transformation, not rely on voluntary action or individual sacrifice.

• 88% of people globally say governments should be doing more to combat climate change.
• 82% support prioritising public investment in clean energy, even when this requires significant government spending.

These are not abstract environmental preferences. They reflect a growing understanding that public investment, regulation, and economic planning are essential to building resilient, fair economies: ones that deliver decent jobs, affordable energy, and healthy environments.

And yet, only 42% of people believe their government is taking more action now than last year to protect the environment. The result is a widening credibility gap between what people know is needed and what governments are prepared to do.

Reclaiming economies means governments stepping up for the climate

Crucially, the survey shows that people do not see the green transition as something households can, or should, carry alone. The biggest barrier to more sustainable choices is not apathy or unwillingness, but lack of government support, cited by 52% of respondents globally.

This is especially pronounced in lower-income countries, where citizens are often most exposed to environmental harm while having the least influence over global economic rules. In countries such as Nigeria, Turkey, and South Africa, over 60% identify government inaction as the main obstacle.

When asked what would help, people pointed to:

• Better laws and stronger regulation
• Increased funding for environmental programmes
• Support for green jobs and environmentally responsible businesses

In other words, people are asking governments to reclaim their role in shaping the economy, rather than outsourcing responsibility to individuals and markets that reward pollution and short-term profit.

Trust in leaders is collapsing, but people still want ambitious action 

Trust in political leadership remains worryingly low. Just 39% of people globally trust political leaders to make the right decisions for a sustainable future. But this collapse in trust has not dampened ambition.

Instead, people are calling for bold reforms that challenge business-as-usual: stricter regulation of pollution, stronger accountability for corporations, and public investment to steer economies towards long-term wellbeing, even if this means economic trade-offs in the short term.

This reflects a growing public understanding that an economy designed around endless growth, extraction, and inequality is neither sustainable nor desirable. People are ready for a new direction — one that measures success by health, resilience, and shared prosperity, not just GDP.

The public has spoken, now it’s time our governments delivered

Taken together, the findings leave no room for doubt. Governments already have a clear public mandate to act on climate, on nature, and on the economy itself.

Reclaiming our economies means: 

• • putting people and the planet back at the centre of decision-making.
  • using public policy to reward care, restoration, and long-term value  and to hold polluters to account. 
  • moving beyond rhetoric, towards real investment, regulation, and reform.

People are already doing their part. They are ready for change. The question is whether political leaders are willing to listen, and to finally use the tools they have to build economies that work for everyone.

What do we want? Economies that serve people and the planet. When do we want them? Now.

The post 84% of us want nature protected, even if it slows economic growth appeared first on 350.