© Ronaldo Schemidt/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
The European Parliament approved €489.15 million in financial assistance for Portugal, Spain, Italy and Malta on Wednesday, 21 October, following severe storms and flooding that damaged infrastructure and disrupted communities across southern Europe during the opening months of 2026.
The allocation from the European Union Solidarity Fund was approved by 651 votes to 17, with three abstentions. Portugal will receive the largest share, approximately €261.5 million, followed by Spain with €149.1 million, Italy with €74.9 million and Malta with €3.7 million.
The funding is intended to support recovery operations and help national authorities meet the costs of restoring essential public infrastructure and services damaged by the disasters.
Portugal’s €261.5 million allocation follows flooding and storms that affected the country during January and February.
The Portuguese authorities applied for assistance from the EU Solidarity Fund after assessing the extent of the damage and the associated costs of emergency operations and infrastructure recovery.
The funds will contribute to eligible public expenditure arising from the disasters, potentially including the restoration of transport links, damaged public facilities and other essential infrastructure.
Portugal has already received approximately €65.37 million in advance funding, according to the figures accompanying the parliamentary decision.
Spain will receive €149.1 million following destructive weather during the same period, including severe flooding in February.
The Spanish government had also requested European assistance to cover part of the expenditure associated with recovery operations.
Approximately €37.26 million of Spain’s allocation has already been paid in advance.
The two countries together account for the substantial majority of the assistance approved on Wednesday, reflecting the scale of their eligible recovery costs.
Italy and Malta will receive assistance following Storm Harry, which struck parts of the central Mediterranean in January 2026.
Italy’s allocation amounts to €74.9 million, while Malta will receive €3.7 million.
The storm caused significant disruption in affected Mediterranean areas, with heavy rainfall, strong winds and damaging sea conditions placing pressure on local infrastructure.
Italian authorities sought European support for recovery operations in the affected territories, while Malta submitted its own request following the damage sustained during the storm.
The Maltese allocation includes approximately €931,000 already made available through an advance payment.
The final assistance amounts were proposed by the European Commission after examining the applications submitted by the four governments.
The Commission’s September proposal to mobilise the EU Solidarity Fund set out the amount of assistance required for each country.
The total proposed mobilisation was €489,148,220.
The European Union established the Solidarity Fund in 2002 to assist member states and certain countries participating in the EU accession process following major natural disasters.
The mechanism provides financial support for public emergency and recovery expenditure rather than operating as a general insurance scheme for individuals or businesses.
Eligible expenditure can include emergency accommodation, restoring essential infrastructure, securing protective infrastructure, cleaning disaster-affected areas and protecting cultural heritage.
National authorities submit applications to the Commission, which evaluates them against the relevant eligibility requirements and financial thresholds.
Assistance depends on the assessed disaster damage and applicable regulatory criteria, rather than simply reimbursing every euro of economic loss.
The fund is financed through EU budgetary arrangements and is mobilised following the required institutional approvals.
Payments are made to the countries concerned, which remain responsible for ensuring that assistance is used in accordance with EU financial rules.
The Solidarity Fund can therefore help governments manage exceptional recovery costs, but it does not replace national budgets, private insurance or other financial arrangements.
The latest allocation comes against a background of increasingly frequent demands on European disaster-response mechanisms.
Southern European countries have experienced damaging floods, storms, heatwaves and wildfires in recent years, leading to repeated requests for assistance.
Recovery expenditure extends beyond immediate emergency operations. Damaged roads, bridges, coastal defences, water systems and public buildings can require prolonged reconstruction.
These costs can place considerable pressure on local authorities, particularly where a disaster affects tourism, transport or economic activity.
The EU faces the additional challenge of maintaining sufficient funds to respond to major disasters affecting several countries within a relatively short period.
Extreme weather events can also expose weaknesses in existing infrastructure, prompting governments to consider whether reconstruction should incorporate additional protection against future disasters.
However, such investments must be assessed against the eligible spending categories of the Solidarity Fund and the availability of other EU financing programmes.
Wednesday’s vote represents parliamentary approval of the mobilisation proposed by the European Commission.
The decision concerns disasters that occurred earlier in 2026 and does not constitute a new emergency response operation.
The funds will support eligible recovery measures carried out by the national authorities in the four countries.
The payments already made to Portugal, Spain and Malta will be taken into account when the remaining assistance is disbursed.
EU authorities will retain responsibility for monitoring compliance with the relevant financial and reporting requirements.
The substantial parliamentary majority indicates broad support for assistance to the affected countries, although future disaster-funding arrangements will continue to depend on the resources available in the European budget.
For the four governments, the immediate task is to use the approved assistance to meet eligible recovery costs and restore damaged public infrastructure following the storms earlier this year.
Nuclear power has historically been a divisive issue: During the Cold War, an entire generation feared annihilation at the hands of the same basic technology that some want to use to power their homes.
That's unfortunate, because nuclear energy has considerable benefits—a reliable source of power with very few greenhouse gas emissions—with increasingly lower risks.
Thankfully, it seems that message is catching on with people from both major political parties.
"About six-in-ten U.S. adults now say they favor more nuclear power plants to generate electricity," Pew Research reported in October 2025. "That's up from 43% in 2020, driven by increasing support among both Republicans and Democrats." The authors noted that "Republicans are more likely than Democrats" to favor the policy, with "roughly seven-in-ten Republicans and Republican-leaning independents" expressing support, but it still included 52 percent of Democrats and independents who lean in that direction.
Gallup found similar results earlier this year. The pollster "asked whether the U.S. should put more emphasis, less emphasis or about the same emphasis as it does now on producing domestic energy from each of six sources," wrote Megan Brenan. The six sources were solar, wind, nuclear, natural gas, oil, and coal.
"Nuclear energy is the only one of the six sources to see support grow since 2021, rising seven points to 46%," Brenan added. "This shift is notable given that preferences for nuclear energy had historically been more evenly divided among responses of more, less and the same." Instead, those favoring more emphasis on nuclear power outranked both those who want less and those who wish for it to stay the same, by about 20 points each.
It seems the consensus has been building: In 2024, a poll of first-time voters in The Wall Street Journal found overwhelming support for nuclear energy as a means of fighting climate change.
The trend is welcome, and it marks a major reversal of anti-nuclear sentiment that goes back decades.
The China Syndrome, a film about a possible meltdown at a fictional California nuclear plant, premiered in the U.S. in March 1979. One character in the film warns that a meltdown could "render an area the size of Pennsylvania permanently uninhabitable, not to mention the cancer that would show up later."
Less than two weeks later, in a disastrous bit of timing, a malfunction caused a partial meltdown at the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant near Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Thankfully, Three Mile Island was not a disaster. "Some radioactive gas was released a couple of days after the accident, but not enough to cause any dose above background levels to local residents," according to the World Nuclear Association. "There were no injuries or adverse health effects."
But those details were lost on the public. Several recording artists formed Musicians United for Safe Energy (MUSE), an activist group that opposed nuclear power. Just six months after Three Mile Island, MUSE held a series of "No Nukes" concerts at Madison Square Garden, plus a rally in Central Park that drew nearly 200,000 attendees.
That populist support spilled over into politics, particularly among Democrats. Running for president in 1980, Sen. Ted Kennedy (D–Mass.) called for a two-year moratorium on new nuclear plants. In its national platform, the Democratic Party pledged to "retire nuclear power plants in an orderly manner."
After the Three Mile Island incident, 39 planned nuclear plants were canceled.
That's a shame, for many reasons. As Reason's Ronald Bailey wrote in 2018, in a theoretical world where the development of U.S. nuclear power continued at its previous pace, "by 2015 it would have replaced all coal-burning and three-quarters of gas-fired electric power generation….Cumulative global carbon dioxide emissions would be about 18 percent lower, and annual global carbon dioxide emissions would be one-third less."
Yet even decades later, plenty of people—again, particularly Democrats—still opposed nuclear energy.
"Of all the Democratic divides on climate," Politico wrote in 2019, "the role of nuclear power may be the biggest. Progressives and some environmental groups have long lumped it into a category with fossil fuels, and some have spent decades opposing it."
At the time, a number of people were running to be the Democratic Party's presidential candidate, and many of them had strong opinions on nuclear energy. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) said that she would not license any new nuclear reactors; Sen. Bernie Sanders (I–Vt.) pledged to go one step further and not renew the licenses of any existing reactors.
But things have changed in just a few short years, and nuclear energy is now an issue with potential bipartisan support. When did this pivot take place, and why?
"It was really around 2021, 2022, I would say that things really began to shift," James Walker, CEO of Nano Nuclear Energy, tells Reason. "A lot of the popular support looks like it's coming from younger people….It is a zero-carbon-emission power, and they have been raised to [be] more climate goal-focused" than older generations.
It's not just Gen Z either: Lawmakers are more keen on nuclear power now too. Earlier this month, the MORE American Fuel Act, sponsored by Sens. Cynthia Lummis (R–Wyo.) and Mark Kelly (D–Ariz.), passed the Senate unanimously. The bill "modernizes outdated Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) licensing requirements for uranium enrichment facilities and aligns them with the process already used for other nuclear facilities and reactors," according to a press release from Lummis. It also "lets enrichment companies begin construction at their own risk instead of waiting years for a construction license before breaking ground, while preserving public participation and the NRC's rigorous safety standards."
"What we've seen up in Washington is that there is a nervousness around keeping pace with AI development," Walker adds. "There is a concern that rivals that are also investing very heavily into AI, such as China, are building nuclear reactors like crazy, and one of the reasons they're doing that is just so they have baseload power that allows them to scale up their systems. They are building two gigawatt-scale nuclear power plants every year at the moment, and a lot of it is to try and catch up with the U.S. tech industry."
The post Nuclear Power Now Has Bipartisan Support appeared first on Reason Magazine.
It may be thousands of kilometres away but a Belgian animal park is doing its bit to protect the rainforest.
Pairi Daiza,near Mons, is helping to preserve 50 hectares (124 acres) of rainforest in one of the world’s most biodiverse … Read more
The El Nino weather phenomenon gripping the planet could be off the charts, the United Nations warned Wednesday, saying countries should take urgent action to prepare for the worst.
"The current El Nino event could be unprecedented in strength. Literally off the monitoring charts that we have used for the past four decades," Celeste Saulo, head of the UN's World Meteorological Organization, told a press conference in Geneva. "El Nino will peak towards the end of 2026, but its impacts will be felt long after that."
She said the WMO's latest global seasonal climate updates forecast that sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific Ocean—the epicentre of El Nino—may rise to 3.8C above average during November to January: way out of line with typical El Nino figures.
"This will have far-reaching consequences for weather patterns across the world," said Saulo.
The naturally occurring weather phenomenon is set to bring higher temperatures to much of the planet, the UN's weather and climate agency said, with its impact compounding the effects of man-made climate change.
Saulo was joined by the UN aid chief Tom Fletcher.
"Today, we are issuing a joint call for urgent and coordinated anticipatory action... We cannot stop El Nino, but we can prevent many of its worst human consequences," she said.
Fletcher said El Nino was set to be a "wrecking ball" of extreme heat, droughts and floods in different parts of the world, triggering "massive humanitarian consequences".
"The damage will not stay in the countries in the immediate path of this El Nino," he warned. "It will create economic shocks for the global economy and drive further conflict, displacement, migration. I am sounding the alarm that the humanitarian system... cannot alone cope with a threat on this scale."
He called on countries, development banks and international financial institutions to get money moving "before that damage is done, not afterwards".
"The choice is clear: we can wait for disaster or we can invest in resilience. We cannot prevent El Nino but we can be serious about the challenges ahead," he added.
Fletcher said he had released $50 million to help 11 countries on the frontline, including Chad, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Somalia and South Sudan.
El Nino warms surface temperatures in the central and eastern equatorial Pacific Ocean, bringing worldwide changes in winds, pressure and rainfall patterns.
It typically takes place every two to seven years and lasts around nine to 12 months.
Conditions oscillate between El Nino and its opposite La Nina, with neutral conditions in between.
As glaciers melt and permafrost thaws, Longyearbyen, on the remote Arctic islands of Svalbard, faces climate-induced problems from tap water to housebuilding to landslides
• Heavy metals make Norwegian village’s tap water toxic
On a rugged mountain plateau of snow-dusted rocks, in the remote archipelago of Svalbard, a glaciologist, Andy Hodson, points out the “ears” of ice, white against the rock, that gave Foxfonna glacier its name, after the arctic fox.
The small glacier, on a mountain 8 miles (15km) outside the Norwegian village of Longyearbyen, is a popular summer hike for tourists who come here seeking the Arctic experience.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Image Professionals GmbH/Alamy
© Photograph: Image Professionals GmbH/Alamy
© Photograph: Image Professionals GmbH/Alamy
These yachts are highly popular with the ‘super-bourgeoisie’ – and getting bigger. Can anything be done to stop them destroying our seas?
Who knew? Apparently everyone did, apart from me: you don’t wear shoes on a superyacht. Now, about to step on to my first teak deck at the Monaco Yacht Show, I’ve got to take my trainers off, and I’m having a sock panic. Have they got holes? Do they even match? Do they smell?
To be honest, I’ve come dressed all wrong for Europe’s big annual superyacht trade exhibition. The code for men seems to be crisp and tucked in, blazers and chinos, navy and white, sculpted hair and designer sunnies. (I went colourful, loose, casual). For women, it’s something like Riviera elegance. Everyone – whether they’re Italian, French, English, German, American, exhibitors, buyers, brokers, charterers – seems to know each other. The international superyacht community seems to be a close-knit one, and I’m not part of it. Yet.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Sam Wollaston/The Guardian
© Photograph: Sam Wollaston/The Guardian
© Photograph: Sam Wollaston/The Guardian
In 2022, I helped push through the international agreement to protect biodiversity. Wars and economic pressures can make nature seem like a ‘nice-to-have’. But it is a critical asset, and Cop17 must deliver real action
When I was five, property developers came to cut down the woods behind my home in La Tuque, Quebec. My mother encouraged me to climb one of the trees in protest, then told the developers, straight-faced, that there was nothing she could do when they asked her to get me down. A few days later, the tree was cut down anyway.
I thought about that tree in the early hours of a freezing Montreal morning in December 2022, as the gavel came down on a global agreement between nearly 200 countries to halt and reverse the loss of nature by 2030. I thought about how important nature is for our health, our food security and our economies, but also how much passion there is around protecting it, and how it has the power to inspire people all around the world.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: COP17
© Photograph: COP17
© Photograph: COP17
As Cop17 kicks off, records since 1921 show more bee species declining than increasing in all parts of Europe except the Alps
Most of Europe’s wild bee species and about half of its hover fly species have declined over the last century, a study has found, as a UN biodiversity summit begins in Armenia.
Records since 1921 show more bee species are declining than increasing in all parts of Europe except the Alpine region. The richness of bee and hover fly species suffered a persistent drop in the Atlantic and Continental regions, the study found, though trends in other regions were mixed or even positive.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Niall Carson/PA
© Photograph: Niall Carson/PA
© Photograph: Niall Carson/PA
The joint statement, signed in Leuven on Monday, 19th October, sets out commitments for Flanders, Wallonia and the Brussels-Capital Region, including action on industrial pollution, pesticides and persistent chemicals such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, commonly known as PFAS.
The agreement was signed by European Commissioner for Environment, Water Resilience and a Competitive Circular Economy Jessika Roswall, Flemish Environment Minister Jo Brouns, Walloon Environment Minister Yves Coppieters and Brussels State Secretary Ans Persoons.
According to the European Commission’s announcement, the agreement follows a detailed examination of Belgium’s implementation of European water legislation and identifies measures requiring greater attention from regional authorities.
Belgium is the second EU Member State to complete a structured dialogue under a Commission initiative launched in November 2025.
The process is intended to improve implementation of existing environmental requirements rather than establish an entirely new legislative framework.
European water legislation already obliges Member States to assess the condition of their rivers and groundwater, control pollution and prepare management plans intended to improve water quality.
However, achieving the objectives of the EU’s Water Framework Directive remains difficult in several countries, particularly where pollution, agricultural activity and urban development place competing demands on water resources.
Belgium presents additional administrative complications because responsibility for environmental policy and water management is divided principally between three regional governments.
Watercourses also cross regional and international boundaries, requiring cooperation with neighbouring countries.
The Commission’s review examined Belgium’s third generation of river basin management plans and its second generation of flood risk management plans.
Technical discussions identified areas where implementation could be accelerated, particularly regarding pollution controls, water efficiency and coordination between public authorities.
Under the agreement, Flanders will prioritise investment in water resilience and stronger action against industrial pollution.
The region intends to use its IMPULSE programme to support improvements in water management and pollution reduction.
Industrial discharges are among the issues specifically identified for closer scrutiny.
The joint statement calls for more systematic reviews of permits governing water abstraction and industrial wastewater discharges, particularly where existing activities place pressure on rivers and groundwater.
The agreement also highlights the need to tackle persistent chemical pollution.
PFAS have become a significant environmental concern because many of these substances degrade extremely slowly and can accumulate in water, soil and living organisms.
Certain PFAS compounds have been associated with adverse health effects, although the risks depend on the individual chemical, exposure level and duration.
The Commission’s commitments include stronger action on PFAS and pesticides, alongside improvements in monitoring and pollution prevention.
Agricultural pollution is another area requiring attention.
Fertilisers and pesticides can enter rivers and groundwater through runoff or infiltration, creating difficulties for water treatment and contributing to the deterioration of aquatic ecosystems.
The three regions have agreed to strengthen cooperation with farmers, retailers and researchers to support more sustainable agricultural practices, including expanding markets for organic products.
Wallonia has committed to continuing investment in river restoration and improved water resilience, with particular attention to the Vesdre basin.
The region intends to use a €300 million loan secured from the European Investment Bank in 2025 to support restoration work.
The Vesdre basin experienced severe flooding in July 2021, when widespread destruction across eastern Belgium exposed weaknesses in flood protection and the management of vulnerable river valleys.
Restoration measures can include improving river channels, reconnecting floodplains and using natural systems to retain water during periods of heavy rainfall.
The regional authorities also intend to support industrial companies investing in water-efficient production technologies and environmental innovation.
These measures are intended to reduce pressure on water resources while helping businesses adapt to changing environmental requirements.
Wallonia has additionally committed to supporting cleaner agricultural practices, consistent with the wider national objective of reducing pollution from fertilisers and pesticides.
The Brussels-Capital Region will concentrate on improving water governance and wastewater treatment.
Urban wastewater infrastructure is particularly important in densely populated areas, where drainage networks and treatment facilities must accommodate domestic sewage, commercial activity and rainfall.
Heavy precipitation can place additional pressure on combined sewer systems, potentially increasing the risk of untreated or insufficiently treated wastewater entering natural watercourses.
Improving treatment capacity and water management requires investment in infrastructure, monitoring and coordination between the authorities responsible for sanitation and environmental protection.
The Brussels commitments therefore form part of the wider European effort to modernise urban wastewater systems and improve the ecological condition of rivers passing through major cities.
The agreement also identifies the need for closer cooperation in the Scheldt and Meuse river basins.
Both river systems cross national boundaries, making their management dependent on coordination between Belgium and neighbouring countries.
Regional governments have committed to supporting the restoration of floodplains and the removal of barriers affecting shared watercourses where appropriate.
The measures are intended to improve the condition of aquatic ecosystems while strengthening natural protection against floods and droughts.
The Commission will support Belgium through initiatives under the European Water Resilience Strategy, including research, digital technologies, technical expertise and assistance in mobilising public and private investment.
However, the joint statement signed in Leuven does not itself establish a new binding regulatory regime or guarantee that all the investments identified will be financed.
Its importance will depend on whether the three regional governments translate their commitments into funded projects, revised permits and measurable improvements in water quality.
For the European Commission, Belgium’s agreement is also part of a wider programme of structured discussions with Member States on compliance with EU water legislation. Further national dialogues are expected as Brussels seeks to improve implementation across the Union.
The worst flooding struck parts of Valencia and Alicante, where swollen rivers overwhelmed roads, flooded residential districts and disrupted transport. Authorities ordered residents of 145 municipalities to remain indoors as rescue operations continued on Monday, 19th October.
The disaster has revived memories of the October 2024 floods, which killed more than 230 people in the Valencia region and prompted widespread criticism of the authorities’ emergency warnings and response.
The coastal town of Oliva, in Valencia province, was among the worst affected areas. Approximately 2,000 people were evacuated from seven campsites as floodwaters spread through low-lying neighbourhoods, while residents elsewhere sought refuge on upper floors and rooftops.
According to reports from the Spanish news agency EFE, emergency crews were reinforced by Spain’s Military Emergencies Unit, whose personnel were deployed from their base at Bétera to assist local firefighters and rescue teams.
Helicopters were used to reach people trapped by the rising water. Roads became impassable, vehicles were swept away and several settlements were temporarily isolated as streams and drainage channels overflowed.
The scale of the rainfall was exceptional even for a region accustomed to intense autumn storms. In parts of Valencia and Alicante, precipitation approached 700 litres per square metre over approximately 48 hours, equivalent to 700 millimetres of rain.
Pego, in neighbouring Alicante province, recorded more than 600 millimetres within approximately 36 hours, placing considerable pressure on local waterways and drainage infrastructure.
Two women died during the weekend, including one swept away by floodwaters near Cabrera de Mar, north of Barcelona, and another whose body was recovered near Sagunto, in Valencia.
A third woman was found dead inside a flooded property in Oliva during rescue operations on Monday. Separately, a 64-year-old man died after suffering a heart attack at a flooded campsite in the same town, according to EFE’s account of the incident.
The regional authorities activated level-two emergency arrangements, enabling additional resources to be mobilised as local services confronted the consequences of prolonged rainfall.
At the height of the emergency, stay-at-home restrictions covered approximately 800,000 people. These measures were subsequently eased in many municipalities, although restrictions remained in force in particularly exposed districts.
Schools were closed in affected areas, roads were blocked and rail services disrupted. The situation remained particularly difficult where floodwaters had entered homes, commercial premises and tourist accommodation.
Storm Adam has inevitably drawn comparisons with the disaster of October 2024, when catastrophic flooding in eastern Spain exposed serious weaknesses in emergency communication, evacuation procedures and coordination between public authorities.
That earlier disaster generated disputes over responsibility between regional and national institutions, particularly concerning the timing of warnings and the deployment of rescue resources.
The latest flooding places those questions back on the political agenda. Spain’s decentralised administrative structure gives regional governments substantial responsibility for civil protection, while the central government can provide military assistance and additional emergency resources.
The deployment of the Military Emergencies Unit demonstrates how rapidly local incidents can require national intervention when extreme rainfall affects several municipalities simultaneously.
The challenge extends beyond issuing weather warnings. Authorities must determine whether warnings reach vulnerable residents, whether evacuation routes remain accessible and whether emergency personnel can intervene before flooding becomes dangerous.
In communities close to rivers, floodplains and coastal drainage systems, these decisions become particularly consequential when rainfall accumulates over a short period.
The disaster also raises questions about infrastructure investment and the application of European flood-risk legislation.
Under the EU’s Floods Directive, Member States are required to assess flood risks, prepare hazard maps and develop management plans designed to reduce the consequences for human health, economic activity and the environment.
Those obligations require national and regional authorities to identify vulnerable areas and consider preventive measures, including land-use planning, flood defences and emergency preparedness.
Extreme rainfall does not produce the same consequences everywhere. The effects depend partly on local geography, drainage capacity, urban development and the condition of waterways.
Meteorological warnings had also extended towards Catalonia as the weather system moved northwards, creating additional concern in areas where saturated ground could increase the risk of further flooding.
For the affected municipalities, the immediate priorities remain the completion of rescue operations, restoration of essential services and assessment of damage to homes, roads and businesses.
The longer-term examination will concern whether the emergency arrangements and infrastructure improvements undertaken since the 2024 disaster were sufficient to reduce the consequences of another major autumn storm.
Four years ago nearly every government on Earth agreed to protect nature. Now, as countries gather for Cop17, the pressure is on to follow through on those commitments
Passersby could smell the dead fish before they saw them. In August, more than 3,000 pike, roach, carp and rudd were found lifeless along the River Wensum in Norwich. Some gasped for air in their final moments, desperate for the oxygen that heatwave conditions had depleted in the water. Investigators believe that the die-off was triggered by heavy rainfall that flushed through high concentrations of pollution at a time when wildlife were already struggling.
The 45-mile (70km) chalk river is one of about 250 in the country. They are a geological accident almost unique to Britain – and one of Earth’s rarest habitats. They emerge from chalk aquifers and are home to species such as freshwater shrimp, otters and stoneflies, also providing drinking water for millions of people. But just 11 have formal protection, with many ravaged by sewage pollution and overextraction. The Norfolk river is one of the few that does have legal protection, but it is in poor ecological health.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Norwich Green Party
© Photograph: Norwich Green Party
© Photograph: Norwich Green Party
Warning for other Arctic communities as residents told not to use water in Longyearbyen in Svalbard, one of the fastest-warming places in the world
Residents of a remote town in Norway that is in one of the fastest-warming places in the world have been told they must no longer drink tap water due to heavy metal contamination that scientists have linked to the thawing permafrost.
Longyearbyen, in the archipelago of Svalbard, gets its main drinking water supply from a 1.5 mile-long (2.5km) dammed lake called Isdammen, or “ice pond”. Higher temperatures as a result of the climate crisis have thawed permafrost, leading to newly exposed bedrock leaching metals into the pond.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Rimante_Hegland/Getty Images/iStockphoto
© Photograph: Rimante_Hegland/Getty Images/iStockphoto
© Photograph: Rimante_Hegland/Getty Images/iStockphoto
This month’s biodiversity summit in Yerevan, Armenia, aims to push governments to meet the 23 targets agreed at Cop15 in 2022
This month, nearly every country on Earth will return to the question of how to stem the rapid destruction of the natural world. Humans are driving it, but so far we have not found a way to stop it.
In late 2022, governments reached an ambitious once-in-a-decade deal to better protect nature amid scientific warnings that the planet is going through the largest loss of life since the extinction of the dinosaurs. Now, they are assessing their progress on the targets for the first time.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Andrej Ivanov/AFP/Getty Images
© Photograph: Andrej Ivanov/AFP/Getty Images
© Photograph: Andrej Ivanov/AFP/Getty Images
Spar pilot scheme will test whether heirloom fruit can thrive in today’s commercial and environmental conditions
Only about 10 of the 2,000 types of apples growing in Austria can be found in supermarkets among the polished, pristine fruit usually on display – a sad ratio according to fans of historic varieties being primed for a comeback.
One of the country’s biggest retail chains has embarked on a pilot rollout of unusual and long-forgotten apples enjoyed in previous centuries, riding an international trend of reviving heirloom fruit and vegetables.
Continue reading...
© Photograph: Marek Slusarczyk/Alamy
© Photograph: Marek Slusarczyk/Alamy
© Photograph: Marek Slusarczyk/Alamy
Login