Connect with us

Published

on

What does it mean to be undocumented in the United States, to live in fear of loved ones being deported, to feel the formalized language of being ‘alien’ knowing it is a tactic to dehumanize us? When asked to share our stories, which ones do we tell?

I’ve learned over time how to decipher which version to share and which aspects to keep. For me, it depends on the community in which I tell it and the sense of ‘belonging’ I perceive from the places I share it.

Understanding climate change has meant digging into history, my ancestral knowledge, why my parents moved from Zacatecas, Mexico, to Minnesota, and embracing what makes a place ‘home.’ I learned that Zacatecas was a hot spot for mining, silver, copper, and gold as exports to Canada and the United States. My family held these jobs, which meant handling the TNT for land blasting and other unimaginable work. My dad was a worker in an open mine just a few miles from our home, a profession that left him with the scars to prove the physical demand. When I was born in 1992, both of my parents were already sick, and I was born with a lot of health complications. Doctors told my parents that if we remained in the community, it would be challenging to keep me healthy. I am not sure that my parents made the connection between heavy industry and our sickness. Still, my parents desperately wanted me to be healthy, so we migrated to the U.S. Now, I see the interconnections with corporations who positioned jobs that poisoned us as viable opportunities to make a living and that my parents had to choose between staying and remaining sick or migrating for the promise of health and a better life. I see the sacrifice that they made for me.

I know how people think and talk about immigrants, and I know the importance of what it means to share my story as part of this collective narrative. I know that it will resonate with so many others. I am holding the fear of wanting to protect my people while learning the importance of being more open so that we can be visible and represented in the climate conversation, too.

Moving to Minneapolis, we rented a room, and my school was near the HERC (Hennepin Energy Recovery Center), the state’s largest trash incinerator. We did not know the HERC was burning 1,000 tons of trash per day, with it emitting mercury, lead, carbon monoxide, and dioxins into the air. We did not know that the surrounding community had asthma rates in children five times the national average. I spent childhood years playing in the neighborhood, but I only learned about the dangers of the HERC a year ago. I now recall when we moved to the suburb of Richfield, that my sickness had gotten better. The HERC was built 34 years ago, and for a long time was positioned as “green energy.” I wonder how might things have been different if this information had been more openly available? I am grateful for the work of community groups, environmental justice activists and organizers who are dedicated to telling these truths. Yet, there is more work to do to make this environmental injustice and its importance known in the Latinx community. In my role, as Associate Executive Director of COPAL (Communities Organizing Latinx Power and Action), I have the power and privilege to do something about it.

This begins with recognizing the known patterns: who are the culprits in Minnesota and our homelands? When I was 9 years old, my mom was diagnosed with cancer. I began to unpack the layered and cumulative impacts of environmental injustice following our family from one community to the next. The commonalities are powerful corporations that share a greed that puts people last, extraction of land and labor, and monies made for profit first. Thinking about my origin story in Mexico, I now understand that there were policies in place to lessen harm to the health and viability of the community that could have made it possible for my family to stay, but they were not followed. Here in Minnesota, the Cumulative Impacts Environmental Justice Bill passed in the 2023 Legislative Session, yet there are still loopholes for industries to pollute without facing penalties. So, we must keep asking questions and showing up to hold those accountable. To implement laws that protect our people and put the community first. The journey of learning about who I am, the connections of environmental justice in my own story, and knowing what we have been through to be here fills me with mixed feelings about how people talk or think about immigrants as less than. In reality, climate change and the corporations responsible have played a significant role in migrant stories, and that connection is often overlooked.

In 2016, the hateful rhetoric coming from the President of the United States left an impact on me. I remember doing homework at the dining table after school, and my mom was in the kitchen. We listened as he talked on the news, saying that illegal immigrants were not people but animals. Something deeply stirred in me as I heard threats to make our existence here less visible. As a DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) recipient, which granted me temporary protection, otherwise known as a “Dreamer.” This status and more were at stake, and it was deeply personal. I started teaching citizenship classes so that my community members in Minnesota could become eligible to vote and change the narrative to reflect more accurately seeing people as human beings worthy of that dignity.

With a group of friends, we started teaching courses in Spanish to address the language barrier for a test only offered in English. The first class had thirty participants, and it became an incredibly successful program. In 2018, I met Francisco Segovia, the Executive Director at COPAL. That began our work together at COPAL to address the immediate needs of the Latinx community through policy change. In my role, I work at the intersection of environmental justice, health, wellness, and communications. My pull into this work directly relates to my lived experiences, but making the climate connection to the migrant story is not always accessible to people. It requires deeper awareness and learning for people to unpack their own stories. A big part of this work is listening to people and asking curious questions: where is home? Where are our families from? What cultural aspects, favorite foods, and celebrations make us who we are? What represents home, and how can Minnesota be part of that?

Working on the cumulative impacts of environmental justice and with community members to pass legislation has shown me the importance of sharing our dreams and stories. Crafting stories to share in community are the powerful testimonies that will be essential in public commenting to impact rulemaking where the details and accountability matter and must reflect our lived realities and experiences. Unfortunately, I am not alone in deciphering which version of the story I can tell based on the audience. But I want to get better at leaning into the fullness of what I want to share, despite the reception level I receive or the willingness of mainstream audiences to hear my words. Mostly, I want to share my story in the presence of my beloved community to help others see themselves in my migrant story.

Written by Carolina Oritz, with story coaching support from Change Narrative LLC.

Carolina Ortiz

Carolina Ortiz has been with COPAL since its founding in 2018. She led the communications team for two years and is now the associate executive director. Carolina was born in Zacatecas, Mexico and is currently studying communications at the University of Minnesota. A DREAMer herself, her passion for social justice stems from her own experiences and those of her community.

Carolina is a Climate Generation Window Into COP delegate for COP28. To learn more, we encourage you to meet the full delegation and subscribe to the Window Into COP digest.

The post The Universal Right to a Healthy Environment appeared first on Climate Generation.

The Universal Right to a Healthy Environment

Continue Reading

Climate Change

DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report

Published

on

Welcome to Carbon Brief’s DeBriefed. 
An essential guide to the week’s key developments relating to climate change.

This week

Blazing heat hits Europe

FANNING THE FLAMES: Wildfires “fanned by a heatwave and strong winds” caused havoc across southern Europe, Reuters reported. It added: “Fire has affected nearly 440,000 hectares (1,700 square miles) in the eurozone so far in 2025, double the average for the same period of the year since 2006.” Extreme heat is “breaking temperature records across Europe”, the Guardian said, with several countries reporting readings of around 40C.

HUMAN TOLL: At least three people have died in the wildfires erupting across Spain, Turkey and Albania, France24 said, adding that the fires have “displaced thousands in Greece and Albania”. Le Monde reported that a child in Italy “died of heatstroke”, while thousands were evacuated from Spain and firefighters “battled three large wildfires” in Portugal.

UK WILDFIRE RISK: The UK saw temperatures as high as 33.4C this week as England “entered its fourth heatwave”, BBC News said. The high heat is causing “nationally significant” water shortfalls, it added, “hitting farms, damaging wildlife and increasing wildfires”. The Daily Mirror noted that these conditions “could last until mid-autumn”. Scientists warn the UK faces possible “firewaves” due to climate change, BBC News also reported.

Around the world

  • GRID PRESSURES: Iraq suffered a “near nationwide blackout” as elevated power demand – due to extreme temperatures of around 50C – triggered a transmission line failure, Bloomberg reported.
  • ‘DIRE’ DOWN UNDER: The Australian government is keeping a climate risk assessment that contains “dire” implications for the continent “under wraps”, the Australian Financial Review said.
  • EXTREME RAINFALL: Mexico City is “seeing one of its heaviest rainy seasons in years”, the Washington Post said. Downpours in the Japanese island of Kyushu “caused flooding and mudslides”, according to Politico. In Kashmir, flash floods killed 56 and left “scores missing”, the Associated Press said.
  • SOUTH-SOUTH COOPERATION: China and Brazil agreed to “ensure the success” of COP30 in a recent phone call, Chinese state news agency Xinhua reported.
  • PLASTIC ‘DEADLOCK’: Talks on a plastic pollution treaty have failed again at a summit in Geneva, according to the Guardian, with countries “deadlocked” on whether it should include “curbs on production and toxic chemicals”.

15

The number of times by which the most ethnically-diverse areas in England are more likely to experience extreme heat than its “least diverse” areas, according to new analysis by Carbon Brief.


Latest climate research

  • As many as 13 minerals critical for low-carbon energy may face shortages under 2C pathways | Nature Climate Change
  • A “scoping review” examined the impact of climate change on poor sexual and reproductive health and rights in sub-Saharan Africa | PLOS One
  • A UK university cut the carbon footprint of its weekly canteen menu by 31% “without students noticing” | Nature Food

(For more, see Carbon Brief’s in-depth daily summaries of the top climate news stories on Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday.)

Captured

Factchecking Trump’s climate report

A report commissioned by the US government to justify rolling back climate regulations contains “at least 100 false or misleading statements”, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists. The report, compiled in two months by five hand-picked researchers, inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed” and misleadingly states that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”80

Spotlight

Does Xi Jinping care about climate change?

This week, Carbon Brief unpacks new research on Chinese president Xi Jinping’s policy priorities.

On this day in 2005, Xi Jinping, a local official in eastern China, made an unplanned speech when touring a small village – a rare occurrence in China’s highly-choreographed political culture.

In it, he observed that “lucid waters and lush mountains are mountains of silver and gold” – that is, the environment cannot be sacrificed for the sake of growth.

(The full text of the speech is not available, although Xi discussed the concept in a brief newspaper column – see below – a few days later.)

In a time where most government officials were laser-focused on delivering economic growth, this message was highly unusual.

Forward-thinking on environment

As a local official in the early 2000s, Xi endorsed the concept of “green GDP”, which integrates the value of natural resources and the environment into GDP calculations.

He also penned a regular newspaper column, 22 of which discussed environmental protection – although “climate change” was never mentioned.

This focus carried over to China’s national agenda when Xi became president.

New research from the Asia Society Policy Institute tracked policies in which Xi is reported by state media to have “personally” taken action.

It found that environmental protection is one of six topics in which he is often said to have directly steered policymaking.

Such policies include guidelines to build a “Beautiful China”, the creation of an environmental protection inspection team and the “three-north shelterbelt” afforestation programme.

“It’s important to know what Xi’s priorities are because the top leader wields outsized influence in the Chinese political system,” Neil Thomas, Asia Society Policy Institute fellow and report co-author, told Carbon Brief.

Local policymakers are “more likely” to invest resources in addressing policies they know have Xi’s attention, to increase their chances for promotion, he added.

What about climate and energy?

However, the research noted, climate and energy policies have not been publicised as bearing Xi’s personal touch.

“I think Xi prioritises environmental protection more than climate change because reducing pollution is an issue of social stability,” Thomas said, noting that “smoggy skies and polluted rivers” were more visible and more likely to trigger civil society pushback than gradual temperature increases.

The paper also said topics might not be linked to Xi personally when they are “too technical” or “politically sensitive”.

For example, Xi’s landmark decision for China to achieve carbon neutrality by 2060 is widely reported as having only been made after climate modelling – facilitated by former climate envoy Xie Zhenhua – showed that this goal was achievable.

Prior to this, Xi had never spoken publicly about carbon neutrality.

Prof Alex Wang, a University of California, Los Angeles professor of law not involved in the research, noted that emphasising Xi’s personal attention may signal “top” political priorities, but not necessarily Xi’s “personal interests”.

By not emphasising climate, he said, Xi may be trying to avoid “pushing the system to overprioritise climate to the exclusion of the other priorities”.

There are other ways to know where climate ranks on the policy agenda, Thomas noted:

“Climate watchers should look at what Xi says, what Xi does and what policies Xi authorises in the name of the ‘central committee’. Is Xi talking more about climate? Is Xi establishing institutions and convening meetings that focus on climate? Is climate becoming a more prominent theme in top-level documents?”

Watch, read, listen

TRUMP EFFECT: The Columbia Energy Exchange podcast examined how pressure from US tariffs could affect India’s clean energy transition.

NAMIBIAN ‘DESTRUCTION’: The National Observer investigated the failure to address “human rights abuses and environmental destruction” claims against a Canadian oil company in Namibia.

‘RED AI’: The Network for the Digital Economy and the Environment studied the state of current research on “Red AI”, or the “negative environmental implications of AI”.

Coming up

Pick of the jobs

DeBriefed is edited by Daisy Dunne. Please send any tips or feedback to debriefed@carbonbrief.org.

This is an online version of Carbon Brief’s weekly DeBriefed email newsletter. Subscribe for free here.

The post DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report appeared first on Carbon Brief.

DeBriefed 15 August 2025: Raging wildfires; Xi’s priorities; Factchecking the Trump climate report

Continue Reading

Climate Change

New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit

Published

on

The specter of a “gas-for-wind” compromise between the governor and the White House is drawing the ire of residents as a deadline looms.

Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied against new natural gas pipelines in their state as a deadline loomed for the public to comment on a revived proposal to expand the gas pipeline that supplies downstate New York.

New York Already Denied Permits to These Gas Pipelines. Under Trump, They Could Get Greenlit

Continue Reading

Climate Change

Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims

Published

on

A “critical assessment” report commissioned by the Trump administration to justify a rollback of US climate regulations contains at least 100 false or misleading statements, according to a Carbon Brief factcheck involving dozens of leading climate scientists.

The report – “A critical review of impacts of greenhouse gas emissions on the US climate” – was published by the US Department of Energy (DoE) on 23 July, just days before the government laid out plans to revoke a scientific finding used as the legal basis for emissions regulation.

The executive summary of the controversial report inaccurately claims that “CO2-induced warming might be less damaging economically than commonly believed”.

It also states misleadingly that “excessively aggressive [emissions] mitigation policies could prove more detrimental than beneficial”.

Compiled in just two months by five “independent” researchers hand-selected by the climate-sceptic US secretary of energy Chris Wright, the document has sparked fierce criticism from climate scientists, who have pointed to factual errors, misrepresentation of research, messy citations and the cherry-picking of data.

Experts have also noted the authors’ track record of promoting views at odds with the mainstream understanding of climate science.

Wright’s department claims the report – which is currently open to public comment as part of a 30-day review – underwent an “internal peer-review period amongst [the] DoE’s scientific research community”.

The report is designed to provide a scientific underpinning to one flank of the Trump administration’s plans to rescind a finding that serves as the legal prerequisite for federal emissions regulation. (The second flank is about legal authority to regulate emissions.)

The “endangerment finding” – enacted by the Obama administration in 2009 – states that six greenhouse gases are contributing to the net-negative impacts of climate change and, thus, put the public in danger.

In a press release on 29 July, the US Environmental Protection Agency said “updated studies and information” set out in the new report would “challenge the assumptions” of the 2009 finding.

Carbon Brief asked a wide range of climate scientists, including those cited in the “critical review” itself, to factcheck the report’s various claims and statements.

The post Factcheck: Trump’s climate report includes more than 100 false or misleading claims appeared first on Carbon Brief.

https://www.carbonbrief.org/factcheck-trumps-climate-report-includes-more-than-100-false-or-misleading-claims/

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com