Connect with us

News

Climate Concerns Rise Over Sponsorships at 2026 Winter Olympics

Published

on

The 2026 Winter Olympics in northern Italy are facing mounting criticism over the environmental impact of their sponsorship deals, with scientists and athletes warning that the Games’ carbon footprint could threaten the future of winter sports.

A report by Scientists for Global Responsibility and the New Weather Institute, titled Olympics Torched, estimates that the Games themselves will produce around 930,000 tonnes of CO2 emissions. However, just three sponsorship agreements with major corporations could add 1.3 million tonnes more, more than doubling the total impact. The sponsors identified are oil and gas company Eni, car manufacturer Stellantis, and Italy’s national airline, ITA Airways, with Eni responsible for over half of the added emissions.

The report warns that the combined emissions could result in the loss of 5.5 square kilometres of snow cover in the Dolomites, equivalent to more than 3,000 Olympic-sized ice hockey rinks. Organisers have already announced plans to produce 2.4 million cubic metres of artificial snow for the Games, requiring 948,000 cubic metres of water, as warming temperatures continue to reduce natural snow and glaciers in the region.

“Even without the growing mountain of scientific evidence on the impact of global heating on winter sports, it is plain enough to anyone visiting actual mountains that snow cover is being lost and glaciers are melting,” said Stuart Parkinson, director of Scientists for Global Responsibility. He added that winter sports contribute directly to climate change through emissions and indirectly by promoting major polluters through sponsorship.

The report calls for urgent action, urging the Winter Olympics to end partnerships with high-carbon corporations, avoid new venue construction, and reduce spectator travel by air. Swedish cross-country skier Björn Sandström said the Games’ greatest influence is the signal they send to the world. “When that signal is driven by fossil-fuel sponsorship, it directly contradicts climate science and threatens the future of winter sport,” he said.

See also  Saudi Doctor Charged Over Christmas Market Attack in Magdeburg

Greenlandic biathlete Ukalew Slettermark echoed the concern, arguing that giving oil companies a platform at the Games is unjustifiable. “It’s a complete contradiction when the fossil fuel industry, the biggest contributor to climate change, is allowed to sponsor winter sports, which they are simultaneously threatening,” she said.

The report also highlights broader environmental challenges in the Alps. Italy has lost 265 ski resorts in the past five years due to rising temperatures, and recent studies show mountain regions are warming faster than lowland areas, putting winter sports at risk.

The Milan-Cortina Olympics, spread across the Dolomites, have become a focal point for debates about climate responsibility in global sporting events. Critics say sponsorship deals with polluting corporations undermine efforts to promote sustainability and could damage the credibility of winter sports in a warming world.

Euronews Green has reached out to the International Olympic Committee for comment.

News

US Sanctions Cuban Oil Company Escalate Tensions Amid Deepening Energy Crisis

Published

on

The United States has imposed new sanctions on Cuba’s state-owned oil and gas company Cupet, a move that is expected to further strain already fragile relations between Washington and Havana and deepen the island’s ongoing energy crisis.

The announcement was made on Thursday by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who said the measures target key assets of Cupet that he claimed were “unlawfully expropriated from American owners years ago.” The decision comes as Cuba continues to grapple with severe fuel shortages, rolling blackouts, and a strained national grid that has struggled for years under limited investment and reduced oil imports.

Rubio accused Cuban authorities of “weaponising energy” and using fuel distribution as a tool of political control. He alleged, without providing evidence, that government officials divert scarce energy supplies for military and security use while rationing fuel for the general population. He also said Cuban officials were reselling fuel on secondary markets, further worsening shortages on the island.

The Cuban government has not issued an immediate response to the latest sanctions. In previous statements, it has consistently argued that US restrictions are designed to cripple the economy and place pressure on ordinary citizens rather than the political leadership.

Cupet, which oversees Cuba’s fuel imports, refining, and distribution, operates in a heavily restricted environment. Fuel sales to the public have been severely limited in recent months, with rationing becoming widespread as the country faces one of its worst energy shortages in years.

The sanctions follow earlier US measures targeting Cuban President Miguel Díaz-Canel and other senior officials, further expanding Washington’s pressure campaign on the island’s leadership. US officials have framed the actions as part of a broader effort to push for political and economic change in Cuba.

See also  Zelensky: Nearly 50,000 Russian Troops Amassed in Kursk Amid Ongoing Counteroffensive

Energy shortages in Cuba have worsened over the past five years, driven by aging infrastructure, reduced foreign oil supplies, and tighter international financial constraints. The situation has resulted in frequent power outages, disruptions to public transport, and shortages of essential goods.

Some analysts say the new sanctions could intensify humanitarian challenges on the island. Critics also argue that restricting access to energy infrastructure may complicate efforts by private operators and humanitarian suppliers who rely on state-controlled systems to distribute fuel.

US officials, however, maintain that the measures are aimed at limiting what they describe as the Cuban government’s misuse of resources and its control over strategic sectors of the economy.

With tensions rising and diplomatic engagement limited, the latest sanctions mark another escalation in a long-running standoff between the two countries, with no immediate sign of de-escalation.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Welcomes Rising Inflation Data as Energy Prices Surge Amid Iran Conflict

Published

on

US President Donald Trump has reacted unexpectedly to new economic data showing that inflation in the United States rose to an annual rate of 4.2% in May, saying during a White House briefing that he “loved the inflation” and describing the figures as “great.”

The latest rise in consumer prices comes as the ongoing conflict with Iran continues to disrupt global energy markets. Inflation has accelerated steadily since the beginning of the year, climbing from 2.4% in February, before the outbreak of hostilities, to 3.3% in March and 3.8% in April. The sharpest pressures have come from energy costs following turmoil in the Strait of Hormuz, a vital route for global oil and gas shipments.

Speaking to reporters, Trump dismissed concerns over rising prices and suggested that the United States was managing energy flows through covert operations in the region. He claimed Washington had been “taking out millions of barrels of oil” and referred to undisclosed naval activity in the Gulf. He also said oil prices, currently around $85 per barrel, reflected the impact of recent military actions.

The president, who campaigned on bringing down inflation, acknowledged that the conflict had affected financial markets but maintained that the consequences were justified. He reiterated his position that military action was necessary, arguing that Iran was close to acquiring nuclear weapons. “We have to go and attack,” he said, defending the decision to escalate involvement in the region.

According to official data from the US Bureau of Labor Statistics, energy prices have risen 23.5% over the past year, while gasoline costs have surged by 40.5%, placing additional pressure on households and businesses.

See also  EU Struggles to Find Consensus on Defence Policy Amid Push for European Defence Union

The economic impact is expected to remain a key issue ahead of November’s midterm elections, where voters will decide control of Congress. Rising living costs are already shaping political debate, with critics warning that higher prices could erode household purchasing power.

Among those responding to Trump’s remarks was Senator Bernie Sanders, who criticised the administration’s handling of inflation. In a social media post, he argued that working families were bearing the brunt of rising costs, particularly for fuel, groceries and essential goods, and blamed government policy for worsening economic pressures.

As inflation continues to climb, attention is expected to remain focused on how the administration balances military strategy abroad with economic stability at home.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Abruptly Ends NBC Interview After Clash Over 2020 Election Claims

Published

on

US President Donald Trump abruptly ended a televised interview with NBC after a heated exchange over his repeated claims of fraud in the 2020 presidential election, walking out mid-conversation during a segment that aired over the weekend.

The interview, conducted on Friday and filmed at a farm in Wisconsin, was set against a rural backdrop featuring a tractor and hay bales as Trump spoke to local farmers. The setting was repeatedly disrupted by heavy rain and strong winds, with audio interference making parts of the conversation difficult to follow.

At several points, Trump reacted to the weather conditions, asking, “Is that wind or what?” and later commenting on the sound of thunder, lightning and rain as it intensified outside. Despite the interruptions, host Kristen Welker attempted to continue the discussion, checking with production staff about whether to pause.

Tensions escalated when the conversation turned to Trump’s past claims about election integrity. When challenged, Trump rejected the line of questioning and accused the broadcaster of bias, saying, “You’re a one-sided, crooked network. Sorry. Let’s call it quits because I’ve had enough.”

He then stood up and left the interview, which was being conducted with Kristen Welker for the programme Meet the Press.

Before walking out, Trump also responded to questions on foreign policy, including the situation involving Iran and broader US military strategy. He defended his administration’s defence posture, stating, “Why would I have built the strongest military in the world?” while insisting he did not support prolonged wars.

The exchange became increasingly tense when Welker questioned Trump about a proposed taxpayer-funded initiative aimed at compensating individuals he claims were unfairly targeted during the Biden administration. Trump defended the idea, while also attacking what he described as “fake” and “crooked” media coverage.

See also  Zelensky to Meet European Leaders in London After Heated Clash with Trump

Welker pushed back, stating there was no evidence supporting some of the claims raised. Trump repeated his assertion that the 2020 election had been “rigged” and also suggested without evidence that recent political contests had been compromised.

As the interview deteriorated, Trump said, “You are either crooked or you’re stupid,” before exiting the camera frame while Welker attempted to continue the exchange.

Following the incident, Welker told viewers that she had spoken with Trump the next day regarding the weather disruptions during filming, and that he had indicated willingness to participate in another interview at a later date.

Continue Reading

Trending