Companies are now accountable for emissions and environmental risk in supplier facilities they do not own. Most sustainability programs were not built for that scope.
Two Arizona rate cases approved increases of up to 300% for small rural water systems with aging infrastructure, reflecting a national pattern Pew and AWWA research puts at $2.1 trillion in need by 2050.
Companies that map their full supply chain typically find more than they expected: hidden concentration, environmental exposure several tiers deep, and risk that travels farther than anyone modeled.
The data is better than it has ever been. It is also revealing something uncomfortable: visibility and control are not the same thing.
Pennsylvania has addressed less than 2% of its documented inventory of orphaned and abandoned wells, each one a potential source of methane emissions, groundwater contamination, and safety risk.
DOE's Idaho Operations Office approved a preliminary safety analysis for Oklo's Aurora reactor under the Reactor Pilot Program, a staged federal framework for advanced nuclear deployment.
Global energy transition investment hit $2.3 trillion in 2025. But capital is concentrating in data centers and a few large managers, leaving most clean energy deals competing for less.
Sustainability teams must now report the same data through CSRD, IFRS S1 and S2, CDP, and GRI at once. Software providers are splitting into two distinct categories to keep up.
Global climate reporting relies on emissions data collected under different methodologies, standards, and frameworks, making cross-border comparisons more difficult than many assume.
Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Thailand have enacted mandatory sustainability disclosure. Third-party assurance lags years behind, leaving a gap between what is filed and what can be trusted.
Scope 3 emissions represent 75% of most corporate footprints, but 79% of companies say supplier data is their top challenge. That gap is widening as mandates tighten.
The Army Corps of Engineers Far East District just earned the Army Safety Star after seven years of work. What that process requires puts the Longview disaster in sharper context for EHS leaders.
MIT research shows third-party audited companies initially report 13.7% higher emissions. That is not failure. It is what honest measurement looks like — and regulators are watching.
A UK consortium validated a floating hydrogen hub delivering 5MW of clean shore power to docked ships with no grid connection, cutting years off typical port electrification timelines.
Ameresco's Phase 1 manhole rehab in Mesquite, TX shows how cities are managing inflow and infiltration compliance risk as EPA enforcement on wastewater systems tightens heading into summer.
Regulators want data with a documented chain of custody. Assurance providers want controls, not commitments. Most corporate sustainability programs were not built for any of those three things.
A University of Rochester solar desalination system now extracts lithium directly from seawater, a development procurement teams tracking battery supply chain risk should follow.
The regulatory framework for industrial radiography involves multiple federal and state agencies, dose limits that carry criminal exposure if violated, and compliance failures specific enough that inspectors arrive with a checklist most field crews have never read.
OSHA's enforcement priorities have shifted, inspection weighting has evolved, and heat illness citations are expanding without a finalized federal standard, leaving many EHS programs misaligned with how inspections are actually being conducted in 2026.
The exposure most EHS teams are carrying right now is not from failing operations. It is from the inability to demonstrate that operations are succeeding.