🐍 Capturada una serp d’escala totalment albina a les Borges Blanques (Les Garrigues) en una actuació conjunta d'#AgentsRurals i @mossos.
🟢 És una espècie autòctona i protegida, inofensiva, ja que no és verinosa, aliada contra els rosegadors i vital pels nostres ecosistemes.
Tot el món ramader gira al voltant d'una sola cosa : l'herba.
Tota la cultura dels pastors hi està indissolublement lligada.
No hi ha res més important.
#MilAnysPelsCaminsDeLHerba
Picture this.
A “Great Russian Real Estate Event” held in London. Selling plots of land in occupied Ukraine.
The British government would shut it down within hours.
Today, RIGHT NOW, there is a private, invitation-only event happening in London selling plots of land on *illegally occupied* Palestinian territory.
Companies with documented histories of building on West Bank settlements. They quietly removed ethnic cleansing crimes from their website the moment journalists started looking.
Gwyneth Paltrow (Gwynocide) is helping promote it.
Richard Burgon (in the video below) raised it in Parliament. Nothing was done.
140 Labour MPs wrote a letter. Nothing was done.
The event has went ahead anyway.
The UK government formally recognises Palestine as a state. Israeli settlements are ILLEGAL under international law, the British government itself says so in its own guidance.
And yet here we are.
One rule for Russia. Another rule for Israel.
HOGARES PALEOLÍTICOS
Documentan restos de hogares de hace 15.000 años en el Molí del Salt (Tarragona, España) pertenecientes a los últimos grupos de cazadores-recolectores del Paleolítico Superior
📰https://t.co/O3LRa55vsa
vía @iphes#Paleolitico#Arqueologia
📊 Ja tenim les dades del balanç climàtic de la primavera… i cal destacar que la #primavera de 2026 ha estat la MÉS CÀLIDA registrada a Catalunya des que es tenen dades.
Entrem en detall amb algunes dades? 👀👇
👉IAC-CATAC denuncia que la mala gestió de la Direcció General de Medi Natural posa en risc la conservació dels espais naturals de Catalunya
#mediambient#parcsnaturals@CATAC_IAC
https://t.co/hoYX1higiv
De les carboneres al quad, de les pipes de bruc a passejar-hi gossos, de les pinyes i pinyons al "running"...del bosc productiu al lúdic sense compensar sengles propietaris...a punt a @AjCastelldefels . @ObsForestCAT@xarxaforestal@scea_cat
Les papallones parlen: conservar i potenciar prats i herbassars, és crucial per la salvaguarda de la biodiversitat a l'entorn metropolità de Barcelona; cada pam de terra compta ⬇️
https://t.co/XIwfJl8mBO
It always astonishes me how there is virtually ZERO public debate - or even public awareness - in Europe about the decisions that will most shape ordinary people's lives.
These days, the EU is drafting a new anti-China legal framework where - quite literally - the more affordable and competitive Chinese products are, the more illegal they'd become.
You'd think EU citizens would want to be informed about such things - as it couldn't be more consequential for their prosperity.
Yet I bet virtually no EU citizen is even aware of it, beyond a vague sense that there is some sort of trade dispute going on.
So what's going on exactly? It all centers around a new legal instrument the EU is drafting called the "overcapacity instrument" (https://t.co/mNpCMudYyS).
First of all, the very notion of "overcapacity" is pretty ridiculous to begin with, especially the way it's being defined by the EU, as it basically means being competitive enough to export.
By this definition of "overcapacity," pretty much every European industry that's ever run a trade surplus - German cars, French wine, Italian fashion - has been guilty of "overcapacity."
I'm not even exaggerating: if you read this study by the EU Parliament on "Industrial overcapacities, with a focus on China" (https://t.co/TcwEBoL8mD), they define "overcapacity" as building more capacity than your domestic market can absorb. So the moment you build capacity to export abroad, you're in "overcapacity."
Utterly ridiculous.
And what this "overcapacity instrument" is about is creating a permanent legal mechanism for the EU to block Chinese competition across whole sectors of the economy, if they happen to be in "overcapacity."
In effect, this means that if China is competitive globally in a given sector in such a way that it exports a lot, that's proof of overcapacity, and legally it'd mean that the entire sector can be restricted from the EU market.
Which means it really, factually, is a legal framework where the more affordable and competitive your products are, the more illegal they become.
Which is a CRAZY economic concept! 🤦♂️
Please note that it's different from the anti-subsidy legal instrument, which the EU has already put in place in 2023 (the "Foreign Subsidies Regulation": https://t.co/SvPKFyN0zo).
This "overcapacity instrument" would be above and beyond this: it wouldn't even matter if a particular sector was subsidized by the Chinese government or not, the mere fact of its competitiveness in exports would be grounds for restrictions in the EU.
It doesn't take a genius to understand how badly this could impact everyday people: this is European consumers being forced to pay more for worse products by law, so that uncompetitive European firms don't have to improve.
Politicians frame it as avoiding a "China shock 2.0" but really this is choosing an even steeper self-inflicted decline than is already the case, where EU citizens would subsidize mediocre EU companies that would have even less pressure to catch up. It's a hidden tax: subsidies for uncompetitive firms paid by consumers instead of governments, which in turn makes them less incentivized to become competitive.
The first "China shock" did de-industrialize Europe somewhat, but at least it made things cheaper for European consumers. If this becomes Europe's response to a second "China shock" not only it'd make everything more expensive but it'd do nothing for EU industry: you don't become competitive by banning the competition...
Look at China itself: the way it industrialized was NOT by banning Western firms but on the contrary by welcoming them strategically and learning from them. You learn to compete by... competing, duh!
What I find most shocking in all of this isn't even the policy itself - you can make arguments for and against protectionism, and reasonable people can disagree.
What's shocking is that virtually no European media outlet is explaining any of this to the public. This is unarguably one of the single most consequential economic decisions the EU will make this decade, affecting the price of everything, and it's being drafted in near-total silence.
No newspaper is running the headline "EU plans to make Chinese goods illegal if they're too affordable" - even though that's essentially what's happening.
But that's what you call a "democracy" with "freedom of expression" these days apparently...
💧 S'obre una nova oportunitat per recuperar i revitalitzar els nostres ecosistemes aquàtics.
🌱 La convocatòria dona suport a actuacions de recuperació de riberes i millora de l'estat ecològic de rius i zones humides.
So to sum up:
- the EU cut itself off from Russian oil and gas
- is suffering from unprecedented energy supply issues from the Middle-East
- has industrial energy costs 2-3X higher than its competition
- produces 40% LESS electricity than the US despite having 33% MORE people (and 75% less electricity than China)
And their move - right now, in this context - is to deliberately raise the cost and slow the rollout of Chinese solar, the cheapest and fastest-deploying form of electricity in the market, on the flimsy pretext it's a "security threat."
You'd think the bigger "security threat" would be having your industrial base relocate to countries that didn't voluntarily price themselves out of energy. Or, for that matter, ensuring that any new AI infrastructure or industrial projects gets built anywhere but Europe.
Beyond parody.
The Iranian navy, which has been destroyed eight times, closed the Strait of Hormuz again, because the United States for the seventh time won the war that wasn’t a war, so the United States can open the Strait of Hormuz that was open before the not war.
The not war that started to get the uranium that was completely obliterated, so that the Iranians can’t build the nuclear bomb that they weren’t building for the not war that the United States started.
Then the United States which has nuclear weapons threatening to use nuclear weapons to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons because having nuclear weapons is dangerous.
If the United States saw what the United States is doing in the United States, the United States would invade the United States to liberate the United States from the tyranny of the United States.
Un bus estalvia els problemes d’aparcament als visitants del parc natural de la Zona Volcànica de la Garrotxa.
Per 2 €, el Rumbus ofereix viatges il·limitats durant tot el dia https://t.co/6ZBy2BV20b