Tuesday, August 18, 2026

 

Leap of faith: Firefighter's ladder too short, woman jumps from 11th floor blaze in Berlin

Police officers stand in front of a high-rise building after a fire in Friedrichshain, 14 August, 2026
Copyright AP Photo

By Kirsten Ripper
Published on

The video shows how the woman made the two-storey drop and land safely in the basket of the ladder next to a firefighter.

Video of a dramatic rescue by firefighters attending an apartment fire in the German capital has gone viral and is now being reported around the world.

When the fire brigade arrived at around 6.30 am on Friday, the woman was already sitting on the outside windowsill of her burning flat on the eleventh floor of a tower block in Friedrichshain, regional public broadcaster Rundfunk Berlin Brandenburg (RBB) reported.

"It really was touch and go," a fire service spokesperson said, pointing out that the Berlin fire brigade's turntable ladder only reached up to about the ninth floor of the 21-storey building.

Smoke had already spread so extensively through the building that hundreds of residents had to be led outside via the stairwell by firefighters and 13 people were injured.

Firefighters work at extinguishing a fire in a high-rise building in Friedrichshain, 14 August, 2026

Firefighters work at extinguishing a fire in a high-rise building in Friedrichshain, 14 August, 2026 AP Photo

Video of the rescue goes viral

And the footage of the dramatic rescue on 14 August has now gone viral.

On X, the video posted by user ColdJack has been viewed more than 3.3 million times and reposted countless times.

The woman has to jump several metres down into the basket of the fire brigade's turntable ladder. She hesitates for a long time before she finally dared make the leap.

The video shows how the woman made the two-storey drop and land safely in the basket of the ladder next to a firefighter.

According to the Berlin fire brigade, 116 emergency personnel were deployed to the incident.

After around five hours, the scene of the fire at the tower block was handed over to the police to investigate the cause.

The footage of the rescue is so spectacular that images of the fire in Berlin, in which fortunately no one was seriously injured, have now been picked up by media outlets across the globe.

But the fire service spokesperson, reflecting on the dramatic operation, said: "That's not something you need to experience every day."

Explainer: What's the EU's carbon market, and why does it matter?

A worker is seen on a pontoon near the former Corus, and current Tata steel factory, background, in IJmuiden, Netherlands, on Tuesday Jan. 30, 2007.
Copyright AP Photo / Peter Dejong


By Marta Pacheco
Published on


The European Commission proposed revising the bloc's major climate policy, the Emissions Trading System (ETS), on 17 July. Euronews explains what the ETS is, why it is being revised and why it has become an incredibly polarising topic on the EU agenda.

The European Commission's revision of the European Union's carbon market, the Emissions Trading System (ETS), was unveiled on 17 July. It came after months of intense lobbying by those seeking to scrap it, and claims from the other side that it should remain unchanged or only slightly adjuste

The ETS review is shaping up to be one of the EU's most consequential climate policy battles because it sits at the intersection of climate ambition, industrial competitiveness and energy affordability.

Euronews' explainer examines the basics of the ETS, what is at stake and why the ETS has been such a hot topic on the EU's agenda.

What is the ETS?

The ETS is a cap-and-trade system used by the EU to lower greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) from heavy-industry sectors that account for around 40% of the EU's total emissions.

In practice, the ETS requires certain industries to pay for the pollution they emit. This means that for each metric tonne of CO2 emitted, they need to purchase ETS allowances.

Some industries have been entitled to free allowances. This prevents them from being forced to relocate to countries with less strict environmental rules, so-called carbon leakage.

Under the previous ETS design, the system's emissions cap was set to reach zero free allowances by 2039.

Every year, the total number of allowances has been reduced to ensure emissions fall in line with the EU's climate targets.

The Commission proposed to extend it beyond 2039, continuing conditional free allocation for industry to address competitiveness concerns, as many industrial sectors are expected to continue producing some emissions well beyond that date.

Why is the Commission revising the ETS?

The ETS was implemented in 2005 to help the EU meet its obligations under the Kyoto Protocol, the world's first legally binding agreement to reduce GHG emissions. Since then, it has cut greenhouse gas emissions by roughly 50% in its covered sectors.

The current ETS system is based on the EU's 2030 climate goals, which require the bloc to reduce GHG emissions by 55% compared to 1990 levels, under the European Climate Law adopted in 2021. By 2050, the EU is legally bound to reach net-neutrality.

But the EU has also now adopted an intermediary binding climate target to reduce net GHG emissions by 90% by 2040.

The Commission says that predictability and stability are needed for investments, and the ETS must be revisited accordingly to reach the new target.

In its upcoming fourth legislative revision, it will assess whether key design features, such as free allocation of allowances and market functioning, continue to balance the EU's climate and competitiveness goals.

Which industries are covered?

Steel and iron, cement, chemicals, oil refineries, paper and pulp, glass, ceramics, and aluminium are all covered by the ETS; aviation and maritime are also partly covered.

Flights within the European Economic Area must pay for the emissions they produce. International flights arriving in Europe from destinations within 5,000 km are required to pay for their CO2 emissions starting in 2029, according to the new Commission proposal.

Large ships calling at EU ports have been included in the EU ETS since 2024, with shipping companies gradually becoming responsible for all of their reported emissions.

The collected revenues are meant to be channelled to clean technologies, including the decarbonisation of heavy industries, which are typically harder to go green. The idea is to encourage industries to pollute less while also monetising it for the green transition.

What's at stake?

There will be both winners and losers after changes to the carbon market, depending on whether carbon will be priced higher or lower. The revision may also determine the pace of financing Europe's green transition.

The ETS has raised a total of €265.7 billion since its inception, with the majority going directly to EU countries. Part of the revenues are also channelled to EU funding programmes that support investments in clean tech innovation and the energy transition.

From 2013 to the end of 2025, ETS auctions have raised over €258 billion in revenue. In 2025 alone, revenues totalled more than €43 billion, with some €24 billion directly benefiting EU countries. However, not all of these funds went to the energy transition.

Now, the Commission wants member states to earmark at least 50% of ETS revenues for industry to decarbonise domestic industry. This could be politically significant, as many finance ministries have used ETS income to support general state budgets.

Who wants to scrap it and who wants to keep it?

Several industries, particularly the chemical industry, were instrumental in putting the ETS in the spotlight as one of the culprits for the high electricity prices.

They argued that high energy prices were shutting down factories in Europe, which never fully recovered after ditching cheap Russian gas. Carbon costs were passed on the electricity bill, exacerbating their lack of competitiveness vis-a-vis China and the United States.

The industry was backed by several EU countries, with Italy openly asking for the ETS to be scrapped. Austria, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, and Poland — nations traditionally more reliant on fossil fuels — also sided against high carbon costs.

Portugal, Spain, Denmark, Finland and countries producing vast amounts of renewable energy were lobbying the Commission to keep the ETS and not to eliminate climate ambition, citing important revenues for sectors in need of decarbonisation.

Interestingly, among heavy-industry sectors, some companies that had already invested in clean technologies to decarbonise their operations were also backing a more robust ETS rather than scrapping it, fearing lost investment and regulatory certainty.

Even among the supporters, several EU countries have asked for more free allowances in light of a sluggish competitiveness landscape.

Why did the ETS become controversial?

The controversy boils down to a fundamental trade-off.

Supporters say the ETS is the most cost-effective way to cut emissions because it makes pollution more expensive and rewards cleaner technologies.

Critics argue that, unless accompanied by strong support measures, it could raise energy costs, put European industry at a disadvantage and disproportionately affect households — as the EU is planning to launch ETS2, a separate piece of legislation, from 2028, covering fuel suppliers for road transport and buildings.

Consumers will not buy ETS allowances directly, but fuel suppliers are expected to pass some of the carbon cost on through higher prices for petrol, diesel, natural gas and heating oil.

Next steps

The baton has now passed to the EU co-legislators, the European Council and the European Parliament, which will start political talks after the summer break.

However, as it expects the wider ETS overhaul to become one of the EU's most contentious climate files, the Commission wants to fast-track decisions on free carbon allowances for energy-intensive industries. It argues companies need investment certainty long before the broader reform is concluded.

 THE STATE IS ADDICTED TO SIN TAXES

Could the EU ban smoking? Commission to re-write rules for the next generation

REGULATE NICOTINE AS A PESTICIDE
A pack of cigarettes
Copyright Canva

By Leticia Batista Cabanas
Published on

The EU is pursuing its biggest overhaul of tobacco taxation in a decade. The proposed Tobacco Taxation Directive (TTD) raises taxes on cigarettes and introduces taxes on vapes, heated tobacco products, and nicotine pouches. After the Parliament rejected its position, Council negotiations continue.

As part of its Tobacco Control Framework Evaluation, the European Commission reviewed current tobacco laws and found that, while older rules successfully lowered traditional cigarette consumption, they are nowcompletely outdated and failing to stop a massive surge in digital marketing and novel nicotine products.

As a result, the Commission proposed a revision of the Tobacco Taxation Directive (TTD) to implement fresh rules and curb tobacco use. It remains under negotiation after the Parliament failed to adopt a formal position in June 2026, leaving the final decision to the Council of the European Union, where unanimous agreement among member states is required.

Roughly one in four Europeans still smoke or use tobacco regularly. And the problem is increasingly urgent among young people, with data showing that over 11 percent of teens aged 13 to 15 now regularly consume tobacco or trendy nicotine alternatives like flavoured disposable vapes.

“The EU continues to experience roughly 700.000 tobacco-related deaths annually. It remains a leading preventable cause of cancer and cardiovascular disease. From a public health perspective, lower taxes effectively subsidise consumption of a product that kills up to half of long-term users when used as intended”, Professor Martin McKee, Strategic Advisor at the European Public Health Association, told Euronews.

Does the EU have a cigarette problem?

300 billion cigarettes are sold annually in the EU; 24 percent of Europeans smoke, with higher rates among men than women. This massive consumer market is sustained internally, as European factories manufacture more than 220 billion cigarettes each year to meet demand.

Who smokes the most? Eurostat shows ranges from just 8 percent in Sweden up to 37 percent in Bulgaria. Regional disparities are particularly visible among males, with nearly half of the men in Bulgaria (49 percent) and Latvia (48 percent) smoking regularly, compared to less than 10 percent in Sweden.

For women, the highest use is in Greece at 32 percent, while Sweden again reports the minimum at 8 percent. Southern and Eastern European nations consistently report the highest tobacco use, with Croatia and Greece keeping overall smoking rates above 35 percent. Western and Northern European countries like the Netherlands and Denmark have driven their use down to 11 percent and 14 percent respectively.

Smoking poses huge pressures on health sectors. Chronic exposure to tobacco and nicotine results in millions of avoidable hospital admissions every year for respiratory failure, stroke, and ischaemic heart disease. Treating these long-term cardiovascular and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases drains an estimated €25 billion annually directly from public healthcare budgets.

"Even a delay of a few years in major tobacco-control measures translates into millions of additional smokers, preventable diseases and deaths over time”, warned McKee.

The rise of vapes and IQOS

The peak of traditional tobacco consumption is among citizens aged 25 to 54. However, the market is shifting as younger generations pivot away from traditional cigarettes and towards other products.

These include e-cigarettes or vapes (which heat a liquid with nicotine and flavourings into an inhalable aerosol) and heated tobacco products, such as IQOS, which warm processed tobacco without burning it. Nicotine pouches deliver nicotine orally without containing tobacco leaf.

Health authorities consider these products less harmful than conventional cigarettes, but not risk-free. Studies by several health organisations identified potentially harmful substances, including formaldehyde, acetaldehyde and acrolein, while nicotine itself remains highly addictive. Public health experts also warn that nicotine exposure during adolescence can affect brain development and increase the risk of long-term dependence.

According to the World Health Organization, 11.6 percent of teens aged 13 to 15 in the European region use these products. "Marketing and product design are important drivers. Common features include flavours attractive to young consumers, heavy social-media promotion, lifestyle branding, claims that products are modern, cleaner or safer, and discreet designs that are easy to conceal”, said McKee.

The EU wants smokers to quit

The EU wants to create a “Tobacco-Free Generation” by 2040, where less than 5 percent of the population smokes. This is a cornerstone of Europe’s Beating Cancer Plan. But Brussels lacks the authority for a blanket ban on smoking, because health policy remains a sovereign right for states. Instead, the EU can use its fiscal and regulatory powers to dictate how tobacco is sold and promoted around the bloc.

Over the past decade, it implemented several landmark laws. The 2014 Tobacco Products Directive (TPD II) mandated graphic warnings covering 65 percent of packages and capped e-cigarette nicotine concentration at 20 mg/ml. The Tobacco Advertising Directive (2003) banned tobacco advertising, and the 2001/37/EC Directive completely banned misleading product descriptors like "light," "mild," or "low tar", forcing manufacturers to write bold, black-and-white health warnings on all cigarette packs.

The Tobacco Control Framework Evaluation found these measures successful at lowering traditional smoking rates, which fell from 28 percent to 24 percent among adults. However, it warns that these older laws left gaping loopholes that allowed high-tech nicotine alternatives, like novel products, to thrive unregulated.

The new directive

The Commission's proposed revision of the Tobacco Taxation Directive wants to make tobacco and nicotine products significantly more expensive by raising minimum duties across the EU. For example, it targets a dramatic 139 percent increase in minimum excise duties for standard cigarettes, instantly driving up the baseline retail price.

It also establishes mandatory EU-wide minimum excise taxes on vapes, heated tobacco, and nicotine pouches for the first time, and includes raw tobacco leaf in the EU's electronic tracking system to shut down underground black markets and cross-border tax evasion.

The Commission presented the proposal in July 2025. In June 2026, however, the European Parliament rejected its own advisory report on the file after political groups from across the spectrum voted against a heavily amended compromise text. Because tax legislation follows the EU's special legislative procedure, Parliament's opinion is not binding. The proposal therefore remains under discussion in the Council of the European Union, where unanimous approval from all 27 member states is required before it can become law.

"Many people think the European Parliament is deciding the future excise tax rates. We're not. We're giving an opinion that is not legally binding on the Council”, said Patriots for Europe MEP Tomas Kubin, the report’s rapporteur.

Although the Parliament failed to adopt a formal position, the legislative process continues because taxation is decided by the Council under the EU's consultation procedure.

In parallel, countries are implementing national bans within their own borders. Belgium became the first EU nation to outlaw the sale of disposable electronic cigarettes. France followed by passing its own single-usevape ban, alongside strict legislation that outlaws smoking in public parks, beaches, and school areas. The Netherlands has enforced one of Europe's toughest flavour bans by completely prohibiting every vape liquid except for basic tobacco profiles, while simultaneously drafting laws to raise the legal nicotine purchase age from 18 to 21.

What could change if the directive is adopted

If adopted, the revised directive would place huge pressure on tobacco companies by targeting their profits. The industry remains an economic giant in Europe, with total annual sales reaching approximately €130 billion across the bloc. Companies like Philip Morris International and British American Tobacco would face a direct threat to their business models as the EU introduces these new minimum taxes.

Logistically, manufacturers will no longer be able to use novel products as low-tax loopholes to offset declining traditional cigarette revenues. Furthermore, including raw tobacco into the EU's electronic tracking system will force companies to comply with strict supply chain audits, increasing their administrative and operational costs.

If the proposal is ultimately approved by all member states, European consumers would see significant changes in both the pricing and availability of nicotine products.

Public space restrictions are also tightening across several member states through separate national legislation. Belgium, France and the Netherlands have already introduced stricter rules on vaping and smoking in public places. If the revised TTD is eventually adopted, smokers across the EU would also face significantly higher prices for cigarettes and many alternative nicotine products.


Is nicotine a good pesticide?


Is Nicotine a Good Pesticide? Exploring Its Efficacy and Risks

Is nicotine a good pesticide? The answer is complex: while nicotine was an effective early pesticide, its high toxicity to humans and other non-target organisms has largely relegated it to niche applications or historical interest, making it generally not recommended as a good pesticide in modern agriculture

A Historical Look at Nicotine as a Pesticide

Nicotine, derived from the tobacco plant, Nicotiana tabacum, was one of the first widely used insecticides. Its insecticidal properties were recognized centuries ago, and it became commercially available in the late 19th century. Before the advent of synthetic pesticides like DDT, nicotine filled a crucial role in crop protection. Its natural origin and relatively rapid breakdown compared to later synthetic options were initially seen as advantages. However, understanding its limitations and significant risks is essential.

How Nicotine Acts as a Pesticide

Nicotine is a potent neurotoxin. It works by mimicking acetylcholine, a neurotransmitter critical for nerve function in insects. When an insect is exposed to nicotine, the substance binds to acetylcholine receptors in the insect’s nervous system. This disrupts normal nerve impulses, causing overstimulation, paralysis, and ultimately, death. This mode of action is similar to that of some modern neonicotinoid insecticides, although with a far less targeted approach and much higher risk.

Forms and Application Methods

Nicotine-based pesticides were traditionally available in several forms, including:

  • Nicotine sulfate: This was a common salt form of nicotine used in sprays.
  • Nicotine alkaloid: The pure alkaloid form, often mixed with soap or other surfactants to improve its effectiveness.
  • Dust formulations: Nicotine mixed with inert carriers for dusting directly onto plants.

Application methods varied depending on the crop and the target pest:

  • Spraying: The most common method, involving the application of a nicotine solution to foliage.
  • Fumigation: Used in enclosed spaces like greenhouses to control pests in the air.
  • Soil application: Less common, but sometimes used to control soil-borne pests.

The Dark Side: Risks and Drawbacks

While effective against many pests, nicotine’s high toxicity presents significant risks:

  • High Toxicity to Humans: Nicotine is acutely toxic to humans through inhalation, ingestion, and skin absorption. Symptoms of nicotine poisoning include nausea, vomiting, seizures, and respiratory failure.
  • Non-Target Effects: Nicotine is toxic to beneficial insects like bees and ladybugs, disrupting ecological balance.
  • Environmental Persistence: While nicotine degrades relatively quickly compared to some synthetic pesticides, its breakdown products can still persist in the environment and pose risks.
  • Pest Resistance: Some insect populations have developed resistance to nicotine, reducing its effectiveness over time.
  • Regulation and Availability: Due to its toxicity, nicotine-based pesticides are heavily regulated or banned in many countries.

Modern Alternatives

Given the risks associated with nicotine, safer and more effective alternatives are widely available. These include:

  • Synthetic Pyrethroids: These are synthetic versions of naturally occurring insecticides derived from chrysanthemums.
  • Neonicotinoids: A class of insecticides that act on the insect nervous system, similar to nicotine but with (ideally) more targeted action, although their environmental impacts are also of concern.
  • Biological Controls: Using natural predators, parasites, or pathogens to control pests.
  • Insecticidal Soaps and Oils: These are less toxic alternatives that work by suffocating insects.
  • Integrated Pest Management (IPM): A comprehensive approach that combines various pest control methods to minimize pesticide use.

Comparing Nicotine to Modern Pesticides

FeatureNicotineModern Synthetic PesticidesBiological Controls
ToxicityHighVariesLow
SelectivityLowModerate to HighHigh
PersistenceModerateVariesLow
ResistanceHighModerateLow
Environmental ImpactHighVariesLow
CostLow (Historically)ModerateModerate to High
EffectivenessModerateHighVaries

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

What is nicotine’s toxicity level compared to other pesticides?

Nicotine is considered highly toxic compared to many modern synthetic pesticides and especially biological controls. Its LD50 (lethal dose, 50%) is significantly lower, meaning it takes a smaller amount of nicotine to cause death.

Is nicotine allowed for use as a pesticide in organic farming?

Generally, no, nicotine is not permitted for use in certified organic agriculture in most countries. Organic farming emphasizes natural and sustainable pest control methods, and nicotine’s toxicity goes against those principles.

Can I extract nicotine from tobacco for use in my garden?

While technically possible, it is strongly discouraged. Extracting nicotine without proper equipment and expertise can be extremely dangerous, and homemade nicotine solutions can be highly unpredictable in terms of concentration and effectiveness, posing a significant risk to yourself and the environment. Furthermore, such use may be illegal.

What are the symptoms of nicotine poisoning in humans?

Symptoms of nicotine poisoning can range from mild to severe, depending on the dose. Mild symptoms include nausea, vomiting, dizziness, and increased heart rate. Severe symptoms can include seizures, respiratory failure, and even death. Immediate medical attention is crucial if nicotine poisoning is suspected.

Does nicotine only affect insects?

No, nicotine is toxic to a wide range of organisms, including humans, mammals, birds, amphibians, and aquatic invertebrates. Its lack of selectivity is a major drawback compared to more targeted pesticides.

How quickly does nicotine break down in the environment?

Nicotine degrades relatively quickly compared to some synthetic pesticides, with a half-life in soil ranging from a few days to a few weeks, depending on environmental conditions like temperature and moisture. However, its breakdown products can still pose risks. Care must still be taken to minimize environmental exposure.

Are there any situations where nicotine might still be a preferable pesticide?

In very limited circumstances, such as research settings where controlled experiments are conducted and stringent safety precautions are in place, nicotine might be used. However, safer alternatives are almost always available, making nicotine a last resort even in these situations.

How does nicotine compare to neonicotinoids in terms of environmental impact?

While both are neurotoxic insecticides, neonicotinoids are generally considered to have a lower acute toxicity to mammals compared to nicotine. However, neonicotinoids have been linked to significant negative impacts on bee populations and other non-target insects, leading to restrictions on their use in many regions. The environmental impact of both is a serious concern.

Can nicotine-resistant pests become resistant to other pesticides?

Resistance mechanisms can sometimes be cross-resistant, meaning that pests resistant to nicotine might also be resistant to other insecticides with similar modes of action. This underscores the importance of rotating different classes of pesticides and employing IPM strategies to prevent resistance development. Careful planning and varied methods are key.

What is Integrated Pest Management (IPM), and how does it relate to the use of nicotine?

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a holistic approach to pest control that emphasizes prevention, monitoring, and the use of multiple control methods in a way that minimizes environmental risks. The use of nicotine is generally incompatible with IPM principles due to its high toxicity and non-selectivity.

Is it legal to sell tobacco dust as a pesticide?

The legality of selling tobacco dust as a pesticide varies depending on local regulations. In many regions, it is illegal to sell unregistered pesticides, including tobacco dust. Even if it is legal, it is generally not recommended due to the risks associated with nicotine exposure.

What are some safer alternatives to nicotine for controlling aphids?

Safer alternatives for aphid control include insecticidal soaps, horticultural oils, introducing natural predators like ladybugs, and using strong jets of water to dislodge aphids from plants. These methods are generally much safer for humans, beneficial insects, and the environment.