Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

GoGreenNation News

Learn more about the issues presented in our films
Show Filters

Shell facing first UK legal claim over climate impacts of fossil fuels

Survivors of a deadly typhoon in the Philippines have filed a claim against the UK's largest oil company.

Shell facing first UK legal claim over climate impacts of fossil fuelsMatt McGrathEnvironment correspondentGetty ImagesVictims of a deadly typhoon in the Philippines have filed a legal claim against oil and gas company Shell in the UK courts, seeking compensation for what they say is the company's role in making the storm more severe.Around 400 people were killed and millions of homes hit when Typhoon Rai slammed into parts of the Philippines just before Christmas in 2021.Now a group of survivors are for the first time taking legal action against the UK's largest oil company, arguing that it had a role in making the typhoon more likely and more damaging.Shell says the claim is "baseless", as is a suggestion the company had unique knowledge that carbon emissions drove climate change.Typhoon Rai, known locally as Odette, was the most powerful storm to hit the Philippines in 2021.With winds gusting at up to 170mph (270km/h), it destroyed around 2,000 buildings, displaced hundreds of thousands of people - including Trixy Elle and her family.She was a fish vendor on Batasan island when the storm hit, forcing her from her home, barely escaping with her life."So we have to swim in the middle of big waves, heavy rains, strong winds," she told BBC News from the Philippines."That's why my father said that we will hold our hands together, if we survive, we survive, but if we will die, we will die together."Trixy is now part of the group of 67 individuals that has filed a claim that's believed to be the first case of its kind against a UK major producer of oil and gas.Getty ImagesA family take shelter in the wake of Typhoon Rai which left hundreds of thousands of people homelessIn a letter sent to Shell before the claim was filed at court, the legal team for the survivors says the case is being brought before the UK courts as that is where Shell is domiciled – but that it will apply the law of the Philippines as that is where the damage occurred.The letter argues that Shell is responsible for 2% of historical global greenhouse gases, as calculated by the Carbon Majors database of oil and gas production.The company has "materially contributed" to human driven climate change, the letter says, that made the Typhoon more likely and more severe.The survivors' group further claims that Shell has a "history of climate misinformation," and has known since 1965 that fossil fuels were the primary cause of climate change."Instead of changing their industry, they still do their business," said Trixy Elle."It's very clear that they choose profit over the people. They choose money over the planet."Getty ImagesShell's global headquarters is in London which is why the claim has been lodged at a UK courtShell denies that their production of oil and gas contributed to this individual typhoon, and they also deny any unique knowledge of climate change that they kept to themselves."This is a baseless claim, and it will not help tackle climate change or reduce emissions," a Shell spokesperson said in a statement to BBC News."The suggestion that Shell had unique knowledge about climate change is simply not true. The issue and how to tackle it has been part of public discussion and scientific research for many decades."The case is being supported by several environmental campaign groups who argue that developments in science make it now far easier to attribute individual extreme weathernevents to climate change and allows researchers to say how much of an influence emissions of warming gases had on a heatwave or storm.But proving, to the satisfaction of a court, that damages done to individuals by extreme weather events are due to the actions of specific fossil fuel producers may be a challenge."It's traditionally a high bar, but both the science and the law have lowered that bar significantly in recent years," says Harj Narulla, a barrister specialising in climate law and litigation who is not connected with the case."This is certainly a test case, but it's not the first case of its kind. So this will be the first time that UK courts will be satisfying themselves about the nature of all of that attribution science from a factual perspective."The experience in other jurisdictions is mixed.In recent years efforts to bring cases against major oil and gas producers in the United States have often failed.In Europe campaigners in the Netherlands won a major case against Shell in 2021 with the courts ordering Shell to cut its absolute carbon emissions by 45% by 2030, including those emissions that come from the use of its products.But that ruling was overturned on appeal last year.There was no legal basis for a specific cuts target, the court ruled, but it also reaffirmed Shell's duty to mitigate dangerous climate change through its policies.The UK claim has now been filed at the Royal Courts of Justice, but this is just the first step in the case brought by the Filippino survivors with more detailed particulars expected by the middle of next year.

Ocean Warmed by Climate Change Fed Intense Rainfall and Deadly Floods in Asia, Study Finds

Ocean temperatures warmed by human-caused climate change fed the intense rainfall that triggered deadly floods and landslides across Asia in recent weeks, according to an analysis released Wednesday

BENGALURU, India (AP) — Ocean temperatures warmed by human-caused climate change fed the intense rainfall that triggered deadly floods and landslides across Asia in recent weeks, according to an analysis released Wednesday.The rapid study by World Weather Attribution focused on heavy rainfall from cyclones Senyar and Ditwah in Malaysia, Thailand, Indonesia and Sri Lanka starting late last month. The analysis found that warmer sea surface temperatures over the North Indian Ocean added energy to the cyclones.Floods and landslides triggered by the storms have killed more than 1,600 people, with hundreds more still missing. The cyclones are the latest in a series of deadly weather disasters affecting Southeast Asia this year, resulting in loss of life and property damage.“It rains a lot here but never like this. Usually, rain stops around September but this year it has been really bad. Every region of Sri Lanka has been affected, and our region has been the worst impacted,” said Shanmugavadivu Arunachalam, a 59-year-old schoolteacher in the mountain town of Hatton in Sri Lanka’s Central Province. Warmer sea surface temperatures Sea surface temperatures over the North Indian Ocean were 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.3 degrees Fahrenheit) higher than the average over the past three decades, according to the WWA researchers. Without global warming, the sea surface temperatures would have been about 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit) colder than they were, according to the analysis. The warmer ocean temperatures provided heat and moisture to the storms.When measuring overall temperatures, the world is currently 1.3 degrees Celsius (2.6 degrees Fahrenheit) warmer than global average during pre-industrial times in the 19th century, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.“When the atmosphere warms, it can hold more moisture. As a result, it rains more in a warmer atmosphere as compared to a world without climate change,” said Mariam Zachariah, with the Centre for Environmental Policy at Imperial College London and one of the report's authors. Using tested methods to measure climate impacts quickly The WWA is a collection of researchers who use peer-reviewed methods to conduct rapid studies examining how extreme weather events are linked to climate change. “Anytime we decide to do a study, we know what is the procedure that we have to follow,” said Zachariah, who added that they review the findings in house and send some of their analysis for peer review, even after an early version is made public.The speed at which the WWA releases their analysis helps inform the general public about the impacts of climate change, according to Zachariah.“We want people everywhere to know about why something happened in their neighborhood," Zachariah said. “But also be aware about the reasons behind some of the events unfurling across the world.”The WWA often estimates how much worse climate change made a disaster using specific probabilities. In this case, though, the researchers said they could not estimate the precise contribution of climate change to the storms and ensuing heavy rains because of limitations in climate models for the affected islands. Climate change boosts Asia's unusually heavy rainfall Global warming is a “powerful amplifier” to the deadly floods, typhoons and landslides that have ravaged Asia this year, said Jemilah Mahmood, with the Sunway Centre for Planetary Health, a Malaysia-based think tank that was not involved with the WWA analysis.“The region and the world have been on this path because, for decades, economic development was prioritized over climate stability,” Mahmood said. “It’s created an accumulated planetary debt, and this has resulted in the crisis we face.”The analysis found that across the affected countries, rapid urbanization, high population density and infrastructure in low lying flood plains have elevated exposure to flood events.“The human toll from cyclones Ditwah and Senyar is staggering,” said Maja Vahlberg, a technical adviser with the Red Cross Red Crescent Climate Centre. “Unfortunately, it is the most vulnerable people who experience the worst impacts and have the longest road to recovery.”Delgado reported from Bangkok, Thailand.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

Trump Administration Launches Regenerative Agriculture Pilot

December 10, 2025 – The Trump administration will direct $700 million into a voluntary regenerative agriculture pilot program that builds on existing conservation programs, top health and agriculture officials announced Wednesday. The funds will be split between existing conservation programs under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This includes $300 million for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) […] The post Trump Administration Launches Regenerative Agriculture Pilot appeared first on Civil Eats.

December 10, 2025 – The Trump administration will direct $700 million into a voluntary regenerative agriculture pilot program that builds on existing conservation programs, top health and agriculture officials announced Wednesday. The funds will be split between existing conservation programs under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). This includes $300 million for the Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) and $400 million for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP). These funds will come from the fiscal year 2026 budgets for both programs. USDA also plans to leverage the SUSTAINS Act to bring corporate partners and likely funds into the effort. The SUSTAINS Act allows the USDA to accept private funding to support conservation programs. While it was passed by Congress in 2023, the USDA under the Biden administration sought public input on how exactly to leverage these private funds. No companies appear to be tied to the plan yet. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said conservation efforts at the USDA’s Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) are currently “severely fragmented,” or simply address one part of conservation. The new regenerative agriculture initiative aims to create a unified process that emphasizes whole-farm planning, she continued. This includes finding ways to address soil, water, farm vitality and more under one system. Such planning can improve soil health, an issue often raised by the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) movement. Conservation groups welcomed the initiative, but raised questions about how it will be fully executed. Whole-farm planning is already part of CSP, said Jesse Womack, policy specialist at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition. However, seeing the USDA adopt this philosophy more broadly into conservation is a positive step, he said. Meanwhile, EQIP has often allowed producers to implement conservation practices individually, which is helpful for farmers taking a first step in this style of farming, he continued. “I think it’s really cool to imagine for folks experimenting with practices for the first time, that that experimenting is happening as part of a larger plan,” Womack said. Farm Action, a nonprofit that advocates for small farms, celebrated the investment but emphasized that the administration must ensure there is adequate staffing at NRCS to allocate funds “quickly and fairly.” The service has lost at least 2,400 employees since January due to Trump administration efforts to reduce the federal workforce. In its 2026 budget request, the administration suggested eliminating NRCS technical assistance. In the final appropriations bill that funds the USDA and other agencies, Congress took a more moderate approach, but still cut nearly $100 million. “Regenerative agriculture requires whole-farm, science-based planning, and right now the agency lacks the army of specialists needed to help farmers design and implement those plans,” Sarah Starman, senior food and agriculture campaigner at Friends of the Earth, said in a statement. Starman also said regenerative agriculture efforts need to include phasing out synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. The incentives under the new initiative for Integrated Pest Management “fall short” in creating an off-ramp from these chemicals, she continued. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. joined Rollins at Wednesday’s announcement, calling the initiative the “fulfillment of a promise” made in the second MAHA Commission report. Kennedy has rallied against pesticides throughout his career. But so far, pesticide critics who have long backed Kennedy are questioning whether the administration is prepared to take substantial action. During the announcement, Kennedy dismissed concerns that recent Environmental Protection Agency approvals of pesticides and PFAS chemicals are threatening a key pillar of his supporters. “We’re in discussions with Lee Zeldin at EPA and we’re very very confident of his commitment to make sure to reduce toxic exposures to the American people,” Kennedy said. (Link to this post). The post Trump Administration Launches Regenerative Agriculture Pilot appeared first on Civil Eats.

MacKenzie Scott Has Given $26B to Nonprofits Since 2019. Here's What She Supported in 2025

The billionaire and author MacKenzie Scott revealed $7.1 billion in donations to nonprofits Tuesday, bringing her overall giving since 2019 to $26.3 billion

The billionaire and author MacKenzie Scott revealed $7.1 billion in donations to nonprofits Tuesday, bringing her overall giving since 2019 to $26.3 billion. Scott first pledged to give away the majority of her wealth in 2019 after her divorce from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Since, she's distributed large, unrestricted gifts to nonprofits without asking for applications or progress reports. Largely, her giving has focused in the U.S., though not exclusively. Scott doesn't have a public foundation and so it's not easy to independently track her giving. But she's revealed her gifts in occasional blog posts and essays posted to her website, Yield Giving, which also now includes a database of her grants. The amount of her annual giving has fluctuated, ranging from a reported $2.1 billion in 2023 to $7.1 billion in 2025. In 2025, Scott's gifts showed a particular focus on supporting colleges and universities, especially historically Black and tribal schools, as well as community colleges. She also gave major gifts to organizations focused on mitigating and adapting to climate change. A new emphasis on climate organizations When the list of 2025 recipients was published Tuesday, it included a number of significant gifts to climate groups, with the largest — $90 million — going to the collaborative Forests, People, Climate, which focuses on stopping tropical deforestation. The nonprofit Panorama Global has analyzed Scott's giving over the years and found that historically, giving to the environment has represented a small part of her overall donations. In 2024, only 9.4% of Scott's gifts went to environmental groups, though on average the amount of those gifts was larger than to other areas, according to their research. “What we’re now seeing is different years have different focus areas,” said Gabrielle Fitzgerald, founder and CEO of The Panorama Group. “So last year, there was a really big economic security focus. This year, I really see education and climate.” Scott's assets have grown even as she's given away a fortune When Scott started detailing her giving in 2020, her fortune was valued around $36 billion, according to Forbes. It's fluctuated over the years, but today, Forbes estimates her net worth to be $33 billion, even as she's given away more than $26 billion. Initially, Scott told grantees not to expect or plan for a second gift, but over time, she has given additional gifts to some of the same organizations, often larger than her original grant. “She clearly is getting comfortable with reinvesting in partners that she thinks are doing good work,” said Fitzgerald. At least one organization, CAMFED, which supports girl's education in African countries, has now received four gifts from Scott, including the largest so far, $60 million, in 2025, according to Scott's website. Many generous gifts to minority colleges and universities In addition to at least $783 million Scott gave to historically Black colleges and universities in 2025, her website details many gifts to tribal colleges, community colleges and scholarship funds. “It looks like she sees a lot of need, particularly in two areas ensuring people are getting higher education and ensuring that groups are working to protect the climate,” said Fitzgerald. While Scott has given to higher education since 2020, those gifts have historically been a smaller portion of her education funding. In a 2024 analysis, Panorama Global found nearly 30% of Scott's education grantees were focused on youth development. Marybeth Gasman, a professor at Rutgers University and expert on HBCUs, said she noticed that what sets many of the HBCUs who receive Scott's funding apart from others is steady, consistent leadership and Gasman said, “She’s very interested in institutions that are rooted in community.” The value of unrestricted grants Scott does not put any conditions on her donations, allowing recipients to decide how and when to spend the funds. Unrestricted funding is rare from major donors and foundations, with many choosing to support very specific projects over specific timeframes. However, research from the Center for Effective Philanthropy in 2023 found that concerns about nonprofits misusing Scott's funds or growing unsustainably have largely not been born out. In part, that may be because Scott's team researches and vets groups extensively before making donations. Unrestricted gifts can help nonprofits weather disruptions, test new approaches or technologies or invest in the systems and infrastructure that underpin their work. For example, after the Trump administration cut funding from the U.S. Agency for International Development, the nonprofit Village Enterprise, which runs antipoverty programs, used a grant it received from Scott in 2023 to keep essential programs running.Additionally, Scott allows groups the flexibility to decide whether to publicly share how much they've received, with more than a third of recipients in 2025 not disclosing the grant amounts in Scott's grant database. Fitzgerald said altgoether, she thinks Scott tries to not make her giving about herself. “In her essays, she’s always talking about other stakeholders and other people’s contributions," Fitzgerald said. "So it’s very different than many other philanthropists who are often the center of the story of their gift.” Associated Press coverage of philanthropy and non-profits receives support through the AP’s collaboration with The Conversation US, with funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The AP is solely responsible for this content. For all of AP’s philanthropy coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/philanthropy.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

We may finally know what a healthy gut microbiome looks like

Our gut microbiome has a huge influence on our overall health, but we haven't been clear on the specific bacteria with good versus bad effects. Now, a study of more than 34,000 people is shedding light on what a healthy gut microbiome actually consists of

The trillions of microscopic bacteria that reside in our gut have an outsized role in our healthTHOM LEACH/SCIENCE PHOTO LIBRARY We often hear talk of things being good for our microbiome, and in turn, good for our health. But it wasn’t entirely clear what a healthy gut microbiome consisted of. Now, a study of more than 34,000 people has edged us closer towards understanding the mixes of microbes that reliably signal we have low inflammation, good immunity and healthy cholesterol levels. Your gut microbiome can influence your immune system, rate of ageing and your risk of poor mental health. Despite a profusion of home tests promising to reveal the make-up of your gut community, their usefulness has been debated, because it is hard to pin down what defines a “good” microbial mix. Previous measures mainly looked at species diversity, with a greater array of bacteria being better. But it is difficult to identify particular communities of interacting organisms that are implicated in a specific aspect of our health, because microbiomes vary so much from person to person. “There is a very intricate relationship between the food we eat, the composition of our gut microbiome, and the effects the gut microbiome has on our health. The only way to try to map these connections is having large enough sample sizes,” says Nicola Segata at the University of Trento in Italy. To create such a map, Segata and his colleagues have assessed a dataset from more than 34,500 people who took part in the PREDICT programme in the UK and US, run by microbiome testing firm Zoe, and validated the results against data from 25 other cohorts from Western countries. Of the thousands of species that reside in the human gut, the researchers focused on 661 bacterial species that were found in more than 20 per cent of the Zoe participants. They used this to determine the 50 bacteria most associated with markers of good health – assessed via markers such as body mass index and blood glucose levels – and the 50 most linked to bad health. The 50 “good bug” species – 22 of which are new to science – seem to influence four key areas: heart and blood cholesterol levels; inflammation and immune health; body fat distribution; and blood sugar control. The participants who were deemed healthy, because they had no known medical conditions, had about 3.6 more of these species than people with a condition, while people at a healthy weight hosted about 5.2 more of them than those with obesity. The researchers suggest that good or bad health outcomes may come about due to the vital role the gut microbiome plays in releasing chemicals involved in cholesterol transport, inflammation reduction, fat metabolism and insulin sensitivity. As to the specific species that were present, most microbes in both the “good” and “bad” rankings belong to the Clostridia class. Within this class, species in the Lachnospiraceae family featured 40 times, with 13 seemingly having favourable effects and 27 unfavourable. “The study highlights bacterial groups that could be further investigated regarding their potential positive or negative impact [on] health conditions, such as high blood glucose levels or obesity,” says Ines Moura at the University of Leeds, UK. The link between these microbes and diet was assessed via food questionnaires and data logged on the Zoe app, where users are advised to aim for at least 30 different plants a week and at least three portions a day of fermented foods, with an emphasis on fibre and not too many ultra processed options. The researchers found that most of the microbes either aligned with a generally healthy diet and better health, or with a worse diet and poorer health. But 65 of the 661 microbes didn’t fit in. “These 65 bacteria are a testament to the fact that the picture is still more complex than what we saw,” says Segata, who also works as a consultant for Zoe. “The effects may depend on the other microbes that are there, or the specific strain of the bacterium or the specific diet.” This sorting of “good” versus “bad” bacteria has enabled the researchers to create a 0 to 1000 ranking scale for the overall health of someone’s gut microbiota, which is already used as part of Zoe’s gut health tests. “Think of a healthy gut microbiome as a community of chemical factories. We want large numbers of species, we want the good ones outnumbering the bad ones, and when you get that, then you’re producing really healthy chemicals, which have impacts across the body,” says team member Tim Spector at King’s College London and co-founder of Zoe. This doesn’t mean the ideal healthy gut microbiome has been pinned down, though. “Defining a healthy microbiome is a difficult task, as the gut microbiome composition is impacted by diet, but it can also change with environmental factors, age and health conditions that require long-term medication,” says Moura. “We really need to think about our body and our microbiome as two complex systems that together make one even more complex system,” says Segata. “When you change one thing, everything is modified a bit as a consequence. Understanding what is cause and effect in many cases can be very intricate.” Bigger studies are needed to tease out these links and cover more of the global population, says Segata. However, once we have established the baseline of your health and microbiome, it should become possible to recommend specific foods to tweak your gut bacteria, he says.

Why we only recently discovered space is dark not bright

For centuries, Europeans thought that eternal daylight saturated the cosmos. The shift to a dark universe has had a profound psychological impact upon us

Adobe Stock Photo/Phoebe Watts A blue Earth ascends over the barren surface of the moon, against the black void of space. This famous photograph, Earthrise, was taken on Christmas Eve of 1968, by Apollo 8 astronaut Bill Anders. After almost six decades, we take this image for granted. But imagine a different Earthrise, in which space isn’t black but bright blue, like the clear day sky. As strange as it may strike you, this is how most Europeans imagined it for centuries. We know our understanding of the universe has undergone other major transformations, with far-reaching effects. For example, the shifts from an Earth-centred to a sun-centred universe and from a finite to an infinite universe weren’t only scientific discoveries. They made people genuinely rethink their place in the cosmos. The shift from a bright to a dark universe is of comparable significance, but it has been almost lost to history. In recent years, through my research in literary history and the history of science, I have tried to piece together when this shift happened. When, so to speak, did space turn dark? And I’ve found myself asking: what happened to us in the process? Earthrise, a photograph taken from the lunar surface in 1968, crystallized the idea that space was darkNASA Consider the testimony of Domingo Gonsales, the protagonist of the first English science-fiction novel, Francis Godwin’s 1638 Man in the Moone. Travelling to the moon aboard a swan-powered spacecraft, Gonsales reports seeing very few stars – and these few, “by reason it was always day, I saw at all times alike, not shining bright, as upon the earth we… see them in the night time, but of a whitish colour, like that of the moon in the day time with us”. Why does he see fewer stars than we do from Earth? And why are they pale, like the moon seen in the daytime sky? Because his space simply is the daytime sky. The sun has dimmed the light of the brightest stars and drowned out completely that of fainter ones. From our perspective, Gonsales’s universe is upside down. In his version, it is in daytime that we see it as it really is, whereas at night it is obscured by Earth’s dark shadow. But if we ascended into space at midnight, we would eventually break out of the shadow, into the eternal day beyond. In Francis Godwin’s Man in the Moone, the protagonist Domingo Gonsales sets sail for the moon in his swan-powered spacecraftHoughton Library Gonsales doesn’t mention the shadow, but we catch a glimpse of it in another early space travel story, John Milton’s Paradise Lost. Approaching Earth, Milton’s Satan sees “the circling canopy / Of night’s extended shade”. In imagining a premodern Earthrise, then, we should add this shadow into the picture – a dark cone extending from the gibbous planet into the blue heavens and disappearing below the lunar horizon. Other authors explain why space isn’t just bright, but bright blue. The most common explanation is that the “firmament” – the variously imagined vault of the cosmos – was blue in colour. This is the view, notes Milton’s contemporary, the atomist philosopher Walter Charleton, held “not only by vulgar, but many transcendently learned heads”. In looking at the day sky, they thought they were simply looking at the end of the universe. The path towards Earthrise This universe also appears in visual art. Here, again, comparison with Apollo 8 is instructive. Some hours after capturing Earthrise, the crew delivered a radio broadcast to Earth from lunar orbit. Commander Frank Borman wished Earthlings a merry Christmas and read from the biblical account of creation. For the first time, humans attained a comparable, godlike perspective on their blue planet, sparkling in the black abyss. But when premodern artists illustrated these same biblical verses, they often drew the inverse: dark Earths, suspended in azure heavens. To complete the alternative Earthrise, imagine one of these darker Earths, rather than the familiar “blue marble”, ascending over the lunar surface. And it wasn’t just poets and painters. Philosophers and scientists also imagined such universes. Aristotle describes “the shadow of the earth (which we call night)”. Two millennia later, so does Copernicus, writing that “while the rest of the universe is bright and full of daylight, night is clearly nothing but the Earth’s shadow, which extends in the shape of a cone and ends in a point”. There was nothing irrational about such views. Early European thinkers simply had no compelling evidence to the contrary, especially regarding the nature of outer space and of Earth’s light-refracting atmosphere. Without such evidence, why suspect that night is the rule and day the exception? What reason had a premodern Christian to break with centuries of tradition and no longer view the heavens – the abode of God, angels and blessed souls – as a realm of eternal light, but one of eternal darkness? A 13th-century manuscript depicts a grey Earth casting a black shadow into a blue universe (left). The newly created Earth is also imagined as a black marble surrounded by a blue cosmos in a 15th-century manuscriptHeritage Image Partnership Ltd/Alamy; Bibliothèque nationale de France Which isn’t to say bright space was universal, even in premodernity. Thinkers of the Islamicate world, for example, accepted dark space from the 9th century onwards, though the reach of their views in the West seems to have been limited. By all accounts, dark space had to be rediscovered by European thinkers in the 17th century. For one thing, the period saw major advances in the scientific understanding of the atmosphere. Indeed, “atmosphere” is a 17th-century word, and one of the first to use it in English was Walter Charleton, whose universe can be described as the missing link in the story: neither bright nor dark, but changing from one to the other as the observer turns towards and away from the sun. This is because Charleton’s universe is still bounded by a firmament – although a black one, “and not azure, as most suppose” – and is also filled with swarms of tiny particles or “atoms”, driving him to speculate about their visual effects. But for Otto von Guericke, who accepted an unbound, infinite universe, and made groundbreaking experiments studying the vacuum, space is, precisely, space. If we found ourselves in such “pure”, “empty” space, with “no body lighted by the sun either underneath or before” us, we would “see nothing other than shadow”. From this point on, dark space is increasingly accepted by European scientists and scientifically literate thinkers. But that isn’t where the story ends, because bright space still survives for centuries in the popular imagination. Fast-forwarding to 1858, here is the astronomer James Gall, imagining ascending into space in a work aimed at the Victorian general reader: “We look around, and oh, how strange! the heavens are black”. Gall knows space is black, but he doesn’t expect his audience to know it. And this audience isn’t necessarily uneducated in other departments. It isn’t an ignoramus or a child who, as late as 1880, still believes the universe is an “enormous sphere of blue” – it is a distinguished literary historian, David Masson. Isolated instances continue into the 1920s, the very doorstep of the Space Age. We are dealing, then, not only with a lost, but also remarkably recent shift in our cosmological imagination. Because some of the most striking evidence appears in literary works, especially space travel narratives, it was first noticed by literary scholars: C. S. Lewis and, more recently, John Leonard. But it is yet to receive sustained study, and its cultural impact remains almost entirely uncharted. This impact has been profound, although it often hides in plain sight. For example, it is widely recognised that images like Earthrise transformed our planetary and environmental consciousness. Earth became “whole” and “blue”, but also “fragile”: emblematic of the imperatives of political unity and ecological sustainability, as well as the threat of nuclear warfare and anthropogenic climate change. What isn’t recognised, however, is that this transformation wasn’t due solely to a new view of the planet, but also of what surrounded it. Whole Earths had been imagined, depicted and reflected on since antiquity. But most floated in bright universes, eliciting very different reactions. The impact of Earthrise was therefore even greater than commonly understood. Once such images entered mass circulation, they wiped away even the last remaining vestiges of the old, bright cosmos, searing its exact inversion into the popular imagination: Earth as a luminous oasis in a dark cosmic desert. Earth was never “blue” or “fragile”, as such. It appeared so against the lethal darkness around it, which now became not only a scientific but also a cultural and psychological reality.

Montana youth activists who won landmark climate case push for court enforcement

In 2023, court had ruled in favor of 16 plaintiffs that officials violated their constitutional right by promoting fossil fuelsThe young Montanans who scored a landmark triumph in the lawsuit Held v Montana are calling on the state’s highest court to enforce that victory.In a groundbreaking legal decision in August 2023, a Montana judge ruled in favor of 16 youth plaintiffs who had accused state officials of violating their constitutional rights by promoting fossil fuels. The state’s supreme court affirmed the judge’s findings in late 2024. But state lawmakers have since violated her ruling, enshrining new laws this year that contradict it, argue 13 of the 16 plaintiffs in a petition filed on Wednesday. Continue reading...

The young Montanans who scored a landmark triumph in the lawsuit Held v Montana are calling on the state’s highest court to enforce that victory.In a groundbreaking legal decision in August 2023, a Montana judge ruled in favor of 16 youth plaintiffs who had accused state officials of violating their constitutional rights by promoting fossil fuels. The state’s supreme court affirmed the judge’s findings in late 2024. But state lawmakers have since violated her ruling, enshrining new laws this year that contradict it, argue 13 of the 16 plaintiffs in a petition filed on Wednesday.“These new policies mean the state is going to just continue to act in a way that will increase greenhouse gasses which during the Held case were shown to be disproportionately harming youth,” said Rikki Held, the 24-year-old lead petitioner who was also the named plaintiff in the earlier lawsuit. “It means we’ll continue down a path we already know and have proven is detrimental.”The Held decision stated that state laws limiting state agencies’ ability to consider greenhouse gas emissions and climate impacts during environmental reviews are unconstitutional. It also said that though the climate crisis is a global issue, Montana bears responsibility to address the harms that are being caused by greenhouse gas emissions within the state.“The decision confirmed that laws which put blinders on agencies during environmental reviews are unconstitutional,” said Nate Bellinger, supervising staff attorney at Our Children’s Trust, the non-profit law firm that filed the petition and Held v Montana. “But now the state is essentially re-blindering agencies.”During the 2025 Montana legislative session, the new challenge says, elected leaders passed a law prohibiting the state from adopting air quality standards more stringent than those incorporated in the federal Clean Air Act. It’s a “complete inversion” where the federal standards will serve as a cap on regulation instead of a floor, Bellinger said.The legislature also amended the state’s Environmental Policy Act, naming just six climate warming gases for the state to inventory while conducting environmental reviews of energy projects. It also dictated that upstream and downstream emissions – or those resulting from transporting fossil fuels or out-of-state combustion of the fuels produced in Montana – should not to be incorporated in the analysis, even though agencies used to consider these impacts.In an “even more egregious” provision, said Bellinger, lawmakers explicitly barred state agencies from using the resulting information about pollution to condition or deny permits for those proposals.“Those provisions are unconstitutional,” Bellinger said.The state of Montana was not immediately available for comment.Lawmakers behind the new policies made it “pretty clear” that their proposals were a response to the youth challengers’ 2023 victory, said Bellinger. Late last year, the incoming state senate president and house speaker even issued a joint statement telling the court to “buckle up” for the following session.In the new petition, challengers are asking the Montana’s supreme court to strike down these new laws. They say that is a necessary step to ensure the state is upholding duties laid out in its constitution, which guarantees the right to a “clean and healthful environment”.The challenge comes amid an assault on climate and environmental regulations from the Trump administration. Those attacks make it all the more important for states to protect their citizens, said the youth activist Held.“It’s a time when we really should be seeing more action from our government on greenhouse gas emissions,” said Held.Montana has moved in the opposite direction, said Bellinger, with the state’s governor creating a taskforce to provide recommendations to “unleash” fossil fuel output, echoing an executive order Trump signed in January. State officials are actively evaluating proposals to expand coal, oil, and gas in compliance with Trump’s pro-fossil fuel agenda, he said.“We need to get these laws off the books as quick as possible so they can have all the tools they need before them to deny those permits and not feel like they have to approve,” Bellinger said.Held says she has directly felt the impacts of the climate crisis, caused primarily by the burning of fossil fuels. On her family’s ranch where she grew up, drought has taken a toll on the health of livestock and crops, while extreme weather limited her ability to spend time outside. Between the filing of Held v Montana in 2020 and plaintiffs’ victory in the case three years later, global warming became worse, she said.“We don’t have another five years to wait for protections while the state keeps using fossil fuels,” she said. “This is really urgent.”

Spandrels of the Sea: From Evolution’s Byproducts to Blueprints for Equity and Representation in Ocean Conservation

Unintended consequences can become indispensable — in architecture and in efforts to preserve life on Earth. The post Spandrels of the Sea: From Evolution’s Byproducts to Blueprints for Equity and Representation in Ocean Conservation appeared first on The Revelator.

Conservation isn’t always about grand designs. Sometimes the most powerful tools are byproducts of other work — unintended consequences that become indispensable. Think of the spaces that emerge between a dome and its arches. No one designs these triangles. They simply arise, an inevitable feature of the structure. Yet in the Basilica of San Marco in Venice, the Alhambra in Spain, or the Taj Mahal in India, these spaces are decorated with lavish mosaics of gold and glass, or with paintings and iconography so beautiful that they become the focal point of the entire building. They’re what biologists Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Lewontin called spandrels. Spandrel at La Mezquita de Córdoba, Andalucía, Spain. Photo: Brent Miller (CC BY-NC-ND 2.0) In 1979 Gould and Lewontin borrowed this architectural term to challenge the idea that every biological trait is a perfect adaptation honed by natural selection. In their essay, “The Spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian Paradigm,” they argued that some traits arise as inevitable byproducts of structure or developmental constraints. Eventually these spandrels may be repurposed with a new function. Once you understand the idea, you can’t help but see spandrels everywhere. Not just in cathedrals, but in our own systems. Conservation, like nature, generates byproducts. Some fade into obscurity. Others, once decorated with meaning, become indispensable to our work. The Spandrel in Evolutionary Biology: Origin and Reasoning The mid-20th century was dominated by what Gould and Lewontin called the adaptationist programme: the assumption that every trait must be adaptive, shaped directly by natural selection. If birds had red plumage, it must confer advantage. If humans had chins, they must aid chewing or sexual display. The tiny arms of a Tyrannosaurus rex must have served a purpose. Gould and Lewontin resisted this Panglossian optimism, named for Voltaire’s Dr. Pangloss, who insisted, in a jab at the philosophy of Gottfried Leibniz, that all features exist in “the best of all possible worlds.” They urged scientists to consider whether traits might simply be incidental byproducts of other evolutionary processes. When domes meet arches, the leftover triangular spandrels are unavoidable. In the same way, some traits in organisms show up simply because of limits in embryonic development, links between traits, or even random chance. Later these features may be put to use in a process known as “exaptation,” a term introduced by Gould and paleontologist Elizabeth Vrba in 1982. Classic examples of biological spandrels abound. Male nipples, for instance, persist as a feature retained from our shared embryology with females. The famously tiny arms of T. rex may have shrunk as an unintended consequence of its skull and jaw enlarging over evolutionary time. Human cognition itself, manifested in art, religion, and music, may be a by-product of neural circuits originally evolved for language and pattern recognition. Even the panda’s so-called “thumb,” a modified wrist bone, began as a structural constraint before being coopted into a remarkably effective bamboo-stripping tool. Together these cases reveal how traits that emerge incidentally can be repurposed — “decorated,” as Gould might say — into vital adaptations. From Biology to Conservation: The Ocean’s Decorated Spandrels If spandrels remind us to look for unintended byproducts in organisms, the metaphor helps us analyze our own conservation practice. Ocean conservation produces spandrels too: outcomes not deliberately designed but emerging from structural constraints, cultural forces, or institutional habits. Some fade away. Others are decorated — infused with meaning until they become central to our storytelling, fundraising, and advocacy. Just as San Marco’s spandrels hold shimmering mosaics, conservation’s byproducts often bear the weight of public engagement. Decorated Conservation Spandrels Charismatic megafauna: Fascination with whales, dolphins, and turtles wasn’t engineered. It arose culturally through storytelling, religion, aquariums and documentaries. Conservationists later took advantage of that, making these species ambassadors for bycatch reform, fisheries policy, and climate resilience. Citizen science: Born from scarcity, it began as a stopgap for limited funding and capacity. Today it empowers stewardship, ownership, and participatory democracy. Conservation tourism: Shark dives and manta snorkeling began as commercial novelties. Reframed, they became conservation tools, turning spectacle into empathy and tourists into donors. Ocean days and hashtags: UN “international days” were bureaucratic spandrels. Activists decorated them into rituals for fundraising, awareness, and norm-building. #OceanOptimism: Emerging from burnout and doom fatigue, #oceanoptimism wasn’t a designed strategy. But once decorated, it reframed narratives, energized practitioners, and invited new communities into ocean care. Hunting for Spandrels: A Framework for Practice Conservation often produces unexpected side effects: some trivial, some troublesome, some surprisingly useful. Instead of ignoring or lamenting these byproducts, we can deliberately scan for them and ask: What hidden opportunities might they hold? That’s the heart of what I call “spandrel hunting.” Here’s a practical way to do it: Identify the byproducts: Notice the extra things our work generates, from viral memes to volunteer enthusiasm to funder metrics. Diagnose spandrelness: Ask whether these features arose by design or simply as incidental outcomes. Scan for coopt potential: Explore how unintended products can be repurposed into advocacy or engagement tools. Watch for self-defeating spandrels: Stay alert to “false friends” like paper parks, plastics-only campaigns, or other distractions that undermine deeper goals. Institutionalize the scan: Build spandrel-hunting into evaluations, retrospectives, and funding cycles so it becomes routine practice. In this way conservation can reframe failure and side effects into raw material for innovation — irritants that can be polished into mosaics. Case Study: Sharks, Spectacle, and the Spandrels of Charisma For much of the 20th century, sharks were cultural villains. The movie Jaws and its imitators spurred fear and culls. No strategist would have proposed sharks as conservation icons. And yet spandrels emerged. Discovery Channel’s Shark Week (1988) was a ratings ploy, not a conservation platform. Its lurid fearmongering carved sharks into public consciousness. Simultaneously, coastal fishers turned to tourism as economies shifted. Shark diving in the Bahamas, South Africa, Fiji, and Palau revealed living sharks’ economic value: millions annually, far surpassing fishing revenue. Conservationists decorated these spandrels. NGOs injected science into Shark Week narratives. Operators partnered with researchers, blending spectacle with tagging and data collection. Even Jaws author Peter Benchley recanted, becoming a shark advocate. But the risks remain. Sensationalist media still perpetuate myths. Some tourism practices alter shark behavior. And the megafauna focus risks neglecting less telegenic species. The shark spandrel offers several lessons. First, visibility matters, even when it begins in a negative light, as with the fear stoked by Jaws and early Shark Week spectacles. Second, economic pivots, such as the rise of shark tourism, can transform these unintended byproducts into powerful conservation assets. Third, cultural narratives can be “hacked” to shift public perception, turning once-vilified predators into ambassadors for ocean health. Finally, there’s a caution: Over-decorating a spandrel can mislead or distract, as sensationalism sometimes overshadows science or diverts attention from less charismatic but equally threatened species. Future Spandrels: Byproducts as Pathways to Justice and Representation The spandrels of tomorrow won’t just be about memes or metrics. They’ll also emerge in the spaces where conservation bumps into questions of justice, representation, and whose stories are told. The future spandrel landscape is rich with opportunities to elevate Indigenous stewardship, amplify BIPOC and LGBTQ voices, and redirect cultural byproducts into tools for equity as well as ecology. Ocean plastic cleanups: Photogenic and headline-friendly, but often narrow and sometimes scientifically shaky. They can, however, be reframed as on-ramps into bigger justice debates about petrochemicals, environmental racism, and the frontline communities most hurt by waste and toxic industries. Hashtag and meme culture: Algorithmic byproducts that can be harnessed as equity pivots, amplifying hashtags like #BlackInOceanScience, #IndigenousKnowledge, #LandBack, #BlackBirders, or #QueerInScience alongside micro-actions and entry-level engagement. Funder metrics: Donor-driven and often ill-fitting, but when redirected to track inclusion (Black-led organizations, Indigenous stewardship roles, community participation), they can make funder logic itself a lever for equity. Doom fatigue: Burnout as a psychological spandrel. When acknowledged and reframed, it can open the door to movements like #OceanOptimism that decorate despair with agency. Highlight how communities of color and Indigenous groups have practiced resilience under centuries of ecological and cultural stress. 30×30 proliferation: Risks creating “paper parks,” but even shallow commitments can normalize the idea of large-scale protection and provide political footholds for deeper action. Coopt 30×30 momentum to emphasize Indigenous-led MPAs and community tenure rights, reframing the spandrel of empty targets into footholds for lasting sovereignty and equity. Conservation tourism shifts: Once sold as selfies and thrills, now reframed as ambassador programs that foreground Native guides, local narratives, and traditional ecological knowledge ensuring visitors learn whose waters they’re in and whose stories they’re hearing. Blue economy buzzword: Vague and overused, but politically potent. The “blue economy” can be hacked to prioritize equity and sovereignty, Indigenous tenure, small-scale fishers, and coastal communities too often sidelined in ocean development schemes. Influencer science: Deliberately cultivate and platform Black, Brown, and Indigenous scientists as digital ambassadors on TikTok, Instagram, and beyond. Invest in training, partnerships, and amplification so that the algorithmic by-product of “influencer science” broadens whose faces and voices represent ocean knowledge. By treating these cultural and institutional byproducts not as noise but as raw material, conservation can reroute attention and energy toward hidden representation gaps, making equity and inclusion inseparable from innovation and impact. Final Thought: Decorating Our Own Spandrels The genius of Gould and Lewontin’s spandrel metaphor was not to deny adaptation but to guard against easy narratives. In evolution not every trait is adaptive. In conservation not every tool was designed. But accidents can be opportunities. Side effects can become strategies. Byproducts can become mosaics. Many of our most powerful tools (charismatic species, citizen science, Shark Week) began as spandrels, emerging as a result of cultural and economic factors and only later becoming central to the work we do to save our ocean. The ocean’s future may depend on our ability to keep scanning for these spandrels: to notice the byproducts of our work, ask what might be coopted, and decorate them into mosaics of resilience. If we decorate tomorrow’s spandrels with justice and inclusion, the mosaics we leave will reflect not only resilience, but whose voices and visions truly belong in the ocean’s future. Our basilica of conservation is still under construction. The dome rises. The arches stand. The spandrels are waiting. Previously in The Revelator: Incredible Journeys: Migratory Sharks on the Move The post Spandrels of the Sea: From Evolution’s Byproducts to Blueprints for Equity and Representation in Ocean Conservation appeared first on The Revelator.

No Results today.

Our news is updated constantly with the latest environmental stories from around the world. Reset or change your filters to find the most active current topics.

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.