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.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation News

Learn more about the issues presented in our films
Show Filters

As California cracks down on groundwater, what will happen to fallowed farmland?

California water regulators are cracking down on the overuse of groundwater by farmers. Enforcement could prompt them to idle thousands of acres of farmland and poses larger questions about what will happen to the affected fields.

In summary California water regulators are cracking down on the overuse of groundwater by farmers. Enforcement could prompt them to idle thousands of acres of farmland and poses larger questions about what will happen to the affected fields. A couple of weeks ago, the California Water Resources Control Board put five agricultural water agencies in Kings County on probation for failing to adequately manage underground water supplies in the Tulare Lake Basin that have been seriously depleted due to overpumping. It was the state’s first major enforcement action under the State Groundwater Management Act, passed a decade ago to protect the aquifers that farmers have used to supplement or replace water from reservoirs that’s curtailed during periods of drought. In some areas, so much groundwater has been pumped that the land above it has collapsed, a phenomenon known as subsidence. The board’s action on April 16 not only subjects the Kings County agencies to fees and tighter monitoring but sends a message to irrigators throughout the state that they must get serious about eliminating overdrafts after having a decade to adopt aquifer management plans. Curtailing groundwater use is not an isolated event, but rather a significant piece of the state’s declared intent to reduce the share of water devoted to agriculture – roughly three quarters of overall human use – as the state adjusts to the effects of climate change. As if to punctuate that goal, federal water managers have told San Joaquin Valley farmers that despite two wet winters they will receive less than half of their contracted allocations of water during this year’s growing season. In decades past, when surface water from reservoirs has fallen short of demand, farmers have drilled deep wells to tap aquifers. With the state water board cracking down on groundwater, it is inevitable, experts say, that some fields will have to be taken out of production. The Public Policy Institute of California, which closely monitors management of the state’s water supply, has estimated that at least 500,000 acres of farmland will be fallowed when the groundwater law is fully implemented. Whose lands will be affected, what happens to idled acreage and the financial impacts are issues hovering over groundwater reduction. One day after the water board’s crackdown on Kings County, a hint of those issues surfaced as the Assembly Utilities and Energy Committee approved legislation that would make it easier for farmers whose access to groundwater is restricted to convert their fields into solar energy farms. Assembly Bill 2528, carried by Assemblyman Joaquin Arambula, a Fresno Democrat, would allow affected farmers to withdraw their land from Williamson Act conservation contracts and use it for solar power generation without paying the stiff cancellation fees now in current law. The six-decade-old Williamson Act gives farmers big reductions in their property taxes in return for making long-term commitments to keep land in agricultural production. Learn more about legislators mentioned in this story. Joaquin Arambula Democrat, State Assembly, District 31 (Fresno) Arambula told the committee that “many agricultural landowners are at risk of losing access to water that is essential for their ability to farm their land (and) this confluence of water sustainability needs and clean energy demand creates an opportunity for us to craft an approach that addresses multiple economic and environmental goals.” The bill is backed by the solar power industry and the Western Growers Association, which generally represents large farmers. However, the California Farm Bureau, with many relatively small farmers as members, is opposed, saying the bill could undermine the Williamson Act’s goal of conserving farmland. The split between the two farm groups implies that as groundwater is curtailed, there will be a scramble over the conversion of fallowed fields. Some farmers are already lining up deals with solar energy interests that would be even more lucrative if they can cancel their Williamson Act contracts without paying hefty cancellation fees, as much as 25% of the land’s value.

Water
Agriculture
Conservation

Folding the Future: How Origami Modules Are Redefining Construction

Foldable origami with thick panels opens a world of possibilities. For the first time, engineers at the University of Michigan have shown that load-bearing structures,...

Yi Zhu, a Research Fellow in Mechanical Engineering, holds an origami design that is capable of folding up into something that could fit into a pocket and capable of expanding out into something much longer. Credit: Brenda Ahearn/University of Michigan, College of Engineering, Communications and MarketingFoldable origami with thick panels opens a world of possibilities.For the first time, engineers at the University of Michigan have shown that load-bearing structures, such as bridges and shelters, can be constructed using origami modules. These versatile components are capable of folding compactly and morphing into various shapes.It’s an advance that could enable communities to quickly rebuild facilities and systems damaged or destroyed during natural disasters, or allow for construction in places that were previously considered impractical, including outer space. The technology could also be used for structures that need to be built and then disassembled quickly, such as concert venues and event stages.Advancements in Origami Construction“With both the adaptability and load-carrying capability, our system can build structures that can be used in modern construction,” said Evgueni Filipov, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering and of mechanical engineering, and a corresponding author of the study in Nature Communications. Principles of the origami art form allow for larger materials to be folded and collapsed into small spaces. And with modular building systems gaining wider acceptance, the applications for components that can be stored and transported with ease have grown.From left, Yi Zhu, a Research Fellow in Mechanical Engineering, and Evgueni Filipov, an associate professor in both Civil and Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, working in his lab in the George G. Brown Laboratories Building. Filipov and Zhu are applying principles of origami to create Modular and Uniformly Thick Origami (MUTO) for large-scale, load-carrying, adaptable structures. These can be used to create temporary structures such as stages or concert venues as well as to build structures such as buildings or bridges to be used in response to natural disasters. Credit: Brenda Ahearn/University of Michigan, College of Engineering, Communications and MarketingResearchers have struggled for years to create origami systems with the necessary weight capacities while keeping the ability to quickly deploy and reconfigure. U-M engineers have created an origami system that solves that problem. Examples of what the system can create include:A 3.3-foot-tall column that can support 2.1 tons of weight while itself weighing just over 16 pounds, and with a base footprint of less than 1 square foot.A package that can unfold from a 1.6-foot-wide cube to deploy into different structures, including: a 13-foot-long walking bridge, a 6.5-foot-tall bus stop, and a 13-foot-tall column.A New Approach to Origami DesignA key to the breakthrough came in the form of a different design approach provided by Yi Zhu, research fellow in mechanical engineering and first author of the study.“When people work with origami concepts, they usually start with the idea of thin, paper-folded models—assuming your materials will be paper-thin,” Zhu said. “However, in order to build common structures like bridges and bus stops using origami, we need mathematical tools that can directly consider thickness during the initial origami design.”Evgueni Filipov, an associate professor in both Civil and Environmental Engineering and Mechanical Engineering, demonstrates different folds and structures with a small model in his lab. Credit: Brenda Ahearn/University of Michigan, College of Engineering, Communications and MarketingTo bolster weight-bearing capacity, many researchers have attempted to thicken their paper-thin designs in varying spots. U-M’s team, however, found that uniformity is key.“What happens is you add one level of thickness here, and a different level of thickness there, and it becomes mismatched,” Filipov said. “So when the load is carried through these components, it starts to cause bending.“That uniformity of the component’s thickness is what’s key and what’s missing from many current origami systems. When you have that, together with appropriate locking devices, the weight placed upon a structure can be evenly transferred throughout.”In addition to carrying a large load, this system—known as the Modular and Uniformly Thick Origami-Inspired Structure system—can adapt its shapes to become bridges, walls, floors, columns, and many other structures.Reference: “Large-scale modular and uniformly thick origami-inspired adaptable and load-carrying structures” by Yi Zhu, and Evgueni T. Filipov, 15 March 2024, Nature Communications.DOI: 10.1038/s41467-024-46667-0U-M’s research has been helped along by use of its Sequentially Working Origami Multi-Physics Simulator (SWOMPS). It’s a simulator that accurately predicts the behaviors or large-scale origami systems. Developed at U-M, the system has been available to the public since 2020.The research was funded by the U.S. National Science Foundation and the Automotive Research Center.

Cosmos
Nature
Science

We found pesticides in a third of Australian frogs we tested. Did these cause mass deaths?

Among the poisons found in 36% of the frogs tested, rodenticide was detected for the first time. Pesticides are considered a threat to hundreds of amphibian species.

Jodi Rowley, CC BY-NC-NDIn winter 2021, Australia’s frogs started dropping dead. People began posting images of dead frogs on social media. Unable to travel to investigate the deaths ourselves because of COVID lockdowns, we asked the public to report to us any sick or dead frogs. Within 24 hours we received 160 reports of sick and dying frogs, sometimes in their dozens, from across the country. That winter, we received more than 1,600 reports of more than 40 frog species. We needed help to investigate these deaths. We asked people across New South Wales to collect any dead frogs and store them frozen until travel restrictions eased and we could pick them up for testing. Hundreds of people stepped up to assist. What could be causing these deaths? Aside from the obvious suspect, disease, many people wondered about pesticides and other chemicals. One email we received pondered: Maybe a lot of these Green Frogs that are turning up dead have in fact died from chemicals. Another asked: Is there any relationship between chemicals being used to control the current mice plague in Eastern Australia and effects on frogs? In our newly published research, we detected pesticides in more than one in three frogs we tested. We found a rodenticide in one in six frogs. Pesticides have been shown to be a major cause of worldwide declines in amphibians, including frogs and toads. In the case of the mass deaths in Australia, we don’t believe pesticides were the main cause, for reasons we’ll explain. Read more: Dead, shrivelled frogs are unexpectedly turning up across eastern Australia. We need your help to find out why What did the research find? As soon as travel restrictions eased, we drove around the state with a portable freezer collecting these dead frogs. We began investigating the role of disease, pesticides and other potential factors in this awful event. We tested liver samples of 77 frogs of six species from across New South Wales for more than 600 different pesticides. We detected at least one pesticide in 36% of these frogs. Our most significant discovery was the rodenticide Brodifacoum in 17% of the frogs. This is the first report of rodenticides – chemicals meant to poison only rodents – in wild frogs. We found it in four species: the eastern banjo frog (Limnodynastes dumerilii), green tree frog (Litoria caerulea), Peron’s tree frog (Litoria peronii) and the introduced cane toad (Rhinella marina). The eastern banjo frog (Limnodynastes dumerilii) was one of the species in which rodenticide was detected. Jodi Rowley, CC BY-NC-ND How did these poisons get into frogs? How were frogs exposed to a rodenticide? And what harm is it likely to be causing? Unfortunately, we don’t know. Until now, frogs weren’t known to be exposed to rodenticides. They now join the list of non-rodent animals shown to be exposed – invertebrates, birds, small mammals, reptiles and even fish. It’s possible large frogs are eating rodents that have eaten a bait. Or frogs could be eating contaminated invertebrates or coming into contact with bait stations or contaminated water. Whatever the impact, and the route, our findings show we may need to think about how we use rodenticides. Large species like the cane toad (Rhinella marina) could eat rodents that have ingested baits. Jodi Rowley, CC BY-NC-ND Two pesticides detected in frogs were organochlorine compounds dieldrin and heptachlor. A third, DDE, is a breakdown product of the notorious organochlorine, DDT. These pesticides have been banned in Australia for decades, so how did they get into the frogs? Unfortunately, these legacy pesticides are very stable chemicals and take a long time to break down. They usually bind to organic material such as soils and sediments and can wash into waterways after rain. As a result, these pesticides can accumulate in plants and animals. It’s why they have been banned around the world. We also found the herbicide MCPA and fipronil sulfone, a breakdown product of the insecticide fipronil. Fipronil is registered for use in agriculture, home veterinary products (for flea and tick control) and around the house for control of termites, cockroaches and ants. MCPA has both agricultural and household uses, including lawn treatments. Pesticides detected in frogs and the percentages of tested frogs in which each chemical was detected. Jodi Rowley, CC BY-NC-ND What are the impacts on frogs? There’s very little research on the impact of pesticides on frogs in general, particularly adult frogs and particularly in Australia. However, from research overseas, we know pesticides could kill frogs, or cause sub-lethal impacts such as suppressing the immune system or malformations, or changes in growth, development and reproduction. Pesticides are considered a threat to almost 700 amphibian species. Unfortunately for them, frogs do have characteristics that make them highly likely to come into contact with pesticides. Most frog species spend time in both freshwater systems, such as wetlands, ponds and streams (particularly at the egg and tadpole stage), and on the land. This increases their opportunities for exposure. Second, frogs have highly permeable skin, which is likely a major route for pesticides to enter the body. Frogs obtain water through their skin – you’ll never see a frog drinking – and also breathe through their skin. Peron’s tree frog (Litoria peronii) is one of the common species in which pesticides were detected. Jodi Rowley, CC BY-NC-ND Our findings are a reminder that frogs are sensitive indicators of environmental health. Their recognition as bioindicators, or “canaries in the coalmine”, is warranted. Frogs and other amphibians are the most threatened group of vertebrates on the planet. More research is needed to determine just how our use of pesticides is contributing to ongoing population declines in frogs. So, were pesticides the major driver of the mass frog deaths in 2021? We don’t believe so. We didn’t detect pesticides in most frogs and the five pesticides detected were not consistently found across all samples. It’s certainly possible they contributed to this event, along with other factors such as disease and climatic conditions, but it’s not the smoking gun. Our investigation, with the help of the public, is ongoing. Chris Doyle, from the NSW Department of Climate Change, Energy, the Environment and Water, contributed to this article. Jodi Rowley has received funding from the Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment, Perth Zoo, the Australian Museum Foundation and other state, federal and philanthropic agencies.Damian Lettoof does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

Agriculture
Animals
Chemicals

It’s time to strike an environmental grand bargain between businesses, governments and conservationists – and stop doing things the hard way

It shouldn’t take sustained public outrage to stop environmentally destructive projects. Nature positive offers us a way forward.

jenmartin/ShutterstockApril has been a bad month for the Australian environment. The Great Barrier Reef was hit, yet again, by intense coral bleaching. And Environment Minister Tanya Plibersek delayed most of her Nature Positive Plan reforms. True, Plibersek did reject the controversial Toondah Harbour proposal, but only after a near decade-long grassroots campaign to save the wetland from an apartment and retail development deemed clearly unacceptable by her own department. Rather than fall back into old patterns of developers versus conservationists, we have a rare chance to find a compromise. Labor’s embrace of “Nature Positive” – a promising new environmental restoration approach – opens up the possibility of a grand bargain, whereby developers and business get much faster approvals (or rejections) in exchange for ensuring nature as a whole is better off as a result of our activities. Sustainable development was meant to save us First, a quick recap. We were meant to have put the era of saving the environment one place at a time to bed a long time ago. Around 1990, governments worldwide took to the then-novel idea of sustainable development. We even had a special Australian variant, ecologically sustainable development, which our federal and state governments backed unanimously. This led to a national strategy and incorporation into well over 100 laws, including flagship laws like the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, passed in 1999. The basic idea was, and is, sound: encourage development to improve our quality of life, while maintaining the ecological processes on which life depends. Read more: Australia's long-sought stronger environmental laws just got indefinitely deferred. It's back to business as usual But it’s not what ended up being legislated. The 1990’s laws did not require developers to make their projects sustainable. Typically, sustainable development was watered down into principles ministers only had to “consider”. Meanwhile, our ecosystems have continued to go downhill. And in a 2020 review of the laws, Graeme Samuel pronounced the EPBC Act a failure. Nature, positive? When Labor was elected in 2022, it promised a new goal: “Nature Positive”. This idea is no mere slogan. Nature positive is a serious policy idea. Think of it as the biodiversity counterpart to net zero emissions. The goal is ambitious: stop the decline by 2030 and set about restoring what has been lost for a full recovery of nature by 2050. Rather than ticking boxes on whether principles had been considered, regulators would answer a much more basic question: will this development deliver a net positive outcome for nature? Measuring progress is core to nature positive. We would take an environmental snapshot at the outset and track the gains and losses from there. Like sustainable development before it, nature positive has been adopted with gusto by the Australian government, internationally and domestically. In 2022, Plibersek committed to “stop the slide” and to “bake [the Nature Positive reforms] into law”. Now, suddenly, we have lost momentum. The crucial part of the reforms – embedding nature positive in stronger environment laws – has been kicked down the road. Plibersek has blamed complexity, extensive consultation and the need to get it right. Others see political concerns. Could we strike a grand environmental bargain? By pushing these laws back, Plibersek has effectively turned the already extended consultation process into an open-ended negotiation. Given consultation will keep running indefinitely, we’re now in the realm of regulatory co-design, previously only on offer to First Nations representatives for new cultural heritage protection laws. Co-design implies proceeding by consensus. It would be politically embarrassing to run a consultation over years only to bring down the policy guillotine. Consensus in turn raises the possibility of a grand environmental bargain, built around nature positive. Could this work? Might environment groups settle for a limited form of nature positive? Might business, in return for much faster approvals or rejections, support much stronger legal protection, especially for particularly vulnerable or important ecosystems? Samuel certainly thinks so. At a recent Senate Inquiry, he recounted telling a meeting during his review: If you each stick to your aspirations 100%, you’ll end up getting nothing. If you’re prepared to accept 80%-plus of your aspirations, you’ll get them, and that will be a quantum leap forward from the abysmal failure that we’ve had for two and a half decades What might an 80% agreement look like? If we are to turn decline into recovery, we need to ensure each natural system is intact. That is, it retains the minimum level of environmental stocks (such as animals, plants and insects) and flows (such as water, nutrients) needed to sustain ecological health. If flows of water into wetlands drop below a certain threshold, they’re not wetlands any more. AustralianCamera/Shutterstock Such thresholds for ecological health are everywhere. For example, keeping the platypus off the endangered list would involve maintaining its population close to current levels and working out how much of its riverbank habitat should be conserved. For policymakers, this suggests environmental laws should define minimum viability thresholds. Some thresholds would be absolute; others would be crossable in one location provided equivalent restoration was done in another. Environmental groups could take satisfaction that thresholds would be maintained in most cases. Ecosystems would function, rivers would flow. But governments would still override thresholds for important economic and social reasons, say to approve a critical minerals project. What’s in it for corporate Australia? Business would gain upfront certainty about what can be approved and quicker approvals for projects. Environmental litigation would fall. But development options would be narrowed and offsets would become more expensive. The government would achieve a key goal: major environmental reform. But it would have to say no more often, and be transparent about crossing environmental thresholds. It would have to finance the science and planning needed. And it would need to boost investment in environmental restoration, to compensate for using override powers and for the cumulative impact of smaller-scale activities. A grand bargain along these lines would not deliver nature positive in full. We’d still be losing nature due to climate change. But it might go close enough to offer hope of long-term recovery. Is such a deal feasible? It depends on how players read the incentives for compromise. For example, business will not want to be locked out of prospective development areas, but will also be worried about the possibility of a minority Labor government dependent on the Greens next year. Nature positive in Australia is down – but opportunity remains. Read more: Out of alignment: how clashing policies make for terrible environmental outcomes Peter Burnett is a member of the Biodiversity Council, an independent expert group founded by 11 Australian universities to promote evidence-based solutions to Australia’s biodiversity crisis. This article does not necessarily reflect the Council's views.

Business
Conservation
Government

How Minecraft and other video games are teaching kids about climate change

Forget slaying dragons, the newest gaming trend is saving the virtual world (and maybe ours too).

Earlier in April, more than 60 million people were presented with a mission: Track down and vanquish a golden, fire-breathing dragon terrorizing a vulnerable village.That is, a digital village in the metaverse of Minecraft, a videogame that allows its many users to explore and build their own worlds. In this new Minecraft minigame, “Heat Wave Survival,” players are facing up against the Heat Dragon, a villain developers created to represent the deadly threat of extreme heat as global temperatures rise.This is just one of the many ways that climate change is infiltrating game night. Around the world, developers and designers are intentionally weaving climate change characters like the Heat Dragon, as well as potential solutions, into board games and video games to help engage users in the fight to slow global warming.Today, we are exploring how the climate movement is growing within the gaming universe—and what that could mean for the real world.Climate Gamers: The main goal of Minecraft’s “Heat Wave Survival” is to slay the mighty heat dragon, but throughout the mission, players get tips on how to recognize the symptoms of heat-related illnesses and the best ways to respond such as hydrating or finding a cool space, reports Fast Company.The team, led by the nonprofit Adrienne Arsht-Rockefeller Foundation Resilience Center, is also developing a second game in its series in which players are in charge of building their own city supplied by renewable energy, with the option to install heat-resilient infrastructure such as shade structures. The games are primarily aimed at young students.But this isn’t the first initiative of its kind. In 2019, the United Nations launched its Playing for the Planet Alliance, with the goal of helping the video game industry shrink its environmental footprint and engage its players in climate action.Each year, the Alliance—which has dozens of members such as Sony and Google—hosts a “Green Game Jam,” where companies are encouraged to integrate more eco-friendly themes into their games. In 2023, developers added nature conservation elements into 41 games, Bloomberg reports. For example, the company Rovio Entertainment added a temporary new challenge to the popular game Angry Birds, in which users were tasked with saving virtual endangered animals in the Amazon.However, the video game industry itself has its own emissions issues to reckon with. Along with the energy required to play a game, engineers use large amounts of energy to power computers during development, and manufacturing of game accessories and devices uses vast quantities of plastic and batteries, which can contribute to the growing problem of electronic waste after they are disposed of, Claire Asher writes for Mongabay.In December, a CNET report found that “only a portion of gaming companies release climate impact data,” but that a growing number of developers are making efforts to reduce emissions through the use of renewable energy in their supply chains.Clean Energy Simulations: Outside the virtual world, a new energy-oriented version of the classic board game “Settlers of Catan” is being released this summer. The original iteration was created in 1995 and tasked players with creating their own nation from scratch on an undeveloped island. The new game, dubbed “Catan: New Energies,” will introduce more of the modern-day struggles that come along with rapid industrial growth, and the emissions associated with them.In the game, players must choose between investing in expensive clean energy options or low-cost but high-polluting fossil fuels (sound familiar?). Though “Catan: New Energies” does not outright mention the term climate change, if pollutant levels get too high, “the game ends in catastrophe” and the player with the most renewable energy tokens wins, according to Catan’s website.Benjamin Teuber, co-developer of the new game, told NPR that during the development phase, the testing team would “always manage to over pollute.”However, games offer unlimited chances to explore how to wrangle in runaway emissions: “We had heavy discussions afterwards,” Teuber said. “We all felt kind of bad, we learned a thing or two, and the next game we played differently.”But what about the real world, where research shows that there won’t be unlimited opportunities to slow emissions before climate change irrevocably alters ecosystems and cities? Board games and simulations can “inspire players to learn about the climate crisis and motivate them to act,” Sam Illingworth, a game developer and science communications expert at Edinburgh Napier University in the United Kingdom, wrote in the Conversation.“As we face the urgent challenges ahead, I believe that such games can play a crucial role in fostering understanding, dialogue and action.”This article originally appeared on Inside Climate News, a nonprofit, independent news organization that covers climate, energy and the environment. It is republished with permission. Sign up for their newsletter here.

Climate
Animals
Crisis

Meet the top-paid green group bosses

Leaders of the World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund and Nature Conservancy are among the best-paid execs.

Leaders of the World Wildlife Fund, Environmental Defense Fund and Nature Conservancy are among the best-paid execs.

Nature

Winners of the Goldman Environmental Prize Use Courts to Contest Oil Projects

Around the world, grass-roots organizers and Indigenous communities are taking proposed coal, oil and gas projects to court — and winning.

You have been granted access, use your keyboard to continue reading.Environmental Prize Highlights Work to Keep Fossil Fuels at BayAround the world, grass-roots organizers and Indigenous communities are taking proposed coal, oil and gas projects to court — and winning.Wild Coast residents demonstrated against Royal Dutch Shell’s plans to start seismic surveys for petroleum exploration at Mzamba Beach, Sigidi, South Africa, in 2021.Credit...Rogan Ward/ReutersApril 29, 2024, 1:09 p.m. ETNew coal mines continue to open each year, and oil and gas companies are still exploring new parts of the world. But increasingly, people — especially Indigenous communities — are saying no to new fossil fuel developments on their land and using courts and legislatures to deliver the message.In India, protests by Adivasi communities persuaded officials to cancel the auction of land for coal mines in the biodiverse forests of Chhattisgarh State. In South Africa, the Mpondo people stopped the Shell Global company from carrying out seismic surveys for oil and gas off the Wild Coast. In Australia, First Nations people blocked development of a coal mine in Queensland.These legal victories occurred within the past three years. On Monday, leaders of these and other grass-roots environmental movements, spanning six countries, won the Goldman Environmental Prize.“One of the things we’ve seen in recent years is that environmental law, protection of natural resources, has become intertwined with human rights law and the law of Indigenous people,” said Michael Sutton, an environmental lawyer and the executive director of the Goldman Environmental Foundation.Forcing these types of cases is the fact that as climate concerns have risen so has exploration for fossil fuels in many places, said Carla García Zendejas, a lawyer and director of the People, Land & Resources program at the Center for International Environmental Law.“With all the decisions that are being made for climate change, trying to address the climate crisis,” Ms. García Zendejas said, “it seems that the oil companies are just trying to get every drop of oil out of the ground as soon as possible, before permits and concessions are halted or revoked or stopped.”In most countries, a proposed project to extract natural resources must undergo an environmental review process, she said. And people living in the areas have a legal right to access information about the proposed project.In 2021, locals in Mpondoland on the Wild Coast of South Africa learned from visiting tourists and guides that a project was underway to conduct seismic surveys for oil and gas off their shore.“It was a shock for us to hear that the Department of Minerals and Energy has already given permission for Shell to explore oil and gas,” Nonhle Mbuthuma, a local resident and community organizer, said. “But the people on the ground were not aware.”She had co-founded a group called the Amadiba Crisis Committee — originally to fight a proposed titanium mine — which she quickly mobilized to oppose the seismic surveys.Ms. Mbuthuma is one of the winners of this year’s Goldman Environmental Prize, along with Sinegugu Zukulu, a program manager for a local NGO called Sustaining the Wild Coast.The region’s coastal waters provide habitat for dolphins, whales and many migratory fish species. Communities in the area depend on fishing and eco-tourism for their livelihoods.“When you talk about the ocean to the people of Wild Coast, the ocean is home to us,” Ms. Mbuthuma said. “The ocean is the economy.”Seismic testing can harm wildlife — damaging marine animals’ hearing, disrupting their natural behaviors and causing them to leave affected areas. Studies of smaller invertebrate species like lobsters, scallops and zooplankton have found that some species become injured or sick enough to die after exposure to seismic air guns.Both coastal and inland communities in the region mobilized to oppose the project, “speaking in one voice to say no to oil and gas,” Ms. Mbuthuma said.Ms. Mbuthuma and Mr. Zukulu, along with other community members, filed a legal challenge to the project’s environmental approval, arguing that local people hadn’t been properly consulted. In 2022, South Africa’s High Court ruled in their favor and rescinded Shell’s permit.Shell did not respond to a request for comment, but the company has appealed the court’s decision.The Mpondo people are concerned not only about direct threats to their livelihoods and about local pollution, but also about global climate change caused by the burning of fossil fuels, Mr. Zukulu said. “It wasn’t just us in our land, in our little corner,” he said. “It is a global challenge.”Similar local fights are playing out around the world. In quickly developing countries, demand for energy is still rising as more people gain access to electricity and economies grow.In India, more than 70 percent of electricity currently comes from coal, and more than 20 percent of that coal comes from Chhattisgarh State.For years, India’s central government went back and forth on whether to open the state’s Hasdeo Aranya forest to coal mining or to declare it a “no go” zone. The forest is home to dozens of rare and endangered species, including the Asian elephant. About 15,000 Adivasi people in the region depend on the forest for their traditional ways of life.But Hasdeo Aranya also sits on top of one of the country’s largest coal reserves.“It represents a very unique microcosm of all the environmental and social justice movements that exist in India,” said Alok Shukla, another winner of this year’s Goldman prize, through a translator. Mr. Shukla helped found the local Save Hasdeo Aranya Resistance Committee, and also convenes an alliance of grass-roots movements in the state called the Save Chhattisgarh Movement.With help from Mr. Shukla and other organizers, residents of the region have protested the proposed mines for years, and successfully lobbied for a protected elephant reserve in the forest. In 2020, the government announced a new set of land auctions for potential coal mines, setting off a new wave of protests.Neither India’s Ministry of Coal nor Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change responded to requests for comment.In October 2021, 500 villagers went on a 10-day march to the state capital, Raipur. The following spring, women in several villages began a weekslong tree-hugging protest, employing a tactic used to stop deforestation in northern India in the 1970s.That summer, Chhattisgarh’s state legislature adopted a resolution against mining in the region.Other winners of this year’s Goldman prize include a lawyer from Spain who won legal rights for Europe’s largest saltwater lagoon; an activist from the United States for work to limit carbon emissions from freight trucks and trains in California; and a journalist from Brazil who traced the beef supply chain back to illegal deforestation, persuading major supermarkets to boycott illegally sourced meat.In Australia, Murrawah Maroochy Johnson, a young Indigenous Wirdi woman, won the Goldman prize also for work blocking coal mining on her community’s land. Ms. Maroochy Johnson argued in court that the greenhouse gases released from this mine would violate the human rights of First Nations people across Australia.Mr. Shukla hopes that their actions inspire others around the world.“There is a way that local communities can actually resist even the most powerful corporations using just their resolve and peaceful, democratic means,” he said.Enjoy unlimited access to all of The Times.6-month Welcome Offeroriginal price:   $6.25sale price:   $1/weekLearn more

Indigenous
Activism
Climate

1 in 3 births: C-section rate increases, again

Data: CDC; Map: Axios VisualsThe rate of cesarean births in the U.S. has gone up, again.Why it matters: About one in three births in the U.S. are C-sections, according to new data, well above the 10-15% rate that the WHO considers "ideal."By the numbers: The national C-section delivery rate increased in 2023 to 32.4%, up from 32.1% in 2022, according to provisional CDC numbers.That's the highest rate since 2013, and the fourth annual increase after the rate generally declined 2009 - 2019, the CDC says.The rate of low-risk cesarean deliveries (mothers' first births of full-term, head-first singletons) increased from 26.3% in 2022 to 26.6% in 2023, the highest rate since 2013, per the CDCYes, but: An increase in C-sections doesn't necessarily mean the rate of unnecessary procedures has risen — there are other factors at play.Patients are sicker overall.With conditions like gestational diabetes and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy on the rise, there could be a greater need for C-sections, says Jane van Dis, OB-GYN and assistant professor at the University of Rochester.Van Dis says it's her hypothesis that the rise in those conditions is due to "environmental exposure," and she cites the increasing use of plastics.Repeat C-sections account for many procedures, even though the old "too posh to push" idea is not widely held."If you have already had a C-section, you will almost always be offered — and indeed the default is likely to be — a second," says Emily Oster, economist and author of "The Unexpected," her book about navigating pregnancy complications, due out April 30.Between the lines: Hospital politics might also come into play.For example, there are cases when doctors are more inclined to perform C-sections because that option would less likely lead to a medical malpractice lawsuit, Van Dis says.And health care system reimbursements for C-sections are generally higher than for vaginal births. "Financial incentives almost always play some role," Oster says.What they're saying: The "biggest consideration" with having a C-section is "future fertility," because of an increased risk of complications in later pregnancies, Oster tells Axios.Compared to a vaginal delivery, a C-section doesn't lead to a statistically different outcome for the baby, but it's a major abdominal surgery that tends to require a longer short-term recovery for the mother.Overall, a C-section "is an absolutely safe method of childbirth that should be available, and it should not be the first choice," Oster says.Vaginal deliveries also come with their own risks.And there are many situations — like in cases of breech birth, the presence of certain placenta problems, and severe preeclampsia — where a C-section should be performed, Van Dis says.What we're watching: Expanding access to doula care — as new legislation in New York does — could lower the rates of C-sections.A number of studies already suggest that the presence of doulas lowers the use of C-sections, Oster says.Doulas are there for psychological support during the often-overwhelming labor process, and to help with birth positions that could avoid the need for a C-section, Van Dis says."Doulas should be in every hospital … paid for," she adds.

Data: CDC; Map: Axios VisualsThe rate of cesarean births in the U.S. has gone up, again.Why it matters: About one in three births in the U.S. are C-sections, according to new data, well above the 10-15% rate that the WHO considers "ideal."By the numbers: The national C-section delivery rate increased in 2023 to 32.4%, up from 32.1% in 2022, according to provisional CDC numbers.That's the highest rate since 2013, and the fourth annual increase after the rate generally declined 2009 - 2019, the CDC says.The rate of low-risk cesarean deliveries (mothers' first births of full-term, head-first singletons) increased from 26.3% in 2022 to 26.6% in 2023, the highest rate since 2013, per the CDCYes, but: An increase in C-sections doesn't necessarily mean the rate of unnecessary procedures has risen — there are other factors at play.Patients are sicker overall.With conditions like gestational diabetes and hypertensive disorders in pregnancy on the rise, there could be a greater need for C-sections, says Jane van Dis, OB-GYN and assistant professor at the University of Rochester.Van Dis says it's her hypothesis that the rise in those conditions is due to "environmental exposure," and she cites the increasing use of plastics.Repeat C-sections account for many procedures, even though the old "too posh to push" idea is not widely held."If you have already had a C-section, you will almost always be offered — and indeed the default is likely to be — a second," says Emily Oster, economist and author of "The Unexpected," her book about navigating pregnancy complications, due out April 30.Between the lines: Hospital politics might also come into play.For example, there are cases when doctors are more inclined to perform C-sections because that option would less likely lead to a medical malpractice lawsuit, Van Dis says.And health care system reimbursements for C-sections are generally higher than for vaginal births. "Financial incentives almost always play some role," Oster says.What they're saying: The "biggest consideration" with having a C-section is "future fertility," because of an increased risk of complications in later pregnancies, Oster tells Axios.Compared to a vaginal delivery, a C-section doesn't lead to a statistically different outcome for the baby, but it's a major abdominal surgery that tends to require a longer short-term recovery for the mother.Overall, a C-section "is an absolutely safe method of childbirth that should be available, and it should not be the first choice," Oster says.Vaginal deliveries also come with their own risks.And there are many situations — like in cases of breech birth, the presence of certain placenta problems, and severe preeclampsia — where a C-section should be performed, Van Dis says.What we're watching: Expanding access to doula care — as new legislation in New York does — could lower the rates of C-sections.A number of studies already suggest that the presence of doulas lowers the use of C-sections, Oster says.Doulas are there for psychological support during the often-overwhelming labor process, and to help with birth positions that could avoid the need for a C-section, Van Dis says."Doulas should be in every hospital … paid for," she adds.

Health
Crisis
Science

Environmental Change, Written in the DNA of Birds

Two studies of California bird populations show how shifting environments can rewrite animals’ genomes — for better or worse. The post Environmental Change, Written in the DNA of Birds appeared first on The Revelator.

As the environment shifts — due to climate change, habitat destruction, or other threats — we can often observe some of the ways that wildlife responds. Populations may decline. Individual animals may move. Some species may alter their behavior. But at the same time, scientists warn, wild plants or animals may experience harder-to-detect changes — for example, alterations to their genomes, the very DNA that defines them. It requires a sophisticated genetics laboratory to see these otherwise invisible changes at first, but they may have important implications for populations’ futures. How exactly can threats such as climate change and habitat loss have hidden effects on a species’ genetic code? Two studies on California birds, both published in the past year, illustrate the potential — both beneficial and problematic. A New Adaptation The endangered southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus), ranging from California east to New Mexico and Colorado, depends on rapidly disappearing riparian habitats. As those riverbanks dry up, scientists began to wonder how the birds have adapted. They found the answers by looking to the past. Photo: USFWS In summer 2023 a group of scientists published a study comparing the genomes of flycatcher specimens collected in the San Diego around the turn of the 20th century — taxidermied birds preserved in museums — with those of contemporary birds, using blood samples collected from individuals captured across willow flycatchers’ breeding range today. The study was only possible due to rapid advances in technology. “Until recently, it was very difficult to sequence historical specimens across their entire genome,” says Sheela Turbek, a postdoctoral fellow at Colorado State University who led the project. “DNA tends to degrade over time, and older specimens can have really low DNA concentrations.” The results surprised Turbek and her colleagues: San Diego flycatchers’ genetic diversity has increased over time. Most notably, this increased diversity included areas of the genome linked with climate adaptation. According to the study, it appears the San Diego birds have bred with flycatchers originally from populations in other areas of the West, which may have moved in response to local habitat losses. And as natural selection has acted on this increased diversity, the San Diego birds’ genomes have shifted away from those of neighboring populations, potentially making the local birds better suited for life in a wetter, more humid environment being shaped by climate change. It’s the first time, as far as Turbek knows, that genetic adaptation to climate change has been documented in a wild bird population. “These genetic changes are imperceptible to the human eye, and we don’t know exactly what [these genes] are controlling,” says Turbek, “but we were able to identify several genes that are likely involved in heat tolerance and the birds’ ability to effectively dissipate heat in humid environments.” Turbek cautions that this doesn’t necessarily mean that the future of the San Diego flycatchers is rosy. “Given the unprecedented rate at which environmental conditions are changing, I think this rate of adaptation is likely insufficient, and current records show that the San Diego population is still declining,” she says. But, she admits, it’s “encouraging.” Losing What Matters Scientists call this exchange of genes between populations “gene flow.” Gene flow has also helped boost the genetic diversity of another threatened California bird population — but at a cost. Phred Benham, now a postdoctoral researcher at UC Berkeley, spent his time as a Ph.D. student investigating how two savannah sparrow subspecies, Passerculus sandwichensis alaudinus and Passerculus sandwichensis beldingi, have colonized coastal saltmarshes and adapted to life in a saline environment. “While spending a lot of time driving around California, I became interested in the human impact on these marshes,” he says. Photo: Peter Pearsall/U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service He led a study published in January that documented how the genomes of California’s coastal savannah sparrows have changed over the past century — a period during which up to 90% of the birds’ habitat has been destroyed by human activity. Like Turbek, he sequenced the genomes of historical bird specimens preserved in natural history museums and compared them to those of birds alive today. Benham’s study encompassed six tidal marsh populations, and he expected that those that had lost the most habitat would also have lost the most genetic diversity. Instead, he and his colleagues found, in the San Francisco Bay area — where birds had experienced the greatest levels of habitat loss — genetic diversity remained relatively high. This, Benham believes, is probably due to immigration from inland populations of savannah sparrows. There’s just one problem: Those inland birds don’t share the genetic adaptations that make the coastal birds so perfectly suited for life in saltmarshes. Coastal sparrows have larger kidneys, the ability to excrete salt in their urine, and even the ability to distinguish between more- and less-salty water when they need a drink. Now genes from inland interlopers may be diluting the traits that make saltmarsh birds unique. There’s no way to really stop birds from other parts of the state from dispersing into these coastal areas, so Benham would rather focus on preserving and restoring saltmarsh habitat. “The population can tolerate immigrants if the selection [for salt-tolerant traits] is stronger than the rate of gene flow from those immigrants,” he says. In other words, if there’s enough intact saltmarsh habitat for salt-tolerant traits to really have a big impact on the birds’ success, genes from inland immigrants will be naturally weeded out. Genetics Reveal Conservation Priorities Taken together, these two studies illustrate the hidden ways in which environmental change can rewrite animals’ genetic code, and how the same unseen force — in this case, gene flow — can be helpful or harmful, depending on the context. According to Benham, wildlife managers’ views on gene flow have swung back and forth over time. In some cases, conservationists have pushed to eliminate “hybrid” populations, where subspecies have interbred, to preserve genetic purity. On the opposite side of the spectrum, wildlife officials famously brought cougars to Florida from other parts of North America to revive the state’s inbred population. “There’s a lot of evidence showing that when you have a very tiny, inbred population, gene flow can rescue it from the negative effects of inbreeding,” Benham says. But if intermingling populations are adapted for very different environments, the cure may be as bad as the disease. Both studies also highlight the value of natural history collections, an invaluable but underfunded and underappreciated resource for understanding environmental change. Duke University, for example, recently announced that it will close its herbarium, which houses 825,000 plant specimens dating back a century. “I don’t think we can fully grasp at this point the value of all those specimens in museum collections,” says Turbek. “We’re going to continue uncovering that as the technology develops to fully mine them for further information.” It’s too soon to say for sure how these newly revealed genetic-level changes might ultimately affect the health of San Diego’s willow flycatchers or San Francisco’s savannah sparrows. Researchers still lack the data necessary to connect the genetics to the physical traits of individual birds, or to say how those traits might impact their survival. But as climate change continues to accelerate, understanding how it may rewrite the genetic code of the species it impacts will only become more crucial. “Our understanding of [genetic] adaptation to changing climate conditions is surprisingly limited,” says Turbek. We’ll need every resource we have — from historical specimens in the back rooms of natural history museums to cutting-edge gene sequencing techniques — if we hope to untangle these complex relationships in the future. The answers we find may provide the clues we need to keep species from suffering in a world that’s changing around them. Get more from The Revelator. Subscribe to our newsletter, or follow us on Facebook and LinkedIn.  Previously in The Revelator: A New Way to Count African Forest Elephants: DNA From Dung The post Environmental Change, Written in the DNA of Birds appeared first on The Revelator.

Animals
Climate
Forests

Toxic chemicals from car tyres can get into soil and contaminate food

Governments need to take action to protect people from potentially toxic additives in tyre rubber, say researchers after finding they can get into food from contaminated soil

Wear from car tyres produces tiny particles that pollute the air and watershine.graphics/Shutterst​ock Toxic additives in tyre rubber can leach into soil, be taken up by plants and end up in our food, according to the latest study highlighting a major source of pollution that is largely unregulated. “It’s too early to say there’s no risk or high risk from food at the moment, but this might change in the next five years,” says Thilo Hofmann at the University of Vienna in Austria. “Tyre wear particles are a major environmental…

Food
Pollution
Water

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.