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

Exoplanet atmospheres are a key to habitability

The habitable zone of a planet might be key to whether life can survive there. But so are exoplanet atmospheres, scientists say. The post Exoplanet atmospheres are a key to habitability first appeared on EarthSky.

Artist’s concept of exoplanet GJ 9827 d. It might be a steam world, with lots of water vapor in its atmosphere. Astronomers say exoplanet atmospheres are a key to whether or not life could survive on a planet. Image via NASA/ ESA/ Leah Hustak (STScI)/ Ralf Crawford (STScI)/ University of Montreal. Scientists focus on the habitable zone (where liquid water might exist) when they are gauging whether an exoplanet could be habitable. But exoplanet atmospheres are also key to whether a planet can maintain stable, life-supporting conditions. For life to persist on a planet, the environment must be stable. A planet’s surface, oceans and atmosphere can work together to regulate the system. By Morgan Underwood, Rice University EarthSky isn’t powered by billionaires. We’re powered by you.Support EarthSky’s 2025 Donation Campaign and help keep science accessible. Exoplanet atmospheres are a key to habitability When astronomers search for planets that could host liquid water on their surface, they start by looking at a star’s habitable zone. Water is a key ingredient for life, and on a planet too close to its star, water on its surface may boil. Too far, and it could freeze. This zone marks the region in-between. But being in this sweet spot doesn’t automatically mean a planet is hospitable to life. Other factors, like whether a planet is geologically active or has processes that regulate gases in its atmosphere, play a role. The habitable zone provides a useful guide to search for signs of life on exoplanets, or planets outside our solar system orbiting other stars. But what’s in these planets’ atmospheres holds the next clue about whether liquid water – and possibly life – exists beyond Earth. The greenhouse effect On Earth, the greenhouse effect, caused by gases like carbon dioxide and water vapor, keeps the planet warm enough for liquid water and life as we know it. Without an atmosphere, Earth’s surface temperature would average around 0 degrees Fahrenheit (-18 C), far below the freezing point of water. The boundaries of the habitable zone are defined by how much of a greenhouse effect is necessary to maintain the surface temperatures that allow for liquid water to persist. It’s a balance between sunlight and atmospheric warming. Many planetary scientists, including me, are seeking to understand if the processes responsible for regulating Earth’s climate are operating on other habitable-zone worlds. We use what we know about Earth’s geology and climate to predict how these processes might appear elsewhere. That is where my geoscience expertise comes in. Picturing the habitable zone of a solar system analog, with Venus- and Mars-like planets outside of the “just right” temperature zone. Image via NASA. Why the habitable zone? The habitable zone is a simple and powerful idea, and for good reason. It provides a starting point, directing astronomers to where they might expect to find planets with liquid water. But without needing to know every detail about the planet’s atmosphere or history. Its definition is partially informed by what scientists know about Earth’s rocky neighbors. Mars, which lies just outside the outer edge of the habitable zone, shows clear evidence of ancient rivers and lakes where liquid water once flowed. Similarly, Venus is currently too close to the sun to be within the habitable zone. Yet, some geochemical evidence and modeling studies suggest Venus may have had water in its past. Though how much and for how long remains uncertain. These examples show that while the habitable zone is not a perfect predictor of habitability, it provides a useful starting point. How to have a stable environment What the habitable zone doesn’t do is determine whether a planet can sustain habitable conditions over long periods of time. On Earth, a stable climate allowed life to emerge and persist. Liquid water could remain on the surface, giving slow chemical reactions enough time to build the molecules of life. This let early ecosystems develop resilience to change, which reinforced habitability. Life emerged on Earth, but continued to reshape the environments it evolved in, making them more conducive to life. This stability likely unfolded over hundreds of millions of years, as the planet’s surface, oceans and atmosphere worked together as part of a slow but powerful system to regulate Earth’s temperature. Recycling inorganic carbon A key part of this system is how Earth recycles inorganic carbon between the atmosphere, surface and oceans over the course of millions of years. Inorganic carbon refers to carbon bound in atmospheric gases, dissolved in seawater or locked in minerals, rather than biological material. This part of the carbon cycle acts like a natural thermostat. When volcanoes release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, the carbon dioxide molecules trap heat and warm the planet. As temperatures rise, rain and weathering draw carbon out of the air and store it in rocks and oceans. If the planet cools, this process slows down. This allows carbon dioxide, a warming greenhouse gas, to build up in the atmosphere again. This part of the carbon cycle has helped Earth recover from past ice ages and avoid runaway warming. Even as the sun has gradually brightened, this cycle has contributed to keeping temperatures on Earth within a range where liquid water and life can persist for long spans of time. Similar cycles in exoplanet atmospheres? Now, scientists are asking whether similar geological processes might operate on other planets. And if so, how they might detect them. For example, if researchers could observe enough rocky planets in their stars’ habitable zones, they could look for a pattern connecting the amount of sunlight a planet receives and how much carbon dioxide is in its atmosphere. Finding such a pattern may hint that the same kind of carbon-cycling process could be operating elsewhere. The mix of gases in a planet’s atmosphere is shaped by what’s happening on or below its surface. One study shows that measuring atmospheric carbon dioxide in a number of rocky planets could reveal whether their surfaces are broken into a number of moving plates, like Earth’s, or if their crusts are more rigid. On Earth, these shifting plates drive volcanism and rock weathering, which are key to carbon cycling. Simulation of what space telescopes, like the Habitable Worlds Observatory, will capture when looking at distant solar systems. Image via STScI/ NASA GSFC. Keeping an eye on distant exoplanet atmospheres The next step will be toward gaining a population-level perspective of planets in their stars’ habitable zones. By analyzing atmospheric data from many rocky planets, researchers can look for trends that reveal the influence of underlying planetary processes, such as the carbon cycle. Scientists could then compare these patterns with a planet’s position in the habitable zone. Doing so would allow them to test whether the zone accurately predicts where habitable conditions are possible, or whether some planets maintain conditions suitable for liquid water beyond the zone’s edges. This kind of approach is especially important given the diversity of exoplanets. Many exoplanets fall into categories that don’t exist in our solar system. These include super Earths and mini Neptunes. Others orbit stars smaller and cooler than the sun. NASA’s Habitable Worlds Observatory The datasets needed to explore and understand this diversity are just on the horizon. NASA’s upcoming Habitable Worlds Observatory will be the first space telescope designed specifically to search for signs of habitability and life on planets orbiting other stars. It will directly image Earth-sized planets around sunlike stars to study their atmospheres in detail. Instruments on the observatory will analyze starlight passing through these atmospheres to detect gases like carbon dioxide, methane, water vapor and oxygen. As starlight filters through a planet’s atmosphere, different molecules absorb specific wavelengths of light, leaving behind a chemical fingerprint that reveals which gases are present. These compounds offer insight into the processes shaping these worlds. The Habitable Worlds Observatory is under active scientific and engineering development, with a potential launch targeted for the 2030s. Combined with today’s telescopes, which are increasingly capable of observing atmospheres of Earth-sized worlds, scientists may soon be able to determine whether the same planetary processes that regulate Earth’s climate are common throughout the galaxy, or uniquely our own. NASA’s planned Habitable Worlds Observatory will look for exoplanets that could potentially host life. Morgan Underwood, Ph.D. Candidate in Earth, Environmental and Planetary Sciences, Rice University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article. Bottom line: The habitable zone of a planet might be key to whether life can survive there. But so are exoplanet atmospheres, scientists say.The post Exoplanet atmospheres are a key to habitability first appeared on EarthSky.

Thousands of US Hazardous Sites Are at Risk of Flooding Because of Sea Level Rise, Study Finds

A new study finds that thousands of hazardous sites across the U.S. are at risk of flooding due to sea level rise that could pose public health threats to neighboring communities

If heat-trapping pollution from burning coal, oil and gas continues unchecked, thousands of hazardous sites across the United States risk being flooded from sea level rise by the turn of the century, posing serious health risks to nearby communities, according to a new study.Researchers identified 5,500 sites that store, emit or handle sewage, trash, oil, gas and other hazards that could face coastal flooding by 2100, with much of the risk already locked in due to past emissions. But more than half the sites are projected to face flood risk much sooner — as soon as 2050. Low-income, communities of color and other marginalized groups are the most at risk.With even moderate reductions to planet-warming emissions, researchers also determined that roughly 300 fewer sites would be at risk by the end of the century. “Our goal with this analysis was to try to get ahead of the problem by looking far out into the future," said Lara J. Cushing, associate professor in the Department of Environmental Health Sciences at the University of California, Los Angeles who co-authored the paper published in the science journal Nature Communications.“We do have time to respond and try to mitigate the risks and also increase resilience," she added, speaking at a media briefing Wednesday ahead of the study's release. The study was funded by the Environmental Protection Agency and builds on previous research from California. Climate change is driving and accelerating sea level rise. Glaciers and ice sheets are melting, and the sea's waters are expanding as they warm. In many places along the coastal U.S., sea level rise is accelerating faster than the global average because of things like erosion and land sinking from groundwater pumping, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Thomas Chandler, managing director at the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University who was not involved in the research, said it’s “a really important study” that the public, policy makers and government agencies “need to make note of.” Derek Van Berkel, an associate professor in the school for environment and sustainability at University of Michigan who was also not involved in the study, wasn't surprised to learn about the disproportionate risks. What was “alarming” was considering the magnitude of “feedback effects” from flooding, he said. How researchers approached the data The study's researchers started by identifying and classifying tens of thousands of hazardous sites near the coasts of Puerto Rico and the 23 states with coastline. Next, they wanted to know each site's projected future flood risk. They did this by calculating how likely each year coastal flooding could inundate a site using historical sea level measurements and projected sea level rise in 2050 and 2100 under low and high emissions scenarios. Lastly, they identified and classified communities as being at-risk if homes are located within 1 kilometer (0.62 miles) of a hazardous site with a high threat of future flooding, and compared those communities' characteristics with other coastal neighborhoods with no at-risk sites nearby. But researchers did not include all types of hazardous facilities, such as oil and gas pipelines, nor did they account for groundwater upwelling or more intense and frequent storms in the future, which could lead to underestimates. On the other end, the flood-risk model they used could have overestimated the number of threatened sites. “It is important to note that previous disasters, such as hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Harvey, did result in a lot of toxic contamination from oil and gas pipelines,” Chandler said. The 5,500 at-risk sites includes 44% that are fossil fuel ports and terminals, 30% power plants, 24% refineries and 22% coastal sewage treatment facilities. Most of the sites — nearly 80% — are in Louisiana, Florida, New Jersey, Texas, California, New York and Massachusetts. Potential health impacts from exposure to hazards People exposed to flood waters near industrial animal farms or sewage treatment plants could be exposed to bacteria like E. coli, said Sacoby Wilson, professor of global, environmental and occupational health at the University of Maryland during the briefing. Symptoms can include bloody or watery diarrhea, severe stomach cramps or vomiting and fever. Those living near industrial sites like refineries could be exposed to heavy metals and chemicals that can cause rashes, burning of the eyes, nose and throat, headaches or fatigue, added Wilson, who was not involved in the study. “For folks who are vulnerable, maybe have an underlying health condition, those health conditions could be exacerbated during those flood events.” Longer term, some of these exposures could contribute to cancer, liver, kidney or other organ damage, or have reproductive effects, he said. For Chandler, the Columbia University director, the study highlights the need to heavily invest in hazard mitigation. “It's really important for federal, state and local governments in the United States to address these factors through multi-stakeholder resilience planning and encouraging local governments to integrate climate risk assessments into their mitigation strategies.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environment.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

This pig’s bacon was delicious. But she’s alive and well

A company called Mission Barns is cultivating pork fat in bioreactors and turning it into meatballs and other products. Honestly, they're pretty darn good.

I’m eating Dawn the Yorkshire pig and she’s quite tasty. But don’t worry. She’s doing perfectly fine, traipsing around a sanctuary in upstate New York. (Word is that she appreciates belly rubs and sunshine.) I’m in San Francisco, at an Italian joint just south of Golden Gate Park, enjoying meatballs and bacon not made of meat in the traditional sense, but of plants mixed with “cultivated” pork fat. Dawn, you see, donated a small sample of fat, which a company called Mission Barns got to proliferate in devices called bioreactors by providing nutrients like carbohydrates, amino acids, and vitamins — essentially replicating the conditions in her body. Because so much of the flavor of pork and other meats comes from the animal’s fat, Mission Barns can create products like sausages and salami with plants, but make them taste darn near like sausages and salami. I’ve been struggling to describe the experience, because cultivated meat short-circuits my brain — my mouth thinks I’m eating a real pork meatball, but my brain knows that it’s fundamentally different, and that Dawn (that’s her above) didn’t have to die for it. This is the best I’ve come up with: It’s Diet Meat. Just as Diet Coke is an approximation of the real thing, so too are cultivated meatballs. They simply taste a bit less meaty, at least to my tongue. Which is understandable, as the only animal product in this food is the bioreactor-grown fat.Cultivated pork is the newest entrant in the effort to rethink meat. For years, plant-based offerings have been mimicking burgers, chicken, and fish with ever-more convincing blends of proteins and fats. Mission Barns is one of a handful of startups taking the next step: growing real animal fat outside the animal, then marrying it with plants to create hybrids that look, cook, and taste more like what consumers have always eaten, easing the environmental and ethical costs of industrial livestock. The company says it’s starting with pork because it’s a large market and products like bacon are fat-rich, but its technology is “cell-agnostic,” meaning it could create beef and chicken, too. Matt Simon Honestly, Mission Barns’ creations taste great, in part because they’re “unstructured,” in the parlance of the industry. A pork loin is a complicated tangle of fat, muscle cells, and connective tissues that is very difficult — and expensive — to replicate, but a meatball, salami, or sausage incorporates other ingredients. That allows Mission Barns to experiment with what plant to use as a base, to which they add spices to accentuate the flavors. It’s a technology that they can iterate, basically, crafting ever-better meats by toying with ingredients in different ratios. So the bacon I ate, for instance, had a nice applewood smoke to it. The meatballs had the springiness you’d expect. During a later visit to Mission Barns’ headquarters across town, I got to try two prototypes of its salami as well — both were spiced like you’d expect, but less elastic, so they chewed a bit more easily than what you’d find on a charcuterie board. (The sensation of food in the mouth is known in the industry as “mouthfeel,” and nailing it is essential to the success of alt-meats.) The salami slices even left grease stains on the paper they were served on — Dawn’s own little mark on the world. Matt Simon I was one of the first people to purchase a cultivated pork product. While Mission Barns has so far only sold its products at that Italian restaurant and, for a limited time, at a grocery store in Berkeley — $13.99 for a pack of eight meatballs, similar to higher-end products from organic and regenerative farms — it is fixing to scale up production and sell the technology to other companies to produce more cultivated foods. (It is assessing how big the bioreactors will have to be to reach price parity with traditional meat products.) The idea is to provide an alternative to animal agriculture, which uses a whole lot of land, water, and energy to raise creatures and ship their flesh around the world. Livestock are responsible for between 10 and 20 percent of humanity’s greenhouse gas emissions — depending on who’s estimating it — and that’s to say nothing of the cruelty involved in keeping pigs and chickens and cows in unsavory, occasionally inhumane, conditions.Getting animal cells to grow outside of an animal, though, ain’t easy. For one, if cells don’t have anything to attach to, they die. So Mission Barns’ cultivator uses a sponge-like structure, full of nooks and crannies that provides lots of surface area for the cells to grow. “We have our media, which is just the nutrient solution that we give to these cells,” said Saam Shahrokhi, chief technology officer at Mission Barns. “We’re essentially recapitulating all of the environmental cues that make cells inside the body grow fat, [but] outside the body.” While Dawn’s fat is that of a Yorkshire pig, Shahrokhi said they could easily produce fat from other breeds like the Mangalitsa, known as the Kobe beef of pork. (In June, the company won approval from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to bring its cultivated fat to market.)Fat in hand, Mission Barns can mix it with plant proteins. If you’re familiar with Impossible Foods, it uses soy to replicate the feel and look of ground beef and adds soy leghemoglobin, which is similar to the heme that gives meat its meaty flavor. Depending on the flavor and texture it’s trying to copy, Mission Bay uses pea protein for the meatballs and sausages, wheat for the bacon, and fava beans for the salami. “The plant-based meat industry has done pretty well with texture,” said Bianca Le, head of special projects at Mission Barns. “I think what they’re really missing is flavor and juiciness, which obviously is where the fat comes in.” Matt Simon But the fat is just the beginning. Mission Barn’s offerings not only have to taste good, but also can’t have an offputting smell when they’re coming out of the package and when they’re cooking. The designers have to dial in the pH, which could degrade the proteins if not balanced. How the products behave on the stove or in the oven has to be familiar, too. “If someone has to relearn how to cook a piece of bacon or a meatball, then it’s never going to work,” said Zach Tyndall, the product development and culinary manager at Mission Barns.When I pick up that piece of salami, it has to feel like the real thing, in more ways than one. Indeed, it’s greasy in the hand and has that tang of cured meat. It’s even been through a dry-aging process to reduce its moisture. “We treat this like we would a conventional piece of salami,” Tyndall said. Cultivated meat companies may also go more unconventional. “I also love the idea of taking their pork fat and putting it in a beef burger — what would happen if you did that?” said Barb Stuckey, chief new product strategy officer at Mattson, a food developer that has worked with many cultivated meat companies. “Mixing species, it’s not something we typically do. But with this technology, we can.” Of course, in this new frontier of food, the big question is: Who exactly is this for? Would a vegetarian or vegan eat cultured pork fat if it’s divorced from the cruelty of factory farming? Would meat-eaters be willing to give up the real thing for a facsimile? Mission Barns’ market research, Le said, found that its early adopters are actually flexitarians — people who eat mostly plant-based but partake in the occasional animal product. But Le adds that their first limited sale to the public in Berkeley included some people who called themselves vegetarians and vegans.  Mission Barns There’s also the matter of quantifying how much of an environmental improvement cultivated fat might offer over industrial pork production. If scaled up, one benefit of cultivated food might be that companies can produce the stuff in more places — that is, instead of sprawling pig farms and slaughterhouses being relegated to rural areas, bioreactors could be run in cities, cutting down on the costs and emissions associated with shipping. Still, those factories would need energy to grow fat cells, though they could be run on renewable electricity. “We modeled our process at the large commercial scale, and then compared it to U.S. bacon production,” Le said. (The company would not offer specific details, saying it is in the process of patenting its technique.) “And we found that with renewable energy, we do significantly better in terms of greenhouse gas emissions.”Whether or not consumers bite, though, remains to be seen. The market for meat alternatives in the U.S. has majorly softened of late: Beyond Meat, which makes plant-based products like burgers and sausages, has seen revenues drop significantly, in part because of consumers’ turn away from processed foods. But by licensing its technology elsewhere, Mission Barns’ strategy is to break into new markets beyond the U.S.The challenges of cultivated meat go beyond the engineering once you get to the messaging and branding — telegraphing to consumers that they’re buying something that may in fact be partially meat. “When you buy chicken, you get 100 percent chicken,” Stuckey said. “I think a lot of people go into cultivated meat thinking what’s going to come onto the market is 100 percent cultivated chicken, and it’s not going to be that. It’s going to be something else.” Regardless of the trajectory of cultivated fat products, Dawn will continue mingling with llamas, soaking up the sunshine, and getting belly rubs in upstate New York — even as she makes plants taste more like pork.  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline This pig’s bacon was delicious. But she’s alive and well on Nov 20, 2025.

Coalition to help Labor rush through new nature laws if environmental protections dropped

Sussan Ley’s offer allows a clear path to pass laws to rewrite Environmental Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act in final sitting weekGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastThe Coalition has offered to help Labor rush through new nature laws if it agrees to gut environment protection, challenging Labor to side with business interests over green groups to implement the long-awaited changes.Environmental lawyers are urging the government against further weakening already flawed laws at the “behest of industry”. Continue reading...

The Coalition has offered to help Labor rush through new nature laws if it agrees to gut environment protection, challenging Labor to side with business interests over green groups to implement the long-awaited changes.Environmental lawyers are urging the government against further weakening already flawed laws at the “behest of industry”.The new offer from the opposition leader, Sussan Ley, gives Anthony Albanese a clear path to pass the laws to re-write the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation (EPBC) Act when parliament returns next week for the final sitting of the year.Sign up: AU Breaking News emailBut it would require ceding to the Coalition’s demands to water-down protection for nature and stripping back the powers of Labor’s proposed environment protection agency (EPA), risking a major backlash from environmentalist and potentially members of Labor’s backbench.After Guardian Australia revealed senior Liberals were optimistic about a deal, Ley confirmed the opposition would agree to overhaul the EPBC Act if Labor accepted its amendments while rejecting the Greens’ demands, which include new protection for native forests and measures to consider the climate impact of projects.The opposition wants changes to address seven points of concern, including the powers of the EPA, the requirement for large projects to disclose projected emissions upfront and threat of “excessive” financial penalties for breaches of nature laws and “stop-work” orders that could halt projects.The Coalition is also concerned about two provisions designed to protect nature: a new definition of “unacceptable impact” on the environment and a “net gain” test that is supposed to force developers to make up for damage and deliver an overall benefit for the environment.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Breaking News AustraliaGet the most important news as it breaksPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotion“The Coalition is seeking sensible amendments,” Ley said in a statement.“If they are adopted, then we will be supportive of legislation next week. However, if the government rejects sensible suggestions and chooses to put jobs at risk, then we will vote against them, with an open mind to revisit negotiations next year.”The environment minister, Murray Watt, remains open to striking a deal with either the Coalition or the Greens to get the laws through the Senate before parliament wraps up for 2025 next Thursday.On Thursday, Watt was adamant that the legislation would pass next week despite not yet having the support of either party.The Greens leader, Larissa Waters, said if Labor stitched up a deal with the Coalition then it wasn’t serious about protecting nature.“I think if the Labor government wants to do a deal with the climate denying, anti-science dinosaurs in the Liberal party that tells you everything that you need to know about what the government’s motivations are. It’s not the environment. It’s lining the pockets of big corporates,” she told ABC’s Afternoon Briefing.The warning came as the Environmental Defenders Office told a senate committee examining the government’s legislation that the bills, as drafted, risked making the failings of the current laws “worse”. EDO’s deputy director of policy and law reform, Rachel Walmsley, told the committee the parliament had three options: fail to pass the legislation and keep the failed EPBC Act in place for many more years, pass the bills as proposed or even weakened at the “behest” of industry or strengthen the bills and “actually deliver outcomes for nature”. “It has to be option three,” she said.

Crews race storm to contain oil spill in Ventura County creek

Cleanup was underway Wednesday in a wooded, remote area of Ventura County after about 420 gallons of crude oil inundated a waterway, officials said, and crews were working to beat the upcoming storm.

Cleanup was underway Wednesday in a wooded, remote area of Ventura County after about 420 gallons of crude oil inundated a waterway, officials said, and crews were working to beat the upcoming storm.An above-ground storage tank operated by Carbon California spilled the oil into a remote tributary of Sisar Creek near Ojai, contaminating about three-quarters of a mile of the waterway, according to state wildlife officials.Although the waterway and spill are small compared to some other major oil spills, “everything counts,” said Kristina Meris, a spokesperson for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s Office of Spill Prevention and Response.“There’s wildlife, there’s the environment, and people live in these areas,” she said. “We want to clean up everything we possibly can as quickly as we can safely.”Initial reports of an oil spill were received Tuesday afternoon, Meris said. But steep terrain, limited road access and the approaching severe weather are complicating the cleanup.Responders reached the creek bed Wednesday and “hit it pretty hard today,” Meris said, setting up a safety zone around the site. Officials will also conduct air quality tests to evaluate health hazards.“It’s a super remote and super difficult area to get to,” Meris told The Times. “The only concern for the response tomorrow will be the bad weather coming in, so the safety of our responders could become an issue.”The spill originated from a damaged gas tank owned by Carbon California, a company that operates oil and gas wells in the state, particularly in Ventura County. Officials said the cause remained under investigation, but the company has been designated the responsible party and is participating in a unified command with state and local agencies, which also includes personnel from the Environmental Protection Agency, Fish and Wildlife and the Ventura County Sheriff’s Department.Cleanup teams are skimming and pumping oil from the tributary and deploying absorbent booms and pads to recover oil trapped along the creek bed. Crews have been able to contain much of the spill, Meris said, but storm conditions could hamper their efforts.They expect to begin reporting recovery totals Thursday morning, though those numbers will likely reflect an “oily water mixture,” not pure crude. “Sometimes it can be a little bit higher than the number [of gallons spilled] because there will be water mixed in,” she said.No wildlife had been reported harmed as of Wednesday evening, but Meris emphasized that swift response was critical to preventing harm.“The quicker you respond, the quicker you get this cleaned up, the better for the environment,” she said.The spill site is far from major roadways, part of what officials described as a rugged stretch of watershed feeding into Sisar Creek. Cleanup operations will pause overnight for safety but are expected to resume Thursday morning, weather permitting.Officials did not immediately provide a timeline for a complete cleanup but said the response would continue until the creek met “established environmental endpoints” and recoverable oil product was removed.

Nazi bombs, torpedo heads and mines: how marine life thrives on dumped weapons

Scientists discover thousands of sea creatures have made their homes amid the detritus of abandoned second world war munitions off the coast of GermanyIn the brackish waters off the German coast lies a wasteland of Nazi bombs, torpedo heads and mines. Thrown off barges at the end of the second world war and forgotten about, thousands of munitions have become matted together over the years. They form a rusting carpet on the shallow, muddy seafloor of the Bay of Lübeck in the western tip of the Baltic Sea.Over the decades, the Nazi arsenal was ignored and forgotten about. A growing number of tourists flocked to the sandy beaches and calm waters for jetskiing, kite surfing and amusement parks. Beneath the surface, the weapons decayed. Continue reading...

In the brackish waters off the German coast lies a wasteland of Nazi bombs, torpedo heads and mines. Thrown off barges at the end of the second world war and forgotten about, thousands of munitions have become matted together over the years. They form a rusting carpet on the shallow, muddy seafloor of the Bay of Lübeck in the western tip of the Baltic Sea.Over the decades, the Nazi arsenal was ignored and forgotten about. A growing number of tourists flocked to the sandy beaches and calm waters for jetskiing, kite surfing and amusement parks. Beneath the surface, the weapons decayed.A shore crab in a video taken by a submersible. Photograph: DeepSea Monitoring/GeomarWhen the first scientists went looking to see what they were doing to the ecosystem, “some of us expected to see a desert, with nothing living there because it was all poisoned”, says Andrey Vedenin, from the Senckenberg Research Institute in Frankfurt am Main, who led a team of scientists to catalogue for the first time what life is able to survive on underwater weaponry.What they found astonished them. Vedenin remembers his colleagues shouting with surprise when the submersible first sent the images back. “It was a great moment,” he says.Thousands of sea creatures had made their homes amid the munitions, creating a regenerated ecosystem more populous than the sea floor around it.This underwater metropolis was testament to the tenacity of life. “It is actually astonishing how much life we find in places that are supposed to be toxic and dangerous,” he says.More than 40 starfish had piled on to one exposed chunk of TNT. They were living on metal shells, fuse pockets and transport cases just centimetres from its explosive filling. Fish, crabs, sea anemones and mussels were all found on the old munitions. “You could compare it with a coral reef in terms of the amount of fauna that was there,” says Vedenin.The munitions host a regenerated ecosystem of fish, crabs, sea anemones and mussels. ‘A lot of species that are otherwise rare or declining, such as the Baltic cod, are thriving,’ says Andrey VedeninAn average of more than 40,000 animals were living on every square metre of the munitions, scientists wrote in their paper on the discovery, published in the journal Communications Earth & Environment in September. The surrounding area was much less diverse, with only 8,000 individuals on every square metre.It is ironic that “things that are meant to kill everything are attracting so much life,” says Vedenin. “You can see how nature adapts after a catastrophic event such as the second world war and how, in some way, life finds its way back to the most dangerous places.”What the researchers found in the Bay of Lübeck reveals a surprising truth about how underwater life can repurpose human debris.Typically “urban sprawl” is considered bad for nature, but underwater, the script can be flipped. This is because every day, an average of 1m dumper trucks of rock, gravel, clay and silt are removed from the marine environment. These hard surfaces provide homes for corals, sponges, barnacles and mussels, as well as nursing grounds for fish.Before the war, this area of the Baltic Sea was full of boulders and rocky outcrops, but virtually all of them were removed for construction, to build homes and roads.Things that are meant to kill everything are attracting so much life … You can see how nature adaptsArtificial structures such as shipwrecks, offshore windfarms, oil rigs and pipelines can provide substitutes, replacing some of the lost habitat. This study shows that munitions could be similarly beneficial – the bloom of life on those in the Bay of Lübeck is likely to be repeated elsewhere.Between 1946 and 1948, 1.6m tonnes of arms were dumped off the German coast. Thousands of people loaded them in barges; some were dropped in designated sites, others just thrown overboard en route. This is the first time researchers have documented how marine life has responded.The seabed of the North and Baltic Seas off Germany are littered with munitions from the first and second world wars, such as shells once fired from German warships. Photograph: SeaTerraBut the phenomenon is not restricted to weapons. In the US, decommissioned oil and gas structures have turned into coral reefs; the Rigs-to-Reefs programme encourages authorities to leave the clean and stable structures underwater for the environmental benefits. Sunken ships from the first world war have become habitats for wildlife along the Potomac River in Maryland.These places become even more important for wildlife as the oceans are increasingly denuded by fishing, bottom trawling and anchoring. Sunken ships and weapons dump sites “essentially act as protected areas – they are not national parks, but almost any kind of human activity is prohibited”, says Vedenin. “Therefore a lot of species that are otherwise rare or declining, such as the Baltic cod, are thriving.”Anywhere where military conflict has occurred in the past 100 years, surrounding seas are usually strewn with munitions, says Vedenin. Millions of tonnes of explosive material lie in our oceans.The locations of these munitions are poorly documented, partly because of national borders, classified military information and the fact that records are buried in historic archives. They pose an explosion and security risk, as well as risk from the ongoing release of toxic chemicals.In the 1990s, academics started warning about the “danger from the deep”, and the need to remove potentially explosive material. Pressure to remove the weaponry also came from a growing demand to use the seabed for something else, such as dredging or offshore infrastructure such as windfarms, cables, and oil and gas pipelines.A black goby (Gobius niger), which feeds on the small crustaceans, fish, molluscs and worms living on the munitions in the Baltic Sea. Photograph: DeepSea Monitoring/ GeomarAs Germany and other countries embark on removing these relics, scientists hope to protect the ecosystems that have formed around them. In the Bay of Lübeck munitions are already being removed.“We should replace these metal carcasses left from munitions with some safer, some non-dangerous objects, like maybe concrete structures,” says Vedenin.He now hopes that what happens in Lübeck sets a precedent for replacing material after munitions removal elsewhere – because even the most destructive weaponry can become scaffolding for new life.Tank tracks that have become home to coral off Asan beach, Guam, came from US equipment lost during the invasion of the Pacific island in 1944. Photograph: National Park Service via GuamFind more age of extinction coverage here, and follow the biodiversity reporters Phoebe Weston and Patrick Greenfield in the Guardian app for more nature coverage

Some California landfills are on fire and leaking methane. Newly proposed rules could make them safer

California is considering adopting new rules to better identify and more quickly to respond to dangerous methane leaks and underground fires at landfills statewide.

A vast canyon of buried garbage has been smoldering inside a landfill in the Santa Clarita Valley, inducing geysers of liquid waste onto the surface and noxious fumes into the air.In the Inland Empire, several fires have broken out on the surface of another landfill. In the San Fernando Valley, an elementary school has occasionally canceled recess due to toxic gases emanating from rain-soaked, rotting garbage from a nearby landfill. And, in the San Francisco Bay Area, burrowing rodents may be digging into entombed trash at a landfill-turned-park, unloosing explosive levels of methane.These are just a few of the treacherous episodes that have recently transpired at landfills in California, subjecting the state’s waste management industry to growing scrutiny by residents and regulators.Landfill emissions — produced by decaying food, paper and other organic waste — are a major source of planet-warming greenhouse gases and harmful air pollution statewide. But mismanagement, aging equipment and inadequate oversight have worsened this pollution in recent years, according to environmental regulators and policy experts.This week, the California Air Resources Board will vote on adopting a new slate of requirements to better identify and more quickly respond to methane leaks and disastrous underground fires at large landfills statewide.The proposal calls for using satellites, drones and other new technologies to more comprehensively investigate methane leaks. It also would require landfill operators to take corrective action within a few days of finding methane leaks or detecting elevated temperatures within their pollution control systems.In recent years, state regulators have pinpointed at least two landfills in Southern California experiencing “rare” underground landfill fires — largely uncontrollable disasters that have burned troves of buried garbage and released toxic fumes into the air. More recently, a new state satellite program has detected 17 methane plumes from nine landfills between July and October, potentially leaking the flammable gas into unwanted areas and contributing to climate change.Proponents of the proposed rule say the added oversight could help reduce California’s second-largest source of methane, a potent greenhouse gas that warms the atmosphere much more than carbon dioxide. It could also bring relief to hundreds of thousands of people who live nearby landfills and may be exposed to toxic pollutants like hydrogen sulfide or benzene.“Curbing methane emissions is a relatively quick and cost-effective way to reduce the greenhouse pollution that’s wreaking havoc with our climate,” said Bill Magavern, policy director at the Coalition for Clean Air. “But [we’ve] also been involved in updating and strengthening the rule because we’re seeing the community impacts of leaking landfills, particularly at places like Chiquita Canyon, where we have a landfill fire that is making people in the community sick.”Nearly 200 landfills statewide would be subject to the proposed requirements — 48 are privately owned and 140 are government-owned.Many landfill operators oppose the rule, saying the new requirements would saddle the industry with an untenable workload and millions of dollars each year in added costs. These costs could be passed on to residents, whose garbage fees have already risen significantly in recent years.Sacramento County officials, who operate the Kiefer Landfill, said the proposed protocols were not feasible. “As a public landfill, Kiefer cannot quickly adapt to regulatory shifts of this magnitude, and these increased costs would ultimately burden the community it serves,” Sacramento County officials wrote in a Nov. 10 letter to the state Air Resources Board.The vast majority of landfills are already required to monitor for leaks and operate a gas collection system — a network of wells that extend deep into the layers of buried waste to capture and destroy methane.A hot messChiquita Canyon Landfill in Castaic has become the poster child for the issues plaguing California’s waste management system.A blistering-hot chemical reaction began inside the landfill’s main canyon in May 2022, roasting garbage in a roughly 30-acre area.Starting in April 2023, residents of Castaic and nearby Val Verde began to take notice. They called in thousands of odor complaints to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, with many citing headaches, nausea, nosebleeds and difficulty breathing.Later that year, state regulators learned that the landfill’s temperatures had risen above 200 degrees, melting plastic pipes used to collect landfill gases. An air district inspector also witnessed geysers of liquid waste bursting onto the surface and white smoke venting from large cracks spreading across the reaction area.Air sampling found elevated levels of lung-aggravating sulfur pollutants and cancer-causing benzene. Air samples in 2023 detected benzene concentrations more than eight times higher than the state’s short-term health limit at Hasley Canyon Park, which abuts Live Oak Elementary School, alarming local parents.“I personally have transferred my children to different schools further away,” said Jennifer Elkins, a Val Verde resident whose children attended Live Oak. “I spend three hours a day driving my kids to and from school. The commute has been a sacrifice, but it’s also been well worth it, because I know my children are breathing cleaner air, and I have seen their health improve.”The landfill, owned by Texas-based Waste Connections, installed new heat-resistant equipment to extract liquid waste in an attempt to reduce broiling temperatures. It also installed a large covering over the affected area to suppress odors. It permanently closed and ceased accepting waste this year.Still, the reaction area has tripled in size and could consume the entire 160-acre canyon for many more years. During other underground landfill fires, elevated temperatures have persisted for more than a decade.The issue is, once these broiling temperatures start consuming landfill waste, there’s little that landfill operators can do to snuff them out.The fumes from Chiquita Canyon have pushed some longtime residents to consider moving. After more than 25 years in Val Verde, Abigail DeSesa is contemplating starting anew somewhere else.“This is our life’s investment — our forever home that we were building for retirement and on the verge of paying off,” DeSesa said. “And we may have to start over.”“I don’t know that I can outlast it,” DeSesa added.Chiquita Canyon is not alone.Earlier this year, the South Coast air district learned about another fiery chemical reaction brewing inside El Sobrante Landfill in Corona. In August, Waste Management, the landfill’s owner and operator, acknowledged there was a two-acre “area of concern” where landfill staff had observed temperatures climbing above 200 degrees. Riverside County inspectors also found several fires had ignited on the landfill’s surface in recent years, according to public records.Environmental advocates fear that many more landfills may be on the precipice of these largely unmanageable disasters.According to an analysis by California Communities Against Toxics, there are 18 landfills in California that have had prolonged heat signatures detected by NASA’s Fire Information for Resource Management System, an online tool using satellite instruments to detect fires and thermal anomalies.At least 11 of these landfills requested and received permission from either federal or local environmental regulators to continue operating with higher temperatures than currently allowed, according to public records obtained by the environmental organization.These regulatory exemptions are part of the problem, said Jane Williams, the group’s executive director.“We have 11 landfills across California that have been granted waivers by the government to basically ‘hot rod’ the landfill,” Williams said. “We would really like EPA and state agencies to stop granting landfill waivers. It’s a permission slip to speed in a school zone.”Under newly proposed revisions to state rules, operators must be more transparent in disclosing the temperatures in their gas collection systems. If operators detect elevated temperatures, they must take action to minimize the amount of oxygen in the landfill.While these rule changes might be coming too late to fix the issues near Chiquita Canyon, locals hope it will help others who live in the orbit of the nearly 200 other large landfills in California that could be subject to these rules.“While there’s still a fight here to try to address the concerns at Chiquita Canyon Landfill, we know that there’s an opportunity to really prevent this kind of disaster from happening anywhere else in our state,” said Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo.Dangerous leaksMeanwhile, many other landfills are releasing unsafe amounts of methane, an odorless gas produced by bacteria that break down organic waste.These emissions present two critical issues.First, methane is a powerful greenhouse gas — capable of warming the atmosphere 80 times more than the same amount of carbon dioxide over 20 years. Following California’s large dairy and livestock operations, landfills emit the second-most methane statewide.Second, methane is the primary constituent in natural gas. It can ignite or explode at certain concentrations, presenting a serious safety risk in the event of uncontrolled releases. Several times over the last few years, regulators have detected potentially explosive concentrations in the air and shallow soil near several landfills.Under current landfill regulations, operators are required to monitor for excessive methane leaks four times a year. Many operators hire contractors to walk across accessible portions of the landfill with a handheld leak-monitoring device, an approach that some environmental advocates say is unreliable.In addition, some areas of the landfill are not screened for methane leaks if operators consider them to be unsafe to walk across, due to, for example, steep hills or ongoing construction activities.“Landfills have to monitor surface emissions, but they do that in a very inefficient way, using outdated technology,” Magavern said.Starting this past summer, California has partnered with the nonprofit organization Carbon Mapper to use satellites to detect methane leaks, and already has found 17 coming from landfills. In one case, researchers saw a large methane plume appear to emanate from Newby Island Landfill in San José and drift into a nearby residential neighborhood.Although the state has notified these landfill operators, it currently cannot require them to repair leaks detected via satellite. That would change under the proposed amendments to the state’s landfill regulations. Operators would also have to use state-approved technology to routinely scan portions of their landfills they deem inaccessible.The proposed amendments seek to prevent the most common causes of methane emissions. A series of surveys of landfill operators found 43% of leaks in recent years were caused by one or more of a facility’s gas collection wells being offline at the time.The new rules would require that such wells can only be offline for up to five days at a time for repairs. Operators would also be required to install gas collection systems within six months of when garbage is first placed in a new part of a landfill — rather than the 18-month time frame currently allowed.In addition, landfills would be forced to take actions to fix a leak within three days of detection, rather than 10 days. In theory, that should help reduce the risk of leaks from things like cracks in landfill covers (typically a layer of soil or plastic covering) and damaged components of gas collection systems — two other major sources of leaks that landfill operators have reported.The amended landfill rules could collectively cost private companies and local governments $12 million annually.Some say that’s well worth the cost.A contingent of residents who live near Chiquita Canyon Landfill are flying to Sacramento to attend the state Air Resources Board meeting. They are expected to testify on how the fire and landfill emissions have unraveled the fabric of the semi-rural community.Elkins, the Val Verde resident, appreciated the area’s natural beauty — picturesque hillsides, wildlife and opportunities for stargazing without bright city lights. However, now her family hardly spends any time outdoors due to the noxious odors.Some of her neighbors have moved away, but Elkins and many other longtime locals cannot, no matter how they fear for their health and safety. “The homes are not selling,” she said. “Other homes sit vacant, and community members are paying two mortgages just to get away. And for many of us, it would be financial suicide to move away and start over somewhere new.”

Latest Kote climate order aims to speed up Oregon’s clean energy transition

The executive order seeks to accelerate wind and solar energy and energy storage, energy efficiency and the transition to clean fuels in Oregon.

Gov. Tina Kotek has issued another broad climate executive order directing state agencies to take specific actions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and speed up Oregon’s move to carbon-free electricity. Her order Wednesday seeks to accelerate wind and solar energy and energy storage by streamlining land use and environmental reviews, siting, permitting and grid connections.It sets an energy storage goal and directs agencies to prioritize public-private partnerships for clean energy projects and to find ways to support emerging technologies such as enhanced geothermal technology, offshore wind and advanced battery storage. The order also calls for state agencies to increase energy efficiency in public and private buildings and extends Oregon’s Clean Fuels Program through 2040. The program requires suppliers to steadily cut fuel pollution.“The rising cost of living is hitting Oregonians household budgets hard, so we must act effectively and prudently to protect ratepayers from increased energy costs, while also building a more resilient, clean energy future,” Kotek said at a press conference at the state Capitol while flanked by a group of clean energy and climate action supporters.Kotek’s move comes amid growing doubts about Oregon’s ability to hit its ambitious 100% clean energy target. State law requires investor-owned utilities in Oregon to reduce emissions by 80% by 2030 and to transition to all clean electricity by 2040, something experts say utilities are unlikely to do given the lack of transmission lines and the extraordinary growth in electricity demand from data centers, buildings and cars. The order also lands as the Trump administration has moved aggressively to roll back federal climate policies, reversing many emissions-reduction measures enacted under President Joe Biden – including halting wind and solar projects on federal lands and dismantling generous tax credits funded by the Biden-era Inflation Reduction Act. It’s Kotek’s third climate-related executive order in less than a month. At the end of October, she directed state agencies to harness the potential of forests, farms, wetlands and waterways to reduce emissions, preserve wildlife habitat and help communities withstand the threat of climate change. And in early October, she pushed to streamline and accelerate the pace of wind and solar project development in the state before the clock runs out on federal clean energy tax credits.Kotek said the latest executive order can help slow climate change, expand transmission grid capacity, attract new businesses and create economic opportunities across Oregon’s energy sector. The order sets a goal of 8 gigawatts of energy storage in Oregon by 2045. Building more energy storage is key, the governor’s office said, because it provides backup electricity when wind or solar power production is low and during outages or peak demand periods. Energy storage projects also reduce the need for building additional electricity-generating resources such as wind or solar projects.Eight gigawatts is achievable, the governor’s office said, because the state already has nearly 500 megawatts of energy storage and more than 7 gigawatts of storage projects are currently planned for development. The order also directs the state Department of Energy to designate transmission corridors, including on public land, and streamline siting and approval in those corridors or in existing rights of way. The order requires a 50% reduction in carbon intensity of Oregon fuels by 2040. The current rule requires a 10% reduction in average carbon intensity from 2015 levels by 2025, followed by a 20% reduction by 2030 and 37% by 2035. Most fuel producers mix in cleaner fuels such as ethanol, biodiesel or renewable diesel into traditional gasoline and diesel or buy credits from others who have gone beyond the state requirement. In 2024, the Clean Fuels Program led to the reduction of approximately 3 million metric tons of greenhouse gases. Over the lifetime of the program, since 2016, approximately 14.6 million metric tons of greenhouse gases have been reduced.Much of the order focuses on state agencies – including the Department of Energy, the Department of Land Conservation and Development, Department of Environmental Quality and the Public Utility Commission – aligning their decisions, investments and activities, including the implementation of existing programs, to advance clean energy, clean fuels and energy efficiency. It doesn’t entail new programs or additional funding for the remainder of the 2025-2027 biennium but may lead to new funding demands in future years, said Kotek spokesperson Anca Matica. The order directs agencies to tally the barriers to clean energy permitting, construction and connecting into the transmission grid and come up with solutions by next fall. The agencies are to focus on projects that benefit Oregon ratepayers and that involve upgrades to the existing grid and transmission expansion in existing rights-of-way.By September 2026, agencies are to identify strategies to streamline and accelerate the construction of wind and solar projects. Agencies must provide quarterly updates on progress in advancing public-private partnerships. The governor’s office said the order won’t raise rates. Rather, the order directs agencies to prioritize energy efficiency and investments that deliver the greatest value to ratepayers, the governor’s office said. (should you move this up where she has the quote?)Reporter Carlos Fuentes contributed to this story. If you purchase a product or register for an account through a link on our site, we may receive compensation. By using this site, you consent to our User Agreement and agree that your clicks, interactions, and personal information may be collected, recorded, and/or stored by us and social media and other third-party partners in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

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.