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

Mysterious sea foam on South Australian beaches reportedly leaves more than 100 surfers ill

Leafy seadragons, fish, and octopuses among creatures to have washed up dead on both Waitpinga Beach and Parsons BeachFollow our Australia news live blog for latest updatesGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastA mysterious foam on a South Australian beach is being blamed for more than 100 surfers becoming ill, and for the deaths of leafy seadragons, fish, and octopuses.Health authorities have closed Waitpinga and Parsons Beach, about 80km south of Adelaide, and say the foam could be due to a microalgal bloom driven by hot temperatures, still water, and an ongoing marine heatwave.Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email Continue reading...

A mysterious foam on a South Australian beach is being blamed for more than 100 surfers becoming ill, and for the deaths of leafy seadragons, fish, and octopuses.Health authorities have closed Waitpinga and Parsons Beach, about 80km south of Adelaide.“It’s just covered in a really heavy, dense, yellow foam, with a fair bit of green, slimy, scummy stuff on the beach at the tidelines,” local surfer Anthony Rowland said.Rowland posted pictures online of dead sea creatures washed up on the beach, including the seadragons, which are close relatives of seahorses.The pictures show the foam bubbling over rocks and forming snaking coloured lines in the sand.“Some of the foam has a bit of rainbow effect in the bubbles,” Rowland said.After going out in the water on the weekend, he had a respiratory reaction.“I was really raspy. It was sort of like when you inhale a potent cleaning product, if you’re cleaning a kitchen sink or something. It hit the back of my throat,” he said.The reaction to his post was “absolutely overwhelming”, he said, adding that he and others worked out there were more than 100 people affected. And he is worried that it is spreading to other beaches on the Fleurieu Peninsula.“In the last 24 hours there’s dead fish along Victor (Harbor), Middleton, Encounter Bay. It’s definitely hit the Victor coast, and there are dead octopuses in Middleton,” he said.Marine life has washed up on the beach amid a ‘heavy, dense, yellow foam’. Photograph: Anthony RowlandA state environment department spokesperson said in a statement that the beaches were closed “in the interest of safety” and that authorities were investigating.“Waitpinga Beach and Parsons Beach within the Newland Head Conservation Park will be temporarily closed to the public in response to a fish mortality event in the area,” the spokesperson said.“The beaches will be re-opened as soon as possible.”The South Australian Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) told NewsWire: “It is believed the event could be due to a microalgal bloom that has been driven by hot temperatures and still water and an ongoing marine heatwave, with temperatures currently 2.5C warmer than usual, with little wind and small swell contributing to conditions.”South Australia is experiencing drought conditions and has had recent bouts of extremely hot weather.

Fired workers return to federal agencies — but are put on paid leave

As a result of recent court orders, federal employees are returning to their jobs — but are being put on paid leave. A spokesperson for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) told The Hill that as a result of a court restraining order, it was rescinding the terminations of 419 employees. The spokesperson said that these...

As a result of recent court orders, federal employees are returning to their jobs — but are being put on paid leave. A spokesperson for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) told The Hill that as a result of a court restraining order, it was rescinding the terminations of 419 employees. The spokesperson said that these employees are “mostly in an administrative leave status.” The Hill also obtained a notice that the Commerce Department sent to a staffer it had fired. The notice said that the employee will be reinstated, but that for the time being the employee will be placed in “paid, non-duty status.” The employee will remain on paid leave until the court case is resolved or until the department decides otherwise, according to the notice viewed by The Hill. Employees are subject to being fired again depending on the ultimate outcome of the case. It’s not immediately clear how many people received such notices or whether other agencies were similarly placing employees on paid leave. Tens of thousands of staffers across the government were laid off after a directive to fire workers who were considered “probationary” — those who were relatively new to their agency or who had recently been promoted. The Hill previously reported that hundreds at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), which is inside the Department of Commerce, and about 400 at the EPA were let go as part of this purge.  The Commerce Department and the White House did not immediately respond to The Hill’s requests for comment.  The latest news comes after a judge ruled last week that probationary workers had to be reinstated.  However, more firings are expected in the weeks ahead, as the Trump administration seeks additional staff cuts. Another 1,000 workers are slated to be cut at NOAA, while the National Park Service could lose 30 percent of its payroll. 

Grass-fed beef no better when it comes to carbon emissions, researchers find

Other scientists say grass-fed beef still wins out on other factors like animal welfare or local environmental pollution.

For cattle fattened in fields instead of feedlots, the grass may be greener, but the carbon emissions are not.A study out Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences finds that even in the most optimistic scenarios, grass-fed beef produces no less planet-warming carbon emissions than industrial beef. The finding calls into question the frequent promotion of grass-fed beef as a more environmentally friendly option. Still, other scientists say grass-fed beef wins out on other factors like animal welfare or local environmental pollution, complicating the choice for conscientious consumers.“I think that there is a large portion of the population who really do wish their purchasing decisions will reflect their values,” said Gidon Eshel, a research professor of environmental physics at Bard College and one of the study’s authors. “But they are being misled, essentially, by the wrong information.”When it comes to food, beef contributes by far the most emissions fueling climate change and is one of the most resource- and land-intensive to produce. Yet demand for beef around the world is only expected to grow. And carefully weighing the benefits of grass-fed beef matters because in most parts of the world where beef production is expanding, such as South America, it’s being done by deforesting land that would otherwise store carbon, said Richard Waite of the World Resources Institute.Experts say this study’s finding makes sense because it’s less efficient to produce grass-fed cattle than their industrial counterparts. Animals that are fattened up in fields instead of feedlots grow more slowly and don’t get as big, so it takes more of them to produce the same amount of meat.The researchers used a numerical model of the emissions produced across the process of raising beef, then simulated many herds of industrial and grass-fed cattle. It compared differences in how much food they would eat, how much methane and carbon dioxide they would emit and how much meat they would produce. Those differences mirror real-life scenarios; cattle in arid New Mexico and lush northern Michigan have different inputs and outputs.Eshel and his team also analyzed previous studies that examined how much cattle grazing promotes carbon storage, but found that even in the best-case scenarios, the amount of carbon that grasses could sequester didn’t make up for the emissions of the cattle.Randy Jackson, a professor of grassland ecology at University of Wisconsin-Madison who was not involved in the study, said he has found similar results in his own research showing that grass-fed beef has higher emissions assuming the same demand. In fact, Eshel’s team cited his work. But he worries that the study is too focused on minimizing emissions “without concern for the environmental impacts beyond GHG load to the atmosphere,” like biodiversity and soil and water quality, he wrote in an email.The American Grassfed Association, a nonprofit membership group for producers of grass-fed livestock, did not immediately provide a comment on the study.Jennifer Schmitt, who studies the sustainability of U.S. agricultural supply chains at the University of Minnesota and also wasn’t involved in the study, said she thinks the paper “helps us get a little closer to answering the question of maybe how much beef should we have on the landscape versus plant proteins,” she said.Schmitt said maybe if beef was scaled back on a large enough scale and if farmers could free up more cropland for other foods that humans eat, the localized environmental benefits of grass-fed cattle could make up for the fact that they come with higher emissions.It would be harder to convince Eshel, however. He thinks climate change is “second to none” when it comes to global problems and should be prioritized as such.“I have a hard time imagining, even, a situation in which it will prove environmentally, genuinely wise, genuinely beneficial, to raise beef,” Eshel said.For consumers who truly want to be environmentally conscious, he added, “don’t make beef a habit.”-- Melina Walling, The Associated Press

‘It’s a history lesson’: fossil fish up to 16m years old found perfectly preserved in central NSW

Fossils retain microscopic structural features including stomach contents and provide first detailed evidence in Australia for fish called OsmeriformesGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastFossil fish so exquisitely preserved that scientists have been able to reconstruct their final days from up to 16m years ago have been discovered in central New South Wales.Several fossils of small freshwater fish, embedded in an iron-rich mineral called goethite at the McGraths Flat fossil site, have retained microscopic structural features including their stomach contents and the outlines of cells that determine colour. Continue reading...

Fossil fish so exquisitely preserved that scientists have been able to reconstruct their final days from up to 16m years ago have been discovered in central New South Wales.Several fossils of small freshwater fish, embedded in an iron-rich mineral called goethite at the McGraths Flat fossil site, have retained microscopic structural features including their stomach contents and the outlines of cells that determine colour.This unusual level of detail – including the slender shape of the fish and position of its bones and fins – has revealed a lot about the species, called Ferruaspis brocksi, said lead author Dr Matthew McCurry, curator of palaeontology at Australian Museum.“In palaeontology there’s often so many gaps. Normally we just find isolated bones of a particular species,” McCurry said. “We can’t often see the whole animal, and we rarely see things like soft tissues preserved.”A fossil of stomach contents of the species called Ferruaspis brocksi shows that it fed predominantly on phantom midge. Photograph: Salty Dingo/Australian MuseumThe find, published in Vertebrate Palaeontology, has provided the first detailed evidence in Australia for a group of fish called the Osmeriformes, which today include graylings and smelts, McCurry said.Unusually, the fossils retained remnants of colour cells, called melanophores, including the tiny melanin-containing granules inside called melanosomes (measuring just over a thousandth of a millimetre).Co-author Assoc Prof Dr Michael Frese, a virologist adept at microscopy and based at the University of Canberra, said this level of detail “pushed the boundaries” of what could be preserved.From these microscopic details, the authors determined the fish were “counter shaded” – darker at the top and lighter at the belly – with two stripes along their sides.Also preserved were the animals’ stomach contents, and in some cases the intestinal tract.Frese said when viewed under a high-powered microscope, the fish bellies were full of the antennae of phantom midge larvae (a type of insect), bits and pieces of half-digested wings, and even a small mussel, or bivalve.These minute details offered a glimpse into the life of the fish in its final days, he said.The fossils were buried at the bottom of a lake like a billabong that was separated from nearby rivers, he said. Yet a second tiny bivalve, attached to a fish fin, suggested the animals came from a nearby river.That river might have flooded or otherwise spilled over into the lake, where the fish probably gorged themselves on phantom midge larvae. “They died with a full stomach,” Frese said.Illustration of species called Ferruaspis brocksi. Photograph: Alex BoersmaThe evolutionary biologist and palaeontologist Dr Alice Clement, who was not involved in the paper, said analysing melanophores to reconstruct colour patterns was a “big advancement in the study of fossil fishes”.Colours and patterns were important in the animal world – used for attracting mates, warning off predators and for camouflage. Yet the study of these characteristics in fossils was still in its infancy, she said.The species is named after Prof Jochen J Brocks, from the Australian National University, who has discovered several fossilised species at the McGraths Flat site.As well as detailed insights into the species itself, the fossils provided an “unprecedented opportunity” to understand Australia’s ancient ecosystems and the evolution of fish during the Miocene, McCurry said.The palaeontologist Prof John Long, an expert in ancient fishes at Flinders University who was not involved in the study, said fish fossils from the Miocene provided a “rare window” into ecosystems at a time of dramatic environmental change, when deserts expanded and forests declined.“It helps us appreciate the diversity of Australia’s unique fauna and how it evolved to cope with changing climatic conditions.”Frese said uncovering fossils at McGraths Flat was like flipping individual pieces of an upside-down mosaic.The fossils provide an ‘unprecedented opportunity’ to understand Australia’s ancient ecosystems, Dr Matt McCurry says. Photograph: Salty Dingo/Australian MuseumThe more you flipped, the more it revealed about the environment around the lake, he said. Over time, an even bigger picture emerged about how species evolved, and how continents and landscapes transformed at a critical point in history.“At the time these fish died and were preserved, that was a transitional period for Australia,” he said. “Basically it’s a history lesson, or a geological lesson, of what happens if the climate changes fundamentally.”

Why build nuclear power in place of old coal, when you could have pumped hydropower instead?

Research reveals most of the sites the Coalition has earmarked for nuclear power plants would be suitable for pumped hydropower plants.

Phillip Wittke, ShutterstockAustralia’s energy policy would take a sharp turn if the Coalition wins the upcoming federal election. A Dutton government would seek to build seven nuclear power plants at the sites of old coal-fired power stations. The Coalition says its plan makes smart use of the existing transmission network and other infrastructure. But solar and wind power would need to be curtailed to make room in the grid for nuclear energy. This means polluting coal and gas power stations would remain active for longer, releasing an extra 1 billion to 2 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide. So is there another option? Yes: pumped hydro storage plants. This technology is quicker and cheaper to develop than nuclear power, and can store solar and wind rather than curtail it. It’s better suited to Australia’s electricity grid and would ultimately lead to fewer emissions. Drawing on our recent global analysis, we found the technology could be deployed near all but one of the seven sites the Coalition has earmarked for nuclear power. The Coalition is likely to spend anywhere from A$116 billion to $600 billion of taxpayers’ money to deliver up to 14 gigawatts of nuclear energy. Experts say the plan will not lower power prices and will take too long to build. Our findings suggest cheap storage of solar and wind, in the form of pumped hydro, is a better way forward. This way, we can continue to build renewable energy capacity while stabilising the grid. More than 45GW of solar and wind is already up and running, with a further 23GW being supported by the Capacity Investment Scheme until 2027. Only a handful of the pumped hydro sites we found would be needed to decarbonise the energy system, reaching the 1,046 gigawatt-hours of storage CSIRO estimates Australia needs. Building pumped hydro storage systems near old coal-fired power generators has some advantages, such as access to transmission lines – although more will be needed as electricity demand increases. But plenty of other suitable sites exist, too. Filling the gaps Pumped hydro is a cheap, mature technology that currently provides more than 90% of the world’s electrical energy storage. It involves pumping water uphill from one reservoir to another at a higher elevation for storage. Then, when power is needed, water is released to flow downhill through turbines, generating electricity on its way to the lower reservoir. Together with battery storage, pumped hydro solves the very real problem of keeping the grid stable and reliable when it is dominated by solar and wind power. By 2030, 82% of Australia’s electricity supply is expected to come from renewables, up from about 40% today. But solar panels only work during the day and don’t produce as much power when it’s cloudy. And wind turbines don’t generate power when it’s calm. That’s where storage systems come in. They can charge up when electricity is plentiful and then release electricity when it’s needed. Grid-connected batteries can fill short-term gaps (from seconds to a few hours). Pumped hydro can store electricity overnight, and longer still. These two technologies can be used together to supply electricity through winter, and other periods of calm or cloudy weather. Two types of pumped-storage hydropower, one doesn’t require dams on rivers. NREL Finding pumped hydro near the Coalitions’s proposed nuclear sites Australia has three operating pumped hydro systems: Tumut 3 in the Snowy Mountains, Wivenhoe in Queensland, and Shoalhaven in the Kangaroo Valley of New South Wales. Two more are under construction, including Snowy 2.0. Even after all the cost blowouts, Snowy 2.0 comes at a modest construction cost of A$34 per kilowatt-hour of energy storage, which is ten times cheaper than the cost CSIRO estimates for large, new batteries. We previously developed a “global atlas” to identify potential locations for pumped hydro facilities around the world. More recently, we created a publicly available tool to filter results based on construction cost, system size, distance from transmission lines or roads, and away from environmentally sensitive locations. In this new analysis, we used the tool to find pumped hydro options near the sites the Coalition has chosen for nuclear power plants. Mapping 300 potential pumped hydro sites The proposed nuclear sites are: Liddell Power Station, New South Wales Mount Piper Power Station, New South Wales Loy Yang Power Stations, Victoria Tarong Power Station, Queensland Callide Power Station, Queensland Northern Power Station, South Australia (small modular reactor only) Muja Power Station, Western Australia (small modular reactor only). We used our tool to identify which of these seven sites would instead be suitable for a pumped hydro project, using the following criteria: low construction cost (for a pumped hydro project) located within 85km of the proposed nuclear sites. We included various reservoir types in our search: new reservoirs on undeveloped land (“greenfield” sites) repurposing existing reservoirs (“bluefield” sites) repurposing existing mining pits (“brownfield” sites). Exactly 300 sites matched our search criteria. No options emerged near the proposed nuclear site in Western Australia, but suitable sites lie further north in the mining region of the Pilbara. One option east of Melbourne, depicted in the image below, has a storage capacity of 500 gigawatt-hours. Compared with Snowy 2.0, this option has a much shorter tunnel, larger energy capacity, and larger height difference between the two reservoirs (increasing the potential energy stored in the water). And unlike Snowy 2.0, it is not located in a national park. Of course, shortlisted sites would require detailed assessment to confirm the local geology is suitable for pumped hydro, and to evaluate potential environmental and social impacts. More where that came from We restricted our search to sites near the Coalition’s proposed nuclear plants. But there are hundreds of potential pumped hydro sites along Australia’s east coast. Developers can use our free tool to identify the best sites. So far, the Australian electricity transition has mainly been driven by private investment in solar and wind power. With all this renewable energy entering the grid, there’s money to be made in storage, too. Large, centralised, baseload electricity generators, such as coal and nuclear plants, are becoming a thing of the past. A smarter energy policy would balance solar and wind with technologies such as pumped hydro, to secure a reliable electricity supply. Timothy Weber receives funding from the Australian government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Australian Centre for Advanced Photovoltaics.Andrew Blakers receives funding from the Australian government Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade and other organisations.

North American iguanas rafted 5,000 miles to colonize Fiji: Study

A subset of North American iguanas likely landed on an isolated group of South Pacific islands about 34 million years ago — having rafted some 5,000 miles from the West Coast of the faraway continent, a new study has found. Their epic journey to what is now Fiji marks the longest known transoceanic expansion of...

A subset of North American iguanas likely landed on an isolated group of South Pacific islands about 34 million years ago — having rafted some 5,000 miles from the West Coast of the faraway continent, a new study has found. Their epic journey to what is now Fiji marks the longest known transoceanic expansion of any terrestrial vertebrate species, according to the study, published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. Overwater travel for both animals and plants isn't unique in and of itself, as this is the primary way in which newly formed islands have become populated by plants and animals, the study authors noted. Such travel has often led to the evolution of new species and ecosystems — a phenomenon that has fascinated scientists since the time of Charles Darwin. Iguanas themselves are also known for their propensity to float elsewhere and are often found rafting around the Caribbean aboard plant life, the researchers explained. And while the scientists were already aware that the lizards traveled 600 miles to get from Central American to the Galapagos Islands, the massive 5,000-mile trip to Fiji took them by surprise. "That they reached Fiji directly from North America seems crazy," senior author Jimmy McGuire, a professor of integrative biology at the University of California Berkeley, said in a statement. "As soon as land appeared where Fiji now resides, these iguanas may have colonized it," added McGuire, who is also a herpetology curator at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology. Previously, biologists had assumed that Fiji iguanas — four species from the genus Brachylophus — descended from an older lineage that was at one point common around the Pacific but ultimately died out. Another possibility was the idea that the lizards "hitchhiked" from South America and then through Antarctica or Australia. Nonethless, the researchers found that there was no genetic or fossil evidence to support those theories. To draw their conclusions, the researchers acquired genome-wide, sequence DNA from more than 4,000 genes and from the tissues of more than 200 iguana specimens in global museum collections. As they began comparing the data to that of the Fiji iguanas, the scientists found that these animals were most closely related to iguanas in the genus Dipsosaurus. Within that genus, the most widespread lizard is the North American desert iguana, Dipsosaurus dorsalis, which has adapted to the desert heat of the U.S. Southwest and Northern Mexico, according to the study. "If there had to be any group of vertebrate or any group of lizard that really could make an 8,000 kilometer journey across the Pacific on a mass of vegetation, a desert iguana-like ancestor would be the one," lead author Simon Scarpetta, a former postdoctoral fellow at UC Berkeley. The findings also indicated a much more recent emergence on Fiji — up to 34 million years ago — than the previously suggested arrival times of either 43 million years ago or up to 60 million years ago. "The lineage of Fiji iguanas split from their sister lineage relatively recently, much closer to 30 million years ago," added Scarpetta, who is now an assistant professor in environmental science at University of San Francisco. That appearance in Fiji would have either post-dated or occurred "at about the same time that there was volcanic activity that could have produced land," Scarpetta said. The four species of Fiji iguanas, which inhabit both Fiji and Tonga, are listed as endangered — due to habitat loss, predation by invasive rats and smuggling for exotic pet trades, the authors noted. McGuire acknowledged that it may have been "easier to imagine that Brachylophus originated from South America," since marine and land iguanas dispersed to the Galapagos from the mainland. But this theory can now be ruled out, he and his colleagues confirmed. Although the scientists might could not pinpoint the exact moment and circumstances under which the iguanas arrived in Fiji, they marveled at the prospect of the journey. "Regardless of the actual timing of dispersal, the event itself was spectacular," McGuire added.

Everything you need to know to keep your teeth healthy

From brushing to whitening to the timing for dental cleanings, and everything in between.

Consumer Reports has no financial relationship with any advertisers on this site.With age comes a greater risk that things will go wrong with your teeth. Among adults, procedures such as filling cavities tend to peak in your early to mid-50s, according to the Health Policy Institute. By the time you reach your 60s, you’re almost certain to need treatment for tooth decay. Figuring out exactly what dental care you need and when can be challenging. Yet there’s one key step that’s simple and inexpensive: taking care of your teeth at home.Though certain dental problems may require extra attention, the basics of brushing twice daily and cleaning between your teeth by flossing haven’t changed. And while plenty of companies would like to sell you pricey gadgets and special products for your oral health, you don’t need to shell out big bucks to keep your mouth in great shape.How often for dental cleaning?Even with great home hygiene habits, you still need to see your dentist regularly for checkups and cleanings. Some people will need to visit more often than the standard twice a year, while others may be fine with less frequent visits. A 2020 review by Cochrane, an independent group of expert researchers, found that adults who visited the dentist every six months and those who visited on a schedule customized to their individual dental risk had comparable oral health.People who are being treated for periodontal disease or who have dental implants — which can fail more quickly than a natural tooth — may need to see their provider every three months or so, says Martha McComas, a clinical associate professor of dentistry at the University of Michigan School of Dentistry in Ann Arbor.Your dentist can help you figure out the right cadence for checkups, as well as your optimal at-home dental care strategy. “We can customize it based on what we see in your mouth,” says Karin Arsenault, program director of geriatric dentistry at the Tufts University School of Dental Medicine in Boston.Between visits, here’s what you need to know about the vital tools for keeping your teeth and your whole mouth as healthy as they can be.Your toothpaste mattersFluoride is important. Fluoride is crucial because of the power it has to help fight cavities and tooth decay — something proved by decades of research. While some ingredients, notably a chemical called hydroxyapatite, have shown promise as viable alternatives, fluoride is still your best choice right now, according to the American Dental Association.Cavities occur when the bacteria in our mouths consume the traces of food left on our teeth, particularly anything sugary. As the bacteria gobble up these sugars, they release acid, which can remove minerals from our teeth’s enamel, eventually creating cavities. Fluoride can help replace some of these lost minerals, strengthening the surface of our teeth and repairing some damage.When you’re shopping for toothpaste, look for one with the ADA Seal of Acceptance. To earn that seal, manufacturers need to not only include fluoride in their toothpaste but also meet other safety and efficacy standards, including one meant to ensure toothpastes aren’t too abrasive. (Very abrasive toothpastes can damage enamel.)Watch out for this ingredient: If you’re prone to canker sores inside your mouth, you may want to look for a toothpaste that doesn’t contain sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS). A 2019 research review found that using an SLS-free toothpaste might help reduce canker sores in people who get a lot of them (about 25 percent of adults).Skip charcoal toothpaste. Activated charcoal is often touted as a superior ingredient for a variety of products, including toothpaste. But it can be highly abrasive, which research has shown can damage your enamel and cause increased sensitivity.How much toothpaste to use: Generally, adults need only a pea-size amount of toothpaste — that will create enough foam to cover all the surfaces in your mouth, Arsenault says.Also, “one of the big myths about toothbrushing is that you should rinse your mouth out after you brush,” says McComas. Studies show that the fluoride in your toothpaste provides the biggest benefit if you don’t do this, instead allowing the fluoride to work its magic on your enamel for more time.What about prescription pastes? You may want to ask your dentist whether a prescription toothpaste, which generally contains a higher dose of fluoride, might be right for you. Severe dry mouth, which can be more common as you age (particularly if you’re taking certain medications for various chronic conditions, including for high blood pressure and depression), can raise your risk of cavities. So can periodontal disease, especially if the surfaces of the roots of your teeth, which lack protective enamel, are exposed.How to brush wellThe right bristles: Use a toothbrush with soft or extra-soft bristles. There are so many toothbrush options, but in the midst of considering the shape of the brush head, the brand name and other fancy features, don’t lose sight of bristle stiffness. Seek out a toothbrush with “soft” or “extra soft” on the packaging. Stiffer bristles are more likely to damage your gums or your teeth’s enamel, according to the American Dental Association.The advantages of an electric toothbrush: You can keep your mouth perfectly healthy with a manual toothbrush, but a 2014 Cochrane review found that three months of using an electric toothbrush resulted in 21 percent less plaque and 11 percent less gum inflammation (also called gingivitis).There are not significant performance differences between oscillating (or rotating) electric toothbrushes, which typically have round heads, and sonic toothbrushes, which usually have rectangular heads. So get the kind you like and will use.How much to brush: Do it twice a day for at least two minutes. Some research suggests that people may brush for a lot less time than this on average, possibly around a minute or less. But common sense and a 2009 Journal of Dental Hygiene study suggest that brushing longer will remove more plaque — though the added benefit of extra time beyond two minutes is probably marginal, and brushing too hard can exacerbate problems, including receding gums, which can expose the roots of your teeth to a greater risk of cavities and tooth decay.How to flossWhy flossing matters: Use any standard string floss (waxed or unwaxed), floss pick or interdental cleaning brush. The scientific evidence for flossing is not as strong as it is for brushing: A 2019 Cochrane review found that flossing in addition to brushing may reduce plaque and gingivitis more than brushing alone, but the authors cautioned that the evidence supporting this conclusion was weak. Still, dentists say the biological justification for flossing is sound: Without it, the bacteria that cause decay can build up between your teeth even if you’re brushing regularly.Do water flossers work? While not quite as effective as string floss, water flossers can be a great option if you have a hard time using string floss, have mouth hardware like braces or a permanent retainer, or have other kinds of dental work like implants, bridges, or crowns. Dentist Sally Cram, a spokeswoman for the American Dental Association, says the evidence on the benefits of a water flosser is encouraging, but it’s not enough for her to recommend it as a replacement for flossing just yet. Still, if you know you won’t use string floss every day, a water flosser is better than nothing.Avoid floss with PFAS. Skip floss that’s coated with these environmental contaminants, which are associated with a variety of health problems. You can look for flosses that use non-PFAS coatings such as beeswax or plant waxes like carnauba or candelilla.CR partnered with Made Safe, an independent organization that certifies products as safer and more sustainable, to find flosses made without PFAS. Read our special report, “How to Choose Dental Floss Without PFAS and Other Harmful Chemicals,” for the details, including three good floss options made from silk instead of plastic.How often should you floss? Do it once a day. Whether you floss or brush first doesn’t matter, as long as you do both.What if you have implants or gum disease? If you have an implant, you may want to opt for an interdental brush instead of regular string floss, particularly if your implant doesn’t touch the teeth next to it on either side.These are tiny round brushes designed specifically to clean in between teeth, and they work well with teeth that have gaps in between them. They come in different sizes, so Jennifer Harmon, a registered dental hygienist and clinical associate professor at the University of North Carolina Adams School of Dentistry in Chapel Hill, recommends working with your dentist to figure out which size you need for your teeth.If you’re dealing with bleeding gums, Arsenault says, you can consider using prescription chlorhexidine mouthwash after you floss. Just be sure to follow your dentist’s instructions, because chlorhexidine can also cause some tooth staining and changes in taste.Do you need these dental tools?Tongue scrapers: The experts we spoke with say this is a great tool. The bacteria that cause tooth decay don’t just live on your teeth; they can collect on your tongue, too. That means you should clean your tongue daily. You can do this with your toothbrush bristles or the ridged back of some brushes, but a tongue scraper can be a little more effective, Cram says.Plus, scraping your tongue is a great habit if you struggle with halitosis (bad breath), says Roxanne Dsouza-Norwood, a registered dental hygienist and clinical assistant professor of dental hygiene at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. But be gentle; otherwise you could accidentally lacerate your tongue. And you may need to experiment with different types of tongue scrapers to find one that doesn’t activate your gag reflex.Whitening strips: Over-the-counter whitening strips can help your teeth look whiter, but it can sometimes be difficult to spot the change, McComas says. You can try using them only on the upper teeth first so that the difference is more visible. (Then apply them to the lower teeth.) Keep in mind that the older you get, the more you can see the yellowish dentin underneath your enamel, which — along with crowns and implants — is not affected by strips. So you might end up with uneven colors.Strips can also cause sensitivity, particularly if you already have sensitive areas from gum recession, Cram says. So leave them on only as long as instructed on the package.Mouthwash: Because swishing it around can coat parts of your teeth’s surface that are harder to reach with other tools, mouthwash can be a nice adjunct to your dental care routine, particularly if you choose one that has fluoride. Prescription washes that contain chlorhexidine can also be helpful for people with bleeding gums or other severe gum problems.Consumer Reports is an independent, nonprofit organization that works side by side with consumers to create a fairer, safer and healthier world. CR does not endorse products or services and does not accept advertising. Read more at ConsumerReports.org.

Oregon, nine other states hit big electric vehicle goal

The states have collectively registered 3.3 million new electric vehicles in the last 12 years.

Oregon and nine other states recently achieved a collective goal of shifting new car buyers toward electric rather than gas-powered vehicles in an effort to reduce pollution and combat climate change.The states have collectively registered 3.3 million new electric vehicles in the last 12 years, fulfilling a 2013 agreement to do so by 2025, according to a report shared Monday by the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management, a Boston-based nonprofit association of state air pollution control agencies.In 2013, the then-governors of Oregon, California, Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont collectively agreed that they would boost policies and public information that could spur the sales of zero-emission vehicles in their states.Transportation was and remains the largest source of planet warming greenhouse gases in Oregon and the nation. When then-Gov. John Kitzhaber signed onto the 2013 agreement, just 300 electric vehicles were registered in Oregon. Today, more than 100,000 electric vehicles have been registered in the state, according to the Oregon Department of Energy. That’s about 5% of all new cars registered in the state in the last decade.Gov. Tina Kotek in a news release called the growth of electric vehicle adoption in Oregon, and the realization of the 2013 goals, a “milestone.”“Transportation electrification is key to meeting Oregon’s climate goals,” she said. “Strong partnerships between states and private sector partners will be key to the nation’s success in the years to come.In 2013, there were 16 electric vehicle models available for purchase in the U.S., according to the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management. Today, there are more than 150 models.Cumulative electric vehicle sales across the 10 states grew steadily in the first few years after the 2013 memorandum, but sales fully doubled from 2022 to 2024. In 2022, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act that included a $7,500 tax rebate on the purchase of a new electric vehicle. Oregon’s own rebate program, passed in 2017, and offers up to $7,500 back on the purchase of an electric vehicle. The program, which has paused issuing rebates since June of 2024 for a lack of adequate funding, is expected to resume sometime in 2025, according to the Department of Environmental Quality.One-third of all electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles registered in Oregon received one of the state’s Clean Vehicle Rebates, according to officials at the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, which distributes the rebates. The rebates have been worth nearly $100 million since 2017.Since 2013, five more states have created their own zero-emission vehicle programs similar to those of the original taskforce states to spur electric vehicle adoption and expand charging infrastructure through public investment and tax rebates, according to the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management. Oregon and those 14 other states now account for more than one-third of all U.S. sales of new electric vehicles.-- Alex Baumhardt, Oregon Capital ChronicleThe Oregon Capital Chronicle, founded in 2021, is a nonprofit news organization that focuses on Oregon state government, politics and policy.

Europe Should Focus on Sustainable Chip Production as Sector Emissions Rise, Study Says

By Nathan VifflinAMSTERDAM (Reuters) - With pollution linked to the manufacture of cutting-edge computer chips needed for AI rising rapidly, the...

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - With pollution linked to the manufacture of cutting-edge computer chips needed for AI rising rapidly, the European Union should focus on developing its existing lower-emission semiconductor production, think-tank interface said on Monday.In a review of pollution trends in the chemical-intensive semiconductor sector published on Monday, interface found the industry's energy use had risen 125% globally over the past eight years both as output rose and as cutting-edge chip production caused more emissions per chip."Mature" or "legacy" chips, such as those used in cars, electric grids and industrial applications, are generally less polluting."Where we could increase our competitiveness is by strengthening EU companies that are already market-leading and manufacturing chips needed for the green transition," Julia Hess, who led the research, told Reuters in an e-mail.European chipmakers such as STMicroelectronics, Infineon and NXP are among the world's top firms at manufacturing those kinds of chips.The EU is considering additional measures to support its semiconductor industry following the 2023 Chips Act, which helped spark investments in new production but failed to meet its primary goal of bringing cutting-edge manufacturing to Europe.Hess said it was not clear if Europe should continue pursuing cutting-edge production."If the EU wants to double down on cutting-edge chip production, this will significantly affect the climate and environment (given these chips have much higher emissions and energy consumption) per wafer," she said.If it does, arguments in favour include Europe's better access to water and renewable energy, she said. Most cutting-edge chips are made in humid subtropical climates in Asia, which adds significant energy costs to manufacturing. Hess said having chips produced with better environmental standards will turn out to be a long-term competitive advantage.(Reporting by Nathan Vifflin and Toby Sterling in Amsterdam; Editing by Jan Harvey)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Russia’s Ukraine Invasion Causes a Deadly Oil Spill on the Black Sea

Russia’s “shadow fleet” of aging oil tankers helps fund the ongoing war but puts the region at risk of more environmental disasters. The post Russia’s Ukraine Invasion Causes a Deadly Oil Spill on the Black Sea appeared first on The Revelator.

On Dec. 15, 2024, in a raging storm, two Russian oil tankers carrying more than 9,000 tons of heavy oil collided off the coast of Port Taman in the Kerch Strait in the Black Sea. A video posted to Telegram allegedly depicting the crash shows one of the tankers, with a broken bow, sinking into the sea. The second vessel reportedly ran aground closer to the port. The crash spilled thousands of tons of toxic heavy fuel oil and has harmed thousands of birds, dozens of dolphins, and other animals, and resulted in a state of emergency in Crimea. By mid-January the fuel had spread far enough that it could be seen from space. Satellite images studied by Greenpeace show coastal contamination stretching from Novorossiysk in the Krasnodar Krai to Ozero Donuzlav in the western coast of Russian-occupied Crimea. Even Russian president Vladimir Putin called the disaster “one of the most serious environmental challenges we have faced in recent years.” For a region accustomed to rough seas and choppy weather, this accident, while unfortunate, was not uncommon. Experts have raised alarms about Russian tankers in the region for years, following previous accidents that caused smaller but still significant spills. With this new crash continuing to cause damage, experts and activists warn that the region remains heavily militarized and under the control of the corrupt, autocratic Russian government, making response to the oil spill increasingly challenging. This has left a vacuum in disaster response, filled sparingly by local volunteers who’ve worked for three months to mitigate the damage. Anna, a student from Moscow, was among the first few volunteers on the scene. “I study at a university that specializes in the oil and gas industry, so I was able to find out quickly how much fuel oil was on the surface and what the government was doing to deal with the emergency,” she told The Revelator. (Anna did not disclose her full name for fear of retribution.) Heavy oil mixed with sand and shells on the polluted beach. Photo provided by volunteers and used with permission. Along with a dozen others, Anna made her way to the Anapa, a coastal resort town in Krasnodar Krai, and began coordinating with groups organizing rescue and cleanup efforts. Within days hundreds of volunteers had mobilized to help, including other students, many of whom traveled from as far as Moscow to help with the cleaning. The reaction from the Russian government has been a lot less enthusiastic. It took the government nearly two weeks to declare the state of emergency Dec. 25. Volunteers, however, have been working relentlessly. “We are catching, cleaning, and helping birds” affected by the spill, Anna said. “This is the easiest part of our work.” Volunteers also engaged in beach-cleaning efforts, but full treatment of the pollution will require specialized workers. A Heavy Problem The problems facing volunteers are not just logistical. The nature of the fuel they’re attempting to clear is itself problematic. “Fuel oil is quite heavy, so it sinks,” Anna explained. “But if the temperature rises or there are storms, it rises in the water and hits the shorelines again.” The vessels carried mazut, a type of low-quality heavy fuel oil that can be very difficult to clean in a spill. “Heavy fuel oil, also known as residual fuel, is what’s left at the end of the refining process,” explained Sian Prior, a marine science expert and lead adviser to the Clean Arctic Alliance, an organization that has advocated for tighter rules on fossil-fuel shipments in the region. “It’s used by a lot of ships in many different parts of the world.  Most of the heavy fuels also have very high sulfur levels, which when burned releases sulfur oxides, which is bad for health and the environment.”   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by Andrew Yanayt I Cameraman (@andrewyanayt) In 2020 the International Maritime Organization, which regulates global commercial shipping, introduced a limit on the amount of sulfur allowed in the fuel. But the fuel industry responded by blending fuels, mixing lighter fuels with heavy fuel to create a product that has low sulfur but still has a lot of heavy residual fuel, Prior said. The resulting mix poses several challenges after spills. “It’s very difficult to clean up, because it’s very viscous and emulsifies when it mixes with water, so its volumes actually increase,” she said. “Once this fuel is spilled … it’s virtually impossible to clean it up adequately.” The effects of a mazut spill could be worse than regular oil spills, which in themselves are disastrous. “The lighter fuels, distillate fuels, will break up much more quickly in the environment,” Prior explains. Mazut, however, remains very thick and viscous. “It can even end up forming hard balls of oil that will sink to the seabed, and get mixed into the sediment, sand, and can persist there for a very, very long time,” she said. “If there’s a storm it can get then released back into the environment, or if it gets very warm, it will become a little bit more viscous,” she said, echoing the experiences of volunteers in Anapa. “It clogs everything it mixes with…and can have a smothering effect on wildlife, marine mammals or birds if they come into contact with it. It’s also toxic, so if they ingest it, it will have an effect internally on their organs.” While Prior’s organization mainly focuses on advocacy in the Arctic Sea region, it says the events in Kerch are a warning on the dangers of transporting heavy fuel. As a result of the work by Clean Arctic Alliance, the International Maritime Organization instituted its ban on the use and carriage of heavy fuel oil in the Arctic as of July 2024. “But not all countries have implemented it so far. Russia hasn’t yet.” Shady Oils, Shadow Vessels Russia’s transport of this already dangerous substance has become more precarious because it’s currently being navigated across continents on fleets of extremely old, poorly maintained and uninsured ships. One of the crashed tankers, Volgoneft-239, in 2024. Photo by VladimirPF – Own work, CC BY 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=159254368 In fact, while the total number of oil spills worldwide has declined over the past four decades, the statistics are the opposite in the Russian seas, said Dmitry Lisitsyn, a Russian environmentalist and executive fellow at the Yale School of Environment. Lisitsyn’s organization, Sakhalin Environment Watch, monitors environmental safety and wildlife preservation on the eastern coast of Russia. The Russian government has declared it a “foreign agent,” limiting their work there. Before that they worked on cleaning up after a similar, albeit less pervasive oil spill in the southwest coast of Sakhalin Island in 2015. Lisitsyn said that despite growing number of oil-spill incidents in Russia, the government has lacked the political will to enforce preventive measures or actionable laws. Following December’s crash a local court in Krasnodar Krai filed the company that owned the tankers just 30,000 rubles (about $215) last month. But more worryingly, Lisitsyn said, the stakeholders seem reluctant to learn lessons from previous spills — including one in the Kerch Strait in 2007. “A similar spill, in the same region, involving the same type of tankers in the same kind of weather conditions should have been lesson enough,” he said. “It was about 20 kilometers to the north [of the current site], near the island of Tuzla, and took place around the same time of the year, but was half the amount of mazut spilled,” said Russian environmental scientist Eugene Simonov. “It caused a lot of damage, even though the scale and geographic range was smaller.” But 2007 was not even the first time, Simonov pointed out. In 1999 a tanker, the same kind that crashed in December, crashed “in front of the Istanbul ports. The tanker split in half and heavy fuel poured out in front of some popular tourist spots,” he said. “It was the least problematic because Turkey was really good at handling that and did not even engage with Russia or anyone else. They just went ahead and cleaned it up.” The biggest takeaway from these incidents, Simonov said, is that these tankers need to be decommissioned. “They are beyond their useful working age and not well-equipped to go into the sea, even into the Black Sea,” he said. “They’re built for the river and even the smallest waves put them in a clear danger of splitting, because they are too long and too weak.” Lisitsyn agrees. “These series of tankers should not go to the sea,” he said. “They are completely unsafe in the stormy seas.” Both tankers were built during the Soviet times. The Volgoneft-212 was about 55 years old, while Volgoneft-239 was a little over 40 years old. Why does Russia still use these old, unreliable vessels? The answer lies in its ongoing invasion of Ukraine and the many sanctions on Russian goods, particularly oil exports. Soon after the 2022 invasion, several western countries banned or significantly reduced the import of Russian oil, sanctions implemented largely on pipeline purchases. To bypass the sanctions, Russia has employed fleets of tankers, usually very old and in poor condition with obscure details of ownership, to continue its trade with western companies. The lack of identity of these tankers, widely referred to as “Shadow Fleets,” helps Russia circumvent sanctions to continue selling its prime economic product. One report by the Carnegie Eurasia center documented 2,849 oil tankers in the first nine months of 2024. The vessels carried an estimated average of 48 million barrels of oil per day. In 2024 Greenpeace identified a list of 192 aging tankers carrying Russian oil around the world. “The list covers only crude oil tankers, which are currently not on any sanctions list but are outdated old vessels,” said Natalia Gozak, director at Greenpeace Ukraine. “The ships visited Russian ports at least three times during the observation period, which established their connection to the Russian oil trade, and it was noted that they didn’t have internationally recognized insurance which would cover costs of any potential oil spill.” Since Greenpeace released the list, Gozak said, the United States, the United Kingdom, and the European Union have sanctioned about 70 of the vessels. Another 130 ships continue transporting oil for Russia.   View this post on Instagram   A post shared by FREE RUSSIA FOUNDATION (@freerussia_eng) The shadow fleet has several major implications, said Gozak, “the first of which is that it is financing the war and invasion of Ukraine.” Nearly 1,000 Russian tankers sailed along the Baltic coast in 2023, a Greenpeace report noted, averaging two to three ships per day, and the “highest number of Russian oil tankers ever recorded off the German coast.” As Russia increasingly moves its oil trade through shadow fleets, Gozak estimates the revenues from these exports fund approximately one third of its military budget. “It’s a huge source of income that continues fueling the war,” she said. “I’m based in Kyiv, and I can feel the impact here every day when we come under drone and missile attacks. It’s intensive.” The other prominent effect of these fleets is on the environment. “We have conducted a simulation of possible oil spill in the Baltic Sea and calculated the currents any spill in the region could spread really fast and the impact will be absolutely huge, affecting all countries bordering the Baltic Sea,” Gozak warned. He also brought up the 2007 spill in Kerch to emphasize the dangers posed by the most recent tragedy. “At the time about 1,300 tons of mazut was spilled,” much less than the current spill, he says. “But the impact was huge. Nearly 30,000 birds were killed.” The contamination also “lasted for years,” he said. “This type of oil doesn’t remain on the surface. It sinks down, especially when it’s cold, affecting bottom marine life, including filtrating organisms like mussels, and in this way could enter the food chain. We will continue to see the impact in the coming years, much like in 2007, when even two years after, studies showed high levels of contamination in the water there.” Russian War Preventing Response The conflict in the region, beginning with the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea and continuing through its invasion of Ukraine, has resulted in heavy militarization of the Black Sea region. This has further complicated redressal of the catastrophe. The war decreases the ability to mobilize international support, said Simonov. To make things worse, “the disputed status of occupied areas creates an incentive to hide the degree of disaster even more than in times of peace.” During the 2007 spill, Simonov said, both Russia and Ukraine participated in a cleanup. The two countries “quarreled with each other but had some joint operation” and allowed for international intervention. “Now you have a militarized area where they don’t want any eyes. So even if they lack technical capacity, they’re unwilling to seek support.” The war has already contributed to environmental pollution in the region, as Simonov wrote in a paper for the Ukraine War Environmental Consequences Working Group. “Risks posed by wrecked ships have also increased, with roughly 100 additional ships, military and civilian, sinking or damaged since the war began,” he noted in the paper. “For example, evidence of a limited oil spill was visible from space at the site where the Moskva military cruiser sank. Most of its fuel reserves, which may exceed 2,000 tons, are probably still stored in its fuel tanks at a depth of 50 meters — a huge risk for the future.” Russia may also not readily admit that it lacks the technical capacity to assess the damage or conduct adequate cleanup. “There are two aspects: the political will and the technological capacity to respond. Russia lacks both,” Simonov said. “Their systems are based on false reporting,” he continued. “Even when the initial figures demanded immediate action, they had no capacity to monitor or respond. It took them ten days to make key decisions.” He pointed to recent documents he discovered from April 2024 that show the company that owned the two ships passed their environmental impact assessments positively. Additionally, Simonov said, Russian officials had a full-scale oil-spill prevention and response drill in October 2024 that was supposedly concluded successfully. “So essentially they faked the whole complex of environmental preparations, because only two months after an emergency drill, they were still unable to do anything,” he said. “They purport themselves to be a great energy empire but lack the technological capacity to deal with a situation that has occurred before, and for which there should have been plans, drills and protocols in place.” Prior said Russia is not alone in this problem. “Obviously things are very difficult in terms of engaging with Russia at the moment, because environmental groups no longer have any status there,” she said. “But they’re not the only ones by any means. Countries that have large shipping fleets tend to be more challenging in terms of getting them to work to the same level.” Assessing Future Risk Parts of the sunken vessels, still holding nearly 4,000 tons of fuel, lie at the bottom of the strait. Environmentalists have raised concerns over the potential effects. The timing of the accident made a difference, though. “It happened during a season when there wasn’t any active breeding of the marine population, or migration,” Simonov said. The colder temperatures also helped prevent some of the active pollution, he pointed out. But as the temperature rises and seasons change, the insufficient response from the government increases vulnerability. “The greatest fear right now is that those tankers still down there with remaining mazut will start actively spilling around March-April…during the active bird and fish migration. That may make things clearly much worse,” he said. With global waters already warmer than previous decades, the mazut at the bottom of the sea increases the risks of marine pollution. Volunteers have been working relentlessly over the past two months but aren’t sure yet of the extend of the damage. “I hope that we will be able to clean the beaches and catch the [affected] birds,” Anna said. “But it’s impossible to say how much has been cleaned and how much remains.” Meanwhile the damage spreads. “The emergency affected not only the city of Anapa, but also Sochi and Crimea,” Anna said. “There are also rehabilitation centers working in the area. Volunteers are helping to get rid of all this because they care.” The tragedy continues to threaten the safety of marine life three months after the initial crash. According to the Delphi Scientific and Ecological Center for Dolphin Rescue, which is operating rescue efforts in the region, at least 84 dolphins have been killed by the oil spill as of February. Anna urges the administration to take coastline health more seriously to mitigate further damage. “We need to bring equipment that can remove one and a half meters of sand at a time,” she said. “We need a system to work with landfill [owners] to remove the contaminated soil.” But most importantly, she said, “we need to improve our oil-spill response plan. We don’t know when or where it might happen again.” That’s a warning echoed by many of the experts we spoke with: Under Russia’s corrupt, autocratic system and fossil-fuel-based economy, the chances of the country’s shadow fleet causing another environmental disaster — and the people and wildlife of the area suffering because of it — remains all too high. Scroll down to find our “Republish” button Previously in The Revelator: War Threatens Ukraine’s Unique Red Seaweed Fields. Here’s How Scientists Monitor Them From Afar The post Russia’s Ukraine Invasion Causes a Deadly Oil Spill on the Black Sea appeared first on The Revelator.

No Results today.

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

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

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

CONTACT US

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

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