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

Destinations Hit by Natural Disasters Need Tourists Back—but Maybe Not in the Same Way as Before

Places like Maui and Asheville, North Carolina, rebuilding after wildfires and hurricanes, are doing so with a mind to sustainable tourism

Destinations Hit by Natural Disasters Need Tourists Back—but Maybe Not in the Same Way as Before Places like Maui and Asheville, North Carolina, rebuilding after wildfires and hurricanes, are doing so with a mind to sustainable tourism Shoshi Parks - History Correspondent April 14, 2025 8:00 a.m. People gather on Kaanapali Beach, a popular tourist destination near Lahaina, Hawaii, in August 2024. Mario Tama/Getty Images When wildfires engulfed the Hawaiian island of Maui’s historic downtown Lahaina in August 2023, Kohola Brewery was caught in their flames. The facility and taproom were completely destroyed, along with the core of the town’s Front Street. It took the beer’s producers only five months to begin brewing again—this time with borrowed equipment and space at Kona Brewing Hawaii. But returning to Lahaina to rebuild was out of the question. Instead, they opened a new taproom in Wailea about 30 miles from the original, “a pivot to brick-and-mortar” that allowed them to serve food for the first time but not to resume brewing on their own, says Isaac Bancaco, vice president of operations at Kohola. In its original form, the brewery’s taproom did business with the nearly three million tourists who visited Maui each year. Last year, that number was down by almost a quarter. The Kohola Brewery taproom and restaurant is one of many businesses ready to welcome visitors back to Maui—but are they ready to return? Buildings smolder days after a wildfire gutted Lahaina in August 2023. Robert Gauthier/Los Angeles Times via Getty Images The planet is at a climate crossroads. Natural disasters are increasing so much in frequency and intensity that even places once believed to be insulated from the worst of what’s to come—the cool, wet Pacific Northwest, for example—are experiencing greater effects from wildfire, storms, flooding, landslides and drought. These events devastate local communities not just as the tragedy unfolds but in its aftermath. Those with diverse economies can be somewhat nimble in their recovery. Houston, which was devastated by Hurricane Harvey in 2017, bounced back more quickly than expected because its economy was split among a wide variety of industries, including health care, aerospace, shipping, manufacturing and technology. Those sectors that couldn’t immediately resume business were balanced out by those that could. But when a community is dependent on a single industry, rebuilding can be much harder. This is especially true when tourism is the primary—or in some cases the only—economic driver. “When the economy is very much reliant on one industry and that industry fails, it’s very vulnerable,” says Paloma Zapata, CEO of Sustainable Travel International, an organization working to help the global travel industry strengthen its climate resilience. Heavy rains from Hurricane Helene caused record flooding and damage on September 28, 2024 in Asheville, North Carolina. Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images Tourism destinations hit by natural disasters need visitors in order for local people and businesses to survive. But important questions underlie tourists’ return: Is restoring the tourism status quo the best future for a destination that’s been impacted by natural disaster? Would it be better for local communities and environments if a pre-disaster form of tourism never returned at all? The answer is complicated. “Typically, a destination that relies on tourism is not going to stop relying on tourism just because of a natural disaster,” says Zapata. But natural disasters can act as a pivot point for both overdeveloped places and tourists to re-evaluate the sustainability of their behavior. Destinations dependent on tourism need visitors to return, but “there needs to be a balance between economic development, conservation, community well-being and the visitor experience,” she continues. In the United States alone, several popular tourism destinations are in varying stages of recovery following calamitous natural disasters. In August 2023, the fifth-deadliest wildland fire in U.S. history erupted on the Hawaiian island of Maui. High winds drove the flames from the hills to the sea, destroying more than 2,200 structures in and around the historic district of Lahaina, and taking more than 100 lives. In September 2024, the Blue Ridge Mountain town of Asheville, North Carolina, suffered extreme flooding due to Hurricane Helene, which dropped around 14 inches of rain—40 percent of the city’s annual rainfall—in just three days. Mudslides and cresting rivers there destroyed around 2,300 structures. Then, this January, wildfires ripped across drought-affected brush and forestland in Los Angeles, destroying entire neighborhoods and causing an estimated $250 billion in damages. Residents of Asheville view damage to the Arts District downtown after Hurricane Helene. Melissa Sue Gerrits/Getty Images These events are nothing short of catastrophic for local communities, but the way they are portrayed in the media often doesn’t fully reflect what’s happening on the ground, according to Victoria Isley, president and CEO of Explore Asheville. Disaster coverage creates “global impressions that are very difficult to combat,” she says, like the idea that local infrastructure no longer exists. “There are many places, like downtown Asheville, that visibly look like nothing ever happened,” says Isley, six months after Helene. “The majority of our restaurants, breweries and music venues are open downtown, in South Asheville and in North Asheville. Almost all of our hotels are open. Our airport has been functional the entire time, and half of a brand-new terminal will open this summer.” Even many of the small mountain towns around Asheville that were hit hard by the storm—including Spruce Pine, for instance, which has one of the only mines on Earth for the high-purity quartz used in electronics, solar panels and the chips that power artificial intelligence—were back to work within weeks. Still, in the months following Hurricane Helene, estimates that Asheville’s tourism industry would experience a 70 percent decline in the last quarter of 2024—a loss of more than $584 million in revenue—circulated through the news cycle. By the end of February 2025, it was actually the opposite that had occurred, with a 4 percent increase in visitors from pre-Helene numbers. In Maui, while some of the island’s celebrity homeowners initially discouraged visitors from returning, the region was welcoming people back two months after the wildfires, says Kalani Kaʻanāʻanā, chief stewardship officer at the Hawaii Tourism Authority. Outside the core of historic Lahaina, which centered on the ocean-facing Front Street, the region today appears virtually untouched by the disaster, and “many Lahaina businesses have reopened or relocated,” Kaʻanāʻanā says. Even so, the island has struggled to attract the same volume of visitors as it once did. The University of Hawaii Economic Research Organization predicts that Maui will have almost 400,000 fewer tourists in 2025 than the 2.97 million it received in 2022, and half a million fewer than pre-pandemic levels in 2019. Maui will have almost 400,000 fewer tourists in 2025 than the 2.97 million it received in 2022. Mario Tama/Getty Images “Lower visitor numbers continue to affect local businesses and, by extension, our communities,” continues Kaʻanāʻanā. With around 80 percent of the region’s economy rooted in tourism, the slow recovery has resulted in the need for many families to relocate to other islands or the continental U.S. just to survive. The entire Maui County, which includes the island of Maui and two neighboring islands with small populations, Molokai and Lanai, employs fewer than 20,000 people in its two second-largest industries, retail trade and health care and social assistance. Recent data indicates that while Maui’s health care, construction and educational services industries are slowly growing, they remain only a small fraction of the economy overall. While economic diversification could help to build Maui’s resilience, the reality is that “usually tourism-dependent economies are dependent to tourism because they don’t have a choice,” says CB Ramkumar, vice chair of the Global Sustainable Tourism Council. If visitors do not return, the entire community would collapse. Ironically, because tourism is a major driver of carbon emissions and human-caused climate change, restoring high numbers of visitors could also have a similarly negative impact on the community in the long run. It’s a “dual issue,” Ramkumar says. It’s important for destinations to give serious thought to the kind of tourism they want back following a natural disaster, says Zapata. “There’s always going to be support from governments to ‘build back better,’ but most of the cost is going to come from the [business] owners’ pockets.” It’s unfortunately true that some of the infrastructural challenges hotels and other businesses face after a disaster are due to the corners they cut to keep costs to a minimum in the first place. “It’s going to take a big effort first with infrastructure, the opportunity to build more renewable energy sources and use more innovative materials, and also [with the type of tourists] you target,” Zapata continues. In the Caribbean, for example, restoring mangrove swamps and relocating businesses unwisely established in their footprint is likely to make a destination more ecologically resilient and better able to withstand disasters in the future. “Looking at a higher-value, lower-impact model for any destination [while simultaneously] diversifying the economy are really the keys to being able to withstand when a natural disaster comes,” says Zapata. Even when a destination has a plan for sustainable recovery post-disaster, though, following it is not always so simple. Some places grow much faster than anticipated. In Curaçao, for example, where Zapata worked on the carrying capacity of the island’s tourism in the years following extreme flooding from 2010’s Hurricane Tomas, it took only two years for the number of visitors to arrive that they expected at the end of five years, “causing, of course, infrastructure pressure but also societal pressure” in sectors like the housing market, she says. “They have to handle their growth now or they’re going to have more problems.” As Ramkumar puts it, “It’s like water gushing down a mountain. You’ve got to build the banks of the river so that the water doesn’t go flood the whole place and nobody wins.” It’s a lesson in sustainability that Hawaii is taking to heart. “Maui’s approach to tourism is evolving,” says Kaʻanāʻanā. “We’re promoting and supporting programs that amplify community voices and engage visitors in cultural preservation and environmental protection, such as tree-planting initiatives and cultural education. Community input and environmental considerations will continue to shape Maui’s tourism future.” Beachfront homes burned in Malibu, California, as wildfires caused damage and loss throughout the Los Angeles region in January 2025. Mario Tama/Getty Images Reimagining the types of experiences available to visitors and establishing guidelines for them can also help destinations to weed out (some) of those who have little interest in respecting the places and people they visit. Increasingly, says Ramkumar, “there is a whole class of tourists who are willing to go to a place just to help others because that experience of giving is enriching in itself.” Individual travelers have a responsibility to consider their own carbon footprint and the types of businesses and tours they are willing to invest in. If, according to Sustainable Travel International’s carbon calculator, it produces 1.01 metric tons of carbon dioxide to fly round-trip from San Francisco to Maui, each visitor adds to the island’s ecological fragility unless they also do things like offset their emissions, support carbon-neutral businesses and contribute through voluntourism. Currently, visitors to Maui can assist in restoring and preserving the island’s cultural and archaeological sites with Maui Cultural Lands or participate in cleanup events and invasive species removal with Malama Maui Nui. Those headed to Asheville can help with debris removal and rebuilding projects through All Hands and Hearts and the United Way of Asheville and Buncombe County, while Los Angeles visitors can volunteer with L.A. Works to repair homes, assemble food packages and organize clothes for survivors. “Anywhere we go we should leave the places better than how we found them,” says Zapata. Isley in Asheville agrees. Locals hope “visitors and travelers take to heart where they are visiting and how they are visiting,” she says. “Going from recovery to revival, the grit and the guts of Appalachia has always been there, and I think that’s just shining brighter after the storm.” Planning Your Next Trip? Explore great travel deals A Note to our Readers Smithsonian magazine participates in affiliate link advertising programs. If you purchase an item through these links, we receive a commission.

Length of a Day on Uranus Revised, Pour Height Influences Coffee Quality, and Plastics Recycling Falls Short.

A fluid study homes in on the best method to make a cup of coffee, scientists use the Hubble Telescope to reassess the length of a day on Uranus, and we discuss more of the latest in science in this news roundup.

A Long Day on Uranus, a Better Method of Making Coffee and Disputed Dino DeclineA fluid study homes in on the best method to make a cup of coffee, scientists use the Hubble Telescope to reassess the length of a day on Uranus, and we discuss more of the latest in science in this news roundup.By Rachel Feltman, Fonda Mwangi & Alex Sugiura Anaissa Ruiz Tejada/Scientific AmericanRachel Feltman: Happy Monday, listeners! For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, I’m Rachel Feltman. Let’s catch up on some of the science news you might have missed last week.We’ll ease into things with a new study on a subject that’s bound to perk you up: coffee. Up until now the best way to learn more than you ever wanted to know about pour-over coffee was to ask literally any guy at a party in Brooklyn. But a study published last week in the journal Physics of Fluids brings some actual science into debates over how to brew the perfect pot of joe.Using transparent silica gel particles in place of coffee grounds, researchers captured high-speed footage showing exactly how water flows through a pour-over setup under different conditions. They determined that the best way to brew a strong cup of coffee was to maximize the contact time between water and coffee grounds while also allowing for plenty of mixing so as much coffee as possible was extracted. The team says the key is to pour slowly—to maximize contact—and from a greater height to increase the water velocity. A slim stream of water from a gooseneck kettle can help optimize this process. As those dudes from parties in Brooklyn have probably already told you. If you get it right, the researchers say, you can actually get a stronger cup of coffee using a smaller quantity of grounds. They recommend experimenting by subtracting a small amount from your usual bean count—maybe a couple of grams per serving—and then trying cups brewed at different pour heights until you find a strength you like.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.Now that we’re all bright-eyed and bushy-tailed, let’s move on to another troubling story of cuts in federal funding for research. Last Tuesday the U.S. Department of Commerce announced that the Trump administration will pull around $4 million in research grants for climate change-related projects from Princeton University. According to a press release from the Department of Commerce, the projects funded by these grants “are no longer aligned with the program objectives” of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and “are no longer in keeping with the Trump Administration’s priorities.”One of the targeted projects focuses on how water supplies might fluctuate as global warming progresses. The Department of Commerce stated that “using federal funds to perpetuate these narratives does not align with the priorities of this Administration,” which is, frankly, chilling language to use when talking about climate change research. The press release also accused some of the slashed projects of increasing “climate anxiety,” which is a phrase that’s increasingly being used to cast folks’ concerns over very real evidence about the climate crisis in a hysterical light.Speaking of environmental threats: a study published last Thursday in the journal Communications Earth & Environment found that less than 10 percent of the plastic made worldwide in 2022 contained recycled materials. The world produced more than 400 million tons of plastic that year. And some estimates say that amount will more than double by 2050. The new study also found that just around 28 percent of all plastic waste made it to the sorting stage and only half of that plastic was actually recycled. While China had the highest plastic consumption overall in 2022, the U.S. had the highest amount of usage per person, according to the researchers. On average, each individual in the U.S. consumed about 476 pounds [216 kilograms] of plastic that year.Now, obviously plastic usage is a massive, complex, systemic problem that high income countries around the world need to address, so this isn’t me trying to make you feel guilty about your ever-growing pile of old takeout containers. But if you’ve been looking for something to motivate you to start making some slightly less convenient choices in the name of using less plastic—carrying reusable straws and silverware with you, finding a local bulk grocery store that lets you use your own containers—maybe these new findings can fire you up to make a change.Now let’s check in with a cosmic neighbor. The Small Magellanic Cloud is a galaxy not far from our own, and a new study published in the Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series suggests that things might be getting a little hectic over there. Within the SMC, researchers tracked the motion of roughly 7,000 stars, each one more than eight times the mass of our own sun. The team found that the stars were moving in different directions on the galaxy’s respective sides. The scientists think that the gravitational pull of the nearby Large Magellanic Cloud—which, to state the obvious, is the bigger of the two galaxies—might be pulling the SMC apart. The researchers say that studying how the SMC and LMC interact with both each other and with the Milky Way will help us understand how galaxies form and behave.In other space news, it turns out that a day on Uranus lasts slightly longer than we thought. A study published last Monday in Nature Astronomyused data from the Hubble Space Telescope to estimate the ice giant’s rotation rate with unprecedented accuracy. Our prior estimate of 17 hours, 14 minutes and 24 seconds came from Voyager 2’s 1986 flyby of Uranus. That figure relied on measurements of the planet’s magnetic field and radio signals emitted by its auroras. For a better estimate scientists used more than a decade’s worth of Hubble data to track the movement of Uranus’s auroras, which helped them zero in on the actual location of the planet’s magnetic poles. The researchers’ findings added a whopping 28 seconds to Uranus’s previously estimated rotational period. And hey, every second on Uranus is precious.We’ll wrap up with some new findings on the demise of the dinosaurs. Some earlier research has suggested that dinosaurs were already on the outs before that infamous asteroid struck the killing blow. But a study published last Tuesday in Current Biologyargues that the dinosaurs were doing just fine before that pesky space rock came along, thank you very much.Researchers analyzed the North American fossil record for the 18 million years preceding the mass extinction event in question—about 8,000 fossil specimens in total. That fossil record does indeed seem to show that dinosaur populations started declining millions of years before the asteroid hit. But the new study suggests it’s not the dinosaurs themselves that declined but simply their mark on the fossil record. The researchers argue that geological changes made dinosaur fossils less likely to be preserved in places where archaeologists could one day access them. It’s certainly not the end of this debate, but it’s now a little more plausible to imagine that, had things gone down a little differently, we might still have dinosaurs roaming the Earth today—other than birds, of course.That’s all for this week’s news roundup. We’ll be back on Wednesday to talk about a trendy disinfectant that sounds almost too good to be true: hypochlorous acid. Tune in to get the full scoop on this so-called miracle molecule.Science Quickly is produced by me, Rachel Feltman, along with Fonda Mwangi, Kelso Harper, Naeem Amarsy and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was edited by Alex Sugiura. Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck fact-check our show. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith. Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news.For Scientific American, this is Rachel Feltman. Have a great week!

New technologies are helping to regrow Arctic sea ice

But should we use them?

In the dim twilight of an Arctic winter’s day, with the low sun stretching its orange fingers across the frozen sea, a group of researchers drill a hole through the ice and insert a hydrogen-powered pump. It looks unremarkable — a piece of pipe protruding from a metal cylinder — but it holds many hopes for protecting this landscape. Soon, it is sucking up seawater from below and spewing it onto the surface, flooding the area with a thin layer of water. Overnight this water will freeze, thickening what’s already there.  The hope is that the more robust the ice, the less likely it will be to disappear in the warm summer months.  Since 1979, when satellite records began, Arctic temperatures have risen nearly four times faster than the global average. Sea ice extent has decreased by about 40 percent, and the oldest and thickest ice has declined by a worrying 95 percent. What’s more, scientists recently estimated that as temperatures continue to climb, the Arctic’s first ice-free day could occur before 2030, in just five years’ time.  NASA The researchers are from Real Ice, a United Kingdom-based nonprofit on a mission to preserve this dwindling landscape. Their initial work has shown that pumping just 10 inches of ocean water on top of the ice also boosts growth from the bottom, thickening it by another 20 inches. This is because the flooding process removes the insulating snow layer, enabling more water to freeze. When the process is done, the patch of ice measured up to 80 inches thick — equal to the lower range of older, multi-year ice in the Arctic. “If that is proved to be true on a larger scale, we will show that with relatively little energy we can actually make a big gain through the winter,” said Andrea Ceccolini, co-CEO of Real Ice. Ceccolini and Cian Sherwin, his partner CEO, ultimately hope to develop an underwater drone that could swim between locations, detecting the thickness of the ice, pumping up water as necessary, then refueling and moving on to the next spot.  This winter, they carried out their largest field test yet: comparing the impact of eight pumps across nearly half a square mile off the coast of Cambridge Bay, a small town in the Kitikmeot Region of Nunavut, part of the Canadian Arctic. They now wait until June for the results. During a January 2024 field test, a hydrogen-powered pump sucks water from Cambridge Bay, Canada and spews it onto the surface. The water will freeze and thicken the existing ice. Video courtesy of Real Ice Their work is at the heart of a debate about how we mitigate the damage caused by global warming, and whether climate interventions such as this will cause more harm than good.  Loss of sea ice has consequences far beyond the Arctic. Today, the vast white expanse of this ice reflects 80 percent of the sun’s energy back into space. Without it, the dark open ocean will absorb this heat, further warming the planet. According to the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California, San Diego, if our sea ice disappears entirely, it will add the equivalent warming of 25 years of carbon dioxide emissions. There are also huge implications for our weather patterns: Diminishing sea ice is already changing ocean currents, increasing storms, and sending warmer, drier air to California, causing increased wildfires. Within the Arctic, loss of ice means loss of habitat and food security for the animals, microorganisms, and Indigenous communities that depend on it. “Personally I’m terrified,” said Talia Maksagak, Executive Director of the Kitikmeot Chamber of Commerce, about the changing sea ice. It’s freezing later and thinner each year, affecting her community’s ability to travel between islands. “People go missing, people are travelling and they fall through the ice,” she continues. They also rely on the ice for hunting, fishing, and harvests of wild caribou or musk ox, who migrate across the frozen ocean twice a year — although they, too, are increasingly falling through the thin ice and drowning.  Maksagak has been instrumental in helping Real Ice to consult with the local community about their research, and she is supportive of their work. “If Real Ice comes up with this genius plan to continue the ice freeze longer, I think that would be very beneficial for future generations.” Researchers get ready to connect their pump system to the hydrogen battery that powers it. Real Ice There are still many questions around the feasibility of Real Ice’s plan, both for critics and the Real Ice researchers themselves. First, they need to establish if the principle works scientifically — that the ice they’ve thickened does last longer, counteracting the speed of global warming’s impact on the region. At worst, adding salty seawater could potentially cause the ice to melt more quickly in the summer. But results from last year’s research suggest not: When testing its pilot ice three months later, Real Ice found its salinity was within normal bounds. If all goes well with this year’s tests, the next step will be an independent environmental risk assessment. Noise is one concern. According to WWF, industrial underwater noise significantly alters the behaviour of marine mammals, especially whales. Similarly, blue cod lay their eggs under the ice, algae grows on it, and larger mammals and birds migrate across it. How will they be impacted by Real Ice’s water pumps? “These are all questions that we need to ask,” said Shaun Fitzgerald, Director of the Center for Climate Repair at Cambridge University, which has partnered with Real Ice, “and they all need to be addressed before we can start evaluating whether or not we think this is a good idea.”  Fitzgerald predicts four more years of research are needed before the nonprofit can properly recommend the technology. For now, the Nunavut Impact Review Board, Nunavut’s environmental assessment agency, has deemed Real Ice’s research sites to cause no significant impact.  New ice forms on the surface of Cambridge Bay, Canada. Real Ice But critics of the idea argue the process won’t scale. “The numbers just don’t stack up,” said Martin Siegert, a British glaciologist and former co-chair of the Grantham Institute for Climate Change. He pointed to the size of the Arctic — 3.9 million square miles of sea ice on average — and how many pumps would likely be needed to freeze even 10 percent of that. More importantly, who is going to pay for it? Ceccolini is undaunted by the first question. Their technology is not complicated — “it’s technology from 50 years ago, we just need to assemble it in a new way” — and would cost an estimated $5,000 per autonomous pump. Their models predict that 500,000 pumps could rethicken about 386,000 square miles of sea ice each year, or an area half the size of Alaska. Assuming the thicker ice lasts several years, and by targeting different areas annually, Ceccolini estimates the technology could maintain the current summer sea ice levels of around 1.63 million square miles. “We’ve done much bigger things in humanity, much more complex than this,” he said.   As for who pays, that’s less clear. One idea is a global fund similar to what’s been proposed for tropical rainforests, where if a resource is globally beneficial, like the Amazon or the Arctic, then an international community contributes to its protection. Another idea is ‘cooling credits’, where organizations can pay for a certain amount of ice to be frozen as an offset against global warming. These are a controversial idea started by the California-based, geoengineering start-up Make Sunsets, which believes that stratospheric aerosol injections — releasing reflective particles high into the earth’s atmosphere — is another way to cool the planet. However its research comes with many risks and unknowns that has the scientific community worried, and has even been banned in Mexico. Meanwhile faith in the credits system has been undermined in recent years, with several investigations revealing a lack of integrity in the carbon credits industry.  A researcher looks out from a field site tent onto Cambridge Bay, Canada, where Real Ice ran back-to-back tests in 2024 and 2025. Real Ice Panganga Pungowiyi, climate geoengineering organizer for the Indigenous Environmental Network, a nonprofit for environmental and economic justice issues, is vehemently against cooling and carbon credits in principle, explaining that they are “totally against our [Indigenous] value system.” She explained that, “it’s essentially helping the fossil fuel industry escape accountability and cause harm in other Indigenous communities — more pain, more lung disease, more cancer.”  This gets to the heart of the debate — not whether a solution like this can be done, but whether it should be done. Inuit opinion is divided. Whilst Maksagak is supportive of Real Ice, Pungowiyi says the technology doesn’t align with Indigenous values, and is concerned about the potential harms of scaling it. In addition to the environmental concerns, Pungowiyi notes that new infrastructure in the Arctic has historically also brought outsiders, often men, and an increase of physical and sexual assault on Indigenous women, many who end up missing or murdered. Ceccolini and Sherwin are aware of such risks and they are clear that any scaling of their technology would be done in partnership with the local community. They hope the project will eventually be Indigenous-run. Scientists use augers to drill through Arctic ice to install the pumps. They do this work in the winter, with the hope that the thickened ice lasts longer during summer months. Real Ice “We don’t want to repeat the kind of mistakes that have been made by Western researchers and organizations in the past,” said Sherwin.  Real Ice is not the only company that wants to protect the Arctic. Arctic Reflections, a Dutch company, is conducting similar ice thickening research in Svalbard; the Arctic Ice Project is assessing if glass beads spread over the ice can increase its reflectivity and protect it from melting; and engineer Hugh Hunt’s Marine Cloud Brightening initiative aims to increase the reflectivity of clouds through sprayed particles of sea salt as a way to protect the ice. “I think these ideas are getting far too much prominence in relation to their credibility and maturity,” said Seigert, referring to conversations about Arctic preservation at annual United Nations climate change meetings, known as COP, and the World Economic Forum. It is not only that these technologies are currently unproven, Seigert noted, but that people are already making policy decisions based on their success. It’s an argument known as ‘moral hazard’ — the idea that developing climate engineering technologies will reduce people’s desire to cut emissions. “This is like a gift to the fossil fuel companies,” he said, allowing them to continue using oil, gas, and coal without change. “We have the way forward, decarbonization, and we need every effort to make that happen. Any distraction away from that is a problem.”  Freshly pumped seawater freezes to form layers of new ice in Cambridge Bay. Real Ice “It’s a strong argument,” agreed Fitzgerald, of Cambridge University, when asked about moral hazard. “I am concerned about it. It’s the one thing that probably does cause me to have sleepless nights. However, we need to look at the lesser of two evils, the risk of not doing this research.”  Or as Sherwin said: “What is the cost of inaction?” Those in support of climate intervention strategies stress that although decarbonization is vital it’s moving too slowly, and there is a lack of political will. Technologies like those being developed by Real Ice could buy ourselves more time. Paul Beckwith, a climate system analyst from the University of Ottawa, espouts a three-pronged approach: eliminating fossil fuels, removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, and protecting the Arctic.  “It should be less a conversation of one over the other and more how we run all three pillars at the same time,” said Sherwin. “Unfortunately we’re in a position now where if we don’t protect and restore ecosystems, we will face collapse.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline New technologies are helping to regrow Arctic sea ice on Apr 14, 2025.

Katy Perry set for space with all-women crew on Blue Origin rocket

Six women—including pop star Katy Perry—are set to blast off into space as part of an all-women suborbital mission

Katy Perry set for space with all-women crew on Blue Origin rocketMaddie MolloyBBC Climate & Science reporterGetty ImagesThe singer will be aboard Blue Origin's New Shepard rocketPop star Katy Perry and five other women are set to blast into space aboard Jeff Bezos' space tourism rocket.The singer will be joined by Bezos's fiancée Lauren Sánchez and CBS presenter Gayle King.The New Shepard rocket is due to lift off from its West Texas launch site and the launch window opens at 08:30 local time (14:30 BST). The flight will last around 11 minutes and take the crew more than 100km (62 miles) above Earth, crossing the internationally recognised boundary of space and giving the crew a few moments of weightlessness.Also on board are former Nasa rocket scientist Aisha Bowe, civil rights activist Amanda Nguyen, and film producer Kerianne Flynn.The spacecraft is fully autonomous, requiring no pilots, and the crew will not manually operate the vehicle.The capsule will return to Earth with a parachute-assisted soft landing, while the rocket booster will land itself around two miles away from the launch site."If you had told me that I would be part of the first-ever all-female crew in space, I would have believed you. Nothing was beyond my imagination as a child. Although we didn't grow up with much, I never stopped looking at the world with hopeful WONDER!" Mrs Perry said in a social media post.Blue Origin says the last all-female spaceflight was over 60 years ago when Soviet Cosmonaut Valentina Tereshkova became the first woman to travel into space on a solo mission aboard the spacecraft Vostok 6. Since then, there have been no other all-female spaceflights but women have made numerous significant contributions. Blue Origin is a private space company founded in 2000 by Bezos, the billionaire entrepreneur who also started Amazon.Although Blue Origin has not released full ticket prices, a $150,000 (£114,575.85) deposit is required to reserve a seat—underlining the exclusivity of these early flights.Alongside its suborbital tourism business, the company is also developing long-term space infrastructure, including reusable rockets and lunar landing systems. The New Shepard rocket is designed to be fully reusable and its booster returns to the launch pad for vertical landings after each flight, reducing overall costs.According to US law, astronauts must complete comprehensive training for their specific roles.Blue Origin says its New Shepard passengers are trained over two days with a focus on physical fitness, emergency protocols, details about the safety measures and procedures for zero gravity.Additionally, there are two support members referred to as Crew Member Seven: one provides continuous guidance to astronauts, while the other maintains communication from the control room during the mission.BBC / Maddie MolloyThe rise of space tourism has prompted criticism that it is too exclusive and environmentally damaging.Supporters argue that private companies are accelerating innovation and making space more accessible.Professor Brian Cox told the BBC in 2024: "Our civilisation needs to expand beyond our planet for so many reasons," and believes that collaboration between NASA and commercial firms is a positive step.But critics raise significant environmental concerns.They say that as more and more rockets are launched, the risks of harming the ozone layer increases.A 2022 study by Professor Eloise Marais from University College London found that rocket soot in the upper atmosphere has a warming effect which is 500 times greater than when released by planes closer to Earth.The high cost of space tourism makes it inaccessible to most people, with these expensive missions out of reach for the majority.Critics, including actress Olivia Munn, questioned the optics of this particular venture, remarking "There's a lot of people who can't even afford eggs," during an appearance on Today with Jenna & Friends.Astronaut Tim Peake has defended the value of human space travel, especially in relation to tackling global issues such as climate change.At the COP26 climate summit in Glasgow, Peake voiced his disappointment that space exploration was increasingly seen as a pursuit for the wealthy, stating: "I personally am a fan of using space for science and for the benefit of everybody back on Earth, so in that respect, I feel disappointed that space is being tarred with that brush."Watch Blue Origin's Last Spaceflight on the New Shepard RocketWatch: Blue Origin's tenth human space mission blast offAdditonal reporting by Victoria Gill and Kate Stephens, BBC Climate and Science.

RFK Jr. is wrecking public health — but we can (and will) survive this

There really is a way to make America healthy again. It's just not Kennedy's way

The greatest invention of the Industrial Age isn’t the iPhone or lithium-ion batteries or even the internal combustion engine — it’s public health. Unfortunately for our “see it to believe it” culture, public health works best when it’s practically invisible, just humming along in the background. Thus, there are few things Westerners take for granted more than reduced child mortality, reduced death in child birth and the eradication of history’s most brutal diseases like polio and smallpox. Thankfully, very few of us know what it’s like to grow up with half our siblings dying from relatively minor infections or experiencing life-long disability from surviving an epidemic. Those days are behind us — or so some of us thought. For anyone paying the slightest attention, it’s clear our global society is quickly devolving, reverting back to a time before antibiotics and widespread sanitation. It sounds extreme, but little else would explain the fixation on raw milk, for example. A combination of engrained ignorance and political interests is eroding the foundation of something that made our capitalist society possible in the first place. It’s hard to build an international trade empire if your customers are too sick to work or die often.  Because we are so many generations removed from the people who coughed up bloody bits of the Black Death, it’s understandable human nature why so many of us refuse to acknowledge COVID-19 is a serious illness or think ditching vaccination is wise. Naïvety is intoxicating and no one likes confronting their own ableism or mortality. It’s these forces that are allowing us to grind basic tenets like germ theory and fluoridation into the woodchipper. It’s an astonishing level of reckless stupidity that we will be contending with for generations. But let’s not get too sentimental about public health either. It’s far from a perfect system. We can think of it like a great oak, with many branches and deep roots. There’s no denying this tree has been poisoned by profit-seeking incentives that have produced giant, twisted branches like Big Pharma or health care insurance middlemen that profit from denying claims. In spite of this, it has helped people live longer, healthier lives compared to those over a century ago — and to fix the issues that plague it, we need to fertilize it, not chainsaw it down. But that’s exactly what we’re doing. “Public health — and trust in public health — is being eroded in the U.S.,” Dr. Andrea Love, an immunologist and microbiologist, told Salon by email. “We are seeing rejection (and in some instances, legal action) against long-supported and evidence-based public health measures: vaccinations, pasteurization and food safety, water fluoridation. We are also seeing an erasure of investment and funding in research and health care infrastructure that focus on understanding and improving public health. It has been difficult as a scientist, science communicator, and member of this country to see this occurring when we have the most scientific knowledge we have ever had in human history.” This is the kind of leadership at HHS these days: wasting resources attacking established science while dismantling the systems that protect against epidemics and research treatments. It’s bad enough that the public is being gaslit about an ongoing measles outbreak that has so far spread across 25 states, infecting more than 700 people, with more than 540 in Texas alone. This epidemic, caused by a virus that was once eliminated in the U.S. in 2000, has claimed at least two lives: two children, one eight-years old and the other only six. The death of a New Mexico man who had measles is still under investigation.  Despite a recent New York Times headline that suggests this is the "new normal," the resurgence of preventable disease is not a law of nature — it's literally a choice we, as a society, are making. And so much more illness is on the rise, from Victorian-era diseases like tuberculosis to novel tropical diseases like “sloth fever.” The threat of another pandemic, be it bird flu or another COVID-19 surge are always present. But now Republican leadership wants us to pretend like none of this is happening while firing the people who track these sorts of things and gutting social safety nets like Social Security and Medicaid. Last month, Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced “a major restructuring” of the Health and Human Services Department, which has so far resulted in the mass layoff of about 10,000 federal health workers. At least eight top-level managers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have resigned in recent weeks, all while the agency has clawed back $11.4 billion in COVID-19 research dollars and suppressed a report on measles suggesting that individuals get vaccinated. Most recently, the Trump administration forced out Peter Marks, the nation’s top vaccine regulator at the Food and Drug Administration, who wrote in his resignation letter “It is unconscionable with measles outbreaks to not have a full-throated endorsement of measles vaccinations.” Though Kennedy has recently said that the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine is the best way to prevent infection and spread, this is in sharp contrast to his previous statements denying vaccine efficacy, including last week when he incorrectly stated that some vaccines “never worked.” Maybe Kennedy wants to give lip service to the MMR shot after attending the funeral of an unvaccinated victim of the Texas measles outbreak, but actions speak louder than words: earlier this month, dozens of free measles vaccine clinics were shuttered in Texas due to federal funding cuts. And Kennedy still won’t let go of this ridiculous notion — debunked again and again — that vaccines are a cause of autism. That hasn’t stopped Health and Human Services from recently appointing a discredited vaccine skeptic to investigate this link. On April 10, Kennedy said we’d “know by September” what has “caused the autism epidemic.” In a statement, Christopher Banks, CEO and president of the Autism Society of America, responded that Kennedy’s remarks are “both unrealistic and misleading,” adding that such efforts “risk undermining decades of progress and causing real harm to the autism community.” Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes. But this is the kind of leadership at HHS these days: wasting resources attacking established science while dismantling the systems that protect against epidemics and research treatments, not to mention denying people access to health care. The institutions monitoring, treating, researching and informing us about disease are now either broken, underfunded or pushing misinformation. It begs the question: is public health even a thing in this country anymore? “As it currently stands, public health no longer exists at the federal level,” Dr. Ryan Marino, an emergency medicine physician at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, told Salon by email. “It’s still to be seen if this very intentional gutting of our public health institutions, infrastructure and funding will decimate state and regional public health but these ‘cuts’ in spending are likely to mean less services everywhere and for everyone.” To illustrate how far back this trend goes, professor Sean Valles, director of the Center for Bioethics at Michigan State University, pointed to a 2013 report by the U.S. National Research Council and the U.S. Institute of Medicine, which summarizes the situation in its title: “Shorter Lives, Poorer Health.” Since then, average life expectancy in the U.S. has only dropped further. “There is some good news, including that drug overdose deaths are finally falling,” Valles told Salon by email. “But the overall picture is dire. As a Commonwealth Fund report puts it, compared to other high-income countries, ‘The U.S. has the lowest life expectancy at birth, the highest death rates for avoidable or treatable conditions, the highest maternal and infant mortality, and among the highest suicide rates.’” None of this started with the Trump administration, not even the first one, though the decline has clearly accelerated in just a few months. As Daniella Barreto, host and producer of the podcast “Public Health is Dead,” explained, “The Biden administration paved the way for the further destruction of public health when they decided, in a feat of circular logic, that the COVID pandemic was over because they said so. People latched on to that because they wanted it to be true.” Barreto gave numerous examples, from how testing was severely limited under Biden, which meant less data to track the SARS-CoV-2 virus, to how in 2021 the CDC was lobbied by airline business interests to shorten COVID isolation guidelines or how the agency’s then director, Rochelle Walensky, said that masks were a “scarlet letter.” “The push for ‘back to normal’ and short-term profits for corporations have come at the expense of everyone’s long-term health, including children’s,” Barreto told Salon by email. Congress also bears a lot of responsibility for how public health has been starved, Love said. “Simply because Biden was President did not give him ultimate authority to repair a lot of infrastructure that had been eroded,” Love explained. “For example, the USDA/FDA budget and personnel cuts from Trump's first term have led to reduction in workforce to conduct food safety inspections that aren’t able to be corrected quickly — especially when the Congress did not allocate more funding to these agencies. RFK Jr’s claims that his gutting of health agencies will improve public health are objectively false — we know that things that will improve public health, and halting funding for critical interventions, research, community outreach/education, and global health will do the opposite.” Love said that by rejecting public health and defunding the scientific research that is its foundation, “we are all going to become less safe, less healthy, and less secure.” Indeed, many people are at greater risk of disability or death from these policies — not just at home, but across the globe. Trump’s decision to withdraw from the WHO and the dismantling of USAID and other essential programs will have ripple effects. As the CDC puts in their guide to global health security, “In today's interconnected world, a disease threat anywhere is a threat everywhere – and outbreaks can disrupt American lives and livelihoods even if they never reach America's shores.” Which makes a recent finding by the World Health Organization — that almost 75% of U.N. countries have experienced severe disruptions to health services — somewhat rattling. “The rhetoric from this administration takes the mentality that health is an 'individual' issue, and not shaped by social determinants of health and societal initiatives,” Love said. “Health issues do not adhere to country boundaries, especially when we are talking about infectious diseases. I do worry that this damage will cause generational, perhaps irreparable harm, as the U.S. erasing its own scientific institutions but also the collaborative ecosystem globally will have far reaching effects.” In Barreto’s opinion, that’s precisely the point. “The extreme cuts at HHS also impact environmental health, sexual health, and sexual violence prevention programs as well as health and safety regulatory bodies,” Barreto said. “I believe this administration is not unaware that the people who will bear the brunt of this are racialized, disabled, trans and otherwise marginalized.” If top-level public health basically doesn’t function anymore, where does that leave the public? At least 23 states and the District of Columbia are currently suing Kennedy and the HHS, The Guardian reported, “alleging the abrupt terminations of $11bn in public health funding were ‘harmful’ and 'unlawful.’” A judge later blocked these cuts. But more than staunching the bleeding is necessary, as Valles explained that public health improvements take hard work and investment. “Today, we need to be a period for rebuilding the public health workforce, so that we have the next generation of public health workers of all sorts, from community health workers who help people to sign up for benefits like food assistance for their children, to CDC researchers vigilantly watching for the next pandemic,” Valles said. “Instead, the federal government is now trying to lay off hundreds of probationary employees at the CDC, rescinding some of the layoffs, and now many of them are caught in legal limbo as courts decide whether their layoffs were illegal. Meanwhile, federal grants that support the work of public health around the US are being haphazardly canceled. This is not how to rebuild or reform an effective public health workforce, it is how to destroy one.” Love said we need to reclaim the importance of science, which “requires a systemic mindset shift that won’t happen until the misinformation spread by wellness profiteers is clamped down on.” She also emphasized the role of Congress, universities and the media to “push back” on these attacks. “It needs to be common knowledge what the consequences of these actions will be, even for people who think they aren’t going to be impacted,” Love said. “Without our government supporting these initiatives, we may need to turn to other sources of support. Other countries, philanthropic organizations. But that isn’t a substitute. It’s a band-aid on a broken bone.” As long as there is a public, there will be public health, Valles said. What shape it takes depends on a lot of things we can’t always control — social determinants of health like income and zip code — so without clear direction on the federal level, we have to begin more locally. “As a first step, I encourage U.S. readers to learn more about the health of their own communities,” Valles said. “Look up your county in the database of county-level health measures to how your county compares to state and national averages in things like percent of children experiencing poverty, access to opportunities for exercise, and breast cancer mammogram screening rates. If you enter your address on this website, you can see the life expectancy of people living in your neighborhood … Or go to this website to see a map of that data for neighborhoods across the U.S.” Ultimately, to slow the erosion of public health, it needs to be something that people generally value. It may seem insurmountable to get the Trump administration to reverse course, but it will only be possible if people demand it. “It’s easy to see what’s happening and feel defeated; it’s objectively awful,” Marino said. “But public health has always been fighting uphill battles without enough resources. And perhaps the hardest part has always been convincing the public to care about public health. I hope that people do not have to suffer and die for people to realize the value that public health provides, even when programs seem so distant. I guess we will see whether people care or not.” Read more about public health

New Gear Could Keep California Crab Fishermen on the Water Longer, and Whales Safe

After years of a shortened crab fishing season aimed at preventing whale entanglements off the West Coast, California crabbers are experimenting with a new fishing method that allows them to stay on the water longer while keeping the marine mammals safe

After years of a shortened crab fishing season aimed at preventing whale entanglements off the West Coast, California crabbers are experimenting with a new fishing method that allows them to stay on the water longer while keeping the marine mammals safe.The state has been running a pilot program since 2023 to try out so-called pop-up gear to protect whales while finding a solution to fishermen's woes and is expected to fully authorize the gear for spring Dungeness crab fishing in 2026. The gear, which uses a remote device to pull up lines laid horizontally across the sea floor, also is being tried on lobster in Maine, black sea bass in Georgia and fisheries in Australia and Canada.“Unfortunately, it has been six years we've been delayed or closed early for whales,” said Brand Little, a San Francisco Dungeness crab fisherman who is among those participating in the pilot. "This is a way to get our industry back," he said.The effort comes after reports of whale entanglements off the Pacific Coast spiked a decade ago during a marine heat wave. The change in temperature drove whales, many of them threatened or endangered humpbacks, to seek out food sources closer to the California coast, where they were caught in vertical fishing lines that had been strung between crab pots on the ocean floor and buoys bobbing on the surface.In response, California state regulators barred Dungeness crab fishing when whales are known to be present. That shortened the season significantly, giving fishermen a narrow window in which to make a living. So some began trying pop-up gear and determined the method works and is worth the additional cost.The gear lets fishermen use a remote-operated, acoustic release device to pop-up a crab pot from the ocean floor rather than have it tethered to a floating buoy. Pots can be strung together with ropes laid horizontally instead of vertically, so whales can pass over them while migrating through the area.“If you remove the vertical line, you have removed the entanglement risk, and you have allowed a fishery to continue,” said Ryan Bartling, senior environmental scientist supervisor with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.Many long-time Dungeness crab fishermen have been slow to warm up to the idea due to the cost, which can run $1,000 per pop-up device plus an on-board unit. It also takes time to restring the pots after an intense winter season of derby-style fishing, which takes place when whales are calving in warmer waters to the south.There also is a need for a unified tracking system since the gear isn’t visible on the surface, Bartling said.More than four dozen whales were entangled in fishing nets in 2015, compared with an annual average of 10 in prior years, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Many were humpback whales, which were listed as endangered in the 1970s and have been recovering since protections were put in place, the agency said.Environmental advocates sued California over the increased entanglements and reached a settlement with the state in 2019 that encouraged the use of ropeless gear.Bart Chadwick, who owns San Diego-based Sub Sea Sonics, said he previously used pop-up technology to retrieve expensive equipment while conducting environmental work at sea. When he retired from his job, he made tweaks so it could be adapted for fishing.“It allows them to fish in places they wouldn’t otherwise,” Chadwick said, adding the technology also reduces gear losses.Most Dungeness crab fishermen make their money during the early part of the season when whales typically aren't near the California coast. Experts say the pop-up gear won't work then due to crowding and the technology is currently being considered solely for the smaller spring season, which starts April 16 in central California.Geoff Shester, senior scientist at conservation organization Oceana, said he thinks the method could eventually be used more broadly if fishermen find it efficient and cost-effective.“Think about electric cars, or hybrids, or even digital cameras," Shester said. "Every time you have a new technology, there is a lot of resistance at first.”Crab fisherman Ben Platt said he was a vocal opponent but will join this year's pilot since multiple pots now can be strung together, making the method simpler and cheaper. Still, he said many fishermen have concerns and aren't likely to get on board.“We’ll just have to see and take a look at the results,” Platt said.For Stephen Melz, who fishes out of Half Moon Bay, California, having more time out on the ocean is key. Years ago, he said he would go out for Dungeness crab starting in November and fish through the spring.Now, with the shortened season, he said there is no room for error and the gear helps him get out so he can pay his bills.“Better than just sitting at dock,” he said.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Ukraine Seeking Solutions for Damaged Chernobyl Confinement Vessel, Minister Says

By Yurii KovalenkoCHORNOBYL, Ukraine (Reuters) - Ukraine is seeking solutions to repair the damage caused by a Russian drone attack to the...

CHORNOBYL, Ukraine (Reuters) - Ukraine is seeking solutions to repair the damage caused by a Russian drone attack to the confinement vessel at the stricken Chornobyl nuclear power plant, a government minister said on Saturday.Minister of Environmental Protection and Natural Resources Svitlana Hrynchuk was speaking outside the decommissioned station during the inauguration of a 0.8-megawatt solar power facility ahead of two conferences due to discuss Chornobyl and other issues related to nuclear power operations.She said Ukraine was working together with experts to determine the best way to restore the proper functioning of the containment vessel, or arch, after the February 14 drone strike."Unfortunately, after the attack, the arch partially lost its functionality. And now, I think, already in May, we will have the results of the analysis that we are currently conducting ...," Hrynchuk said.Taking part in the analysis, she said, was the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, scientific institutions and companies involved in installing the arc in 2019 to cover the leaking "sarcophagus" underneath, hurriedly put in place in the weeks following the 1986 Chornobyl disaster."In a few weeks we will have the first results of this analysis," she said."We are actively working on this ... We, of course, need to restore the "arch" so that there are no leaks under any circumstances, because ensuring nuclear and radiation safety is the main task."Officials at the plant said the drone attack punched a large hole in the new containment structure's outer cover and exploded inside. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova at the time called the incident at Chornobyl "a provocation".The containment vessel was intended to cover the vast, and deteriorating, steel and concrete structure erected after the plant's fourth reactor exploded, sending radioactivity over much of Europe in the world's biggest nuclear accident.The plant lies within the 30-km (18-mile) exclusion zone set up after the accident, with abandoned high-rise apartment buildings and an amusement park still standing nearby.Hrynchuk said the solar power facility was important to maintain the power supply to the disused station and was also a start to plans to promote renewable energy in the area."We have been saying for many years that the exclusion zone needs to be transformed into a zone of renewal," she said. "And this territory, like no other in Ukraine, is suitable for developing renewable energy projects."(Reporting by Yurii Kovalenko, writing by Felix Hoske and Ron Popeski, editing by Sandra Maler)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Scientists say they 'de-extincted' dire wolves. Experts at La Brea Tar Pits are skeptical

Colossal Biosciences, the company that made headlines years back for claims they wanted to revive the woolly mammoth, say they successfully "de-extincted" the dire wolf. Local experts are not so sure.

When news that scientists in Texas had succesfully reintroduced the long-extinct dire wolf to the modern world, more people than just “Game of Thrones” fans took notice.Researchers at the Natural History Museum’s La Brea Tar Pits, where a wall is decorated with hundreds of dire wolf skulls, had questions.Namely, are they really dire wolves? Turns out, it depends on how you define it.“What they have created is basically a genetically engineered gray wolf that has been given genetic traits so they can express morphological or physical traits that more resemble dire wolves,” said Kayce Bell, a terrestrial mammal curator at the Natural History Museum. “The technology and the tools that they are developing with this work are incredible and very powerful, but the terms that are being used to discuss it, I think, are misleading.”Earlier this week, biotechnology company Colossal Biosciences in Dallas announced they had “de-extincted” the dire wolf, sharing the news of the births of three healthy pups. Over 18 months, experts there extracted and sequenced ancient DNA from two dire wolf fossils — a 13,000-year-old tooth from Sheridan Pit, Ohio, and a 72,000-year-old inner ear bone from American Falls, Idaho. With that ancient DNA, scientists identified gene variants specific to dire wolves and then performed multiplex gene editing with a genome from the gray wolf, dire wolves’ closest living relatives. They used domestic dogs as surrogate mothers to birth the three pups. This undated photo provided by Colossal Biosciences shows two pups that were genetically engineered with similarities to the extinct dire wolf. (Colossal Biosciences via Associated Press) Colossal’s chief science officer, Beth Shapiro, said she understands the scientific skepticism that came with the announcement. “I get it,” she said. “It’s frustrating when you work in paleontology and you feel like it’s not effective science communication, and I wish I’d done a bit better.”Though Southern California has a jackpot of dire wolf fossils relative to other sites, extracting DNA from the local samples is difficult. Shapiro said she’s been trying and unable to collect DNA from local samples for 20 years. Among the reasons it’s challenging to collect, experts say, is that L.A.’s urban landscape bakes in the sun, heating up the asphalt, which could degrade ancient DNA buried underneath.La Brea Tar Pits has the highest concentration of dire wolf fossils in the world, with remains from over 4,000 dire wolves found at the site. They lived in the region for at least 50,000 years, disappearing about 13,000 years ago.“There’s no other site on Earth that even comes close to that,” said Emily Lindsey, the associate curator and excavation site director at La Brea Tar Pits.Dire wolves, native to Southern California but not limited to the region, were highly adaptable and had a very wide range of environmental tolerances before the species went extinct about 10,000 years ago, Lindsey said. The three pups — Romulus and Remus, who were born in October, and Khaleesi, born in January — now live on an ecological preserve at an undisclosed location that spans over 2,000 acres and hosts 10 full-time staff members who care for and observe them. The preserve is certified by the American Humane Society and registered with the U.S. Department of Agriculture.Depending on how you look at it, that could be dire wolf territory now.In 2016, the International Union for Conservation of Nature published a report that focused on de-extinction and defined it as “bringing back a proxy of an extinct species that resembles it in some way, phenotypically, physiologically, ecologically,” Shapiro said.But in the end, she said she’s not really hung up on what the animals are called beyond their names, inspired by founders of Rome and the “Game of Thrones” show.“Call it a de-extinct dire wolf that abides by the definition that the scientific community agreed on 10 years ago. Call it Colossal’s dire wolf. Call it a gray wolf with 20 edits that looks and acts like a dire wolf and is a functional replacement for a dire wolf,” Shapiro said.Part of Colossal’s announcement this week included news that they had also successfully created four clones of the endangered red wolf using a new noninvasive cloning technology. Both Lindsey and Bell said they appreciated Colossal’s work on conserving endangered species, but think that focusing on conservation is a more productive use of resources. “There are potentially useful applications of some of these technologies, particularly for preventing highly endangered species from going extinct. I think that would be a far more efficient application of these technologies than trying to bring something resembling an extinct species back to life,” Lindsey said. “I’d hate to have to be trying to de-extinct wolves once they go extinct, right?”Colossal’s Chief Executive Ben Lamm said the company wants to pair their “de-extinction events” with work they’re doing to protect critically endangered species. The company’s other de-extinction hopes include reviving the woolly mammoth, the dodo, and the thylacine, or Tasmanian tiger. To Lamm and Shapiro, de-extinction and conservation can work in tandem.“Conservation and de-extinction are not at odds with each other. The de-extinction toolkit should be part of the increasing number of ways that we have at our fingertips to be able to help endangered species survive,” Shapiro said.Lamm, who held up drawings of dodos and other extinct animals children had sent to the Colossal team during a Zoom interview with The Times, said he thinks the milestone could also inspire more people to pursue careers in related fields.“The world needs a little hope right now, and I think the world needs more science. Hopefully, we’re providing a little bit of both,” he said.And yes, of course “Jurassic Park” quotes and references are tossed Lamm and Shapiro’s way with stunning frequency.“People actually say to us, ‘Don’t you know what happened in Jurassic Park?,’ equating it to, like, Chernobyl,” Lamm said. “ ‘Didn’t you see what happened there?’ Not, ‘Didn’t you watch the movie and learn anything about human hubris from the movie?’ They don’t say that.”Shapiro added: “People are yelling at us that these aren’t real dire wolves. But no one has ever questioned whether the dinosaurs in ‘Jurassic Park’ are real dinosaurs.”While the debate is still open, Lindsey said she invites anyone curious about the creatures to visit La Brea Tar Pits to see some of the “real dire wolves” that they have excavated at the site. “It’s a really cool opportunity — one that you don’t get in almost any other city in the world — to come and really see the incredible diversity of large animals that lived here until very recently,” Lindsey said.

Bad News for Man’s Best Friend: Dogs Are Environmental Villains

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Dogs have “extensive and multifarious” environmental impacts, disturbing wildlife, polluting waterways and contributing to carbon emissions, new research has found. An Australian review of existing studies has argued that “the environmental impact of owned dogs is far greater, more […]

This story was originally published by the Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. Dogs have “extensive and multifarious” environmental impacts, disturbing wildlife, polluting waterways and contributing to carbon emissions, new research has found. An Australian review of existing studies has argued that “the environmental impact of owned dogs is far greater, more insidious, and more concerning than is generally recognised”. While the environmental impact of cats is well known, the comparative effect of pet dogs has been poorly acknowledged, the researchers said. The review, published in the journal Pacific Conservation Biology, highlighted the impacts of the world’s “commonest large carnivore” in killing and disturbing native wildlife, particularly shore birds. In Australia, attacks by unrestrained dogs on little penguins in Tasmania may contribute to colony collapse, modelling suggests, while a study of animals taken to the Australia Zoo wildlife hospital found that mortality was highest after dog attacks, which was the second most common reason for admission after car strikes. In the US, studies have found that deer, foxes and bobcats were less active in or avoid wilderness areas where dogs were allowed, while other research shows that insecticides from flea and tick medications kill aquatic invertebrates when they wash off into waterways. Dog feces can also leave scent traces and affect soil chemistry and plant growth. The carbon footprint of pets is also significant. A 2020 study found the dry pet food industry had an environmental footprint of around twice the land area of the UK, with greenhouse gas emissions—56 to 151 Mt CO2— equivalent to the 60th highest-emitting country. The review’s lead author, Prof Bill Bateman of Curtin University, said the research did not intend to be “censorious” but aimed to raise awareness of the environmental impacts of man’s best friend, with whom humans’ domestic relationship dates back several millennia. “To a certain extent we give a free pass to dogs because they are so important to us…not just as working dogs but also as companions.” “To a certain extent we give a free pass to dogs because they are so important to us… not just as working dogs but also as companions,” he said, pointing to the “huge benefits” dogs had on their owners’ mental and physical health. He also noted that dogs played vital roles in conservation work, such as in wildlife detection. “Although we’ve pointed out these issues with dogs in natural environments…there is that other balancing side, which is that people will probably go out and really enjoy the environment around them—and perhaps feel more protective about it—because they’re out there walking their dog in it.” Angelika von Sanden, a trauma therapist and the author of Sit Stay Grow: How Dogs Can Help You Worry Less and Walk into a Better Future, said she had observed that for many clients the companionship of a dog was often “literally the only reason to survive, to get up, to still keep going”. “It gives them a reason to get up, a reason to get out, a reason to move around and be in contact a little bit with the world outside,” she said. “Dog owners can get a bad name if they are not aware of the surroundings they are in and of other people around them.” In the review, the researchers attributed the extent of the environmental impacts to the sheer number of dogs globally, as well as “the lax or uninformed behavior of dog owners”. A simple way to mitigate against the worst impacts was to keep dogs leashed in areas where restrictions apply and to maintain a buffer distance from nesting or roosting shorebirds, the paper suggested. “A lot of what we’re talking about can be ameliorated by owners’ behavior,” Bateman said, pointing out that low compliance with leash laws was a problem. “Maybe, in some parts of the world, we actually need to consider some slightly more robust laws.” He suggested that dog exclusion zones might be more suitable in some areas. Bateman also raised sustainable dog food as an option to reduce a pet’s environmental paw print, noting however that “more sustainable dog food tends to cost more than the cheap dog food that we buy which has a higher carbon footprint.” “If nothing else, pick up your own dog shit,” he said.

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.