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

Engineered Microbes Pull Critical Minerals from Mining Waste

Biomining uses engineered microbes to harvest critical minerals

October 1, 20255 min readMeet the Microbes That Munch Mountains of Mining WasteBiomining uses engineered microbes to harvest critical mineralsBy Vanessa Bates Ramirez edited by Sarah Lewin FrasierEscondida Mine, located in Chile’s Atacama Desert. The copper-bearing waste is poured into the impoundment area as a liquid (green region at image center) and dries to the lighter tan and gray color. Science History Images/Alamy Stock PhotoAt the northern edge of Chile’s Atacama Desert sits a pile of rocks that’s so big that you can see it from space—and it’s teeming with invisible activity. Billions of microbes are hard at work dissolving compounds in this giant mound of crushed ore from Escondida, the biggest copper mine on the planet.“Microbes are the world’s oldest miners,” says Liz Dennett, founder and CEO of the start-up Endolith Mining, based near Denver, Colo. “They’ve had billions of years to become incredibly good at eating rocks.”Scientists at Endolith and elsewhere are engineering microbes to get even better at this process, called biomining—to work faster, extract more copper and even pull out other kinds of minerals. Endolith tests different microbes to see which are most fit for the job and then exposes them to harsh conditions to further strengthen them. “Think of it like a superhero training camp,” Dennett says. In May the company’s engineered microbes demonstrated copper extraction superior to microbes found in nature; its first field deployments are scheduled for later this year.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.Biomining, if it can be scaled up, could make it possible to decrease reliance on global supply chains, which are becoming ever more fragile. “If we can make biomining work, we can break the monopoly that states like China have on critical metals,” says Buz Barstow, a biological and environmental engineer at Cornell University. Barstow is leading a project called the Microbe-Mineral Atlas that catalogs microorganisms, their genes and how they interact with minerals. The project’s goal is to build genetically engineered microorganisms that can effectively mine critical metals.As many countries transition to renewable energy, they will require fewer fossil fuels but more minerals such as lithium, cobalt, copper, nickel and zinc. These are not only needed for wind turbines, solar panels and batteries; they’re also crucial for the laptops and cell phones we use every day. Copper demand, in particular, is set to skyrocket. Forecasts show we’ll need more copper in the next 30 years than has been mined throughout all of history. Much of the low-hanging fruit—that is, high-grade ore—has been picked, and mines have to work a lot harder than before to get the same quantity.Trucks hauling earth from Escondida.Cavan Images/Alamy Stock PhotoConventional mining techniques are resource-intensive, expensive and harmful to the environment. After using explosives and heavy machinery to extract ore from the earth, mining companies must isolate and purify the minerals in question. Often, that means breaking chemical bonds that keep minerals bound to sulfur in sulfide ores. This is most commonly done using heat through a process called smelting or acid through a process called leaching. Smelting requires extremely high temperatures, reached by burning fossil fuels or using a lot of electricity. On top of the carbon dioxide emissions this generates, burning sulfur produces toxic sulfur dioxide gas. Acid leaching, meanwhile, carries the risk of acid mine drainage, where fluids contaminate rivers or groundwater and harm the surrounding ecosystem. The sulfuric acid used for this process can cause harm before it even reaches mines. “Production of sulfuric acid is very nasty,” Dennett says. “There’s a lot of secondary and tertiary effects on the environment.”Microbes can do the same work as heat and acid, but their cost and environmental impact are much lower. “Microbes use at least six different mechanisms for biomining,” Barstow says. The most common is an oxidation-reduction reaction, or redox reaction, in which microbes break the chemical bonds in a sulfide ore by “eating” their sulfur and iron. This releases the minerals in the ore, breaking them down until they can dissolve in water. The mineral-rich solution is collected in a pond after it is drained from the rock and is then exposed to solvents and electricity that attract the minerals like a magnet while leaving water, acid and impurities behind.The microbes still need a small amount of sulfuric acid to kick-start the process of breaking down the ore. Piles of rock such as the one at Chile’s Escondida mine—called heap leaches—are sprayed with an acid-water mixture that only needs to be added once because microbes make more acid naturally as they break the ore’s chemical bonds. “Replacing [most] sulfuric acid is a big economic benefit, as it can often be the largest operating expense for a mine,” says Sasha Milshteyn, founder of Transition Biomining, a company that analyzes the DNA of microbes found in ores to develop custom additives for increased copper recovery.Though the process avoids toxic gas emissions, uses less energy and water than conventional methods and minimizes hazardous chemicals, it has its limitations. It’s slower than traditional mining: while smelting can take hours to days, and acid leaching takes days to weeks, microbes do their work over several months. They’re sensitive to pH, temperature, and moisture levels and can be killed off or slowed down by changes in any of these. And they still produce acidic solutions that need to be contained and treated. As Barstow puts it, “Biomining won’t be an environmental panacea; it will just be quite a bit better than what we do now.”The real promise of biomining is that it can squeeze more out of rocks than conventional methods do. “Modern mining technologies ‘skim the cream’ of economically valuable metals from a deposit and leave everything else behind in [waste rock called] tailings,” Barstow says.That waste is worth far more than it usually gets credit for. A study recently published in Science found that recovering the minerals in waste from existing U.S. mines could meet nearly all of the country’s critical mineral needs; recovering just 1 percent would substantially reduce import reliance for many elements. “If large mines just added additional recovery circuits to their process, this could bring needed minerals into production relatively quickly,” says the study’s lead author Elizabeth Holley, a mining engineer at the Colorado School of Mines.Copper mine waste can hold bits of tellurium, cobalt or zinc; coal ash can contain lithium, manganese and rare earth elements. The quantities are too small for conventional mines to bother with, but they’re not too small for microbes. Besides being used in heap leaches or pumped straight into the ground, microbes can be applied directly to waste streams, where they can pull out tiny amounts of minerals that can add up to be significant.Microbes may be the world’s oldest miners, but biomining as a technology is still new, Milshteyn notes, and doesn’t yet leverage the full complexity of microbial ecosystems. “The heaps that perform best in the field have thriving ecosystems of diverse microbes working together,” he says. “I think the next generation of biomining has to contend with that complexity.”It’s Time to Stand Up for ScienceIf you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Team Trump Will Spend $625 Million and Open Public Lands to Revive a Dying Industry

This story was originally published by Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. The White House will open 13.1 million acres of public land to coal mining while providing $625 million for coal-fired power plants, the Trump administration has announced. The efforts came as part of a suite of initiatives from the Department of the […]

This story was originally published by Guardian and is reproduced here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. The White House will open 13.1 million acres of public land to coal mining while providing $625 million for coal-fired power plants, the Trump administration has announced. The efforts came as part of a suite of initiatives from the Department of the Interior, Department of Energy, and Environmental Protection Agency, aimed at reviving the flagging coal sector. Coal, the most polluting and costly fossil fuel, has been on a rapid decline over the past 30 years, with the US halving its production between 2008 and 2023, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). “This is an industry that matters to our country,” Interior Secretary Doug Burgum said in a livestreamed press conference on Monday morning, alongside representatives from the other two departments. “It matters to the world, and it’s going to continue to matter for a long time.” “This is a colossal waste of our money at a time when the federal government should be spurring along the new energy sources.” Coal plants provided about 15 percent of US electricity in 2024—a steep fall from 50 percent in 2000—the EIA found, with the growth of gas and green power displacing its use. Last year, wind and solar produced more electricity than coal in the US for the first time in history, according to the International Energy Agency, which predicts that could happen at the global level by the end of 2026. Despite its dwindling role, Trump has made the reviving the coal sector a priority of his second term amid increasing energy demand due to the proliferation of artificial intelligence data centers. “The Trump administration is hell-bent on supporting the oldest, dirtiest energy source. It’s handing our hard-earned tax dollars over to the owners of coal plants that cost more to run than new, clean energy,” said Amanda Levin, director of policy analysis at the national environmental nonprofit Natural Resources Defense Council. “This is a colossal waste of our money at a time when the federal government should be spurring along the new energy sources that can power the AI boom and help bring down electricity bills for struggling families.” The administration’s new $625 million investment includes $350 million to “modernize” coal plants, $175 million for coal projects it claims will provide affordable and reliable energy to rural communities, and $50 million to upgrade wastewater management systems to extend the lifespan of coal plants. The efforts follow previous coal-focused initiatives from the Trump administration, which has greenlit mining leases while fast-tracking mining permits. It has also prolonged the life of some coal plants, exempted some coal plants from EPA rules, and falsely claimed that emissions from those plants are “not significant.” The moves have sparked outrage from environmental advocates who note that coal pollution has been linked to hundreds of thousands of deaths across the past two decades. One study estimated that emissions from coal costs Americans $13-$26 billion a year in additional ER visits, strokes and cardiac events, and a greater prevalence and severity of childhood asthma events.

Air Pollution Worsens Sleep Apnea

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterWEDNESDAY, Oct. 1, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Air pollution could be making matters worse for people with sleep...

By Dennis Thompson HealthDay ReporterWEDNESDAY, Oct. 1, 2025 (HealthDay News) — Air pollution could be making matters worse for people with sleep apnea, according to a new study.Sleep apnea patients have more episodes of reduced or stopped breathing during their slumber in areas with heavier air pollution, researchers reported Tuesday at an European Respiratory Society meeting in Amsterdam.Further, these sleep apnea episodes increased as air became more polluted, researchers found.“We confirmed a statistically significant positive association between average long-term exposure to air pollution, specifically fine particles known as PM10, and the severity of obstructive sleep apnea,” researcher Martino Pengo, an associate professor from the University of Milano-Bicocca in Italy, said in a news release.PM10 particles are less than 10 micrometers in diameter, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. By comparison, a human hair is 50 to 70 micrometers wide.People with sleep apnea snore loudly and their breathing starts and stops during the night, disturbing their sleep. The condition is known to increase risk of high blood pressure, stroke, heart disease and type 2 diabetes, according to the Mayo Clinic.For the study, researchers tracked more than 19,000 patients with sleep apnea from 25 cities in 14 countries. The team compared the patients’ apnea data from sleep studies with records of particle pollution in the air where they live.Results showed that the number of respiratory events — breathing slowing or stopping — per hour of sleep increased by 0.41 for every one-unit increase in PM10 particle pollution.“This effect may seem small for an individual, but across entire populations it can shift many people into higher-severity categories, making it meaningful from a public health perspective,” Pengo said.Researchers also found the link between particle pollution and sleep apnea varied in strength between cities. People in Lisbon, Paris and Athens were more affected by air pollution.“In some cities, the impact was stronger; in others, it was weaker or even absent,” Pengo said. “These regional differences might be due to things like local climate, the type of pollution or even how health care systems detect obstructive sleep apnea.”Sophia Schiza, head of the European Respiratory Society’s expert group on sleep disordered breathing, said that “for people with obstructive sleep apnea, especially those living in cities with high levels of air pollution, this study is important as it suggests pollution could be making their condition worse.”The study strengthens the connection between environmental health and sleep medicine, added Schiza, a professor of pulmonology at the University of Crete in Greece who was not involved in the research. “It reminds us that tackling air pollution isn't just good for the planet, it's also vital for our lungs and our sleep quality too,” she said in a news release.Findings presented at medical meetings should be considered preliminary until published in a peer-reviewed journal.SOURCE: European Respiratory Society, news release, Sept. 30, 2025Copyright © 2025 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Government shutdown means 90% of EPA staff won't be working

The EPA will pause research work, grants, permits and inspections while the government is shut down. Nearly all staff will stop working. Some may not be rehired.

The shutdown of the U.S. government could have ripple effects for human health and the environment as an already weakened Environmental Protection Agency will see nearly all of its staff furloughed and many of its operations paused. The first shutdown in six years went into effect late Tuesday and requires federal agencies to stop all nonessential work. Most EPA work is considered only partially essential under federal rules. Nearly 90% of EPA staff will be furloughed; only 1,732 of 15,166 employees will report to work, according to the agency’s most recent shutdown contingency plan, issued in September.Immediate environmental hazard work is likely to continue, but longer-term efforts such as research, permitting, writing new rules and pollution enforcement will largely freeze. Experts note that the shutdown comes as the agency already has seen significant cuts as part of the Trump administration’s efforts to restructure the federal government and save taxpayers money. About 4,000 EPA employees, or a quarter of its workforce, have been fired or have taken a buyout this year. “The shutdown has already been happening for months,” said Marc Boom, a former senior policy advisor with the EPA who now serves as senior advisor with the Environmental Protection Network, a bipartisan group of more than 700 former EPA employees based in Washington, D.C.Many activities will halt, including research and the publication of research results, and the issuance of new grants, contracts and permits, according to the agency. Critically, civil enforcement inspections — on-site visits to facilities to check their compliance with environmental regulations — will also cease. Whether cleanup work at hazardous waste areas known as Superfund sites will continue will be decided case by case. At sites where stopping would pose an imminent threat to human life, work will continue, but at others, it will pause, according to the agency.Preparing for, preventing and responding to environmental disasters such as oil spills and chemical releases, known as emergency response readiness operations, will not stop. Freezers, animals, plants and other assets in research labs will continue to be maintained. In a statement to The Times before the shutdown, EPA officials blamed Democrats for the quagmire and said the agency will continue to strive to meet its mission. The impasse came as Democrats demanded healthcare provisions in the budget while Republicans pushed for a short-term budget extension without policy changes.“Congressional Democrats are not only unwilling to vote for a clean funding bill, but their goal is to inflict as much pain on the American people as possible,” the EPA said. “Americans made their voices heard last November; Democrats must respect the will of the people. ... EPA will work to fulfill our statutory obligations, emergency response efforts, and Administration priorities.” But the agency has already lost considerable expertise through its staff cuts and restructuring, which have lessened its ability to respond to both emerging and existing threats, according to Linda Birnbaum, former director of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program. “The additional loss of people will essentially take us to a point where EPA will be almost unable to complete its mission,” Birnbaum said in a statement. Since Trump took office in January, the EPA has canceled hundreds of environmental grants; rolled back protections against pesticides, forever chemicals and fossil fuel emissions; issued exemptions for large polluters, eliminated its office of Research and Development and announced plans to repeal the endangerment finding, which affirms that greenhouse gases are harmful to human health and the environment, among other efforts.The furloughs at EPA could become permanent. A recent memo from the federal Office of Management and Budget directed federal agencies to prepare for mass layoffs in the event of a government shutdown, implying people may not be rehired.“If you’ve already cut the staff by 4,000 and more is to come from the shutdown and from further [reductions in force], then there will be even less protections,” said Vicki Arroyo, a former EPA associate administrator for policy who served under both the Biden and Reagan administrations. Arroyo recalled the challenges of maintaining the agency’s core functions during the last federal shutdown six years ago, when she was the only one of about 160 people on her team who remained at work. Duties such as economic analyses, permitting for energy projects such as offshore wind and National Environmental Policy Act reviews were among those to suffer, she said, and could be hit even harder this time around.“When EPA funding and staffing are undercut, it doesn’t just hurt these public servants, it hurts us all,” Arroyo said. “Without a functioning EPA, we can’t trust that the water out of our tap is safe ... and without EPA staff on duty, we can’t rely on EPA to monitor and protect air quality so that children without asthma and others with respiratory conditions are safe from pollution.” She and other experts also feared that less support and oversight from the federal government would result in diminished quality control at the local level, as many federal laws are delegated to states. In California, much will depend on the length of the shutdown, according to H.D. Palmer, spokesman for the California Department of Finance. A shutdown lasting only a few days would probably have minimal effect on the California EPA.Specifically, Palmer said many California environmental programs that were funded under the Biden administration should be able to continue even if there is a brief lapse in appropriations, such as brownfield project grants and the state’s Clean Water State Revolving Fund. However, a protracted shutdown could lead to delays in new project grants or permits being issued.“We’re going to continue to assess it depending on how long this thing goes on,” Palmer said. The EPA is not the only environmental agency that will face challenges. The U.S. Forest Service, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the National Park Service are also bracing for interruptions under the shutdown in addition to cuts this year.

Op-ed: Let’s Preserve Our Communities Through Canning Food

“Anything you want cooked, I can cook. I can cook dirt,” jokes David, who has operated this community cannery for the last 30 years, guiding his neighbors through the steps of preserving their own food—from cooking the raw ingredients to sealing them into jars. Known as the “Moonshine Capital of the World” for its distilled […] The post Op-ed: Let’s Preserve Our Communities Through Canning Food appeared first on Civil Eats.

Set in the foothills of the Blue Ridge Mountains of Virginia, surrounded by rolling farmlands and hardwood forests, Glade Hill Cannery often opens before the sun has risen. On one such early morning, expert canner Ronald David supervises the pots of apple butter that bubble on the stoves, fogging the windows with steam. “Anything you want cooked, I can cook. I can cook dirt,” jokes David, who has operated this community cannery for the last 30 years, guiding his neighbors through the steps of preserving their own food—from cooking the raw ingredients to sealing them into jars. Known as the “Moonshine Capital of the World” for its distilled alcohol production during Prohibition, Franklin County, Virginia, has a robust agriculture economy as well. Glade Hill stands as one of the oldest surviving canneries in the country, with more than 80 years of preserving, jarring, and steaming under its belt. The cannery operates in a 1940s-era masonry building behind Glade Hill Elementary School, and allows locals to can just about anything they want—though so far no one has taken David up on his dirt offer. Master canner Ronald David has worked at Glade Hill Cannery since the 1990s. (Photo credit: Rinne Allen)
 A community cannery is essentially a shared, public-access kitchen with commercial-grade equipment where anyone can process raw produce into shelf-stable goods. Commonly canned items include tomatoes, green beans, peaches, jams, pickles, and sauces. Across the U.S., the scale of community canneries ranges widely, from those operating out of small school kitchens to those that are industrial-size, like Glade Hill. Growing up in California’s Napa Valley, I was surrounded by examples of people enjoying fresh, homegrown food. One of my earliest memories is of learning to weed my dad’s backyard garden and helping him relocate snails. (I recall being more interested in befriending the creatures than moving them.) In addition to having a green thumb, my dad is an avid canner, meaning I have a year-round supply of jams, sauces, and stocks labeled with names like “Summer Lovin” and “Magic Mineral Broth” in his blocky uppercase handwriting. In an era when we often purchase food grown halfway across the world, community canneries are hanging on, allowing people to eat from sources closer to home. Canneries reduce reliance on industrial agriculture, help mitigate climate change, support small-scale farmers, build food sovereignty, and foster a sense of community where knowledge, recipes, and harvests can be shared. We need more of them. How Community Canneries Work Community canneries emerged alongside World War II victory gardens as a way for amateur gardeners to grow and preserve their own produce. A nationwide campaign sponsored by the U.S. government, the canneries were part of an effort to prevent food shortages and send more food overseas to American soldiers stationed there. The response was overwhelmingly positive: Canning peaked in 1943, with individuals producing over 4.1 billion jars of food in their homes and at community canning centers. As food processing industrialized, however, the number of community canneries dwindled from more than 3,800 facilities across the United States to fewer than a couple hundred. Steamed spinach, ready for canning at Glade Hill. (Photo credit: Rinne Allen)
 Canning centers have always been vital spaces for strengthening social bonds, reducing food waste, and increasing food security for rural farmers. David recalls whole church congregations coming together to make apple butter and neighbors canning food to raise money for buildings or first responders—an inseparable blend of love, community, and food. Every cannery functions differently, but at Glade Hill, work sometimes starts at 5 a.m. Hustling between pressure canners, 50-gallon kettles, and tin cans stacked on worktables, David says he helps up to 30 people each day cook down produce and seal jars, doling out advice along the way—and always leaving time for neighborly conversation. At any given time, the room may smell like sweet apples and cinnamon or savory, smoky slow-cooked pork with paprika. Putting Excess Produce to Good Use Skeptics may argue that community canneries don’t address the most pressing issues associated with local food movements, particularly access to fresh produce in low-income communities. But even so, canning has a number of environmental and social benefits that make it well worth the effort. First, it enables people to more easily preserve food from their own gardens and the farmers in their communities, making them less reliant on industrial agriculture—a major contributor to environmental destruction, responsible for approximately 80 percent of global deforestation and over 70 percent of terrestrial biodiversity loss. Additionally, preserving food offers a practical way to reduce the 30 to 40 percent of the U.S. food supply that is wasted each year, according to estimates from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). Beyond the carbon dioxide released during its production, transport, and processing, food is the single largest category of material found in most landfills, where it breaks down and releases methane, another potent greenhouse gas. Diverting food from the landfill through canning helps mitigate this. Canneries can help improve food access in their communities as well. They can partner with local farms, community gardens, food banks, and other organizations to preserve excess produce and distribute it. The Baxter Community Center in Grand Rapids, Michigan, for example, provides fresh produce, garden space, and canning workshops to community members at no cost to promote both local food production and preservation. At Glade Hill Cannery, cans of beans with chunks of hog jowl await their turn in the water bath. (Photo credit: Rinne Allen) Canneries can also play a role in increasing self-reliance for small farmers. They can help farmers convert unsold produce into value-added products such as jams, sauces, or pickles, reducing waste and generating alternate streams of income. Some community canneries, like Glade Hill, allow farmers to drop off produce for processing and pick it up later. By enabling individuals and communities to assume greater control over what they eat, community canning also weakens relationships of dependency and helps increase food sovereignty, a concept that Monica M. White, an associate professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, explores in her research on D-Town Farm in Detroit. This can be especially important for marginalized communities. The Oneida Community Cannery in Oneida County, Wisconsin, for example, was established in the ’70s to help tribal and local community members reconnect with and learn to preserve traditional foods. The cannery’s success eventually led to the creation of a program to encourage self-reliance within the community, demonstrating that canning can be a tool for cultural preservation and community resilience. Lastly, canning builds community. Some of my fondest childhood memories are of being in the kitchen with my dad, learning to create his famous meatballs. Those moments weren’t just about the meal; they were about love, patience, and care. Community canneries provide the same opportunity: spaces to share recipes, preserve culinary traditions, and learn from other generations. Be a Community Canneries Advocate Community canning creates all kinds of benefits. It builds relationships, encourages people to grow and preserve their own food, and gives us healthy options to the processed foods so prevalent today. So how can you support it? Most community canneries operate as nonprofit organizations or are funded by local governments, supporting themselves through a combination of usage fees or public funding. Each one is unique, but they typically charge small fees based on hourly use of equipment, per batch or pounds processed, or through annual memberships. Prepping late-season tomatoes for canning at Glade Hill Cannery. (Photo credit: Rinne Allen) If possible, support a cannery near you. Virginia, Florida, and Georgia remain strongholds for community canneries, offering myriad models. Virginia alone has up to 11 seasonally operating community canneries, including Glade Hill. The Carroll County Cannery, for example, is open June through December, offering equipment and an on-site cannery specialist to help select recipes, acquire ingredients, and guide day-of canning. If you don’t have a cannery nearby, advocate for one. Most canneries are funded by local governments. Public investment increases their accessibility, keeping usage fees low. If you are interested in getting a cannery established in your area, attend city council meetings and make the case for these establishments. You might also consider working to establish a cannery within your local school district, to educate children on the importance of local food. The Eastanollee Cannery in Eastanollee, Georgia, for example, is owned by the Stephens County school system and focuses on both how to safely can food and increase engagement with local farmers. There’s something truly powerful about preparing food together. David tells me he’s formed friendships with many of the people who visit Glade Hill, often receiving a jar of apple butter as a thank-you gift. He and his regulars take care of each other. And that’s the essence of community canneries. Regardless of whether you have two cans to fill or 100, David says, “Come on in. I’ll make room for ya.” Jillian Fischer wrote this opinion as an undergraduate student in Liz Carlisle’s course, “Food, Agriculture, and the Environment,” offered this spring at the University of California Santa Barbara. Civil Eats partnered with Carlisle on writing and editing guidance for this story. The post Op-ed: Let’s Preserve Our Communities Through Canning Food appeared first on Civil Eats.

Revealed: Europe losing 600 football pitches of nature and crop land a day

Investigation shows extent of green land lost across UK and mainland Europe to development from 2018 to 2023The Santa Claus effect: how expanding tourism ate into Lapland’s green spaceEurope is losing green space that once harboured wildlife, captured carbon and supplied food at the rate of 600 football pitches a day, an investigation by the Guardian and partners has revealed.Analysis of satellite imagery across the UK and mainland Europe over a five-year period shows the speed and scale with which green land is turning grey, consumed by tarmac for roads, bricks and mortar for luxury golf courses and housing developments. Continue reading...

Europe is losing green space that once harboured wildlife, captured carbon and supplied food at the rate of 600 football pitches a day, an investigation by the Guardian and partners has revealed.Analysis of satellite imagery across the UK and mainland Europe over a five-year period shows the speed and scale with which green land is turning grey, consumed by tarmac for roads, bricks and mortar for luxury golf courses and housing developments.The loss of the Amazon rainforest has been measured for years using satellite imagery and on-the-ground monitoring, but until now the scale of green land lost in Europe had never been captured in the same way.In the first investigation of its kind across Europe, the Green to Grey project, working with scientists from the Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (Nina) to measure nature loss, reveals the scale of nature and farmland engulfed by human interventions.The cross-border project by the Guardian, Arena for Journalism in Europe (Arena), Nina, the Norwegian broadcaster NRK and other news outlets in 11 countries found that Europe loses about 1,500 sq km (580 sq miles) a year to construction. About 9,000 sq km of land – an area the size of Cyprus – was turned green to grey between 2018 and 2023, according to the data. That is the equivalent of almost 30 sq km a week, or 600 football pitches a day.Nature accounts for the majority of the losses, at about 900 sq km a year, but the research shows we are also building on agricultural land at a rate of about 600 sq km a year, with grave consequences for the continent’s food security and health.Steve Carver, a professor of wilderness at the University of Leeds, said: “Land lost to development is one of the primary drivers of wilderness loss and biodiversity decline. But we are also losing cropland and productive land as our cities expand into the green belt and on to agricultural land.”The most common developments, accounting for a quarter of all cases, were for housing and roads. But nature and farmland is also being destroyed to accommodate luxuries for the rich, tourism, consumerism and industry.Arena reveals that in Portugal, almost 300 hectares (740 acres) of the protected sand dunes at Galé Beach near Melides, an hour south of Lisbon, have been lost to create a new golf course at the CostaTerra Golf and Ocean Club, where properties will sell for about £5.6mThe resort, which is still under construction, is a second home to Princess Eugenie and her husband, Jack Brooksbank, who works for the development. It is being built on Natura 2000 land, which is supposed to be protected under EU regulations.Satellite imagery shows the areas of protected dune land lost to the CostaTerra Golf and Ocean Club in southern PortugalThe resort promises “the simple luxury of European living” on “the last untouched Atlantic coast in southern Europe”. Its 75-hectare golf course is estimated to consume as much as 800,000 litres of water a day to maintain the greens.Exceptions to development on Natura 2000 land can be granted if there is overriding public interest. The Portuguese authorities approved the resort, which is owned by the US property firm Discovery Land Company, on the grounds of economic benefit.Ioannis Agapakis, a lawyer for ClientEarth, an environmental law NGO, said a golf course did not fulfil these requirements. “It is obviously not overriding public interest,” he said. “The mere fact that you find economic benefits or some type of economic development from a project does not make it overriding public interest.”Discovery Land Company said in a statement: “We are developing CostaTerra to be a model for environmental stewardship and sustainability in the region.“Every aspect of the property – from the design of the golf course, to rainwater and waste management practices, to the development and preservation of wildlife habitat and corridors – was designed to meet or exceed EU standards, including the Natura 2000 framework.“We’ll continue to innovate and find solutions to make CostaTerra the most responsible property of its kind.”Brooksbank was approached by the Guardian but did not comment.In Turkey, the Çaltılıdere wetland in the İzmir province on the Aegean coast has been buried beneath more than a square kilometre of concrete foundations for a marina to repair and build luxury yachts, the investigation shows.Officially designated as a wetland by Turkey, Çaltılıdere was home to flamingos, pelicans, cormorants, sea bream and sea bass. It also served as a vital carbon store and natural flood defence.But local authorities overturned its protected status in 2017 after a tense and controversial local commission meeting. Satellite images show how the vital stopping point for migratory birds has been consumed by concrete foundations.Satellite imagery shows the wetland lost to the marina development at Çaltılıdere in TurkeyYatek, the industry cooperative developing the marina project, says it will bring huge economic growth and thousands of jobs to the area. “The richest people in Turkey and in the world will bring their big yachts here and repair them or have them built,” Yatek’s former director said in an interview in 2021. The cooperative foresees manufacturing as many as 132 luxury yachts a year.Yatek said in a statement that its project was “a fully compliant initiative that strictly follows all legal procedures, including the acquisition of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) report”, a document detailing a project’s effects for permission to be granted under EU law.“The environmental impacts and other ecological aspects of the project have been thoroughly assessed by the competent authorities of our country, which have granted a positive EIA decision. Accordingly, the entire project process continues lawfully and in line with the relevant legislation,” the statement said.skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain information about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. If you do not have an account, we will create a guest account for you on theguardian.com to send you this newsletter. You can complete full registration at any time. For more information about how we use your data see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionTurkey, the largest country in the analysis, ranked highest for the amount of green land lost between 2018 and 2023. It built on 1,860 sq km of nature and crop land, accounting for more than a fifth of the total loss in Europe.But the developments are across Europe. In the Vermio mountains in northern Greece, defined as a roadless area of wilderness in Greek law, a large windfarm is being developed across the western and central Macedonia regions.According to the Dublin-based Aer Soléir, the ultimate owner of the Vermio windfarms, the plans are fully aligned with applicable Greek and EU regulatory frameworks. It said the development had “secured, during a lengthy demanding design and licensing process, all required permits and approvals”, and added: “The project was reviewed twice by the supreme administrative court. In both cases, the relevant annulment actions were rejected, and the court confirmed full compliance of the project with the environmental and regulatory framework.”The company also said a series of reforestation works were being undertaken in parallel with construction.In Germany, half a million trees were felled near Berlin to build a Tesla gigafactory after the government approved a plan to expand the plant to double production to 1m cars a year. Tesla has been approached for comment.Satellite images show the woodland cleared to make way for the Tesla factory.The methodology used in the Green to Grey investigation is different from the official method used by the European Environment Agency (EEA), which excludes areas smaller than 50,000 sq metres, the equivalent of about five football pitches. The investigation identified small, piecemeal nature losses as well as construction in urban green spaces, resulting in estimates 1.5 times larger than the EEA’s calculations and showing the total impact of cumulative small-scale losses.“It’s a slow-burning issue,” said Jan-Erik Petersen of the EEA. “It just accumulates over time.”The Green MEP Lena Schilling said: “For years, the EU has promised to lead on climate and nature protection, but what this investigation shows is that we are literally cementing over our own future.“Every forest, fertile field and biodiversity hotspot destroyed for short-term profit is a betrayal of the promises we made to young people.”The construction site for Tesla’s gigafactory near Berlin pictured in September 2020. Photograph: Odd Andersen/AFP/Getty ImagesShe said that if nature continued to be treated as expendable, Europe would lose not only its climate goals, but also its food security, its health and the very places that made the continent worth living in.The analysis covered 30 countries, covering 96% of the EEA’s 39-country area. Every country examined is losing natural and agricultural areas, but some fare worse than others. The five countries with the highest green losses were Turkey, with more than 1800 sq km of nature and crop land lost between 2018 and 2023, Poland (more than 1,000 sq km), France (950 sq km), Germany (720 sq km) and the UK (604 sq km).Zander Venter of Nina is planning to scale up the project to establish a global vision of the impact humans have had on the planet. For anyone interested in helping, he will be launching a citizen science web app to try crowdsource the verifications.Additional reporting by Rachel Keenan, Raphael Boyd, Olivia Lee, Yassin El-Moudden, Gracie Daw, Matthew Holmes, Mariam Amini, Gabriel Smith, Dominic Kendrick and Emma RussellFor more, visit greentogrey.euThe next phase of this project will be planet-wide: join a crowdsourced citizen science initiative to measure global nature loss here

Amazon Communities Deliver “Unprecedented” Conservation Wins

Local Amazon communities protect ecosystems while sustaining fisheries. Support is needed to keep efforts viable. New research highlights “unprecedented” conservation outcomes achieved through community-led management of protected areas in the Amazon, at a time when many of these regions face increasing threats from weak regulatory enforcement, external encroachment, and competition for natural resources. The study [...]

Local community member engaged in Community-Based Management (CBM) carrying a large wild-caught Arapaima fish. Credit: Hugo CM Costa / Instituto JuruaLocal Amazon communities protect ecosystems while sustaining fisheries. Support is needed to keep efforts viable. New research highlights “unprecedented” conservation outcomes achieved through community-led management of protected areas in the Amazon, at a time when many of these regions face increasing threats from weak regulatory enforcement, external encroachment, and competition for natural resources. The study outlines a promising approach for expanding effective area-based protection by building on existing community practices for managing local resources. Conventional protected areas in the tropics often struggle due to limited staffing, scarce funding, and inadequate equipment. These shortcomings raise concerns about how such areas can be maintained under financial constraints and in the face of unsupportive political environments. Efforts to expand formally designated protected areas have also slowed, despite renewed global commitments to safeguard 30% of the planet’s land and seas by 2030, a target reaffirmed in the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) three years ago. Community-based management as a conservation solution The findings, published in Nature Sustainability, come from a collaboration between researchers in Brazil and the UK. They suggest that one way forward is to strengthen Other Effective Area-Based Conservation Measures (OECMs), which refer to regions managed in ways that deliver sustained biodiversity protection. The research team, representing the Instituto Juruá (Brazil), University of East Anglia (UK), Universidade Federal de Alagoas (Brazil), and Instituto Nacional de Pesquisas da Amazonia (Brazil), examined the conservation benefits of community-based fisheries management along a 1,200-kilometer stretch of the Juruá River, a major Amazon tributary in the state of Amazonas. A local fisherman paddling a large dugout canoe after a successful fishing trip into one of the community-managed lakes protected by his community. Credit: Andre Dib / Instituto JuruáTheir results show that when accounting for all areas under direct or indirect protection, each community safeguards floodplain and upland forest nearly 86 times larger than the dry-season surface area of oxbow lakes that support local arapaima fish populations. Across the state of Amazonas, this management approach has protected approximately 15 million hectares of floodplain forest. Local enforcement, biodiversity gains, and community benefits Professor Carlos Peres, from UEA’s School of Environmental Sciences and a senior author on the paper, said: “This study clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of empowering local management action by stakeholders who have the greatest interest and a 24-7, year-round presence where conservation battles are being won or lost. “The conservation dividends from community-based protection are unprecedented and deployed at a tiny fraction of the financial costs of traditional protection mechanisms. In practice, this makes local land managers true ‘unsung heroes’ in the cacophony of theoretical conservation discourse.” Through locally coordinated enforcement and active surveillance, local communities in the western Brazilian Amazon mount concerted efforts to protect oxbow lakes, where commercially valuable fisheries are managed, against exploitation by outsiders. These communities then benefit from an annual windfall in sales of sustainably harvested fish, accrued from the local harvesting of protected populations of key resources, which also boosts populations of several other non-target co-occurring species that have been historically overexploited, such as giant otters, manatees, and giant Amazon River turtles. Long-term challenges and policy implications The study authors call for more recognition and financial support for these crucial conservation efforts, which play a significant role in protecting the vast Amazon biome. Without adequate support, they warn that the long-term sustainability of this model, dependent on unpaid labor and costs borne by communities, may be uncertain. Dr Ana Carla Rodrigues from Universidade Federal de Alagoas led the study. She said: “We have shown how Amazonian community-based management can protect vast areas across one of the planet’s most complex and vital biomes. The community-led systems safeguard biodiversity at an impressive scale, despite bearing a heavy social and economic burden. “Recognizing the vital role local people play in protecting the Amazon rainforest and supporting local communities are essential for long-term conservation and a crucial matter of social justice.” A team of local fishermen involved in both annual fish counts and collectively guarding community-managed lakes at the critical time of the year. Credit: Edimar Costa / Instituto JuruáThe team analyzed data on the costs and benefits of collective protection efforts by local communities over 96 protected lakes located along the Juruá River, which were on average 47.4 ha in size. These lakes were under the direct jurisdiction and stewardship of 14 rural communities and hosted a population count of approximately 109,000 adult arapaima. They also surveyed both the extent and cost of protection beyond lakes alone, including the adjacent flooded forests and upland terra firme forest areas that are safeguarded by community patrols. These additional areas, functionally linked to lake ecosystems and key for species’ life cycles, expand the overall conservation footprint dramatically. Currently, the costs of protecting these areas are borne entirely by community members, covering expenses such as fuel and food for volunteer rangers – without any compensation for their work. However, implementing fair compensation schemes such as Payments for Environmental Services (PES) would remain significantly more cost-effective than conventional protected area enforcement strategies. Future directions for conservation and social justice Dr João Vitor Campos-Silva, a Co-Director of Instituto Juruá and a co-author on the study, added: “Currently, six million people in the Brazilian Amazon depend directly on wild nature. By explicitly including local dwellers in conservation practices, we can both increase the effectiveness of conservation outcomes and enhance local welfare.” The team hopes its evidence will help persuade governments that supporting local conservation is both extremely good value for money and critical to successful ecological and conservation programs. Reference: “Community-based management expands ecosystem protection footprint in Amazonian forests” by Ana Carla Rodrigues, Hugo C. M. Costa, Carlos A. Peres, Eduardo Sonnewend Brondizio, Adevaldo Dias, José Alves de Moraes, Pedro de Araujo Lima Constantino, Richard James Ladle, Ana Claudia Mendes Malhado and João Vitor Campos-Silva, 19 September 2025, Nature Sustainability.DOI: 10.1038/s41893-025-01633-6 Never miss a breakthrough: Join the SciTechDaily newsletter.Follow us on Google, Discover, and News.

Giant Sinkhole in Chilean Mining Town Haunts Residents, Three Years On

TIERRA AMARILLA (Reuters) -Residents in the mining town of Tierra Amarilla in the Chilean desert are hopeful that a new court ruling will allay...

TIERRA AMARILLA (Reuters) -Residents in the mining town of Tierra Amarilla in the Chilean desert are hopeful that a new court ruling will allay their fears about a giant sinkhole that opened near their homes more than three years ago and remains unfilled.A Chilean environmental court this month ordered Minera Ojos del Salado, owned by Canada's Lundin Mining, to repair environmental damage related to activity at its Alcaparrosa copper mine, which is thought to have triggered the sinkhole that appeared in 2022.The ruling calls on the company to protect the region's water supply and refill the sinkhole. The cylindrical crater originally measured 64 meters (210 ft) deep and 32 meters (105 ft) wide at the surface.That has provided a small measure of relief to those in arid Tierra Amarilla in Chile's central Atacama region, who fear that without remediation the gaping hole could swallow up more land."Ever since the sinkhole occurred ... we've lived in fear," said Rudy Alfaro, whose home is 800 meters from the site. A health center and preschool are nearby too, she said."We were afraid it would get bigger, that it would expand, move toward the houses." The sinkhole expelled clouds of dust in a recent earthquake, provoking more anxiety, she said.     The court upheld a shutdown of the small Alcaparrosa mine ordered by Chile's environmental regulator in January, and confirmed "irreversible" damage to an aquifer, which drained water into the mine and weakened the surrounding rock."This is detrimental to an area that is already hydrologically stressed," said Rodrigo Saez, regional water director. Lundin said it will work with authorities to implement remediation measures.(Writing by Daina Beth Solomon, Editing by Rosalba O'Brien)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.

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.