Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

How outdoor programs are adapting to the challenge of extreme weather

News Feed
Wednesday, August 7, 2024

The vision “How can healing our relationship to the planet help us heal our relationships with ourselves?” — Ki’Amber Thompson The spotlight The outdoors can be a healing place. Spending time in nature can inspire wonder, confer physical and mental health benefits, and deepen our understanding of the land and ecosystems around us — and our role in caring for them. That’s part of the idea behind the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project, an outdoor program in San Antonio specifically for young people whose families have been impacted by incarceration. The organization offers activities like camping trips, surfing, and community gardening, also weaving in meditation, journaling, and other exercises intended to foster introspection and empowerment. “We are not just an outdoor organization creating more access in the outdoors, or working on climate issues in a solely environmental way,” said Ki’Amber Thompson, the program’s founder. “We’re also doing deep healing work with the participants, and thinking about not only environmental but social sustainability, and how that connects.” But creating safe and joyful experiences also means overcoming many barriers these kids face in enjoying the outdoors. Those include both historical exclusion from these spaces and a continued narrative that outdoor recreation is not for people of color. And, increasingly, these barriers are compounded by extreme weather that makes it ever-harder to ensure safety, let alone restoration, in the outdoors. Thompson (who uses both they and she pronouns) started the Bloom Project to address a need they saw in their community. They had discovered a love for the outdoors while attending college in California, and wanted to make those same transformative experiences possible for young people in her hometown of San Antonio — specifically, those caught up in a system of over-policing, incarceration, and environmental injustice. This work is personal for both Thompson and Gabriela Lopez, the organization’s co-director. Lopez’s father has been in prison for most of her life, she said, and as a kid she saw nature as a form of therapy that helped her cope. She was excited to join the Bloom Project after spending many years as a teacher, and seeing how the school system was not well equipped to address some of the mental health issues and traumas that young people were experiencing. “I feel like it’s promoting healing in a way that’s really accessible,” she said of the Bloom Project’s work, “but then also creating a generation of advocates, not only for their communities, but for nature and for the outdoors and for the land.” Lopez (right) with two Bloom Project participants at a retreat in December of 2023. Courtesy of the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project In creating those experiences, the Bloom Project’s directors know they are up against prevailing narratives that outdoor recreation is not for people of color. In Texas, around 95 percent of land is privately owned, Thompson said, making access to outdoor spaces challenging — but, they added, that’s only the beginning of the issue. Despite their best efforts to make outdoor excursions feel safe and inclusive, they have still on occasion been made to feel unwelcome, a microcosm of the issues people of color face in outdoor access across the country. “We’ve done camping trips in different state parks and at Big Bend National Park in Texas, and we’ve experienced policing on multiple occasions from white park users,” they said. Many affinity organizations have emerged to create more visibility and safety in outdoor spaces for people of color, people with disabilities, queer people, and others — including Black Outside, the Texas-based organization that has housed the Bloom Project for the past five years. (Later this year, the program will be spinning off into its own nonprofit.) At the Bloom Project, the aim is not only to increase outdoor access, but to use that access to help these kids actively oppose systems of oppression — something that, as children of incarcerated parents, they experience keenly. “Knowing the extent to which Black youth are policed in schools, parks, neighborhoods, and families, in the Bloom Project, we affirm our youth for who they are and all that they bring to our community,” Thompson said. In some ways, she said, the Bloom Project is an experiment in preconfiguring a better, more just world. Sessions include healing or talking circles for sharing and processing, in an environment intentionally free from policing. And another core part of the programming is education that tackles head-on the realities of the challenges that are showing up in young people’s lives — always in an age-appropriate way, Lopez said. At a park day with a group of younger kids earlier this summer, she facilitated an experiment in which they tested how quickly ice cubes would melt on different surfaces — a fun way of learning about the urban heat island effect. But the heat melting those ice cubes also represents another, ever more pressing challenge to creating safe and enjoyable outdoor experiences. More frequent and intense extreme weather events — like Hurricane Beryl, which narrowly missed San Antonio last month — and a new normal of hotter summers mean that the very tool the Bloom Project uses to facilitate healing and connection is getting harder to access. “It’s so, so hot in San Antonio these summers,” Thompson said. Last year, the city sweltered through more than 70 days of triple-digit temperatures. Because of heat, the organization does not run camping trips locally in Texas in the summer months. “It’s really hard because [summer] is a time where we could see our youth more, since they’re on a break from school,” Lopez said. But it isn’t always worth the risk, nor conducive to the overall mission. “We don’t want to bring people outside and have them feel miserable.” Thompson said they’ve made adjustments like starting some activities earlier in the morning before it gets prohibitively hot outside and paying attention to basic protections like hats, sunscreen, and shade. The organization has also thought about emphasizing water-centric activities in the hot months, or even indoor sessions. Bloom Project participants on a trip to White Sands National Park in April 2023. Courtesy of the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project One new program the Bloom Project is piloting this later summer, in partnership with Latino Outdoors and the Casey Family Foundation, an organization aimed at improving the foster system, is a four-month special cohort dubbed the Wild Trail fellowship. That program will focus less on recreation and more on education and career pathways in different environmental and outdoor sectors. The first meeting will be in an REI store, Lopez said, where the high school-age participants will go on an indoor scavenger hunt, assemble first aid kits, and hopefully hear from a store manager. Across the country, organizations that work on outdoor access, education, and recreation are grappling with the same conundrum. José González, founder of Latino Outdoors, noted that for the first time this year, the nationwide Latino Conservation Week will be shifted from late July to late September, due to concerns about the heat. And even if an event is not cancelled or postponed, extreme weather has increasingly become a part of planning. “Many people do not know how heat can affect them — how to spot heat stroke, for example — so it’s important to note it as part of risk management and the education for participants,” he said. In May, the outdoor education organization Outward Bound coordinated three events in Vancouver, Halifax, and Toronto, bringing together more than 60 groups from across Canada to discuss how the outdoor sector can adapt to climate impacts, and also be apart of mitigation. One wilderness program manager noted that “climate change has irrevocably shifted the landscape of outdoor education.” Although the realities of climate change are compounding the challenges faced in creating restorative and joyful experiences in the outdoors, they also make it all the more pressing. The ultimate goal for the Bloom Project, Thompson said, is to imbue these young people with a sense of agency and radical imagination that will help them usher in a healthier, more just world. “Sometimes with justice education, it’s really focused on all the problems,” Thompson said. “And that’s real, and it’s important to be educated on that.” But, they said, the key is striking the right balance, and creating the right container that can allow moments of heaviness alongside moments of reflection — and fun. “Joy is what sustains us,” they said, “and just being able to access that and tune into that is so key to have the capacity to [not only] want to be here in the first place, but to envision a better world.” — Claire Elise Thompson More exposure Read: a personal essay describing the healing power that nature can have as a respite from systemic racism and injustice (Glamour) Read: about the importance of representation in the outdoors, and a push for a federal fund to make recreation more accessible (Grist) Read: some of the science behind how nature improves our health — and how much exposure we need to get those benefits (Yale Environment 360) Watch: an Instagram Live with Ki’Amber Thompson and Wawa Gatheru, discussing their paths into environmental justice and the importance of solidarity (or read some highlights from the conversation here) A parting shot If extreme heat makes it more challenging to find healing respite in the outdoors, it also amplifies risk for athletes pushing their bodies to the brink in outdoor environments — including many competing in the Paris Olympics this summer. While some countries made plans to protect their athletes by bringing portable air conditioners to Olympic Village (thwarting Paris officials’ plans to make the games more green), others, including the Olympics medical department, have suggested heat acclimatization training as a way to adapt. In this photo, spectators mill around tennis courts at Roland Garros stadium on July 31 — day five of the games, when temps in Paris reached 90 degrees Fahrenheit. IMAGE CREDITS Vision: Grist Spotlight: Courtesy of the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project Parting shot: Julian Finney / Getty Images This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How outdoor programs are adapting to the challenge of extreme weather on Aug 7, 2024.

This organization helps young people heal through outdoor experiences. It's working around the sweltering Texas summer.

Illustration of large tree with flowers in foreground

The vision

“How can healing our relationship to the planet help us heal our relationships with ourselves?”

— Ki’Amber Thompson

The spotlight

The outdoors can be a healing place. Spending time in nature can inspire wonder, confer physical and mental health benefits, and deepen our understanding of the land and ecosystems around us — and our role in caring for them.

That’s part of the idea behind the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project, an outdoor program in San Antonio specifically for young people whose families have been impacted by incarceration. The organization offers activities like camping trips, surfing, and community gardening, also weaving in meditation, journaling, and other exercises intended to foster introspection and empowerment.

“We are not just an outdoor organization creating more access in the outdoors, or working on climate issues in a solely environmental way,” said Ki’Amber Thompson, the program’s founder. “We’re also doing deep healing work with the participants, and thinking about not only environmental but social sustainability, and how that connects.”

But creating safe and joyful experiences also means overcoming many barriers these kids face in enjoying the outdoors. Those include both historical exclusion from these spaces and a continued narrative that outdoor recreation is not for people of color. And, increasingly, these barriers are compounded by extreme weather that makes it ever-harder to ensure safety, let alone restoration, in the outdoors.

. . .

Thompson (who uses both they and she pronouns) started the Bloom Project to address a need they saw in their community. They had discovered a love for the outdoors while attending college in California, and wanted to make those same transformative experiences possible for young people in her hometown of San Antonio — specifically, those caught up in a system of over-policing, incarceration, and environmental injustice.

This work is personal for both Thompson and Gabriela Lopez, the organization’s co-director. Lopez’s father has been in prison for most of her life, she said, and as a kid she saw nature as a form of therapy that helped her cope. She was excited to join the Bloom Project after spending many years as a teacher, and seeing how the school system was not well equipped to address some of the mental health issues and traumas that young people were experiencing. “I feel like it’s promoting healing in a way that’s really accessible,” she said of the Bloom Project’s work, “but then also creating a generation of advocates, not only for their communities, but for nature and for the outdoors and for the land.”

A woman and two teenage girls embrace, smiling at the camera

Lopez (right) with two Bloom Project participants at a retreat in December of 2023. Courtesy of the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project

In creating those experiences, the Bloom Project’s directors know they are up against prevailing narratives that outdoor recreation is not for people of color. In Texas, around 95 percent of land is privately owned, Thompson said, making access to outdoor spaces challenging — but, they added, that’s only the beginning of the issue. Despite their best efforts to make outdoor excursions feel safe and inclusive, they have still on occasion been made to feel unwelcome, a microcosm of the issues people of color face in outdoor access across the country. “We’ve done camping trips in different state parks and at Big Bend National Park in Texas, and we’ve experienced policing on multiple occasions from white park users,” they said.

Many affinity organizations have emerged to create more visibility and safety in outdoor spaces for people of color, people with disabilities, queer people, and others — including Black Outside, the Texas-based organization that has housed the Bloom Project for the past five years. (Later this year, the program will be spinning off into its own nonprofit.)

At the Bloom Project, the aim is not only to increase outdoor access, but to use that access to help these kids actively oppose systems of oppression — something that, as children of incarcerated parents, they experience keenly. “Knowing the extent to which Black youth are policed in schools, parks, neighborhoods, and families, in the Bloom Project, we affirm our youth for who they are and all that they bring to our community,” Thompson said. In some ways, she said, the Bloom Project is an experiment in preconfiguring a better, more just world. Sessions include healing or talking circles for sharing and processing, in an environment intentionally free from policing. And another core part of the programming is education that tackles head-on the realities of the challenges that are showing up in young people’s lives — always in an age-appropriate way, Lopez said.

At a park day with a group of younger kids earlier this summer, she facilitated an experiment in which they tested how quickly ice cubes would melt on different surfaces — a fun way of learning about the urban heat island effect.

But the heat melting those ice cubes also represents another, ever more pressing challenge to creating safe and enjoyable outdoor experiences. More frequent and intense extreme weather events — like Hurricane Beryl, which narrowly missed San Antonio last month — and a new normal of hotter summers mean that the very tool the Bloom Project uses to facilitate healing and connection is getting harder to access.

“It’s so, so hot in San Antonio these summers,” Thompson said. Last year, the city sweltered through more than 70 days of triple-digit temperatures. Because of heat, the organization does not run camping trips locally in Texas in the summer months.

“It’s really hard because [summer] is a time where we could see our youth more, since they’re on a break from school,” Lopez said. But it isn’t always worth the risk, nor conducive to the overall mission. “We don’t want to bring people outside and have them feel miserable.”

Thompson said they’ve made adjustments like starting some activities earlier in the morning before it gets prohibitively hot outside and paying attention to basic protections like hats, sunscreen, and shade. The organization has also thought about emphasizing water-centric activities in the hot months, or even indoor sessions.

A group of around seven young people walk along a bright white sandy dune with blue sky overhead

Bloom Project participants on a trip to White Sands National Park in April 2023. Courtesy of the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project

One new program the Bloom Project is piloting this later summer, in partnership with Latino Outdoors and the Casey Family Foundation, an organization aimed at improving the foster system, is a four-month special cohort dubbed the Wild Trail fellowship. That program will focus less on recreation and more on education and career pathways in different environmental and outdoor sectors. The first meeting will be in an REI store, Lopez said, where the high school-age participants will go on an indoor scavenger hunt, assemble first aid kits, and hopefully hear from a store manager.

Across the country, organizations that work on outdoor access, education, and recreation are grappling with the same conundrum. José González, founder of Latino Outdoors, noted that for the first time this year, the nationwide Latino Conservation Week will be shifted from late July to late September, due to concerns about the heat. And even if an event is not cancelled or postponed, extreme weather has increasingly become a part of planning. “Many people do not know how heat can affect them — how to spot heat stroke, for example — so it’s important to note it as part of risk management and the education for participants,” he said.

In May, the outdoor education organization Outward Bound coordinated three events in Vancouver, Halifax, and Toronto, bringing together more than 60 groups from across Canada to discuss how the outdoor sector can adapt to climate impacts, and also be apart of mitigation. One wilderness program manager noted that “climate change has irrevocably shifted the landscape of outdoor education.”

Although the realities of climate change are compounding the challenges faced in creating restorative and joyful experiences in the outdoors, they also make it all the more pressing. The ultimate goal for the Bloom Project, Thompson said, is to imbue these young people with a sense of agency and radical imagination that will help them usher in a healthier, more just world.

“Sometimes with justice education, it’s really focused on all the problems,” Thompson said. “And that’s real, and it’s important to be educated on that.” But, they said, the key is striking the right balance, and creating the right container that can allow moments of heaviness alongside moments of reflection — and fun. “Joy is what sustains us,” they said, “and just being able to access that and tune into that is so key to have the capacity to [not only] want to be here in the first place, but to envision a better world.”

— Claire Elise Thompson

More exposure

A parting shot

If extreme heat makes it more challenging to find healing respite in the outdoors, it also amplifies risk for athletes pushing their bodies to the brink in outdoor environments — including many competing in the Paris Olympics this summer. While some countries made plans to protect their athletes by bringing portable air conditioners to Olympic Village (thwarting Paris officials’ plans to make the games more green), others, including the Olympics medical department, have suggested heat acclimatization training as a way to adapt. In this photo, spectators mill around tennis courts at Roland Garros stadium on July 31 — day five of the games, when temps in Paris reached 90 degrees Fahrenheit.

An aerial shot of a crowd walking between two red clay tennis courts on a hot day

IMAGE CREDITS

Vision: Grist

Spotlight: Courtesy of the Charles Roundtree Bloom Project

Parting shot: Julian Finney / Getty Images

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How outdoor programs are adapting to the challenge of extreme weather on Aug 7, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Controversial UK oil field publishes full scale of climate impact

The impact from the Rosebank oil field is estimated at nearly 250 million tonnes of planet warming CO2.

The UK's largest undeveloped oil field has revealed the full scale of its environmental impact, should it gain approval by the government.Developers of the Rosebank oil field said nearly 250 million tonnes of planet warming gas would be released from using oil products from the field.The amount would vary each year, but by comparison the UK's annual emissions in 2024 were 371 million tonnes.The field's developer said its emissions were "not significant" considering the UK's international climate commitments.Rosebank is an oil and gas field which lies about 80 miles north-west of Shetland and is one of the largest undeveloped discoveries of fossil fuels in UK waters.It is said to contain up to 300 million barrels of oil and some gas, and is owned by Norwegian energy giant Equinor and British firm Ithaca Energy.The field was originally approved in 2023, but in July a court ruled that a more detailed assessment of the field's environmental impact was required, taking into account the effect on the climate of burning any fossil fuels extracted from it.A public consultation has now been opened, and will run until 20th November 2025.The final decision on whether to approve the field will be made by the Energy Secretary.Until recently such projects were only required to consider the impact on the environment from extracting the fossil fuels.But in June last year the Supreme Court ruled that authorities must take account of the impact from also using the products, after a woman in Surrey challenged the development of her local gas project.This ruling was then used in a further challenge to the Rosebank oil field by environmental campaigners Uplift and Greenpeace - which was subsequently successful in January. Equinor was required to recalculate the "full impact" of the field and it now estimates that it will contribute an additional 249 million tonnes of the planet warming gas CO2 over the next 25 years. This is more than 50 times greater than the original figure of 4.5 million tonnes it gave from extracting the oil and gas.The UK has a target to produce no additional emissions by 2050 and Energy Secretary Ed Miliband has been vocal about the need to move away from fossil fuels. On Tuesday, he told an industry conference that the UK's dependence on fossil fuels was its "Achilles' heel" and argued clean power was the only way to reduce bills.The fossil fuels for the Rosebank field are not guaranteed to be used in the UK but would be sold on the international market.As such the project is unlikely to have an impact on lowering gas prices. The UK's independent climate advisors said in 2022 that any more domestic oil and gas extraction would have "at most, a marginal effect on prices".But Arne Gurtner, Equinor's senior vice president for the UK, has previously said that: "If the UK needs Rosebank oil, it will go to the UK through open market mechanisms."

Climate
Energy
Water

The Blue-State Governors Who’ve Gone Weak on Climate Policy

If you scroll California Governor Gavin Newsom’s press releases, a portrait emerges of a undaunted climate fighter. One day he’s “paving [the] way for climate pollution-cutting technology”; another he’s launching “new international climate partnerships as Trump unleashes unhinged UN rant.” Last month, he announced the signing of a suite of measures “saving billions on electric bills, stabilizing [the] gas market and cutting pollution.” But look under the hood, and his heroic self-image dims somewhat. That big legislative package, for instance, also increases oil drilling and sets up a regional electricity market that “could tether California to fossil-fuel states at a time when the Trump administration is moving to roll back clean energy,” CalMatters reported.With Trump in death-drive mode on climate, canceling renewable energy projects left and right and even forbidding federal agencies to use language such as “climate change,” “green,”or “sustainable,” blue-state governors are well positioned to distinguish themselves and their party on the issue. They also have a responsibility: The states are our best hope for policy at a scale to match the problem. Yet a worrying trend is taking shape: Blue-state governors are making a big show of battling the Trump administration, but on climate issues they’ve been disappointing—and sometimes downright infuriating. Last month’s climate package wasn’t the California Democrats’ first flub this year. Over the summer, in what Politico dubbed the state’s “Great Climate Retreat,” they weakened limits on the carbon intensity of transportation fuels, rolled back environmental reviews for new housing, and lifted a cap on oil industry profits. “California was the vocal climate leader during the first Trump administration,” Chris Chavez, deputy policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air, told Politico. “It’s questionable whether or not that leadership is still there.” In Maryland, a climate advisory panel appointed by Governor Wes Moore has hit the brakes on a carbon trading measure, and late last month the state Department of the Environment, or MDE, appeared to cave to the Trump administration in abandoning some environmental justice metrics, which many fear means abandoning Black and brown communities to the whims of polluters. “It just appears to me that MDE blatantly does not want to be accountable in the massive pollution and the overburden of these heavy industrial industries,” Kamita Gray, a community leader in Brandywine—a majority-Black town that’s home to gas-fired power plants, a coal ash dump, and a Superfund site—told Maryland Matters.Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania too is under fire from climate critics. As attorney general, he authored a solid road map for protecting Pennsylvanians from the harmful environmental and health effects of fracking, but in his two years as governor he has allowed companies to be secretive about the chemicals used in fracking, and has not pushed to pass any laws curbing the industry. The Environmental Health Project, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit, said “residents are still waiting for meaningful action. Our assessment concludes that the Shapiro administration has not fulfilled the commitments the governor made to Pennsylvanians in general and to frontline communities in particular.”And then there’s New York. Governor Kathy Hochul has been failing to follow the decarbonization timeline that was outlined in the state’s 2019 climate law, prompting environmental justice groups to sue her. She has delayed plans for “cap and invest” and is dragging her feet on building public renewables (despite the state’s landmark Build Public Renewables Act, which passed in 2023). She has seemingly caved to Trump by going ahead with gas pipelines she previously rejected. And it’s unclear whether she will sign a repeal of the outdated “100 foot rule,” which requires utility ratepayers to subsize the cost of connecting new customers to the gas system, a reform that has long been a priority of the state’s climate movement.Part of what’s so self-destructive here is that energy affordability is a highly salient issue for voters, taking center stage, for example in the governor’s race in New Jersey, where electricity rates have risen 22 percent. Interviewed in Friday’s New York Times on this subject, David Springe of the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates described electricity as “the new eggs,” an indicator of how costly daily life is for most Americans. Republicans in New York have seized on the problem as an opportunity to blame Democrats and climate-friendly policies. Stephan Edel of New York Renews, a progressive coalition fighting for clean energy, told me the governor “has spoken really eloquently about the need to do something about affordability.” Indeed, she endorsed Zohran Mamdani, the democratic socialist, for New York City mayor, partly for this reason. She often uses “affordability” to justify rightward shifts or retreats from climate policy, he said, adding that, inexplicably, she also shies away from touting the affordability benefits of climate policies that she does support. For example, in the state budget last year, she agreed to invest over a billion dollars in funding for climate programs, including one that will help make homes for low-income New Yorkers more energy efficient and another that will save school districts money by shifting to electric school buses. Instead of touting those wins for affordability—or embracing the potential of publicly owned renewables to do the same—she’s embraced the Republican narrative that climate policy and affordability are at odds.By contrast, Mikie Sherill in New Jersey has been touting clean energy as a solution to energy affordability woes. If she gets elected and continues this path, more blue state governors should follow her lead. The Democratic base is desperate to see its leaders stand up to Trump on both climate and affordability. (And when Democratic governors do stand up to Trump on anything—Illinois’s JB Pritzker on the militarization of Chicago, Maine’s Janet Mills on health care—their poll numbers spike.)And the reverse is also true—failing to differentiate themselves from Trump has been political suicide for many Democrats. “Every time one of these elected officials says, ‘I’m going to stand up to Trump, I’m going to protect affordability, I’m going to address climate change,’ and then doesn’t do it,” that’s a win for the Republicans, Edel said, because it fuels low turnout for Democratic voters. Climate offers an obvious opportunity to isolate the Republicans on a matter of broad concern, renew Americans’ faith in government, and make real progress. The Democratic governors flailing so badly on this issue have not only a moral obligation to change course, but also a political one.

If you scroll California Governor Gavin Newsom’s press releases, a portrait emerges of a undaunted climate fighter. One day he’s “paving [the] way for climate pollution-cutting technology”; another he’s launching “new international climate partnerships as Trump unleashes unhinged UN rant.” Last month, he announced the signing of a suite of measures “saving billions on electric bills, stabilizing [the] gas market and cutting pollution.” But look under the hood, and his heroic self-image dims somewhat. That big legislative package, for instance, also increases oil drilling and sets up a regional electricity market that “could tether California to fossil-fuel states at a time when the Trump administration is moving to roll back clean energy,” CalMatters reported.With Trump in death-drive mode on climate, canceling renewable energy projects left and right and even forbidding federal agencies to use language such as “climate change,” “green,”or “sustainable,” blue-state governors are well positioned to distinguish themselves and their party on the issue. They also have a responsibility: The states are our best hope for policy at a scale to match the problem. Yet a worrying trend is taking shape: Blue-state governors are making a big show of battling the Trump administration, but on climate issues they’ve been disappointing—and sometimes downright infuriating. Last month’s climate package wasn’t the California Democrats’ first flub this year. Over the summer, in what Politico dubbed the state’s “Great Climate Retreat,” they weakened limits on the carbon intensity of transportation fuels, rolled back environmental reviews for new housing, and lifted a cap on oil industry profits. “California was the vocal climate leader during the first Trump administration,” Chris Chavez, deputy policy director for the Coalition for Clean Air, told Politico. “It’s questionable whether or not that leadership is still there.” In Maryland, a climate advisory panel appointed by Governor Wes Moore has hit the brakes on a carbon trading measure, and late last month the state Department of the Environment, or MDE, appeared to cave to the Trump administration in abandoning some environmental justice metrics, which many fear means abandoning Black and brown communities to the whims of polluters. “It just appears to me that MDE blatantly does not want to be accountable in the massive pollution and the overburden of these heavy industrial industries,” Kamita Gray, a community leader in Brandywine—a majority-Black town that’s home to gas-fired power plants, a coal ash dump, and a Superfund site—told Maryland Matters.Governor Josh Shapiro of Pennsylvania too is under fire from climate critics. As attorney general, he authored a solid road map for protecting Pennsylvanians from the harmful environmental and health effects of fracking, but in his two years as governor he has allowed companies to be secretive about the chemicals used in fracking, and has not pushed to pass any laws curbing the industry. The Environmental Health Project, a Pittsburgh-based nonprofit, said “residents are still waiting for meaningful action. Our assessment concludes that the Shapiro administration has not fulfilled the commitments the governor made to Pennsylvanians in general and to frontline communities in particular.”And then there’s New York. Governor Kathy Hochul has been failing to follow the decarbonization timeline that was outlined in the state’s 2019 climate law, prompting environmental justice groups to sue her. She has delayed plans for “cap and invest” and is dragging her feet on building public renewables (despite the state’s landmark Build Public Renewables Act, which passed in 2023). She has seemingly caved to Trump by going ahead with gas pipelines she previously rejected. And it’s unclear whether she will sign a repeal of the outdated “100 foot rule,” which requires utility ratepayers to subsize the cost of connecting new customers to the gas system, a reform that has long been a priority of the state’s climate movement.Part of what’s so self-destructive here is that energy affordability is a highly salient issue for voters, taking center stage, for example in the governor’s race in New Jersey, where electricity rates have risen 22 percent. Interviewed in Friday’s New York Times on this subject, David Springe of the National Association of State Utility Consumer Advocates described electricity as “the new eggs,” an indicator of how costly daily life is for most Americans. Republicans in New York have seized on the problem as an opportunity to blame Democrats and climate-friendly policies. Stephan Edel of New York Renews, a progressive coalition fighting for clean energy, told me the governor “has spoken really eloquently about the need to do something about affordability.” Indeed, she endorsed Zohran Mamdani, the democratic socialist, for New York City mayor, partly for this reason. She often uses “affordability” to justify rightward shifts or retreats from climate policy, he said, adding that, inexplicably, she also shies away from touting the affordability benefits of climate policies that she does support. For example, in the state budget last year, she agreed to invest over a billion dollars in funding for climate programs, including one that will help make homes for low-income New Yorkers more energy efficient and another that will save school districts money by shifting to electric school buses. Instead of touting those wins for affordability—or embracing the potential of publicly owned renewables to do the same—she’s embraced the Republican narrative that climate policy and affordability are at odds.By contrast, Mikie Sherill in New Jersey has been touting clean energy as a solution to energy affordability woes. If she gets elected and continues this path, more blue state governors should follow her lead. The Democratic base is desperate to see its leaders stand up to Trump on both climate and affordability. (And when Democratic governors do stand up to Trump on anything—Illinois’s JB Pritzker on the militarization of Chicago, Maine’s Janet Mills on health care—their poll numbers spike.)And the reverse is also true—failing to differentiate themselves from Trump has been political suicide for many Democrats. “Every time one of these elected officials says, ‘I’m going to stand up to Trump, I’m going to protect affordability, I’m going to address climate change,’ and then doesn’t do it,” that’s a win for the Republicans, Edel said, because it fuels low turnout for Democratic voters. Climate offers an obvious opportunity to isolate the Republicans on a matter of broad concern, renew Americans’ faith in government, and make real progress. The Democratic governors flailing so badly on this issue have not only a moral obligation to change course, but also a political one.

Climate
Chemicals
Government

Nations Meet to Consider Regulations to Drive a Green Transition in Shipping

Maritime nations are meeting in London to discuss regulations that could shift the shipping industry away from fossil fuels

The world’s largest maritime nations are gathering in London on Tuesday to consider adopting regulations that would move the shipping industry away from fossil fuels to slash emissions.If the deal is adopted, this will be the first time a global fee is imposed on planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions. Most ships today run on heavy fuel oil that releases carbon dioxide and other pollutants as it’s burned. That would be a major win for the climate, public health, the ocean and marine life, said Delaine McCullough at the Ocean Conservancy. For too long, ships have run on crude, dirty oil, she said.“This agreement provides a lesson for the world that legally-binding climate action is possible," McCullough, shipping program director for the nonprofit environmental advocacy group, said. Shipping emissions have grown over the last decade to about 3% of the global total as trade has grown and vessels use immense amounts of fossil fuels to transport cargo over long distances. The regulations would set a pricing system for gas emissions The regulations, or “Net-zero Framework,” sets a marine fuel standard that decreases, over time, the amount of greenhouse gas emissions allowed from using shipping fuels. The regulations also establish a pricing system that would impose fees for every ton of greenhouse gases emitted by ships above allowable limits, in what is effectively the first global tax on greenhouse gas emissions.There's a base-level of compliance for the allowable greenhouse gas intensity of fuels. There's a more stringent direct compliance target that requires further reduction in the greenhouse gas intensity.If ships sail on fuels with lower emissions than what's required under the direct compliance target, they earn “surplus units," effectively credits. Ships with the highest emissions would have to buy those credits from other ships under the pricing system, or from the IMO at $380 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent to reach the base level of compliance. In addition, there's a penalty of $100 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent to reach direct compliance. Ships that meet the base target but not the direct compliance one must pay the $100 per ton penalty, too. Ships whose greenhouse gas intensity is below a certain threshold will receive rewards for their performance.The fees could generate $11 billion to $13 billion in revenue annually. That would go into an IMO fund to invest in fuels and technologies needed to transition to green shipping, reward low-emission ships and support developing countries so they aren’t left behind with dirty fuels and old ships. Looking for alternative fuels Ships could lower their emissions by using alternative fuels, running on electricity or using onboard carbon capture technologies. Wind propulsion and other energy efficiency advancements can also help reduce fuel consumption and emissions as part of an energy transition. Large ships last about 25 years, so the industry would need to make changes and investments now to reach net-zero around 2050.If adopted, the regulations will enter into force in 2027. Large oceangoing ships over 5,000 gross tonnage, which emit 85% of the total carbon emissions from international shipping, would have to pay penalties for their emissions starting in 2028, according to the IMO. The International Chamber of Shipping, which represents over 80% of the world’s merchant fleet, is advocating for adoption. Concerns over biofuels produced from food crops Heavy fuel oil, liquefied natural gas and biodiesel will be dominant for most of the 2030s and 2040s, unless the IMO further incentivizes green alternatives, according to modeling from Transport and Environment, a Brussels-based environmental nongovernmental organization. The way the rules are designed essentially make biofuels the cheapest fuel to use to comply, but biofuels require huge amounts of crops, pushing out less profitable food production, often leading to additional land clearance and deforestation, said Faig Abbasov, shipping director at T&E. They are urging the IMO to promote scalable green alternatives, not recklessly promote biofuels produced from food crops, Abbasov said. As it stands now, the deal before the IMO won't deliver net-zero emissions by 2050, he added.Green ammonia will get to a price that it’s appealing to ship owners in the late 2040s — quite late in the transition, according to the modeling. The NGO also sees green methanol playing an important role in the long-term transition. The vote at the London meeting The IMO aims for consensus in decision-making but it's likely nations will vote on adopting the regulations. At the April meeting, a vote was called to approve the contents of the regulations. The United States was notably absent in April, but plans to participate in this meeting. Teresa Bui at Pacific Environment said she's optimistic “global momentum is on our side” and a majority of countries will support adoption. Bui is senior climate campaign director for the environmental nonprofit, which has consultative, or non-voting, status at the IMO. If it fails, shipping’s decarbonization will be further delayed.“It's difficult to know for sure what the precise consequences will be, but failure this week will certainly lead to delay, which means ships will emit more greenhouse gases than they would have done and for longer, continuing their outsized contribution to the climate crisis,” said John Maggs, of the Clean Shipping Coalition, who is at the London meeting. The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Climate
CO2
Crisis

For the first time, we linked a new fossil fuel project to hundreds of deaths. Here’s the impact of Woodside’s Scarborough gas project

The results challenge claims that the climate risks posed by an individual fossil fuel project are negligible or cannot be quantified.

Massimo Valicchia/NurPhoto via Getty ImagesGlobal warming from Woodside’s massive Scarborough gas project off Western Australia would lead to 484 additional heat-related deaths in Europe alone this century, and kill about 16 million additional corals on the Great Barrier Reef during each future mass bleaching event, our new research has revealed. The findings were made possible by a robust, well-established formula that can determine the extent to which an individual fossil fuel project will warm the planet. The results can be used to calculate the subsequent harms to society and nature. The results close a fundamental gap between science and decision-making about fossil fuel projects. They also challenge claims by proponents that climate risks posed by a fossil fuel project are negligible or cannot be quantified. Each new investment in coal and gas, such as the Scarborough project, can now be linked to harmful effects both today and in the future. It means decision-makers can properly assess the range of risks a project poses to humanity and the planet, before deciding if it should proceed. Each new investment in coal and gas extraction can now be linked to harmful effects. Shutterstock Every tonne of CO₂ matters Scientists know every tonne of carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions makes global warming worse. But proponents of new fossil fuel projects in Australia routinely say their future greenhouse gas emissions are negligible compared to the scale of global emissions, or say the effects of these emissions on global warming can’t be measured. The Scarborough project is approved for development and is expected to produce gas from next year. Located off WA, it includes wells connected by a 430km pipeline to an onshore processing facility. The gas will be liquefied and burned for energy, both in Australia and overseas. Production is expected to last more than 30 years. When natural gas is burned, more than 99% of it converts to CO₂. Woodside – in its own evaluation of the Scarborough gas project – claimed: it is not possible to link GHG [greenhouse gas] emissions from Scarborough with climate change or any particular climate-related impacts given the estimated […] emissions associated with Scarborough are negligible in the context of existing and future predicted global GHG concentrations. But what if there was a way to measure the harms? That’s the question our research set out to answer. A method already exists to directly link global emissions to the climate warming they cause. It uses scientific understanding of Earth’s systems, direct observations and climate model simulations. According to the IPCC, every 1,000 billion tonnes of CO₂ emissions causes about 0.45°C of additional global warming. This arithmetic forms the basis for calculating how much more CO₂ humanity can emit to keep warming within the Paris Agreement goals. But decisions about future emissions are not made at the global scale. Instead, Earth’s climate trajectory will be determined by the aggregation of decisions on many individual projects. That’s why our research extended the IPCC method to the level of individual projects – an approach that we illustrate using the Scarborough gas project. Scarborough’s harms laid bare Over its lifetime, the Scarborough project is expected to emit 876 million tonnes of CO₂. We estimate these emissions will cause 0.00039°C of additional global warming. Estimates such as these are typically expressed as a range, alongside a measure of confidence in the projection. In this case, there is a 66–100% likelihood that the Scarborough project will cause additional global warming of between 0.00024°C and 0.00055°C. This additional warming might seem small – but it will cause tangible damage. The human cost of global warming can be quantified by considering how many people will be left outside the “human climate niche” – in other words, the climate conditions in which societies have historically thrived. We calculated that the additional warming from the Scarborough project will expose 516,000 people globally to a local climate that’s beyond the hot extreme of the human climate niche. We drilled down into specific impacts in Europe, where suitable health data was available across 854 cities. Our best estimate is that this project would cause an additional 484 heat-related deaths in Europe by the end of this century. The project would cause an additional 484 heat-related deaths in Europe by the end of this century. Antonio Masiello/Getty Images And what about harm to nature? Using research into how accumulated exposure to heat affects coral reefs, we found about 16 million corals on the Great Barrier Reef would be lost in each new mass bleaching. The existential threat to the Great Barrier Reef from human-caused global warming is already being realised. Additional warming instigated by new fossil fuel projects will ratchet up pressure on this natural wonder. As climate change worsens, countries are seeking to slash emissions to meet their commitments under the Paris Agreement. So, we looked at the impact of Scarborough’s emissions on Australia’s climate targets. We calculated that by 2049, the anticipated emissions from the Scarborough project alone – from production, processing and domestic use – will comprise 49% of Australia’s entire annual CO₂ emissions budget under our commitment to net-zero by 2050. Beyond the 2050 deadline, all emissions from the Scarborough project would require technologies to permanently remove CO₂ from the atmosphere. Achieving that would require a massive scale-up of current technologies. It would be more prudent to reduce greenhouse gas emissions where possible. ‘Negligible’ impacts? Hardly Our findings mean the best-available scientific evidence can now be used by companies, governments and regulators when deciding if a fossil fuel project will proceed. Crucially, it is no longer defensible for companies proposing new or extended fossil fuel projects to claim the climate harms will be negligible. Our research shows the harms are, in fact, tangible and quantifiable – and no project is too small to matter. In response to issues raised in this article, a spokesperson for Woodside said: Woodside is committed to playing a role in the energy transition. The Scarborough reservoir contains less than 0.1% carbon dioxide. Combined with processing design efficiencies at the offshore floating production unit and onshore Pluto Train 2, the project is expected to be one of the lowest carbon intensity sources of LNG delivered into north Asian markets. We will reduce the Scarborough Energy Project’s direct greenhouse gas emissions to as low as reasonably practicable by incorporating energy efficiency measures in design and operations. Further information on how this is being achieved is included in the Scarborough Offshore Project Proposal, sections 4.5.4.1 and 7.1.3 and in approved Australian Government environment plans, available on the regulator’s website. A report prepared by consultancy ACIL Allen has found that Woodside’s Scarborough Energy Project is expected to generate an estimated A$52.8 billion in taxation and royalty payments, boost GDP by billions of dollars between 2024 and 2056 and employ 3,200 people during peak construction in Western Australia. Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick receives funding from the Australian Research CouncilAndrew King receives funding from the Australian Research Council (Future Fellowship and Centre of Excellence for 21st Century Weather) and the National Environmental Science Program. Nicola Maher receives funding from the Australian Research Council. Wesley Morgan is a fellow with the Climate Council of Australia

Climate
CO2
Government

Emissions linked to Woodside’s Scarborough gas project could lead to at least 480 deaths, research suggests

Scientists have examined the $16.5bn project’s climate impact and found it could expose more than half a million people to unprecedented heatSign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereGreenhouse emissions linked to a gas field being developed by Australian fossil fuel company Woodside could lead to the death of at least 480 people and expose more than half a million to unprecedented heat, new research suggests.Scientists from six universities have examined the climate impact of the $16.5bn Scarborough project, which is expected to start production off the northern Western Australian coast next year and could result in 876m tonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere over three decades. Continue reading...

Greenhouse emissions linked to a gas field being developed by Australian fossil fuel company Woodside could lead to the death of at least 480 people and expose more than half a million to unprecedented heat, new research suggests.Scientists from six universities have examined the climate impact of the $16.5bn Scarborough project, which is expected to start production off the northern Western Australian coast next year and could result in 876m tonnes of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere over three decades.Emissions from the project would contribute 0.00039C to global heating, they estimate. Using recently developed techniques known as climate attribution, they suggest that fraction of warming would expose an additional 516,000 people globally to unprecedented heat, and result in the loss of an extra 16m coral colonies in the Great Barrier Reef in every future bleaching event.It would also push 356,000 people outside the “human climate niche” – the reasonable zone for human survival, with an upper limit for average annual temperature of 29C.The study, published in the journal Climate Action, forms part of a new focus in climate science that aims to quantify the impacts of individual fossil fuel projects and emitters.A Woodside spokesperson said the company would reduce the Scarborough project’s “direct greenhouse gas emissions to as low as reasonably practicable by incorporating energy efficiency measures in design and operations”.“Climate change is caused by the net global concentration of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere,” they added. “It cannot be attributed to any one event, country, industry or activity.” Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletterBut study co-author Andrew King, an associate professor in climate science at the University of Melbourne, said the research illustrated that individual projects had tangible climate impacts.“Often the argument made for individual projects that would involve greenhouse gas emissions is that they are quite small [in the global context],” he said. “But really, especially with larger fossil fuel projects, we can very clearly say that the impacts are not negligible.”Study co-author Sarah Perkins-Kirkpatrick, a professor of climate science at the Australian National University, said that given Australia’s emission reductions requirements, in the coming decades Scarborough would also constitute a greater proportion of the country’s CO2 emissions budget.“By 2049, assuming that the Scarborough project emits the same amount year on year, it’s going to be chewing up half of our emissions budget,” Perkins-Kirkpatrick said. “That’s the stuff that we burn here, let alone what we export overseas.”Beyond 2050, emissions from Scarborough would require CO2 removal from the atmosphere – “technologies that either don’t exist yet, or that we can’t scale up”, she said.skip past newsletter promotionSign up to Clear Air AustraliaAdam Morton brings you incisive analysis about the politics and impact of the climate crisisPrivacy 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 promotionUnder a middle-of-the-road emissions scenario, warming contributed by Scarborough would cause an additional 484 heat-related deaths in Europe alone by the end of the century, the researchers calculated. Taking into account a reduction in cold-related deaths in Europe, they estimate a net contribution of 118 additional deaths.The researchers calculated the project’s climate impacts with a tool used by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, called the Transient Climate Response to CO2 Emissions (TCRE). The TCRE estimates that every 1,000 gigatonnes of CO2 emissions causes 0.45C of additional global heating.Scarborough’s contribution to global heating had a likely range between 0.00024C and 0.00055C, the study’s authors estimated, but they noted “direct measurement of global mean temperature changes is not possible with this level of precision”.The approach could be used by governments and companies to assess whether future “projects fall within acceptable levels of environmental and societal risk”, the researchers suggest. The tool “could be part of the process for determining whether a project should be approved”, King said.Yuming Guo, a professor of global environmental health and biostatistics at Monash University, who was not involved in the study, said the study provided “a valuable tool for conducting environmental risk assessments”.“Considering the vast number of fossil fuel projects operating globally, the cumulative contribution of these emissions to climate change is substantial and should not be overlooked,” he said.Dr Kat O’Mara, a senior lecturer in environmental management and sustainability at Edith Cowan University, who was not part of the study, said: “With the International Court of Justice’s advisory opinion a few months ago that countries need to take action to protect the climate, this new research reinforces the need to consider climate impacts beyond just how much carbon is being produced.”

Climate
CO2
Energy

Suggested Viewing

Just Can't Stop!

a musical tribute to Exxon and climate change

Music
Crisis
Climate

Silent Skies - The First Electric Plane Flyover

Silent Skies follows the groundbreaking journey of three Pennsylvania college students who orchestrated and piloted the first ever fully electric airplane stadium flyover. Stunning fans with a whisper-quiet show, this event signaled the dawn of America's transition to electric aviation. The students completed a record breaking trip flying the airplane from its base in Hartford, CT to the stadium in Easton, PA, recharging at enroute airports directly from a fleet of electric F-150 trucks. The air travel industry faces an unprecedented challenge: decarbonization. Historically, new aviation technologies are met with consumer skepticism. Demonstrating electric aircraft today, ahead of widespread adoption, is key for building consumer trust, political support, and sustained investment. The flyover was witnessed by 10,000+ attendees, thousands more on ESPN+ and created a precedent for the FAA to approve manned electric aircraft demonstrations over populated areas. Textron eAviation and Ford amplified the event through their social media channels and the film premiered at San Francisco Climate Week.

Technology
Transportation
Climate

Sounding the Alarm ~ America's Climate Crisis

"It's really hard being a fire family. Every day it's getting worse." -Brett, wife of Marin County Battalion Chief in California.Every day, Americans who live close to the land and sea face the dangers of climate change—from a firefighter in California, to a beekeeper in Arizona, to a climate refugee losing her home in Florida. The changing climate affects our food systems, water and way of life. These American families are in the trenches sacrificing everything while facing depression, PTSD, and suicide—collateral damage of a crisis unchecked. Award-winning filmmaker, Peter Goetz, captures America's faces and voices, shot in 2020 leading up to the presidential election. Goetz and the Biden campaign made history, producing the first national climate spot to run during a presidential election. But this film dives deeper into the American climate crisis to explore the lives of the people who are sounding the alarm, worried about their grandchildren’s future, asking, "If not us, then who?" This is a story of the resilience, perseverance, and ingenuity of the American people. Ever hopeful, they collectively take on a common enemy. As the young, Navajo solar visionary Brett Issac insists, "We've got to turn this train around before it's too late."

Climate
Crisis
Government

Evangelicals for Climate Action

This film introduces Evangelical Christians working for action on climate change and the environment. They explain how they became passionate about the environment, their fears about the future of our planet, and how their passion is based on their deep faith and love for creation. They call on all other Evangelicals to join them.

Climate
Culture

THE SPRAYER

In the land occupied with the sprayers army, no one has the right to grow any kind of plants either in public or private. So many of the people and soldiers do not even know how a plant grows or looks like, until one day one of the soldiers finds a seed buried deep down in the dust and his curiosity is just the beginning of something extraordinary, something big, something revolutionary.

Plants
CO2
Animation

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.