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

Quantifying the “Carbon Gap” – Unmasking the Shortfalls in Global Climate Efforts

News Feed
Friday, May 3, 2024

Research indicates that existing plans for carbon dioxide removal are inadequate for meeting the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 ºC warming limit. Enhanced awareness and action are required to close the significant gap between projected increases and the needs identified in IPCC focus scenarios.Insufficient carbon dioxide removal efforts jeopardize meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate goals, highlighting the urgent need for enhanced technologies and strategies.New research suggests that countries’ current plans to remove CO2 from the atmosphere will not be enough to comply with the 1.5 ºC warming limit set out under the Paris Agreement.Since 2010, the United Nations environmental organization UNEP has taken an annual measurement of the emissions gap — the difference between countries’ climate protection pledges and what is necessary to limit global heating to 1.5 ºC, or at least below 2 ºC. The UNEP Emissions Gap Reports are clear: climate policy needs more ambition. This new study now explicitly applies this analytical concept to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) — the removal of the most important greenhouse gas, CO2, from the atmosphere.The study, published today (May 3) in the journal Nature Climate Change, was led by the Berlin-based Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) and involved an international team of scientists.“In the Emissions Gap Reports, carbon removals are only accounted for indirectly,” said lead author Dr. William Lamb, of the MCC Applied Sustainability Science working group.“After all, the usual benchmark for climate protection pledges is net emissions, ie emissions minus removals. We are now making transparent the specific ambition gap in scaling up removals.“This planetary waste management will soon place completely new requirements on policymakers and may even become a central pillar of climate protection in the second half of the century.”Co-author Dr. Naomi Vaughan, of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at UEA, added: “Carbon dioxide removal methods have a small but vital role to play in achieving net zero and limiting the impacts of climate change.“Our analysis shows that countries need more awareness, ambition, and action on scaling up CDR methods together with deep emissions reductions to achieve the aspirations of the Paris Agreement.”According to the study, if national targets are fully implemented, annual human-induced carbon removals could increase by a maximum of 0.5 gigatonnes of CO2 (500 million tonnes) by 2030, and by a maximum of 1.9 gigatonnes by 2050.This contrasts with the 5.1 gigatonne increase required in a ‘focus scenario’, which the research team depicts as typical from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report.There, global heating, calculated over the entire course of this century, is limited to 1.5 ºC, and a particularly rapid expansion of renewable energies and reduction of fossil emissions is depicted as the core climate protection strategy.But, the focus scenario still relies on scaling up carbon removals. The gap for the year 2050 is therefore at least 3.2 gigatonnes of CO2 (5.1 minus a maximum of 1.9).An alternative focus scenario, also derived from the IPCC, assumes a significant reduction in global energy demand, due to politically initiated behaviour changes as the core element of climate protection strategy.Here, carbon removals would increase by a more modest amount: 2.5 gigatonnes in 2050. Fully implemented national targets would be close to sufficient when compared to this scenario, with a gap in 2050 of 0.4 gigatonnes.The research team points out the problem of sustainability limits in scaling up carbon removals; for example, the associated land area demand will come to jeopardise biodiversity and food security. Nevertheless, there is still plenty of room for designing fair and sustainable land management policies.In addition, novel carbon removal options, such as air filter systems, or ‘enhanced rock weathering’, have hardly been promoted by politicians to date.They currently only remove 0.002 gigatonnes of CO2 per year from the atmosphere, compared to 3 gigatonnes through conventional options such as afforestation, and they are unlikely to significantly increase by 2030. According to the scenarios, they must become more prevalent than conventional options by 2010.Since only 40 countries have so far quantified their removal plans in their long-term low emissions development strategies, the study also draws on other national documents and best-guess assumptions.“The calculation should certainly be refined,” said Dr. Lamb. “But our proposal using the focus scenarios further opens the discourse on how much carbon removal is necessary to meet the Paris Agreement.“This much is clear: without a rapid reduction in emissions towards zero, across all sectors, the 1.5 ºC limit will not be met under any circumstances.”Reference: “The carbon dioxide removal gap” by Lamb, W, Gasser, T, Roman-Cuesta, R, Grassi, G, Gidden, M, Powis, C, Geden, O, Nemet, G, Pramata, Y, Riahi, K, Smith, S, Steinhauser, J, Vaughan, N, Smith, H, Minx, J, 3 May 2024, Nature Climate Change. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-024-01984-6

Insufficient carbon dioxide removal efforts jeopardize meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate goals, highlighting the urgent need for enhanced technologies and strategies. New research suggests that...

Carbon Dioxide Atmosphere Concept

Research indicates that existing plans for carbon dioxide removal are inadequate for meeting the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 ºC warming limit. Enhanced awareness and action are required to close the significant gap between projected increases and the needs identified in IPCC focus scenarios.

Insufficient carbon dioxide removal efforts jeopardize meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate goals, highlighting the urgent need for enhanced technologies and strategies.

New research suggests that countries’ current plans to remove CO2 from the atmosphere will not be enough to comply with the 1.5 ºC warming limit set out under the Paris Agreement.

Since 2010, the United Nations environmental organization UNEP has taken an annual measurement of the emissions gap — the difference between countries’ climate protection pledges and what is necessary to limit global heating to 1.5 ºC, or at least below 2 ºC.

The UNEP Emissions Gap Reports are clear: climate policy needs more ambition. This new study now explicitly applies this analytical concept to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) — the removal of the most important greenhouse gas, CO2, from the atmosphere.

The study, published today (May 3) in the journal Nature Climate Change, was led by the Berlin-based Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) and involved an international team of scientists.

“In the Emissions Gap Reports, carbon removals are only accounted for indirectly,” said lead author Dr. William Lamb, of the MCC Applied Sustainability Science working group.

“After all, the usual benchmark for climate protection pledges is net emissions, ie emissions minus removals. We are now making transparent the specific ambition gap in scaling up removals.

“This planetary waste management will soon place completely new requirements on policymakers and may even become a central pillar of climate protection in the second half of the century.”

Co-author Dr. Naomi Vaughan, of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at UEA, added: “Carbon dioxide removal methods have a small but vital role to play in achieving net zero and limiting the impacts of climate change.

“Our analysis shows that countries need more awareness, ambition, and action on scaling up CDR methods together with deep emissions reductions to achieve the aspirations of the Paris Agreement.”

According to the study, if national targets are fully implemented, annual human-induced carbon removals could increase by a maximum of 0.5 gigatonnes of CO2 (500 million tonnes) by 2030, and by a maximum of 1.9 gigatonnes by 2050.

This contrasts with the 5.1 gigatonne increase required in a ‘focus scenario’, which the research team depicts as typical from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report.

There, global heating, calculated over the entire course of this century, is limited to 1.5 ºC, and a particularly rapid expansion of renewable energies and reduction of fossil emissions is depicted as the core climate protection strategy.

But, the focus scenario still relies on scaling up carbon removals. The gap for the year 2050 is therefore at least 3.2 gigatonnes of CO2 (5.1 minus a maximum of 1.9).

An alternative focus scenario, also derived from the IPCC, assumes a significant reduction in global energy demand, due to politically initiated behaviour changes as the core element of climate protection strategy.

Here, carbon removals would increase by a more modest amount: 2.5 gigatonnes in 2050. Fully implemented national targets would be close to sufficient when compared to this scenario, with a gap in 2050 of 0.4 gigatonnes.

The research team points out the problem of sustainability limits in scaling up carbon removals; for example, the associated land area demand will come to jeopardise biodiversity and food security. Nevertheless, there is still plenty of room for designing fair and sustainable land management policies.

In addition, novel carbon removal options, such as air filter systems, or ‘enhanced rock weathering’, have hardly been promoted by politicians to date.

They currently only remove 0.002 gigatonnes of CO2 per year from the atmosphere, compared to 3 gigatonnes through conventional options such as afforestation, and they are unlikely to significantly increase by 2030. According to the scenarios, they must become more prevalent than conventional options by 2010.

Since only 40 countries have so far quantified their removal plans in their long-term low emissions development strategies, the study also draws on other national documents and best-guess assumptions.

“The calculation should certainly be refined,” said Dr. Lamb. “But our proposal using the focus scenarios further opens the discourse on how much carbon removal is necessary to meet the Paris Agreement.

“This much is clear: without a rapid reduction in emissions towards zero, across all sectors, the 1.5 ºC limit will not be met under any circumstances.”

Reference: “The carbon dioxide removal gap” by Lamb, W, Gasser, T, Roman-Cuesta, R, Grassi, G, Gidden, M, Powis, C, Geden, O, Nemet, G, Pramata, Y, Riahi, K, Smith, S, Steinhauser, J, Vaughan, N, Smith, H, Minx, J, 3 May 2024, Nature Climate Change.
DOI: 10.1038/s41558-024-01984-6

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Growing Tensions with Air Regulator Lead Top California Environmental Justice Advisor to Resign

While Governor Gavin Newsom was touting California’s climate leadership last week in Brazil at the U.N.’s annual climate summit, a conflict was brewing back home between environmental justice leaders and the state’s lead air pollution regulator.  The fallout came this Tuesday, when a top advisor to the California Air Resources Board resigned in protest over […]

The departure points to an intractable conflict between environmental justice groups and the California Air Resources Board over the impacts of carbon markets.By Blanca BegertWhile Governor Gavin Newsom was touting California’s climate leadership last week in Brazil at the U.N.’s annual climate summit, a conflict was brewing back home between environmental justice leaders and the state’s lead air pollution regulator. 

Climate
Pollution

HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering

PRESS RELEASE: HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering COP30 is a festival of false solutions PRESS RELEASE: HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering  21 November, 2025 Belém, Brazil In a betrayal of Indigenous Peoples, climate justice movements and civil society, COP30 […] The post HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering first appeared on Indigenous Environmental Network.

PRESS RELEASE: HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering COP30 is a festival of false solutions PRESS RELEASE: HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering  21 November, 2025 Belém, Brazil In a betrayal of Indigenous Peoples, climate justice movements and civil society, COP30 […] The post HOME Alliance Slams COP30 Captured by Carbon Markets and Illusionary Fixes like Geoengineering first appeared on Indigenous Environmental Network.

Climate
Indigenous

COP30’s biofuel gamble could cost the global food supply — and the planet

What was once considered a climate holy grail comes with serious tradeoffs. The world wants more of it anyway.

First the plant stalk is harvested, shredded, and crushed. The extracted juice is then combined with bacteria and yeast in large bioreactors, where the sugars are metabolized and converted into ethanol and carbon dioxide. From there, the liquid is typically distilled to maximize ethanol concentration, before it is blended with gasoline.  You know the final products as biofuels — mostly made from food crops like sugarcane and corn, and endorsed by everyone from agricultural lobbyists to activists and billionaires. Biofuels were developed decades ago to be cheaper, greener alternatives to planet-polluting petrol. As adoption has expanded — now to the point of a pro-biofuel agenda being pushed this week at COP30 in Belém, Brazil — their environmental and food accessibility footprint has remained a source of fierce debate.  The governments of Brazil, Italy, Japan, and India are spearheading a new pledge calling for the rapid global expansion of biofuels as a commitment to decarbonizing transportation energy.  Though the text of the pledge itself is vague, as most COP pledges tend to be, the target embedded in an accompanying International Energy Agency report is clear: expand the global use of so-called sustainable fuels from 2024 levels by at least four times, so that by 2035, sustainable fuels cover 10 percent of all global road transport demand, 15 percent of aviation demand, and 35 percent of shipping fuel demand. By Friday, the last official day of COP30, at least 23 countries have joined the pledge — while Brazilian delegates have been working “hand in hand with industry groups” to get language backing biofuels into the final summit deal.  “Latin America, South East Asia, Africa — they need to improve their efficiency, their energy, and Brazil has a model for this [in its rollout of biofuels],” Roberto Rodrigues, Brazil’s special envoy for agriculture at the summit, said on a COP panel last weekend. As of the time of this story’s publication, the pro-biofuel language hadn’t made it into the latest draft text that outlines the main outcome of the summit released Friday — although it appears the summit could end without a deal.  Read Next At COP30 in Brazil, countries plan to armor themselves against a warming world Zoya Teirstein Though scientists continue to experiment with utilizing other raw materials for biofuels — a list which includes agricultural and forestry waste, cooking oils, and algae — the bulk of feedstocks almost exclusively come from the fields. Different types of food crops are used for different types of biofuels; sugary and starchy crops, such as sugar cane, wheat, and corn, are often made into ethanol; while oily crops, like soybeans, rapeseed, and palm oil, are largely used for biodiesel.  The cycle goes a little like this: Farmers, desperate to replace cropland lost to biofuel production, raze more forests and plow up more grasslands, resulting in deforestation that tends to release far more carbon than burning biofuels saves. But as large-scale production continues to expand, there may be insufficient land, water, and energy available for another big biofuel boom — prompting many researchers and climate activists to question whether countries should be aiming to scale these markets at all. (Thomson Reuters reported that global biofuel production has increased ninefold since 2000.) Biofuels account for the vast majority of “sustainable fuels” currently used worldwide. An analysis by a clean transport advocacy organization published last month found that, because of the indirect impacts to farming and land use, biofuels are responsible globally for 16 percent more CO2 emissions than the planet-polluting fossil fuels they replace. In fact, the report surmises that by 2030, biofuel crops could require land equivalent to the size of France. More than 40 million hectares of Earth’s cropland is already devoted to biofuel feedstocks, an area roughly the size of Paraguay. The EU Deforestation-Free Regulation, or EUDR, cites soybeans among the commodities driving deforestation worldwide. “While countries are right to transition away from fossil fuels, they also need to ensure their plans don’t trigger unintended consequences, such as more deforestation either at home or abroad,” said Janet Ranganathan, managing director of strategy, learning, and results at the World Resources Institute in a statement responding to the Belém pledge. She added that rapidly expanding global biofuel production would have “significant implications for the world’s land, especially without guardrails to prevent large-scale expansion of land dedicated to biofuels, which drives ecosystem loss.” Other environmental issues found to be associated with converting food crops into biofuels include water pollution from fertilizers and pesticides, air pollution, and soil erosion. One study, conducted a decade ago, showed that, when accounting for all the inputs needed to produce different varieties of ethanol or biodiesel — machinery, seeds, water, electricity, fertilizers, transportation, and more — producing fuel-grade ethanol or biodiesel requires significantly more energy input than it creates.  Read Next ‘Everyone is exhausted’: First week of COP30 marked by frustration with slow progress Bob Berwyn, Inside Climate News Nonetheless, it’s not a shock to see Brazil betting big on biofuels at COP30. In Brazil, biofuels make up roughly a quarter of transportation fuels — a remarkably high proportion compared to most other countries. And that share, dominated by sugarcane ethanol, is still on an upward climb, with the Belém pledge evidence of the country’s intended trajectory.  A spokesperson from Brazil’s foreign affairs ministry told The Guardian that the “proponents of the pledge (which include Japan, Italy, India, among others) are calling upon countries to support quadrupling production and use of sustainable fuels — a group of gaseous and liquid fuels that include e-fuels, biogases, biofuels, hydrogen and its derivatives.” They added that the goal is based on the new IEA report that underscores the production increase as necessary to aggressively reduce emissions. That report suggests that if current and proposed national and international policies are implemented and fully legislated, global biofuel use and production would double by 2035. “The word ‘sustainable’ is not used lightly, neither in the report nor in the pledge,” the spokesperson said.  The issue, of course, is in how emissions footprints of something like ethanol fuel production are even measured. Much like many other climate sources, scientists argue that tracking greenhouse gas emissions linked to ethanol fuel should account for emissions at every stage — production, processing, distribution, and vehicle use. Yet that isn’t often the case: in fact, a 2024 paper found that Brazil’s national biofuel policy does not account for all direct and indirect emissions in its calculation.  The exclusions are evident of a larger trend, according to University of Minnesota environmental scientist Jason Hill. “Overall, either those studies have not included [direct and indirect emissions], or they found ways to spread those impacts over anticipated production, decades, centuries, or so forth, that tend to dilute those effects. So the accounting methods aren’t really consistent with what the best science shows,” said Hill, who studies the environmental and economic consequences of food, energy, and biofuel production.  In short: More biofuels means either more intensive agriculture on a smaller share of available cropland, which has its own detrimental environmental effects, or expansion of cropland, and the land-use emissions and environmental impacts that can carry. “Biofuel production today is already a bad idea. And doubling [that] is doubling down on an existing problem,” said Hill.  Read Next COP30 has big plans to save the rainforest. Indigenous activists say it’s not enough. Frida Garza & Miacel Spotted Elk Moreover, diverting crops like corn and soybeans from dinner plates to fuel tanks doesn’t just spark brutal competition for land and resources, it can also spike food prices and leave the world’s most vulnerable populations with less to eat.  A 2022 analysis of the U.S. Renewable Fuel Standard, the world’s largest biofuel program, found that it has led to increased food prices for Americans, with corn prices rising by 30 percent and other crops such as soybean and wheat spiking by around 20 percent. This then set off a domino effect: Increasing annual nationwide fertilizer use by up to 8 percent and water quality degradants by up to 5 percent. The carbon intensity of corn ethanol produced under the mandate has ended up at least equaling the planet-polluting effects of gasoline.  “Biofuel mandates essentially create a baseline demand that can leave food crops by the wayside,” says Ginni Braich, a data scientist at the University of Colorado Boulder who has worked as a senior advisor to government clean technology and emission reduction programs. That’s because of the issue with supply and demand of food crops — higher competition for feedstocks hikes up the prices of food, feed, and farming inputs.  When there are biofuel mandates, which the IEA report underlying the Belém pledge recommends, demand remains inelastic — no matter the changes in yields, growing and weather conditions, prices, or markets. Say there is a huge drought that decimates crop yields, as one example, the baseline demand of biofuels still needs to be met despite depleted food stocks. In terms of supply, increasing growing area for biofuels typically means less area available to grow food crops — which can cause prices to surge alongside supply shortages, and spike costs of seed, inputs, and land. Nutritional implications should also be taken into account, according to Braich. Not only do people’s diets tend to shift when food gets more costly, but cropping patterns are already revealing adverse shifts in dietary diversity, which could be exacerbated by a further concentration on fewer crops. The Belém pledge, and Brazil’s intention to lead a global expansion of the biofuels market, does not bode well for people’s food accessibility nor for the future of the planet, warns Braich.  “It seems quite paradoxical for Brazil to promote the large-scale expansion of biofuels and also be seen as a protector of forests,” she said. “Is it better than decarbonization and fossil fuel divestment rhetoric without actual transition pathways? Yes, but in a lot of ways it is also greenwashing.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline COP30’s biofuel gamble could cost the global food supply — and the planet on Nov 21, 2025.

Climate
Food
Agriculture

Iran's Capital Has Run Out of Water, Forcing It to Move

The decision to move Iran’s capital is partly driven by climate change, but experts say decades of human error and action are also to blame

November 21, 20252 min readIran's Capital Is Moving. The Reason Is an Ecological CatastropheThe move is partly driven by climate change, but experts say decades of human error and action are also to blameBy Humberto Basilio edited by Claire CameronA dry water feature in Tehran on November 9, 2025 TTA KENARE/AFP/Getty ImagesTehran can no longer remain the capital of Iran amid a deepening ecological crisis and acute water shortage.The situation in Tehran is the result of “a perfect storm of climate change and corruption,” says Michael Rubin, a political analyst at the American Enterprise Institute.“We no longer have a choice,” Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian reportedly told officials on Friday.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.Instead, Iranian officials are considering moving the capital to the country’s southern coast. But experts say the proposal does not change the reality for the nearly ten million people who live in Tehran, who are now suffering the consequences of a decades-long decline in water supply.Since at least 2008, scientists have warned that unchecked groundwater pumping for the city and for agriculture was rapidly draining its aquifers. The overuse did not just deplete underground reserves—it destroyed them, as the land compressed and sank irreversibly. One recent study found that Iran’s central plateau, where most of the country’s aquifers are located, is sinking by more than 35 centimeters each year. As a result, the aquifers lose about 1.7 billion cubic meters of water annually as the ground is permanently crushed, leaving no space for underground water storage to recover, says Darío Solano, a geoscientist at the National Autonomous University of Mexico.“We saw this coming,” says Solano.Other major cities like Cape Town, Mexico City, Jakarta and parts of California are also facing day zero scenarios as they sink and run out of water.This is not the first time Iran’s capital has moved. Over the centuries, it has shifted many times, from Isfahan to Tabriz to Shiraz. Some of these former capitals still thrive while others exist only as ruins, says Rubin. But this marks the first time the Iranian government has moved the capital because of an ecological catastrophe.Yet, Rubin says, “it would be a mistake to look at this only through the lens of climate change.” Water, land and wastewater mismanagement and corruption have made the crisis worse, he says. If the capital moves to the remote Makran coast in the south, it could cost more than $100 billion dollars. The region is known for its harsh climate and difficult terrain, and some experts have doubts about its viability as a national center. Relocating a capital is often driven more by politics than by environmental concerns, says Linda Shi, a social scientist and urban planner at Cornell University. “Climate change is not the thing that is causing it, but it is a convenient factor to blame in order to avoid taking responsibility” for poor political decisions, she says.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.

Climate
Water
Crisis

Flatwater Free Press and Grist hire Anila Yoganathan to cover climate change in Nebraska

Yoganathan will report local stories, which will be available to republish for free.

The Flatwater Free Press and Grist are pleased to announce the hire of reporter Anila Yoganathan to cover how climate change is impacting Nebraska communities, from worsening extreme weather to shifting energy systems and economies.  Yoganathan will be an employee of Flatwater and based in Omaha, with the two newsrooms splitting the costs of her salary as part of their new collaboration. Anila Yoganathan was born and raised in Georgia and graduated from the University of Georgia. She previously worked at the Atlanta Business Chronicle, covering everything from energy and manufacturing to infrastructure and economic development, and as an investigative reporter for the Knoxville News Sentinel in Tennessee. Her work has also appeared in the Associated Press and Atlanta Journal-Constitution, among other publications.  “We’re thrilled to welcome Anila and to partner with Grist on this important work,” said Matt Wynn, executive director of the Nebraska Journalism Trust. “Her reporting will help ensure Nebraska’s environmental and agricultural stories are told with the depth they deserve — and that they reach an audience that needs to hear them.” “I am so excited to learn more about the environment and energy landscape in Nebraska,” said Yoganathan. “My favorite part of the job is getting to know a community and telling their stories.” The hire marks the continued expansion of Grist’s Local News Initiative, which aims to bolster coverage of climate change in communities across the United States through partnerships with local newsrooms. Grist already has reporters embedded with WABE in Georgia, IPR in Michigan, WBEZ in Illinois, BPR in North Carolina, Verite News in Louisiana, and The Salt Lake Tribune in Utah. Yoganathan will be the seventh such reporter. Yoganathan will report local stories for Flatwater, which will be shared with the newsroom’s statewide and regional network of syndication partners. Grist will also adapt Yoganathan’s stories and bring them to its nationwide audience and publishing partners. “At a time when trust in journalism is eroding, Flatwater Free Press has managed to buck the trend and develop a deep connection with its Nebraska readers,” said Katherine Bagley, Grist’s editor-in-chief. “Combined with Anila’s investigative reporting skills and sharp eye for compelling environmental stories, we’re excited to bolster climate reporting in a state on the frontlines of a warming planet.”  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Flatwater Free Press and Grist hire Anila Yoganathan to cover climate change in Nebraska on Nov 10, 2025.

Climate
Water
Energy

Suggested Viewing

Sustainable Living with Patrick Lang

A day in the life of Patrick Lang living a sustainable life in Malibu… filmed before his home and community were consumed by fire in the fall of 2018.

Sustainable
Land Use
Solutions

Beyond the Soil

Beyond the Soil is a short, poetic documentary which explores the emotional impact of climate change on farmers and ranchers who are on the frontlines of the megadrought in the Rocky Mountain West, and their innovation and resilience in the face of ecological crisis.

Climate
Food

The Pleasure of Killing Bugs

In the near future, the climate crisis reaches an irreversible point. A nun and a priest meet to talk about the disappearance of insects.

Climate
Fiction
Student

Crossing the Divide

An Iowa farmer reacts swiftly when he hears that radical climate marchers plan to disrupt peace in his tiny town. What he does after that offers a lesson for would-be peacemakers everywhere.

Inspirational
Activism
Climate

Resilience

In 1998, a vast power grid serving 5 million people in Canada was destroyed by an ice storm. Twenty years later researchers of that disaster are developing a new kind of resilient power grid. Based in part on the book The Grid and the Village, the film explores how to protect grids and the people they serve from war, terrorist attack, and extreme weather.

Energy
Climate
Crisis

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.