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.

Responding to the climate impact of generative AI

News Feed
Tuesday, September 30, 2025

In part 2 of our two-part series on generative artificial intelligence’s environmental impacts, MIT News explores some of the ways experts are working to reduce the technology’s carbon footprint.The energy demands of generative AI are expected to continue increasing dramatically over the next decade.For instance, an April 2025 report from the International Energy Agency predicts that the global electricity demand from data centers, which house the computing infrastructure to train and deploy AI models, will more than double by 2030, to around 945 terawatt-hours. While not all operations performed in a data center are AI-related, this total amount is slightly more than the energy consumption of Japan.Moreover, an August 2025 analysis from Goldman Sachs Research forecasts that about 60 percent of the increasing electricity demands from data centers will be met by burning fossil fuels, increasing global carbon emissions by about 220 million tons. In comparison, driving a gas-powered car for 5,000 miles produces about 1 ton of carbon dioxide.These statistics are staggering, but at the same time, scientists and engineers at MIT and around the world are studying innovations and interventions to mitigate AI’s ballooning carbon footprint, from boosting the efficiency of algorithms to rethinking the design of data centers.Considering carbon emissionsTalk of reducing generative AI’s carbon footprint is typically centered on “operational carbon” — the emissions used by the powerful processors, known as GPUs, inside a data center. It often ignores “embodied carbon,” which are emissions created by building the data center in the first place, says Vijay Gadepally, senior scientist at MIT Lincoln Laboratory, who leads research projects in the Lincoln Laboratory Supercomputing Center.Constructing and retrofitting a data center, built from tons of steel and concrete and filled with air conditioning units, computing hardware, and miles of cable, consumes a huge amount of carbon. In fact, the environmental impact of building data centers is one reason companies like Meta and Google are exploring more sustainable building materials. (Cost is another factor.)Plus, data centers are enormous buildings — the world’s largest, the China Telecomm-Inner Mongolia Information Park, engulfs roughly 10 million square feet — with about 10 to 50 times the energy density of a normal office building, Gadepally adds. “The operational side is only part of the story. Some things we are working on to reduce operational emissions may lend themselves to reducing embodied carbon, too, but we need to do more on that front in the future,” he says.Reducing operational carbon emissionsWhen it comes to reducing operational carbon emissions of AI data centers, there are many parallels with home energy-saving measures. For one, we can simply turn down the lights.“Even if you have the worst lightbulbs in your house from an efficiency standpoint, turning them off or dimming them will always use less energy than leaving them running at full blast,” Gadepally says.In the same fashion, research from the Supercomputing Center has shown that “turning down” the GPUs in a data center so they consume about three-tenths the energy has minimal impacts on the performance of AI models, while also making the hardware easier to cool.Another strategy is to use less energy-intensive computing hardware.Demanding generative AI workloads, such as training new reasoning models like GPT-5, usually need many GPUs working simultaneously. The Goldman Sachs analysis estimates that a state-of-the-art system could soon have as many as 576 connected GPUs operating at once.But engineers can sometimes achieve similar results by reducing the precision of computing hardware, perhaps by switching to less powerful processors that have been tuned to handle a specific AI workload.There are also measures that boost the efficiency of training power-hungry deep-learning models before they are deployed.Gadepally’s group found that about half the electricity used for training an AI model is spent to get the last 2 or 3 percentage points in accuracy. Stopping the training process early can save a lot of that energy.“There might be cases where 70 percent accuracy is good enough for one particular application, like a recommender system for e-commerce,” he says.Researchers can also take advantage of efficiency-boosting measures.For instance, a postdoc in the Supercomputing Center realized the group might run a thousand simulations during the training process to pick the two or three best AI models for their project.By building a tool that allowed them to avoid about 80 percent of those wasted computing cycles, they dramatically reduced the energy demands of training with no reduction in model accuracy, Gadepally says.Leveraging efficiency improvementsConstant innovation in computing hardware, such as denser arrays of transistors on semiconductor chips, is still enabling dramatic improvements in the energy efficiency of AI models.Even though energy efficiency improvements have been slowing for most chips since about 2005, the amount of computation that GPUs can do per joule of energy has been improving by 50 to 60 percent each year, says Neil Thompson, director of the FutureTech Research Project at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and a principal investigator at MIT’s Initiative on the Digital Economy.“The still-ongoing ‘Moore’s Law’ trend of getting more and more transistors on chip still matters for a lot of these AI systems, since running operations in parallel is still very valuable for improving efficiency,” says Thomspon.Even more significant, his group’s research indicates that efficiency gains from new model architectures that can solve complex problems faster, consuming less energy to achieve the same or better results, is doubling every eight or nine months.Thompson coined the term “negaflop” to describe this effect. The same way a “negawatt” represents electricity saved due to energy-saving measures, a “negaflop” is a computing operation that doesn’t need to be performed due to algorithmic improvements.These could be things like “pruning” away unnecessary components of a neural network or employing compression techniques that enable users to do more with less computation.“If you need to use a really powerful model today to complete your task, in just a few years, you might be able to use a significantly smaller model to do the same thing, which would carry much less environmental burden. Making these models more efficient is the single-most important thing you can do to reduce the environmental costs of AI,” Thompson says.Maximizing energy savingsWhile reducing the overall energy use of AI algorithms and computing hardware will cut greenhouse gas emissions, not all energy is the same, Gadepally adds.“The amount of carbon emissions in 1 kilowatt hour varies quite significantly, even just during the day, as well as over the month and year,” he says.Engineers can take advantage of these variations by leveraging the flexibility of AI workloads and data center operations to maximize emissions reductions. For instance, some generative AI workloads don’t need to be performed in their entirety at the same time.Splitting computing operations so some are performed later, when more of the electricity fed into the grid is from renewable sources like solar and wind, can go a long way toward reducing a data center’s carbon footprint, says Deepjyoti Deka, a research scientist in the MIT Energy Initiative.Deka and his team are also studying “smarter” data centers where the AI workloads of multiple companies using the same computing equipment are flexibly adjusted to improve energy efficiency.“By looking at the system as a whole, our hope is to minimize energy use as well as dependence on fossil fuels, while still maintaining reliability standards for AI companies and users,” Deka says.He and others at MITEI are building a flexibility model of a data center that considers the differing energy demands of training a deep-learning model versus deploying that model. Their hope is to uncover the best strategies for scheduling and streamlining computing operations to improve energy efficiency.The researchers are also exploring the use of long-duration energy storage units at data centers, which store excess energy for times when it is needed.With these systems in place, a data center could use stored energy that was generated by renewable sources during a high-demand period, or avoid the use of diesel backup generators if there are fluctuations in the grid.“Long-duration energy storage could be a game-changer here because we can design operations that really change the emission mix of the system to rely more on renewable energy,” Deka says.In addition, researchers at MIT and Princeton University are developing a software tool for investment planning in the power sector, called GenX, which could be used to help companies determine the ideal place to locate a data center to minimize environmental impacts and costs.Location can have a big impact on reducing a data center’s carbon footprint. For instance, Meta operates a data center in Lulea, a city on the coast of northern Sweden where cooler temperatures reduce the amount of electricity needed to cool computing hardware.Thinking farther outside the box (way farther), some governments are even exploring the construction of data centers on the moon where they could potentially be operated with nearly all renewable energy.AI-based solutionsCurrently, the expansion of renewable energy generation here on Earth isn’t keeping pace with the rapid growth of AI, which is one major roadblock to reducing its carbon footprint, says Jennifer Turliuk MBA ’25, a short-term lecturer, former Sloan Fellow, and former practice leader of climate and energy AI at the Martin Trust Center for MIT Entrepreneurship.The local, state, and federal review processes required for a new renewable energy projects can take years.Researchers at MIT and elsewhere are exploring the use of AI to speed up the process of connecting new renewable energy systems to the power grid.For instance, a generative AI model could streamline interconnection studies that determine how a new project will impact the power grid, a step that often takes years to complete.And when it comes to accelerating the development and implementation of clean energy technologies, AI could play a major role.“Machine learning is great for tackling complex situations, and the electrical grid is said to be one of the largest and most complex machines in the world,” Turliuk adds.For instance, AI could help optimize the prediction of solar and wind energy generation or identify ideal locations for new facilities.It could also be used to perform predictive maintenance and fault detection for solar panels or other green energy infrastructure, or to monitor the capacity of transmission wires to maximize efficiency.By helping researchers gather and analyze huge amounts of data, AI could also inform targeted policy interventions aimed at getting the biggest “bang for the buck” from areas such as renewable energy, Turliuk says.To help policymakers, scientists, and enterprises consider the multifaceted costs and benefits of AI systems, she and her collaborators developed the Net Climate Impact Score.The score is a framework that can be used to help determine the net climate impact of AI projects, considering emissions and other environmental costs along with potential environmental benefits in the future.At the end of the day, the most effective solutions will likely result from collaborations among companies, regulators, and researchers, with academia leading the way, Turliuk adds.“Every day counts. We are on a path where the effects of climate change won’t be fully known until it is too late to do anything about it. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to innovate and make AI systems less carbon-intense,” she says.

Explosive growth of AI data centers is expected to increase greenhouse gas emissions. Researchers are now seeking solutions to reduce these environmental harms.

In part 2 of our two-part series on generative artificial intelligence’s environmental impacts, MIT News explores some of the ways experts are working to reduce the technology’s carbon footprint.

The energy demands of generative AI are expected to continue increasing dramatically over the next decade.

For instance, an April 2025 report from the International Energy Agency predicts that the global electricity demand from data centers, which house the computing infrastructure to train and deploy AI models, will more than double by 2030, to around 945 terawatt-hours. While not all operations performed in a data center are AI-related, this total amount is slightly more than the energy consumption of Japan.

Moreover, an August 2025 analysis from Goldman Sachs Research forecasts that about 60 percent of the increasing electricity demands from data centers will be met by burning fossil fuels, increasing global carbon emissions by about 220 million tons. In comparison, driving a gas-powered car for 5,000 miles produces about 1 ton of carbon dioxide.

These statistics are staggering, but at the same time, scientists and engineers at MIT and around the world are studying innovations and interventions to mitigate AI’s ballooning carbon footprint, from boosting the efficiency of algorithms to rethinking the design of data centers.

Considering carbon emissions

Talk of reducing generative AI’s carbon footprint is typically centered on “operational carbon” — the emissions used by the powerful processors, known as GPUs, inside a data center. It often ignores “embodied carbon,” which are emissions created by building the data center in the first place, says Vijay Gadepally, senior scientist at MIT Lincoln Laboratory, who leads research projects in the Lincoln Laboratory Supercomputing Center.

Constructing and retrofitting a data center, built from tons of steel and concrete and filled with air conditioning units, computing hardware, and miles of cable, consumes a huge amount of carbon. In fact, the environmental impact of building data centers is one reason companies like Meta and Google are exploring more sustainable building materials. (Cost is another factor.)

Plus, data centers are enormous buildings — the world’s largest, the China Telecomm-Inner Mongolia Information Park, engulfs roughly 10 million square feet — with about 10 to 50 times the energy density of a normal office building, Gadepally adds. 

“The operational side is only part of the story. Some things we are working on to reduce operational emissions may lend themselves to reducing embodied carbon, too, but we need to do more on that front in the future,” he says.

Reducing operational carbon emissions

When it comes to reducing operational carbon emissions of AI data centers, there are many parallels with home energy-saving measures. For one, we can simply turn down the lights.

“Even if you have the worst lightbulbs in your house from an efficiency standpoint, turning them off or dimming them will always use less energy than leaving them running at full blast,” Gadepally says.

In the same fashion, research from the Supercomputing Center has shown that “turning down” the GPUs in a data center so they consume about three-tenths the energy has minimal impacts on the performance of AI models, while also making the hardware easier to cool.

Another strategy is to use less energy-intensive computing hardware.

Demanding generative AI workloads, such as training new reasoning models like GPT-5, usually need many GPUs working simultaneously. The Goldman Sachs analysis estimates that a state-of-the-art system could soon have as many as 576 connected GPUs operating at once.

But engineers can sometimes achieve similar results by reducing the precision of computing hardware, perhaps by switching to less powerful processors that have been tuned to handle a specific AI workload.

There are also measures that boost the efficiency of training power-hungry deep-learning models before they are deployed.

Gadepally’s group found that about half the electricity used for training an AI model is spent to get the last 2 or 3 percentage points in accuracy. Stopping the training process early can save a lot of that energy.

“There might be cases where 70 percent accuracy is good enough for one particular application, like a recommender system for e-commerce,” he says.

Researchers can also take advantage of efficiency-boosting measures.

For instance, a postdoc in the Supercomputing Center realized the group might run a thousand simulations during the training process to pick the two or three best AI models for their project.

By building a tool that allowed them to avoid about 80 percent of those wasted computing cycles, they dramatically reduced the energy demands of training with no reduction in model accuracy, Gadepally says.

Leveraging efficiency improvements

Constant innovation in computing hardware, such as denser arrays of transistors on semiconductor chips, is still enabling dramatic improvements in the energy efficiency of AI models.

Even though energy efficiency improvements have been slowing for most chips since about 2005, the amount of computation that GPUs can do per joule of energy has been improving by 50 to 60 percent each year, says Neil Thompson, director of the FutureTech Research Project at MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory and a principal investigator at MIT’s Initiative on the Digital Economy.

“The still-ongoing ‘Moore’s Law’ trend of getting more and more transistors on chip still matters for a lot of these AI systems, since running operations in parallel is still very valuable for improving efficiency,” says Thomspon.

Even more significant, his group’s research indicates that efficiency gains from new model architectures that can solve complex problems faster, consuming less energy to achieve the same or better results, is doubling every eight or nine months.

Thompson coined the term “negaflop” to describe this effect. The same way a “negawatt” represents electricity saved due to energy-saving measures, a “negaflop” is a computing operation that doesn’t need to be performed due to algorithmic improvements.

These could be things like “pruning” away unnecessary components of a neural network or employing compression techniques that enable users to do more with less computation.

“If you need to use a really powerful model today to complete your task, in just a few years, you might be able to use a significantly smaller model to do the same thing, which would carry much less environmental burden. Making these models more efficient is the single-most important thing you can do to reduce the environmental costs of AI,” Thompson says.

Maximizing energy savings

While reducing the overall energy use of AI algorithms and computing hardware will cut greenhouse gas emissions, not all energy is the same, Gadepally adds.

“The amount of carbon emissions in 1 kilowatt hour varies quite significantly, even just during the day, as well as over the month and year,” he says.

Engineers can take advantage of these variations by leveraging the flexibility of AI workloads and data center operations to maximize emissions reductions. For instance, some generative AI workloads don’t need to be performed in their entirety at the same time.

Splitting computing operations so some are performed later, when more of the electricity fed into the grid is from renewable sources like solar and wind, can go a long way toward reducing a data center’s carbon footprint, says Deepjyoti Deka, a research scientist in the MIT Energy Initiative.

Deka and his team are also studying “smarter” data centers where the AI workloads of multiple companies using the same computing equipment are flexibly adjusted to improve energy efficiency.

“By looking at the system as a whole, our hope is to minimize energy use as well as dependence on fossil fuels, while still maintaining reliability standards for AI companies and users,” Deka says.

He and others at MITEI are building a flexibility model of a data center that considers the differing energy demands of training a deep-learning model versus deploying that model. Their hope is to uncover the best strategies for scheduling and streamlining computing operations to improve energy efficiency.

The researchers are also exploring the use of long-duration energy storage units at data centers, which store excess energy for times when it is needed.

With these systems in place, a data center could use stored energy that was generated by renewable sources during a high-demand period, or avoid the use of diesel backup generators if there are fluctuations in the grid.

“Long-duration energy storage could be a game-changer here because we can design operations that really change the emission mix of the system to rely more on renewable energy,” Deka says.

In addition, researchers at MIT and Princeton University are developing a software tool for investment planning in the power sector, called GenX, which could be used to help companies determine the ideal place to locate a data center to minimize environmental impacts and costs.

Location can have a big impact on reducing a data center’s carbon footprint. For instance, Meta operates a data center in Lulea, a city on the coast of northern Sweden where cooler temperatures reduce the amount of electricity needed to cool computing hardware.

Thinking farther outside the box (way farther), some governments are even exploring the construction of data centers on the moon where they could potentially be operated with nearly all renewable energy.

AI-based solutions

Currently, the expansion of renewable energy generation here on Earth isn’t keeping pace with the rapid growth of AI, which is one major roadblock to reducing its carbon footprint, says Jennifer Turliuk MBA ’25, a short-term lecturer, former Sloan Fellow, and former practice leader of climate and energy AI at the Martin Trust Center for MIT Entrepreneurship.

The local, state, and federal review processes required for a new renewable energy projects can take years.

Researchers at MIT and elsewhere are exploring the use of AI to speed up the process of connecting new renewable energy systems to the power grid.

For instance, a generative AI model could streamline interconnection studies that determine how a new project will impact the power grid, a step that often takes years to complete.

And when it comes to accelerating the development and implementation of clean energy technologies, AI could play a major role.

“Machine learning is great for tackling complex situations, and the electrical grid is said to be one of the largest and most complex machines in the world,” Turliuk adds.

For instance, AI could help optimize the prediction of solar and wind energy generation or identify ideal locations for new facilities.

It could also be used to perform predictive maintenance and fault detection for solar panels or other green energy infrastructure, or to monitor the capacity of transmission wires to maximize efficiency.

By helping researchers gather and analyze huge amounts of data, AI could also inform targeted policy interventions aimed at getting the biggest “bang for the buck” from areas such as renewable energy, Turliuk says.

To help policymakers, scientists, and enterprises consider the multifaceted costs and benefits of AI systems, she and her collaborators developed the Net Climate Impact Score.

The score is a framework that can be used to help determine the net climate impact of AI projects, considering emissions and other environmental costs along with potential environmental benefits in the future.

At the end of the day, the most effective solutions will likely result from collaborations among companies, regulators, and researchers, with academia leading the way, Turliuk adds.

“Every day counts. We are on a path where the effects of climate change won’t be fully known until it is too late to do anything about it. This is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to innovate and make AI systems less carbon-intense,” she says.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

74 countries have now ratified a landmark treaty to protect the high seas. Why hasn’t NZ?

The High Seas Treaty comes into force in January. New Zealand lags behind on several fronts, including marine protection and recognition of Māori customary rights.

Getty ImagesThe ratification by more than 60 states, the minimum required to turn the Agreement on Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (better known as the High Seas Treaty) into law, means it will enter into force on January 17. The treaty covers nearly two-thirds of the ocean – an area of sea and seabed outside the national jurisdiction of any country, which has come under growing pressure from mining, fishing and geoengineering interests, with climate change a compounding factor. The High Seas Treaty sits under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which New Zealand ratified in 1996. This established the international legal framework governing the marine environment within each country’s jurisdiction, including the territorial sea, exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and continental shelf. New Zealand’s EEZ is the fifth largest in the world and 15 times its landmass. The objective of the High Seas Treaty is to ensure the conservation and sustainable use of marine biological diversity beyond national jurisdiction – where the seabed and its resources are “common heritage of humankind”. It addresses four main issues: marine genetic resources and benefit sharing, marine protection, environmental impact assessments, and technology transfer. New Zealand is the last country reported to be bottom trawling in the South Pacific high seas for species such as the long-lived orange roughy. It also has ambitions to allow seabed mining in its own waters. The High Seas Treaty is drawing much-needed attention to New Zealand’s approach to ocean governance, both at home and on the world stage. What this means for NZ New Zealand was an active participant in the drafting of the High Seas Treaty and an early signatory in September 2023. A total of 74 nations have now ratified it, but New Zealand is not one of them. The deep seafloor beneath much of the high seas includes various habitats with rich biodiversity, much of it undescribed. Bottom trawling uses large nets to scrape the seafloor. The bycatch can include deepwater corals and sponges, which destroys the habitat of fish and other species. While the High Seas Treaty doesn’t directly regulate extractive activities such as fishing and mining in the high seas and deep seabed, it has implications for their exercise. International organisations such as the International Seabed Authority and regional fisheries management groups regulate mining and fisheries, respectively. But new international institutions will be established to enforce compliance with the High Seas Treaty, including to establish marine protected areas in support of the Global Biodiversity Framework’s goal of protecting 30% of the ocean by 2030. The Treaty also requires new activities in the high seas and deep seabed - aquaculture, geoengineering or seabed mining – to undergo an evaluation of environmental impacts. A beacon for best-practice ocean governance The High Seas Treaty reflects contemporary international legal consensus on best-practice ocean governance. Its guiding principles include: Those who pollute marine areas should bear the costs of managing the issue any benefits flowing from marine resources should be shared equitably (including with Indigenous peoples) states should take a precautionary approach to marine uses where their effects are not well understood states should take an ecosystem-based and integrated approach to ocean management states should use an ocean-governance approach that builds resilience to climate change and recognises the ocean’s role in the global carbon cycle, and states should use the best available science and traditional knowledge in ocean governance and respect the rights of Indigenous peoples. These principles align with broader ocean-focused initiatives as part of the UN Decade of Ocean Science for Sustainable Development and the sustainable development goals, which signals a growing awareness of the need to improve how ocean resources are managed. In New Zealand, international law is not directly enforceable in the courts unless incorporated into domestic legislation. But the courts can refer to international treaties when interpreting domestic legislation. This happened when the Supreme Court used the Law of the Sea Convention to direct decision makers to take a precautionary and ecosystem-based approach to approving seabed mining within New Zealand’s EEZ, based on science, tikanga and mātauranga Māori. The High Seas Treaty also reflects the unequivocal international recognition that states, including New Zealand, have obligations under international law to reduce the impacts of climate change on marine areas, reduce pollution and support the restoration of the ocean. However, New Zealand lags behind other countries in the protection of marine biodiversity. The government has delayed marine protection legislation in the Hauraki Gulf and proposed the removal of a requirement for cameras on fishing industry boats. It has also increased catch limits for some commercial fish species, but reduced them for orange roughy after being taken to court by environmental advocates. It has also opened up seabed mining to the fast-track consenting regime, despite a failure to meet basic standards for environmental impact assessment. And it is proposing to rework the coastal policy statement to enable the use and development of the coastal environment for “priority activities” such as aquaculture, resource extraction and energy generation. Time for NZ to show ocean leadership Ocean advocates and scientists have repeatedly called for reform of New Zealand’s highly fragmented and outdated oceans governance frameworks. The international call to states to uphold the rights of Indigenous peoples stands in stark contrast to the New Zealand government’s recent track record on Māori marine and coastal rights and interests. The courts recently overturned government polices that failed to uphold Māori fishing rights protected by Treaty of Waitangi settlements. But the government nevertheless plans legal changes that would further undermine Māori customary rights in marine and coastal areas. Upholding Māori rights in line with international law is not just an obligation but an opportunity. Iwi and hapū Māori have significant knowledge to contribute to the management of the ocean. It is high time for New Zealand to show leadership on oceans policy on the global stage by ratifying the High Seas Treaty. But it is as important to look after matters within domestic waters, aligning fragmented and outdated marine laws to match global best practice in ocean governance. Elizabeth Macpherson receives funding from Te Apārangi The Royal Society of New Zealand. Conrad Pilditch receives funding from Department of Conservation, MBIE, regional councils and PROs. He is affiliated with the Mussel Reef Restoration Trust and the Whangateau Catchment Collective. Karen Fisher receives funding from MBIE and the Government of Canada’s New Frontiers in Research Fund (NFRF). Simon Francis Thrush receives funding from MBIE, the Marsden Fund, the EU and philanthropic sources.

Turkey argues both countries can win from drawn-out contest with Australia over Cop31 hosting rights

Exclusive: Turkey’s climate minister says country is working on ‘innovative solutions’ as Labor privately downplays expectations impasse can be brokenSign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereTurkey says it is pursuing “innovative solutions” in the race with Australia to host the Cop31 UN climate talks, arguing both countries can win from drawn-out negotiations over next year’s summit.After talks with the climate change and energy minister, Chris Bowen, on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in New York last week, Turkey’s climate minister, Murat Kurum, said he was optimistic about a resolution.Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletter Continue reading...

Turkey says it is pursuing “innovative solutions” in the race with Australia to host the Cop31 UN climate talks, arguing both countries can win from drawn-out negotiations over next year’s summit.After talks with the climate change and energy minister, Chris Bowen, on the sidelines of the UN general assembly in New York last week, Turkey’s climate minister, Murat Kurum, said he was optimistic about a resolution.Azerbaijan’s Cop29 president, Mukhtar Babayev, has helped moderate some of the discussions.“We respect Australia’s candidacy,” Kurum told Guardian Australia.“Since 2023, we have been examining options with my esteemed counterpart and friend, Chris Bowen, and our teams.“We believe that we can achieve a success based on historical ties where both countries win. With the support of the UN Climate Secretariat, we are working on innovative solutions in the procedures.”The Albanese government has privately downplayed expectations Australia will win the bid due to Turkey’s desire to stay in the race. If neither party withdraws before Cop30 ends in November, hosting rights automatically revert to Bonn in Germany.It is unclear how the impasse will be resolved, or what the new solutions could be.In 2019, then UK prime minister Boris Johnson used a package of incentives to convince Turkey to pull out of the bidding contest for Cop26, including promising to back its candidates in other international events and to push countries on reclassifying Turkey under the UN convention for climate aid.Johnson also reportedly agreed to support Turkey’s bid to host Cop31. Keir Starmer’s Labour government has since publicly backed Australia’s bid.Anthony Albanese’s efforts to meet the Turkish president, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, in New York failed, and the government has ruled out using taxpayer funds to effectively buy off the opposition.Turkey’s first lady, Emine Erdoğan, is considered a key player in her country’s bid. A longtime environmental campaigner, she is reportedly eager for Turkey to host the summit in Antalya, the resort city where world leaders met for the 2015 G20 summit.Australia wants delegates to meet in Adelaide, in a partnership with Pacific Island nations.Kurum said Turkey planned to officially submit its nationally determined contribution to carbon emission reductions and “successfully complete consultations for Cop31” before this year’s summit in Belém, Brazil.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 promotion“We are ready to demonstrate real, participatory, fair, and effective leadership in the fight against the climate crisis,” he said.Kurum said Turkey had a very strong vision for hosting in 2026.“Our goal is to create a bridge that strengthens climate action and leaves no one behind.“We are aiming for a global Cop presidency, not just a regional one. We believe that hosting the Cop presidency in our country would also be an opportunity for the world.”Bowen said the Albanese government respected Turkey’s desire to host the event.“While there is strong support for Australia and the Pacific’s bid, the process requires consensus, and so we remain in discussions with Türkiye towards a mutually acceptable outcome, in consultation with our Pacific family,” he said.Bowen and Albanese have declined to discuss the status of negotiations with Turkey in recent weeks, other than to say they remained a work in progress. Both describe Australia’s support among partner countries as overwhelming. Australia has at least 23 votes among the critical 28-country Western European and Others group whose turn it is to host the summit.Guardian Australia revealed last week Bowen had appeared with Emine Erdoğan at a major environment event. She hosted dignitaries at the Zero Waste Blue exhibition on New York’s upper east side.

Incredible Journeys: Migratory Sharks on the Move

Even as scientists rush to identify the migratory paths of some endangered shark species to help better protect them, climate change and other threats shift this behavior, adding urgency to the research. The post Incredible Journeys: Migratory Sharks on the Move appeared first on The Revelator.

Migration: Many animal species do it — from tiny zooplankton to enormous whales —   moving over every continent and through all oceans, from north to south, south to north, Europe to Asia, and Asia to Africa. This movement by individual animals in response to season or life stage typically involves substantial numbers and vast distances. Recent studies give scientists a better understanding of migrations at the species and population levels and reveal implications for conservation. This series focuses on a few particular species, what we’re learning about their migrations, and how that knowledge may help us protect them. We start with a group of species many people may not realize migrate: sharks. In April 2025 researchers tagged a 7-foot male scalloped hammerhead shark they dubbed Webbkinfield off Port Aransas, Texas. Over the next four months, the scientists watched, fascinated, as Webbkinfield pinballed around just off the continental shelf. He didn’t wander far on the map but swam almost 2,000 miles. Less of a homebody, a male shortfin mako named Pico was tagged in March 2018 off the Texas coast and traveled more than 21,000 miles by August 2020. His journeys took him up to Massachusetts and back. Twice. Scientists are learning that some sharks get around more — a lot more — than others. A silky shark tagged June 18, 2021, in the Galápagos Marine Reserve had swum more than 1,000 miles west into the open ocean by Sept. 20; another tagged that February traveled more than 8,000 miles into the big blue and back. Others milled around the reserve, with a few making short forays to the Central or South American coast. Silky shark satellite tagging in the Galapagos. Photo: Pelayo Salinas, used with permission. This research on when and where marine animals move is critical to efforts to protect them, says Yannis Papastamatiou, an associate professor in Florida International University’s Institute of Environment. “Conservation is expensive, so we need to know when, where, and how to apply actions,” he says. Papastamatiou is one of the more than 350 contributing authors of a recent study in the journal Science that aims to tackle part of that challenge. The study examined data on migration patterns of more than 100 large-bodied marine vertebrate species, including several sharks. One of the study’s biggest revelations: On average, data showed, the tracked animals spent just 13% of their time inside existing marine protected areas. That suggests a pressing need to protect more ocean habitats and figure out the best areas to protect. Some efforts along these lines are already underway. For example, in 2022 the nations that are parties to the United Nations Convention on Biodiversity adopted the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, which set a goal to protect, conserve, and manage at least 30% of the world’s oceans. But Papastamatiou stresses that it needs to be the right 30%. “A lot of these animals move over very large areas, and it is not feasible to protect all of those.” Research on three shark species help illustrate the challenges ahead, as well as what we still need to understand about shark migration. Shortfin Mako Mako shark populations have plummeted due to commercial and recreational fishing, which is they they’re listed on Appendix II of the Convention on International Trade on Endangered Species, which puts limits on their commercial exploitation. Makos are an apex predator found in tropical and temperate waters around the world, but until recently little was known about their movements and, therefore, where to protect them. But earlier this year, a genetic study identified two distinct mako populations in the North and South Atlantic, according to co-author Mahmood Shivji of the Save Our Seas Foundation Shark Research Center at Nova Southeastern University, Florida. Females appear to stick to their respective populations, but males contribute genetically to both, which means they move between them. Such intermixing helps maintain genetic diversity, Shivji points out, giving the species a better chance to adapt to environmental changes. This new information builds on a 2021 tagging study by the Harte Research Institute at Texas A&M University Corpus Christi (which included Pico) that showed makos spend more time in the northwestern Gulf of Mexico than expected. Another found that some stay in the Gulf year-round. “We thought makos were seasonal in the Gulf from looking at catch data,” said Kesley Banks, an associate research scientist at the institute and an author on both papers. “We assumed they left in the summer and that isn’t the case. With both these studies, we see that they stay in the Gulf all year.” Not all of them, though. In addition to Pico’s summer sojourns up the Atlantic coast, another male traveled thousands of miles to and around the Caribbean. Mako sharks tagged in the Atlantic by Shivji and his colleagues have not been tracked to the western Gulf, though, according to Banks. These findings highlight how much movement patterns vary even within a species and make it clear that highly migratory animals must be managed at a large scale, not just on the local level. Those two meandering makos from the Gulf, for example, passed through at least 12 jurisdictional boundaries, representing different levels of fishing pressure and a variety of regulations. Scalloped Hammerheads Critically endangered scalloped hammerhead sharks are another highly migratory species experiencing intense overfishing and rapidly diminishing numbers. Every year hundreds of these hammerheads, mostly females, gather around protected areas near the Galápagos Islands. It isn’t clear where they migrate from, though, or whether the same individuals return every year. To find out, the Florida Shark Research Center spent five years conducting biopsies collected from the aggregation. They’re currently analyzing the samples, with plans to publish results in mid-2026. Researcher about to deploy a satellite tag on a scalloped hammerhead. Photo: Mark Wong, used with permission. But we already know a few things about their behavior. “The sharks aggregate during daytime and disappear at night,” probably to feed, says Shivji, who is leading the study. The researchers suspect many of the females are pregnant based on their size, and tracks show some moving from the aggregation to recently discovered nursery areas near the mainland. Others have gone westward far into the Pacific, although their tags didn’t last long enough to show whether those individuals turned around and came back. This study could help make the case that the paths the sharks travel between existing protected areas also need protection. “Their migrations to the aggregation area put them at risk,” Shivji says. Silky Sharks Considered “vulnerable to extinction” by the IUCN, silky sharks get their name from the sheen created by densely packed dermal denticles — the tooth-like structures that make up shark skin. Once one of the most abundant shark species, they are heavily fished for their fins. Silky sharks aggregate around Cocos Island in Costa Rica and the Galápagos Marine Reserve. Individuals tagged there by Shivji’s team mostly remained close by, not venturing far outside the Reserve. But some were tracked far into unprotected international waters, with the data indicating they faced fishing pressure on as much as 50% of their journeys. Shivji and colleagues also have tagged silky sharks in Revillagigedo National Park, part of a network of protected areas in Mexico’s Eastern Tropical Pacific (and a UNESCO World Heritage Center). Those, too, traveled well outside the protected area, with two known to have been captured. One question answered by this work could be whether the Galápagos and Mexico populations mix and if so, whether their travel routes that can be protected. More to Learn Researchers have learned a lot about shark migrations in the past few decades thanks in part to improved and more commonplace tools. Tags are more advanced, for example, providing near real-time tracking via satellites for longer periods of time thanks to protective paint and better batteries. Even so, findings have only scratched the surface. The movements of many species remain a mystery, as does the variation in migration behaviors within a species. “People like to describe migration as a population-level reaction, where everybody leaves at same time, all go here, and all come back at the same time,” Papastamatiou says. “But we have started to see it is a proportion of animals that perform a migration, with a mix of animals that migrate or are residential. It is important to ask what determines who migrates and who remains? There has to be some selective reason for it.” Studies have shown sex differences in migratory patterns of some shark species, such as females seeming more likely to migrate than males and pregnant females more likely to migrate than nonpregnant ones. A Moving Target Even as scientists are learning shark migration patterns, those patterns may be changing. Another paper on which Shivji is a co-author found mako migrations responding to increasing water temperatures and the decreased dissolved oxygen content that results. Because makos have the highest metabolic rate of any shark, low oxygen levels effectively restrict their range. “People focus on water temperature with climate change, but dissolved oxygen should be as big a concern,” Shivji said. Other research has concluded that elevated sea-surface temperatures could cause sharks to delay their departure for summer habitats. That may already be happening; from 2011 to 2021, researchers at Florida Atlantic University saw blacktip shark populations off the state’s coast decrease to one-tenth of their initial abundance. “In 2011 it was common to see over 10,000 sharks on a single aerial survey flight along Palm Beach County,” FAU professor Stephen Kajiura wrote in an email. “By 2021, we barely saw 1,000, despite increasing the number of flights in later years. The sharks were shifting northward. During that time, the average winter water temperature had increased by 1 degree C. That is a dramatic shift in just a decade.” Such changes in the behavior of major predators have wide-ranging effects on local ecosystems. For example, fewer sharks preying on groupers and snappers could increase their numbers, and those fish would eat more of the smaller fish. Reducing the number of smaller fish could increase that of other creatures down the food web, in turn causing changes to their prey. Down at the bottom of the chain, a decline in species that eat blue-green algae could increase toxic algae blooms. In addition to protected areas, mitigation strategies also must account for changes in movement patterns. For example, a shift in timing of the arrival of a species to an aggregation could necessitate altering existing fishing limits. Enforcement is also key — and already inadequate. “Law enforcement is stretched out. We need more funding and more people,” said Banks. “But we also need the research to know where to send people, to narrow down where enforcement should be.” Toward that goal, she and other scientists plan to continue tagging sharks. “I’m waiting on tags in the mail right now,” Banks says. “Shark science is in its infancy, we are just now learning where they’re going and making new discoveries.” “There are still species that we don’t know much about,” Papastamatiou says. “And even those we do know about, we can’t stop studying them because they can change.” Previously in The Revelator: Trump vs. Birds: Proposed Budget Eliminates Critical Research Programs The post Incredible Journeys: Migratory Sharks on the Move appeared first on The Revelator.

Some Air Travelers Bothered by Their Flight's Emissions Turn to Carbon Offsets. Do They Work?

Air travel results in a lot of planet-warming emissions, but it's also sometimes necessary

So you're booking your flight, and just when you're about to check out, the airline asks if you'd like to pay a little something to offset your share of the flight's pollution. Or, maybe you're an environmentally minded person, and you've heard you can buy these things called carbon offsets.Are they worth it? Let's explore. Why planes are so pollutive Jet engines burn fossil fuels, releasing planet-warming gases into the atmosphere. They also release water vapor, which turns into long, thin clouds called contrails that trap heat instead of letting it escape to space — additional warming that isn't typically included in a flight's emissions, said Diane Vitry, aviation director at a clean energy advocacy organization called the European Federation for Transport and Environment.Reducing emissions from air travel is difficult. Batteries weigh too much and provide too little power for long flights. Sustainable aviation fuel — biofuels made from things like corn, oil seeds and algae that can be mixed with jet fuel — is currently more expensive than traditional fuel and lacking sufficient supply to be in wide use.“Aviation is the problem child,” Vitry said. “Aviation and shipping are not decarbonizing, and definitely not fast enough.”That's where carbon offsets come in.A carbon offset is a certificate or a permit to emit planet-warming gases. It's connected to something that stores or reduces carbon emissions — for example, planting trees, or funding renewable energy.The idea is that the program or action offsets your pollutive action. You drive a car that pollutes a certain amount, you buy a carbon offset that leads to the planting of a tree that sequesters the same amount, and bam: the pollutive action (driving) is offset (tree planting).They've gotten popular enough that there's an entire marketplace that connects people and companies wanting to reduce their impacts with other companies that promise to do so.Vitry doesn't think so. She calls them a fake climate solution.“Unfortunately, it is not what is going to solve aviation’s climate problem,” she said. “You can’t clear your climate conscience with an offset.”Sure, you can plant a tree, but Vitry said that doesn’t stop your flight's emissions from entering the atmosphere. The tree may eventually absorb an equivalent amount of emissions. Or it may die. Or it may be sold as an offset multiple times by an unscrupulous company, meaning the tree can't possible absorb all the emissions it's supposed to.Barbara Haya, director of the Berkeley Carbon Trading Project, has studied carbon offsets for more than 20 years. She said some offset schemes are overcounted by 10 to 13 times their actual value.“There’s so much over-crediting on the offset market, so many credits that either don’t represent any emissions reductions at all or represent just a small fraction of what they claim,” Haya said.She said that’s partly because the voluntary offset market is largely unregulated, and it’s really difficult to measure offsets. The other problem is everyone involved benefits from over-exaggerating the benefits of offsets. “The buyer of the credit wants the cheap credits, the seller of the credits wants to get more credits for the same activity and the third party verifier is hired by the project developer, so has a conflict of interest to be lenient,” Haya said.Jodi Manning, chief executive of the carbon offset nonprofit Cool Effect, said consumers should beware of offset programs that don't say clearly which project will benefit from your purchase or how much of your money is going to a project. But she said “high-quality” carbon credits can play an important role where emissions are unavoidable.Manning said offsets have to be permanent, transparent, and unable to exist without the offset funding. “When carbon is done correctly, it can provide a credible, immediate way to account for the emissions that travelers cannot otherwise reduce. We all create emissions at some point and it is certainly better to take action to compensate for it than to do nothing,” she said.Several airlines that offer offsets did not respond to requests from AP to talk about their use. One that did, Southwest Airlines, said in a statement that it does not plan to rely on carbon offsets to help it reach a goal of net zero emissions by 2050. What are you some other options for offsetting your air travel? Fly less, take the train if you can, and pack light, Manning said.Instead of buying carbon offsets, Haya said she donates $1,000 to an organization she cares about on the rare occasion she flies for work or family visits. "We have an ethical obligation not to fly unless we really have to," she said.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 – Sept. 2025

Suggested Viewing

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.