Category: climate

  • Why so much confusion over climate change?

    Why so much confusion over climate change?

    Bwambale estimates that less than 1% of the global population truly grasps the implications of climate change. “Even worse are Ugandans,” he said.

    Gerison pointed out that much of the population of Uganda is young. “With 80% below the age of 25, many haven’t witnessed the full extent of climate changes,” he said.

    A diminishing crop is easily understood.

    Janet Ndagire, Bwambale’s colleague, said it is difficult for Ugandan natives to connect with climate campaigns. They often perceive them as obstacles to survival rather than crucial interventions.

    “Imagine telling someone who relies on charcoal burning for survival that cutting down a tree could be hazardous!” Ndagire said. “It doesn’t make sense to them, especially when the tree is on their plot of land.”

    Reflecting on personal experiences, Ndagire recalled childhood days of going to sleep fully covered. Nowadays it is too hot to do that, he said.

    Ssiragaba Edison Tubonyintwari, a seasoned bus driver originally from western Uganda but currently driving with the United Nations, recounts the challenges of driving between 5 and 9 AM in the Albertine rift eco-region especially around the Ecuya forest reserve.

    “It would be covered in mist,” said Tubonyintwari. “We’d ask two people to stand in front, one on either side of the bus, signalling for you to drive forward, or else, you couldn’t see two metres away. Currently, people drive all day and night!”

    Irish potatoes in the African wetlands

    What happened? Tubonyintwari pointed to unauthorised tree cutting in the reserve, residential constructions and the cultivation of tea alongside Irish potatoes in the wetlands. The result was rising temperatures.

    His account supplements a Global Forest Watch report which puts commodity-driven deforestation above urbanisation.

    It’s notable that Tubonyintwari didn’t explicitly use the term “climate change,” yet the sexagenarian can effectively explain the underlying concept through his detailed description of altered environmental conditions.

    Global Forest Watch reports alarming deforestation trends, with 5.8 million hectares lost globally in 2022. In Uganda, more than 6,000 deforestation alerts were recorded between 22 and 29 November this year.

    The consequences of such environmental degradation are dire. Ndagire emphasised that those who once wielded axes and chainsaws for firewood are now the very individuals facing reduced crop yields due to extreme weather conditions.

    Even as Uganda grapples with the aftermath of a sudden surge in heavy rains from last October, Bwambale questions the country’s meteorological department, highlighting the failure to provide precise explanations and climate-aware preparations.

    These interconnected narratives emphasise the need for accessible climate campaigns and community-driven solutions. As COP28 gathers elites, the call for a simplified narrative gains prominence, mirroring successful communication models seen during the Covid-19 pandemic; else it’s the same old throwing of good money after bad.

    Questions to consider:

    1. Why does deforestation continue in places like Uganda when people know about its long-term consequences?

    2. In what ways are high level discussions about climate change disconnected from people’s everyday experiences?

    3. In what way do you think scientists and environmentalists need to change the climate change narrative?

    Source link

  • When a company’s enviro claims sound convincing …

    When a company’s enviro claims sound convincing …

    Many companies contribute to the climate crisis and make a profit doing so. As consumers and governments pressure them to reduce their carbon emissions, they look for ways to make themselves appear environmentally friendly. This is called green marketing.

    As a journalist, you need to learn to spot what a business really means by its green marketing.

    Greenwashing is when a brand makes itself seem more sustainable than it really is, as a way to get consumers to buy their product. For example, let’s look at fashion, an industry that is responsible for between 2 and 8% of global greenhouse gas emissions.

    In the absence of environmental legislation around the fashion industry a business might get themselves certified under a sustainability certification scheme — these are standards developed by governments or industry groups or NGOs to measure such things as energy efficiency or processes that are low carbon or carbon neutral. There are more than 100 different such certification programs.

    Companies tout these certifications. But a 2022 study by the Changing Markets Foundation (CMF) found that the standards set by the majority of the 10 or more popular certification initiatives for the fashion industry aren’t difficult to meet and lack accountability.

    Artificial claims about sustainability

    Fast fashion relies on cheap synthetic fibers, which are produced from fossil fuels such as oil and gas. And while you might assume that clothing with labels such as “eco” or “sustainable” might have fewer synthetics, you’d unfortunately be wrong.

    Another study by CMF found that H&M’s “conscious” clothing range, for example, contained 72% synthetics — which was higher than the percentage in their main collection (61%). And it’s not just H&M. While the same study found that 39% of products made some kind of green claim, almost 60% of these claims did not match the guidelines set out by the UK Competition and Markets Authority.

    The same is happening in the meat and dairy industry. Companies say they are reducing their environmental footprint by engaging in “regenerative agriculture”, a farming approach that aims to restore and improve ecosystem health. They argue that it reduces greenhouse gas emissions and helps store carbon in the soil.

    But relying on carbon storing in soil is not enough. An article in Nature Communications found that around 135 gigatonnes of stored carbon would be required to offset the emissions that come from the agriculture sector. This is roughly equivalent to the amount of carbon lost due to agriculture over the past 12,000 years, according to CMF.

    But companies grab onto these empty promises, perhaps knowing that the general public might only see regenerative agriculture and other “green narratives” as promising.

    Look for real solutions to climate change.

    For example, Nestlé tells their customers that it is addressing the carbon footprint of the agriculture industry by supporting regenerative agriculture, stating on its website that in 2024, some 21% of the ingredients they source come from farmers adopting regenerative agriculture practices.

    When you understand that regenerative agriculture is not the solution it has been made out to be, only then can you see through Nestlé’s branding.

    So how can you spot greenwashing?

    Let’s say you saw a press release from a company in an industry that has historically relied heavily on fossil fuels. It tells its readers that it plans to be carbon neutral by a certain date, or that it’s using recycled materials for a large portion of its production, or that its future is “green”.

    You might first wonder, is this an example of how companies are moving away from fossil fuels and towards a green future? How can you tell?

    1. Be skeptical.

    When something has to tell you that it is green, it might not be. Start your investigation right there.

    For example, if you were looking at Nestlé’s regenerative agriculture campaign, you would need to find out what regenerative agriculture is and how much it is indeed reducing greenhouse gas emissions. You can do this by starting with a good Google search: e.g “regenerative agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions”.

    Once you click on a number of articles that report on this topic, you’ll be able to read about the different studies and data into the topic. Follow the sources used when an article cites a study or data. The article should hyperlink or list the sources. But those hyperlinks might take you to other secondary sources — other articles that cited the same data.

    For example, an article might cite this statistic: sustainability certifications increase consumer willingness to pay by approximately 7% on average. The article might cite as the source this study published in the journal Nature. But that article isn’t the original source of that data. It came from a 2014 study published in the Journal of Retailing.

    So try to find the primary source and see how credible or reputable it is. Who conducted the research in the first place?

    If you wanted to find out what H&M’s “conscious” range really meant, you would start by looking at H&M’s website and reports to look further into their claims. Then, follow those claims.

    2. Research the wider industry.

    Whether you’re reporting on fashion, agriculture or any other industry, look into where its emissions are coming from, which companies are claiming what and what the evidence says needs to be done in order for these industries to reduce their emissions.

    Providing context is important. What percentage of global greenhouse gas emissions is this industry responsible for? Is it getting better or worse? What legislation is in place to reduce emissions from these industries? In order for you and your audience to understand the greenwashing of any company, this background information is vital.

    3. Go straight to the company.

    Once you’ve conducted some initial research, follow up with the company if you are using it as an example or focus for your article. On Nestlé’s website, for example, you can find contact details for their communications, media or PR department. Send them an email saying something like the following:

    “I am writing an article on regenerative agriculture and I’ve found some studies that show that soil sequestration through these practices are in fact not enough to be a real climate solution. Can you please provide me with a comment on what Nestlé thinks about this?”

    They might not answer, but that also says a lot. If they don’t reply to you after one or two follow-up emails, you might try calling them.

    If you try several times and in different ways to contact them and they failed to respond, you can state that in your article. That way your readers know you made the effort.

    Claims from corporations that they are doing all they can to help the planet are easy to make. But if we really want to slow down climate change, significant efforts have to be made. And it is the role of journalists to hold companies to account for the claims they make.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What is “greenwashing”

    2. What is one example of greenwashing?

    3. What criteria do you use when deciding whether to buy a company’s product?

    Source link

  • When young girls pay the cost of climate change

    When young girls pay the cost of climate change

    Jaffarabad, Balochistan: When floodwaters swept through Shaista’s village in 2022, they didn’t just take her family’s home and farmland, they also took away her childhood. Just 14 years old, Shaista was married off to a man twice her age in exchange for a small dowry. 

    Her father, a daily wage laborer, said it was the most painful decision he has ever made.

    “I didn’t want to do it,” he said, his eyes fixed on the cracked earth where his fields used to be. “But I have four other children to feed and no land to farm. We lost everything.”

    Stories like Shaista’s are becoming increasingly common across Balochistan, Pakistan’s poorest province. In 2022, devastating floods there driven by record-breaking monsoon rains and accelerated glacial melt linked to climate change, displaced over 1.5 million people.

    There is worldwide recognition that extreme weather events — not just floods, but drought, heatwaves, tornados and hurricanes — are becoming more frequent and less predictable as the planet warms. These events have devastating and long-term consequences for people in poor regions. 

    Young girls as assets 

    In districts like Jaffarabad and Chowki Jamali, the aftermath of the disaster has left families grappling with deepening poverty, food insecurity and crushing debt. For many, marrying off their young daughters is no longer just a tradition, it’s a form of survival.

    A 2023 survey by the Provincial Disaster Management Authority reported a 15% spike in underage marriages in flood-affected regions. Child rights activists warn that these numbers likely underestimate the scale of the crisis, as most cases go unreported.

    “In flood-hit areas, families are exchanging their daughters to repay loans, buy food or simply reduce the number of mouths to feed,” said Maryam Jamali, a social worker with the Madad Community organization. “We’ve documented girls as young as 12 being married to men in their forties or fifties. This isn’t about tradition anymore, it’s desperation.”

    Bride prices, once a source of negotiation and family prestige, have plummeted due to the economic collapse. Activists report instances where girls are married for as little as 100,000 Pakistani rupees (roughly US$360), or in some cases, simply traded for livestock or debt forgiveness.

    “There are villages where girls are married off like assets being liquidated,” said Sikander Bizenjo, a co-founder of the Balochistan Youth Action Committee. “It’s not just a violation of rights, it’s a systemic failure rooted in climate vulnerability, poverty and legal gaps.”

    Marriage as debt payment

    In Usta Muhammad, another flood-ravaged district, 13-year-old Sumaira (name changed) was married off just weeks after her family’s mud house collapsed. Her parents received 300,000 rupees (a little over $1,000) from the groom’s family, which they used to rebuild their shelter and repay moneylenders. 

    Now pregnant, Sumaira, has dropped out of school and rarely leaves her husband’s house.

    “I miss my friends and school,” she told us softly. “I wanted to become a teacher. But my parents said there was no other way.”

    Child marriages like Shaista’s and Sumaira’s carry lasting consequences: early pregnancies that endanger both mother and child, disrupted education, psychological trauma and lifetime economic dependence. 

    A study following the 2010 floods found maternal mortality rates in some affected regions were as high as 381 per 100,000 live births, one of the highest in the world.

    “These girls are thrust into adult roles before they’re ready,” said Dr. Sameena Khan, a gynecologist in Quetta. “They face dangerous pregnancies, and many have no access to medical care. Their childhood ends the moment they say ‘yes’ or are forced to.”

    Giving girls an alternative to marriage

    The crisis unfolding in Balochistan is not unique. Across the world, climate shocks and civil strife are causing displacement that intensifies the risk of child marriage. 

    In 2024, News Decoder correspondent Katherine Lake Berz interviewed 14-year-old Ola, who nearly became a child bride after her Syrian family, displaced by war and facing severe poverty, began arranging her marriage to an older man. But before that coil happen, Ola was able to enroll in Alsama, a non-governmental organization that provides secondary education to refugee girls. In less than a year, she was reading English at A2 level.

    Alsama, which has more than 900 students across four schools and a waiting list of hundreds, has been able to show girls and their parents that education can offer an alternative path to security and dignity.

    In Balochistan, the absence of legal safeguards compounds the crisis. The Sindh province banned child marriage in 2013 under the Sindh Child Marriage Restraint Act which set the legal age at 18 for both girls and boys. But Balochistan has yet to enact a comparable law. 

    Nationally, Pakistan remains bound by the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, which requires nations to end child marriage but enforcement remains patchy. And Pakistan is not one of the 16 countries that have also signed onto the Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage and Registration of Marriages, which forbids marriage before a girl reaches puberty and requires complete freedom in the choice of a spouse. 

    Pakistan needs to reform its laws, said human rights lawyer Ali Dayan Hasan. “Without a clear provincial law and mechanisms to enforce it, girls are at the mercy of social pressure and economic collapse,” Hasan said. “We need legal reform that matches the urgency of the climate and humanitarian crises we are facing.”

    Attempts to introduce child marriage laws in Balochistan have repeatedly stalled amid political resistance and lack of awareness. Religious and tribal leaders argue that such laws interfere with cultural norms, while government officials cite limited administrative capacity in rural areas.

    Bringing an end to child marriages

    The solution, experts agree, is multi-pronged: legal reform, economic recovery and access to education.

    “We can’t end child marriage without rebuilding livelihoods,” said Bizenjo. “Families need food, land, healthcare and hope. If they can’t survive, they’ll continue to sacrifice their daughters.”

    Grassroots organizations like Madad and Sujag Sansar provide vocational training, safe shelters and legal awareness sessions in flood-affected areas. In one case, Sujag Sansar intervened to stop the marriage of 10-year-old Mehtab in Sindh, enrolling her in a sewing workshop instead.

    UNICEF estimates that child marriages could increase by 18% in Pakistan due to the 2022 floods, potentially reversing years of progress. The agency is urging governments to integrate child protection into climate adaptation and disaster relief programs.

    “Girls must not be forgotten in climate response plans,” said UNICEF Pakistan’s representative Abdullah Fadil. “Their future cannot be the cost of every flood, every drought, every crisis.”

    Back in Jaffarabad, Shaista now lives with her husband’s family in a two-room house. Her dreams of becoming a doctor have faded, replaced by household chores and looming motherhood. “I wanted to study more,” she said. “But now I have to take care of others.”

    Questions to consider:

    1. How does the marriage of young girls connect to climate change?

    2. How can societies end the practice of child marriage?

    3. Why do you think only 16 countries have signed the UN treaty that requires consent for marriages?

     

    Source link

  • Can the world wean itself off petroleum?

    Can the world wean itself off petroleum?

    It has been just six years since the Paris Climate Agreement set a race against time to rein in global heating. But the Earth is sending ever-harsher signals of alarm.

    When the accord was signed, we were on course for global heating of 4°C from the start of the industrial era to the end of this century. Now the figure is around 2.7°C. So something has been achieved, but relative safety comes at no more than 1.5°C.

    There is still a gap between the policies put in place over the past six years and what is needed to achieve that lower figure, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said in its annual outlook, published in October.

    Yet we know what to do: substitute renewable energy for the power we get from fossil fuels by mid-century; decarbonize industry and adapt land-use to trap carbon in soil and plants; adapt our means of transport and our growing cities to use less energy; and protect marine areas to enhance carbon absorption in oceans.

    “Two parallel and contradictory processes are in play,” wrote environmentalist and author George Monbiot in a Guardian opinion piece on November 3. “At climate summits, governments produce feeble voluntary commitments to limit the production of greenhouse gases. At the same time, almost every state with significant fossil reserves … intends to extract as much as they can.”

    Everything depends, he concluded, on which process prevails.

    Making strides in renewable energy

    Similar tensions are in play at industrial and economic levels. On the plus side, there is now a surprisingly strong backstory in renewable wind and solar energy, particularly solar, and particularly in the United States, the heaviest polluter historically per person, and China, the biggest polluter in absolute quantities of its emissions.

    The energy crisis resulting from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine last February has prompted policies that will boost clean energy, the IEA added in its World Energy Outlook, which projects trends out to 2030.

    While the crisis has created a temporary upside for coal, in the long run, production of renewable energy will outpace the production of energy derived from fossil fuels, the report said.

    Another positive sign is the nascent hydrogen industry.

    Widely occurring and carbon-free, this gas could decarbonize long-distance travel and industries that are heavy emitters. Producing it without carbon emissions implies using intermittent renewable energy when it is over-abundant, a virtuous circle.

    However, none of this is yet at industrial scale — barring a few hydrogen-powered trains. Not all claims for hydrogen can be borne out, and it is not yet a viable financial concern.

    There is a significant plus on the political front with the election of Luiz Ignácio Lula da Silva as Brazil’s next president. He promises to end the record deforestation of the Amazon under his predecessor, Jair Bolsonaro, and is to take office in January.

    But there is no slowdown in fossil fuels.

    Yet investment in fossil fuels still dwarfs cash flowing into renewables, even though they offer economic advantages. The United States, for example, has ploughed over $9 trillion into oil and gas projects in Africa since it signed the Paris Agreement, The Guardian found.

    Africa, a continent starved of cash for energy but with vast potential for solar power, is now under pressure — including from international oil companies operating in its national parks — to exploit its fossil fuel resources just to bring electric power to its people.

    The fossil fuel industry’s damage doesn’t end there. There has been drastic under-counting of carbon emissions, a new tracking tool backed by former U.S. Vice President Al Gore has found. Oil and gas companies have underestimated their emissions threefold, Gore said when launching the tool at the United Nations Climate Summit (COP 27) in Egypt this month.

    “For the oil and gas sector it is consistent with their public relations strategy and their lobbying strategy. All of their efforts are designed to buy themselves more time before they stop destroying the future of humanity,” The Guardian quoted Gore as saying.

    Investing in Africa

    Across the world, policies are in place to invest over $2 trillion in clean energy by 2030, half as much again as today, led by the United States and China, but also including the European Union, India, Indonesia and South Korea, according to the IEA.

    In the United States, solar was already becoming the star of the new energy scene, according to an annual report from Berkeley National Labs. The country added 1.25 terrawatts of solar capacity in 2021. That’s more than the installed solar capacity in the entire world, which reached 1 terrawatt in early 2022.

    That was before the Biden Administration enacted the Inflation Reduction Act, which brings extra impetus for the sector. The United States plans to add 2-1/2 times its existing solar and wind capacity every year between now and 2030 and grow its fleet of electric vehicles seven-fold, the IEA said.

    At the same time, Africa is desperate for energy investment.

    To provide access to electricity for its population, the continent would need $25 billion per year, the IEA said in its annual Africa Energy Outlook, published in June. “This is around 1% of global energy investment today, and similar to the cost of building just one large liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminal,” it said.

    The continent has 60% of the world’s best solar resources but only 1% of installed solar photovoltaic capacity. This is already the cheapest source of power in many parts of Africa and would outcompete all other energy sources across the continent by 2030, the IEA said.

    The energy watchdog projects that solar, wind, hydropower and geothermal energy would provide over 80% of new power generation capacity in Africa by 2030. No new coal-fired power plants would be built once those now under construction are completed. Half the cost of adding new solar installations out to 2025 could be covered by investments that would otherwise have gone into discontinued coal plants.

    Yet this assessment leaves out the plans for increased oil and natural gas developments on the continent.

    Pressure from energy companies

    A report just published by Rainforest UK and Earth Insight 2022 found that the area of land allocated across Africa for such developments is set to quadruple under existing plans. That report focuses on the Congo Basin, but in East Africa, French oil major TotalEnergies is pushing ahead with a large-scale oil project and trans-continental pipeline in Uganda.

    A first cargo of liquefied natural gas has just left Mozambique after multiple delays caused by an insurgency in the region of the gas field, in a venture involving several oil companies.

    These oil and gas projects would lock the continent into fossil fuels for decades to come and blow a hole in the bid to keep global heating to no more than 1.5°C.

    These energy projects have wide support among African leaders, who contrast the immediacy of such investments and their benefits for their countries with the reluctance of Western nations to put up the finance agreed over a decade ago for energy transitions and preservation of biodiversity.

    African environmentalists question the wisdom of this carbon bomb. But it is hard to dismiss the idea that broken promises by the countries that have caused the climate crisis has driven Africa into the arms of the fossil fuel industry.

    TotalEnergies’ CEO Patrick Pouyanné argues that the world cannot quit fossil fuels before it has alternative sources of energy.

    “The mistake being made now is to think that the solution for the climate is to abandon fossil fuels,” he said in an interview with French TV station LCI on November 17. “The solution is first to build the new decarbonized energies that we need.”

    “If you do both at the same time, what happens?,” Pouyanné said. “Exactly what you reproach us for — prices rise because of the rarity of supply, because the demand for oil is not falling.”

    The monopoly power of fossil fuel firms

    These energy companies have long fought the switch from fossil fuels to renewables.

    Half a century ago, Total concealed a report it had commissioned that clearly explained how burning fossil fuels would cause global heating and the consequences we are seeing today.

    Other oil and gas companies, notably Exxon, acted similarly and responded to their findings by funding climate-denying think tanks and political lobbyists.

    More recently, as the evidence mounted, they turned their attention to lobbying for exemptions, even though the scientific consensus demands that to achieve the 1.5°C limit on warming, there can be no new oil, gas or coal exploration or extraction.

    A record number of fossil fuel lobbyists attended this month’s climate summit in Egypt (see the graphic here).

    Fossil fuels no longer make economic sense.

    The sector is a good example of reality flouting economic theory, which teaches that if a new technology reaches a point where it outcompetes an existing one, the new technology will replace the older one.

    This should be happening with solar versus coal, oil and gas — and indeed is predicted to happen by 2050. Meanwhile, harmful emissions continue to rise.

    Energy markets and the fossil fuel firms themselves do not obey basic economics for the simple reason that they are monopolies with the power to skew conditions in their favor.

    The oil producers’ monopoly, in the form of OPEC, has controlled production to keep prices higher for decades. In the 1990s, the big Western oil companies went through a frenzy of mega-mergers that created today’s top five — Shell, ExxonMobil, BP, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips — whose sheer size gives them disproportionate bargaining and lobbying power.

    Now activists are trying to gain support for a Fossil Fuel Non-Proliferation Treaty as a way of reining in the root cause of the climate emergency. The initiative was put before the United Nations in September and the COP 27 climate summit in November.

    “Will you be on the right side of history? Will you end this moral and economic madness?” Ugandan climate activist Vanessa Nakate asked global leaders at the summit.

    On that, the jury is still out.

    Landmark deal opens way for loss and damage fund

    It has taken 27 climate summits, but the COP 27 in Egypt finally managed to pull out an agreement to set up a specific fund to aid poor countries hit by damage caused by climate disasters. The deal was approved on November 20 after a marathon negotiating session.

    The proposal had been fought tooth and nail by the rich industrialized countries whose emissions have fostered global heating, stirring resentment among poorer countries who have suffered the most extreme consequences and have the least ability to mitigate the damage. 

    Details will be hammered out over the coming year, and there is as yet no money in the fund. It was nevertheless a major step forward.

    However, the final agreement failed to call for phasing out all fossil fuels and for warming emissions to peak by 2025, both heavily opposed by oil-producing countries, raising fears that the goal of limiting warming to 1.5°C by mid-century will not be achievable.

    Questions to consider:

    1. Where is a major boom in solar energy taking place?
    2. What is Africa’s energy dilemma?
    3. Why do you think fossil fuel majors have so much influence?

     

    Source link

  • Saying goodbye to our glaciers

    Saying goodbye to our glaciers

    Across the world two billion people — around a quarter of the world’s population — depend on glaciers for water to irrigate fields for agriculture, provide drinking water and to generate electricity.

    But these glaciers are melting before our eyes.

    Consider that 10% of Iceland is covered by glaciers but that is 1% less than a decade ago. That percentage will continue to decrease as the rate of change due to global warming has become dramatic.

    Glaciers are so iconic in Iceland that when one collapses, people hold a funeral. 

    It’s a ceremony created for humans to make people aware about the urgency of global warming. And it’s a poetic way of marking the end of one of nature’s most inspiring creations.

    A land where ice is prized

    The first funeral for a glacier took place in 2019. It was for Okjökull glacier, the smallest glacier in a land that is dominated by ice and snow. 

    Okjökull glacier, popularly known as Ok, was only a modest 15 square kilometres big and had been shrinking for decades. Icelanders regarded diminutive Ok with affection, even making it a character in children’s book. 

    So the emotional impact of watching Ok vanish was felt not only by the locals who had grown up with the glacier, but across Iceland. Icelanders are brought up learning songs and sagas about their spectacular island. The snowpack of their glaciers creates the wild rolling rivers and massive waterfalls throughout the island before the flow tumbles into the stormy North Atlantic.

    Now on the hill which had been covered by Okjökull is a rock with a brass plate with urgent words from Icelandic poet Andri Snær Magnason.

    A LETTER TO THE FUTURE

    Vatnajökull ice cap and parts of Hofsjökull ice cap, Iceland in September 2022. (Credit: Pierre Markuse via Wikimedia Commons)

    Ok is the first Icelandic glacier to lose its status as a glacier. In the next 200 years all our glaciers are expected to follow the same path.
    This monument is to acknowledge that we know
    what is happening and what needs to be done.
    Only you will know if we did it.

    Ice loss in Iceland

    Tiny Okjökull was nothing compared to the largest glacier in Iceland — and in Europe — the Vatnajökull ice cap.

    Despite its mass, scientists estimate that nine million litres of Vatnajökull’s glacial ice are being turned into water every minute. 

    The lakes and ice lagoons downstream of Vatnajökull, filled by meltwater, are bigger every year as the glacier itself shrinks.

    So should there be funerals for glaciers?

    Sigurdur Arni Thordarson, the pastor of Hallgrímskirkja Church in Iceland thinks so. His church was built to resemble the mountains and glaciers of Iceland and dominates the Reykjavík skyline.

    “For humans, the loss of a glacier is a real loss,” Thordarson said. “People who have a deep understanding and awareness of interconnectedness of life really feel the necessity of expressing the grief.”

    Snow melt in the Alps

    It seems a widespread sentiment. A few months after the ceremony in Iceland, hikers, many dressed in black, gathered on Pizol glacier in the Swiss Alps to listen as a priest gave a funeral service. 

    Another ceremony followed in 2020 for Clark Glacier in Oregon and soon after on a Mexican glacier named Ayoloco by the Aztecs. The Mexican geologists and ecologists who marked the day used the words written by Andri Snær Magnason that commemorate Okjökull.

    Crossing into another culture, Buddhists monks in Nepal held an ‘ice funeral’ in the Himalayas in May 2025 for Yala Glacier which had shrunk by two thirds in the past several decades. Attended by locals and climate scientists they gathered under traditional prayer flags across from the last visible ice. Even Yala’s altitude over 5,000 metres was no protection against deglaciation

    Two granite stones now mark the spot of the ceremony. One with the words of Magnason from Iceland, the other with an inscription from Nepali poet Manjushree Thapa:

    Hallgrimskirkja Church

    Hallgrímskirkja Church in Reykjavík, Iceland. (Credit: Mattias Hill via Wikimedia Commons)

    Yala, where the gods dream high in the mountains, where the cold is divine.
    Dream of life in rock, sediment, and snow, in the pulverizing ofice and earth, in meltwater pools the colour of sky. 
    Dream. Dream of a glacier and the civilizations downstream.

    In all these commemorations, Magnason’s alarm from Iceland have been echoed:

    …We know what is happening and what needs to be done. Only you will know if we did it.

    The Third Pole

    The glaciers in the Himalayas are sometimes called the ‘Third Pole’ because they account for the most ice after the Arctic and Antarctica. 

    Around the world glaciers are melting faster than ever recorded but the Himalayas are warming at a higher rate than the global average, up to 65% faster. The Himalaya glaciers feed some of the great rivers of Asia — the Ganges, Indus, Brahmaputra and Yangtze rivers which flow through some of the most populated areas on the planet. 

    The consequences of disappearing glaciers are starting to be felt. Mexican climate scientists who attended the Ayoloco ceremony pointed out that “without large ice masses on mountain peaks temperatures will increase.”

    All of our planet was created by massive geologic forces. Those forces are more easily observable in Iceland, being one of the newest land masses to be created on Earth. It is an island nation that was created by volcanoes but sculpted and defined by glaciers. It may be fitting that, in addition to the first glacier funeral ever held, the first Glacier Graveyard was created in 2024, to mark extinct glaciers and provide a reminder of what is at stake. 

    The glaciers remembered were taken from the first Global Glacier Casualty List. Soon after, the United Nations declared 2025 the International Year of Glacier Preservation. Now, all fifteen tombstones carved from ice to mark those vanished glaciers have melted.

     

    Questions to consider: 

    1. Should glaciers, like some rivers which have been granted legal rights, be regarded as living creatures?

    2. Does a ceremony like a funeral provide an inspiration for climate activism?

    3. What natural formations or environmental places are important to you? 

     

    Source link

  • What happens to the ski runs when the snow runs out?

    What happens to the ski runs when the snow runs out?

    I’m in high school now, and skiing is one of my favorite things to do — but I know it’s something my grandkids may never get to experience. 

    Normally the bike trails underneath the chairlift would be buried under a thick blanket of snow in the winter. But as temperatures begin to rise, more and more people are beginning to see the snow fade to brown earlier than ever before. Skiing could very well become a relic of the past — an age-old sport confined to history books and old photographs. 

    According to a study conducted by U.S. climate scientists in 2017 and funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Atmospheric Programs, “season length changes” due to warming winters “could result in millions to tens of millions of foregone recreational visits annually by 2050, with an annual monetized impact of hundreds of millions of dollars.”

    These same scientists found that ski seasons in the United States are expected to see reductions in length, exceeding 50% in 2050 and 80% in 2090 for some locations.

    The reality is that by the end of the century most resorts in the United States will have closed. While it may seem like artificial snow is the solution to this monumental problem, that is not the case. This fake snow may be able to help resorts stay afloat for the next decade or so, but it is not a viable option in the long run.

    Can we make snow?

    According to an article published by the American Chemical Society in 2019, snow making takes energy, mostly fossil-based, which further exacerbates the issue by contributing to more carbon emissions.

    Not only are these snow makers harmful to the environment, but as temperatures begin to rise, there are less windows for snowmaking itself. 

    Dr. Elizabeth Burakowski, a climate scientist at the University of New Hampshire, said that snowmaking operations require temperatures that are below freezing to operate efficiently. This means that even though artificial snow can be useful in the short term, it won’t be a feasible solution in the future as the conditions needed for making that snow begin to disappear.

    More importantly, artificial snow is merely a band-aid on a much larger wound. The onus is instead on ourselves to remedy this problem and not the resorts trying to scramble for answers. 

    Amie Engerbretson, a professional skier and climate activist, thinks that both skiers and resorts are reluctant to talk about the problem. “I think they’re scared,” Engerbretson said. “I think they’re scared of being called a hypocrite.” This fear is understandable. Many in the ski-industry rely on fossil-fuel powered lifts and snowmobiles and travel to enjoy the sport they love. 

    Let’s speak for the snow.

    To Burakowski, speaking out means acknowledging these contradictions. “If anyone expects to be a perfect advocate, then they’re setting the bar impossibly high,” she said. 

    This is where the conversation around climate change usually stalls. Many athletes and outdoor enthusiasts hesitate to take a stand because they either don’t think their opinion matters or they don’t want to seem like hypocrites themselves. However, advocacy can reflect the complications as long as what is being advocated is progress toward a greener future.

    Most people get too caught up in the individual aspect of climate advocacy and climate change in general. However, if we try to address this problem as individuals, we won’t make much progress. 

    Instead, change will come from systemic action and involvement in the public sphere. When I asked Dr. Burakowski what the best thing someone can do to make an impact, she said: “vote”. 

    With the way things are going, just remembering to turn off your lights when you leave a room or buying an electric car will not be the difference between sustainability or catastrophe. Real progress requires a collective effort — new climate policy, corporate accountability and government action. 

    Questions to consider:

    • Why does the author think that his grandchildren won’t get the chance to experience skiing?

    • Why can’t making snow make up for a lack of snowfall? 

    • What sports do you like that might be at risk from climate change?

     

     

    Source link

  • Can we de-stress from climate change distress?

    Can we de-stress from climate change distress?

    Consider that BP, one of the world’s biggest oil companies, popularised the term “carbon footprint”, which places the blame on individuals and their daily choices. 

    Anger also comes up a lot, Robinson said, particularly for young people. 

    “They’re angry this is happening,” she said. “They’re angry they have to deal with it. They’re angry that this is their world that they’re inheriting and that all totally makes sense. It’s not fair to burden young people with this. It’s really important that they have support and action by adults in all kinds of ways throughout society.”

    Working through our feelings

    Then there’s sadness and grief. 

    “We have of course loss of life in many climate disasters,” Robinson said. “That’s really significant. And loss of habitat, loss of biodiversity, loss even of traditions and ways of life for a lot of people, often in Indigenous cultures and others as well.”

    One of the most simple and effective ways we can deal with climate distress is by talking about it, and by giving young people the opportunity and space to do so. 

    “One of the hardest things is that people often feel really isolated,” Robinson said. “And so talking about it with someone, whether that’s a therapist or whether that’s in groups … just anywhere you can find to talk about climate emotions with people who get it. Just talk about climate change and your feelings about it.”

    Having a space to discuss climate change and their feelings associated with it can help a young person feel understood. Talking about feelings in general, known as “affect labelling”, can help reduce the activity of the amygdala — the part of the brain most associated with fear and emotions — in stressful times.

    Unplug yourself.

    Unlimited access to the internet does allow young people to connect with like-minded people and engage in pro-environmental efforts, but the amount of information being consumed can also be harmful. 

    Climate change is often framed in the media as an impending environmental catastrophe, which studies say may contribute to this sense of despair and helplessness, which can lead to young people feeling apathetic and being inactive. 

    Robinson said that while you don’t need to completely cut out reading the news and using social media, it is important to assess the role of media consumption in your life. She suggested setting a short period of time every day where you connect to the media, then try your best to refrain from scrolling and looking at your phone for the rest of the day. 

    “Instead, look outside at nature, at the world we’re actually a part of instead of what we’re getting filtered through the media,” she said.

    For some people, looking at social media around climate is a way of connecting with a community that cares about climate, so it can still be a useful tool for many people. 

    “Our nervous systems can get really hijacked by anxiety,” Robinson said. “We know that when mindfulness is a trait for people, when it really becomes integrated into who they are, that it does help. It’s associated with less climate anxiety in general.”

    Take in the nature around you.

    Studies show that mindfulness can improve symptoms of anxiety and depression. Robinson says this is partly due to it allowing us to be present with whatever feelings come up, that it helps us to stay centred throughout the distress. 

    It can be as simple as taking a mindful walk in a nearby forest or green space. While of course forests are helpful in absorbing carbon and reducing emissions, they can also help us reduce stress. Some studies have shown that spending more than 20 minutes in a forest — noticing the smells, sights and sounds — can reduce the stress hormone cortisol. 

    Robinson said that one of the more powerful things you can do is to band together with others. 

    “Joining together with other people who care and who can have these conversations with you and then want to do something along with you is really powerful,” she said. “We’re social animals as humans, and we need other people and we really need each other now during all of this. And it’s so important to be building those relationships if we don’t have them.”

    It is possible that climate anxiety can increase when young people learn about climate change and the information is just thrown out there, Robinson said, and the opportunity to talk about emotions should be incorporated into learning. 

    “It is different than learning math, or learning a language,” she said. “It’s loaded with all kinds of threat. Kids need to know what to do with that because there is going to be an emotional response.”

    Take climate action.

    It has also been shown that action can be an “antidote” for climate anxiety and that education centred around action empowers youth, when providing ways of engaging with the crisis collectively. 

    Teachers can then help students connect their feelings with actions, whether that be in encouraging their participation in green school projects or on a broader level in their communities. 

    “That action, it helps, it really gives people a sense of agency and they know that they are making a difference,” Robinson said.

    We need to come together, she said, not just to help us feel better, but to find solutions. “I really think that our connection, our systemic issues that we have, are so profound and they really push us away from each other in so many ways.”

    Our societies often favour consumption over connection, she said. “As human beings we developed in the context of nature, evolutionarily,” she said. “We were immersed. We were part of nature, and we are still, but we have increasingly grown apart from that relationship.”

    That changed over time. Now people spend little time in nature even though it’s often all around them.

    “From an eco-psychological sort of point of view, we’re embedded in that system, and we’re harming that system because of that separation that’s developed,” she said. 

     

    Questions to consider:

    1. What is “climate anxiety”?

    2. What is the connection between climate anxiety and education?

    3. How do you handle the stresses that you are under?

     

    Source link

  • When Will We Stop Moving to the Riskiest Regions? (PBS Terra)

    When Will We Stop Moving to the Riskiest Regions? (PBS Terra)







    Higher Education Inquirer : Climate Change: When Will We Stop Moving to the Riskiest Regions? (PBS Terra)




    Source link