Category: environment

  • Bringing back birds from the brink of extinction

    Bringing back birds from the brink of extinction

    Bringing back birds

    Vallocchia’s work has also taken her to Malta and Mexico. She’s been with Maui Forest Bird Recovery for four years. As avian research field supervisor, she works on honeycreeper surveys, counting the relatively few remaining birds from what was once a thriving bird paradise with more than 50 species of honeycreeper.

    On Maui, Vallocchia says, six species of honeycreeper remain. Three of these are endemic to Maui, found nowhere else. Vallocchia and her colleagues track populations of Kiwikiu (Maui parrotbill) and ʻĀkohekohe (crested honeycreeper).

    Vallocchia and her colleagues camp out in various locations on Maui, tracking birds and their activities at predetermined spots or transects on a specific line through a forest. This gives them a consistent scientific way to count the birds.

    Right now, fewer than 150 kiwikiu remain, Vallocchia says.

    “The native birds, you see how special they are here,” Hebebrand says. “When I saw a kiwikiu in the wild for the first time, I cried.”

    The soundscape of Hawaii

    Some native birds are spotted closer to the project’s home office. A Hawai’i ‘amakihi was spotted recently feeding on a hibiscus plant in the yard, delighting the staff.

    Program manager Hanna Mounce describes the work of Maui Forest Bird Recovery Project as an investment in ecosystems, cultural connections and the next generation.

    “I’m hopeful that our work today will help ensure these birds are still here for our children and grandchildren,” Mounce says. “Every day, I work alongside a team deeply committed to protecting something bigger than themselves.”

    Hawai’ian birds often make the sounds of their names. The kiwikiu might screech keee-eee-eee or tree-tree or kiwi-kiwi-kiwi-kiwi.

    “It’s so varied,” Vallocchia said.

    What tourists don’t see or hear

    These songs most likely won’t be heard by visitors coming to the islands on vacation. People relaxing at resorts may not know they’re missing the native wildlife and birds of the Hawai’ian islands.

    “Millions of people visit Hawaiʻi every year,” says Chris Warren, forest bird program coordinator at Haleakalā National Park, “and only a fraction of those get a chance to see an ʻiʻiwi or other fabulous native birds. People can grow up here and never experience a native forest.”

    Warren worked for MFBRP for more than a decade and continues to partner with the organization.

    “The project has always been driven by passion and a deep desire to save these species from extinction,” Warren says. His own understanding of extinction dates back to his work at the Joseph Moore Museum of Natural History in Indiana. He encountered specimens of extinct birds like passenger pigeons and Bachman’s warblers.

    “There is something profound about holding an animal in your hand that will never be seen alive again,” Warren says. “And to know that that extinction was preventable made a deep impact on me.”

    Protecting without disturbing

    Warren says one of the biggest challenges to forest bird recovery involves educating the public, who may not know these birds exist. People care more deeply about things that they’ve personally experienced, he says.

    Vallocchia agrees. She invites visitors to explore accessible areas of Maui, hiking into its fragile forests with awareness and care.

    “For people to want to protect something, they need to see it, experience it, understand the beauty of it,” Vallocchia says. “Being part of nature is not disturbing nature if it’s done in the right way.”

    Camping with permits is possible in places like Haleakalā National Park.

    “You could wake up to the song of the honeycreeper,” Vallocchia says.

     

    Recommended:

    The award-winning documentary “Vanishing Voices” combines interviews with bird recovery workers and animation to explain the science being used to save birds from extinction.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What are some threats to the honeycreepers on Maui?

    2. How are conservationists trying to restore the population of alalā?

    3. What birds can you spot where you live?


    Want to see and hear some honeycreepers? Check out the video below:

    Source link

  • Universities, climate, and COP30 | Wonkhe

    Universities, climate, and COP30 | Wonkhe

    It was announced in October that Earth has reached its first catastrophic climate tipping point, with warm water coral reefs facing long-term decline.

    The report was produced by the University of Exeter’s Global Systems Institute, a world-leading centre in climate change research, and it carries the stark warning of further impacts – like melting of the polar ice sheets, and dieback of the Amazon rainforest – that “would cascade through the ecological and social systems we depend upon, creating escalating damages.”

    Despite such findings emphasizing the need for more effective and faster progress, the consensus about climate action needed to propel change that existed in 2019 has given way to scepticism and cynicism in some quarters.

    Political parties and influential figures in the UK (and beyond) are turning their attention away from the climate crisis and Net Zero, if they don’t dismiss it outright. The Conservatives have pledged to repeal the Climate Change Act, claiming it has harmed the economy. Reform supports the continuing use of fossil fuels. Donald Trump has recently called climate change a ‘con job’.

    So political support for Net Zero, and by extension the climate emergency, is shaky. As a result, there is a risk to climate action being perceived by the wider public to be unfair, something that forces a negative economic impact on their lives, and that’s out of touch with the concerns and needs of ordinary people.

    A fair COP?

    With these developments forming part of the backdrop of the COP30 global climate summit, that took place in Brazil in November, and mindful of there being a need to transform the narrative on climate action, the President of COP30 (Ambassador André Aranha Corrêa do Lago) made it his mission to turn the story about tipping points from one of doom and danger into one of hope, opportunity, and possibility.

    Although confidently billed in advance as “the implementation COP”, in fact it concluded as anything but. One positive outcome of the event was agreement to establish a just transition mechanism that would enable equitable and inclusive transitions for communities of workers in high-carbon industries shifting to clean energy and a climate-resilient future: though participation in the mechanism is nonetheless voluntary.

    There was a modest step towards the phasing out of fossil fuels amidst accounts of fractious talks and frantic negotiations. Outside, indigenous groups protested, and a thunderstorm caused flooding and brought down trees; the climate crisis visiting the venue, literally. Other commentators speak of underwhelm and disappointment, judging that COP30 did not deliver a turning point, and that not much will change if climate action is left to governments – it being instead down to other organisations and individuals to take collective responsibility.

    What it means for the sector

    Universities, with their core mission of delivering for the public good, have a pivotal role here. A poll published by the University of Cambridge last year demonstrated that nearly two-thirds of adults expect universities to come up with ways of fixing the climate crisis. The need for universities to “[ground] the realities of a sustainable future in the day to day of people’s lives” was advocated by James Coe in Wonkhe three years ago.

    How does what UK universities are doing on climate action now reflect these matters and respond to the attendant challenges?

    Here are some examples that offer reasons to have hope for the future.

    The reassuring starting point is that there continues to be consensus within higher education about the need for climate action. The UK Universities Climate Network includes academic and professional services staff from over 90 institutions advancing climate action and promoting a “zero carbon, resilient future”, and the University Alliance of professional and technical universities aims to find “practical solutions to pressing climate challenges, making a difference for people in their everyday lives”.

    Much of what universities do to exert influence on climate action is through research grounded in science which seeks to inform policy-making by developing human understanding of the consequences of climate change, and how its effects will play out in different geographical contexts. Leading academics in climate change contributed to the National Emergency Briefing in Westminster on 27 November, a gathering of political, media and business figures.

    Meanwhile, research that leads to the design and implementation of scientific solutions provides tangible evidence of public benefit. The Sheffield Institute for Sustainable Food has recently published work on transforming food systems, addressing public health and biodiversity challenges. Its recommendations include incentivising the growing of beans and peas, which are both healthy for people and require less energy, land, and water to grow, have a lower carbon footprint compared with animal products, and are good for the soil.

    A connection is made

    One thing that’s persuasive about this is how it relates climate action to real lives and issues that carry significance for people, like health, food, and – this is the UK after all – the weather. Another fascinating example in this vein is the Weathering Identity: Weather and Memory in England project at the King’s Climate Research Hub. This involved the gathering of oral histories of the weather and how it has shaped individual lives, and considering how more frequent extreme weather events might alter human memory and sense of place.

    A different way in which universities convince with their action on climate change, especially in a world where many are cynical about the established order, is by demonstrating they are not simply acting in a business-as-usual way and ‘admiring the problems’ caused by current policy. One example of critical thinking with reflection on radical policy change is James Dyke’s System Update film, which challenges the “incremental and timid policies of today” in search of a better world, putting the spotlight on the role that continuous economic and material growth has in causing ecological degradation. The film also suggests that citizens’ assemblies of people who are invested in meeting climate change challenges in the longer term could play a larger role in determining policy. In recent years several UK universities have convened their own climate assemblies mobilising students and staff.

    Living through change

    Building on that idea of public empowerment, there is a strand of university research focusing on the abilities and education needed to help people live through and address the challenges of climate change. Researchers at University College London have suggested ways of embedding climate education into the secondary curriculum, promoting emotional engagement with the climate crisis as a means of helping young people avoid negative feelings, and motivating them to take action.

    Environmental and social justice go hand in hand and feature prominently in university climate action. The Priestley Centre for Climate Futures in Leeds has a study looking at how the climate crisis, decarbonisation, and net zero will impact the world of work, with the guiding principle that climate transformation measures should be just and fair for workers.

    And across the Pennines, the JUST centre based at the University of Manchester but involving researchers from a group of northern institutions focuses on the pursuit of sustainability transformations that are people-centred, joined-up and socially just for citizens in regions that benefit the least from dominant economic and political systems.

    The field of arts and cultures has always played a part in inspiring reflection – which is itself a form of action – sparking emotions, and firing the imagination of its audience, with the potential to ultimately lead that audience to doing something transformative. VOTUM at Hadrian’s Wall is an art project supported by Newcastle University, part of a programme where artists are invited to undertake research inspired by Roman archaeology and climate research. Interlocking mirrored shields arranged in the shapes of artefacts found at the Wall reflect the sky and show the viewer themselves in the landscape, holding a mirror up to people and challenging them to think about their impact on the environment.

    What the examples above show is that, through work responding to climate change, universities are collectively addressing some of the concerns that are important to everyone whatever their background: healthy living, sustainable places and communities, and empowering people to maximise their potential.

    They are aligned with the narrative of the future that the COP30 President said should be “not imposed by catastrophe, but designed through cooperation”. Universities are committed to urgent climate action, but the story these examples offer is not gloomy, alienating, or dispiriting; it is engaging, inclusive and hopeful.

    It has the power to counteract climate denialism and allay doubts over net zero; it speaks of collective responsibility and points towards the possibility of a world that is fairer and greener.

    Source link

  • Decoder Replay: Can we prepare for unpredictable weather?

    Decoder Replay: Can we prepare for unpredictable weather?

    There’s no denying climate change when a tornado rips through your town or a blizzard buries you in snow. So why blame the people who raise weather alarms?

    Source link

  • To fight climate change, begin in the classroom

    To fight climate change, begin in the classroom

    A good teacher stays with you. For me it was my Grade 9 English teacher, Mrs. Renshaw, who was an eagle in a smart skirt suit, her beak always pointed in your direction, her eyes sharp and seeing. She scared us.

    The highest value, she often said, was “self discipline”. You would not be late to Mrs. Renshaw’s class.

    She stays with me not because some students cried under her screech, but because of the way she taught. We would begin every class by writing a caption to a funny image — a bicycle with square wheels or a whale breathing on land.

    We would then read, all together, one student out loud at a time, before discussing the themes of the story and its meaning.

    We didn’t have to wait for social science or psychology class to discuss such things as war, power structures, human instinct or violence because in Mrs. Renshaw’s class, we read and discussed “Lord of the Flies”. She thrived on hearing our interpretations of an author’s intentional and unintentional meaning and on hearing the stories we would come up with ourselves.

    She passed away a few years after I left high school, but Mrs. Renshaw left something powerful with me: A passion for stories as a way of understanding our world.

    Learning through stories

    For all teachers out there, Mrs. Renshaw left this lesson: Stories could be the main vessel through which we teach and through which we can empower youth.

    This is the heart of the EYES project.

    It started as an idea, almost precisely two years ago, driven by the bright headlights of two organisations: News Decoder and the The Environment and Human Rights Academy.

    The goal? Combine authoritative climate education and journalism to create a pathway for youth to deep knowledge.

    We would design a climate change curriculum with a systems approach and justice lens, grounded in storytelling, to provide teachers with an innovative and flexible way of teaching something multifaceted and vital — and to provide students with the agency to take action.

    The curriculum wouldn’t prescribe shorter showers or fewer beef burgers. It would instead shine light on the systems that keep the climate crisis in a relentless spiral and the injustices that have come as a result. And it would give students this fundamental task: Find the stories of the people and systems at the heart of climate change, but in their own communities and circumstances. We would guide them in communicating these stories to the world.

    Seeing the small parts that make a big problem

    They could start, maybe, with saving water if they have water to save and eating a plant-based diet if that’s available and affordable to them, but they should understand those are just pieces of a giant problem.

    By finding and telling stories, by being a journalist in one’s own community, students can start to connect the different pieces of climate change to their own circumstances and to feel a different sense of agency.

    Producing the climate storytelling curriculum was one thing. The challenge was getting it into schools. We ended up piloting it in ten countries — five in the European Union, five outside Europe — to gather feedback and refine the materials into a curriculum that can be added to any educator’s repertoire.

    We soon collided with reality. Tight school curricula leave little room for innovation. Teachers are busy. How to present something both complex and innovative in a way that is engaging, tangible and accessible to all students between the ages of 15 and 18?

    We built up a team of pilot teachers — springboarding from our networks -– and gave them a set of seven modules that explored such things as fossil fuel emissions, the carbon budget, climate justice and reasons to focus away from individual carbon footprints.

    Reporting climate change

    The modules included a project for students. They would pick a topic and report on it as journalists. That meant conducting interviews, gathering data and presenting it in a multimedia format.

    We imagined deep investigations, groundbreaking documentaries, enlivened youth.

    We organised in-person events to see how this curriculum would empower students in real time. In Brussels, we spoke with students about how emitting fossil fuels stays profitable and about how one area in Mumbai can be six degrees hotter than its immediate — and wealthier -– neighbouring area.

    In Paris, students pitched stories about climate injustice, and in Pristina, Kosovo, Roma students drew images of their own lived reality of climate change. We were in Romania and Serbia, and in two alternative education spaces in Portugal, where all modules were delivered to students who came from complex social backgrounds.

    We supported our pilot teachers in Cameroon, Colombia and Kenya from afar and connected students in Colombia, Kenya and Slovenia by making them “pen pals” so they could exchange letters on their differing lived experiences of climate change.

    Change doesn’t come easy.

    But we kept falling back onto the same challenges: time is squeezed at schools and climate injustice — a reality often experienced “elsewhere” — is hard to convey to young people.

    We get it. The economic system that climate change is rooted in is a hard one to grasp when you’re trying to figure out whether to go to university or how to get a job or what career to train for.

    It was disheartening. Was anyone really being empowered? There was little pick up and a whole lot of resistance, despite the innovative social science research that was at the heart of our program.

    And so again, we came back to the thread of the project — storytelling. After all, as author and organizational consultant Peg Neuhauser said: “No tribal chief or elder has ever handed out statistical reports, charts, graphs or lists to explain where the group is headed or what it must do.”

    It was in a conference room just south of Brussels, over three days in crisp October, that the wick of the project’s candle was finally lit. Educators from across Europe gathered around a large table to revitalise their teaching and, as the project was coming to a close, they opened a door I’d turned a blind eye to.

    Inspiring teachers to empower youth

    They listened, they contributed and they gave us a sense that we’d done it. We had laid down the soil. We had planted the seeds. All we needed were enthusiastic and present teachers to find the time and space to be together. This was the bright and warm spring we were waiting for.

    We saw that our curriculum was not a rigid product but a set of concepts, pedagogies and ideas that could be adapted by skilled and passionate teachers. And we could trust them to do that. The magic wasn’t in what we gave them, but in feeding the fire they already had for teaching climate change.

    The EYES curriculum is now as follows: 16 standalone classroom units each dealing with one concept — from tipping points to systemic change, from human–nature connection to green extractivism — and each including a bite-size storytelling activity such as come up with a pitch, explain a concept, make a connection. It includes six journalism guides from the principles of journalism and how to spot greenwashing, to how to interview and write an article.

    There’s an Educators’ Guide produced from the brainstorming of that workshop in Brussels, a blog written by educators and students and a podcast series featuring brilliant thinkers. All materials are freely available to educators wherever they teach.

    Ultimately, the success of EYES comes down to people: The educators; the advisory board; the students who were enlightened and empowered; the brilliance, strength and kindness of Andreea Pletea at The Environment and Human Rights Academy and her intimidatingly intelligent colleagues Anka Stankovic and Sebastien Kaye; the team at Young Educators European Association who bolstered the project when it was needed by helping to reach more students; Matthew and Jules Pye of The Climate Academy for transforming my way of seeing this global challenge; and my fantastic, curious and creative colleagues at News Decoder.

    Empowering Youth through Environmental Storytelling comes to an end on 31 December. And as I close my laptop on EYES for the final time, I am assured that I leave behind something that will continue to spread in classrooms and help teachers and students find the climate stories yet to be told.

    As Mrs. Renshaw taught me: A story does not end on the last page. It lives on in those it touches.

    Questions to consider:

    1. How can storytelling help students learn?

    2. What does it mean to look at a problem at the systems level?

    3. If you were going to explore a topic related to climate change, what would you tackle?

    Source link

  • Are you aware of your level of climate ignorance?

    Are you aware of your level of climate ignorance?

    Do you know which country emits the most greenhouse gases per capita? If not, you aren’t alone.

    I’m a student at The Climate Academy, an international organization founded by philosopher and climate activist Matthew Pye who teaches students about climate change from a systems point of view.

    This year, we surveyed almost 500 people in Brussels, Varese and Milan to analyse the level of climate literacy among populations across Europe. Many people we surveyed pointed at large emitters such as the United States, China and India.

    Yes, these are big emitters in quantity, but when it comes to per capita emissions — the amount divided by the population of the country — the top three are smaller, wealthy countries: Singapore, the United Arab Emirates and Belgium.

    These numbers can be explained by the extremely consumeristic, luxury lifestyle of the overwhelming majority of their citizens and the over-reliance on fossil fuels for generating energy. Yet, in our survey, 378 people out of 468 — 81% — named the United States, China or India.

    We must refocus the lens.

    What does this mean? That the media attention is on the wrong players. As stated by the World Economic Forum:

    “When India surpassed the European Union in total annual greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in 2019 becoming the third largest emitting country after China and the United States, that statistic only told part of the story. India’s population is nearly three times larger than that of the EU, so based on emissions per person, India ranks much lower among the world’s national emitters.”

    It is crucial to look at per capita emissions. That’s the conclusion of the Global Change Data Lab, a nonprofit organization that produces Our World in Data. It argues that annual national emissions do not take population size into account.

    “All else being equal, we might expect that a country with more people would have higher emissions,” it reported. “Emissions per person are often seen as a fairer way of comparing. Historically — and as is still true in low- and middle-income countries today — CO2 emissions and incomes have been tightly coupled. That means that low per capita emissions have been an indicator of low incomes and high poverty levels.”

    Europe often points at big emitters, but the comfortable lifestyles Europeans have due to their higher living standards aren’t sustainable.

    Who to blame for climate change?

    There’s a misconception that the more a country emits, the more responsible the country is for climate change.

    This is the result of intense lobbying and voluntary misdirection by the richest. The wealthiest individuals are undoubtedly responsible for a considerably higher share of global emissions. But we’re often told that countries like China and India are the most responsible, as they are some of the world’s biggest polluters, a fact which is widely recognized.

    Pye said it isn’t a surprise that the focus is on numbers at the macro level, as international organizations like the United Nations were created by the main global powers and they are still funded mainly by them.

    “Keeping the language and the numbers about the problem general and global masks the fact that the majority of our [per capita] emissions are still from these rich nations,” he said. “This lack of clarity about who is responsible is reflected right across global media coverage. It is not by chance that we don’t have a clear view of the vital statistics, it is by subtle and powerful design.”

    The UN is founded on the principle of human rights, he said.

    “Should it not think and act on climate change with everyone having an equal right to the air?” Pye said. “When you look at per capita and consumption emissions the whole landscape of responsibility is radically different.”

    Surveying people about greenhouse gases

    I conducted my part of the survey in a middle-class neighborhood of Brussels.

    When I asked a 20-year-old, “What would the consequences of a two degree increase in global temperature be?” I got this answer: “More meteorites.” When I put the same question to someone 50 years of age, the answer was, “It’s going to be cold.”

    A 75-year old told me: “I don’t believe in climate change. There were examples of extreme heat in the 17th century, it is natural. Climate change is a tool of the government to control us.”

    All of these are misconceptions about weather events, temperature patterns and the source and type of climate change we experience.

    Now, this survey included only a small sample of the population. But it already shows that the misconceptions in education about climate change are real and existent across every generation and in many ways. Many other surveys made by reputable organizations have supported this conclusion.

    What people don’t know

    A 2010 report by the Yale University Program on Climate Change Education found that 63% of Americans believed that global warming was happening, but many did not understand why. In this assessment, only 8% of Americans had knowledge equivalent to an A or B, 40% would receive a C or D, and 52% would get an F.

    A report by King’s College in London, based on a 2019 survey, found a similar level of ignorance.

    Misconceptions are still here, waiting to be tackled. It starts in schools, where new, fresh generations without bias or misconceptions are formed. It starts at home, where parents should adapt and teach their kids the basics. Proper educational programs should be set up by governments.

    This seems natural. But just a few months ago, in the United States, the Trump administration cut funding for schools that hold educational programs on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions reduction.

    Educational systems, too, spread misconceptions about climate change. Because we never stop learning, educational systems shouldn’t have such flaws and should provide accurate information.

    As we dive deeper into the climate crisis, proper knowledge and understanding will be key to systemic change and governmental response.

    Until information on climate change becomes a public good, we will continue to “debate what kind of swimming costume we will wear as the tsunami comes.” Those are the words of then-U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson before the 2008 financial crisis.

    Questions to consider:

    1. Why is it important to consider the size of a population when considering responsibility for climate change?

    2. What is meant by “climate ignorance”?

    3. How can you learn more about climate change?

     

    Source link

  • Climate change brings new worries to an old industry

    Climate change brings new worries to an old industry

    It is another early harvest for the Vignoble des Agaises, a vineyard in the region of Mons in Belgium. While the country is widely known for its variety of Trappist beers, the proximity that Mons and the region of Wallonia bears to French Burgundy and Picardie influences the local drinking culture. 

    Indeed, wine means a great deal to Arnaud Leroy, the vineyard’s sales manager. He and his family have, for 20 years now, pioneered the potential of the frontier that is Southern Belgium in the production of champagne and other sparkling wines. 

    Wine has been a staple of the regional economy and culture for centuries and has been a vital part of Leroy’s life and that of millions of other people around the world. Recently, however, a series of early frosts have decimated large quantities of the harvests in the lands stretching from Lombardy to Flanders. 

    These poor harvests have left many local vineyards in a state of financial uncertainty. Such events aren’t unique to the regions of Western Europe. Similar problems and hardships have been experienced in most other winemaking regions of Europe and have caused harm to winemaking communities around the world.

    Europe has been hit by what may only be compared to a “tidal wave” of change as previously predictable and constant meteorological conditions that have allowed winemaking to prosper in these regions for millennia have been altered significantly in the span of nearly a few decades.

    “In the last 10 years we have always harvested in October,” Leroy said. “But recent harvests have systematically been earlier and earlier into September, this year’s harvest being around the third of September.” This seemingly light change may have an outsized impact on the nature of the wine produced, deeply affecting the wine’s taste and composition.

    With wine, climate is everything.

    Wine is widely regarded as one of the most climate-sensitive crop cultures, experiencing possible changes to its texture, taste and tannin density from even the smallest constant meteorological change. 

    Earlier harvests can affect the wine’s taste, as a low maturation of the grapes may cause an increased sourness and a less sweet taste as well as a lighter, less-defined aroma, while spring frosts like the ones experienced in the last few years may cause the exact opposite, making a much sweeter, less-acidic and more tannin heavy wine. 

    Thus, the taste of many well-established sorts and brands of wines may be inconsistent and altered significantly by the seasonal changes brought by the climate crisis. Renowned regions such as Tuscany, Burgundy, Greece, the Rhine Valley, California and many more may be considerably different — and potentially even in danger of being displaced in a few decades.

    Indeed, it would seem one of Europe’s oldest industries is in a crisis. Wine has been a luxury product for thousands of years and holds a cultural, economic, social and historical value that few other comparable goods hold. 

    Associated with the higher class and nobility for centuries and being a valued good for over 10 millennia, wine is arguably one of Europe’s most important goods. It holds a vital place in Christian tradition and practice and — having two saints and a multitude of deities of hundreds of religions and mythologies — it is perhaps one of the most important components to the cultural development of the continent and perhaps, of the world.

    Addressing climate change

    The changes experienced in the last decades have not gone unnoticed. Many oenologists and vintners have called for more attention and action in the fight against climate change and the seasonal changes it may bring. What is now often called a crisis is even further fueled by other external causes.

    “The younger generation simply consumes less alcohol,” Leroy said. This makes the financial impact of said seasonal effects even more devastating to the smaller domaines and vineyards while bigger producers cling on to what is left of their harvests. 

    This year’s harvest has been plentiful and record-breaking in some regions such as Champagne, mostly due to favourable conditions and the development of better technology. But this success has taken media attention away from the longer term crisis.

    In the summer of 2025 large floods hit the regions of Picardie in Belgium and Champagne in France, causing two deaths and large amounts of damage to private property and agricultural lands, further hindering the European wine market.

    Even worse, in the case of an increase of two degrees Celsius (35 degrees Fahrenheit) of global temperatures, scientists warn that the world may pass a tipping point (a point of irreversibility) in the patterns of ocean currents, potentially causing drastic change to the European climate as we know it — a threat that has been mostly ignored by mass media and climatological institutions. 

    And that threat is only about 20 years from now.

    Some grapes suffer, others thrive.

    This doesn’t mean, however, that absolutely all regions will suffer and that there are no solutions. In some southern parts of Sweden for instance, a multitude of new, more resilient vines have laid the foundation for a Scandinavian wine industry, made possible due to the changes experienced in the local climate. 

    “While there have been some exceptions, notably in 2024, wine production has been top quality,” Leroy said. “The earlier harvests have their advantages.”

    As older, more renowned wine producing regions lose their significance, this instability may prove a good time for newer regions and producers with other defined traits such as Scandinavia, the Balkans and the Agaises vineyard with their chalky ground and distinct latitude to fill in the gap left by the older producers. 

    Of course, a solution to the entire issue would be the halting or at least the delaying of climate change through the lowering of consumption and of carbon emissions. But such halting would take a tremendous individual and national effort that is lacking in Europe and in the world. 

    Thus, this problem presents us with yet another reason to continue the costly yet imperative fight against the climate crisis and all effects that it causes.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What does the author mean by a “tidal wave” of change that has hit Europe?

    2. How can climate change help grape growing in some regions when it devastates other regions?

    3. Can you think of other long-time industries that have been affected by climate change?

    Source link

  • Dishing out healthy food options kids will eat

    Dishing out healthy food options kids will eat

    In New York City, a surprising culinary shift is happening where few expect it: inside city agencies that serve up to 219 million meals and snacks a year. From hospitals to shelters, New York is quietly leading a global experiment to reshape the diets of millions, not by persuasion but through policy. 

    Food is sitting at the crossroads of two global crises: chronic disease and climate change. The World Health Organization estimates that in 2017, 11 million deaths were attributable to unhealthy diets that were high in processed meat, sodium and added sugar and low in fruits, vegetables and whole grains. 

    Climate change, in addition to the consequences of extreme weather events, makes existing challenges worse on communities, environments and systems that sustain life. 

    More than half of the world’s population lives in urban areas, where 70% of global CO2 emissions are generated from transport, buildings and energy use. According to a report by the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, roughly 1.7 billion people living in cities and areas around them face food insecurity, making cities the new frontline in the fight against malnutrition. 

    The report calls on governments to use public budgets to buy and serve healthier food, prioritize buying from local, agroecological and small-scale farmers and integrate food planning into urban policies on health, transport, housing and waste. 

    We are what we eat.

    According to the United Nations Environment Programme, how people live — what they eat, how they move and what goods they consume — matters just as much as what governments do. Some governments, like New York’s, are turning sustainable living from a personal choice into a shared system: using their purchasing power to serve millions of plant-forward meals that put vegetables, legumes and grains at the center of the plate across public institutions, and coupling procurement with education and food policy to make diets a driver of both health and sustainability. 

    This makes these cities critical testing grounds for climate solutions, where policies that reshape diets toward more plant-rich, low-carbon meals can contribute directly to urban emissions reduction while improving health. 

    Since signing the C40 Good Food Cities Declaration in 2019, mayors across the world have pledged to make healthy and sustainable eating the norm by buying food aligned with the Planetary Health Diet, which promotes serving more plant-based meals, cutting food waste by half and working across communities, businesses and institutions to integrate these goals into their climate action plans. 

    New York is not alone. In Copenhagen, kitchen staff across more than 500 public kitchens are being trained to prepare nutritious, organic and climate-friendly meals as the city works toward its goal of making 90% of its food organic. In Quezon City in the Philippines, a partnership with Scholars of Sustenance, a nonprofit environmental organization tackling food waste, helped recover and distribute surplus food, providing roughly 22,000 meals for people in need within the first four months of the program. Across the world, cities are rethinking how the meals served through public programs can nourish both people and the planet. 

    In 2021, New York launched an ambitious 10-year plan with five goals: to support food businesses and strengthen protections for food workers; to modernize supply chains; to provide food that is produced, distributed and disposed of sustainably; to promote community engagement and cross-sector co-ordination; and to improve the nutrition and food security of New Yorkers. 

    Building health into a food system

    The city’s updated Food Standards go further: They ban processed meats and deep frying, require two or more servings a week at lunch and dinner to feature plant proteins and limit beef and other meats, such as lamb and mutton, to a maximum of two servings a week at facilities serving three meals a day. These standards touch nearly every corner of city life; they guide what’s served in schools, hospitals, homeless shelters, correctional facilities and senior centers, which adds up to 219 million meals and snacks each year. 

    New York challenges the idea that sustainable diets are solely individual choices, reframing them as civic responsibility. 

    “Food standards are the reinforcement piece for our departments and agencies to align with those values,” said Ora Kemp, senior policy adviser in the Office of the Mayor of New York City. “So those get developed with a very clear and distinct goal of being able to promote, protect and preserve the health of those that we serve through our food service, while simultaneously ensuring that the food is delicious and is culturally representative of the people that we serve.” 

    Transparency is also a central tool in this transformation. The Good Food Purchasing initiative, established in 2022, requires vendors to share data, such as the origin of the food and meals the city buys. 

    The lesson of the city’s policies for the public’s health is simple: People embrace change when it still feels like home. 

    “We have a policy that if 20% of the population is of any religious or ethnic group, then we need to make sure that food is provided for that group,” says Lorraine Cortés-Vásquez, commissioner of the New York City Department for the Aging. “It is very important for us that we manage the requirements, but also look at demand, interest and palate, because we want to respect culture and respect traditions, but we also want people to consume the food.” 

    Sustainable food choices

    In a citywide Cook-Off hosted by the Department for the Aging, chefs came together to demonstrate the flavor, creativity and nutrition of plant-based food, while also bringing the community together. 

    “Most older adults want to live in the community, in the communities that they build,” Cortés-Vásquez said. “They’re an asset, they bring revenue.” 

    Kemp said that plant-based menu options are also a low-effort way to encourage sustainable food choices. 

    “It’s not just the first and not just the second [exposure], but we offer the plant-based default multiple times throughout someone’s stay within any of our health and hospital systems in an attempt to encourage them to choose healthier diets,” Kemp said. 

    Preliminary data from New York City Health and Hospitals demonstrate that the shift is clear: 90% of patients who received plant-based meals report satisfaction. 

    Nicole Bonica, deputy director of menu management at the Office of Food and Nutrition Services for New York City Public Schools, says success depends on building a menu that students also like and that they feel will benefit them. This can be tricky. “Older students, they have preferences,” Bonica said. “Girls may not want to eat so many calories, because they’re watching themselves, whereas the boys actually want more protein items, maybe because they’re in more athletics.”

    The success of Plant-Powered Fridays, where school cafeterias feature a plant-based dish as the primary menu item, has led to additional offerings of plant-powered meals throughout the week in schools. Rich in vitamins, minerals, fiber and protein, these meals must align with both New York City Food Standards and U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 

    While this experiment is still unfolding, city governments may offer the most hopeful ingredient of all: changing what a city eats can change what a city stands for. In kitchens that once served convenience, chefs now serve climate action, health and dignity on the same plate. If New York can make sustainability taste good, perhaps the rest of the world can too. 

    Questions to consider:

    1. How is food connected to climate change?

    2. What is one thing New York City is doing to get young people to eat healthier?

    3. Can you think of ways you could change your diet to make it healthier?

    Source link

  • The high costs of cheap food

    The high costs of cheap food

    From New York to Jakarta, the scene is the same: Shelves overflowing with cheap, ultra-processed snacks and sugary drinks have become the new normal for millions of children. As a result, for the first time in history, more children are obese than underweight.

    UNICEF’s new Feeding Profit report explains why: Across the globe, cheap and intensely marketed ultra-processed foods dominate what families are able to put on the table, while nutritious options remain out of reach.

    Across the world, one in 20 children under five and one in five children and adolescents aged five to 19 are overweight. The number of overweight children and teens in 2000 almost doubled by 2022, with South Asia experiencing an increase of almost 500%. In East Asia, the Pacific, Latin America, the Caribbean, the Middle East and North Africa, the increase was at least 10%.

    Ultra-processed foods and beverages, defined as industrially formulated, are composed primarily of chemically-modified substances extracted from foods, together with additives and preservatives to enhance taste, texture and appearance as well as shelf life.

    These foods — which are often cheaper, nutrient poor and higher in sugar, unhealthy fats and salt — are now more prevalent than traditional, nutritious foods in children’s diets.

    Can we wean ourselves off ultra-processed foods?

    Studies show there’s a direct link between eating a lot of ultra-processed foods and an increased risk of overweight and obesity among children and adolescents. Among teens aged 15-19 years, 60% consumed more than one sugary food or beverage during the previous day, 32% consumed a soft drink and 25% consumed more than one salty processed food.

    Today, children’s paths to healthy eating are shaped less by personal choice than by the food environments that surround them. Those are the places where and conditions under which people make decisions about what to eat. They connect a person’s daily life with the broader food system around them, and are shaped by physical, political, economic and cultural factors that help determine what foods are available, affordable, appealing and regularly eaten.

    Such environments are steering children toward ultra-processed, calorie-dense options, even when healthier foods are available.

    Around the world, countries are beginning to push back. In Mexico, where nearly four million children aged 4-10 are obese, the government took a bold step in March 2025. It banned the sale of ultra-processed foods and sugary drinks in schools.

    The new rules go beyond restriction: Schools must offer fresh, regional foods such as fruits, vegetables and seeds, promote water as the default beverage, and establish health education programs. The policy also calls for regular health monitoring, mandatory fortification of wheat and corn flours, and more opportunities for physical activity, with penalties for schools that fail to comply.

    Taking steps to slim down our diets

    In September 2025, Malaysia’s Ministry of Education followed similar steps. It now prohibits 12 categories of ultra-processed foods and drinks in school canteens, from instant noodles and skewered snacks to frozen desserts and candy.

    But even as countries rewrite their food policies, millions of families still face difficult choices at the market.

    Shauna Downs, associate professor of food policy and public health nutrition at Rutgers University, has seen firsthand how hunger and obesity can coexist within the same communities in her research on informal settlements in Nairobi, Kenya.

    “People are able to find nutrient-rich foods, like leafy greens, fruits, and vegetables, and animal-source foods, but they’re often expensive, and what they can get that’s cheaper is things like mandazi [fried dough], which provide energy, and they taste good, but they’re not getting the nutrients they need,” she said.

    Families that want to buy the nutrient-rich foods are forced into heartbreaking choices, Downs said.

    “So now they’re making a decision between ‘Am I gonna buy this food from the market, which my family needs, or am I gonna pay for my child to go to school?’” she said.

    Looking at food environments

    By spotlighting the food environment, consumers and researchers alike can move past the tired “eat less, move more” narrative to fight childhood obesity and ask a better question: Why wasn’t the healthy plate the obvious, easy and most affordable choice in the first place?

    Long before ultra-processed foods flooded grocery shelves, they quietly took over another key part of children’s lives: school cafeterias. Back in 1981, the Reagan administration cut US$1.5 billion in U.S. school food funding, pushing public institutions to rely on convenience over nutrition.

    Pamela Koch, associate professor of nutrition and education at Teachers College, Columbia University, said that one of the things cut was for funding for schools  upgrade their kitchens.

    “That was the same time as the food supply was becoming more and more [saturated] with highly-processed food, and a lot of food companies realized, ‘Wait, we could have a market selling to schools. Schools don’t have money to buy supplies’,” Koch said.

    Companies began offering deals: Sign a long-term contract and receive a free convection oven to reheat ultra-processed foods. For schools facing budget cuts and limited staffing, the decision was simple. The cost of that convenience would echo for decades.

    Let’s start with school meals.

    The nonprofit Global Child Nutrition Foundation, highlights school meals as an essential lever for transforming food systems: Create demand for nutritious foods, improve the livelihoods of those working in the food system and promote climate-smart foods. However, the cost of scaling up national programs depends on the strength of supply chains, underlying food markets, logistics and procurement models.

    Countries that depend on imported food, already challenged by infrastructure and expensive trading costs, will face additional challenges in delivering healthy school meals.

    In much of the world, climate stress and weak infrastructure are making nutritious food both more difficult to grow and more expensive to purchase.

    Small-scale farmers, sheep and cattle farmers, forest keepers and fishers — known collectively as smallholder farmers — grow much of the food in low-income countries. They face worsening yields due to climate change, land degradation and lack of access to the technology and resources that support sustainable food production.

    At the same time perishable foods are becoming more expensive because the global supply chain — how food gets shipped from a farm in one country through distribution networks to store shelves in another country — is increasingly threatened by political tension, the lasting effects of the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change.

    Durability over nutrition

    Kate Schneider, assistant professor of sustainable food systems at Arizona State University, said that smallholder farmers grow food as their livelihood. “They’re not able to grow enough food, which is partly a story of climate change,” Schneider said. “Multiple generations now have been farming … year after year on the same land, but without external inputs –– fertilizers and modern, high-yielding seeds –– they are resulting in very low yields.”

    Even when fresh fruits and vegetables are available, logistical barriers make it easier to sell ultra-processed foods. Fresh produce is heavy, vulnerable to spoilage and expensive to move, especially in countries with poor transport networks.

    “When we’re thinking about fresh items, they’re perishable, and they need a cold chain,” Schneider said. “You’re paying, when you buy an apple, for the three that also rotted.”

    Meanwhile, ultra-processed products like soda avoid this problem entirely: “It’s cheaper for them to have a ton of different bottling plants around countries than to distribute long distances,” Schneider said.

    The result of these challenges is a global system that rewards durability over nutrition and continues to make healthy food increasingly out of reach.

    Connecting sustainability of diets and the environment

    The EAT-Lancet Commission 2.0, a scientific body redefining healthy and sustainable diets, offers a different view: The ultra-processed foods fuelling obesity are also pushing food systems beyond climate and biodiversity limits.

    Its newly published report says that nearly half the world’s population can’t afford a healthy diet, while the richest 30% generate more than 70% of food-related environmental damage.

    The planetary health diet suggests a plant-rich diet that consists of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, nuts and beans, with only moderate or small amounts of fish, dairy and meat.

    To build healthier and more just food systems, experts also recommend a whole list of other things: make nutritious diets more accessible and affordable; protect traditional diets; promote sustainable farming and ecosystems; reduce food waste.

    And all of this should be done with the participation of diverse sectors of the society.

    The responsibility of transforming food systems falls not only on governments but also on donors and financial partners, development and humanitarian organizations, academic institutions and civil society. The stakes are high, but so is the potential to change. With bold, coordinated action, the next generation of children can be nourished by healthy food, while building food systems that sustain both people and the planet. 

    Questions to consider:

    1. How is obesity connected to the environment?

    2. What are some governments doing to try to tackle the obesity crisis?

    3. What changes could you make to your diet to make it healthier?

     

    Source link

  • Empowering youth through environmental storytelling

    Empowering youth through environmental storytelling

    Through storytelling, we can bring climate-related data to life. Through storytelling, young people can use their voice and the voices of those around them to turn something complex, global and overwhelming, into something local, tangible and meaningful. Through storytelling, young people can help shift narratives and bring to the forefront stories of action and of hope.

    This is the idea behind the EYES climate storytelling curriculum.

    Now available on the eyesonclimate.org website, the curriculum is the culmination of the Empowering Youth through Environmental Storytelling project (EYES), an Erasmus+ co-funded project by News Decoder, The Environment and Human Rights Academy (TEHRA) and Young Educators European Association.

    The Climate Change 101 unit begins with the basics: human activities driving climate change and what temperature increase means for our planet. Students are tasked with producing an article that explains the topic to a younger audience.

    A unit on Climate Injustice walks students through the uncomfortable reality that those causing climate change are suffering the least from its impacts. Those who have contributed the least? They tend to be in the grip of climate change.

    Human stories from a man-made disaster

    We know that learning about the devastations of the climate crisis can leave young people feeling anxious and angry. We also know from the teachers who piloted the EYES curriculum that it’s important to localise these topics.

    So in the Climate Injustice unit, students are tasked with finding a human story: someone to illustrate climate injustice at play in their local area or region.

    Hearing stories about people lets us understand the reality of an issue. Telling these stories gives young people a device for meaning-making and a platform for agency.

    In our Systemic Change unit, students learn about the interconnected mechanisms that keep our economy rooted in endless economic growth and fossil fuel use. They learn about the ‘deep’ leverage points for making change — the rules, the goals and the mindset of a system. They research case studies on commodity supply chains and form their questions into a story pitch.

    Our curriculum runs across school subjects for students between 15 and 18 years of age. Other units include: Tipping Points, Planetary Boundaries, Human–Nature Connection, The Carbon Budget, Doughnut Economics and a Climate Justice Case Study.

    Solutions are out there.

    In Systemic Solutions to the Climate Crisis, we showcase seven inspiring examples of climate solutions from around the world, from local projects such as community-owned solar panels in Mexico to the transition to renewables in Uruguay, to global movements such as recognising the rights of nature or degrowth in the Global North.

    Meaningful action can happen at any scale. By engaging with these case studies, students can see that stories of just and transformative systems change happen all around them.

    There are so many stories yet to be told, and that in itself is empowering.

    To bolster student projects, the curriculum includes units on journalism and storytelling: The Principles of Journalism, Fact Checking and Misinformation, Interviewing and How to Write a Pitch, Write an Article and Produce a Podcast.

    “Storytelling can turn young people into active users of climate knowledge, and even change makers,” said Andreea Pletea, The Environment and Human Rights Academy programme manager. “Students can even help shift dominant narratives by bringing to the surface systemic solutions to the environmental crises that also address inequalities.”

    Causes and systems

    Aside from storytelling, the main focus of the EYES curriculum is on systems thinking and climate injustice.

    “We invite learners to go upstream to the root causes of the crises we face, and question why, despite increasing awareness, meaningful action often lags behind,” Pletea said. “Seeing the big picture particularly through systems thinking and global justice can also help young people make sense of what’s going on in their own local context.”

    Pletea said that ultimately, the goal is to plant a seed. “That all of us, including young people, are more than consumers,” she said. “We are citizens with a voice and power to act and demand change, and especially when we come together.”

    The EYES project itself began as a seed. TEHRA and News Decoder came together to improve climate change education through storytelling, and created a set of materials that were piloted in multiple education contexts across Europe, Africa and Latin America.

    The seeds to stories

    In Slovenia, Kenya and Colombia, pilot students exchanged letters on their local experiences of climate change. In Kosovo, a Roma community of young people visualised their personal experience of climate change through art.

    At a summer camp in Belgium, students played climate change games, pulled apart the individual carbon footprint and were guided through a nature meditation. In Kenya, students visited the precious Karura national park and wrote stories about tipping points and the value of forests.

    The feedback from students and educators, including at a three-day educators workshop in Brussels in October, helped shape and restructure the curriculum. It evolved into a set of off-the-shelf resources that can be used by multiple teachers in one school or independently by learners.

    If you are an educator, we invite you to dive into climate change with your students and use the EYES curriculum. Students need to learn about the root causes of the climate crisis so that they know in which direction to head — in their future careers as much as in their personal set of values.

    Through storytelling, young people can engage with the reality that is climate change, both as authors and as listeners. Storytelling is the way we understand ourselves: why we act the way we do and how together we can solve the problems that humankind has caused.

    Questions to consider:

    1. How can storytelling can turn someone into an active user of climate knowledge?

    2. What types of climate activities did students in different countries do through the EYES lessons?

    3. What stories about climate change have you found interesting to read or hear about?

     

    Source link

  • Are you storing toxic waste in your home or car?

    Are you storing toxic waste in your home or car?

    Los Angeles, California has one of the largest economies in the world. It also has the largest concentration of electric vehicles in the United States. Los Angeles is my hometown and the same place where recent wildfires burned whole neighborhoods to the ground.

    With the fires came the destruction of thousands of lithium-ion batteries in cars, electronics and kitchen appliances.

    The fires started on 7 January 2025, and ended 24 days later. In October of 2025, police arrested a man from the state of Florida for starting the fire, but it was the near perfect environmental conditions that caused the fires to grow fast and move quickly. These fires are thought to have caused an estimated economic loss of between $28 billion and $53.8 billion, and have destroyed upwards of 16,000 structures.

    The fires wreaked havoc on my local community for an entire month. Just miles from my house, I witnessed the destruction these fires caused. Entire residential street blocks lined not with houses, but with rubble. I saw people milling about in front of houses, and I watched one woman stare with a stone-cold look on her face at the remains of a house burned to ashes.

    My family and many others were lucky we were far enough from the fires that we didn’t suffer any loss. Still, even those who didn’t lose their homes suffered from poor air quality.

    “Our business was down 75% immediately after the fires,” said Leila Jersualem, a local business owner. “Because soccer is an outdoor activity, air quality was a frequent concern voiced by our families.”

    Chemicals complicate cleanup.

    The fires also caused the release of many chemicals into the air. One of the most dangerous chemical transmitters, it turns out, are lithium-ion batteries that release toxic gases when burned and can explode when lit on fire.

    Due to this, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had to safely remove more than a thousand burnt lithium-ion batteries from homes and vehicles, among other places.

    A schoolmate I interviewed at the time lived in the Pacific Palisades area. He told me he couldn’t enter his house due to toxic chemical residue from these destroyed batteries and other substances. He also didn’t think he’d ever move back in because of the dangers from these chemicals, which find their way onto household items and surfaces. Months later, he has still not moved back in.

    Cleanup from the Los Angeles fires has become an arduous task. Chris Myers, a lithium-ion battery tech specialist for the EPA, told reporter Erin Stone in nonprofit news site LAist that to clean up the batteries special teams collect them in sealed containers and take them to places where they can be discharged into a saltwater brine solution that extracts any remaining energy.

    The batteries are then crushed, and sent to a recycler who salvages critical minerals.

    The dangers from batteries are global.

    Myers told Stone that the heat from fires can cause a “thermal runaway” — the heat gets so intense that it causes a chemical reaction that creates more heat. When this happens, the batteries can emit toxic chemicals harmful to people in the area, and the chemicals, such as hydrogen chloride and hydrogen cyanide, can cause problems in the respiratory system.

    If a lithium-ion battery catches on fire, anyone within 25 meters has to evacuate and move out of the danger zone.

    Around the world, there were many incidents regarding the safety of lithium-ion batteries. In New York City, lithium-ion batteries were the leading cause of fire-related deaths in 2024. Additionally, lithium-ion batteries make up half of all garbage truck-related fires around the United States.

    One of the largest lithium battery storage and power plants caught on fire in Northern California in January 2025. The nonprofit news site Politico found that, in France, the number of fires at waste facilities caused by lithium batteries in common household items doubled between 2019 and 2023. In South Korea, more than 22 people were killed from a lithium battery explosion in a factory south of Seoul in June 2024.

    There are other problems with lithium ion batters. Conditions at lithium mines have raised some ethical questions, for example. In the U.S. state of Nevada, new lithium mines permitted by the Trump administration are preventing indigenous people from accessing sacred cultural areas, and raising fears of harm to drinking water and overall health of the local people.

    Do the benefits outweigh the danger?

    With all this danger, why are the batteries so prevalent in our homes? It is difficult to deny how useful they’ve been in humanity’s quest for clean energy.

    When comparing lithium-ion batteries to the internal combustion engine, we can see that over a car’s entire lifetime, ones with lithium-ion batteries will contribute less of a carbon footprint.

    It’s not far off to say that lithium-ion batteries have renovated our modern world.

    But even though there are many positives to using lithium-ion batteries, such as renewable energy, they’re only a small part of the actual solution and there are some alternatives.

    Vanadium flow batteries and sodium-ion batteries, for example, are considered viable alternatives to lithium-ion batteries. Sodium-ion batteries are faster to charge, and have a longer lifespan than lithium-ion batteries.

    Weighing alternatives

    The vanadium flow battery doesn’t decay and can contain the same level of recharge throughout the entire batteries’ lifetime. Also, unlike lithium batteries, vanadium flow batteries are non-flammable, making them much safer, especially in the event of fire.

    However, like lithium-ion batteries, they take significant resources to make, and their environmental and social impacts are high.

    When buying a car, getting a battery-powered car may be better for the environment, but consumers should be aware of the dangerous impacts of lithium-ion batteries.

    The effects of these batteries are felt everywhere, some good and some bad. The implications of them in the Los Angeles fires, however, raise questions on how safe they are to people and the environment.

    Further advancement of other parts of the climate solution must take place soon if we want to make a big impact in safer renewable energy.

    Questions to consider:

    1. What makes lithium-ion batteries dangerous?

    2. What alternatives to lithium-ion batteries are there for electric cars?

    3. What products do you use in your home that might contain a lithium-ion battery?

    Source link