Quantcast
Environmental News for a Healthier Planet and Life

Finding Opportunity in Crisis: 3 Essential Reads About Environmental Solutions

Popular
Finding Opportunity in Crisis: 3 Essential Reads About Environmental Solutions
Pexels

By Jennifer Weeks

From climate change to omnipresent plastic waste, 2019 delivered a lot of discouraging environmental news. Several special reports this year from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change documented how global warming is altering the planet's lands, forests, oceans and frozen regions.


Another U.N. report warned that the Earth is losing species at an alarming rate, with around 1 million animal and plant species facing extinction. Key causes include changes in land use, such as clearing forests for agriculture; unsustainable fishing rates; climate change; pollution; and the spread of invasive species.

Governments may seem unable or unwilling to confront these challenges, but scholars are proposing innovative solutions. Here are three articles that we published this year that put forth responses to urgent environmental challenges.

1. Cooling the Planet and Saving Species

Climate change and biodiversity loss are interconnected problems that together can seem overwhelming. But in a study published in April, 18 scientists proposed a "Global Deal for Nature" that can help avert both catastrophic climate change and mass extinction.

The plan identifies about a thousand "ecoregions" on land and sea that each contain unique ensembles of species and ecosystems, and also help curb climate change by storing carbon.

"Our plan would require a budget of some US$100 billion per year. This may sound like a lot, but for comparison, Silicon Valley companies earned nearly $60 billion in 2017 just from selling apps," Arizona State University conservation scientist Greg Asner, a co-author of the report, wrote for The Conversation. "Today, however, our global society is spending less than a tenth of that amount to save Earth's biodiversity."

"Forests, grasslands, peatlands, mangroves and a few other types of ecosystems pull the most carbon from the air per acre of land," Asner noted. "Protecting and expanding their range is far more scalable and far less expensive than engineering the climate to slow the pace of warming. And there is no time to lose."

2. Stemming the Tide of Plastic Trash

Global markets for scrap material, including recyclables, have been in turmoil since early 2018, when China — which was importing a large share of the world's scrap — shut that window almost completely. This year other Asian countries followed suit, saying they would no longer accept materials they were ill-equipped to handle.

These shocks have left U.S. scrap dealers searching for markets. Many are sending plastics – the hardest materials to recycle — to landfills.

Alarmed by these developments and the growing scale of plastic waste, many communities and businesses are intensifying the search for new solutions.

"Recycling authorities have launched public education campaigns, and investment in recycling infrastructure is on the rise," reported Kate O'Neill, professor of global environmental politics at the University of California, Berkeley. "There is palpable energy at trade meetings around improving options for plastics recycling. Chinese companies are investing in U.S. pulp and paper recycling plants, and may extend into plastics."

This process won't be quick, since it also requires action at the global level to connect national policies. And reducing production and use of plastic remains key. "But as one Asian country after another shuts the door on scrap exports, it is becoming increasingly clear that business as usual will not solve the plastic pollution challenge," O'Neill wrote.

3. A New New Deal for U.S. Farmers

Severe weather, corporate consolidation in agriculture and a trade war with China put heavy pressure on U.S. farmers in 2019. Farm bankruptcies are at historic highs, and many experts wonder where the next generation of farmers will come from.

Social scientists Maywa Montenegro of the University of California, Davis, Annie Shattuck of Indiana University and Joshua Sbicca of Colorado State University see this convergence as an economic, environmental and social crisis for farming communities. In response they propose a "just transition" to a system that cuts carbon emissions from agriculture, makes farmers less vulnerable to the effects of climate change and delivers economic justice to rural communities.

"Two elements are essential: Agriculture based in principles of ecology, and economic policies that end overproduction of cheap food and reestablish fair prices for farmers," they assert.

To picture what such a transition would look like, they point to New Deal agriculture policies adopted in the 1930s that directed public investments to rural communities, set price floors for crops and paid farmers to adopt conservation policies. This system was largely scrapped after World War II in favor of rules that promoted large-scale commodity production and maximized output. Today, the authors argue, farmers are locked into an economic model that is "unsustainable for farmers, eaters and the planet."

But in political and agricultural circles, new proposals are emerging for reducing corporate power in agriculture and restoring parity for farmers — payment that reflects production costs. Redirecting an industry this large is a long, slow process, but Montenegro, Shattuck and Sbicca asserted that "if policymakers can envision a contemporary version of ideas in the original New Deal, a climate-friendly and socially just American agriculture is within reach."

Reposted with permission from The Conversation.

With restaurants and supermarkets becoming less viable options during the pandemic, there has been a growth in demand and supply of local food. Baker County Tourism Travel Baker County / Flickr

By Robin Scher

Beyond the questions surrounding the availability, effectiveness and safety of a vaccine, the COVID-19 pandemic has led us to question where our food is coming from and whether we will have enough.

Read More Show Less

EcoWatch Daily Newsletter

Tearing through the crowded streets of Philadelphia, an electric car and a gas-powered car sought to win a heated race. One that mimicked how cars are actually used. The cars had to stop at stoplights, wait for pedestrians to cross the street, and swerve in and out of the hundreds of horse-drawn buggies. That's right, horse-drawn buggies. Because this race took place in 1908. It wanted to settle once and for all which car was the superior urban vehicle. Although the gas-powered car was more powerful, the electric car was more versatile. As the cars passed over the finish line, the defeat was stunning. The 1908 Studebaker electric car won by 10 minutes. If in 1908, the electric car was clearly the better form of transportation, why don't we drive them now? Today, I'm going to answer that question by diving into the history of electric cars and what I discovered may surprise you.

Read More Show Less

Trending

A technician inspects a bitcoin mining operation at Bitfarms in Saint Hyacinthe, Quebec on March 19, 2018. LARS HAGBERG / AFP via Getty Images

As bitcoin's fortunes and prominence rise, so do concerns about its environmental impact.

Read More Show Less
OR-93 traveled hundreds of miles from Oregon to California. Austin Smith Jr. / Confederated Tribes of Warm Springs / California Department of Fish and Wildlife

An Oregon-born wolf named OR-93 has sparked conservation hopes with a historic journey into California.

Read More Show Less
A plume of exhaust extends from the Mitchell Power Station, a coal-fired power plant built along the Monongahela River, 20 miles southwest of Pittsburgh, on Sept. 24, 2013 in New Eagle, Pennsylvania. The plant, owned by FirstEnergy, was retired the following month. Jeff Swensen / Getty Images

By David Drake and Jeffrey York

The Research Brief is a short take about interesting academic work.

The Big Idea

People often point to plunging natural gas prices as the reason U.S. coal-fired power plants have been shutting down at a faster pace in recent years. However, new research shows two other forces had a much larger effect: federal regulation and a well-funded activist campaign that launched in 2011 with the goal of ending coal power.

Read More Show Less