A new report from the United Nations’ Food and Agriculture Organization, or FAO, has found that more fish were farmed worldwide in 2022 than harvested from the wild, an apparent first.

Last week, the FAO released its annual report on the state of aquaculture — which refers to the farming of both seafood and aquatic plants — and fisheries around the world. The organization found that global production from both aquaculture and fisheries reached a new high — 223.3 million metric tons of animals and plants — in 2022. Of that, 185.4 million metric tons were aquatic animals, and 37.8 million metric tons were algae. Aquaculture was responsible for 51 percent of aquatic animal production in 2022, or 94.4 metric tons. 

The milestone was in many ways an expected one, given the world’s insatiable appetite for seafood. Since 1961, consumption of seafood has grown at twice the annual rate of the global population, according to the FAO. Because production levels from fisheries are not expected to change significantly in the future, meeting the growing global demand for seafood almost certainly necessitates an increase in aquaculture. 

Though fishery production levels fluctuate from year to year, “it’s not like there’s new fisheries out there waiting to be discovered,” said Dave Martin, program director for Sustainable Fisheries Partnerships, an international organization that works to reduce the environmental impact of seafood supply chains. “So any growth in consumption of seafood is going to come from aquaculture.”

But the rise of aquaculture underscores the need to transform seafood systems to minimize their impact on the planet. Both aquaculture and fisheries — sometimes referred to as capture fisheries, as they involve the capture of wild seafood — come with significant environmental and climate considerations. What’s more, the two systems often depend on each other, making it difficult to isolate their climate impacts. 

“There’s a lot of overlap between fisheries and aquaculture that the average consumer may not see,” said Dave Love, a research professor at the Center for a Livable Future at Johns Hopkins University. 

Studies have shown that the best diet for the planet is one free of animal protein. Still, seafood generally has much lower greenhouse gas emissions than other forms of protein from land-based animals. And given many people’s unwillingness or inability to go vegan, the FAO recommends transforming, adapting, and expanding sustainable seafood production to feed the world’s growing population and improve food security.

But “there’s a lot of ways to do aquaculture well, and there’s a lot of ways to do it poorly,” said Martin. Aquaculture can result in nitrogen and phosphorus being released into the natural environment, damaging aquatic ecosystems. Farmed fish can also spread disease to wild populations, or escape from their confines and breed with other species, resulting in genetic pollution that can disrupt the fitness of a wild population. Martin points to the diesel fuel used to power equipment on certain fish farms as a major source of aquaculture’s environmental impact. According to an analysis from the climate solutions nonprofit Project Drawdown, swapping out fossil fuel-based generators on fish farms for renewable-powered hybrids would prevent 500 million to 780 million metric tons of carbon emissions by 2050. 

Other areas for improvement will vary depending on the specific species being farmed. In 2012, a U.N. study found that mangrove forests — a major carbon sink — have suffered greatly due to the development of shrimp and fish farming. Today, industry stakeholders have been exploring how new approaches and techniques from shrimp farmers can help restore mangroves. 

Meanwhile, wild fishing operations present their own environmental problems. For example, poorly managed fisheries can harvest fish more quickly than wild populations can breed, a phenomenon known as overfishing. Certain destructive wild fishing techniques also kill a lot of non-targeted species, known as bycatch, threatening marine biodiversity.

But the line between aquaculture and fish harvested from the wild isn’t as clear as it may seem. For example, pink salmon that are raised in hatcheries and then released into the wild to feed, mature, and ultimately be caught again are often marketed as “wild caught.” Lobsters, caught wild in Maine, are often fed bait by fisherman to help them put on weight. “It’s a wild fishery,” said Love — but the lobster fishermen’s practice of fattening up their catch shows how human intervention is present even in wild-caught operations. 

On the flipside, in a majority of aquaculture systems, farmers provide their fish with feed. That feed sometimes includes fish meal, says Love, a powder that comes from two sources: seafood processing waste (think: fish guts and tails) and wild-caught fish. 

All of this can result in a confusing landscape for climate- or environmentally-conscientious consumers who eat fish. But Love recommends a few ways in which consumers can navigate choice when shopping for seafood. Buying fresh fish locally helps shorten supply chains, which can lower the carbon impact of eating aquatic animals. “In our work, we’ve found that the big impact from transport is shipping fresh seafood internationally by air,” he said. Most farmed salmon, for example, sold in the U.S. is flown in. 

From both a climate and a nutritional standpoint, smaller fish and sea vegetables are also both good options. “Mussels, clams, oysters, seaweed — they’re all loaded with macronutrients and minerals in different ways” compared to fin fish, said Love. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The world is farming more seafood than it catches. Is that a good thing? on Jun 14, 2024.

Heat waves don’t just make you sweat — they can also mess with your brain. It’s been established that hot weather can result in lower scores on math tests and higher rates of aggression, ranging from mean-spirited behavior to violent crime. A small but growing body of research suggests it can also influence how people talk. 

Politicians tend to use shorter words in speeches when the temperature outside is 75-80 degrees Fahrenheit or hotter, according to a study published in the journal iScience on Thursday. The analysis looked at 7 million speeches across eight countries — the United States, the United Kingdom, Austria, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Denmark, Spain, and Germany — comparing them against the average temperature the day they were delivered. Cold days didn’t produce the same effect.

Understanding the consequences of heat on cognitive abilities is becoming particularly important as the climate warms, said Risto Conte Keivabu, a co-author of the study who researches climate change at the Max Planck Institute of Demographic Research in Germany. 

On days hotter than 81 degrees F, the simpler language politicians used was equivalent to losing half a month of education. That result is likely an underestimate, Conte Keivabu said, since the study tried to “disentangle the impact of heat from all the possible confounding factors in the most conservative way possible.” Looking at just the data from Germany, researchers found the effect was comparable to a four-month reduction in education, he said. The speeches were measured using Flesch-Kincaid readability tests, which assess how difficult a text is to understand based on the length of the words and sentences.

The study found that adults over 57 years old were more sensitive to heat, based on the German data, with temperatures in the range of 70-75 degrees F linked with changes in their speech. Heat is especially dangerous for older adults, who have a harder time cooling down because of weaker blood circulation and deteriorating sweat glands.

Other studies support the idea that heat can tamper with our words — though more for the reason that it can worsen your mood. Hate speech tends to rise with the thermometer: The number of tweets in the U.S. using pejorative or discriminatory language jumped by up to 22 percent during extreme heat, according to a study from 2022. Researchers have observed a similar phenomenon on Chinese social media, with people using more negative language on very hot days.

Unlike social media posts, however, speeches are typically prepared in advance, which makes politicians’ shift to less complex language on hot days more surprising. The researchers posit that the psychological effects of heat could “influence a speaker to simplify speech or diverge from prepared remarks due to impaired cognitive function and comfort.”

So how is it that a heat wave outside can alter the quality of speech indoors? The study puts forward a few theories. Maybe even a short exposure to heat can cause problems, like waiting for a train during a commute or taking a break outside; or, conversely, uncomfortable temperatures outdoors might lead people to stay inside where the lack of fresh air could hinder their cognitive abilities. Another possibility is that people tend to sleep worse when they’re hot, which makes it harder to think straight the next day.

Using simpler language isn’t necessarily bad — in fact, it’s often easier to understand. But when someone uses less complex language over time, that can indicate cognitive decline, according to Conte Keivabu. “We don’t know if this leads towards outcomes when it comes to the decision-making of politicians or how effective they are in conveying their messages,” he said. Researchers have found that using more generic wording can be an early warning sign of dementia, a pattern detected in authors’ books and politicians’ speeches.

Heat isn’t the only environmental factor that might subtly be influencing us to say one thing instead of another. A study in 2019 found that exposure to air pollution similarly led to a reduction in the complexity of speeches by members of the Canadian parliament, the equivalent of losing nearly three months of education.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How hot weather can tamper with your words on Jun 14, 2024.

Poet Ben Ditmars wrote, “Like a tree, I have stood my ground, not fallen.” If…

The post Earth911 Inspiration: Like a Tree appeared first on Earth911.

In today’s evolving business landscape, the importance of high-quality data to support ESG goals cannot be overstated. With increasing regulatory pressures, such as CSRD and SEC, companies must ensure their ESG reporting is both transparent and accurate.

In a blow to the increasing legal precedent in favor of citizens suing their governments over the adverse impacts of climate change, a vote by Switzerland’s parliament has rejected the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR)’s historic climate ruling in favor of a group of older Swiss women.

The women — KlimaSeniorinnen, a group of more than 2,000 women over age 64 — won a lawsuit in April claiming that their country’s inadequate response to the climate crisis, particularly heat waves, had put their health at risk.

“The declaration is a betrayal of us older women – and of all those who are suffering from the real consequences of global warming today and in the future,” said Rosmarie Wydler-Wälti, KlimaSeniorinnen co-president, as The Guardian reported.

The original ruling was hailed as a huge win since it means countries belonging to the Council of Europe — the continent’s foremost human rights organization — are now susceptible to legal challenges when they are slow to make the transition to more renewable economic systems.

Even so, on Wednesday members of the lower house of Swiss parliament voted 111 to 72 to disregard the verdict. They argued that Switzerland’s response to the climate crisis had been sufficient and accused the judges of “inadmissible and disproportionate judicial activism.”

“This is terrible from a rule-of-law perspective,” said Corina Heri, a University of Zürich legal researcher, as reported by The Guardian. “The term ‘slippery slope’ is overused, obviously, but it is a dangerous precedent to create.”

If the Swiss women feel their country is not adhering to the ruling, they can complain to a Council of Europe committee that meets four times annually to monitor ECHR ruling compliance, Reuters reported.

Raphael Mahaim, a lawyer for the KlimaSeniorinnen, told Reuters the group was considering filing a complaint.

It is also possible for Switzerland to be expelled or leave the Council of Europe of its own accord if it does not want to act in accordance with the council’s directives. In March of 2022, Russia was removed from the council following its invasion of Ukraine.

Legal experts said the more likely outcome would be for Switzerland to be pressured to accept the judgment.

Isabela Keuschnigg, a London School of Economics legal researcher, said Switzerland’s refusal to carry out the ruling could “set a concerning precedent, undermining the role of legal oversight in democratic governance,” reported Reuters.

Joana Setzer, a climate litigation expert with the London School of Economics, said compliance was encouraged by the monitoring system and countries leaving the council would be subjected to “significant political and social repercussions.”

The post Switzerland’s Parliament Votes to Disregard Historic Climate Ruling Victory for Senior Women appeared first on EcoWatch.

In addition to the devastating death toll and widespread destruction of Russia’s war on Ukraine, the ongoing conflict has brought extensive climate damage to the planet.

New research reveals that the first 24 months of the Ukraine war had a climate cost greater than the annual greenhouse gas emissions of 175 individual countries, adding to the global climate crisis.

“Russia’s war in Ukraine has caused extensive devastation, including the destruction or damage of homes, schools, hospitals, and other critical public facilities, leaving citizens without essential resources such as water, electricity, and healthcare. Beside causing damage to the natural environment of Ukraine, this war affects the global climate due to the release of significant amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases (GHG) into the atmosphere,” the authors wrote in the study. “In the early months of the war, the majority of the emissions were caused by the large scale destruction of civilian infrastructure requiring a large post-war reconstruction effort. Now, after two years of war, the largest share of emissions originate from a combination of warfare, landscape fires and the damage to energy infrastructure.”

The study, Climate Damage Caused by Russia’s War in Ukraine: 24 February 2022 – 23 February 2024 by Initiative on GHG accounting of war (IGGAW) — a coalition of climate experts estimating the impact of the war on Earth’s climate — found that, after two years of war, the planet’s GHG emissions have increased by 175 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.

The GHG emissions include carbon dioxide, sulfur hexafluoride — the most potent GHG of all — and nitrous oxide, reported The Guardian. The total is equivalent to the annual emissions of 90 million gas-powered cars and more than that of countries like Venezuela and the Netherlands in 2022.

IGGAW is partially funded by the Swedish and German governments, along with the European Climate Foundation. It says the Russian Federation will be faced with a climate reparations bill of $32 billion for the first two years of the war.

“Russia is harming Ukraine but also our climate. This ‘conflict carbon’ is sizeable and will be felt globally. The Russian Federation should be made to pay for this, a debt it owes Ukraine and countries in the global south that will suffer most from climate damage,” said Lennard de Klerk, IGGAW lead author, as The Guardian reported.

The report is the first time reparations calculations have been made for climate impacts related to war.

The researchers found that one-third of emissions came from military activity — fuel used by Russian troops was the single biggest GHG source.

The concrete and steel that will be necessary to rebuild damaged and destroyed homes, schools, bridges, water plants and factories will contribute another third, depending on what proportion of carbon-intensive and more sustainable methods and materials are used in the reconstruction process.

The other third of GHG emissions came from fires, military strikes on energy infrastructure, the rerouting of commercial aircraft and the displacement of almost seven million Ukrainian and Russian people. The additional aviation fuel used to avoid the conflict generated a minimum of 24 million tonnes of carbon dioxide.

Fires associated with military actions burned 2.47 million acres of forest and fields, making up 13 percent of total carbon emissions.

Energy infrastructure was also targeted, creating huge GHG leaks.

The study found that the forced movement of millions of Ukrainians fleeing the conflict, millions of people displaced internally and Russians fleeing their country generated nearly 3.3 million tonnes of carbon.

“The new monetary estimate of climate damage highlights the important role of greenhouse gas emissions accounting for conflicts,” said Linsey Cottrell, Conflict and Environment Observatory environmental policy officer, as reported by The Guardian. “We critically need international agreement on how conflict and military emissions are measured and addressed.”

The post First Two Years of Russia’s War on Ukraine Increased Climate Pollution by 175 Million Tonnes, Report Finds appeared first on EcoWatch.

A new study from a team of international scientists has uncovered that nitrous oxide emissions, one of the most potent greenhouse gases, have risen continuously over a 40-year period.

The report, published in Earth System Science Data, found that nitrous oxide (N2O) emissions increased by 40% from 1980 to 2020, reaching around 3 million metric tons per year. 

According to the report, nitrous oxide emissions had the fastest growth rate in 2020 and 2021 since 1980, when tracking became more reliable. In 2020 alone, nitrous oxide emissions reached around 10 million metric tons, with 8 million metric tons attributed to agriculture, Scripps Institution of Oceanography at the University of California San Diego reported.

The warming effects of one pound of nitrous oxide are about 265 times the warming effects from the same amount of carbon dioxide, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reported. While nitrous oxide emissions have been rising, the report noted that the amount of nitrous oxide emissions released from natural sources has been mostly steady, meaning the increase could be heavily attributed to human activities.

Even after 2020, nitrous oxide emissions remain unchecked, with a nearly 25% increase in 2022 compared to pre-industrial levels.

“Nitrous oxide emissions from human activities must decline in order to limit global temperature rise to 2°C as established by the Paris Agreement,” Hanqin Tian, lead author of the report and the Schiller Institute Professor of Global Sustainability at Boston College, said in a press release. “Reducing N2O emissions is the only solution since at this point no technologies exist that can remove N2O from the atmosphere.” 

The report found some progress toward curbing these emissions, although more actions are needed, the authors said. Nitrous oxide emissions in Europe have been declining by 31% since the 1930s. While China has been the No. 1 emitter of nitrous oxides since 2010, according to the report, the country has seen the rate of these emissions slow down since the mid-2010s. Following China and rounding out the top 10 emitters are India, U.S., Brazil, Russia, Pakistan, Australia, Indonesia, Turkey and Canada.

In the U.S., agriculture is a major contributor of nitrous oxides, but emissions from industrial activities have declined. Globally, agriculture contributed to about 74% of all nitrous oxide emissions over the past 10 years, the report found.

“While there have been some successful nitrogen reduction initiatives in different regions, we found an acceleration in the rate of N2O accumulation in the atmosphere in this decade,” said Josep Canadell, executive director at the Global Carbon Project and a research scientist at Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization. “The growth rates of atmospheric N2O in 2020 and 2021 were higher than any previous observed year and more than 30 percent higher than the average rate of increase in the previous decade.”  

Because nitrous oxide emissions have been reaching record highs in the past few years, the report authors have recommended frequent assessments as well as improvements to agricultural practices, such as limiting the use of nitrogen fertilizers to slow emissions. They also noted that there needs to be better recordings of the sources of these emissions as well as nitrous oxide sinks.

The post Nitrous Oxide Emissions Increased 40% From 1980 to 2020, Accelerating Climate Change, Study Finds appeared first on EcoWatch.

Diamonds are diamonds wherever they come from, right? Depends on whether you’re asking a jeweler,…

The post Guest Opinion: The Environmental Impact of Lab-Grown Diamonds appeared first on Earth911.

This coverage is made possible through a partnership between IPR and Grist, a nonprofit environmental media organization.

Earlier this month, Laurie Stanek shoveled hay to a group of young black-and-white Holstein cows, just a few among the roughly 200 cattle on her family dairy farm. Located in northern Michigan’s Antrim County, she has worked there for almost 50 years now. 

The farm day starts early. 

“We’re out here at 5 o’clock every morning to get started feeding the babies,” she said.

But there are some additional chores for farmers in Michigan, now that avian influenza, or bird flu, has made the jump to cattle. 

New state requirements include limiting the number of visitors and increasing disinfection practices like cleaning boots and vehicles. Michigan also has prohibited poultry or lactating cows from being shown at events like fairs. The U.S. Department of Agriculture has required that lactating cows moving across state lines receive a negative test result on bird flu. 

“We are conscious that the threat is there, and we wouldn’t let just anybody come in,” Stanek said, referring to the state requirement to limit visitors. 

With outbreaks of bird flu in dairy cattle across the country, health officials are emphasizing biosecurity — that is, efforts to prevent the introduction and spread of disease. 

Researchers are still working to understand how climate change is affecting the spread of the bird flu. But, as Grist has previously reported, H5N1 has spread outside its typical seasons as migratory patterns have changed. And research has shown that generally, climate change could join a host of other factors in making the transmission of viruses between species more likely — something called “viral spillover.” 

“We are in a place where the threat of emerging pathogens is much greater than ever before. So therefore, the need for biosecurity is even more significant than it has ever been before,” said Suresh Kuchipudi, a professor and chair of the infectious diseases and microbiology department at the University of Pittsburgh’s School of Public Health. 

Some, like Kuchipudi, say scaling up biosecurity operations can help the agricultural sector become more resilient to climate change. But it’s just one part of the complicated process of responding to the spread of viruses like the bird flu.

This strain of avian influenza is called H5N1, and it’s highly pathogenic, meaning it’s deadly for poultry. First detected in the 1990s, it has surged over the last several years, spreading to birds and mammals across the world. 

The spread to cattle is new. 

“I’m a virologist by training, and my other virologist buddies and I all have to admit: None of us saw this coming,” said Kim Dodd, the director of the Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at Michigan State University. Animals like foxes can contract the flu when they eat an infected carcass. But cattle don’t eat meat. 

“We didn’t expect to find [highly pathogenic] avian influenza in dairy cattle, and to find that it amplifies so well, and that we have so much virus in the milk,” Dodd said. “And so that’s really a big part of trying to understand, you know, what do we do about that to be able to help control the outbreak.”

The first confirmed case in cattle was reported in Texas earlier this year, and 11 more states have confirmed cases of the bird flu in dairy herds. 

Michigan has reported the most cases in the country. As of Wednesday, the state had confirmed 25 instances of the flu in herds. It also has 2 of the 3 confirmed cases of the disease in people — the other was a dairy worker in Texas. 

In May, state officials declared the flu an “extraordinary emergency,” calling it a threat to animal health, human health, trade and the economy. 

Officials and researchers have said Michigan’s high case count is an example of robust testing in response to the outbreak. Overall, the response to the bird flu outbreak in cattle has been somewhat rocky. States have pushed back against federal efforts to address the virus, and public health experts have raised concerns about the lack of testing and warned that the true reach is likely greater that official counts.

Those involved in Michigan’s response have said part of its response is collaboration with farmers. “That takes two sides,” said Dodd. “It takes the people who are looking and the people who are testing, but it also requires that the people who own the animals are opening their doors and allowing testing to occur.”

H5N1 causes a reduction in cows’ milk production, among other symptoms. It can devastate the poultry industry; since it was detected in commercial flocks in the United States in 2022, it has led to the deaths of close to 100 million farmed birds. 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have maintained that the danger to the public is relatively low. But dairy workers are now more at risk of exposure to the bird flu as they work with cows; the virus appears to be spreading largely through milk. 

“We want to make sure that we’re limiting the further spread of the virus, so that we’re continuing to protect human health, and we don’t have so much virus in the environment that could potentially mutate and affect humans in a different way,” said Tim Boring, the director of the state Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.

One of the ways the state is doing that is by urging farms to follow biosecurity measures. These are pretty low tech — like wearing protective gear and disinfecting equipment. How effective they are comes down to compliance. 

“I’m sure they’re serious. I’m sure they’re not fooling around. It’s their livelihood, their investments,” said Jean-Pierre Vaillancourt, a professor of veterinary medicine at the University of Montreal. But “if they’re not sharing data, and they’re not doing good surveillance to figure out who’s where and what and all that, we already have a big problem.”

Climate change coincides with the spread of certain diseases, as animals interact with one another in new settings. While biosecurity may play a role in prevention or response, it likely won’t stop the next pandemic, Vaillancourt said. He argues that we should actually be looking at disease from a regional perspective.  

“What can we do to minimize the spread between sites?” he said. “That requires data sharing.”

That’s where industry and institutions often fall short. Farms that have outbreaks can face stigma and lose money, and farm workers that test positive can deal with health and economic issues. Worker advocacy groups have also voiced concerns that testing isn’t reaching those on the front lines. 

Some public health experts say the surge of bird flu in cattle is an opportunity to hone that response and protect animal and human life in the process.  

“The fact is, [governments] need to learn how to get this right when the stakes are lower, because there are less forgiving bird flu viruses than this one,” said Amesh Adalja, a scholar at Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security.

The agricultural industry will have to be part of any response to infectious diseases as the climate changes. Humans often interact with animals in agricultural settings. Preventing and responding to viruses also requires establishing trust with farmers. 

“This is going to be part of how you think about building resilience, is that you kind of have this integrated approach,” Adalja said.

That approach is known as One Health, which many involved in public health have pointed to as a framework that acknowledges the connection between people, animals and the environment and seeks to address issues like disease in a holistic way. 

Wildlife surveillance systems and vaccine programs can help track and control viruses like the bird flu. 

And the dairy industry can learn something from those working with pigs, Vaillancourt said. An effort called the Morrison Swine Health Monitoring Project has involved farmers and the industry in keeping track of disease in pigs.

The big picture, he said, is that everyone involved in livestock needs to think about stopping the spread of disease. Say a farmer needs to move some cows.

“How do we move them?” he said. “Which roads are we going to use to minimize contaminating a site on our way. How do we clean and disinfect the vehicles when we go from one site to another site?”

A few efforts have been pushed forward as the virus has spread. The federal government announced that it would spend $824 million in emergency funding on its response, and the USDA just launched a voluntary pilot program to test cow milk in bulk.

And agricultural officials in Michigan say more safety measures on farms could become a bigger part of the state’s approach to climate change.

“Improving biosecurity in new ways that we hadn’t previously considered, I think, will increasingly be a component of robust climate resiliency actions,” said Boring, the director of the state agriculture department. “So we’re seeing a little bit of that in real time here with our response to H5N1 here in the state.”

And back in Antrim County, Laurie Stanek said dealing with animal sickness is just part of running a farm; they’re paying attention to the new rules and doing what they’ve always done.

“A lot of it’s just good herdsmanship — just common sense,” she said. “You keep your animals healthy so they in turn give you a healthy product.”

That, she said, is what their livelihood depends on. 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline In Michigan: Climate change, bird flu, and dairy cows — and why ‘none of us saw this coming’ on Jun 13, 2024.