Isobelle McClements was 13 when she came home from school and told her parents she was going vegan. Reading one book that delved into meat processing was all it took to convince her it was time for a lifestyle upheaval. The logistics of seamlessly feeding a family is a big reason her parents followed suit.

That was a decade ago. Nowadays, the freezer often stocks plant-based meatballs, sausages, or nuggets. When dining out, a faux burger sometimes makes the cut. Her father, David Julian McClements, is a food scientist at the University of Massachusetts Amherst who studies how to make such things healthier and tastier. 

Still, everyone in the family prefers to prepare meat-free fare using fresh fruits and veggies, whole grains, and other ingredients. They can afford the more planet-friendly options now common in grocery stores, but have the time and means to make them from scratch. Most people, of course, can’t do either of those things, which presents an impediment to broader adoption of beef, pork, and chicken alternatives that could help the nation hit its climate targets.

“Finding good quality ingredients [and] being able to bring them all together and combine them into something that tastes great but is also affordable, healthy and sustainable is very, very challenging,” McClements said. 

Pound for pound, plant-based mock meats cost an average 77 percent more than their conventional counterparts. These proteins are typically heavily processed as they’re manufactured from things like soy and pea protein. “That’s partly why it’s so expensive.”

When thinking about who is buying these pricey proteins, an affluent, urban, Tesla-driving white woman who has sworn off all animal products might come to mind. The high tax bracket often rings true, but the rest of that mental picture is a trite misconception. Even the idea that it’s only vegans or vegetarians buying it isn’t entirely the case.

Young and non-white consumers are the most likely to eat plant-based meats, according to a May 2024 survey commissioned by alt-meat advocacy nonprofit the Good Food Institute. Roughly 38 percent of Gen Z and 35 percent of Millennials report dining on such alternatives at least once a month, which is around twice the number of Gen Xers and Baby Boomers doing so. About one-third of Black and Latino consumers regularly eat meat substitutes, compared to one-fourth of white consumers. And just 2.79 percent of households toss only plant-based proteins into the shopping cart. Almost 95 percent of them buy the real deal as well.

Income is where the most striking disparities lie. U.S households with an income approaching $100,000 are most likely to purchase plant-based alternatives, but most of those making less than $45,000 rarely do. One reason is federal assistance like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, often provides too little financial help to make them affordable.

“It’s just a question of cost, and if that is going to be feasible for them, to make sure they make it through the month,” said Parker Gilkesson Davis, a senior analyst at the Center for Law and Social Policy who studies nutrition and poverty.

About 12.5 percent of Americans are enrolled in SNAP, which provides a monthly benefit based on income, family size and certain expenses. In April 2023, the average benefit was $181.72 for a single person or $343 for a household. Making that last is a challenge when food prices have climbed 25 percent in four years. Those who work to reduce hunger argue that safety nets like SNAP have failed to keep pace with inflation, dietary shifts, and all the ways climate change impacts the food supply chain. When low-income residents struggle to purchase meat with food stamps, it reinforces the fact that costlier plant-based alternatives are only for the affluent.

“SNAP has already fallen short in terms of supporting traditional diets, so adding other non-traditional items may be even more difficult,” she said. “There are a lot of lower-income people who do want to consider non-traditional protein products or meats, but these products are more expensive, and so we have to account for that.” 

Of the plant-based meats, beef substitutes have the smallest premium at 20 percent more per pound than the real thing. That’s because they have been around the longest, relatively speaking — hamburger analogues arrived about 15 years ago. Beef also tends to cost more than other meats (and has been getting pricier as climate change impacts herd sizes), which makes the financial jump to its plant-based versions smaller.

And yet even those who can afford the alternatives seem to be cooling on them amid concerns about their sustainability, nutritional value, and even their taste and texture. The $8.1 billion fake meat industry, which experienced soaring sales during the pandemic as the supply chain for conventional meats collapsed, struggled last year. The industry’s sales volumes dropped 9 percent between 2022 and 2023, with a 2 percent decline in revenue.

Glynn Tonsor, an agricultural economist at Kansas State University, manages the Meat Demand Monitor, a database that surveys the meat-buying habits of consumers monthly. The trend he’s seeing suggests that changing eating habits might have something to do with the market decline. In May, plant-based patties held 2 percent of the retail market and 4 percent of the food service market, which is respectively half and a quarter of the market portion they controlled in May of 2021, Tonsor said.

Dwindling volumes don’t help prices, either. Conventional meats are commodities that have been sold at a vast scale for more than a century through a well-established and robust supply chain, with the benefit of government subsidies. All of that keeps costs down.

“Right now, plant-based meat products are not commodities, so that means that plant-based brands tend to sell lower volumes,” said Daniel Gertner, a business analyst at Good Food Institute. “They might, with those lower volumes, in certain cases make higher net profits, but then much of that profit is reinvested into things like overhead, research and development, [and] marketing. With any nascent category, there’s this need to just build the infrastructure from the ground up.”

The Bezos Earth Fund wants to give the industry a boost by finding ways of reducing the cost of plant-based alternatives to animal proteins.

“The food we’re eating is one-third of global emissions. And if you look at where that comes from, half of it is coming from animal-sourced foods, from livestock. So it’s a huge piece of the emissions puzzle,” said Andy Jarvis, director at the fund. 

In an effort to solve that puzzle, the fund has earmarked $100 million toward the creation of three research centers — the first of which opened last month at North Carolina State University — focused on sustainable protein alternatives like plant-based products, precision fermentation and cultivated meat. 

But the largest hurdle to making plant-based proteins a more viable alternative for everyone is the U.S. government’s deep investment in the status quo. Washington spends up to $38 billion subsidizing the meat and dairy industries each year, a move that keeps prices artificially low. Meanwhile, nations around the world have invested a grand total of little more than $1 billion in the alternative protein industry. 

“There’s no surprise that it’s not at price parity, when you certainly don’t have a level playing field on the government support,” said Jarvis.

Barring a major federal intervention, one akin to the financial support that catalyzed explosive growth in renewable energy, getting plant-based meats to a point where they can compete with conventional counterparts will take quite some time. Until that happens, it won’t matter if plant-based chicken tastes just like the real thing. Only when it’s more affordable will more people be able to make a major lifestyle change, much like the McClements household once did.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The climate case for mock meats is clear. But who can afford them? on Jun 24, 2024.

On February 3, 2023, a freight train owned by Norfolk Southern carrying thousands of gallons of toxic chemicals derailed in the town of East Palestine, Ohio.. For days, flames engulfed the rail cars, which contained highly hazardous materials, including vinyl chloride and butyl acrylate, used in the production of plastic. A thick, tall plume of black smoke billowed from the accident site and forced the evacuation of thousands of residents. Now, scientists say that traces of this pollution was found across 16 states, spanning 540,000 square miles from Wisconsin to Maine to South Carolina.  

“Everybody expected a local contamination issue,” said David Gay, coordinator of the National Atmospheric Deposition Program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison and lead author of the new study. “But I think what most people don’t understand about this fire is how big it was and how wide-ranging the implications are.”

Gay and his colleagues tracked the pollution from the fire by testing rain and snow samples from approximately 260 sites across the country in the two weeks following the derailment. The analysis, published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, estimates that the fire in eastern Ohio impacted about 14 percent of U.S. land area and one-third of the country’s population, or 110 million people. 

Across these areas, researchers recorded some of the highest soil pHs, or alkaline soil, and levels of chloride ions in the past decade following the fire in East Palestine. Gay said that the elevated measurements documented during the two-week spike, while certainly unusual, were not dangerous. “It was jumping out like a red light,” said Gay. “I never would have guessed it would have been in Wisconsin, no way in hell.” 

“This study is unique and elegant as it clearly documents the impact that these kinds of accidents can have,” Juliane Beier, a leading expert on the effects of vinyl chloride at the University of Pittsburgh who was not involved in the study, told the Washington Post. “I think we should be concerned,” she continued, noting this isn’t the first time researchers have observed far-researching pollution from local disasters.

Of the 38 train cars that derailed in East Palestine,  at least 11 were carrying highly toxic chemicals. To prevent a potential explosion, officials approved the controlled burn of five-cars worth of vinyl chloride, a colorless, flammable gas and known carcinogen. 

East Palestine residents were allowed to come back home about a week later. On their return, there were reports of strong chemical odors pervading the town. Testing at nearby creeks and rivers revealed high levels of toxic compounds, including vinyl chloride and butyl acrylate. A year on, the environmental cleanup in and around East Palestines has already cost Norfolk Southern close to $800 million.

Gay recalls seeing a picture of the plume rising over East Palestine and poking through the clouds. “When I saw that, I was like, oh yeah, this stuff’s going to go a long way,” he said. 

When Gay and his colleagues began their research, they expected pollution in western New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio. The reality, he said, was much more extensive. A low pressure system helped push pollution over parts of Michigan and Wisconsin. Pollution likely made its way into all the Great Lakes, except Lake Superior, he noted. 

The most extreme measurements were recorded on the New York border with Canada, near the town of Freedonia —- downwind and about an hour and half fromEast Palestine. 

The researchers also found traces of the train derailment pollution as far south as Virginia and South Carolina. There’s a whole strip of the region, running from Illinois through Maryland where it was too dry to collect pollution data. Even so, Gay maintains that chemical traces from the fire likely made their way to those areas too, just not through the rain or snow. 

“This accident wasn’t just in Ohio,” said Gay. “It touched a lot of people.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Pollution from Ohio train derailment reached 110 million Americans on Jun 24, 2024.

While I occasionally bake, I am no Le Cordon Bleu chef. But Celine Fabre of…

The post Baking With Milk Alternatives appeared first on Earth911.

When Lucas George Wendt arrived in Lajeado in late May, the water had already started to recede.

Just days before, the peaks of roofs and the tops of trees were some of the only things visible above the murky brown water that had covered his hometown. Located in the Taquari Valley, Lajeado, population 85,000, was one of the communities hit hardest by the historic flooding that tore through Brazil’s southernmost state, Rio Grande do Sul, between late April and mid-May, displacing more than 650,000 people, killing 173, and injuring 806.

When Wendt arrived, 38 people were still missing. Backhoes were scooping mud from blocked roads, city workers were clearing sidewalks with pressure washers, and volunteers were sorting through donations of clothing, food, personal hygiene products, and bottled water.

Wendt — who now lives in the state capital of Porto Alegre and is studying for his master’s degree in information science while working in communications at the University of Taquari Valley (Univates) — had come home to check in on family and friends. But he also wanted to do something to help while there.

Last September, he had heard about a Univates mapping project led by researcher Sofia Royer Moraes, an environmental engineer who studies extreme flooding events in the Taquari-Antas River Basin. At the time, the Taquari River, which runs through Lajeado, had overflowed, leaving the region to deal with the worst flooding in 82 years, the displacement of at least 359,000 people, and the deaths of 48. Residents of the Taquari Valley were used to dealing with annual flooding, but this event was different. Studies showed that climate change had worsened the flood, which meant that future floods would bring even more deaths.

It was then that Moraes decided she could do something to help. She created what is known as a Citizen Map, using Google Maps as a platform for ordinary people using their smartphones to pinpoint the floodwaters’ reach. These so-called citizen scientists were instructed to take photos of what they saw and send them, along with their geolocation, to a WhatsApp group monitored by Moraes and her team. Combining that information with historic flood data from the area, the team could model what might happen during future floods, helping residents who had already lost everything to decide where it would be safest to rebuild their lives. The models could also give authorities the information they needed for better urban planning and allocation of resources.

Fascinated by the potential of the project, Wendt knew he wanted to pitch in. By now, Univates was partnering with the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, and this time, the goal was to map the entire state of Rio Grande do Sul.

As he drove around his hometown, Wendt snapped photos of everything he thought would benefit the Citizen Map: a white cross smeared with mud where a church once stood; a lone house standing among pieces of hundreds of others that had washed away; markings on a wall in the city center that registered the water’s height.

Wendt’s more than 20 data points collected at the end of May are now among the more than 600 on the constantly updated Citizen Map, a contribution he knew would help others but that he was surprised to see helped him as well.

“It helped me understand all of these connections,” he said. “If it’s raining in one place, what is the impact that’s going to have downriver? Someone who participates in this type of citizen science initiative ends up being more aware, more secure, and more empowered to deal with this type of situation, which, unfortunately, we know we can expect more of in the near future.”

In the context of climate change, the team behind the Citizen Map wants Brazilian authorities to use this data to rethink everything from urban planning and post-disaster recovery to the availability of health care and clean drinking water in the aftermath of climate-change-induced catastrophes. They also hope that by educating people about what’s going on around them, they’ll not only become more interested and invested in participating in solutions to local flooding, but also feel prepared to face what’s to come.

Experts have attributed the severity of the recent flooding in southern Brazil to human-driven climate change. An analysis carried out by researchers at the Pierre Simon Laplace Institute’s Climate and Environmental Sciences Laboratory showed that extreme weather events in Rio Grande do Sul that occurred between 2001 and 2023 delivered up to 15 percent more precipitation than events that occurred between 1979 and 2001.

A recent study also found that “the highly densely populated regions [in] Southern and Southeastern Brazil as well as the coastal section of Northeast Brazil are the most exposed to landslides and floods,” and that these impacts will continue to worsen with more warming. and increased the intensity of the rainfall between 6 and 9 percent.

The first record-setting flood to wash out the Taquari Valley and other parts of Rio Grande do Sul took place in 1941. That event, which also occurred in April and May, left the region’s population, living mostly in rural areas at the time, without food, water and shelter. The only record of the floodwaters’ height was a mark scratched into the wall of a school.

“That memory is isolated there,” says Wendt of the marker. “It doesn’t contribute as much as it could if it had happened nowadays, with the technology we have.”

The first Citizen Map that Moraes created last September collected data only on the perimeter of the affected area to determine what parts of the Taquari Valley would be considered at high risk of future flooding. Around 600 data points were sent in by 150 citizen scientists.

Some neighborhoods that participated heavily in mapping the September floods haven’t been involved in creating the new map, but that’s likely because those areas are still difficult to access, or not accessible at all. And while the state continues to recover from the emergency — it initially focused on saving people and animals from fast-moving waters and collapsing buildings and is now setting people up in shelters and other more permanent housing — data collection is expected to be slow.

“Data will likely start to come in quicker in another two or three weeks,” says Moraes. “The actual modeling of the Citizen Map should happen in July and August, and it will be available for consultation then too.”

In addition to using perimeter data, which shows the horizontal spread of water, the new map will also use data related to the height of floodwaters, often measured by water and mud stains left on the walls of people’s homes and local businesses.

The Citizen Map is currently very simple and powered by Google, but the team plans to partner with the the open-mapping nonprofit Humanitarian OpenStreetMap Team to improve the visuals of their final product. “Google Maps has good visuals, but they’re fairly standard,” says Wendt. “We want our map to be as easy to understand as possible to make sure it can be used by anyone who wants to consult it to keep themselves safe and make the best decisions possible for their future.”

On May 2, when the second of this year’s three rain and flood episodes began in Rio Grande do Sul (the other two were on April 29 and May 13), Moraes and her team had to move out of the university building where they worked. The water had, again, started to rise, and this time it made its way inside.

They ended up setting up shop at A Hora, a local radio station that gave them space to work and talked about their project on the air, providing its WhatsApp number for anyone who wanted to send data or ask questions.

Soon, messages started to pour in. Some 200 people sent their locations to the Citizen Map team on May 2, and the team spent all afternoon and night analyzing data to determine who was in or near an area of risk and who ought to evacuate. For people living downstream, information on what was happening farther upstream was crucial in making such decisions.

“It’s so important for people to understand their surroundings, to know if they’re in an area of risk,” says Moraes. “And they want to understand. They want to be engaged.”

While anyone with a smartphone can collect data for the newest edition of the Citizen Map, most participants so far are professors and their students from universities around the region. The hope is that more people will join in once the situation on the ground starts to improve.

“I really support citizen science initiatives because they are exactly what people need to learn and feel empowered,” says Marta Angela Marcondes, an expert in water resources and coordinator of the Water Pollutant Index Project at the Municipal University of São Caetano do Sul. “I really believe in processes of prevention and not remediation, and civil society is a key component in making this happen.”

The culture of prevention is important to Moraes, too. She wants the Citizen Map not only to help residents of Rio Grande do Sul keep themselves safe and informed, but also for it to guide authorities to do the same. By using the map to define areas of risk, she says, decision makers can improve urban planning, creating better mitigation plans for future flooding — like improving stormwater drainage and management systems — and allowing new homes, schools, and health care facilities, among others, to be built in safer areas.

Moraes wants the Citizen Map to keep growing, eventually mapping the lack of drinking water and access to basic health care, as well as instances of disease, in the aftermath of climate-related crises.

“With that information, I can see the big picture by municipality, region, or state,” she says. “As a decision maker, I can then use this information to determine which areas are more fragile and direct the necessary public policies to those that need them most.”

Two to five years after the original event, Moraes hopes she will be able to map where those public policies have ended up and measure their success. “In this new context of climate change, people need to be prepared,” she says. “We can’t stop these events from happening, but we can make sure we’re ready to deal with them in the best way possible.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline How a ‘citizen map’ is helping Brazil prepare for its next big flood on Jun 23, 2024.

Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, one of the largest rural cooperative utilities in the U.S., is bringing the energy transition home to its massive western service territory. It’s acquiring its first large-scale solar power plants as it prepares to shift away from its current dependence on coal power.

Tri-State generates and transmits power to 41 member cooperatives, which retail to 1 million customers in rural Colorado, New Mexico, Wyoming, and Nebraska (four states, despite the name). The customer base spans 200,000 square miles, more land than the entirety of California, with an average density of just five customers per mile of power line. Just a few years ago, two member cooperatives quit Tri-State to seek cheaper, cleaner power elsewhere. Since then, Tri-State has rolled out a series of clean energy commitments that it says will deliver 50 percent renewable electricity by the end of 2025, up from 33 percent in 2023.

The cooperative announced last week it will buy the forthcoming Axial Basin Solar, a 145-megawatt project in Moffat County, Colorado, and Dolores Canyon Solar, a 110-​megawatt project in Dolores County, Colorado. Both projects are still under construction, but they are slated to deliver power by late next year. Tri-State also signed three new power purchase agreements from solar plants that will come online by the end of this year.

Within days of that announcement, Tri-State also reported that electricity was flowing from the largest third-party solar project it has contracted for thus far, a 200-megawatt site developed by Origis Solar at the former Escalante Station coal-fired power plant in New Mexico. The cooperative also filed an innovative proposal with federal regulators to collaborate with its members that wish to generate clean energy for themselves locally.

Read Next

Puerto Rico is using residents’ home batteries to back up its grid

Gabriela Aoun Angueira

“In the past several months and years, Tri-State has been a very significant leader in the cooperative space in identifying ways to bring the benefits of clean energy to their members, and use the benefits of the Inflation Reduction Act to a maximum degree,” said Uday Varadarajan, a senior principal at climate think tank RMI who tracks rural cooperative decarbonization. (Canary Media is an independent affiliate of RMI.)

This embrace of the energy transition was by no means guaranteed. America’s cooperative utilities, which deliver about 12 percent of the country’s electricity but serve 56 percent of its landscape, were at serious risk of getting left behind by the clean energy transition. The U.S. incubated its renewables industry with tax credits, which don’t do much good for the many federal, municipal, or cooperative utilities that generate power as not-for-profit corporations, and thus owe little to the IRS. Many cooperatives also signed very long-term contracts, which left them committed to paying for coal plants even after they might’ve wanted to switch to cleaner, cheaper alternatives.

Those conditions are changing now, thanks to the landmark climate policies passed in the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022. Chief among them is a ​“direct pay” option that lets nonprofits access the same generous clean energy tax credits as their for-profit peers — even with little to no tax burden. Once Tri-State’s leadership saw clarity on the tax rules, they decided this was the time to strike.

“Not-for-profit cooperatives simply could not take advantage of those [renewable tax credits] because we did not have the tax liability to offset,” said Lee Boughey, vice president of communications at Tri-State. Now, though, he added, ​“We are pursuing the maximum amount of funding available for cooperatives.”

From incumbent to change agent

Back in 2016, at least a few local co-ops that buy power from Tri-State were chafing at its pace of decarbonization. New Mexico’s Kit Carson Electric Cooperative cut ties that year, paying a $37 million exit fee in order to buy power from a company called Guzman Energy and generate more clean energy locally. Colorado’s Delta-Montrose Electric Association soon followed suit. Guzman won them over with renewables-heavy portfolios that it said would save them money over time, compared to staying with Tri-State.

Tri-State kicked off a clean energy planning effort in 2019, and in late 2020 promised to cut carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2030 and shut down several coal plants. The latest solar investments represent strides toward that promise. 

Clean energy technologies and prices reached a different stage of maturity in the early 2020s compared to where they were in 2016, Boughey said. Now the utility sees ample savings and benefits for its customers in maximizing low-cost renewable generation, while ensuring it has enough ​“firm” power — today provided by coal and fossil gas plants — to keep the lights on. The utility recently hit a new record for instantaneous renewable production on May 24, when wind and solar delivered 87 percent of its generation for half an hour.

Cooperative customers are also shareholders, so the people who get to vote on the utility’s leadership are the same ones benefiting from lower-cost renewables. By investing in projects within its territory, Tri-State also supports economic development for its customer-owners. 

“You can pursue an energy transition and still retain that reliability and resilience even in the face of the challenging weather that utilities in the western U.S. can face,” said Boughey.

Inflation Reduction Act breaks down barriers for cooperatives

The Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, finally gave cooperatives a chance to avail themselves of the renewable power discounts that for-profit corporations with large tax burdens could access. But it also included a program specially designed to help rural co-ops deal with closing coal plants without burdening their customers with higher power prices.

Co-ops can’t raise money in quite the same ways as Wall Street–owned for-profit utilities do — they don’t issue stock to profit-hungry investors, for instance. To build new plants without piling steep rate hikes on customers, co-ops often borrow low-cost debt and pay it off over decades using the revenue from generating or transmitting power. Many co-ops, Tri-State included, are still paying off coal plants that they expected to run for decades more; shuttering them early, for climate or economic reasons, leaves customers saddled with an outstanding debt for something that no longer generates any value.

Read Next

The IRA has injected $240 billion into clean energy. The US still needs more.

Syris Valentine

This turns out to be one of the many obscure decarbonization challenges that the IRA tackled. It created a program at the U.S. Department of Agriculture called Empowering Rural America (New ERA for short), which offered up $9.7 billion to help rural utilities finance the transition from coal and support coal communities in the process. The program drew proposals for $93 billion worth of energy transition investment, from public and private sources (winning projects have not yet been announced).

“It did break down some of these barriers to make it easier than it was, and rural America showed up,” Varadarajan said. ​“It is pretty remarkable what has been proposed post-IRA by rural cooperatives.”

Tri-State used the new federal funding opportunity as a springboard for imagining the next phase of its clean energy transition. Its late-2023 proposal to Colorado utility regulators argues that federal funding, if awarded, could help move up the closure of coal plants Craig Station in 2028 and Springerville in 2031. Tri-State would fill the gap with 1,250 megawatts of wind, solar, and energy storage, including conventional lithium-ion batteries and novel iron-air batteries for multiday energy storage. The plan would also add a 290-megawatt combined-cycle natural gas plant with plans for carbon capture and sequestration. 

“We have to have the dispatchable capacity for when those renewable resources aren’t available,” Boughey said, noting that Tri-State goes beyond industry-standard reliability metrics to prepare the grid for extreme weather events, hot or cold.

Renewables purists may balk at the nod to carbon capture at a fossil-fueled plant, which has little precedent for economic success in the real world. But Tri-State frames that plant as more of a backup for moments when renewables can’t carry the day; and even with that new gas, the portfolio is projected to lower carbon emissions from Tri-State’s Colorado electricity generation by 89 percent by 2030, compared to the 2005 baseline. That reduction exceeds what Colorado requires of its utilities, the company noted — and the pace of many of the most progressive utilities nationwide.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline This coal-heavy rural co-op utility is buying its first solar plants on Jun 22, 2024.

A new study by a psychologist at University of Stirling in Scotland has found that, like humans, wild bumblebees are capable of logical reasoning.

In the study, the bees were tasked with spontaneously locating strips of sugar-coated paper in various colors and positions. In both circumstances, the analysis showed they looked in the correct location well above chance, a press release from University of Stirling said.

“My studies examine the ability to make a decision by excluding alternatives, known as inferential reasoning, which is usually considered uniquely human and language dependent,” said Dr. Gema Martin-Ordas, the study’s lead researcher and a University of Stirling senior lecturer in the faculty of natural sciences, in the press release.

It was the first demonstration of insects being capable of inferential reasoning — a hallmark of human cognition.

“The ability to make a decision by excluding alternatives (i.e. inferential reasoning) is a type of logical reasoning that allows organisms to solve problems with incomplete information. Several species of vertebrates have been shown to find hidden food using inferential reasoning abilities. Yet little is known about invertebrates’ logical reasoning capabilities,” Martin-Ordas wrote in the study.

“For example, if I am presented with two cups and I am told that one of them hides a nice reward, when lifting one of them and seeing that it’s empty, I will be able to infer that it is the cup that was not lifted that hides the reward,” Martin-Ordas said in the press release. “This is the first time that this ability is shown in invertebrates, specifically in insects, and questions whether language or big brains are required for this ability. The results are very robust because bees’ performance was consistent across the experiments.”

In May 2023, 33 bumblebees were caught in Stirlingshire, United Kingdom. A transparent plastic tube was used for the two-hour experiments, after which the bees were released back into the wild unharmed.

In the United Kingdom, bumblebees are declining and two species have already become extinct. Of the remaining 24, eight species are currently prioritized for conservation because of widespread declines, the Bumblebee Conservation Trust said.

“Bee decline has become a very public symbol of [environmental] deterioration, which has galvanised conservation efforts through public appreciation,” Martin-Ordas said. “This conservation effort has been further propelled by many of the fascinating discoveries about bees’ cognition. I hope the results of my study will also contribute to these conservation efforts.”

The study, “Inferential reasoning abilities in wild-caught bumblebees,” was published in the journal Biology Letters.

The post Wild Bumblebees Capable of Logical Reasoning, Study Finds appeared first on EcoWatch.

On Thursday, Hawaii agreed to settle a lawsuit brought by 13 young people alleging the state had violated their constitutional rights with infrastructure that adds to greenhouse (GHG) emissions, exacerbating climate change.

In the settlement, the state agreed to decarbonize its transportation system by 2045.

At a news conference, Governor of Hawaii Josh Green, a Democrat, called the settlement “groundbreaking,” reported Reuters.

“We’re addressing the impacts of climate change today, and needless to say, this is a priority because we know now that climate change is here,” Green said, as Reuters reported. “It is not something that we’re considering in an abstract way in the future.”

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Governor Josh Green, M.D. (@govjoshgreen)

Navahine v. Hawaiʻi Department of Transportation (HDOT) is the first constitutional climate case led by youth that addresses climate pollution from transportation, a press release from Earthjustice said.

In the lawsuit, youth plaintiffs asserted their state constitutional rights to a healthy and safe climate. They asked Hawaii’s government to take needed actions to address the climate crisis and shift to a transportation system with zero emissions.

The young people argued that Hawaii had been focusing on projects like highway expansion and construction, rather than making projects that reduce carbon emissions more of a priority, reported Reuters.

“The settlement agreement, which the court has approved, recognizes children’s constitutional rights to a life-sustaining climate and mobilizes HDOT to plan and implement transformative changes of Hawaiʻi’s transportation system to achieve zero emissions in all ground transportation, and interisland sea and air transportation, by 2045. The court will retain jurisdiction to enforce the agreement for the next 21 years until its terms have been achieved,” the press release said.

The settlement includes provisions for immediate and ongoing steps for HDOT to take to implement changes to the state’s transportation system, including establishing a plan for GHG reductions within one year; creating a council of youth volunteers to advise HDOT; and making investments in green transportation infrastructure, including the dedication of at least $40 million for the expansion of public electric vehicle charging stations by 2030 and the completion of bicycle, pedestrian and transit networks within five years.

“Hawai‘i’s young people raised their voices to protect our future here in the islands, and their voices were heard. Today’s settlement shows that the State and HDOT are committed to transformative action to reduce our transportation emissions before it’s too late. This new partnership puts climate action in the fast lane towards a more just and equitable future,” said Earthjustice senior associate attorney Leinā‘ala Ley in the press release.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Earthjustice (@earthjustice)

Many of the youth are Native Hawaiians who have been experiencing climate change impacts such as sea level rise, flooding, drought and wildfires. These climate hazards have threatened cultural traditions like fishing, kalo farming and gathering, as well as put their lives at risk.

“Being heard and moving forward in unity with the State to combat climate change is incredibly gratifying, and empowering. This partnership marks a pivotal step towards preserving Hawai‘i for future generations — one that will have a ripple effect on the world. I hope our case inspires youth to always use their voices to hold leaders accountable for the future they will inherit,” said youth plaintiff Rylee Brooke K. in the press release.

The post Hawaii Agrees to Decarbonize Its Transportation in ‘Groundbreaking’ Youth Climate Change Settlement appeared first on EcoWatch.

This week’s inspirational quote tells a hard truth. The photo below is from Geeamana, Romania,…

The post Earth911 Inspiration: Strange Days appeared first on Earth911.

Last week, the leaders of the world’s seven biggest economies convened in Italy to discuss several pressing global issues during the annual gathering known as the G7 summit. They agreed to lend Russia’s frozen assets to Ukraine, pushed for a ceasefire in Gaza, and pledged to launch a migration coalition.

Those discussions, which concluded Saturday, came right on the heels of the annual Bonn Climate Change Conference, which sets the foundation for the United Nations’ yearly climate gathering. In Bonn, Germany, an enduring dispute over who should provide trillions of dollars in climate aid to poor nations once again ended with little progress toward a solution, dominating the agenda so much so that dialogues on other issues often reverted back to financial debates.  

Government heads at both conferences barely addressed what may be one of the most pressing questions the world faces: how to respond to the immense role animal agriculture plays in driving climate change. This continues a pattern of evasion around this issue on the international stage, which advocates and scientists find increasingly frustrating, given that shrinking the emissions footprint of global livestock production and consumption is a needed step toward mitigating climate change.

“We’re seeing, essentially, the cow in the room being ignored,” said Stephanie Feldstein, population and sustainability director at the Center for Biological Diversity. “We’re seeing these kinds of vague references to needing to shift diets, but still a refusal to call out animal agriculture as the leading cause, by far, of agricultural emissions, as well as other forms of environmental destruction in food and agriculture systems.” 

Although estimates vary, peer-reviewed studies have found that the global food system is responsible for roughly one-third of human-caused greenhouse gas emissions. Animals raised for consumption generate 32 percent of the world’s methane emissions, and agriculture is the largest source of anthropogenic methane pollution. Methane is the second most abundant greenhouse gas after carbon, and it’s 80 to 90 percent more powerful than carbon in its first 20 years in the atmosphere. This is why many scientists believe that aggressively curbing humanity’s methane pollution would be the fastest way to slow planetary warming. And methane isn’t the only environmental problem associated with meat and dairy. Even though animal agriculture provides 17 percent of the world’s calories, it accounts for 80 percent of global agricultural land use and 41 percent of global agricultural water use, which translates into an outsize impact on biodiversity. 

Despite the mountain of evidence establishing a connection between the food we eat and climate change, the subject has only recently begun to pop up at international conferences. The big breakthrough came at last December’s U.N. climate conference, COP28, where more than two-thirds of countries in attendance, including the U.S. and the European Union, pledged to take steps to reduce the colossal climate footprint of food systems. Around the same time, the U.N. Food and Agricultural Organization, or FAO, unveiled its first-ever installment of a roadmap for transforming the global food system to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit). 

However, the FAO roadmap came under criticism because its slate of proposed solutions almost entirely omitted the need to reduce human consumption of meat and dairy. Some researchers later asked the FAO to retract its report, alleging that it misrepresented their work by minimizing reduced meat intake as a way to cut agricultural emissions.

The failure of delegates at COP28 to directly address the causal relationship between meat consumption and climate change was just repeated by G7 nations and the Bonn climate conference attendees. These failures show how “incredibly politically charged” this issue is in multinational gatherings dominated by countries with very high rates of meat and dairy consumption, said Martin Frick, who heads up the World Food Programme’s Berlin office. 

“We are moving in the right direction, but we are not moving fast enough,” said Frick. “Unless we are really serious about food, and look at it from a systems approach, ask ourselves the hard questions and give ourselves the hard answers, I don’t see how we can fix climate change.” 

Still, some do see progress. 

“Only six months ago, 159 governments at world-leader level made a commitment to incorporate food into their climate plans,” said Edward Davey, senior advisor of the Food and Land Use Coalition based at the World Resources Institute. The COP28 pledge includes incorporating the climate footprint of food into each country’s “nationally determined contribution,” or NDC — a specific emissions target required by the Paris Agreement. 

Countries are expected to submit new NDCs by next February, and Davey said those updates will indicate whether those countries are taking the pledge seriously. 

Read Next

What would happen if the world cut meat and milk consumption in half?

Max Graham

Until then, how the topic surfaces in international gatherings is the next best benchmark. “I wanted to see that food was genuinely getting its moment in the sun in the climate talks,” said Davey. “And I think what we saw was that the Bonn talks were largely focused on finance, and less on particular sectors.” 

Food was not entirely absent from the G7 summit agenda. At the gathering in southern Italy, Italian prime minister Giorgia Meloni announced the launch of the Apulia Food Systems Initiative, a climate and food policy aimed at investing in resilient food systems for poorer countries. It commits an undisclosed amount of funding to strengthen agricultural climate adaptation, with most aid allocated across the African continent, where climate change is intensifying food insecurity. The initiative will back a U.S. State Department-led crop research effort, a project to create more resilient coffee supply chains, and technical support for implementing the COP28 food and agriculture pledge into countries’ NDCs.

Unsurprisingly, it does not include any projects to decarbonize animal agriculture. “Livestock is clearly a very good example of what wasn’t tackled directly, in the sense that there is no mention of livestock, per se,” said Francesco Rampa, head of the think tank European Centre for Development Policy Management’s sustainable food systems team, who assisted the Italian G7 presidency in developing the initiative. Rampa is quick to add that this is because the Apulia plan is structured to help poor nations that have negligible emissions from animal agriculture, and not higher-income countries with sizable contributions — like the G7 countries themselves.

Past G7 food initiatives have faced criticism for limited clarity and accountability around finance pledges, for not reaching small farmers, and for failing to facilitate a transition to more sustainable and equitable food systems in the places they aim to aid. Multiple experts told Grist they don’t expect the new Apulia pledge to buck that trend. 

“I’m skeptical of the ability of the international community to act in a way, with the urgency, that this whole issue requires,” said William Dietz, director of research and policy at the Global Food Institute at George Washington University. “We’ve got a generation of leaders like Nero who are fiddling while the world is burning.” 

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline Food’s climate footprint was once again MIA at global talks on Jun 21, 2024.

Kathrin Zangerl is a pediatrician at the Heidelberg Institute of Global Health in Germany, where she is a specialist on how climate change affects children at different stages in their lives. For instance, an infant’s developing lungs make her more susceptible to lasting harm from air pollution. A teenager, on the other hand, might be more likely to become part of the mental health pandemic among adolescents, where climate anxiety is a factor.

In other words, children have differing needs, more vulnerability, and interventions that work for adults might not work for kids.

“Children are not tiny adults,” she said.

So when Zangerl and other researchers combed through the official national climate adaptation plans of 160 countries, they were looking for consideration of the needs and roles of children, especially when it comes to health. How many countries are taking kids into account when they think about climate change?

In an article published earlier this month in The Lancet, Zangerl and her team revealed their findings: Not many. 

It’s not that national climate adaptation plans have the force of law, but they can guide policymakers and attract focused funding from richer countries to low and middle-income countries. International bodies, like the United Nations, its Framework Convention on Climate Change, UNFCCC, the World Health Organization, and UNICEF, are increasingly urging countries to consider the specific needs of children in their climate policies. 

The numbers were dismaying. 

Nearly a third of the plans  — 28 percent —did not mention children at all. Another third — 31 percent — mentioned children in only one area, such as education. And none mentioned children’s mental health. 

As Zangerl wrote in the article: “Children’s mental health is a crucial public health concern that requires immediate action.”

Sudan, one of the poorest countries in the world, scored the highest in the report for its number of mentions of children in its plan. But Zangerl said that’s grading on a curve. 

“No country comprehensively addressed child health needs,” she said. “A few countries were better than others, but they weren’t really good.” 

“I’m not surprised,” said Tooba Akhtar, a PhD researcher at Trinity College Dublin, who was not involved in this study. She focuses on the development and well-being of children affected by climate change.  

Akhtar and two of her colleagues, Kristin Hadfield and Alina Paula Cosma, wrote a recent open letter to the U.N. Climate Change Secretariat. They looked for evidence supporting programs that would help young children cope with the emotional toll of climate disasters, and found none. 

“Our hunch is that these programs do not actually exist,” Akhtar said. 

This is personal for Akhtar, who grew up in Pakistan. She was recently speaking to a friend working for a nonprofit there, documenting the aftermath of the devastating 2022 floods. Camps for displaced survivors have set up makeshift schools. 

“Who’s attending? Children who are already school-aged. Those under 6 are forgotten.” Akhtar said that simple programs for very young children, like shared book reading, could promote social-emotional skills and parent-child bonding, helping entire families cope with post-traumatic stress. But that’s rarely happening. “The father’s off managing the land that’s been destroyed, the mother is taking care of six other kids.”

Children’s needs, especially young children’s, are left out of climate planning, experts said, because of a lack of advocacy, a lack of funding, a lack of collaboration across government ministries, and a lack of data — conditions which all reinforce each other. 

“The child lobby is really lacking,” in international climate negotiations, Zangerl said. A 2023 report from Save the Children found only 2.4 percent of the money from big international climate funds went to projects that incorporated children’s needs. 

As a result, research into climate impacts on children isn’t well funded, and this, in turn, impacts decision-making. For example, in Europe where Zangerl lives, there’s an enormous amount of research on elderly people dying in heat waves. Far less is known about children’s morbidity, such as the way heat waves experienced in early childhood might not necessarily end a life, but could shorten a life. 

For Zangerl and Akhtar, there are two big arguments for countries to do better at planning for and meeting children’s needs in climate adaptation. 

One is that it’s practical and pragmatic. If we want a healthy, resilient adult population to cope with the worsening effects of climate change in 20 years, we need to invest in children today. And most of the world’s children —  more than 75 percent of all adolescents — happen to be located in low- and middle-income countries that are more susceptible to the impact of climate. 

Education and public health awareness are the most common way that children are being included in these national adaptation plans. This perspective tends to treat children more as a resource to be tapped for the benefit of society, than as a population with needs to be served. Children are being prepared for the green workforce. Or they’re helping disseminate health information.

“In many low- and middle-income countries, the child is the only one who receives formal education,” said Zangerl. “They then teach their wider family and community, and so the multiplier effect of teaching children is really high across the globe.” 

The other argument for including children in a country’s climate plans is different. It’s about fairness and children as a more vulnerable population. 

“Children are inheriting an over-warmed world, and they will live longer in it than previous generations,” said Akhtar, noting that children will be forced to bear the long-term consequences of decisions made before they were born. “Equipping them with the knowledge and skills to mitigate and adapt is essential to help them survive.” 

Zangerl said that when talking about children and climate policy, it’s tempting to keep focused on “risk and vulnerability and protection.” But what’s also important “is agency and empowerment” — having young people as part of the decision-making process on policies that will affect their survival. 

“We’re seeing lots of youth advisory boards and adolescents who are change agents or participating actively” in policymaking and activism, she said, noting that it’s possible to listen to even younger children if you are creative about how you do it.  For instance, she is currently working on a study with children from ages 3 to 6, where they are making art and taking photos to express how they are coping with changes to weather and nature. 

Correction: A previous version of this story misstated the number of countries with climate adaptation plans that mention children.

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The kids are not alright: Countries fail to include children in their climate plans on Jun 21, 2024.