The United States Fish and Wildlife Service has found that petitions for nine new animal species may warrant protection under the Endangered Species Act, including the Southern Plains bumble bee.
Before federal wildlife officials make a final decision as to whether to officially list and protect the Southern Plains bumble bee, they will conduct a scientific assessment and hold a public comment period, a press release from the Center for Biological Diversity — who petitioned to have the bee listed as endangered — said.
“Southern Plains bumble bees have already disappeared from six states and desperately need Endangered Species Act protection to survive,” said Jess Tyler, author of the petition and an entomologist with the Center for Biological Diversity, in the press release. “The Act has an incredible track record of keeping species from going extinct and putting them on the path to recovery.”
One of North America’s largest bumble bee species, Southern Plains bumble bees have a less fuzzy appearance than some, owing to flat hairs on their abdomen, which look “slicked-back.”
Bumble bees live in colonies with one queen and as many as hundreds of worker bees. As “foraging generalists,” they gather nectar and pollen from a wide variety of flowers, meaning they can inhabit a broad range. They are essential pollinators for wild plants and crops that depend on insects to pollinate them.
Queen Southern Plains bumble bees can be as large as one inch, while workers can grow to three-quarters that size, reported The Guardian.
Southern Plains bumble bees were once found in 26 states in the Great Plains and southeastern Gulf coastal plain, the press release said. Half their population has been decimated over multiple decades, and they are no longer found in Maryland, Michigan, North Dakota, Ohio, Indiana and New Jersey.
Ongoing threats to the bumble bees and their grasslandshabitat include pesticides, heavy grazing and crop conversion. Pesticides hinder reproduction, harm bees’ immune systems and reduce their survival rates. When grasslands are degraded, it limits the bees’ access to diverse sources of pollen and nectar.
According to the International Union for the Conservation of Nature, 12 species of bumble bee are threatened with extinction in the U.S., but just two — Franklin’s bumble bee and the rusty patched bumble bee — are currently receiving protection under the Endangered Species Act.
The other species the Fish and Wildlife Service found may warrant endangered species protection are the Hickory Nut Gorge green salamander, Railroad Valley toad, pygmy rabbit, Southwest spring firefly, yellow-spotted woodland salamander, white-margined penstemon and two fish species: Betta rutilans and Betta hendra.
“[W]e announce that we are initiating status reviews of these species to determine whether the petitioned actions are warranted. To ensure that the status reviews are comprehensive, we request scientific and commercial data and other information regarding the species and factors that may affect their status,” the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service said. “Based on the status reviews, we will issue 12-month petition findings, which will address whether or not the petitioned actions are warranted in accordance with the Act.”
Researchers from The James Hutton Institute in Aberdeen, Scotland and the University of Graz in Austria have found PFAS from ski wax on the snowy slopes of ski resorts in Austria. The findings raise concern on the impact these “forever chemicals” could have on the local environment, particularly groundwater.
The study, published in the journal Environmental Science: Processes and Impacts, analyzed snow melt, soil and various ski waxes, which are typically used to protect skis and offer a smoother glide. Ski wax often contains PFAS, or per- and poly-fluoroalkyl substances, as these substances have water-resistant properties. But more and more studies are reviewing how long-lasting PFAS impact the environment and human health.
“These chemicals are called forever chemicals because they will need hundreds of years to break down. Because of this, they could accumulate or spread into the wider environment, including groundwater systems, which is the main concern,” Viktoria Müller, lead author of the study, said in a statement.
The researchers found 14 types of PFAS chemicals at Alpine ski slopes, and the PFAS levels found at ski resorts was higher than at non-skiing locations used as controls in the study.
“While there has been concern about the use of PFAS in ski wax for some time, this study on Alpine ski slopes showed that skiing will produce orders of magnitude higher concentrations of PFAS on to anywhere skiing is taking place where these types of wax area used,” Müller explained. “However, even where there is no skiing, there are still small detections because of how widely this chemical has now spread in the environment.”
The study follows recent bans on PFAS use in ski wax at some resorts and professional skiing events, including bans by The International Ski and Snowboard Federation and The International Biathlon Union. In January 2022, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued an alert on perfluorinated chemicals in ski wax, noting that some PFAS are toxic and long-lasting, even in small amounts. Studies have linked certain PFAS, such as PFOA and PFOS, to liver and kidney damage, thyroid disruption and cancer, according to the EPA.
Although the study found higher levels of PFAS in skiing areas and linked that ski wax may be a “significant source of PFAS”, the authors concluded that more research is needed to determine other potential sources of PFAS contamination, especially as there are few studies on PFAS in snow and soil.
“This study showed that public skiing can produce orders of magnitude higher PFAS concentrations in remote Alpine regions and can be a significant source of PFAS in soils,” the authors wrote. “However, other PFAS sources should be also considered.”
The 2 to 4 million species of fungi in the world offer us endless possibilities — from creating alternative building materials and textiles, to cleaning up environmental toxins, to providing new sources of plant-based proteins. Now, scientists are turning to mushrooms and mycoremediation to solve our plastic pollution crisis.
What Is Mycoremediation?
Mushrooms growing at a habitat restoration site in Hylebos Creek, Tacoma, Washington in 2010. Port of Tacoma / Flickr
Mycoremediation is a form of bioremediation: the introduction of microorganisms or other life forms to break down environmental pollutants in contaminated areas. Bioremediation is employed to clean up oil spills, industrial sites, brownfields and even Superfund sites, often introducing bacteria to degrade the pollutants and cycle nutrients back into the environment. Mycoremediation is different in that it uses fungi instead of bacteria. Mycelia — the thread-like root systems of fungi that grow underneath the mushroom — consume food externally, using their enzymes to break down molecules in pollutants and toxins. Basically, they digest the surface they’re growing on and convert it into nutrients.
Mushrooms growing on a burnt tree trunk. graffoto8 / iStock / Getty Images Plus
An employee of the Brussels start-up company Le Champignon de Bruxelles inspects Nameko mushrooms cultivated on ecological waste, in Belgium, Brussels on June 25, 2019. Arne Immanuel Bänsch / picture alliance via Getty Images
And now, we’re beginning to see their potential to break down one of our generation’s most widespread pollutants: plastic.
Potential Uses
Landfills and Marine Plastic Patches
Plastic doesn’t decompose, but merely breaks down into smaller pieces over time. That means that the 8.3 billion tons of plastic that have been produced since the 1950s still exists in one form or another. Landfills, where 27 million tons of plastic have accumulated since 2018, are a particular concern. How, though, can mushrooms be used to break down plastic in these airless, sunless environments?
Pestalotiopsis microspora might be the answer. A 2011 study out of Yale University declares that this rare mushroom — found by students on a class research trip to Ecuador’s Amazon rainforest — can degrade a common type of polymer plastic called polyester polyurethane, along with several other fungi in the Pestalotiopsis genus. These fungi can use plastic as their main source of carbon, converting it into organic matter. Pestalotiopsis microspora can even do so in both liquid and soil suspensions in dark environments without oxygen, meaning it could be useful in landfills, waste treatment centers and even in ocean plastic gyres like the Great Pacific Garbage Patch. Working quickly, it decomposes parts of the plastic in just two weeks.
A landfill covered with plastic waste in Pakistan. Bilal photos / iStock / Getty Images Plus
In 2017, scientist Sehroon Khan of the Kunming Institute of Botany collected Aspergillus tubingensis growing in a city garbage dump in Islamabad, Pakistan. He found that the fungus was able to break down polyurethane — a plastic used widely in producing large appliances, fake leather, sponges, and synthetic fibers — within weeks. The mushroom’s enzymes and mycelia work to break bonds between molecules and then break them apart.
Non-Recyclable Material
Not all plastics can be recycled, or it’s extremely difficult to do so. Polypropylene, for example, accounts for 28% of global plastic waste, but a meager 1% of it is recycled. It’s used to create household items like toys, industrial products like car parts, plastic packaging like takeout containers and cling film, and textiles, making it a widely used plastic for which there are few recycling solutions.
Research conducted by the University of Sydney’s School of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering discovered that two types of fungi typically found in plants and soil — Aspergillus terreus and Engyodontium album — were able to break down this type of plastic after being pre-treated with heat, UV light or an acidic solution called Fenton’s reagent. After 30 days of incubation, the plastic had been reduced by 21%, and after 90 days, it had been reduced by 25 to 27%. Researchers believe that if they optimize the conditions of the process even more, they’ll see a reduction in degradation time.
Oyster mushrooms can also break down items containing non-recyclable plastic. One trial conducted by Fungi Solutions in Melbourne found that they are capable of breaking down most toxins and the microplastics in cigarette butts, which are one of the top items of plastic waste found in the ocean, within seven days. The group believes they can remove 1.2 million cigarette butts from landfills and dispose of them in this way.
Oyster mushrooms growing on a dead tree trunk. jessicahyde / iStock / Getty Images Plus
The Fungi Mutarium might just be the solution. Created by Katharina Unger with Utrecht University in the Netherlands, the recycling system contains pods made of agar and plastics treated with UV. Oyster and split gill mushrooms fed on these pods for a few months. Scientists anticipate smaller scale versions of the Fungi Mutarium being used in homes, and larger systems at recycling or waste-treatment centers for community use. While some bioaccumulate too many toxins when degrading environmental pollutants, some mushrooms that feed on plastic in such systems are even edible — such as the Fungi Mutarium, which produces edible mycelia.
Takeaway
With our plastic pollution crisis only growing, we’ll need to find ways to both reduce our consumption as well as sustainably dispose of these huge amounts of waste. Mycoremediation is an opportunity to handle plastic waste through natural means, perhaps even on a worldwide scale.
Climate activists have set their sights on a new target in the fight to slow global warming: utilities.
Around a dozen communities across the country have launched campaigns to get rid of their investor-owned electric utilities — the for-profit companies that distribute electricity to three-quarters of U.S. households — and replace them with publicly owned ones. Calling their goal “public power,” advocates argue that existing utilities have saddled customers with high rates and frequent outages, while lobbying to delay rooftop solar and other climate policies. Advocates say local ownership of the power grid would lead to lower electric bills, a quicker transition to renewables, and greater accountability to customers.
In November, the movement for public power faced its biggest test yet in Maine. Residents voted on a referendum that would have replaced Maine’s two investor-owned utilities with a statewide public power company. Faced with an existential threat, the legacy utilities launched a $39 million advertising campaign to counter the initiative. The measure ultimately failed, with roughly 70 percent of voters opposed.
Yet despite the defeat in Maine, public power supporters in California, New York, and Michigan told Grist that they’re just getting started. Their campaigns are at different stages — some of them are working to get a measure like Maine’s on the ballot, while others are just trying to convince local officials to study the feasibility of public power. Most of them face opposition from legacy power utilities. But all of them are optimistic about the long-term prospects of publicly owned utilities.
“Public power is a necessarily ambitious and visionary effort,” said Mohini Sharma, organizing director of Metro Justice, a grassroots organization advocating for public power in Rochester, New York. “And when you’re going up against multibillion-dollar corporations, there are going to be some losses along the way.”
Some advocates see a silver lining in the election outcome in Maine. In the state’s largest city, Portland, the vote won by a margin of 163 votes.
Campaigners in San Diego say the results give them hope for what they can accomplish in a smaller, denser population as opposed to an entire state. “It pointed to the fact that if you can organize in a concentrated geographic area like a city, and pour effort and resources into it, even in Maine the result there was favorable,” said Bill Powers, chair of the advocacy group Power San Diego.
This year’s push for public power could find its next major foothold in San Diego. In early December, Power San Diego launched a signature-gathering campaign to get a vote for a new, locally owned electricity distribution utility on this year’s ballot. If the group successfully certifies 80,000 signatures by July, equal to about 10 percent of registered voters in San Diego, residents of California’s second-largest city could decide in November whether to oust their current investor-owned utility, San Diego Gas & Electric, for a municipal alternative.
Power San Diego campaign chair Bill Powers (left) and steering committee member Adam Aron (right) gathering signatures in San Diego.
Power San Diego
Power San Diego argues that a new municipal utility would lower electricity rates by as much as 20 percent in the short term by operating as a nonprofit and taking advantage of lower-interest financing. A recent study commissioned by the city found that if San Diego is able to purchase SDG&E’s grid for $2 billion, on the low end of price estimates, ratepayers could save up to 14 percent each year with a municipal utility within the first decade. If the price ends up on the higher end at $6 billion, residents could see higher costs in the short term but long-term savings after 20 years, the report said.
The campaign says a municipal utility would greatly expand local battery storage and rooftop solar, prioritizing local energy generation over expensive investments in transmission lines, which move electricity from far-away solar, wind, and hydropower facilities.
But Anthony Wagner, communications manager for San Diego Gas & Electric, told Grist that the “Power San Diego initiative is a costly gamble that puts taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars with no plan and no guarantee of benefits.” If residents vote to form a public utility, the city of San Diego would then need to purchase SDG&E’s grid infrastructure using municipal revenue bonds — a cost that would be paid off gradually through electric rates. Wagner added that operating and maintaining the city’s utility system, which serves more than 1 million residents, requires expertise, and that “burdening the city with this essential service in addition to its existing responsibilities is risky and could compromise grid reliability.”
Commissioning a feasibility study — which evaluates the costs, benefits, and risks of public power — is one of the first steps in forming a municipal utility. But in Rochester, New York, efforts to fund such a study have reached a standstill. Advocates with Metro Justice, the local grassroots advocacy organization, are asking city and county officials to fund a study to evaluate the cost of creating a public power company to replace the city’s investor-owned utility, Rochester Gas and Electric. Residents have criticized the utility for its high rates, billing errors, and poor customer service, with some reporting monthly bills totaling thousands of dollars and hours-long call wait times.
Organizers with Metro Justice at a rally in Rochester, New York, in March 2023.
Metro Justice
Shelby Cohen, senior manager of communications at Avangrid, RG&E’s parent company, told Grist that in response to complaints, RG&E “has made significant improvements to customer service, drastically lessening customer wait times, improving the accuracy of billing, and hiring hundreds of new staff.” Cohen also noted that “small rate increases are vital and needed to invest in maintaining, repairing, and replacing New York’s several decades-old aging infrastructure while meeting New York’s clean energy goals,” and that a municipal utility would compromise service and reliability “while putting taxpayers on the hook for billions of dollars.”
Sharma, the organizing director of Metro Justice, said the study will be crucial for clarifying if and by how much electricity rates would fall under a public utility, and enumerating other benefits — like job creation, improvements in reliability, and a transition to renewable power — that a municipal power company could achieve.
In June, the Rochester City Council agreed to allocate $500,000 for a feasibility study, but the funding was contingent on additional financial support from the Monroe County Legislature, whose jurisdiction includes Rochester. In November, county legislators voted against funding another $1 million, citing concerns over the costs and length of time required to form a public utility. Despite the setback, advocates aren’t dissuaded: Sharma said as new county legislators take office this month, Metro Justice will continue to organize for another vote to fund a study.
Meanwhile, in Ann Arbor, Michigan, a recent study commissioned by the city to evaluate public power produced mixed results. The report did not reach a firm conclusion on whether rates under a municipal utility would be lower than under the city’s current investor-owned utility, DTE Energy, due to potential litigation over the costs of buying the grid and future investments needed to improve grid reliability. The study also modeled scenarios for Ann Arbor to achieve 100 percent renewable power by 2030 but excluded a municipal utility as one of those options, arguing that forming the utility would likely take too long.
Public power advocates in Ann Arbor strongly disagreed with that assumption. Don Lee, executive director of the advocacy group Ann Arbor for Public Power, said that the city council has the authority to vote for and launch a municipal utility well within the timeframe to reach 2030 decarbonization goals. Lee also noted that until recently, investor-owned utilities in Michigan were allowed to cap distributed energy generation like rooftop solar to just 1 percent of a utility’s annual average peak load. (A suite of statewide clean energy laws passed in November raised that cap to 10 percent.) In contrast, a municipal utility could rapidly expand rooftop solar, he said, as well as community solar systems, which are currently not allowed under DTE policies.
If Ann Arbor formed a municipal utility, the campaign argues, the city could not only build out local clean energy sources, but also invest in a more reliable grid. Ann Arbor residents have experienced high rates and prolonged outages with DTE Energy, Lee said. Pete Ternes, a communications specialist with DTE Energy, did not respond directly to Grist’s questions about affordability and reliability, but pointed out that the city’s study concluded that working with DTE Energy would be the lowest cost option for Ann Arbor to reach its 2030 climate goals. He noted that 30 percent of Ann Arbor’s energy comes from wind and solar, and that the utility “will continue to submit carbon reduction goals to the Michigan Public Service Commission.”
Ternes added that buying DTE Energy’s distribution system would come at a significant cost, and “does not include the cost of buying or generating electricity for customers or the ongoing costs of running the system once purchased.” Ann Arbor for Public Power has called for another study to further evaluate the costs and benefits of public power.
Publicly owned utilities are far from new. Across the country, around 2,000 consumer-owned utilities serve more than 50 million customers, in places like Sacramento, Long Island, and the entire state of Nebraska. Unlike investor-owned utilities, public utilities don’t pay dividends to shareholders and have access to tax-exempt, low-interest municipal bonds.
Volunteers for Ann Arbor for Public Power at a tabling event in Ann Arbor, Michigan, in July 2023.
Gus Teschke / Ann Arbor for Public Power
Supporters say the benefits of public power are wide ranging. Customers served by publicly owned utilities often have smaller electric bills — on average about $15 lower per month than with an investor-owned utility, according to the American Public Power Association, an industry group representing consumer-owned utilities. They also tend to experience more reliable service than investor-owned utility customers, with on average about half the annual duration of interrupted power.
And while public ownership is no guarantee of climate leadership, advocates say the community-oriented structure can lead to a more rapid switch to renewables. In Kauaʻi, Hawai‘i, residents bought their for-profit utility — a willing seller — in 2002 and created a locally owned electric cooperative. The Kauaʻi Island Utility Cooperative now sources 60 percent of its electricity from renewables, almost double the percentage generated by nearby investor-owned Hawaiian Electric. Meanwhile, many consumer-owned utilities, from Burlington, Vermont, to Greensburg, Kansas, were among the first in the country to achieve 100 percent renewable power.
In recent decades, however, most municipal takeover attempts have failed, owing to the high costs of not only buying out existing utilities’ assets, but also funding legal efforts to defend against pushback. Since 2000, more than 60 cities have attempted to replace investor-owned utilities with a public alternative, but only nine have succeeded, according to a study commissioned by the Edison Electric Institute, a trade association representing investor-owned utilities. They include Jefferson County, Washington, and Winter Park, Florida, which took over their power systems within two and four years, respectively.
But elsewhere, the process can be “torturous,” said Richard Sedano, president and CEO of the Regulatory Assistance Project, an energy policy nonprofit. He cites Boulder, Colorado, as one notable example. Frustrated with the lack of clean energy progress from its investor-owned utility, Xcel Energy, the city embarked on what would become a decade-long struggle to form a municipal utility in 2010. A series of legal challenges initiated by Xcel and other delays ended up costing taxpayers close to $29 million. In 2020, residents voted to ditch the effort and instead enter into a 20-year agreement with Xcel that would hold the utility to certain climate commitments, including achieving 100 percent clean electricity.
Sedano credits Boulder for successfully applying pressure on Xcel to switch to more renewables but wonders if there are less costly solutions to communities’ concerns about investor-owned utilities. One option is for state regulators to set utility performance standards, which reward or penalize utilities based on certain defined criteria, such as the rate at which they connect solar projects to the grid. Sedano also points to community choice aggregation programs, or CCAs, as another way for local governments to provide cheaper and cleaner power. In states with CCA programs like California and Illinois, cities and counties can purchase or generate their own electricity, which is then delivered to customers through the investor-owned utility’s distribution grid.
Working closely with investor-owned utilities, however, can present its own challenges. San Francisco’s Public Utilities Commission, or SFPUC, already generates or purchases more than 70 percent of the city’s electricity supply through its CCA program, CleanPowerSF, and its publicly owned hydroelectric and solar power provider, Hetch Hetchy Power. The city coordinates with the local investor-owned utility, Pacific Gas and Electric, to deliver that supply through PG&E’s poles and wires. Over the years, city officials have accused the utility of requiring exorbitant infrastructure upgrades to connect municipal facilities using the SFPUC’s power supply to the grid, including public transit, affordable housing, and street lights. The city claims that the costs of the utility’s obstruction and delays have totaled more than $20 million. PG&E did not respond to multiple phone calls from Grist.
The O’Shaughnessy Dam at Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, which feeds water into San Francisco’s Hetch Hetchy Power System, in Yosemite National Park, California. George Rose / Getty Images
That’s why San Francisco city officials, including the SFPUC and Mayor London Breed, want to buy out the city’s portion of PG&E’s grid and create a fully public power system. In 2019, city officials offered PG&E $2.5 billion to purchase the city’s electrical grid, but the utility refused, saying the offer was too low. The city is petitioning for a formal evaluation of PG&E’s assets by the California Public Utilities Commission, and hopes to negotiate with the utility once their value is determined.
Barbara Hale, assistant general manager of power services at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, said that if San Francisco succeeded in taking over the local grid, customers would see lower rates, fewer barriers to connecting rooftop solar and battery storage, and local decisions “focused on what San Francisco needs, not what shareholders need.” She pointed out the SFPUC already has a strong track record of generating and distributing clean power, and continues to expand rooftop solar and battery storage.
Hale said that the city is currently focusing on communicating those benefits to San Francisco residents. “One of the lessons we take away from [Maine’s] experience is the importance of us continuing to talk about what value we bring,” she said.
That message is especially important when going up against powerful opposition from investor-owned utilities, said Sharma, from Rochester. “When fighting for something this big against an opponent that is going to outspend you in misinforming the public, it is very important that we’re able to counter that misinformation with real facts and a real concrete vision,” she said.
In San Diego, campaigners say residents are more than ready to hear their case.
“Until this initiative came forward, there was a general sense of resignation when it came to the electric utility,” said Powers. “Like, ‘We want rooftop solar but we can’t get it,’ or ‘These rates are out of control, but there’s nothing we can do.’ And now we have an initiative where people can act, and they can actually do something about it.”
The European Union is in the process of drafting a climate target for 2040 to serve as a bridge between its net greenhouse gas emissions reduction target of 55 percent by 2030 and its goal of net zero by 2050, reported Reuters.
New draft documents from the European Commission said the EU must invest about $1.64 trillion a year starting in 2031 to achieve its net-zero goal, the Financial Times reported.
“The EU aims to be climate-neutral by 2050 – an economy with net-zero greenhouse gas emissions. This objective is at the heart of the European Green Deal, and is a legally binding target thanks to the European Climate Law,” the European Commission has said. “All parts of society and economic sectors will play a role – from the power sector to industry, transport, buildings, agriculture and forestry.”
The document expressed that the big investment is meant to lower the price of inaction as global heating ramps up, reported the Financial Times. And if global temperatures can be kept to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels or cooler, the EU could save $2.61 trillion from 2031 to 2050 and reduce net fossil fuel import costs by $3.05 trillion.
Some in the agriculture and industry sectors have said the requirements of the EU’s climate law are too strict considering the increased inflation and lingering effects of the energy crisis.
The document draft said the green transition presents an “opportunity” for the EU to become a “leading force in the clean technology sectors, stabilise energy bills, create the good jobs of the future, improve our quality of life, and protect ourselves against the worst effects of climate-related hazards,” according to the Financial Times.
The document said the EU’s electricity sector would need to be almost entirely decarbonized by about 2040 in order to achieve the target. There would also need to be an overall fossil fuel consumption reduction of 85 percent along with a transition to green industries. And to get to a goal of a 90 percent reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, there would need to be “close to” a $718 billion annual investment from 2031 to 2050.
Much of the investment would be in the underdeveloped technology of carbon capture to trap residual emissions. Another draft addressing carbon management said 496 million tons must be captured each year by 2050 in order to achieve net zero.
The new document mentions that the use of fertilizers, livestock breeding and other agricultural activities are predicted to become the largest contributor to greenhouse gas emissions in the EU.
The executive arm of the EU is set to publish the document on February 6. It will help inform the establishment of the 2035 Nationally Determined Contribution — a goal for emissions reductions in the bloc that is required to be agreed upon by all 27 governments leading up to next year’s United Nations COP30 climate conference.
According to Electricity 2024, a new report from the International Energy Agency (IEA), electricity demand worldwide is expected to accelerate during the next three years, a press release from the IEA said. However, the additional demand is forecast to be covered by clean energy technologies.
Nuclear power is on course to reach a record high in 2025 as renewables continue to expand quickly, enabling the generation of low-emissions energy sources to outpace the demand for power.
“The power sector currently produces more CO2 emissions than any other in the world economy, so it’s encouraging that the rapid growth of renewables and a steady expansion of nuclear power are together on course to match all the increase in global electricity demand over the next three years,” said Fatih Birol, executive director of the IEA, in the press release. “This is largely thanks to the huge momentum behind renewables, with ever cheaper solar leading the way, and support from the important comeback of nuclear power, whose generation is set to reach a historic high by 2025. While more progress is needed, and fast, these are very promising trends.”
The new report is the IEA’s yearly analysis of policies and developments in the electricity market. It provides forecasts for supply, demand and carbon emissions from the power sector through 2026.
The report found that global electricity demand growth is expected to speed up to a 3.4 percent average from this year through 2026, even after falling slightly last year to 2.2 percent because of less power consumption by advanced economies.
Approximately 85 percent of the global increase in demand for electricity is predicted to come from India, China and Southeast Asian countries.
At the same time, record-setting generation from solar, wind, hydro, nuclear and other low-emissions power sources should reduce the reliance on fossil fuels, the report said.
Low-emissions sources made up just shy of 40 percent of the planet’s electricity generation in 2023, but that is expected to increase to nearly half by 2026.
According to the report, renewables are on course to comprise a third of total power generation by early next year, surpassing coal. When global generation of fossil fuels falls to less than 60 percent, it will be the first time in more than 50 years.
“The decoupling of global electricity demand and emissions would be significant given the energy sector’s increasing electrification, with more consumers using technologies such as electric vehicles and heat pumps,” the press release said.
Demand for electricity in the United States and Europe was down last year, with many developing and emerging economies — in response to growing populations and industrialization — recording growth that is on track to continue through 2026.
Per capita electricity use in Southeast Asia and India has increased rapidly, while in Africa it has been effectively at a standstill for more than 30 years.
“Electricity use is a key indicator of economic development in any country, and it’s a grim sign that it has flatlined in Africa on a per capita basis for over three decades,” Birol said in the press release. “Access to reliable, affordable and sustainable energy for all citizens is essential for African countries to achieve their economic and climate goals. The international community needs to work together with African governments to enable the urgent progress that is needed.”
Whale watching is a popular pastime and a great way to get outdoors, but not everyone knows the best places and times of year to see the largest mammals on Earth. Here’s a quick guide to some of the best places to catch a glimpse of these magnificent creatures in the United States.
San Juan Islands, Washington
An orca breaching in the Haro Strait of the San Juan Islands, Washington. Wolfgang Kaehler / LightRocket via Getty Images
Washington State — and the entire West Coast — has ample opportunities for whale watching. Specifically, the San Juan Islands off the Washington Coast is a great place to look for orcas, humpbacks, gray whales and minkes.
While some orcas, humpbacks and gray whales can be found year-round off the Washington Coast, the best time of year to see them is usually during the summer months. Southern resident orcas — who live in three pods, referred to as the J, K and L — typically make their way through the San Juans from May to October.
The picturesque archipelago is on the Whale Trail — a series of more than 100 sites with resources for watching whales and other marine life — like harbor seals, sea lions, marine birds and porpoises — from the shores of British Columbia down to Southern California.
“I used to go to summer camp in the San Juan Islands and sometimes we would go on boat trips. On one of these trips, one of my fellow campers yelled out, ‘Orcas!’ We all raced to the side of the boat to see a pod traveling besides us. The dark spears of their fins stood out against the gray waves and sky. We watched them arc up and down out of the water until our paths diverged. I was thrilled to see them; it felt like a gift from the universe. I felt honored that they chose to travel beside us,” Olivia Rosane, who is also the opinion editor for Common Dreams, told EcoWatch.
Seward, Alaska
A humpback whale jumps out of the water in Kenai Fjords National Park, Alaska, near a tourboat on a sunny afternoon. R Lolli Morrow / iStock / Getty Images Plus
Alaska is one of the best places in the world for wildlife viewing of any kind, including whales. Every year, more than 22,000gray whales travel along the longest mammal migration route in the world — roughly 10,000 to 14,000 miles round-trip — from Baja, Mexico, north to where they feed in the Chukchi and Bering Seas. Gray whales migrate during the months of late February to May and generally stay near the coast, making them easier to spot — noninvasively — from shore.
During the warmer months — from May to August — you may also see humpback whales near Seward, as they return from their Hawaiian winter feeding grounds.
The best times to catch a glimpse of orcas in and around Resurrection Bay and Kenai Fjords National Park — where fin, minke and grays are also known to gather — is in May and June, though they are around all year.
“Orca whales don’t follow a migration pattern, and instead can be found where there is food, socialization, and ice coverage. Orcas, or killer whales, are the largest member of the dolphin family and have three main classifications: resident, transient, and offshore. We often spot resident orcas near Seward, as they feed on fish. Transient orcas can be spotted, but are less likely since they feed on marine mammals like seals,” Seward.com said.
After blue whales, fin whales are the largest mammals on Earth and are most often seen in Alaska from May to September, generally traveling by themselves or in smaller pods.
When you’re lucky enough to spot them, minke whales can also be seen from May to September, traveling in small, slow-moving pods.
Maui, Hawaii
A humpback whale seen from a whale watching boat in Maui. KonArt / iStock / Getty Images Plus
The beautiful black and white humpback whale is one of the most majestic creatures on Earth. The weathered-looking cetacean can grow up to 60 feet in length and weigh as much as 80 thousand pounds. Most humpback populations were decimated by more than 95 percent before a final commercial whaling moratorium was imposed in 1985. There are now estimated to be approximately 84,000 mature humpback whales on Earth.
The powerful marine mammals — who live in all the world’s oceans — are increasing in much of their range, but are still threatened by entanglement in fishing gear, underwater noise pollution, vessel strikes and harassment from humans.
Humpback whale populations migrate along different routes. Hawaii’s Kohola — or Central North Pacific humpback whale population — travel back and forth from the Hawaiian Islands and Alaska.
The winter migration brings these gentle whales to Hawaii and the North Pacific Ocean from November to May each year, when more than 12,000 humpbacks come to the warmer waters to breed.
“We went to Maui in February about 7 years ago. When we got there we were told that it was prime whale watching time there on the island, so we booked a whale watching boat tour through the hotel. It was a small, modest boat with about 10 other people on it. We were all excited but skeptical about just how many whales we’d see since everyone knows that a lot of times whales can be elusive and unpredictable,” North Carolina resident Anna Moore Groome told EcoWatch. “It was a gorgeous sunny day and right from the beginning of the trip, we began seeing several whales. They were jumping and rolling, splashing their tails and fins and getting super close to our boat and snorting water all over us! We must have been right in the middle of a pod because there were large whales and small whales all around us. We stuck a microphone down in the water and heard what seemed like a million conversations going on under the surface. It was one of the most magical days of my life.”
Passengers on a whale watching boat out of Lahaina, Maui, get a close up look at the tail of a humpback whale. David Fleetham / VW PICS / Universal Images Group via Getty Images
Bar Harbor, Maine
A humpback whale in Bar Harbor, Maine. Patrick Hawks / CC BY-SA 2.0
The picturesque town of Bar Harbor, Maine, on Mount Desert Island is known as the gateway to Acadia National Park with its mountains, rocky cliffs, white sand beaches and sea views. Some of the wildlife living in Acadia National Park include bobcats, moose, porcupines, barred owls, beavers and American black bears.
Located along Frenchman Bay, the area offers wonderful opportunities for wildlife viewing and whale watching. The Shore Path begins at the town’s pier and meanders along the bay with views of the area’s islands.
The best time to see humpback whales, minkes and finbacks around Bar Harbor is from April to October, when the whales come to feed on krill, squid and fish in the Gulf of Maine.
“Our whale watching cruise from Bar Harbor was an adventurous way to rest between more strenuous hike days. We dressed in extra layers of clothing and brought warm hats and gloves, knowing the temperatures would drop once we ventured away from shore,” Michigan author Cynthia Birk told EcoWatch. “Although it took a little while to reach the area where the humpback whales were visible, we were entertained along the way with glimpses of dolphins racing alongside our boat. We also met majestic tall-masted schooners cruising in the opposite direction through the Gulf of Maine. It was too late in the season for us to see any puffins, but as we passed Mount Desert Rock, it looked as if every harbor seal in the area had decided to stop there to soak up the sun near the famous lighthouse. Our boat kept a respectful distance from the whales we encountered, but it was still close enough to see a thrilling show. We enjoyed observing their spouting and breaching behaviors and caught several slaps of tail flukes as the giant creatures dove into the ocean. It was a marvelous experience.”
The world’s groundwater aquifers are taking a beating. Decades of unrestrained pumping by thirsty farms and fast-growing cities have drained these underground rock beds, which hold more than 95 percent of the planet’s drinkable water, pushing countries like Iran to the brink of humanitarian disaster. Aquifer health is also suffering in the United States, where groundwater overdraft in states such as Arizona has dried out wells and caused land to sink and rupture.
But a new study published in the scientific journal Nature this week highlights the few places in the world where groundwater levels are actually recovering. Using 40 years of measurement data from 170,000 groundwater wells, a team of researchers identified a few key policies that can stop water tables from crashing — and even restore them. These policies are all difficult to execute, and each has its own economic costs, but the new data offers hope to areas like California’s Central Valley, which are struggling to slow down massive groundwater declines.
“Much of the dialogue linked to groundwater has focused on depletion, and the novelty in this work lies in our ability to profile some of these cases where groundwater levels have recovered,” said Scott Jasechko, a professor of water resources at the University of California, Santa Barbara, and the lead author of the study. “Although they are rare, these provide informative examples of ways that things might be turned around elsewhere.”
To create a map of aquifer changes around the world, the authors liaised with dozens of governments and compiled more than 1,300 different studies. The more than 40 countries from which they got data account for more than 75 percent of the world’s groundwater usage. After they created the map, Jasechko and his team zoomed in on places where water levels were rising and followed up with local governments in those areas, to see how they’d done it.
The first solution the researchers hit on is obvious: If you’re running out of groundwater, find another water source. The authors point to the success of Albuquerque, New Mexico, which relied on its aquifers to support rapid urban growth over the course of the late twentieth century. When new studies showed the aquifers had much less water than officials thought, they turned to the tributaries of the Colorado River for an alternative supply, building a treatment plant and a series of pipelines to import river water and give the aquifers a break.
“In the ’80s and early ’90s, there was an idea that Albuquerque was sitting on top of a Lake Superior level of water, and then in the ’90s they found out that wasn’t true,” said Mark Kelly, the water resources manager at Albuquerque’s water utility. “That was like a wake-up call, and we changed our strategy.”
The Biden administration has sought to replicate this solution in other parts of the country, spending more than $8 billion to create new reservoirs and pipelines for rural areas that depend on groundwater. But these projects are far too expensive for local governments to pursue without federal help; in the case of New Mexico, the cost of importing Colorado River water ran to more than $450 million, financed by utility cost increases on Albuquerque residents. Furthermore, as the recent history of the Colorado River shows, surface water isn’t always a sure bet — the river itself reached record lows during a recent dry spell in 2022 and forced some farmers in the West to turn back to groundwater for irrigation.
“Further tapping of the Colorado River and moving that water elsewhere can deplete the availability of water in the Colorado itself,” said Jasechko. “I think it would be too generous to call that a solution.”
The second way of halting aquifer decline is to replenish underground water through a strategy known as “managed aquifer recharge,” which involves pushing water down into an aquifer to refill a depleted rock bed. This strategy has already taken off in some water-stressed parts of the U.S. West. In Tucson, Arizona, local officials stored Colorado River water underground to help restore water levels that had been declining for years, giving them a bank they can draw on during extreme droughts. Here, too, it helps to have a substitute surface water source such as a river, though some governments have found alternate supplies. In central Spain, for example, a series of recharge pilot projects have used rooftop runoff and reclaimed wastewater to refill aquifers.
The third solution doesn’t rely on a substitute water source, but it has its own costs. The researchers highlight the case of Bangkok, Thailand, which imposed stringent restrictions on groundwater pumping toward the end of the 20th century after huge chunks of the city’s land started to sink. In the years since, the city’s water table has recovered, and parts of its land have even started to rise again. This improvement didn’t come without a cost: In order to protect its land from sinking, Bangkok had to curb the construction of new factories and industrial plants, meaning it may have lost out on economic growth.
“The measures that have been put in place have helped them a little to recover,” said Jasechko, “but also at the expense of industrial development, and potentially jobs.”
Despite the high cost of importing surface water and the political difficulty of cracking down on groundwater usage, the study’s authors say many countries will need to implement these solutions in order to forestall the even worse consequences of aquifer depletion. The loss of residential wells can make whole neighborhoods unlivable, a risk that has already become real for some residents in Arizona. And if agricultural wells go dry, as happened in Iran, it can threaten regional or national food supplies.
While the case studies of recovery provide blueprints for other areas, climate change might make replicating them difficult, said Helen Dahlke, a professor of hydrology at the University of California, Davis. As the earth warms, precipitation totals in dry areas will fall, and the decline in rain might cancel out some of the positive effects of groundwater regulation.
“The measures that they’re talking about would be that much more impactful if they were able to counterbalance the decline in precipitation,” she said. “You’re playing a game of, ‘how much is coming in, and how much is going out?’”
