Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Quantifying the “Carbon Gap” – Unmasking the Shortfalls in Global Climate Efforts

News Feed
Friday, May 3, 2024

Research indicates that existing plans for carbon dioxide removal are inadequate for meeting the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 ºC warming limit. Enhanced awareness and action are required to close the significant gap between projected increases and the needs identified in IPCC focus scenarios.Insufficient carbon dioxide removal efforts jeopardize meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate goals, highlighting the urgent need for enhanced technologies and strategies.New research suggests that countries’ current plans to remove CO2 from the atmosphere will not be enough to comply with the 1.5 ºC warming limit set out under the Paris Agreement.Since 2010, the United Nations environmental organization UNEP has taken an annual measurement of the emissions gap — the difference between countries’ climate protection pledges and what is necessary to limit global heating to 1.5 ºC, or at least below 2 ºC. The UNEP Emissions Gap Reports are clear: climate policy needs more ambition. This new study now explicitly applies this analytical concept to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) — the removal of the most important greenhouse gas, CO2, from the atmosphere.The study, published today (May 3) in the journal Nature Climate Change, was led by the Berlin-based Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) and involved an international team of scientists.“In the Emissions Gap Reports, carbon removals are only accounted for indirectly,” said lead author Dr. William Lamb, of the MCC Applied Sustainability Science working group.“After all, the usual benchmark for climate protection pledges is net emissions, ie emissions minus removals. We are now making transparent the specific ambition gap in scaling up removals.“This planetary waste management will soon place completely new requirements on policymakers and may even become a central pillar of climate protection in the second half of the century.”Co-author Dr. Naomi Vaughan, of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at UEA, added: “Carbon dioxide removal methods have a small but vital role to play in achieving net zero and limiting the impacts of climate change.“Our analysis shows that countries need more awareness, ambition, and action on scaling up CDR methods together with deep emissions reductions to achieve the aspirations of the Paris Agreement.”According to the study, if national targets are fully implemented, annual human-induced carbon removals could increase by a maximum of 0.5 gigatonnes of CO2 (500 million tonnes) by 2030, and by a maximum of 1.9 gigatonnes by 2050.This contrasts with the 5.1 gigatonne increase required in a ‘focus scenario’, which the research team depicts as typical from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report.There, global heating, calculated over the entire course of this century, is limited to 1.5 ºC, and a particularly rapid expansion of renewable energies and reduction of fossil emissions is depicted as the core climate protection strategy.But, the focus scenario still relies on scaling up carbon removals. The gap for the year 2050 is therefore at least 3.2 gigatonnes of CO2 (5.1 minus a maximum of 1.9).An alternative focus scenario, also derived from the IPCC, assumes a significant reduction in global energy demand, due to politically initiated behaviour changes as the core element of climate protection strategy.Here, carbon removals would increase by a more modest amount: 2.5 gigatonnes in 2050. Fully implemented national targets would be close to sufficient when compared to this scenario, with a gap in 2050 of 0.4 gigatonnes.The research team points out the problem of sustainability limits in scaling up carbon removals; for example, the associated land area demand will come to jeopardise biodiversity and food security. Nevertheless, there is still plenty of room for designing fair and sustainable land management policies.In addition, novel carbon removal options, such as air filter systems, or ‘enhanced rock weathering’, have hardly been promoted by politicians to date.They currently only remove 0.002 gigatonnes of CO2 per year from the atmosphere, compared to 3 gigatonnes through conventional options such as afforestation, and they are unlikely to significantly increase by 2030. According to the scenarios, they must become more prevalent than conventional options by 2010.Since only 40 countries have so far quantified their removal plans in their long-term low emissions development strategies, the study also draws on other national documents and best-guess assumptions.“The calculation should certainly be refined,” said Dr. Lamb. “But our proposal using the focus scenarios further opens the discourse on how much carbon removal is necessary to meet the Paris Agreement.“This much is clear: without a rapid reduction in emissions towards zero, across all sectors, the 1.5 ºC limit will not be met under any circumstances.”Reference: “The carbon dioxide removal gap” by Lamb, W, Gasser, T, Roman-Cuesta, R, Grassi, G, Gidden, M, Powis, C, Geden, O, Nemet, G, Pramata, Y, Riahi, K, Smith, S, Steinhauser, J, Vaughan, N, Smith, H, Minx, J, 3 May 2024, Nature Climate Change. DOI: 10.1038/s41558-024-01984-6

Insufficient carbon dioxide removal efforts jeopardize meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate goals, highlighting the urgent need for enhanced technologies and strategies. New research suggests that...

Carbon Dioxide Atmosphere Concept

Research indicates that existing plans for carbon dioxide removal are inadequate for meeting the Paris Agreement’s 1.5 ºC warming limit. Enhanced awareness and action are required to close the significant gap between projected increases and the needs identified in IPCC focus scenarios.

Insufficient carbon dioxide removal efforts jeopardize meeting the Paris Agreement’s climate goals, highlighting the urgent need for enhanced technologies and strategies.

New research suggests that countries’ current plans to remove CO2 from the atmosphere will not be enough to comply with the 1.5 ºC warming limit set out under the Paris Agreement.

Since 2010, the United Nations environmental organization UNEP has taken an annual measurement of the emissions gap — the difference between countries’ climate protection pledges and what is necessary to limit global heating to 1.5 ºC, or at least below 2 ºC.

The UNEP Emissions Gap Reports are clear: climate policy needs more ambition. This new study now explicitly applies this analytical concept to carbon dioxide removal (CDR) — the removal of the most important greenhouse gas, CO2, from the atmosphere.

The study, published today (May 3) in the journal Nature Climate Change, was led by the Berlin-based Mercator Research Institute on Global Commons and Climate Change (MCC) and involved an international team of scientists.

“In the Emissions Gap Reports, carbon removals are only accounted for indirectly,” said lead author Dr. William Lamb, of the MCC Applied Sustainability Science working group.

“After all, the usual benchmark for climate protection pledges is net emissions, ie emissions minus removals. We are now making transparent the specific ambition gap in scaling up removals.

“This planetary waste management will soon place completely new requirements on policymakers and may even become a central pillar of climate protection in the second half of the century.”

Co-author Dr. Naomi Vaughan, of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research at UEA, added: “Carbon dioxide removal methods have a small but vital role to play in achieving net zero and limiting the impacts of climate change.

“Our analysis shows that countries need more awareness, ambition, and action on scaling up CDR methods together with deep emissions reductions to achieve the aspirations of the Paris Agreement.”

According to the study, if national targets are fully implemented, annual human-induced carbon removals could increase by a maximum of 0.5 gigatonnes of CO2 (500 million tonnes) by 2030, and by a maximum of 1.9 gigatonnes by 2050.

This contrasts with the 5.1 gigatonne increase required in a ‘focus scenario’, which the research team depicts as typical from the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) assessment report.

There, global heating, calculated over the entire course of this century, is limited to 1.5 ºC, and a particularly rapid expansion of renewable energies and reduction of fossil emissions is depicted as the core climate protection strategy.

But, the focus scenario still relies on scaling up carbon removals. The gap for the year 2050 is therefore at least 3.2 gigatonnes of CO2 (5.1 minus a maximum of 1.9).

An alternative focus scenario, also derived from the IPCC, assumes a significant reduction in global energy demand, due to politically initiated behaviour changes as the core element of climate protection strategy.

Here, carbon removals would increase by a more modest amount: 2.5 gigatonnes in 2050. Fully implemented national targets would be close to sufficient when compared to this scenario, with a gap in 2050 of 0.4 gigatonnes.

The research team points out the problem of sustainability limits in scaling up carbon removals; for example, the associated land area demand will come to jeopardise biodiversity and food security. Nevertheless, there is still plenty of room for designing fair and sustainable land management policies.

In addition, novel carbon removal options, such as air filter systems, or ‘enhanced rock weathering’, have hardly been promoted by politicians to date.

They currently only remove 0.002 gigatonnes of CO2 per year from the atmosphere, compared to 3 gigatonnes through conventional options such as afforestation, and they are unlikely to significantly increase by 2030. According to the scenarios, they must become more prevalent than conventional options by 2010.

Since only 40 countries have so far quantified their removal plans in their long-term low emissions development strategies, the study also draws on other national documents and best-guess assumptions.

“The calculation should certainly be refined,” said Dr. Lamb. “But our proposal using the focus scenarios further opens the discourse on how much carbon removal is necessary to meet the Paris Agreement.

“This much is clear: without a rapid reduction in emissions towards zero, across all sectors, the 1.5 ºC limit will not be met under any circumstances.”

Reference: “The carbon dioxide removal gap” by Lamb, W, Gasser, T, Roman-Cuesta, R, Grassi, G, Gidden, M, Powis, C, Geden, O, Nemet, G, Pramata, Y, Riahi, K, Smith, S, Steinhauser, J, Vaughan, N, Smith, H, Minx, J, 3 May 2024, Nature Climate Change.
DOI: 10.1038/s41558-024-01984-6

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

‘The Interview’: Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson

Ayana Elizabeth Johnson on how to overcome the “soft” climate denial that keeps us buying junk.

I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to say that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 2018 report on global warming drastically changed the way many people thought — or felt — about the climate crisis. That report laid out, with grim clarity, both the importance and extreme difficulty of preventing global warming from reaching 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels. Its warnings about what was likely to happen to our planet if we didn’t turn things around were severe.The starkness of the I.P.C.C.’s report led to a surge of pessimism, fear and, in response to those emotions, climate activism that hasn’t really abated. But recently there has been a growing counterresponse to those darker feelings, including from some experts who have a clear view on what’s coming — and that response is a cautious optimism.Though she doesn’t go so far as to call herself hopeful, Dr. Ayana Elizabeth Johnson is one of those experts trying to change the mood. She’s a marine biologist and a founder of the Urban Ocean Lab, a think tank focusing on climate and coastal cities. She has also worked with the Environmental Protection Agency and advised lawmakers on climate policy. Additionally, Johnson, who is 43, is a leading climate activist and communicator. She was an editor of the best-selling climate anthology “All We Can Save,” and her next book, “What if We Get It Right?” which will be published this summer, is a collection of interviews with leaders from various fields about promising climate possibilities.The question posed by that book’s title — what if we get it right on climate? — is one I think about often, and skeptically. I’m not quite convinced that people are motivated more by positivity than fear. But I would like to be, and I was hoping Johnson could help.

Climate
Activism
Government

Q&A: The Dire Consequences of Global Warming in the Earth’s Oceans

From our collaborating partner “Living on Earth,” public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview with Bob Bewyn, a staff writer at Inside Climate News, based in Austria.  Many of the effects of climate disruption are already in progress. One place getting hit especially hard is the ocean.  According to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, […]

Imagining a world without fish in the world’s tropical oceans.Interview by Aynsley O’Neill, Living on EarthFrom our collaborating partner “Living on Earth,” public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview with Bob Bewyn, a staff writer at Inside Climate News, based in Austria. 

Climate

Underwater Time Bomb: Meltwater Ponds Threaten Antarctic Stability

An expedition has found that increased temperatures from climate change are causing ponds that weaken ice. A team of scientists who installed instruments on an...

Recent field observations in Antarctica reveal that meltwater ponds are causing significant flexing and fracturing of ice shelves, suggesting that increased melting from climate change may accelerate the collapse of these critical structures, potentially raising global sea levels.An expedition has found that increased temperatures from climate change are causing ponds that weaken ice.A team of scientists who installed instruments on an Antarctic ice shelf discovered that meltwater ponds were causing the ice to flex and fracture.Though scientists had predicted the phenomenon, this was the first time it was observed in the field.The finding raises concerns that, as climate change progresses and more melting occurs, vulnerable ice shelves in Antarctica will collapse—contributing to global sea rise. “Ice shelves are extremely important for the Antarctic Ice Sheet’s overall health as they act to buttress, or hold back, the glacier ice on land,” said Alison Banwell, a scientist in the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences (CIRES) at the University of Colorado Boulder and lead author of the study published May 4 in the Journal of Glaciology. “Scientists have predicted and modeled that surface meltwater loading could cause ice shelves to fracture, but no one had observed the process in the field, until now.”“It’s looking very likely that this process explains the collapse of the Larsen B Ice Shelf,” added Doug MacAyeal, University of Chicago Prof. Emeritus of Geophysical Sciences and co-author on the paper—referring to a notorious 2002 event in which more than 1,000 square miles of Antarctic ice collapsed into the ocean in a matter of weeks.Around the continent of Antarctica, thick sheets of floating glacier ice extend out over the ocean. Known as ice shelves, they are thought to help keep inland glaciers stable—but more and more seem to be collapsing.Field Research and Observational ChallengesIn 2019, a group of researchers led by Banwell traveled to the George IV Ice Shelf, thought to be one of the at-risk ice shelves in Antarctica. They placed time-lapse cameras and GPS sensors to monitor the ice over the course of a year, throughout the seasonal cycle of freezing and thawing.The outbreak of COVID-19, however, meant it was more than a year before they could return. When they returned in late 2021, several of the stations had been lost. Fortunately, some instruments survived—and they had documented a lot of evidence.According to the research, here’s how the process works. Warmer air temperatures cause the top layers of ice on the ice shelf to melt. The newly liquid water forms a pool, which concentrates the weight in one area. Then, as anyone who’s tried to cup water in their hands knows, the water will find its way down through even the tiniest crack.The water trickling down widens the cracks in the ice, like cracks spreading from a pothole in the road over time. Over the course of the summer, the pools fill and then drain, over and over; the GPS sensors placed atop the ice shelf recorded that the ice shelf was dropping and rising by about a foot each time. This further weakens the ice.Ice is structurally fragile, MacAyeal said; “It’s like a weak form of glass.”Eventually, the dam breaks. The GPS stations recorded a very sudden altitude change—meaning the ice had fractured.The researchers said it was likely this thawing and freezing cycle was a key factor in the collapse of the Larsen B Ice Shelf in 2002, the largest ice shelf breakup on record. Before the event, satellites had recorded many pools of meltwater atop the ice shelf.Global sea levels have risen by eight to nine inches since 1880, and the trend is accelerating over time. The melting of Antarctic ice is a major factor, and scientists worry that the loss of the ice shelves will further destabilize the situation.“These observations are important because they can be used to improve models to better predict which Antarctic ice shelves are more vulnerable and most susceptible to collapse in the future,” Banwell said.Reference: “Observed meltwater-induced flexure and fracture at a doline on George VI Ice Shelf, Antarctica” by Alison F. Banwell, Ian C. Willis, Laura A. Stevens, Rebecca L. Dell and Douglas R. MacAyeal, 3 May 2024, Journal of Glaciology.DOI: 10.1017/jog.2024.31

Climate
Water
Science

Honduran city’s air pollution is almost 50 times higher than WHO guidelines

San Pedro Sula is rated ‘dangerous’ as effects of forest fires, El Niño and the climate crisis cause a spike in respiratory illnessesThe air quality in San Pedro Sula, the second-largest city in Honduras, as been classified as the most polluted on the American continent due to forest fires and weather conditions aggravated by El Niño and the climate crisis.IQAir, a Swiss air-quality organisation that draws data from more than 30,000 monitoring stations around the world, said on Thursday that air quality in the city of about 1 million people has reached “dangerous” levels. Continue reading...

The air quality in San Pedro Sula, the second-largest city in Honduras, as been classified as the most polluted on the American continent due to forest fires and weather conditions aggravated by El Niño and the climate crisis.IQAir, a Swiss air-quality organisation that draws data from more than 30,000 monitoring stations around the world, said on Thursday that air quality in the city of about 1 million people has reached “dangerous” levels.IQAir found that levels of PM2.5 – dangerous air particulates of less than 2.5 micrometres in diameter – reached 249.1 mcg/m³ this week. World Health Organization guidelines state that annual mean concentrations should not exceed 5mcg/m³.Honduran authorities have raised the threat level to its highest in most of the country’s departments because of the public health risks, and advised people to close windows and stay indoors to avoid exposure to contaminated air.Education secretary Daniel Sponda said public and private schools were to be temporarily closed due to the “risk to the physical integrity of the educational community”. The health secretariat has registered an increase of 20% in patients with respiratory infections.“We have seen a steep increase in respiratory emergencies, especially within vulnerable populations, such as children and senior citizens,” said Dr Cristobal Bustamante, the national director of the emergency medical unit of the Honduran Permanent Contingency Commission, . “We have also recorded an increase in cardiac complications and exacerbated asthma.”Bustamante said high levels of air contamination can harm the airways, ranging from irritation and inflammation to cell damage and aggravation of existing respiratory diseases.The clouds of air pollution hanging over Honduran cities have been so thick that in the past two days, several planes due to land in San Pedro Sula were forced to divert to neighbouring countries because the pilots could not see the runways. A number of airports in Honduras have since had to close.“We have never had to shut down the airport due to the air quality, so it’s a first for us,” said Abraham Manun, the head of operations at the Ramón Villeda Morales international airport in San Pedro Sula. “It’s out of our hands and disrupts the entire flight commerce into and out of Honduras, which mainly flows through our airport. We had to cancel or reroute five international and 12 national flights. There is nothing we can do about it but wait.”The air contamination has been caused by aggressive temperature spikes during the El Niño phenomenon, which has affected “the dry corridor” that crosses through Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador and Guatemala.El Niño increases temperatures and decreases rainfall, driving droughts, especially across the dry corridor. More than 3.4 million people in Central America depend on aid, and experts warn that El Niño will reach extreme levels this year, putting more people at risk than ever.Due to the dry climate and intense heat, Honduras is experiencing a sharp rise in wildfires. The Forest Conservation Institute of Honduras has documented 2,598 fires that have devastated 211,292 hectares (5.2m acres) across the country in 2024.At the end of March, La Tigra national park, known as “the lungs of Tegucigalpa”, was almost completely destroyed by fire, severely affecting the vulnerable ecosystem close to the city.“This contamination is linked to the gradual effects of climate change coupled with El Niño, which has caused the conditions for wildfires and droughts,” said Juan José Reyes, the head of Copeco’s early warning system. “The lack of wind allows the smog to hover over the cities, many of which are located in valleys.”Reyes added that if Honduras does not change its environmental policies, the phenomenon could become a regular occurrence and threaten millions across the Central American region.Nelson Aly, of the International Federation of the Red Cross, said climate-related disasters were happening across Central America. “Climate change has pushed us increasingly into these weather extremes,” he said. “We anticipate a sharp increase in climate-related catastrophes across Central America this year and in the future.“We are training our response units and bracing for floods like we have seen in Brazil this month.”

Climate
Crisis
Forests

Economic damage from climate change six times worse than thought – report

A 1C increase in global temperature leads to a 12% decline in world gross domestic product, researchers have foundThe economic damage wrought by climate change is six times worse than previously thought, with global heating set to shrink wealth at a rate consistent with the level of financial losses of a continuing permanent war, research has found.A 1C increase in global temperature leads to a 12% decline in world gross domestic product (GDP), the researchers found, a far higher estimate than that of previous analyses. The world has already warmed by more than 1C (1.8F) since pre-industrial times and many climate scientists predict a 3C (5.4F) rise will occur by the end of this century due to the ongoing burning of fossil fuels, a scenario that the new working paper, yet to be peer-reviewed, states will come with an enormous economic cost. Continue reading...

The economic damage wrought by climate change is six times worse than previously thought, with global heating set to shrink wealth at a rate consistent with the level of financial losses of a continuing permanent war, research has found.A 1C increase in global temperature leads to a 12% decline in world gross domestic product (GDP), the researchers found, a far higher estimate than that of previous analyses. The world has already warmed by more than 1C (1.8F) since pre-industrial times and many climate scientists predict a 3C (5.4F) rise will occur by the end of this century due to the ongoing burning of fossil fuels, a scenario that the new working paper, yet to be peer-reviewed, states will come with an enormous economic cost.A 3C temperature increase will cause “precipitous declines in output, capital and consumption that exceed 50% by 2100” the paper states. This economic loss is so severe that it is “comparable to the economic damage caused by fighting a war domestically and permanently”, it adds.“There will still be some economic growth happening but by the end of the century people may well be 50% poorer than they would’ve been if it wasn’t for climate change,” said Adrien Bilal, an economist at Harvard who wrote the paper with Diego Känzig, an economist at Northwestern University.“I think everyone could imagine what they would do with an income that is twice as large as it is now. It would change people’s lives.”Bilal said that purchasing power, which is how much people are able to buy with their money, would already be 37% higher than it is now without global heating seen over the past 50 years. This lost wealth will spiral if the climate crisis deepens, comparable to the sort of economic drain often seen during wartime.“Let’s be clear that the comparison to war is only in terms of consumption and GDP – all the suffering and death of war is the important thing and isn’t included in this analysis,” Bilal said. “The comparison may seem shocking, but in terms of pure GDP there is an analogy there. It’s a worrying thought.”The paper places a much higher estimate on economic losses than previous research, calculating a social cost of carbon, which is the cost in dollars of damage done per each additional ton of carbon emissions, to be $1,056 per ton. This compares to a range set out by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that estimates the cost to be around $190 per ton.Bilal said the new research takes a more “holistic” look at the economic cost of climate change by analyzing it on a global scale, rather than on an individual country basis. This approach, he said, captured the interconnected nature of the impact of heatwaves, storms, floods and other worsening climate impacts that damage crop yields, reduce worker productivity and reduce capital investment.“They have taken a step back and linking local impacts with global temperatures,” said Gernot Wagner, a climate economist at Columbia University who wasn’t involved in the work and said it was significant. “If the results hold up, and I have no reason to believe they wouldn’t, they will make a massive difference in the overall climate damage estimates.”The paper found that the economic impact of the climate crisis will be surprisingly uniform around the world, albeit with lower-income countries starting at a lower point in wealth. This should spur wealthy countries such as the US, the paper points out, to take action on reducing planet-heating emissions in its own economic interest.Even with steep emissions cuts, however, climate change will bear a heavy economic cost, the paper finds. Even if global heating was restrained to little more than 1.5C (2.7F) by the end of the century, a globally agreed-upon goal that now appears to have slipped from reach, the GDP losses are still around 15%.“That is still substantial,” said Bilal. “The economy may keep growing but less than it would because of climate change. It will be a slow-moving phenomenon, although the impacts will be felt acutely when they hit.”The paper follows separate research released last month that found average incomes will fall by almost a fifth within the next 26 years compared to what they would’ve been without the climate crisis. Rising temperatures, heavier rainfall and more frequent and intense extreme weather are projected to cause $38tn of destruction each year by mid-century, according to the research.Both papers make clear that the cost of transitioning away from fossil fuels and curbing the impacts of climate change, while not trivial, pale in comparison to the cost of climate change itself. “Unmitigated climate change is a lot more costly than not doing anything about it, that is clear,” said Wagner.

Climate
Crisis
Nature

Suggested Viewing

THE SPRAYER

In the land occupied with the sprayers army, no one has the right to grow any kind of plants either in public or private. So many of the people and soldiers do not even know how a plant grows or looks like, until one day one of the soldiers finds a seed buried deep down in the dust and his curiosity is just the beginning of something extraordinary, something big, something revolutionary.

Plants
CO2
Animation

Total Disaster

Armed with realistic bird puppets, trickster environmental activists pretend to be oil company Total—staging a satirical press conference to introduce "RéHabitat," a program to rescue animals from the East African Oil Pipeline by relocating them to “more sustainable” habitats. Using humor and mischief, they expose a deadly ecological disaster in a zany effort to help #StopEACOP.

Activism
Energy
Animals

The Invisible Mammal - The Bat Rescuer

Bats are struggling to survive, specifically in North America, where white nose syndrome is causing a sharp decline of certain species. Pertinent issues: climate change, habitat destruction, what can humans must do to prevent extinction.

Animals
Climate
Extinction

Resilience

In 1998, a vast power grid serving 5 million people in Canada was destroyed by an ice storm. Twenty years later researchers of that disaster are developing a new kind of resilient power grid. Based in part on the book The Grid and the Village, the film explores how to protect grids and the people they serve from war, terrorist attack, and extreme weather.

Energy
Climate
Crisis

Living with Landslides

This film documents the devastating costs of landslides to both private property owners and taxpayers, and offers solutions. Climate change means landslides will only get worse.

Land Use
Education
Climate

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.