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.

GoGreenNation News

Learn more about the issues presented in our films
Show Filters

World’s ugliest lawn winner says she leaves watering to Mother Nature

New Zealand garden takes first prize in global competition designed to promote water conservationA sun-scorched patch of lawn near Christchurch, in New Zealand, has been crowned the ugliest lawn in the world.Now in its second year, the World’s Ugliest Lawn competition rewards lawn owners for not watering their parched yellow grass and patchy flowerbeds. Continue reading...

A sun-scorched patch of lawn near Christchurch, in New Zealand, has been crowned the ugliest lawn in the world.Now in its second year, the World’s Ugliest Lawn competition rewards lawn owners for not watering their parched yellow grass and patchy flowerbeds.The winning lawn in the settlement of Birdlings Flat belongs to Leisa Elliott, and is kept closely cropped by harsh coastal winds and little rainfall.“I live in a small coastal community,” Elliott said. “Our drinking water is pumped from a well in nearby Kaitorete Spit. In my mind, drinking water is drinking water, not watering-the-lawn water.”Leisa Elliott’s winning lawn is in Birdlings Flat in the Canterbury region of New Zealand. Photograph: Leisa ElliotThe contest began in the Swedish municipality of Gotland as a stunt to promote water conservation on the island. An irrigation ban in 2022 due to water shortages led to a competition between residents, which quickly gained global recognition.Elliott said: “I have aimed at creating a garden that primarily looks after itself, making its own natural rhythm.” Bushes of stout, verdant cacti surround the lawn, and are perfectly suited to the hot weather.“Mother Nature does the watering here,” she said. “When the rain comes, the transformation is stunning. An oasis after a desert is a sight to behold.”Wildlife is left to thrive undisturbed, often congregating by Elliott’s pond. “Many varieties of birds drink and bathe in it. Bellbirds, fantails, silver eyes, different types of finches, blackbirds, starlings. The list goes on. Bees and geckos also call this place home.”Elliott found out about the competition in February through a morning breakfast show. “We were experiencing above-normal summer temperatures and my lawn sure fitted the competition bill.”The jury, composed of Gotland residents, voted unanimously for Elliott’s lawn after an hour-long deliberation. “Her lawn may not win beauty contests, but it wins hearts for its message of sustainability and adaptability,” they said. “The ground, parched and textured by the elements, is dotted with natural, weather-carved indentations and adorned with the muted colours of a landscape that thrives without human interference.”skip past newsletter promotionThe planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essentialPrivacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.after newsletter promotionMimmi Gibson, the brand director at tourism agency Region Gotland, who helps organise the contest, said competition for the title was fierce. “I mean, they’re all so bad,” she said. “They’re so terrible.”Gibson said she hoped the annual contest would continue to provide people with optimism and ideas for small, meaningful actions they can take during the climate crisis. In Gotland, the contest and other initiatives have reduced water consumption by 5% to 7% each year since 2022.“We all have to channel this anxiety about environmental issues and the challenges we’re facing as a global population,” Gison said. “And this is one way to do that, not by making people feel bad but making them feel good.“At first you stand and you laugh and it’s like: ‘God, what is this?” Then you start thinking. It’s not just a fun thing, it’s actually saving water. I think people like that.”

How Climate Change Fueled Deadly Los Angeles Fires

A whipsaw swing from very wet to very dry weather exposed millions to flames, smoke and pollutants. The post How Climate Change Fueled Deadly Los Angeles Fires appeared first on .

As unusually strong winds swept across a parched Los Angeles, spreading more than half a dozen firestorms that have now burned an area nearly the size of San Francisco, the fingerprints of climate change were all over the unfolding disaster. The underlying dynamic feeding the flames was a wet-and-dry whiplash in which vegetation, supercharged by heavy rain, dried out and became fuel for fires that left the city all but encircled in flames. It was not difficult for climate experts to connect the dots. Greenhouse gases, mostly from burning fossil fuels, linger in the atmosphere where they heat up the planet, leading to more to extreme weather. A hotter atmosphere holds more moisture, causing rain to fall in intense bursts. The hotter air also increases extreme temperatures and makes dry seasons drier by increasing evaporation.   In Pasadena, a California city on the edge of a major fire burning through Eaton Canyon, where researchers have collected data on precipitation since 1893, they recorded that half of its 20 rainiest days ever occurred since 2000. That includes one day last February when nearly 5 inches of rain fell.  Yet not a single drop has fallen in Pasadena and much of Los Angeles County since early May, according to data from the National Centers for Environmental Information. All the vegetation that grew during the rains in the first half of the year dried out when the rains stopped, transforming Southern California into a vast landscape of tinder that exploded this week.  The intensity of extreme precipitation will continue rising through the century, according to Cal-Adapt, a data analysis initiative sponsored by the California Energy Commission. The state also forecast longer periods of drought exacerbated by rising heat, according to its Fourth Climate Assessment summary report, released in 2018 and currently being updated. These two factors will likely increase the wet-dry cycle, fueling more intense and erratic wildfires, say climate experts. In 2021, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration concluded that drier air due to climate change was the “dominant” cause of variations in wildfire behavior in the West. The effect of the current fires on Los Angeles’ massive population will present researchers with a grim opportunity to study how wildfires can affect large numbers of people in a short period of time. Among the effects is the release of fine particles, called PM2.5, a pollutant that is found in wildfire smoke and that can find its way  into the lungs and bloodstream of those exposed to the smoke. Exposure can lead to decreased lung function, nonfatal heart attacks and death in people with heart or lung disease, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.  Shahir Masri, associate specialist in air pollution exposure assessment and epidemiology in the University of California, Irvine’s Department of Environmental & Occupational Health, studies climate change modeling and air pollution exposure. He published a study in 2022 that linked rising PM2.5 levels in California to wildfires and, to a lesser extent, heat waves. His previous work found that the number of census tracts in California that experienced major wildfires nearly doubled from 2000 to 2020. Capital & Main spoke to Masri about his work as the fires in L.A. County continued to burn. This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity. Capital & Main: Could you describe how climate change is making wildfires worse? Shahir Masri: It’s a variety of factors linked with climate change. Increasing temperatures and aridity in places like the Western U.S, and in more mountainous areas, you can have earlier snowmelt, which leaves downstream riparian areas desiccated and more fire-prone.  But you also have these earlier spring onsets, which generally speaking means an earlier arrival of spring and warm temperatures. You basically get longer warm summer windows, which has ultimately become a longer wildfire season. Landscapes are drying out more quickly, and the wildfire season begins more quickly and ends later. [The Southern California fires] remind me of 2017-’18, the Thomas fire, which burned from December through Jan. 8.  Shahir Fouad Masri. Photo courtesy Dr. Masri. So these later-burning fires are becoming more frequent. And when you add unprecedented heat waves on top of it, you get yet another scenario where you’re setting the stage for a major wildfire. In 2018, we saw a major wildfire season. The following year, we saw a major rainy season. Then in 2020, we saw the biggest wildfire season in the state’s history. That was a combination of huge growth in 2019 of shrubs and plants and a lot of things in the wet seasons, then the following year we got slammed with aggressively oppressive summer heat.  I fear some of this may have been at play in these fires. The last few years we’ve had really wet winters, and this is now the driest winter we’ve seen in a while. We didn’t get our holiday rain. This area burning now would have been much more resistant to a fire breaking out if we had that rain. So those are some of the factors at play and linked with climate change. In your study, you concluded that higher levels of PM2.5 were strongly associated with nearby wildfires. Why did you study PM2.5? PM2.5 is arguably the most robustly associated pollutant associated with adverse health effects. There have been nearly countless studies looking at the effects of PM2.5 and the increase of asthma, hospital admissions, exacerbated [chronic obstructive pulmonary disease] and short life expectancy.  It’s not entirely clear what causes PM2.5 to be more toxic than PM10 [a type of pollutant in the form of relatively larger particulates], and it’s not clear which forms of PM2.5 are most toxic. Is it because of a higher heavy metal content, or is it worse if it has a higher organic composition or sulfur content? The verdict is still out on that. But setting those composition differences aside, PM2.5 is the main characteristic of this particular type of air pollution that is most associated with adverse health effects. What would you expect the health effects to be from these fires, particularly for poorer communities that you found were most vulnerable to PM2.5 from wildfires? About 7% to 8% of Californians are asthmatics. Asthma attacks are exacerbated by things like air pollution — about 38% to 39% of asthmatic individuals will have an attack at least once a year. Therefore, these wildfires will likely result in quite a few asthma attacks. We will probably also see increased hospital admissions for the exacerbation of chronic conditions such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. There’s a whole separate series of health impacts we’re actually looking at through a survey of people exposed to the Tustin [north] hangar fire in 2023. There were a whole host of impacts, including mental stress. In an upcoming paper, we’re talking about mental stress as it relates to wildfires and environmental catastrophes. And I don’t think that should be overlooked, even though it’s less studied.  That, I would presume, will play a role here as well, especially given people abandoning their cars, losing their homes. It’s clearly a lot of trauma inflicted on this population. Post-traumatic stress disorders, anxiety disorders, those are things we see after major wildfire events, especially [in] people close to the fire. These impacts can be quite prevalent and can take quite a long time to dissipate, up to 10 years.  So I think smoke-related impacts are one thing. I think direct injuries from the fire, thermal injuries, are another. Property loss is another as well. But those mental impacts are also a major factor. The volume of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere is at record levels. Do you expect more events like the current Los Angeles fire outbreak? Warming trends in the atmosphere don’t bode well. In addition to wildfire smoke, we also see higher energy demands [to run air conditioners] concurrent with heat waves. And that, depending on which state you live in, translates to greenhouse gas emissions from people using more electricity. Wildfires can wipe out the gains we’ve made from lowering emissions by reducing the prevalence of coal, [for example]. I think there’s a lot of work to be done on climate change in the United States. We have an incoming [presidential] administration notorious for disregarding climate change. And even though President [Joe] Biden acknowledged the importance of climate change and did a lot with the Inflation Reduction Act, we see a reluctance to shift away from fossil fuels even as we see more investments in renewable energy.  Biden broke his promise to end offshore drilling, so we’re seeing this fossil fuel addiction play out and remain, regardless of what political party is in office. In one case, it’s “drill baby drill”; in another, it’s “drill baby drill,” but we’ll also use the sun and wind.  So we’re so far off from where we need to be from policies to get us on the right track. And to highlight extensiveness needed for targets, the COVID-19 pandemic provided clear examples of just how dramatic a shift we’re talking about. We saw an 8% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions during the first year of the pandemic, which is what is needed to comply with the U.N.’s target of an 8% reduction year-over-year for 10 years. That’s hard to fathom, given that our economy is globally grinding to a complete halt. That was an important lesson, and unfortunately we’re not taking steps to get on that track; we’re just ramping up emissions globally.  What gives you hope? What gives me hope is the youth community. My generation was basically much quieter on this issue than the current college generation. With every generation moving forward, the situation becomes all the more dire. It’s been quite inspirational to see them almost single-handedly get major attention and support and popularity around the Green New Deal; those are really youth-driven policy agendas. I think they’ve played a big role in popularizing those ideas.  I think those are major steps that cannot be overstated, and that generation now will be moving into politics, and that’s the most encouraging thing for me as I grapple with these issues.

College Athletics: Game Day for Climate Action

As teams travel thousands of miles to compete, the cost to the planet rises. But sports offer a unique opportunity to advocate for sustainable experiences. The post College Athletics: Game Day for Climate Action appeared first on The Revelator.

Imagine gazing through an airplane window as you pass over Appalachia and, later, the Grand Canyon before touching down just outside of San Francisco. Or grabbing a peek at the Berkshires before feeling the hard ground of Logan airport under thin wheels. This has been the journey of athletes, coaches, staff, and fans of California’s Stanford University and Boston College this past year as the two teams began competing directly in the Atlantic Coast Conference — yes, despite the fact that they’re on different coasts. Located about 3,100 miles apart, they are the farthest-separated competitors in a Power 5 conference and potentially all of college athletics. It’s unclear if this matchup will truly have financial benefits for either school or the conference, but it will have environmental consequences. I’ve always appreciated the amateur aspect of college sports and I continued to appreciate it at a distance from my work in climate activism. But my more formal work in emissions accounting and climate risk have allowed me to see it through a new lens. My preliminary analysis indicates that just one football and two basketball games per season between the Stanford Cardinals and the Boston College Eagles over 10 years will produce equivalent emissions to driving more than 1,000 passenger vehicles for one year. That’s just the result of team member and staff travel and doesn’t even include fan travel, let alone other operations and moving equipment, as well as the many other sports at each school. Air travel is the only real alternative for schools competing at these great distances. High speed rail in this country is years away (though I remain optimistic). Although traditional rail and other nonaviation means are used by an increasing number of professional and college teams, the average cross-country train trip takes three days each way — a difficult burden for athletes who also need to attend classes. But even the most sustainable means of travel have incremental costs and emissions — the greater the distance, the greater the climate cost. Meanwhile many of those travel alternatives are also likely to cost more and, contrary to mainstream narratives, most college athletics, football included, are not “profitable” for universities. Stanford and Boston College are not alone and their matchup is just one of the more egregious examples of this emerging athletic phenomenon. But as a BC alum I feel particularly empowered to call out this piece of their lack of commitment to sustainability. Universities seek to attract students from all over, and BC ranks high for the distance students travel simply to attend. That is not inherently “bad,” but should be understood in the context of transportation emissions and universities’ role, including and beyond athletics. When it comes to sports, hope does exist. The Green Sports Alliance, which I’ve worked with, aims to put into action sustainable events and experiences, especially by our leading universities. Programs like this have great potential. Sports sit at an intersection of health, academia, economy, national and regional identities, international unity, youth, climate, and myriad other cultural issues. While a lot of media coverage highlights negative or outlandish examples, sports have served positively in the fight for racial equity and basic LGBTQ+ inclusion time and again. While they have their issues and can showcase perturbed nationalism or violence, there is a movement toward sports better reflecting positive developments in society. Sports are also beyond bipartisan. Democrat Marty Walsh, a former Boston mayor and labor secretary — as well as a BC alum, I might add — leads the NHL Players Association, while former Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker, a Republican, currently leads the NCAA. Both have demonstrated a certain level of leadership on climate, sustainability, and transportation in their political careers, although we have yet to see that translate into their work in the sports world. Sports can be a beautiful and unifying force, especially for climate. In 2020 the leaders of student governments at all Big Ten schools came together to call for specific climate actions from their universities. The Atlantic Coast Conference Climate Justice Coalition launched a similar call later that same year, and student activists in the Ivy League followed in 2021. And of course who would forget the disruption of the Harvard-Yale football game by climate activists? These calls represent 52 universities, 950,000 active students, more than 12 million alumni, and $306 billion in endowment funds. While their impact on emissions is important, we must also take note of the impact of climate change on sports themselves. General travel and athletic events are often disrupted by weather, with climate change making things more volatile every year. This increases the likelihood of games being cancelled, attendance dropping due to poor weather, fans experiencing accidents on the road, or athletes being injured due to poor field conditions. Even the athletes’ travel itself has become more dangerous: Airlines have already measured an increase in turbulence on flights, and it’s anticipated to get worse. Despite that young athletes face increasing pressure to travel for sports. This pressure is tied into larger, and likely problematic, pressure on youth to perform and over-perform in sports and other aspects of their lives. I’ll let others take on that issue in more detail, but let’s be real — travel is, simply, exhausting. There’s another big threat: Some sports we enjoy in colder months — like skiing — could vanish. A study published this November found that without emission cuts, the Winter Olympics may no longer be possible. Protect Our Winters, another organization I’ve worked with, anticipates that threat and seeks to address climate change in defense of winter sports. It’s not just the Olympics: In the future, perhaps that flight from BC will take place over snowless Berkshires or never take off at all due to a flooded Logan Airport. Already built at sea level and on landfill never meant to be habitable, Logan — like many airports, infrastructure, homes, and other buildings — faces the risk of repeated flooding and damage, making it nearly inoperable as it faces its own contributions to the crisis. It is quite difficult to face this conundrum as both contributor and victim. Wherever you stand politically, in your view of how to raise children in the context of sports, or what your position is on whether college athletes should be paid, we can agree that sports affect emissions, emissions affect sports, and both are powerful aspects of much larger systems. This offers an area of intersection that many in the world not often moved by mainstream climate actions might find interesting or action-provoking, and it’s worthy of further analysis. Individual sports still involve a team at the highest level, and we all are or have been athletes or fans. Climate change is the same — our individual actions count, but our collective work is what affects the system. Scroll down to find our “Republish” button Previously in The Revelator: No Wave Is Insurmountable The post College Athletics: Game Day for Climate Action appeared first on The Revelator.

Fears of ‘rogue rewilding’ in Scottish Highlands after further lynx sightings

Environmentalists condemn unauthorised releases as ‘reckless’ and ‘highly irresponsible’For a brief moment this week, lynx have been roaming the Scottish Highlands once again. But this was not the way conservationists had hoped to end their 1,000-year absence.On Wednesday, Police Scotland received reports of two lynx in a forest in the Cairngorms national park, sparking a frantic search. That episode ended in less than a day. Both animals were quickly captured by experts from the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (RZSS) and taken to quarantine facilities at Highland wildlife park. Continue reading...

For a brief moment this week, lynx roamed the Scottish Highlands once again. But this was not the way conservationists had hoped to end their 1,000-year absence.On Wednesday, Police Scotland received reports of two lynx in a forest in the Cairngorms national park, sparking a frantic search. That episode ended in less than a day. Both animals were quickly captured by experts from the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (RZSS) and taken to quarantine facilities at Highland wildlife park.Yet their delight at a successful operation was shortlived. Early on Friday morning, the RZSS’s network of wildlife cameras caught two more lynx in the same stretch of forest, near Kingussie. The baited traps were redeployed, and its specialists were hunting again.Screen grab taken from video issued by the Royal Zoological Society of Scotland (RZSS) of one of the two Lynx captured in the Cairngorms on Thursday. Photograph: Royal Zoological Society of Scotland/PASpeculation has erupted over who was responsible for the illegal release, and police said enquiries were continuing to establish the full circumstances. Both lynx – who are shy, solitary animals in the wild and not dangerous to humans – appeared tame and showed little sign of being able to survive on their own, according to a witness. The witness said the lynx were found near straw bedding left beside a layby with dead chicks and porcupine quills.On social media, some pointed the finger at rogue rewilders taking the law into their own hands by making the return of lynx a fact on the ground, akin to how beavers returned to the UK through unauthorised “beaver bombing” . Studies indicate that the Highlands could support as many as 400 lynx in the wild and there is strong support for their return among environmental groups. But leading voices in the rewilding sector were quick to condemn this week’s unauthorised release as “reckless” and “highly irresponsible”.Dave Barclay, the RZSS expert leading the hunt for the lynx, was furious. These animals were semi-tame, and “highly habituated to people”, he said, yet had been released in deep winter. Temperatures locally had plunged below -5C, with deep snow cover, and they had been released at the mouth of a forest track heavily used by logging machinery.“All of that compromises the welfare of these animals,” he said. “It is abhorrent what has happened here, and against all international good practice.”Investigators now suspect the lynx could be from a family group. The two captured yesterday are understood to be juveniles, cubs aged about 1 or 2 years of age, while the two spotted on Friday are thought to be an adult and a third juvenile.Ben Goldsmith, an environmentalist who said he was not involved with the release, said: “Like many others, I have been momentarily thrilled by the notion of lynx once again stalking the Cairngorms. Lynx are an iconic native species missing from Britain and they should be back here. The habitat is perfect, these are secretive animals, and there are no good reasons not to reintroduce them.“We don’t know the story behind these missing lynx – perhaps they are abandoned pets that have become unmanageable. Whatever has happened, it seems to have been poorly thought through,” he added.The lynx were found on Danish billionaire Anders Povlsen’s Killiehuntly estate. A spokesperson for WildLand, the company that runs his Scottish estates, said they believed that native predators should only be reintroduced lawfully and in close collaboration with local people.In the UK, citizens must apply to their local council to keep wild animals legally. According to figures collected by Born Free in 2023, 31 lynx were kept by private collectors, although all were housed in England. Experts said that more lynx were likely to be held in unauthorised private collections that were difficult to monitor.“There could be far more lynx in private hands that are actually recorded. If they have cubs, they may not register them. People would be gobsmacked of what people have in their back garden. I know of people who have snow leopards and cougars in their back garden. It’s shocking. It should be banned,” said Dr Paul O’Donoghue, director of the Lynx UK Trust, who also said he was not involved with therelease.Were it not for the English Channel, lynx would probably already have returned to the UK. Now a protected species in Europe, the Eurasian lynx has recovered from a few hundred in the 1950s to as many as 10,000. Research shows there is mixed support for their return in the UK, with strong opposition from the agricultural community, who fear they will attack livestock.Edward Mountain, MSP for the Highlands and Islands and a landowner, said there was a “genuine fear” amongst locals about “guerrilla rewilding”. “We saw it with beavers on the Tay, now there’s talk of reintroducing sea eagles and goshawks. It can change an entire local ecosystem and that’s dangerous if it’s not done properly,” he said.

DC Sues Federal Government Over Pollution in Anacostia River

The District of Columbia is suing the federal government over pollution in the Anacostia River, hoping it will lead to a cleanup of the urban waterway

The District of Columbia on Friday filed a lawsuit against the federal government over pollution in the Anacostia River, arguing it has inflicted “catastrophic harm” on the mostly poor and minority communities living along the urban waterway.The lawsuit argues that federal government, which owns and controls the riverbed, has since the 1800s dumped toxic waste, heavy metals and chemicals including carcinogenic PCBs in the river and refused to clean it up. The 9-mile (14-kilometer) river flows through Washington, D.C. and parts of Maryland. For decades, it was treated as a municipal dumping ground for industrial waste, storm sewers and trash. That contamination largely affected communities of color.The lawsuit alleges that PCBs from the Washington Navy Yard were dumped in the river along with hazardous chemicals from the Kenilworth Landfill and chemical waste from federal printing facilities. It also blamed the federal government for poorly managing the District of Columbia's sewer system, which led to the dumping of raw sewage and toxic waste into the river.That pollution has led to swimming bans and warnings about fishing along the river, the lawsuit alleges, calling the federal government its biggest polluter.“It has systematically contaminated the River through the indiscriminate dumping and release of hazardous substances and through destructive dredge and fill operations,” the lawsuit says.The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.District of Columbia Attorney General Brian Schwalb said pollutants in the river don't break down and cause long-lasting harm to the environment, aquatic wildlife, and human health, including cancer, neurological and developmental disorders and birth defects.The District of Columbia is demanding that the federal government pay for the river's cleanup. The lawsuit comes as the District of Columbia has made progress in cleaning up the river and returning to a time where residents fished and boated and wildlife including bald eagles, osprey, cranes, kingfishers and eel thrived there.A $3.29 billion sewer upgrade, including a series of tunnels drilled under the city to capture storm and sewage water, has reduced overflows into the river by 91%, according to DC Water, the city’s water utility. The final section of the Anacostia Tunnel System went online in 2023, and the overall system is expected to reduce overflows by 98%.Pepco, the city’s utility, also reached an agreement with the District of Columbia to pay more than $57 million for discharging hazardous chemicals from their power plants into soil, groundwater and storm sewers for decades that polluted the Anacostia and other areas. The settlement was believed to be the largest in the utility’s history.The payments will be used in part to clean up the river. Other measures the city government instituted like a fee on plastic bags since 2009 have also helped keep trash out, experts say.Still, the Anacostia remains polluted. It received a failing grade for the third time in six years in 2023 from a nonprofit that grades the river’s health based on its fecal bacteria content and the state of its aquatic vegetation.The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

Black Sea Oil Spill Widens, Russian Authorities Say

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Emergency workers toiling to clean up an oil spill in the Black Sea have detected seven new slicks, a Russian official told the...

MOSCOW (Reuters) - Emergency workers toiling to clean up an oil spill in the Black Sea have detected seven new slicks, a Russian official told the TASS state news agency on Friday, as authorities struggle to mitigate the effects of the nearly month-old disaster.Approximately 2,400 metric tons of oil products have spilled into the sea since Dec. 15, when two ageing tankers were hit by a storm in the Kerch Strait.President Vladimir Putin said on Thursday that the clean-up efforts so far have been insufficient to deal with the scale of the situation, which he called "one of the most serious environmental challenges we have faced in years".Andrei Pavlyuchenko, an emergency ministry official in Russian-annexed Crimea, said on Friday that workers had identified seven more cases of pollution along beaches in four districts in Crimea, as well as on Tuzla Island, a narrow spit of land underneath the Crimean Bridge linking southern Russia to the Black Sea peninsula.Pavlyuchenko told TASS the new contaminated area was about 9 miles (14 km) long, and that 10 vessels and two aircraft were involved in monitoring the coast.Since the spill, thousands of emergency workers and volunteers have been working to clear tons of contaminated sand and earth on either side of the Kerch Strait. Environmental groups have reported deaths of dolphins, porpoises and sea birds.One tanker, the 136-metre Volgoneft 212, split in half and sank, killing one crew member. Russian authorities said on Friday they had detected a new leakage from the stern of the other vessel, the 132-metre Volgoneft-239, which ran aground during the storm."Monitoring groups found that oil products have started to come out of the vessel," the operational headquarters of Russia's Krasnodar region, across the strait from Crimea, wrote on Telegram.Russia's transport ministry said the new slick from the Volgoneft-239 was about 30,000 square feet (2,800 square metres) in size, roughly equivalent to 10 tennis courts.It said specialists were working to remove the waste and were monitoring for new leakages around the clock.(Writing by Lucy Papachristou; Editing by Mark Trevelyan and Sharon Singleton)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See - Sept. 2024

How Wildfire Smoke Affects Your Health—And How to Protect Yourself

Exposure to smoke is dangerous regardless of your health status—so follow these steps to limit the risk.

As a series of massive fires continues to blaze through the Los Angeles area, blanketing neighborhoods with smoke and forcing thousands of people to evacuate their homes, air quality remains unhealthy throughout many parts of the county.Wildfire smoke is a mixture of water vapor, gases, and microscopic particles known as particulate matter. The smallest of these particles, known as PM2.5 because they have a diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers, pose the most danger to human health. They can lodge deep in the lungs and sometimes enter the bloodstream. Earlier this week, PM2.5 around Los Angeles rose to “hazardous” levels, the highest warning on the US Air Quality Index.Science NewsletterYour weekly roundup of the best stories on health care, the climate crisis, new scientific discoveries, and more. Delivered on Wednesdays.“Wildfire smoke is risky for everybody, especially when the particulate matter that is being released is in large quantities for long periods, like what is happening in California right now,” says Zachary Rubin, a Chicago-area pediatrician and spokesperson for the American College of Allergy, Asthma, and Immunology.When fine particulate matter is inhaled, it can trigger inflammation in the body. Symptoms can range from the mild, such as burning or itchy eyes, runny nose, scratchy throat, and headache, to severe respiratory issues, including difficulty breathing, wheezing, coughing, fatigue, and chest pain. It can take anywhere from a few hours to days after exposure for symptoms to appear. In the most serious of cases, it increases the risk of premature death.Children, older adults, pregnant individuals, and those with heart or lung conditions or weakened immune systems are at higher risk of developing severe side effects. But Rubin says it’s possible for anyone, regardless of their health status, to have respiratory effects from exposure to wildfire smoke.“Any level of air pollution, including from wildfires, can be dangerous for your health,” says Laura Corlin, an environmental epidemiologist at Tufts University School of Medicine. Just how dangerous depends on many factors, including your existing health status, your proximity to the fire, and the duration of exposure. “A good rule of thumb is that more exposure is worse,” she says.The composition of a wildfire can also have an impact on human health. With the California fires engulfing homes and businesses, smoke in the region is likely carrying chemicals released from synthetic building materials that are more toxic than those emitted from burning vegetation.People in Los Angeles County and elsewhere in the US can check airnow.gov to learn more about the current air quality in their area. As air quality can change quickly during the day, you should monitor readings regularly if there is a fire burning in your area, and try to limit your exposure to outdoor air when the quality is poor. The Watch Duty app is a good resource for checking if there are fires burning close to where you are.How to Protect Yourself and Others“The lungs purify the air that we breathe in and sends it to the heart, and the heart pumps it to the rest of the body,” says Shazia Jamil, a pulmonologist and professor of medicine at the Scripps Clinic and University of California, San Diego. Jamil helped develop a guide for the American Thoracic Society on how to stay healthy during wildfires.She says if someone is short of breath, wheezing, or has an elevated respiratory rate from inhaling smoke, that makes the heart beat faster and can exacerbate preexisting heart problems. Even healthy people can experience chest pain and shortness of breath due to smoke inhalation.

How to clean before, during and after norovirus

The highly contagious stomach bug calls for “enhanced precautions” — the highest level of cleaning.

Norovirus, a gastrointestinal illness so severe it has earned the evocative sobriquets “winter vomiting disease” and “two-bucket disease,” inspired by the vomiting and diarrhea (often simultaneous!) associated with the bug, is on the rise. In addition to sheer grossness, norovirus is notable for its resistance to many cleaning agents, including alcohol-based hand sanitizers.Subscribe for unlimited access to The PostYou can cancel anytime.Subscribe“It belongs to a group of small, non-enveloped viruses that can be resistant to some cleaning products,” says Callum Couser, a research and development operations manager at Reckitt, the maker of Lysol.Norovirus calls for what are known as “enhanced precautions” when it comes to cleaning and disinfecting. “This is a germ that is highly contagious, difficult to kill, and can survive for weeks on surfaces. You need to clean and disinfect surfaces to prevent reinfection, and you should wear gloves while cleaning,” says Jessica Ek, the senior director of digital communications at the American Cleaning Institute (ACI). Here’s what you need to know to keep you and your family safe from norovirus.The first thing to clean: Your handsWashing your hands is one of the absolute best ways to protect yourself against illness, and this is especially true of norovirus. Here’s how to do it the right way:Wet your hands with clean, running water of any temperature; you do not need to use painfully hot water for hand washing to be effective.Apply soap and lather your hands, including the backs, the space between your fingers, and under your fingernails, for at least 20 seconds. Humming “Happy Birthday to You” twice serves as an easy way to time out the 20 seconds.Rinse the soap off using clean, running water. Dry your hands well, either with a clean towel or an air dryer.It is important to note that hand sanitizer cannot take the place of hand-washing when it comes to this virus. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, hand sanitizer “does not work well against norovirus.” If using hand sanitizer provides psychological comfort to you, you may use it in addition to hand washing, but the CDC says it is not a substitute.Cleaning and disinfecting are often conflated, but they are actually different things — and the distinction is particularly important when norovirus comes calling. Cleaning refers to the removal of unwanted contaminants like dirt or grease, whereas “disinfecting is irreversibly inactivating pathogens (microorganisms that may cause infections and disease) including bacteria, viruses and fungi,” Ek says. To put it another way, cleaning removes messes from surfaces, and disinfecting eliminates microorganisms, including viruses (like norovirus) and bacteria (like E. coli or salmonella), using products that are specifically labeled disinfectants.Not all disinfectants work on every type of microorganism, so it is crucial that you consult the manufacturer’s guidelines on the packaging to ensure a disinfectant is effective against norovirus. Additionally, the Environmental Protection Agency has an online tool, List G: EPA’s Registered Antimicrobial Products Effective Against Norovirus, that allows you to search for disinfecting products that the agency has vetted for use on norovirus; List G includes brand and product names, as well as the recommended contact time and the surface types on which the disinfectant can be used.As an alternative to commercial disinfectants, “steam cleaning can also help reduce the germs on soft surfaces,” Ek says. To disinfect mattresses, upholstered furniture, or carpet that have been exposed to norovirus, steam-clean them to 170 degrees Fahrenheit for five minutes or 212 degrees for one minute.Disinfect the right wayAfter identifying a disinfectant that is formulated for norovirus, it is also critical that you use the product correctly. The biggest mistake people make when it comes to disinfecting, Ek says, is not following directions on the products. “The label will have all the information you need to use the product effectively and safely,” she says. “When people skip reading the directions, they usually miss two key points.”The first, she says, is to clean the surface first: “Unless you are using a cleaning disinfectant, you need to clean and then disinfect so that the disinfectant can reach the germs in order to kill them.”The second is to allow enough contact or dwell time. “When disinfecting a surface, it needs to stay wet for the entire contact time noted on the label, which could be several minutes,” Ek says. If you wipe it off too early or don’t use enough product, you may think the surface is disinfected when it isn’t because the product didn’t have time to work.”Up your ‘level of laundry’If you or someone else in your household has been sick with norovirus, you will need to change the way you do laundry, incorporating “enhanced precautions” into your regular routine. These steps are outlined in the ACI’s guide to laundry levels. (Norovirus is considered the highest level; by comparison, the coronavirus is medium, calling for “extra steps” when doing laundry.)The additional precautions and steps to take when washing clothing, bedding, towels, etc. used by someone with norovirus include:Wear gloves when handling dirty laundry used by someone with norovirus and wash your hands thoroughly after removing and disposing of the gloves.Wash items as soon as possible; if you are unable to wash items immediately, bag them up in a plastic bag (rather than putting them in the hamper) until you are able to do laundry.Wash infected clothes, sheets, towels, etc. separately from other items.Avoid shaking laundry when handling it, which can spread germs.Use the hottest water and heat drying settings and cycle length that the items can tolerate. If your washer offers a sanitize setting, use it.Use a laundry sanitizer, like Lysol Laundry Sanitizer or Clorox Laundry Sanitizer, in addition to regular laundry detergent. Using a deep cleaning detergent, such as Tide Hygienic Clean, is also recommended for use against norovirus.Disinfect hampers that have had contact with a sick person’s laundry.How to clean up vomit and feces (we’re sorry)“When someone has been sick with vomiting or diarrhea, clean and disinfect the area as soon as possible,” Ek says. It is a disgusting job, but here’s how to do it the right way to keep yourself safe and to mitigate the ick factor.Don gloves. It is necessary to wear gloves while cleaning during and after a bout of norovirus, and to wash your hands after removing and disposing of the gloves. “Even if you are wearing gloves, wash your hands for a full 20 seconds with soap and water after cleaning,” Ek says.Pick up solids with paper towels, dispose of them immediately in a plastic trash bag.Cover the area with paper towels, press down to absorb as much liquid as possible, then dispose of them immediately.Once the surface has been cleaned, apply a disinfectant or use steam to kill norovirus on hard or soft non-washable surfaces; launderable items should go straight into the washer, and washed separately from non-contaminated items.Note: If the mess is semisolid, use something like a sturdy piece of cardboard or paper plate to scoop up and dispose of the matter, then use paper towels to absorb any remaining liquid mess.What to clean after norovirusOnce norovirus has passed, another round of cleaning and disinfecting is required to prevent reinfection.Clean and disinfect high-touch surfaces.Clean and disinfect the bathroom, particularly the toilet and sink.Clean and disinfect the kitchen; wash dishes and/or utensils using the sanitize setting of your dishwasher if it has one; throw out any food that may have norovirus.Wash launderable items and disinfect non-washable soft surfaces with a fabric-safe disinfectant or by steam-cleaning.Clean and disinfect children’s toys.Take out the trash.“High-touch surfaces” refers to things and places we touch frequently. They include:Doorknobs, railings and handles, including appliance handles.Light switches.Faucets and toilet flushers.Hand and dish towels.Handbags, backpacks and tote bags.Car door handles and steering wheels.Eyeglasses.Remote controls.Cellphones, telephone handsets, tablets and keyboards.

The flames from wildfires aren’t always the most dangerous part

Climate change is making wildfires more common and more severe. The pollution is killing us

The spate of devastating fires hitting the Los Angeles area has dominated headlines and understandably so. At least 10 people have died and upwards of 180,000 people have been evacuated with more than 10,000 structures destroyed. One of these fires, the Palisades Fire, began burning on Tuesday and continues at the time of this writing, has destroyed at least 17,000 acres, the most in Los Angeles history. But there's also the Eaton Fire, the Hurst Fire, the Kenneth Fire and other fires in the area, many with little to no containment. While hundreds of thousands of Californians are fleeing from flames, there are other risks aside from the immediate damage: air pollution and the charred toxins that are left behind.  To give one example, a recent study in the journal JAMA Neurology has looked at the effects of wildfire smoke on  dementia. Previous research has established that tiny particles in the air (2.5 micrometers or less in diameter, known as PM2.5) are linked to dementia, but the researchers found that long-term exposure to wildfire smoke specifically “was associated with dementia diagnoses.” They added that as climate change worsens, “interventions focused on reducing wildfire PM2.5 exposure may reduce dementia diagnoses and related inequities.” To conduct their research, the scientists looked at health data from more than 1.2 million people from between 2008 and 2019 among members of Kaiser Permanente Southern California. Within this cohort, they discovered “people with higher exposure to wildfire fine particulate matter (PM2.5) had elevated risk of developing dementia,” explained Dr. Joan Casey, the study’s corresponding author and a professor of public health at the University of Washington. Because this study only examined existing patient data, Casey told Salon that scientists will need to do more research on the precise relationship between wildfire exposure and dementia. “We looked at the umbrella of all dementia diagnoses, but certain sub-types like Alzheimer’s or frontotemporal dementia might have stronger links with wildfire PM2.5,” Casey said. “We also want to understand the relevant time window of exposure. Here, we looked at exposure in the prior three years, but a longer window is likely important (up to 20 years.)” "As temperatures and humidity increase, conditions such as stroke, migraines, meningitis, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease, and Parkinson's disease may worsen." The researchers’ work is unfortunately relevant to human beings because climate change is making wildfires more frequent and more intense. From California and Hawaii to Greece and Spain, more and more of Earth’s wooded areas are bursting into flame as humanity overheats the planet with heat-trapping fossil fuel emissions. While these conflagrations engulf millions of acres of lands, they belch fine particulate matter into the air, which humans inevitably inhale. But more and more research is making it clear how devastating to our health this toxic air can be. Although this study focuses specifically on wildfire PM2.5, other research firmly establishes that PM2.5 in general is bad for human health. A report from the National Bureau of Economic Research released last April found that wildfire smoke contributes to the deaths of around 16,000 Americans per year, with that number expected to rise to 30,000 by mid century. A systematic review published in the journal Neurotoxicology found a link between air pollution and increased depressive and anxiety symptoms and behaviors, as well as physical alterations in brain regions believed to be associated with those conditions. A 2024 study in the journal Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety likewise found links between various types of common air pollution and diseases including PTSD and multiple sclerosis, while a 2021 study in the journal Neurology found a link between urban air pollution and central nervous system diseases. Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon's weekly newsletter Lab Notes. "The results of our studies on the effects of nanoparticles in the air show a link between exposure to air pollutants and neurological diseases and neuropsychiatric disorders," 2021 study lead author Mojtaba Ehsanifar, an assistant professor of environmental neurotoxicology at Kashan University of Medical Sciences' Anatomical Sciences Research Center, told Salon by email. Although Ehsanifar has not specifically worked on the effects of pollutants from fires, he noted that pollutants produced by both gases tend to be similar. He blames climate change for this problem. “A recent investigation establishes a connection between climate change and the exacerbation of certain neurological disorders,” Ehsanifar said. “As temperatures and humidity increase, conditions such as stroke, migraines, meningitis, epilepsy, multiple sclerosis, schizophrenia, Alzheimer's disease, and Parkinson's disease may worsen.” He added that as temperatures continue to rise, the heat will combine with the smoke to hurt our brains. "This is yet another example of the profound, yet grossly understated negative health consequences of human-caused climate change." “Currently, brains are already operating toward the upper thresholds of these ranges, and as climate change elevates temperature and humidity, our brains might struggle to maintain temperature regulation, even malfunctioning,” Ehsanifar said. “A high internal body temperature, especially above 104 degrees Fahrenheit, with cognitive impairment such as confusion, defines heat stroke.” This research underscores how global heating is intrinsically linked to our health. University of Pennsylvania climate scientist Dr. Michael E. Mann said it is fair to directly attribute diseases like dementia to climate change when they are demonstrably caused by wildfire exposure. “The connection is epidemiological, much like the negative health consequences of smoking are epidemiological, i.e. statistical in nature,” Mann said. “So in other words, while it’s always possible that a victim could have suffered neurological diseases for other reasons, we can say that exposure to wildfire smoke substantially increases the likelihood of e.g. developing dementia, enough so that there is effectively a causal connection there.” Mann added, “This is yet another example of the profound, yet grossly understated negative health consequences of human-caused climate change.” Dr. Kevin Trenberth, a distinguished scholar at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, told Salon that he is not surprised the study found adverse effects of wildfire pollution. The revelation that PM2.5 may indirectly increase dementia risk, however, was new to him. “But there is no question that air pollution is bad for health in many ways,” Trenberth said. “On bad pollution days, either one should not exercise or should do it indoors. So this affects exercise, which should help health. With wildfires around, one should not breathe the foul air. So this can be partially controlled from industry although mainly for larger particles. It is harder to see the smaller particles.” Nor are humans alone in suffering, Trenberth noted. “Think of all the poor animals exposed.” Scientists writing in 2022 for the journal Environmental Research described air pollution broadly as an underrecognized public health risk, arguing that “policy needs to be matched by scientific evidence and appropriate guidelines, including bespoke strategies to optimise impact and mitigate unintended consequences.” In addition to mitigating the impacts of climate change, experts urge ordinary citizens to take measures to protect their lungs during times of intense air pollution. Whether it is caused by wildfires, urban smog or any other source, the overwhelming evidence is that breathing it in is bad for a person’s respiratory health. What remains after a wildfire can also be dangerous. The charred ruins of houses and burnt out cars contain countless pollutants from melted plastics, paints, electronics and household waste. Until the environment is adequately cleaned up, the likelihood is that those who struggle with disease because of exposure to wildfires both during and after may continue to risk their health. “Seeing the magnitude of the relationship between wildfire PM2.5 and dementia was quite striking,” Casey said. “I was especially struck by how much stronger this relationship was for people living in communities with higher levels of poverty, suggesting that climate change is again increasing health disparities.” Read more about climate change

The climate benefits of NYC’s hard-won congestion pricing plan

Driving into lower Manhattan is now more expensive, but the toll promises cleaner air, safer streets, and improved subways.

After months — and, for some, years — of anticipation, congestion pricing is live in New York City.  The controversial policy, which essentially makes it more expensive to drive into the busiest part of Manhattan, has been floated as a way to reduce traffic and raise money for the city’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs the city’s subways and buses, since the 1970s. But it wasn’t until 2017 that it seemed like it might finally catch on.  Still, getting it implemented has been an uphill battle. Last summer, New York Governor Kathy Hochul abruptly paused a carefully crafted plan that would have implemented $15 tolls on drivers heading into Manhattan below 60th Street, a mere 25 days before the plan would have gone into effect. Months later, in November, she said she would unpause the plan with lower tolls: $9 for passenger vehicles during peak hours and $2.25 during off-peak. After all the hubbub, New York City made history just after midnight on Sunday, January 5, when the cameras used to enforce the tolls turned on.  With this move, New York City becomes the first U.S. city to experiment with congestion pricing tolls, and joins a small cohort of other major cities — London, Stockholm, and Singapore — trying to disincentivize driving in order to unlock safer streets and a host of other environmental benefits. Environmental and public transit advocates praise congestion pricing because it pushes drivers to reconsider whether getting behind the wheel is really the easiest way to get around the city. With fewer cars on the road, congestion pricing promises shorter commute times for those who do drive — and better public transit options, since the money raised by congestion pricing will fund capital improvements by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or MTA.  But the policy has not been without its naysayers. One New York City councilmember — Republican Vickie Paladino — appeared to encourage her followers on X (formerly Twitter) to damage the tolling cameras with lasers. Congestion pricing detractors say that tolls are burdensome. Of course, in some way, this is the point: to make driving slightly less appealing and incentivize alternative modes of transportation.  Proponents say these are worthwhile costs to fund meaningful improvements to New Yorkers’ lives — like safer streets and cleaner air.  “At this point, across much of the country, cars are so ingrained into American culture that we don’t always think of them as environmental hazards, but of course they are,” said Alexa Sledge, director of communications for Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group focused on street safety in New York City. “So a major goal of our climate policy has to be getting people out of cars and on public transit, onto buses, onto bikes, onto trips on foot.” These less carbon-intensive modes of transit, she says, are “always going to be substantially more environmentally friendly.” Cars pass under E-ZPass readers and license plate-scanning cameras on 5th Avenue in Manhattan as congestion pricing takes effect in New York City. Kena Betancur / AFP via Getty Images One of the main selling points of congestion pricing, besides reducing traffic, is improving air quality. Fewer cars on the road means fewer cars emitting exhaust in the nation’s most densely populated city — and less traffic also means that less time spent idling.  An environmental assessment of congestion pricing published in 2023 estimated the impact tolls would have on a number of air pollutants, including carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and benzene. These chemicals have been linked to health problems including heart disease, respiratory issues, cognitive impairment, and increased risk of cancer. The assessment also looked at the impact tolls would have on greenhouse gases. It analyzed these impacts at a regional level, looking at 12 different counties across New York and New Jersey, and projected how big or small the change in pollutants would be by 2045.  The report found that, with congestion pricing, Manhattan would see a 4.36 percent reduction in daily vehicle-miles traveled by 2045. This would lead to sizable reductions in air pollutants in Manhattan, especially in the central business district (the area drivers must pay a toll to enter). For example, per the environmental assessment’s modeling, the central business district would see a 10.72 percent drop in carbon dioxide equivalents by 2045, as well as a similar drop in fine particular matter, and slightly lower drops in nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide (5.89 percent and 6.55 percent, respectively).  When you zoom out, the benefits become sparser, but are still meaningful: The assessment found that, across the 12 New York and New Jersey counties included in its analysis, carbon dioxide equivalents would fall by 0.8 percent by 2045. Those 12 counties have a collective population of roughly 14 million. It’s worth noting that real-life impacts will likely differ from these estimates — and it will take robust data collection to see exactly how. The environmental assessment based these projections off a congestion pricing scenario that’s actually slightly more ambitious than the one in place today, with peak tolls for passenger vehicles priced at $9 and off-peak tolls at $7. But the tolls for drivers that Hochul signed off on will ramp up over time. By 2028, peak tolls will be $12, and by 2031, they’ll reach $15. “The most important thing is to start,” said Andy Darrell, regional director of New York at the Environmental Defense Fund, who was optimistic that real-life benefits may surpass these projections over time. “And it’s important to monitor the effects going forward and then be able to adjust the program as we go. And I think that’s exactly what’s happening now.” A congestion pricing warning sign on 5th Avenue in Manhattan. Kena Betancur / AFP via Getty Images Eric Goldstein, the New York City environmental director at the National Resources Defense Council, was similarly confident about congestion pricing’s benefits. Over email, he said, “Even if the reduction in traditional air pollutants and global warming emissions are modest from implementation of congestion pricing, the indirect air quality benefits will be substantial over the long term,” adding that congestion pricing will “provide a jolt of adrenaline to the region’s subway, bus, and commuter rail system that moves the overwhelming majority of people into and out of Manhattan.” The environmental assessment also found that, as a result of congestion pricing, traffic may increase in other parts of the city, like the Bronx, where neighborhoods like the South Bronx already suffer from disproportionately high rates of asthma. To offset this, the MTA has promised to fund several mitigation efforts, such as replacing diesel-fueled trucks around Hunts Point, a bustling food distribution facility, with cleaner models. It will also install air filtration systems at schools located near highways, plant more trees near roads, and establish a Bronx asthma center.  These efforts, however, have done little to reassure local community members. In November, South Bronx Unite, a coalition centered on social and environmental justice, called New York City’s revived congestion pricing plan a “death blow” for the South Bronx and said the mitigation efforts do not go far enough to address the root causes of pollution in the area. “We welcome all pollution mitigation measures for the South Bronx and for any pollution-burdened community, but they should not be dangled in front of us as a bargaining chip for adding more pollution to the area,” Arif Ullah, the group’s executive director, told reporters.     Beyond cleaner air for most of the region, congestion pricing is likely to have other environmental and climate benefits. For example, the money raised by congestion pricing tolls will allow the MTA to access $15 billion in financing for capital improvements, such as making subway stations more accessible. These sorts of upgrades, while not technically designed with climate change in mind, make the subway safer and more efficient to use — and that matters when extreme weather strikes. Sledge, from Transportation Alternatives, said: “People really do rely on our subway system to get them where they need to go, and if there is a mass weather event, then that’s really scary and really difficult.” In September 2023, rainstorms caused flash flooding in New York City, overwhelming the subway system in many places. After Hochul declared a state of emergency due to the extreme rainfall, the MTA warned of disruptions “across our network” and advised people to stay home if they could. Climate change makes extreme rainfall more likely because rising ocean temperatures lead to more water evaporating into the air. As Sledge notes, these weather events are “obviously only getting more and more common” as global temperatures keep rising. “So anything we can do to mitigate this is going to be extremely important as we move forward.” Technically speaking, the funds raised by congestion pricing will only be spent on capital improvements included in the MTA’s 2020-2024 capital plan; the agency will likely need to raise another $6 billion to fund its climate resilience roadmap, which includes things like elevating subway vents to prevent storm surges from flooding subway stations.  But experts agreed that improving the public transit system is critical to achieving New York City’s climate goals. “For a very densely populated region like the New York metropolitan region, that investment in transit is fundamental to achieving our climate goals and our air quality goals,” said Darrell from the Environmental Defense Fund.  The National Resources Defense Council’s Goldstein agreed: “Ultimately, if we can’t adequately fund this public transit system so that it provides safe, reliable and efficient service, the region’s environment, as well as its economy, is certain to decline.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The climate benefits of NYC’s hard-won congestion pricing plan on Jan 10, 2025.

No Results today.

Our news is updated constantly with the latest environmental stories from around the world. Reset or change your filters to find the most active current topics.

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.