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

UN Climate Conference Host Brazil Urges Nations to Negotiate and Find Solutions to Global Warming

Host country Brazil’s tactful guidance as host of the U.N. climate conference is raising hopes for ambitious action on fighting global warming as speeches continue from the high-level ministers in town

With a direct letter sent to nations, host country Brazil is shifting the U.N. climate conference into a higher gear. The letter sent late Monday comes during the final week of what has been billed as a historic climate summit, the first ever in the Amazon rainforest, a key regulator of climate because trees absorb carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that warms the planet. The letter comes ahead of speeches of high-level ministers Tuesday. Headliners include representatives from influential European countries like Ed Miliband, energy secretary of the United Kingdom, and Deputy Prime Minister Sophie Hermans of the Netherlands. More leaders will also speak from small island states and developing countries like Barbados and Bangladesh, both facing loss of land as seas rise because of climate change. The letter asks leaders to hash out many aspects of a potential agreement by Tuesday night so that much is out of the way before the final set decisions Friday, when the conference is scheduled to end. Climate summits routinely go past their last day, as all nations come to the negotiating table trying to balance domestic concerns with major shifts needed around the world to protect the environment and cut greenhouse gas emissions. Brazil’s guidance for the summit, called COP30, is raising hopes for significant measures to fight global warming, which could range from a road map to move away from fossil fuels like oil and coal, or more money to help nations build out clean energies like wind and solar. For negotiators, Brazil's letter will mean later nights as they seek to strike political bargains across a host of contentious issues.“There are important concessions we expect from all sides,” said André Corrêa do Lago, COP30 president. "It is said you have to give to receive.”That Wednesday timeline is “pretty ambitious" and the stakes are high, said Alden Meyer, a senior associate at climate think tank E3G.“Whether it’s dealing with the impacts of climate change, dealing with increased energy bills and energy insecurity, improving health, creating jobs. Those are the things that people care about. They don’t care about some sub-paragraph in a legal decision adopted here in Belem,” Meyer said. “Brazil, the presidency, has made that very clear since the beginning, that that’s going to be the litmus test.”He added that the optimistic spirit of the host country “is starting to get a little infectious” and that that is part of building trust and goodwill amongst nations.“I sense ambition here. I sense a determination,” former German climate envoy Jennifer Morgan said Monday morning. 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.This story was produced as part of the 2025 Climate Change Media Partnership, a journalism fellowship organized by Internews’ Earth Journalism Network and the Stanley Center for Peace and Security.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

Bigger datasets aren’t always better

MIT researchers developed a way to identify the smallest dataset that guarantees optimal solutions to complex problems.

Determining the least expensive path for a new subway line underneath a metropolis like New York City is a colossal planning challenge — involving thousands of potential routes through hundreds of city blocks, each with uncertain construction costs. Conventional wisdom suggests extensive field studies across many locations would be needed to determine the costs associated with digging below certain city blocks.Because these studies are costly to conduct, a city planner would want to perform as few as possible while still gathering the most useful data for making an optimal decision.With almost countless possibilities, how would they know where to start?A new algorithmic method developed by MIT researchers could help. Their mathematical framework provably identifies the smallest dataset that guarantees finding the optimal solution to a problem, often requiring fewer measurements than traditional approaches suggest.In the case of the subway route, this method considers the structure of the problem (the network of city blocks, construction constraints, and budget limits) and the uncertainty surrounding costs. The algorithm then identifies the minimum set of locations where field studies would guarantee finding the least expensive route. The method also identifies how to use this strategically collected data to find the optimal decision.This framework applies to a broad class of structured decision-making problems under uncertainty, such as supply chain management or electricity network optimization.“Data are one of the most important aspects of the AI economy. Models are trained on more and more data, consuming enormous computational resources. But most real-world problems have structure that can be exploited. We’ve shown that with careful selection, you can guarantee optimal solutions with a small dataset, and we provide a method to identify exactly which data you need,” says Asu Ozdaglar, Mathworks Professor and head of the MIT Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science (EECS), deputy dean of the MIT Schwarzman College of Computing, and a principal investigator in the Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems (LIDS).Ozdaglar, co-senior author of a paper on this research, is joined by co-lead authors Omar Bennouna, an EECS graduate student, and his brother Amine Bennouna, a former MIT postdoc who is now an assistant professor at Northwestern University; and co-senior author Saurabh Amin, co-director of Operations Research Center, a professor in the MIT Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, and a principal investigator in LIDS. The research will be presented at the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems.An optimality guaranteeMuch of the recent work in operations research focuses on how to best use data to make decisions, but this assumes these data already exist.The MIT researchers started by asking a different question — what are the minimum data needed to optimally solve a problem? With this knowledge, one could collect far fewer data to find the best solution, spending less time, money, and energy conducting experiments and training AI models.The researchers first developed a precise geometric and mathematical characterization of what it means for a dataset to be sufficient. Every possible set of costs (travel times, construction expenses, energy prices) makes some particular decision optimal. These “optimality regions” partition the decision space. A dataset is sufficient if it can determine which region contains the true cost.This characterization offers the foundation of the practical algorithm they developed that identifies datasets that guarantee finding the optimal solution.Their theoretical exploration revealed that a small, carefully selected dataset is often all one needs.“When we say a dataset is sufficient, we mean that it contains exactly the information needed to solve the problem. You don’t need to estimate all the parameters accurately; you just need data that can discriminate between competing optimal solutions,” says Amine Bennouna.Building on these mathematical foundations, the researchers developed an algorithm that finds the smallest sufficient dataset.Capturing the right dataTo use this tool, one inputs the structure of the task, such as the objective and constraints, along with the information they know about the problem.For instance, in supply chain management, the task might be to reduce operational costs across a network of dozens of potential routes. The company may already know that some shipment routes are especially costly, but lack complete information on others.The researchers’ iterative algorithm works by repeatedly asking, “Is there any scenario that would change the optimal decision in a way my current data can't detect?” If yes, it adds a measurement that captures that difference. If no, the dataset is provably sufficient.This algorithm pinpoints the subset of locations that need to be explored to guarantee finding the minimum-cost solution.Then, after collecting those data, the user can feed them to another algorithm the researchers developed which finds that optimal solution. In this case, that would be the shipment routes to include in a cost-optimal supply chain.“The algorithm guarantees that, for whatever scenario could occur within your uncertainty, you’ll identify the best decision,” Omar Bennouna says.The researchers’ evaluations revealed that, using this method, it is possible to guarantee an optimal decision with a much smaller dataset than would typically be collected.“We challenge this misconception that small data means approximate solutions. These are exact sufficiency results with mathematical proofs. We’ve identified when you’re guaranteed to get the optimal solution with very little data — not probably, but with certainty,” Amin says.In the future, the researchers want to extend their framework to other types of problems and more complex situations. They also want to study how noisy observations could affect dataset optimality.“I was impressed by the work’s originality, clarity, and elegant geometric characterization. Their framework offers a fresh optimization perspective on data efficiency in decision-making,” says Yao Xie, the Coca-Cola Foundation Chair and Professor at Georgia Tech, who was not involved with this work.

Pope Leo XIV Calls for Urgent Climate Action and Says God’s Creation Is 'Crying Out'

Pope Leo XIV is urging countries at United Nations climate talks to take “concrete actions” to stop climate change that is threatening the planet

BELEM, Brazil (AP) — Pope Leo XIV on Monday urged countries at United Nations climate talks to take “concrete actions” to stop climate change that is threatening the planet, telling them humans are failing in their response to global warming and that God’s creation “is crying out in floods, droughts, storms and relentless heat.”In a video message played for religious leaders gathered in Belem, Leo said nations had made progress, “but not enough.”“One in three people live in great vulnerability because of these climate changes,” Leo said. “To them, climate change is not a distant threat, and to ignore these people is to deny our shared humanity.”His message came as the talks were moving into their second week, with high-level ministers from governments around the world arriving at the edge of the Brazilian Amazon to join negotiations. Monday was dominated by speeches, with several leaders from Global South nations giving emotional testimony on devastating costs of recent extreme weather and natural disasters.Vulnerable nations have pressed for more ambition at these talks as world leaders have begun to acknowledge that Earth will almost surely go past a hoped-for limit — 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) in Earth's warming since pre-industrial times. That was the target set at these talks in 2015 in the landmark Paris agreement.Scientists say in addition to deadly heat, a warming atmosphere leads to more frequent and deadly extreme weather such as flooding, droughts, violent downpours and more powerful hurricanes.Leo said there's still time to stay within the Paris Agreement, but not much.“As stewards of God’s creation, we are called to act swiftly, with faith and prophecy, to protect the gift He entrusted to us,” he said. And he added: “But we must be honest: it is not the Agreement that is failing, we are failing in our response. What is failing is the political will of some.”U.N. climate chief Simon Stiell said Leo's words “challenge us to keep choosing hope and action."Leo "reminds us that the Paris Agreement is delivering progress and remains our strongest tool — but we must work together for more, and that bolder climate action is an investment in stronger and fairer economies, and more stable world," Stiell said.David Gibson, director of the Center on Religion and Culture at Fordham University in New York, said Leo is becoming the world’s most prominent moral leader against climate change.“This message does stake Leo out as a voice for the rest of the world, especially the Southern Hemisphere where climate change is wreaking havoc with the vulnerable in Asia, Africa and Latin America,” said Gibson.And he said it shows that Leo, who spent decades working as a missionary in Peru and is a naturalized Peruvian citizen, “has a Latin American heart and voice.”The Laudato Si' Movement, a Catholic climate movement that takes its name from a 2015 encyclical in which Pope Francis called for climate action, called Leo's message “a profound moral intervention.""He reminds the world that creation is crying out and that vulnerable communities cannot be pushed aside. “His voice cuts through the noise of negotiations and calls leaders back to what truly matters: our shared humanity and the urgent duty to act with courage, compassion, and justice,” the group's executive director, Lorna Gold, said.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.This story was produced as part of the 2025 Climate Change Media Partnership, a journalism fellowship organized by Internews’ Earth Journalism Network and the Stanley Center for Peace and Security.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Oct. 2025

How little plastic does it take to kill marine animals? Scientists have answers

Ocean plastic kills sea creatures. For the first time, researchers set out to find out how much it takes. The answer: Surprisingly little.

Ocean plastic kills sea creatures. It can obstruct, perforate or twist their airways and gastrointestinal tracts.Now new research shows it takes just 6 pieces of ingested rubber the size of a pencil eraser to kill most sea birds. For marine mammals, 29 pieces of any kind of plastic — hard, soft, rubber or fishing equipment — is often lethal.It’s the first time researchers have quantified how much and what kind of plastic — soft, hard, rubber or fishing debris — is needed to kill a bird, marine mammal or a turtle. “I think the lethal doses that we saw were smaller than I expected,” said Erin Murphy, a researcher with the Ocean Conservancy and the department of ecology and evolution at the University of Toronto.“Seeing the particularly small thresholds for rubber and seabirds, for example, that just six pieces of rubber, each smaller on average than the size of a pea was enough to kill 90% of sea birds that ingested it ... That was particularly surprising to me,” she said.The sea birds were less sensitive to hard plastic: It’d take 25 pieces of the pea-sized hard plastic pieces to ensure a 90% chance of dying. Murphy and her colleagues from the University of Tasmania, in Australia, the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, also from Australia, and the Universidade Federal de Alagoas, in Brazil, published their study Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academies of Science.For decades, researchers have been documenting death by plastic in marine animals. They have reported it in the gastrointestinal tracts of nearly 1,300 marine species — including every species of sea turtle, and in every family of seabird and marine mammal family.The team analyzed data from 10,412 published necropsies, or animal autopsy reports. Of the animals studied, 1,306 were sea turtles representing all seven species of sea turtles; 1,537 were seabirds representing 57 species; and 7,569 were marine mammals across 31 species. They found that 35% of the dead seabirds, 12% of marine mammals and 47% of sea turtles examined had ingested plastic. Seabirds seemed to be particularly sensitive to rubber. For marine mammals, soft plastics — such as plastic bags — and fishing debris was most harmful. For sea turtles, their kryptonite was hard and soft plastics.“This was severe trauma or damage to the GI tract, or blockage of the stomach or intestines from plastic... and so these were physical harms that you could see, that you could see in the gut of these animals, and that were reported by scientists,” said Murphy describing the reports. The paper did not look at other ways plastic can kill marine animals — strangulation, entanglement and drowning. Nor did it look at malnutrition or toxicity caused by eating plastic.“So, this is likely an underestimate of the impacts of ingestion, and it’s definitely an underestimate of the lethality of plastics more broadly,” said Murphy.Nearly half the animals in their analysis were threatened or endangered species. More than 11 million metric tonnes — or more than 24 billion pounds — of plastic enters the world’s oceans every year, according to several environmental and industry reports. That’s a garbage truck’s worth dumped every minute.According to the United Nations, that number is expected to triple in the next twenty years. “I find this piece a brilliant contribution to the field,” said Greg Merrill, a researcher with the Duke University Marine Lab, who did not participate in the study.“We have thousands of examples of marine animals ingesting plastic debris. But for a number of reasons, eg. lack of data, difficulty of conducting laboratory-based experiments, and ethical considerations, risk assessments are really challenging to conduct,” he said in an email. Such assessments are crucial for actually linking plastic ingestion to mortality, because “once we know some of those thresholds, they can help policy makers make informed decisions,” said Merrill.And that’s what Murphy said she and her co-authors are hoping for: That lawmakers and others can use this information to reduce plastic, by crafting regulations to ban or reduce plastics, such as plastic bag or balloon bans, and encouraging small, local events such as beach clean ups.“The science is clear: We need to reduce the amount of plastic that we’re producing and we need to improve collection and recycling to clean up what’s already out there,” said Murphy. Earlier this year, in internationals talks on limiting plastic pollution, oil and gas producing countries succeeded in preventing language that would reduce the amount of plastics produced.

Trump proposes to narrow where Clean Water Act applies

The Trump administration is proposing to narrow which bodies of water qualify for Clean Water Act protections. The administration proposed a new definition Monday for what counts as a “water of the United States” and is therefore subject to federal pollution regulations under the Clean Water Act. The issue is a controversial one, with developers,...

The Trump administration is proposing to narrow which bodies of water qualify for Clean Water Act protections.  The administration on Monday proposed a new definition for what counts as a “water of the United States” and is therefore subject to federal pollution regulations under the Clean Water Act. The issue is a controversial one, with developers, farmers and others calling for including fewer bodies of water to make it easier for them to operate. Environmental activists, however, argue that more bodies of water deserve protection in order to prevent pollution that can flow to important waters. “There will be less that will be regulated by the federal government,” Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin told reporters. Waters of the U.S. require permits for pollution, as well as activities such as filling and dredging. Those that are not so classified may not require permits.  In general, large, permanent bodies of water such as oceans and lakes are considered waters of the U.S., but wetlands and streams have been more contentious. DEVELOPING… Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Nuclear-Waste Arks Are a Bold Experiment in Protecting Future Generations

Designing nuclear-waste repositories is part engineering, part anthropology—and part mythmaking

This article is part of a package in collaboration with Forbes on time capsules, preserving information and communicating with the future. Read more from the report.IGNACE, Ontario, C.E. 51,500—Feloo, a hunter, chews a strip of roasted caribou flank, washing it down with water from a nearby lake. Her boots press into thin soil that, each summer, thaws into a sodden marsh above frozen ground. Caribou herds drift across the tundra, nibbling lichen and calving on the open flats. Hooves sink into moss beds; antlers scrape dwarf shrubs. Overhead, migratory birds wheel and squawk before winging south. Two lakes remain liquid year-round, held open by hidden taliks—oases of water in a frozen land. Beneath it all lies the Canadian Shield: a billion-year-old granite craton, a basement of rock, scarred by ice, that has endured glaciation after glaciation. In 10 or 15 millennia, Feloo’s world will vanish beneath three kilometers of advancing ice.Feloo is unaware that 500 meters below her feet rests an ancestral deposit of copper, steel, clay and radioactive debris. Long ago, this land was called Canada. Here a group known as the Nuclear Waste Management Organization (NWMO) built a deep geological repository to contain spent nuclear fuel—the byproducts of reactors that once powered Ontario, Quebec and New Brunswick. The vault was engineered to isolate long-lived radionuclides such as uranium 235, which has a half-life that exceeds 700 million years—sealing them away from war, disaster, neglect, sabotage and curiosity for as long as human foresight could reach.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.NWMO issued reports with titles such as Postclosure Safety Assessment of a Used Fuel Repository in Crystalline Rock. These studies modeled future boreal forests and tundra ecosystems, simulating the waxing and waning of vast glacial ice sheets across successive ice ages. They envisioned the lifeways of self-sufficient hunters, fishers and farmers who might one day inhabit the region—and even the remote possibility of a far-future drill crew inadvertently breaching the buried canisters.Feloo was born into a world that has remembered none of this. Records of the repository were lost in the global drone wars of C.E. 2323. All that endured were the stories of Mishipeshu, the horned water panther said to dwell beneath the lakes—and to punish those who dig too deep. Some of Feloo’s companions dismiss the legend; others whisper that the earth below still burns with poison. Yet every step she takes is haunted by choices made tens of millennia before—when Canada undertook the Promethean task of safeguarding a future it could scarcely imagine.In 2024 NWMO announced that Canada’s deep geological repository for spent nuclear fuel would be built in the granite formations of northwestern Ontario, near the Township of Ignace and the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation. The decision capped off a 14-year siting effort that solicited volunteer host communities and guaranteed them the right to withdraw at any stage of the process. NWMO is now preparing for a comprehensive regulatory review, which will include a licensing process conducted by the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission. This means the development of impact assessments that will be specific to the Ignace site. NWMO has also pledged an Indigenous-led regulatory process alongside federal oversight, with the Wabigoon Lake Ojibway Nation conducting its own assessments to ensure the project reflects Anishinaabe principles of ecological stewardship. If approvals proceed, construction could begin in the 2030s, and the repository could go into operation in the 2040s.A deep-time repository, like a deep-space probe, must endure without maintenance or intervention, independently carrying human intent into the far future.A deep geological repository can be seen as a reverse ark: a vessel designed not to carry valuables forward in time but to seal dangerous legacies away from historical memory. Or it can be understood as a reverse mine: an effort returning hazardous remnants to the Earth rather than extracting resources from it. Either way it is more than just a feat of engineering. Repository projects weave together scientific reasoning, intergenerational ethics and community preferences in decisions that are meant to endure longer than empires. As messages to future versions of ourselves, they compel their designers to ask: What symbols, stories or institutions might bridge epochs? And what does it mean that we are trying to protect future humans who may exist only in our imaginations?I am a cultural anthropologist. From 2012 to 2014 I spent 32 months living in Finland, conducting fieldwork among the safety assessment teams for Onkalo—an underground complex that is likely to become the world’s first operational deep geological repository for spent nuclear fuel. The teams’ work involved modeling far-future glaciations, earthquakes, floods, erosion, permafrost and even hypothetical human and animal populations tens of millennia ahead. That research became the basis for Deep Time Reckoning, a book exploring how nuclear-waste experts’ long-range planning practices can be retooled as blueprints for safeguarding future worlds in other domains, from climate adaptation to biodiversity preservation.During the Biden administration, I joined the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Spent Fuel and High-Level Waste Disposition, where I helped advance participatory siting processes modeled on approaches that had proven successful in Finland and Canada. I served as federal manager of the DOE’s Consent-Based Siting Consortia—a nationwide coalition of 12 project teams from universities, nonprofits and the private sector that were tasked with fostering community engagement with nuclear waste management. Through it all, I came to see repository programs as civilizational experiments in long-term responsibility: collective efforts to extend the time horizons of governance and care so that shared futures may be protected far beyond the scale of any single lifetime or institution.An enduring question for all repository programs is whether—and, if so, how—to mark their sites and archive knowledge about them. There is no guarantee that the languages we speak today will remain intelligible even a few thousand years from now. Beowulf, written in an earlier form of English a millennium or so ago, already reads like a foreign tongue. The meanings of symbols drift just as unpredictably. A skull and crossbones, for instance, may denote poison, death, rebirth—or pirates—depending on culture and context. What, then, might a nuclear waste repository signify to people tens of millennia from now? How long can a warning sign, monument, or archive preserve the meanings we attach to it today? Or should we abandon the illusion of communicating with future humans like Feloo altogether—and instead build repositories that are meant to be forgotten?Nuclear organizations rely on familiar techniques to preserve institutional memory: documentation mandates, digital databases, mentoring pipelines, program redundancy, succession planning. Such mechanisms can sustain continuity for decades, even centuries—but their limits become clear when stretched across millennia. Archives can burn. Technologies can decay into obsolescence. Institutions can falter under political or economic upheaval. And today a new litany of planetary risks crowds the horizon: thermonuclear war, weaponized synthetic biology, climate-driven migrations, institutional collapse, even runaway artificial superintelligence.As NWMO prepares for construction in Ignace in the 2030s, the question of long-term communication must increasingly shift from theory to practice. Canada has participated in the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s Nuclear Energy Agency’s Preservation of Records, Knowledge and Memory initiative, which has explored strategies ranging from warning markers to staged transfers of responsibility across generations. In a 2017 safety report, NWMO wisely conceded a limit: “repository records and markers (and passive societal memory) are assumed sufficient to ensure that inadvertent intrusion would not occur for at least 300 ... years.” Beyond that horizon, the premise changes. No monument, land-use restriction, monitoring system or archive can be trusted to endure indefinitely.Different countries have embraced different philosophies of how to safeguard nuclear waste repositories across centuries and millennia—and how and whether to try to send messages to those who, like Feloo, may one day live above them.The U.S. is home to the Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (WIPP), a deep geological repository carved into ancient salt beds in New Mexico. WIPP stores transuranic waste from the nation’s nuclear weapons programs. In the 1980s and 1990s, task forces convened scientists, artists, science-fiction writers and semioticians to design warning systems that were intended to deter drill crews or archaeologists living thousands of years in the future. Their proposals were dramatic: vast fields of concrete thorns bristling from the desert floor; monolithic slabs etched with multilingual warnings (“this place is not a place of honor ... nothing valued is here”); and signage depicting the anguished face of Edvard Munch’s The Scream. Some envisioned a quasi-religious “atomic priesthood” to preserve the warning through ritual. Others suggested bioengineered “ray cats” whose fur would fluoresce near radiation—accompanied by myths, songs and proverbs to ensure that unborn generations would know to flee.Finland’s Onkalo repository embodies a somewhat different a philosophy. Anticipating the future loss of institutional control and memory of the repository, Onkalo was designed to remain secure for millennia in the absence of monumental communication systems. As in Canada, the lack of exploitable resources in the granite bedrock is meant to deter future prospectors. Once its tunnels are packed with copper canisters and bentonite clay, Onkalo will be backfilled and sealed for perpetuity on a small, unassuming islet in the Baltic Sea sometime in the 2120s. The danger is to be buried so completely that there will be nothing left to remember: no attention-grabbing monoliths to tempt curiosity, no symbols to be misread. When I conducted anthropological fieldwork in Finland, some scientists likened the project to launching a probe into interstellar space: years of meticulous planning and testing culminating in a single, irrevocable release. After that, no repair or recall is possible. A deep-time repository, like a deep-space probe, must endure without maintenance or intervention, independently carrying human intent into the far future.Even the mightiest empires have cycled through collapse and renewal, through forgetting and rediscovery.France has charted a third path with its Cigéo repository, planned in the Callovo-Oxfordian clay of its northeastern departments of Meuse and Haute-Marne. A 2016 law requires Cigéo to remain reversible for at least a century after operations begin. In practice, reversibility means retrievability: the inbuilt capacity to recover waste packages from the underground deposition cells. Advocates see this as a balance between long-term containment and intergenerational agency: the idea that future citizens should retain the right to revisit, or even overturn, choices made today. This logic resonates with those who view spent nuclear fuel as a future resource more than a liability. Jenifer Schafer, an associate director for technology at the DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency–Energy, has argued that “nuclear treasure” may be a more fitting term than “nuclear waste,” as the fissile materials inside it could someday power future innovations in nuclear reactor design. From this perspective, burying spent nuclear fuel too conclusively risks foreclosing possibilities that future generations might prefer to keep open.Taken together, these examples reveal how differently societies imagine their obligations to the far future. The American strategy reflected a lingering cold-war-era faith—tinged with hubris—in design ingenuity to frighten descendants away. The Finnish plan entrusted geology with the work of erasure, even if humans’ memory were to lapse as the landscape quietly reclaimed the site. The French framework preserved the right of future citizens to reject the decisions of today. Canada still has regulatory milestones and First Nations approvals to meet before NWMO can break ground at Ignace. In the decades ahead, however, it, too, will have to specify how it will stage its approach to intergenerational communication.What is certain, though, is that NWMO’s deep geological disposal efforts will unfold not only as a technical project but also as a cultural statement—a statement about care across generations, the limits of understanding across difference and the moral responsibilities of present-day Canadians to those not yet born. Like all repository efforts, NWMO’s work in Ignace will serve as a mirror: a message not only to the future but also to the present, reflecting what we choose to remember, what we choose to forget and how we hope to be remembered ourselves.As NWMO refines its approach to remembering, forgetting and communicating with societies of the future, it would do well to look beyond the nuclear industry for inspiration.Japan’s Kongō Gumi construction firm, founded in C.E. 578, operated independently for more than 1,400 years before it became part of the Takamatsu Construction Group in 2006. Adapting across vast social and political transformations, the Catholic Church, France’s Hôtel-Dieu hospital (C.E. 651) and Morocco’s University of al-Qarawiyyin (C.E. 859) have each endured for more than a millennium. Bali’s subak irrigation system, established in the ninth century, continues to flourish through a network of water temples that unite ecological engineering with Hindu philosophy and ritual. In New Mexico, three-century-old acequia canals still function under community governance, with elected mayordomos overseeing water sharing through collective labor. In Australia, the Brewarrina fish traps have been maintained across countless generations of Aboriginal peoples. What principles of intergenerational adaptation, renewal or continuity might NWMO glean from such long-lived systems?The Memory of Mankind (MoM) project in Austria could also be instructive. MoM’s mission is to preserve a snapshot of human civilization for the distant future, a cultural time capsule designed to outlast war, decay and digital obsolescence. Deep inside the Hallstatt salt mine, MoM stores ceramic tablets engraved with texts and images engineered to resist heat, radiation, chemicals and water. Its archive includes everything from scholarly works to recipes and personal stories. Led by ceramist Martin Kunze, MoM represents a philosophy of strategic redundancy. To guard against loss, Kunze distributes miniature tablets worldwide, each etched with maps pointing back to the Hallstatt archive—a physical embodiment of a principle articulated by the digital-preservation project LOCKSS: “Lots of Copies Keep Stuff Safe.” What might it mean for Canada to apply that same principle to the challenge of nuclear memory?Indigenous cultures offer another paradigm of long-term message endurance: storytelling as recordkeeping. Aboriginal Australian oral histories recount volcanic eruptions in western Victoria that align with geological evidence dating back nearly 37,000 years. Narratives describing islands drowned by rising seas have likewise been corroborated by climate science. Such traditions demonstrate that oral knowledge of environmental change can persist across timescales that far exceed those of our most advanced digital media, which often decay or become unreadable within decades. What might NWMO learn from cultural systems of memory grounded in ceremony, cosmology and story transmission?If built properly, NWMO’s deep geological repository will outlast governments, economies and the very languages that name it. It will join a global lineage of reverse arks: monuments to societies that dared to think beyond themselves. If the facility is someday uncovered by a far-future archaeologist, its depth, placement and engineered barriers could reveal what our civilization judged to be dangerous, how we calculated risk and how we imagined future humans would think, live and interpret signs. Yet scientific literacy cannot be assumed across deep time. Even the mightiest empires have cycled through collapse and renewal, through forgetting and rediscovery. To posterity, a nuclear waste repository might be read as a sacred monument, an extraterrestrial stronghold, a strange geological formation, a chamber of forgotten gods—or something beyond our present-day imagination altogether.In the end, Canada’s proposed Ignace repository will be an artifact of our own self-understanding: stone and metal fashioned into a signal meant to traverse vast orders of time. Its interpretation will belong solely to the future—to whatever beings, human or otherwise, may one day unearth what we once chose to hide.

See how this wolf steals fish, a new discovery of animals using tools

Video from the coast of British Columbia may be the first documented instance of a wild wolf using a tool, according to the researchers who published it on Monday.

The wolf seemed to know exactly what she was doing.She dove into the water, fetched a fishing float and brought it to shore. She then waded back in and tugged on a rope connected to the float. She pulled and backed up, pulled and backed up, until a crab trap emerged. When it was within easy reach, she tore it open and consumed the bait inside.Subscribe for unlimited access to The PostYou can cancel anytime.SubscribeThe scene, caught on camera on the coast of British Columbia in May 2024, may be the first documented instance of a wild wolf using a tool, according to the scientists who published the footage in the journal Ecology and Evolution on Monday.Although the intelligence of wolves is well known, the discovery adds to an expanding list of animals capable of manipulating tools to forage for food, a trait once thought to be unique to humans.“It’s not a surprise they have the capacity to do this,” said Kyle Artelle, an ecologist with the State University of New York College of Environmental Science and Forestry who published the footage. “Yet our jaw dropped when we saw the video.”The discovery also solved a mystery.People of the Heiltsuk Nation in central British Columbia had been puzzled about what was foiling their efforts to capture invasive green crabs along their shores.The crabs are a real problem — they eat through eelgrass that harbors marine life and they devastate the native clam, herring and salmon populations the tribe relies on for food. But the traps people were setting with herring and other bait kept getting damaged. Sometimes, there were just minor tears in the nets. Other times, the entire trap was torn to shreds.Some of the traps were set so deep that, at first, researchers thought the thief must be an otter, seal or other marine mammal. William Housty, director of the Heiltsuk Integrated Resource Management Department, wondered whether tourists were tampering with them. The Heiltsuk Nation worked with Artelle to set up a trail camera to record the perpetrator.A day after the camera was installed, it recorded the female wolf in action.The efficiency with which she snagged the bait — in just three minutes — suggested to Artelle that the animal had done this before.“She’s staring exactly at the trap. Every motion she does is perfectly tailored to getting that trap out as quickly as possible,” said Artelle.In February, the team recorded a second video of a different wolf pulling a line attached to a partially submerged trap. The camera shut off before it could show whether the animal had learned to finish the job and eat the bait. But afterward, two traps were seen on the shore with their bait cups removed.The “weight of evidence,” Artelle said, suggests the female wolf or her full pack are responsible for the pilfering.The tribal territory in British Columbia is a rare place where wolves remain unharassed by hunters, potentially giving them time to learn.“We’ve always maintained a very respectful relationship with the wolves up here in the territory,” Housty said. The oral history of his people, he added, talks of a time when humans and wolves could shape-shift between one another.Researchers have seen tool use in captive canines before. Dingoes, for instance, have been observed opening latches and moving small tables to reach food at a sanctuary in Australia. And pets owners are familiar with the inventiveness of dogs, which can carry hockey pucks in plastic flying discs and move chairs to reach food.Biologists are witnessing more and more animals brandishing tools. Crows maneuver sticks in their beaks to collect grub from crevices. Pandas grab bamboo to scratch their bodies. Octopuses wield the severed tentacles of other animals as makeshift weapons to ward off predators.The wolf video raises a philosophical question: What does it mean to use a tool? Does the animal have to make the tool, as crows do when shortening sticks and peeling off their bark so they fit into crannies? Or can we call an animal a “tool user” if it uses an existing tool, as the wolf did with the rope?“I’m speaking to you on Zoom right now. I did not design this computer. I don’t know how it works, but I’m ‘using’ it, right?” Artelle asked.He said he hopes adding wolves to the list of tool-using animals will prompt some people to see them in a different light — the way public appreciation of chimpanzees grew after Jane Goodall discovered the primates dipping blades of grass into termite mounds to eat the insects.It is “an intelligence that is so familiar to us,” Artelle said. “For better or for worse, as humans, we tend to afford more care and compassion to other people or other species that we see most like us.”

Doug Peacock, the real ‘George Hayduke,’ Looks Back on 50 Years of The Monkey Wrench Gang

Now a famed grizzly conservationist, Peacock served as Edward Abbey’s inspiration for the novel’s most pivotal, piercing character. The post Doug Peacock, the real ‘George Hayduke,’ Looks Back on 50 Years of The Monkey Wrench Gang appeared first on The Revelator.

Half a century ago, a lyrical and passionate philosopher named Edward Abbey published a novel that would help define a generation. The Monkey Wrench Gang supercharged a secretive movement to preserve the remaining American wilderness from devastating overdevelopment and corporate exploitation through targeted acts of violence against machines. The book, which remains painfully relevant to the ongoing environmental crises facing the planet, has recently been re-released in a commemorative anniversary edition. “A 50th anniversary of The Monkey Wrench Gang couldn’t be timelier,” says Abbey’s friend and colleague Doug Peacock, who inspired the character of George Washington Hayduke in the novel. “Our American wilderness, Ed’s and my favorite shared value, has never been in greater peril, and so the book’s theme of challenging authority at every turn really hits the bullseye. We live in a scorching era of biological extinctions. Climate change by itself could take everything out.” Now 83 years old, Peacock wrote the introduction to the new edition of the novel. A distinguished author, filmmaker, and conservationist, he has dedicated his life to the preservation of grizzly bears and the “trophic cascade” of spiraling ecological benefits the bears provide throughout their constricted range. (Disclosure: Funk worked as communications director for Peacock’s former startup, Save the Yellowstone Grizzly.) A Fictional Character Birthed in Genuine Trauma Peacock met Abbey in 1969, shortly after his discharge from the Green Berets during the Vietnam War. “I saw a lot of Ed Abbey in Tucson back then,” Peacock reflects. “I wasn’t a writer yet, but I was a character.” Such a character, in fact, that Peacock immediately stood out in a crowd. His anarchic instincts, incited by his combat experiences and coupled with his having partially recovered from post-traumatic stress disorder through profound encounters with grizzly bears in the wild, made him a unique persona — one that would fit perfectly into what would become The Monkey Wrench Gang. In the novel, four contrarians band together and suppress their differences for a shared and singular mission: thwarting the unchecked destruction of their beloved desert landscapes. Led by the furious and untiring Green Beret medic George Hayduke, the gang plans a sweeping campaign of industrial sabotage in desert country. Abbey’s novel is largely built around this singular character, who eagerly puts the violent wrench into the gang’s monkey business. Hayduke’s struggles with what later became known as PTSD were mirrored in Peacock. “Looking back,” Peacock reflects now, “Abbey probably did me a favor in creating a caricature of myself whose dim psyche I could penetrate when my own seemed off-limits. Ed painted the ex-Green Beret Hayduke with precise brushstrokes as caught in an emotional backwater, an eddy out of whose currents I wanted to swim. The only thing worse than reading your own press was becoming someone else’s fiction.” The other three members of the gang, says Peacock, were also based on friends of his in the Southwest: Seldom Seen Smith was built around the late activist and river runner Ken Sleight. Doc Sarvis “is mostly as far as I’m concerned Ed Abbey, especially when he spouts out his philosophy and little nuggets of wisdom — that’s really Ed.” Bonnie Abbzug was modeled after Ingrid Eisenstadter, a recent contributor to The Revelator, whom Peacock notes “was a handful, not just in fiction. That was really her.” Peacock later recounted his own story in the harrowing 1990 book Grizzly Years: In Search of the American Wilderness. In 2009 The Atlantic released a short documentary about him under the same title: ‘Wilderness Is the Glue’ After returning from Vietnam, Peacock says, he went straight into the wilderness. “I didn’t want to work for anyone or have troubles with the authorities, so I lived in the woods,” Peacock recalls. “I like autonomy and I took it to the extreme when I got back from Vietnam.” He spent most of his time in Yellowstone and Glacier national parks, “and you absolutely could not find me. I lived the life of an outlaw, far from any authority, and took anarchy to the extreme, hidden in the wilderness. I love freedom, and my feelings fit right into Abbey’s rather formal libertarian philosophy that permeates The Monkey Wrench Gang.” They found particular common ground on environmental issues. “Defending the wilderness is really the glue that cemented me with Ed.” Peacock’s insular need for a kind of absolute personal liberty, begun as an aching promise to himself while serving overseas, happened to fit neatly with Abbey’s own philosophical beliefs. Abbey wrote his master’s thesis at the University of New Mexico on anarchy, that ultimate expression of chaotic self-governance, and dedicated The Monkey Wrench Gang to the late 18th-century English reactionary and later Romantic icon Ned Ludd, who launched a populist sabotage campaign against the encroaching Industrial Revolution. In his novel Abbey makes the reader confront and question assumptions about the kinds of people behind the current economy’s ultimate, inevitable toll on our communal natural landscapes. And to bring the fight to them. Radical Rebirth The Monkey Wrench Gang was published in a time of social unrest and political turmoil that somehow seems minor compared to today’s unceasing partisan mayhem. But it struck a chord at the time, and many young people took this novel’s message to heart. Readers have credited the book with sparking the creation of Earth First! and other “radical environmentalist” groups who deflated industrial truck tires to stymy commerce, burned billboards to restore the natural view, spiked trees to prevent logging, and otherwise did what little is possible to take some kind of stand against blind, rampaging overdevelopment. “It was the beginning of radical environmentalism,” Peacock tells me. A Message That Still Resonates Peacock, who has spent a lifetime writing books and making documentaries about his dedication to preserving grizzly bears, sees our present political moment of absolute and almost fanatical obedience to the wishes of ultrarich oil, gas, coal, and timber industries as the tragically perfect time for this reintroduction to an unlikely cabal that refused to let the world die around them. Indeed, the sycophantic corporate atmosphere we’re living in today is different from any other in modern U.S. history. From handing over public lands to private extractive interests to ignoring scientific realities on climate and aggressively seeking to remove vital protections for endangered species, the Trump administration proudly proclaims its unprecedented contempt for what allows the United States to be what it was founded to be — wild and free. The categorically contrasting but equally devoted characters of The Monkey Wrench Gang embody the American belief in pushing past seemingly impenetrable boundaries by working together, by risking it all for common ideals, and by regularly squabbling and then reconciling. Out of a shared sense of duty. This book reminds us today that when all else fails, there’s always the option of rebellious attempts at sabotage to cut through the agitprop and draw attention to an enduring and genuinely apolitical value: preserving what remains of our wilderness. Together. After all, as Peacock says, “The principles and anger behind The Monkey Wrench Gang are still with us, and still with me.” Previously in The Revelator: In Understory, An Ecologist Reflects on the Grief of Losing Nature The post Doug Peacock, the real ‘George Hayduke,’ Looks Back on 50 Years of The Monkey Wrench Gang appeared first on The Revelator.

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.