Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

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

Accept Deny

GoGreenNation news

Calling for further study, California lawmakers table ban on toxic herbicide paraquat

News Feed
Saturday, August 31, 2024

California lawmakers have approved a bill that could help strengthen regulations around the use of paraquat, a powerful weedkiller associated with Parkinson’s disease and other serious health issues. Assembly Bill 1963 was introduced in January by Assemblymember Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), and originally sought to sunset the use of paraquat in California beginning in January 2026. However, the final legislation has been amended so that it now will require the California Department of Pesticide Regulation to complete a reevaluation of the herbicide by Jan. 1, 2029, and determine whether to retain, cancel or suspend its registration, or to create new restrictions. The bill passed the Senate 23 to 8 and now awaits a signature from Gov. Gavin Newsom. Paraquat is banned in more than 60 countries. Many environmental and advocacy groups had been hoping for an outright ban in California, but said the bill still marks a step forward by fast-tracking its safety review — a process that can sometimes take decades.“We are encouraged by the progress being made in California setting the example for other states to act when it comes to evaluating the safety and toxicity of chemicals with long term neurological and other health implications,” read a statement from Julia Pitcher, director of state government relations for the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. “We strongly urge the passage of this legislation and look forward to Governor Newsom signing it into law soon.” Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency describes paraquat as highly toxic — noting that “one sip can kill” — yet California remains one of the nation’s top users of the chemical. The state sprays millions of pounds annually on crops such as almonds, grapes and cotton. An Environmental Working Group report published earlier this year found that the state’s farmworkers and low-income Latino people, in particular, are disproportionately exposed to paraquat in their communities, with more than 5.3 million pounds sprayed in Kern County alone between 2017 and 2021. The bill faced opposition from a coalition of opponents including pesticide manufacturers, chemical industry trade associations and agriculture trade organizations. By the time it wound its way through the legislature, including the Senate Agriculture Committee, it had lost much of its teeth, said Bill Allayaud, California director of government affairs with EWG.“It’s still a good bill, because without this, DPR probably wouldn’t do anything,” he said. “Hopefully the governor will sign it and agree that this is at the top of the list for things we don’t want people exposed to, especially farmworkers.” Paraquat has been the subject of thousands of lawsuits from people seeking damages related to exposure to the product, including people who say it has given them Parkinson’s disease, a neurodegenerative disorder that affects movement. The bill’s legislative analysis notes that at least 10 epidemiological studies have linked paraquat exposure to Parkinson’s disease, including a 2019 meta-analysis of 13 studies that found exposure to the herbicide was associated with a 1.64-fold increase in the risk of the disease.Other studies have found no clear link, however, and the product’s manufacturers continue to reject any claims of a connection. In a statement, Friedman said AB 1963 will have “very real results.”“I’m happy with where the bill landed,” Friedman said. “We never thought we’d get a full ban through the Legislature. But we had to push as hard as we could.”She noted that the Legislature provided the Department of Pesticide Regulation with additional funding this year with a requirement that the agency do more reevaluations of toxic chemicals.“I have full confidence, that should AB 1963 get signed into law, that DPR will do a thorough reevaluation of paraquat, and either ban it outright, or place greater restrictions on its use,” Friedman said.Advocacy groups remain committed to seeing the chemical controlled. The EWG this week launched a campaign with the Michael J. Fox Foundation urging President Biden and the EPA to ban paraquat nationwide. The federal agency will have until Jan. 17 to make a decision.There is some reason for optimism: The EPA last month issued a rare emergency order to stop the use of another weedkiller, dachthal, that poses a significant risk to fetuses.

Assembly Bill 1963 originally sought to sunset the use of the powerful weedkiller. Instead, it orders state regulators to study the safety of the product.

California lawmakers have approved a bill that could help strengthen regulations around the use of paraquat, a powerful weedkiller associated with Parkinson’s disease and other serious health issues.

Assembly Bill 1963 was introduced in January by Assemblymember Laura Friedman (D-Glendale), and originally sought to sunset the use of paraquat in California beginning in January 2026.

However, the final legislation has been amended so that it now will require the California Department of Pesticide Regulation to complete a reevaluation of the herbicide by Jan. 1, 2029, and determine whether to retain, cancel or suspend its registration, or to create new restrictions. The bill passed the Senate 23 to 8 and now awaits a signature from Gov. Gavin Newsom.

Paraquat is banned in more than 60 countries. Many environmental and advocacy groups had been hoping for an outright ban in California, but said the bill still marks a step forward by fast-tracking its safety review — a process that can sometimes take decades.

“We are encouraged by the progress being made in California setting the example for other states to act when it comes to evaluating the safety and toxicity of chemicals with long term neurological and other health implications,” read a statement from Julia Pitcher, director of state government relations for the Michael J. Fox Foundation for Parkinson’s Research. “We strongly urge the passage of this legislation and look forward to Governor Newsom signing it into law soon.”

Aggressive and impactful reporting on climate change, the environment, health and science.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency describes paraquat as highly toxic — noting that “one sip can kill” — yet California remains one of the nation’s top users of the chemical. The state sprays millions of pounds annually on crops such as almonds, grapes and cotton.

An Environmental Working Group report published earlier this year found that the state’s farmworkers and low-income Latino people, in particular, are disproportionately exposed to paraquat in their communities, with more than 5.3 million pounds sprayed in Kern County alone between 2017 and 2021.

The bill faced opposition from a coalition of opponents including pesticide manufacturers, chemical industry trade associations and agriculture trade organizations.

By the time it wound its way through the legislature, including the Senate Agriculture Committee, it had lost much of its teeth, said Bill Allayaud, California director of government affairs with EWG.

“It’s still a good bill, because without this, DPR probably wouldn’t do anything,” he said. “Hopefully the governor will sign it and agree that this is at the top of the list for things we don’t want people exposed to, especially farmworkers.”

Paraquat has been the subject of thousands of lawsuits from people seeking damages related to exposure to the product, including people who say it has given them Parkinson’s disease, a neurodegenerative disorder that affects movement.

The bill’s legislative analysis notes that at least 10 epidemiological studies have linked paraquat exposure to Parkinson’s disease, including a 2019 meta-analysis of 13 studies that found exposure to the herbicide was associated with a 1.64-fold increase in the risk of the disease.

Other studies have found no clear link, however, and the product’s manufacturers continue to reject any claims of a connection.

In a statement, Friedman said AB 1963 will have “very real results.”

“I’m happy with where the bill landed,” Friedman said. “We never thought we’d get a full ban through the Legislature. But we had to push as hard as we could.”

She noted that the Legislature provided the Department of Pesticide Regulation with additional funding this year with a requirement that the agency do more reevaluations of toxic chemicals.

“I have full confidence, that should AB 1963 get signed into law, that DPR will do a thorough reevaluation of paraquat, and either ban it outright, or place greater restrictions on its use,” Friedman said.

Advocacy groups remain committed to seeing the chemical controlled.

The EWG this week launched a campaign with the Michael J. Fox Foundation urging President Biden and the EPA to ban paraquat nationwide. The federal agency will have until Jan. 17 to make a decision.

There is some reason for optimism: The EPA last month issued a rare emergency order to stop the use of another weedkiller, dachthal, that poses a significant risk to fetuses.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Why Are US Agricultural Emissions Dropping?

In recent years, curbing emissions from agriculture and the broader food system has become a bigger piece of the conference’s programming. And this year, the most influential group in American agriculture has been pointing to big strides made. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) annual emissions inventory report showed that emissions from the agricultural sector […] The post Why Are US Agricultural Emissions Dropping? appeared first on Civil Eats.

The fall has become the season for reviewing climate progress, book-ended by two major climate summits. First comes New York City Climate Week, held between September 22 and 29, followed by the most important global climate event of the year, the 2024 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29), which will be held in Baku, Azerbaijan, from November 11 to November 22. There, global leaders will gather to fulfill the legally binding promise of the Paris Agreement: to keep worldwide emissions at a livable threshold. In recent years, curbing emissions from agriculture and the broader food system has become a bigger piece of the conference’s programming. And this year, the most influential group in American agriculture has been pointing to big strides made. “The impact that the drought is having on pasture is forcing the culling of cattle and reducing the cattle herd.” The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) annual emissions inventory report showed that emissions from the agricultural sector dropped by nearly 2 percent, falling from 10.6 to 9.4 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions between 2021 and 2022—the sharpest drop of all sectors in 2022. In response, the American Farm Bureau’s president, Zippy Duvall, attributed the shift to U.S. farmers adopting climate-friendly practices through “voluntary and market-based programs that support farmer efforts in sustainable agriculture practices.” However, the report doesn’t support the conclusion that a bump in conservation practices drove the drop in emissions. Instead, while there is plenty of uncertainty, the most likely causes are fewer cattle burping methane and less fertilizer use. Concentrated feedlot cattle farming and fertilizer production are among the biggest drivers of emissions from agriculture. It’s a significant conclusion, because in the past, industry groups have fought all efforts to draft climate policy around reducing meat and dairy consumption and chemical fertilizer use. Going into climate event season, with the clock ticking even louder, that could happen again. Fewer Cattle Duvall is right about farmers adopting valuable conservation practices. For example, many more are planting cover crops, with acreage increasing by 17 percent between 2017 and 2022. But despite the proven environmental benefits of these practices, their real climate impact is still in question. However, the impact of reducing methane is well understood. And in its report, the EPA explicitly states that the drop of methane emissions was “largely driven by a decrease in beef cattle populations.” Through no fault of their own, ruminant animals, like cattle and sheep, exhale methane as they digest their food. Known as enteric fermentation, this is a top driver of human-related methane emissions in the U.S. In 2022, these emissions decreased by 2 percent, contributing to the overall drop. Why were there fewer cattle? The decline in numbers isn’t due to any regulations on methane or herd size—a frequent Republican talking point—but rather the impacts of climate change. The record-breaking drought since 2022 has dried the landscape and shrunk the available grassy pasture for raising cattle, explained Ben Lilliston, the director of rural strategies and climate change at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. As a result, farmers have had to make hard choices to prevent the overgrazing of this limited green pasture. “The impact that the drought is having on pasture is forcing the culling of cattle and reducing the cattle herd,” said Lilliston. “So, when you have fewer cows, you’re going to have fewer enteric [fermentation] emissions coming from the cow itself.” And it’s not just methane. The EPA also reported lower nitrous oxide emissions from feedlot manure, captured in manure lagoons, “which are major sources of both methane and nitrous oxide,” said Lilliston. “So, when you reduce the cattle herd, you affect both those sources of emissions.” This relationship has generally held true over time. The EPA has observed a consistent relationship between the size of cattle herds and fluctuations in methane emissions from enteric fermentation. As the report states, “this increase in emissions from enteric fermentation from 1990 to 2022 generally follows the increasing trends in cattle populations.” The agency pointed to how “emissions increased from 2005 to 2007, as both dairy and beef populations increased.” Now, as cattle herds decrease, that trend has reversed. The multi-year drought continues to devastate ranchers, which could mean further declines in emissions. “Based on USDA statistics, cattle populations have continued to decrease in 2023 and 2024, which tend to drive methane and nitrous oxide emissions from the enteric fermentation and manure management categories as described in the GHG Inventory,” wrote an EPA spokesperson in an email. Reduced Fertilizer Use The drop in nitrous oxide emissions could also be driven by less fertilizer use, related to the dramatic surge in fertilizer prices in 2021 and 2022, beyond what farmers could afford. This coincided with Russia’s attack on Ukraine, which disrupted fertilizer supply chains. In response, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) noted that farmers made different business calculations: “Some producers may have chosen to reduce the overall acreage planted, while others chose to maintain acreage but change crop mix or modify other practices,” the USDA commented in a 2022 report. This is likely especially true for farmers growing corn, the most widely planted crop in the U.S., primarily grown to produce ethanol. “Corn is the main driver of nitrogen fertilizer use,” said Lilliston. But as fertilizer prices surged, “a lot of commodity farmers responded by planting more soybeans, which doesn’t require as much fertilizer,” he noted. Rather than a permanent shift, this suggests a more temporary fluctuation. Lilliston expects nitrous oxide emissions to rebound in the EPA’s next report, as fertilizer prices leveled in 2023 and the U.S. produced a record corn crop. “Ultimately, it seems primarily the big story is that there’s less production of U.S. agriculture and [therefore] less emissions. Farmers aren’t necessarily producing food in much more climate-smart ways than they were in 2021, just producing a little bit less of it,” said Dan Blaustein-Rejto, the director of food & agriculture at the Breakthrough Institute. “The EPA report is really not meant to assess the impact of conservation programs or specific farming practices,” added Blaustein-Rejto. “[It] certainly is not looking at the effect of specific voluntary programs or other efforts,” he said. In general, agricultural emissions experts interviewed for this article agreed that the EPA’s annual greenhouse-gas emissions inventory reflects such a brief snapshot of time that it can be hard to tell if it indicates a larger shift in the food system or a fluctuation based on agricultural market changes and disruptions. The EPA also continually refines its methodologies for calculating emissions, which can make it hard to compare smaller shifts in emissions included in the reports. ‘There’s so much uncertainty in those predictions that I would hesitate to really read too much into any small variation from year to year, outside of demonstrable changes and practices out on the landscape,” said Steven Hall, a professor in the Department of Plant and Agroecosystem Sciences at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. “The emissions inventories published by EPA are subject to substantial uncertainty.” “I think the EPA is doing an admirable job at trying to estimate this,” he added. “It’s sort of an impossible task.” The report, perhaps, most clearly shows that we still have work to do in transforming our systems for growing food. And it points to two simple things that policy wonks and world leaders could be spending more time debating: How climate policy should and could tackle emissions from beef production and fertilizer use. “Unfortunately, the 2022 reductions were not part of a planned strategy to support farmers in a transition toward less emitting, more resilient agricultural systems,” said Lilliston in a commentary on the EPA report. “Instead, the reductions were the result of sudden shocks that caused enormous harm to farmers and their animals. Volatile prices make it nearly impossible for farmers to plan ahead or transition to more diverse cropping systems that require less fertilizer use.” Going forward, he argued, policy conversations should prioritize transitioning away from industrial animal agriculture, which also depends on fertilized corn for feed. “Instead, policymakers continue to defer to the wants of powerful global grain and meat companies, while climate-related events, such as drought, wildfires, and floods, warn us that change is coming, ready or not.” The post Why Are US Agricultural Emissions Dropping? appeared first on Civil Eats.

Agriculture
Food
Business

Spring Rains Destroyed a Harvest Important to the Oneida Tribe. Farmers Are Working to Adapt

On Oneida Nation in Wisconsin, white corn harvests are an important cultural practice

This spring, a torrent of rain sent a river rushing over a field on the Oneida Nation in Wisconsin, destroying most of what was in its path, including the traditionally important crop of white corn.Families tried planting a second time, but it was too wet; many seeds dissolved in the water-soaked soil. The corn that did sprout was patchy and stunted.It looked “anemic,” said Lea Zeise, one of the coordinators of Ohe·láku, a non-profit that works with the families planting crops. “Really skinny and really frail.”A few members picked what remained at the end of August in its early form, known as green corn, but it was barely enough to go around. There will be none of their white corn in the annual food boxes sent to tribal elders next year. And the harvest moon event, traditionally an important time for ceremonies and community gathering, has been canceled.It’s a stark reminder of the uncertainty in store for Indigenous growers as the planet warms and as seasonal weather patterns become more unpredictable. There will likely be many hard years threatening the food that ties Oneida people to their culture, the land and each other. Oneida white corn stewards and other Indigenous growers want to adapt, and are proactively incorporating sustainable land management techniques like using cover crops to try to improve soil health and bolster their land against future droughts and floods. But years like this one remind them that it won’t always be enough.“We’re really up against some pretty serious odds with climate change. There’s a lot at stake. And so it feels very personal," Zeise said. “It’s very hard not to go out to the field and feel just deeply sad.”EDITOR’S NOTE: This is part of a series of on how tribes and Indigenous communities are coping with and combating climate change.White corn is more than just a food for Oneida people; it's part of their creation story and a relative to be cared for. It's also an annual, seasonal reason for people to come together, which was the philosophy behind Ohe·láku, which translates to “among the cornstalks.”Braiding corn husks is the favorite activity of 10-year-old Lucia Stevens, who was crowned Lil’ Miss Oneida this year and whose Oneida name Tehwahshútyahks means “she breaks the night.” She’s been joining the white corn harvest for about as long as she can remember, but this was the hardest year she’s seen in her lifetime, her mother Stephanie said.“We tried our best,” Lucia said. “The reason why we didn’t get that much corn is because it kept getting too hot days, and then it kept getting too rainy days, and it kept going back and forth like that.”Zeise and her mother Laura Manthe, who helped found the organization, said that by growing corn communally, families can learn from each other. They can all chip in on the labor-intensive processes of sowing, weeding, picking cobs by hand, winnowing to separate the chaff from the grain and other tasks, Manthe and Zeise said. The group can also still have a substantial crop even if the animals get to some of it, and they have a better chance of surviving extreme weather events if they're growing on a larger area of land. But even growing together was no match for this year’s spring inundation. Drive around Wisconsin, Minnesota and Michigan and there are a lot of farmers “whose corn looks horrible,” Manthe said. But commercially grown corn, which uses more uniform varieties than heirloom ones and is often genetically modified, is looking pretty good this time of year, she said.Oneida and commercial farmers take different approaches to dealing with smut, too — a type of fungus that can grow on corn. While many commercial growers consider it a disease to be eradicated, some Mexican growers use it for cooking and consider a delicacy. Ohe·láku members have taken inspiration and are just starting to use it as the wetter seasons make it more prevalent, but by this time the corn smut is already too mature to use.Becky Webster, who grows with Ohe·láku, is also executive director of another Oneida farmstead and non-profit Ukwakhwa, where she plants white corn in smaller plots and in two different ways. Some of it she plants in rows, and some of it in a method called Three Sisters, where corn, beans and squash are all planted together in mounds. She said the Three Sisters corn wasn’t flooded out because it was protected by the mounds, but that an unseasonably late wind storm blew over many of the stalks. She thinks it’s still salvageable but not in a great position. And she can’t remember ever seeing weather this wild.“Our springs were pretty steady before, aside from storms here and there. But we’ve had to deal with extremes. Last year was extreme drought and this year was extreme rain,” Webster said. She added that it’s harder to anticipate which planting methods might be most effective, and described how it’s been a challenge to save seeds strategically because the ones that did well in a wet year won’t do as well in a dry year and vice versa. All the Oneida growers stressed the importance of leaning on traditional farming knowledge, of further importance because many tribal members have been cut off from their own culture. It's a way of returning to their roots after families lost land to colonizers, children were forced to attend boarding schools and land was leased or sold to non-Indigenous farmers. But reviving past knowledge is made harder by the new seasonal unpredictability.“Even if we did know everything our ancestors learned, we’re having to do it in an erratic and changing climate,” Webster said.University of Wisconsin-Madison Ph.D. candidate Daniel Hayden thinks more research will be needed to understand the science behind sustainable Indigenous farming techniques that go back generations. He's been working with Ohe·láku for several years now trialing sustainable methods like interseeding cover crops, which involves planting other crops in the same field to improve soil health, balance moisture levels and prevent erosion. It's a work in progress, and this year it wasn't enough to keep the majority of the corn from getting washed out, though his research plot of white corn did make it.He acknowledged that while Oneida growers are willing to focus on stewarding land and improving soil health — not necessarily maximizing yields — commercial farmers have different priorities. He hopes his research will amplify the conversation about including Indigenous practices in mainstream agriculture, something he doesn't think has gotten enough attention yet.As Webster put it, “The Indigenous practices are no longer plan B, it has to be the plan. Because we are very mindful of all of the things around us."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 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - July 2024

Agriculture
Animals
Climate

Australia has just been handed a map for getting to net zero. Here’s how it will guide us

Emissions pathways act as a map of the future, showing us how to get from where we are to where we want to be.

AustralianCamera/ShutterstockAustralia’s push for net-zero emissions received a welcome boost on Thursday, with the release of an official report showing how Australia can seek to cut domestic emissions across each sector of the economy. The Climate Change Authority prepared the report, which provides vital scaffolding for Australia’s climate ambitions. Hopefully, it will inform the Australian government’s upcoming decarbonisation plans for each sector of the economy, and its updated goal for emissions reduction out to 2035. The pathways laid out by the authority show how emissions cuts can be made in sectors such as land use, resources, transport and energy. Importantly, the report shows what effective climate action looks like – and what Australia can achieve. The roadmap also shows how Australia can do its part to limit global warming to 1.5°C to avoid temperatures climbing dangerously higher. Climate scientists are clear: every fraction of a degree matters. Why are these pathways important? The authority groups Australia’s domestic emissions into six categories: electricity and energy, transport, industry and waste, agriculture and land, built environment, and resources. For each sector of Australia’s economy, getting emissions to net zero poses different challenges and opportunities. Preventing emissions from buildings requires, among other things, getting off gas and making them more efficient. Reducing emissions from transport means encouraging uptake of diverse solutions such as electric vehicles, trains and cycling. The report provides pathways that can guide the decarbonisation of each sector. It shows which technologies could be taken up and phased out, how to attract, enable and time investments, and how to align policy with practical implementation. The authority borrows from the approach of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, by showing a range of possible routes to net zero and comparing their work to others. We hope the Australian government continues this approach, to ensure decision-makers understand how different modelling approaches and scenarios combine to create a robust body of knowledge. The land sector has become a carbon sink in recent years. AzureJasper/Shutterstock Pathways show us the way We have spent more than a decade doing work similar to the report just released. Our own sectoral pathways are also designed to support governments, businesses and investors as they look for opportunities to reduce emissions. Decision-makers around the world are calling for such guidance. Why? Because pathways create a signal of how things can change. Laying out the problem, and different approaches to solving it, helps create a common understanding of the opportunities, risks and barriers to effective action. They make it possible for governments to set clear goals and ensure policies match what is needed and are backed by evidence. Rather than just setting out the overarching intention of, say, cutting emissions in half in a decade, pathways show how it can be done. Pathways let investors and companies identify and reduce risks and get ahead in a global economy aiming for net-zero emissions. And they lay out the technologies and processes needed to make the shift: ranging from mature, ready-to-deploy technologies such as renewable energy and storage, to maturing technologies such as green steelmaking. Mining of critical minerals will increase as fossil fuel extraction decreases under the resources sector plan. Pictured: Greenbushes lithium mine in Western Australia. David Steele/Shutterstock Pathways to keep 1.5°C alive Early next year, the Australian government is expected to release its new 2035 emissions target, taking us beyond the current target for 2030. Every signatory to the 2015 Paris Agreement has to publicly set a new target every five years. Other nations are doing the same. In the authority’s plan, Australia would hit net zero by 2040 under the more ambitious pathway aimed at meeting the 1.5°C goal, or 2050 under the 2°C scenario. These net zero dates are broadly consistent with our own analysis. But there are opportunities to move faster still. Boosted ambitions Transport is now Australia’s fastest-growing source of emissions. The authority’s transport pathway envisages passenger vehicles going electric and encouraging public transport and active transport, such as walking, cycling and micromobility such as e-scooters. It aligns with our research, which shows a diverse solutions approach is a better option to reduce transport emissions. This is especially important given recent delays in the shift to zero-emissions vehicles. However, the authority only takes a diverse approach to passenger transport. Our own work shows Australia can diversify its approach to freight transport. The authority focuses on moving trucks from diesel and petrol to battery electric and green hydrogen. But Climateworks’ analysis shows we can also reduce distance travelled through route optimisation and shift freight to rail, where possible. For the built environment – our houses, offices and infrastructure – the report rightly notes most technologies are now technically ready, commercially available, cheaper to run and healthier. They include energy-efficient electrical appliances, roof and wall insulation and window glazing. But there’s an opportunity to go further. The most cost-effective way to green your house depends on which state or territory you live in. Quick fixes – such as switching gas hot water for heat pumps – are included in the authority’s report. But as our recent modelling shows, homes in cooler climates benefit from more comprehensive improvements including double-glazing windows and adding insulation to walls and ceilings, alongside the quick fixes. Heat pump? Solar? Insulation? The most cost-effective way of cutting emissions from houses differs state by state. ThomsonD/Shutterstock What’s next? The pathways laid out by the Climate Change Authority in this report will not just be left on the shelf. They have very real use for business leaders and investors, as well as for policymakers. These pathways will guide Australia’s comprehensive national net-zero plan. They give us a starting point and show us how it can be done. Read more: Can we really reach net zero by 2050? A new report maps out Australia's path in more detail than ever before Climateworks Centre is a part of Monash University. It receives funding from a range of external sources including philanthropy, governments and businesses.Josh Solomonsz works for Climateworks Centre. Climateworks is a part of Monash University and receives funding from a range of external sources including philanthropy, governments and businesses. Josh is a volunteer committee of management member of the Port Phillip EcoCentre, a community environmental sustainability organisation.Matthew Benetti is affiliated with Think Forward, an intergenerational fairness think tank. I am a volunteer board member.

Agriculture
Business
Climate

Factbox-Key Ministers in Ukraine's Cabinet Reshuffle

By Olena HarmashKYIV (Reuters) - Here are some of the key appointees in a Ukrainian cabinet reshuffle completed on Thursday and why their...

KYIV (Reuters) - Here are some of the key appointees in a Ukrainian cabinet reshuffle completed on Thursday and why their portfolios matter:FOREIGN MINISTER: ANDRII SYBIHA, 49Sybiha's appointment reflects the fact that President Volodymyr Zelenskiy has taken a leading role in foreign policy since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022.Sybiha, a career diplomat without a prominent public profile, was named first deputy foreign minister in April 2024. Before that, he was one of several deputy heads of Zelenskiy's presidential office where he oversaw foreign policy and strategic partnerships. He was Ukraine's ambassador to Turkey from 2016 to 2021 and headed a directorate for consular services at the Foreign Ministry before that. DEPUTY PM FOR INFRASTRUCTURE AND REGIONS: OLEKSIY KULEBA, 41This government portfolio is powerful as it confers some control over financial flows for wartime reconstruction. The durability and viability of infrastructure is also vital as Russia targets it to try to get an upper hand in the war.Kuleba served as a deputy head of Zelenskiy's office overseeing regional policies from January 2023. That job involved coordinating ties between regional authorities and the military to build fortifications and support the development of mobile anti-drone groups across Ukraine. In the first year after Russia's invasion, Kuleba served as the regional governor of the Kyiv region that surrounds the capital.   DEPUTY PM FOR EU INTEGRATION AND JUSTICE MINISTER: OLHA STEFANYSHYNA, 38 Stefanyshyna, a lawyer by education, served as the deputy prime minister in charge of Kyiv's accession to the European Union and NATO military alliance from June 2020. She retains that portfolio and gains the functions of the old justice ministry as head of a bigger ministry combining the two.     A key negotiator in Ukraine's efforts to join the EU, she spent most of her professional life working to integrate Ukraine with the West and get rid of its post-Soviet legacy. In the early years of her career, she worked at the justice ministry, laying the legal groundwork for closer EU-Ukraine cooperation.AGRICULTURE MINISTER: VITALIY KOVAL, 43Koval headed the State Property Fund, Ukraine's main privatisation agency from November 2023. Prior to that he was the governor of the Rivne region in western Ukraine. He also worked in the private sector, serving in various senior positions in banking, transport and agriculture.MINISTER FOR STRATEGIC INDUSTRIES: HERMAN SMETANIN, 32Smetanin is the youngest minister in the cabinet and his appointment is more evidence of a rapid rise through the ranks. An engineer by education, he was named head of Ukraine's largest state-owned defence consortium UkrOboronProm in June 2023. During that period, weapons and ammunition production increased. He also spearheaded a corporate governance reform to increase transparency at the state giant.At the start of the invasion, he worked in his native city of Kharkiv in northeastern Ukraine, about 30 km from the Russian border, as the director of one of the Ukrainian tank factories.MINISTER FOR VETERANS: NATALIIA KALMYKOVA, 37 Kalmykova, a doctor by education, was a deputy defence minister from September 2023. Prior to that, she headed Ukraine's Veterans Fund and worked in Come Back Alive, one of the largest Ukrainian charity organisations. ENVIRONMENT MINISTER: SVITLANA HRYNCHUK, 38 Hrynchuk was a deputy energy minister from September 2023. She was also a deputy environment minister for several months in 2022. Prior to that, she was an adviser to the finance minister and headed a working group in the ministry of energy on environmental protection and climate change. MINISTER FOR CULTURE AND STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS: MYKOLA TOCHYTSKYI, 56Tochytskyi, a career diplomat, was a deputy head of Zelenskiy's office overseeing foreign policy from April 2024. He earlier served as Ukraine's ambassador in Belgium and Luxembourg and was also Ukraine's representative in the Council of Europe.David Arakhamia, head of Zelenskiy's parliamentary faction, has said Ukraine needs to step up its efforts to combat disinformation and that a person with foreign policy experience was needed for that.(Reporting by Olena Harmash; editing by Tom Balmforth and Philippa Fletcher)Copyright 2024 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See - July 2024

Agriculture
Climate
Culture

Could Liverwurst Take Down Boar’s Head?

Deaths from a listeria outbreak are haunting the mysterious deli-meat empire.

Founded in Brooklyn in 1905, Boar’s Head is the industry standard for the modern miracle-horror of processed deli meat, whereby a whole lot of chicken or turkey or pork is macerated into oblivion, injected with a flavor brine, and reconstituted into a shape that is not found in nature. Meat eaters mostly agree that it is a gross and delicious and easy way to make a sandwich — when the system works. But on July 26, Boar’s Head announced a recall of some 207,000 pounds of product due to potential exposure to Listeria monocytogenes at a plant in Virginia, after the Maryland Department of Health found that a sample of Boar’s Head liverwurst tested positive for the bacteria. Four days later, the recall was expanded to include some 7 million additional pounds from the tainted plant — from hot dogs to bacon to something called “hot butt cappy ham.” By late August, nine people had died and 57 were hospitalized, according to the Centers for Disease Control, which is investigating what is the largest listeriosis outbreak since 2011. The adage about meat no longer applies to the recalled products of the Boar’s Head Provision Co. After a summer of recalls and deaths from listeria, people really do want to know how their sausages and other processed meats are made. As food-safety lawyers prepare class-action lawsuits, the next few months for Boar’s Head will involve cleaning up its reputation beyond its closed plant in Virginia — and beyond just liverwurst. “I had a customer come in, he was about 75 years old,” said Paul DiSpirito of Lioni Italian Heroes in Bensonhurst. “He has been eating cold cuts every day of his life for 60 years. He told me he hasn’t eaten a cold cut in a month and a half. So my bill is down. We are selling less Boar’s Head.” DiSpirito claims he has skipped several lunch breaks due to the volume of calls about the meat. “I’m sitting here answering phone calls from all these customers asking about this vendor. It’s bad, because Boar’s Head is New York deli.” On August 26, records released by the United States Department of Agriculture food-safety inspectors showed that the Virginia plant linked to the outbreak had 69 violations for “noncompliance” over the past year. Mildew was found near the sinks for workers to wash their hands. A “black mold-like substance” was found in coolers. Puddles of water were sitting so long they had “green algal growth.” Puddles of blood were found in a cooler. In June, an inspector noted “small flying gnat like insects flying” around a room whose walls had “heavy meat buildup.” One food-safety attorney representing the family of an 88-year-old Holocaust survivor who died after eating tainted liverwurst told USA Today that it was the “worst set of inspection reports I have ever seen.” “We are deeply sorry,” the company wrote in a statement that underlined that only liverwurst from one plant in Virginia was affected. For years, Boar’s Head has been known as a ruthless competitor, suing similarly named businesses to protect its reputation and pulling its products from stores that dared to push their house brands over its own. The president of Dietz & Watson, a rival, once described the juggernaut as its “mortal enemies.” This was before an incident in Florida in which Boar’s Head trucks reportedly blocked parking spots and blew air horns while customers were attending a fundraiser for breast cancer where Dietz & Watson did taste tests against Boar’s Head meats. Boar’s Head now has a CEO from outside the family, but the descendants of founders Frank Brunckhorst and Bruno Bischoff still own the company. They are locked in a yearslong legal battle in federal court. After Brunckhorst’s daughter Barbara died in 2020, her will stipulated that the lion’s share of her stake in the company go to environmental charities and neuroscience research. Bischoff’s grandson claims that Brunckhorst’s shares are actually his. How much the company actually makes is anyone’s guess. Court records suggest annual revenue is north of $1 billion. Despite the current crisis, the company maintains its fans. A friend who grew up working at a family deli — his winter jacket is a Carhartt with the Boar’s Head branding — sent me a picture of a recent party in Philadelphia. In the photo, cold cuts sat under a custom poster of the Boar’s Head logo, in which the brand’s swine has bloodshot eyes and appears to be foaming at the mouth. “I’d rather get the toxin / than eat Dietz & Watson,” read the caption. For those slightly less obsessed with deli meat — but still concerned about the “toxin” — food-safety expert Amanda Lathrop recommends vigilance in food prep. “Listeria is ubiquitous, so it is found pretty much everywhere,” said Lathrop, a professor at California Polytechnic State University. “It is this incredible organism that’s really hearty, so it can tolerate really cold temperatures, it can tolerate really high salt contents. It can grow at refrigeration temperature.” Another incredible aspect of listeria? “It can infect the human body by transversing the stomach lining, and it kind of moves from cell to cell,” said Lathrop. “It just really can evade the human’s immune system as well as things like antibiotics.” For most people, listeriosis will just cause uncomfortable but short-term symptoms like diarrhea, vomiting, and headaches. “It’s really the elderly folks, people who are immunocompromised, and particularly pregnant women who have the most kind of devastating effects,” said Lathrop. Sign Up for the Intelligencer Newsletter Daily news about the politics, business, and technology shaping our world.

Agriculture
Business
Crisis

Suggested Viewing

Sustainable Living with Patrick Lang

A day in the life of Patrick Lang living a sustainable life in Malibu… filmed before his home and community were consumed by fire in the fall of 2018.

Sustainable
Land Use
Solutions

Chicken Soup for the Soil

Chicken Soup for the Soil follows the journey of North Carolina farmers Rachel Herrick and Suzanne Nelson Karreman as they work to rehabilitate farm soil ecosystems one pasture at a time. We learn that animals are not commodities and insects are not pests. They are partners in regenerating the soil. These are grassroots farms working with Nature to help Nature bounce back.

Land Use
Agriculture
Climate

Modern Nature

By 2050, 10 billion people may inhabit Earth. Do we need GMOs to Feed the World? Is organic production the answer? Modern Nature takes the viewer on a worldwide odyssey to find answers. Includes perspectives from philosopher Noam Chomsky, physicist Vandana Shiva and street farmer Ron Finley.

Food
Agriculture
Business

Better Bites with Bugs

The practice of eating bugs -- entomophagy -- has a lot to commend it. You may disagree. But try to put your preconceptions aside!

Agriculture
Food

Ground Operations: Battlefields to Farmfields

Combat veterans from the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan find a new mission and personal healing with new careers as organic farmers and ranchers.

Health
Agriculture
Government

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.