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

N.Y.C. Streets Won’t Be Like This Forever (for Better or Worse)

News Feed
Monday, September 30, 2024

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.N.Y.C. Streets Won’t Be Like This Forever (for Better or Worse)New York City is constantly changing, opening the door to both new battles over traffic and radical solutions.Herald Square in 1986.Credit...Eddie Hausner/The New York TimesSept. 30, 2024, 3:00 a.m. ETThis is Street Wars, a weekly series on the battle for space on New York’s streets and sidewalks.For now, this is the final installment of Street Wars. But to be clear: The battle for space on New York City’s streets is not over.It’s obvious to anyone on New York’s streets — in buses, on foot, on bikes or in cars — that the current situation feels unsustainable.Street-space conflicts are brewing in all parts of the city, and we — and you — should keep an eye on them.Right now, New York has not only the worst traffic in the United States, but also the worst traffic in the world.In addition to being annoying, traffic is an environmental and public health issue.Idling motors contribute to air pollution that is bad for our lungs. And as a new study has found, record slow speeds caused by congestion have resulted in significant increases in emergency response times. A delayed fire truck or ambulance can be a matter of life and death.And there are other battles brewing.Brooklyn is embroiled in several major fights, including one over the use of Underhill and Vanderbilt Avenues, and another about the dangerous thoroughfare of McGuinness Boulevard.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

New York City is constantly changing, opening the door to both new battles over traffic and radical solutions.

You have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.

N.Y.C. Streets Won’t Be Like This Forever (for Better or Worse)

New York City is constantly changing, opening the door to both new battles over traffic and radical solutions.

Herald Square in 1986.Credit...Eddie Hausner/The New York Times

This is Street Wars, a weekly series on the battle for space on New York’s streets and sidewalks.

For now, this is the final installment of Street Wars. But to be clear: The battle for space on New York City’s streets is not over.

It’s obvious to anyone on New York’s streets — in buses, on foot, on bikes or in cars — that the current situation feels unsustainable.

Street-space conflicts are brewing in all parts of the city, and we — and you — should keep an eye on them.

Right now, New York has not only the worst traffic in the United States, but also the worst traffic in the world.

In addition to being annoying, traffic is an environmental and public health issue.

Idling motors contribute to air pollution that is bad for our lungs. And as a new study has found, record slow speeds caused by congestion have resulted in significant increases in emergency response times. A delayed fire truck or ambulance can be a matter of life and death.

And there are other battles brewing.

Brooklyn is embroiled in several major fights, including one over the use of Underhill and Vanderbilt Avenues, and another about the dangerous thoroughfare of McGuinness Boulevard.

We are having trouble retrieving the article content.

Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.

Thank you for your patience while we verify access.

Already a subscriber? Log in.

Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Related News

Eating less sugar would be great for the planet as well as our health

"Globally, sugar intake has quadrupled over the last 60 years . . ."

Sugar addiction is on the rise. Globally, sugar intake has quadrupled over the last 60 years, and it now makes up around 8% of all our calories. This sounds like sugar's keeping us fed, but added sugars are actually empty calories – they are bereft of any nutrients like vitamins or fibers. The result is massive health costs, with sugars linked to obesity around the world. Some estimates suggest that half the global population could be obese by 2035. A limited 20% reduction in sugar is estimated to save US$10.3 billion (£8.1 billion) of health costs in the US alone. Yet, sugar's impacts go far beyond just health and money. There are also many environmental problems from growing the sugar, like habitat and biodiversity loss and water pollution from fertilizers and mills. But overall, sugar hasn't received a lot of attention from the scientific community despite being the largest cultivated crop by mass on the planet. In a recent article, we evaluated sugar's environmental impacts and explored avenues for reducing sugar in the diet to recommended levels either through reducing production or using the saved sugar in environmentally beneficial ways. By phasing out sugar, we could spare land that could be rewilded and stock up on carbon. This is especially important in biodiverse tropical regions where sugar production is concentrated such as Brazil and India. But a different, more politically palatable option might be redirecting sugar away from diets to other environmentally-beneficial uses such as bioplastics or biofuels. Our study shows that the biggest opportunity is using sugar to feed microbes that make protein. Using saved sugar for this microbial protein could produce enough plant-based, protein-rich food products to regularly feed 521 million people. And if this replaced animal protein it could also have huge emission and water benefits. We estimate that if this protein replaced chicken, it could reduce emissions by almost 250 million tons, and we'd see even bigger savings for replacing beef (for reference, the UK's national fossil fuel emissions are around 300 million tons). Given sugar has a far lower climate impact than meat, this makes a lot of sense. Another alternative is to use the redirected sugar to produce bioplastics, which would replace around 20% of the total market for polyethelyne, one of the most common forms of plastic and used to produce anything from packaging to pipes. Or to produce biofuels, producing around 198 million barrels of ethanol for transportation. Brazil already produces around 85% of the world's ethanol and they produce it from sugar, but instead of having to grow more sugar for ethanol we could redirect the sugar from diets instead. This estimation is based on a world where we reduce dietary sugar to the maximum in dietary recommendations (5% of daily calories). The benefits would be even larger if we reduced sugar consumption even further. Supply chain challenges This sounds like a big win-win: cut sugar to reduce obesity and help the environment. But these changes present a huge challenge in a sugar supply chain spanning more than 100 countries and the millions of people that depend on sugar's income. National policies like sugar taxes are vital, but having international coordination is also important in such a sprawling supply chain. Sustainable agriculture is being discussed at the UN's climate summit, Cop29, in Azerbaijan this week. Sustainable sugar production should factor into these global talks given the many environmental problems and opportunities from changing the way we grow and consume sugar. We also suggest that groups of countries could come together in sugar transition partnerships between producers and consumers that encourage a diversion of sugar away from peoples' diets to more beneficial uses. This could be coordinated by the World Health Organization which has called for a reduction in sugar consumption. Some of the money to fund these efforts could even come from part of the health savings in national budgets. We can't hope to transition the way we produce and eat sugar overnight. But by exploring other uses of sugar, we can highlight what environmental benefits we are missing out on and help policymakers map a resource-efficient path forward to the industry while improving public health.   Don't have time to read about climate change as much as you'd like? Get a weekly roundup in your inbox instead. Every Wednesday, The Conversation's environment editor writes Imagine, a short email that goes a little deeper into just one climate issue. Join the 40,000+ readers who've subscribed so far. Paul Behrens, British Academy Global Professor, Future of Food, Oxford Martin School, University of Oxford and Alon Shepon, Principal Investigator, Department of Environmental Studies, Tel Aviv University This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Health
Agriculture
Climate

CDC warns cruise passengers of hot tub disease outbreak

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has alerted cruise-goers of the dangers of hot tub usage on ships. The post CDC warns cruise passengers of hot tub disease outbreak appeared first on SA People.

CDC issues warning of hot tub-caused Legionnaires’ Disease The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recently released a health warning following an outbreak of Legionnaires’ Disease among passengers who had been on cruises.  As reported by Travel News, the CDC found that a number of cases of Legionnaires’ Disease were connected by an unnamed cruise ship, between November 2022 and April 2024 of this year. Private outdoor hot tubs on the balconies of two cruise ships were pinpointed as the source of the bacteria for multiple infections between the period, as stated in a report last month from the CDC. “Epidemiologic, environmental and laboratory evidence suggests that private balcony hot tubs were the likely source of exposure in two outbreaks of Legionnaires’ disease among cruise ship passengers,” the CDC said in the report.   “These devices are subject to less stringent operating requirements than public hot tubs, and operating protocols were insufficient to prevent Legionella growth.” they added. What is Legionnaires’ Disease? According to Cleveland Clinic: “Legionnaires’ disease is a serious type of pneumonia you get when Legionella bacteria infect your lungs. Symptoms include high fever, cough, diarrhea and confusion. You can get Legionnaires’ disease from water or cooling systems in large buildings, like hospitals or hotels.” Legionella is found naturally in lakes, streams and soil, but it can also contaminate drinking water and air systems, especially in large buildings. You can breathe small droplets of water directly into your lungs, or water in your mouth can get into your lungs accidentally You also have an increased risk of getting Legionnaires’ disease if you: Are older than 50. Smoke or used to smoke cigarettes. Have a weakened immune system. Certain medical conditions (like HIV, diabetes, cancer and kidney or liver disease) and medications can compromise your immune system. Have a long-term respiratory illness, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or emphysema. Live in a long-term care facility. Have stayed in a hospital recently. Have had surgery requiring anesthesia recently. Have received an organ transplant recently. The post CDC warns cruise passengers of hot tub disease outbreak appeared first on SA People.

Health
Water

TCEQ to hold public permit renewal meeting for Houston concrete plant with past compliance issues

The Torres Brothers Ready Mix plant has “a history of violations,” according to the Harris County Attorney’s Office. Air Alliance Houston is urging community members to attend the Monday night meeting.

Katie Watkins/Houston Public MediaMany concrete batch plant facilities have permits to operate 24 hours a day. Residents will often complain of the bright lights and noise at night.The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality will hear public comments on the permit renewal of a concrete plant with a history of water and air pollution issues. "They have a history of noncompliance," said Crystal Ngo, environmental justice outreach coordinator with Air Alliance Houston. Over the course of three visits from 2021 through 2024, Harris County Pollution Control Services documented "significant violations" of the state's clean air and water laws at the Torres Brothers Ready Mix plant in South Houston. The Harris County Attorney's Office argued the plant is "unable to comply" with the conditions of its permit and state laws. The county is involved in ongoing litigation with the company and seeks more than $1 million in relief. Torres Brothers did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The plant is one of five in the area. TCEQ doesn't consider the cumulative impact of separate facilities in its permitting process. Instead, it examines the compliance of individual sites. Ngo pointed to public health concerns related to air, water, noise and particulate matter pollution, as well as noise and light nuisances. "With so many concrete batch planets within environmental justice communities, predominantly communities of color, this higher exposure is just disproportionate to more affluent neighborhoods in Houston," Ngo said. The meeting is scheduled for 7 p.m. Monday, Nov. 18, at the Hiram Clarke Multi-Service Center.

Health
Pollution
Water

Standing Desks Are Better for Your Health—but Still Not Enough

Two recent studies offer some of the most nuanced evidence yet about the potential benefits and risks of working on your feet.

Without question, inactivity is bad for us. Prolonged sitting is consistently linked to higher risks of cardiovascular disease and death. The obvious response to this frightful fate is to not sit—move. Even a few moments of exercise can have benefits, studies suggest. But in our modern times, sitting is hard to avoid, especially at the office. This has led to a range of strategies to get ourselves up, including the rise of standing desks. If you have to be tethered to a desk, at least you can do it while on your feet, the thinking goes.However, studies on whether standing desks are beneficial have been sparse and sometimes inconclusive. Furthermore, prolonged standing can have its own risks, and data on work-related sitting has also been mixed. While the final verdict on standing desks is still unclear, two studies out this year offer some of the most nuanced evidence yet about the potential benefits and risks of working on your feet.Take a SeatScience NewsletterYour weekly roundup of the best stories on health care, the climate crisis, new scientific discoveries, and more. Delivered on Wednesdays.For years, studies have pointed to standing desks improving markers for cardiovascular and metabolic health, such as lipid levels, insulin resistance, and arterial flow-mediated dilation (the ability of arteries to widen in response to increased blood flow). But it's unclear how significant those improvements are to averting bad health outcomes, such as heart attacks. One 2018 analysis suggested the benefits might be minor.And there are fair reasons to be skeptical about standing desks. For one, standing—like sitting—is not moving. If a lack of movement and exercise is the root problem, standing still wouldn't be a solution.Yet, while sitting and standing can arguably be combined into the single category of “stationary,” some researchers have argued that not all sitting is the same. In a 2018 position paper published in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, two health experts argued that the link between poor health and sitting could come down to the specific populations being examined and “the special contribution” of “sitting time at home, for example, the ‘couch potato effect.’”The two researchers—emeritus professors David Rempel, formerly at the University of California, San Francisco, and Niklas Krause, formerly of UCLA—pointed to several studies looking specifically at occupational sitting time and poor health outcomes, which have arrived at mixed results. For instance, a 2013 analysis did not find a link between sitting at work and cardiovascular disease. Though the study did suggest a link to mortality, the link was only among women. There was also a 2015 study on about 36,500 workers in Japan who were followed for an average of 10 years. That study found that there was no link between mortality and sitting time among salaried workers, professionals, and people who worked at home businesses. However, there was a link between mortality and sitting among people who worked in farming, forestry, and fishing industries.Still, despite some murkiness in the specifics, more recent studies continue to turn up a link between total prolonged sitting—wherever that sitting occurs—and poor health outcomes, particularly cardiovascular disease. This has kept up interest in standing desks in offices, where people don't always have the luxury of frequent movement breaks. And this, in turn, has kept researchers on their toes to try to answer whether there is any benefit to standing desks.

Health
Business
Crisis

Breathing Dirty Air Might Raise Eczema Risks

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Nov. 15, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- Cases of the autoimmune skin condition eczema appear to rise in areas...

By Ernie Mundell HealthDay ReporterFRIDAY, Nov. 15, 2024 (HealthDay News) -- Cases of the autoimmune skin condition eczema appear to rise in areas most plagued by air pollution, new research shows.Since data has long shown that rates of eczema -- clinically known as atopic dermatitis -- increase along with industrialization, dirty air might be a connecting link, according to the team from Yale University.“Showing that individuals in the United States who are exposed to particulate matter [in air] are more likely to have eczema deepens our understanding of the important health implications of ambient air pollution," wrote researchers led by Yale School of Medicine investigator Gloria Chen.Her team published its findings Nov. 13 in the journal PLOS ONE.According to the National Eczema Association, over 31 million Americans have the skin disorder, "a group of inflammatory skin conditions that cause itchiness, dry skin, rashes, scaly patches, blisters and skin infections."The exact causes of eczema aren't clear, but it's thought to originate in an an overactive immune system that responds to certain environmental triggers.Could air pollution be one of those triggers?To find out, the Yale team looked at data on almost 287,000 Americans, about 12,700 of who (4.4%) had an eczema diagnosis.They compared local eczema rates against levels of air pollution in zip codes across the United States.Chen's team focused especially on what's known as "fine particulate matter" -- microscopic bits of pollution that can get deep into the lungs with each breath.The result: With every increase of 10 micrograms of fine particulate matter per square meter of air that was recorded in a zip code, residents' odds for eczema doubled, the Yale group found.That risk assessment held even after the researchers factored in other possible triggers, including smoking.The study couldn't prove a cause and effect relationship, only associations. But the team pointed to similar findings from studies conducted in places as varied as Australia, Germany and Taiwan.Besides playing a role in the development of eczema, "individuals [already diagnosed] with eczema may be at elevated risk for disease exacerbation or acute flares" when local air quality declines, the researchers wrote.On very smoggy days, "patients may be advised to stay indoors, filter indoor air or cover exposed skin outdoors," Chen and colleagues added.SOURCE: PLOS ONE, Nov. 14, 2024Copyright © 2024 HealthDay. All rights reserved.

Health
Pollution

Suggested Viewing

Sprayed

An exploration of what happens when whole communities get exposed to toxins: Naled sprayed on Miami residents to fight Zika virus, Agent Orange sprayed on the Vietcong, and release of GMO mosquitoes in Brazil with pyriproxyfen added to drinking water to fight dengue. What are the results for nature and humanity? We meet Agent Orange survivors at Vietnamese detoxification and rehabilitation centers, parents of babies born with microcephaly from Zika virus, and Florida residents dealing with efforts to kill mosquitoes carrying Zika virus. Perspectives of doctors, scientists, and politicians are balanced with voices of ordinary citizens and victims to explore concerns about the potential impact on current and future generations.

Chemicals
Health
Science

STOPPING THE NEXT PANDEMIC

Stopping the next pandemic is a new challenge to the most prominent scientists. Their field studies around the world are showing that our health as humans depends on animal and environmental health. Diseases that occur in the remotest places are now our concern. We live in a connected world. We will have to preserve the environment to prevent future pandemics.

Health
Science

Red Bean

An individual who is suffering from the obsessive-compulsive disorder and forced to migrate to outer space, he misses his mother and homeland. However, the only response to his calling his mother is an endless busy tone.

Cosmos
Health
Culture

Riding Bikes with the Dutch

Michael Bauch, a Long Beach resident and independent filmmaker, noticed that many of his local errands involved short rides which were less than three miles. In the summer of 2007 he and his family went to Amsterdam, to document the biking and walking culture that is so natural to the Dutch people. The film suggests that we in the U.S. re-examine our view of bicycles.

Transportation
Culture
Health

In His Own Home

Heavily armed officers of the University of Florida police department in Gainesville, FL, responding to a 911 call from a neighbor who heard screams, break into the campus apartment of Ghanaian graduate student, Kofi Adu-Brempong. Clad in SWAT gear and ready to attack, they see the disabled doctoral student, sitting with a metal table leg in his hand and within a minute of entry, shoot the unarmed man in the face. Adu-Brempong, who because of childhood polio, needed a cane to walk, and had been suffering from mental illness, now has severe facial injuries, and is charged with resisting arrest. He is guarded outside his hospital door, his legs shackled together when going to the bathroom. The officer who shoots Kofi, and who had previously been caught cruising through town throwing eggs at residents of a Black neighborhood, is not suspended or fired. Student protests lead the administration to drop charges but calls for revoking SWAT-like teams on campus go unheard. Kofi’s shooting is not an isolated incident but part of an ongoing pattern of police brutality against Blacks and a stark reminder of the dangers of increasingly militarized campuses nationwide. In His Own Home came out of outrage by a small group of concerned community members committed to seeing social justice happen on a local level. This documentary is an educational and organizing tool, especially calling for our communities to be safe from violence by racist and over-armed police.

Social Justice
Health
Activism

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.