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.

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

News Feed
Friday, January 10, 2025

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

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

After months — and, for some, years — of anticipation, congestion pricing is live in New York City. 

The controversial policy, which essentially makes it more expensive to drive into the busiest part of Manhattan, has been floated as a way to reduce traffic and raise money for the city’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which runs the city’s subways and buses, since the 1970s. But it wasn’t until 2017 that it seemed like it might finally catch on

Still, getting it implemented has been an uphill battle. Last summer, New York Governor Kathy Hochul abruptly paused a carefully crafted plan that would have implemented $15 tolls on drivers heading into Manhattan below 60th Street, a mere 25 days before the plan would have gone into effect. Months later, in November, she said she would unpause the plan with lower tolls: $9 for passenger vehicles during peak hours and $2.25 during off-peak. After all the hubbub, New York City made history just after midnight on Sunday, January 5, when the cameras used to enforce the tolls turned on. 

With this move, New York City becomes the first U.S. city to experiment with congestion pricing tolls, and joins a small cohort of other major cities — London, Stockholm, and Singapore — trying to disincentivize driving in order to unlock safer streets and a host of other environmental benefits.

Environmental and public transit advocates praise congestion pricing because it pushes drivers to reconsider whether getting behind the wheel is really the easiest way to get around the city. With fewer cars on the road, congestion pricing promises shorter commute times for those who do drive — and better public transit options, since the money raised by congestion pricing will fund capital improvements by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, or MTA. 

But the policy has not been without its naysayers. One New York City councilmember — Republican Vickie Paladino — appeared to encourage her followers on X (formerly Twitter) to damage the tolling cameras with lasers. Congestion pricing detractors say that tolls are burdensome. Of course, in some way, this is the point: to make driving slightly less appealing and incentivize alternative modes of transportation. 

Proponents say these are worthwhile costs to fund meaningful improvements to New Yorkers’ lives — like safer streets and cleaner air. 

“At this point, across much of the country, cars are so ingrained into American culture that we don’t always think of them as environmental hazards, but of course they are,” said Alexa Sledge, director of communications for Transportation Alternatives, an advocacy group focused on street safety in New York City. “So a major goal of our climate policy has to be getting people out of cars and on public transit, onto buses, onto bikes, onto trips on foot.” These less carbon-intensive modes of transit, she says, are “always going to be substantially more environmentally friendly.”

A yellow New York City taxicab goes by in front of a hotel
Cars pass under E-ZPass readers and license plate-scanning cameras on 5th Avenue in Manhattan as congestion pricing takes effect in New York City.
Kena Betancur / AFP via Getty Images

One of the main selling points of congestion pricing, besides reducing traffic, is improving air quality. Fewer cars on the road means fewer cars emitting exhaust in the nation’s most densely populated city — and less traffic also means that less time spent idling. 

An environmental assessment of congestion pricing published in 2023 estimated the impact tolls would have on a number of air pollutants, including carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter, and benzene. These chemicals have been linked to health problems including heart disease, respiratory issues, cognitive impairment, and increased risk of cancer. The assessment also looked at the impact tolls would have on greenhouse gases. It analyzed these impacts at a regional level, looking at 12 different counties across New York and New Jersey, and projected how big or small the change in pollutants would be by 2045. 

The report found that, with congestion pricing, Manhattan would see a 4.36 percent reduction in daily vehicle-miles traveled by 2045. This would lead to sizable reductions in air pollutants in Manhattan, especially in the central business district (the area drivers must pay a toll to enter). For example, per the environmental assessment’s modeling, the central business district would see a 10.72 percent drop in carbon dioxide equivalents by 2045, as well as a similar drop in fine particular matter, and slightly lower drops in nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide (5.89 percent and 6.55 percent, respectively). 

When you zoom out, the benefits become sparser, but are still meaningful: The assessment found that, across the 12 New York and New Jersey counties included in its analysis, carbon dioxide equivalents would fall by 0.8 percent by 2045. Those 12 counties have a collective population of roughly 14 million.

It’s worth noting that real-life impacts will likely differ from these estimates — and it will take robust data collection to see exactly how. The environmental assessment based these projections off a congestion pricing scenario that’s actually slightly more ambitious than the one in place today, with peak tolls for passenger vehicles priced at $9 and off-peak tolls at $7. But the tolls for drivers that Hochul signed off on will ramp up over time. By 2028, peak tolls will be $12, and by 2031, they’ll reach $15.

“The most important thing is to start,” said Andy Darrell, regional director of New York at the Environmental Defense Fund, who was optimistic that real-life benefits may surpass these projections over time. “And it’s important to monitor the effects going forward and then be able to adjust the program as we go. And I think that’s exactly what’s happening now.”

A man walks in front of a sign announcing the start of congestion pricing in New York City, his face blurred.
A congestion pricing warning sign on 5th Avenue in Manhattan.
Kena Betancur / AFP via Getty Images

Eric Goldstein, the New York City environmental director at the National Resources Defense Council, was similarly confident about congestion pricing’s benefits. Over email, he said, “Even if the reduction in traditional air pollutants and global warming emissions are modest from implementation of congestion pricing, the indirect air quality benefits will be substantial over the long term,” adding that congestion pricing will “provide a jolt of adrenaline to the region’s subway, bus, and commuter rail system that moves the overwhelming majority of people into and out of Manhattan.”

The environmental assessment also found that, as a result of congestion pricing, traffic may increase in other parts of the city, like the Bronx, where neighborhoods like the South Bronx already suffer from disproportionately high rates of asthma. To offset this, the MTA has promised to fund several mitigation efforts, such as replacing diesel-fueled trucks around Hunts Point, a bustling food distribution facility, with cleaner models. It will also install air filtration systems at schools located near highways, plant more trees near roads, and establish a Bronx asthma center. 

These efforts, however, have done little to reassure local community members. In November, South Bronx Unite, a coalition centered on social and environmental justice, called New York City’s revived congestion pricing plan a “death blow” for the South Bronx and said the mitigation efforts do not go far enough to address the root causes of pollution in the area. “We welcome all pollution mitigation measures for the South Bronx and for any pollution-burdened community, but they should not be dangled in front of us as a bargaining chip for adding more pollution to the area,” Arif Ullah, the group’s executive director, told reporters.    

Beyond cleaner air for most of the region, congestion pricing is likely to have other environmental and climate benefits. For example, the money raised by congestion pricing tolls will allow the MTA to access $15 billion in financing for capital improvements, such as making subway stations more accessible. These sorts of upgrades, while not technically designed with climate change in mind, make the subway safer and more efficient to use — and that matters when extreme weather strikes. Sledge, from Transportation Alternatives, said: “People really do rely on our subway system to get them where they need to go, and if there is a mass weather event, then that’s really scary and really difficult.”

In September 2023, rainstorms caused flash flooding in New York City, overwhelming the subway system in many places. After Hochul declared a state of emergency due to the extreme rainfall, the MTA warned of disruptions “across our network” and advised people to stay home if they could. Climate change makes extreme rainfall more likely because rising ocean temperatures lead to more water evaporating into the air. As Sledge notes, these weather events are “obviously only getting more and more common” as global temperatures keep rising. “So anything we can do to mitigate this is going to be extremely important as we move forward.”

Technically speaking, the funds raised by congestion pricing will only be spent on capital improvements included in the MTA’s 2020-2024 capital plan; the agency will likely need to raise another $6 billion to fund its climate resilience roadmap, which includes things like elevating subway vents to prevent storm surges from flooding subway stations. 

But experts agreed that improving the public transit system is critical to achieving New York City’s climate goals. “For a very densely populated region like the New York metropolitan region, that investment in transit is fundamental to achieving our climate goals and our air quality goals,” said Darrell from the Environmental Defense Fund. 

The National Resources Defense Council’s Goldstein agreed: “Ultimately, if we can’t adequately fund this public transit system so that it provides safe, reliable and efficient service, the region’s environment, as well as its economy, is certain to decline.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The climate benefits of NYC’s hard-won congestion pricing plan on Jan 10, 2025.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

USDA Continues to Roll Out Deeper Cuts to Farm Grants: A List

Over the past several weeks, farmers and farm groups with USDA grant contracts have been reeling from uncertainty caused by the agency’s funding freeze. At the same time, cancellation letters terminating individual grant contracts based on stated commitments to equity and diversity began to trickle in. Now, deeper cuts are coming into focus. Last night, […] The post USDA Continues to Roll Out Deeper Cuts to Farm Grants: A List appeared first on Civil Eats.

Over the past several weeks, farmers and farm groups with USDA grant contracts have been reeling from uncertainty caused by the agency’s funding freeze. At the same time, cancellation letters terminating individual grant contracts based on stated commitments to equity and diversity began to trickle in. Now, deeper cuts are coming into focus. Last night, Marcia Brown at Politico reported the agency officially ended two local food programs expanded under Biden to connect small farms to school meals and hunger assistance programs like food banks. Organizations with active contracts in those programs told Civil Eats they were devastated by the cuts. And more cuts are likely: According to an internal USDA document viewed by Civil Eats, staff that cover programs under the agency’s Farm Production and Conservation mission area were given a flowchart to help them determine which funds to continue to distribute and which contracts to refer for potential cancellation. The document confirms the agency’s review of grant contracts to determine if they include “DEIA or EJ” (diversity, equity, inclusion, accessibility or environmental justice) and whether they were funded by the Inflation Reduction Act and include energy or conservation. The chart directs staff to send contracts funded by IRA money that meet certain criteria to the Office of Management and Budget to review. It directs staff to send contracts with other sources of funding that meet certain criteria to the Office of Secretary Rollins to “decide on whether to terminate the agreement or modify the scope of work.” This is a developing story. Civil Eats is compiling a list of grant program cancellations and pauses, below, and will continue to update the list as more information becomes available. This list is based on cancellations and pauses reported directly to Civil Eats. Email tracker@civileats.com to submit a tip.  Full Programs Reportedly Ended to Date Working Lands Conservation Corps Local Food for Schools and Child Care Cooperative Agreement (LFSCC) Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement program (LFPA) Individual Contract Cancellations Reported Within Program Farmers Market Promotion Program (FMPP) Equity in Conservation Outreach Program Funding Disbursements for Active Contracts Reported Paused  Partnerships for Climate-Smart Commodities Program Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) Rural Energy Assistance Program (REAP) Local Food Promotion Program (LFPP) Organic Market Development Grants The post USDA Continues to Roll Out Deeper Cuts to Farm Grants: A List appeared first on Civil Eats.

In Another Climate and Money Withdrawal, US Pulls Out of Climate Damage Compensation Fund

The Trump administration has told world financial institutions that the U.S. is pulling out of the landmark international climate Loss and Damage Fund

Formalizing another withdrawal from both climate and foreign aid programs, the Trump administration has told world financial institutions that the U.S is pulling out of the landmark international climate Loss and Damage Fund.Climate analysts Monday were critical of the Treasury Department's decision to formally pull out from the fund designed as compensation for damage by polluting nations to poor countries especially hurt by the extreme storms, heat and drought caused by the burning of coal, oil and gas. A Treasury official said in a letter last week that the U. S. board members of the fund were resigning but gave no reason for the withdrawal.“It’s a great shame to see the U.S. going back on its promises," said Mohamed Adow, founder of Power Shift Africa and a veteran of United Nations climate negotiations. "This decision will result in great suffering for some of the poorest and most vulnerable people in the world. These people have contributed the least to the climate emergency they are now living through.”The Treasury did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment.When the fund was agreed upon in 2022, then-President Joe Biden pledged that the U.S., the world's biggest historic carbon dioxide emitter, would contribute $17.5 million. A dozen countries that have polluted less — Australia, Austria, Denmark, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, the United Arab Emirates and the United Kingdom — and the European Union have pledged more than the U.S.The two biggest pledges — $104 million — came from Italy and France. As of January, the Loss and Damage Fund had $741.42 million in pledges, according to the United Nations.“The Trump administration’s withdrawal from the Loss and Damage Fund is yet another cruel action that will hurt climate vulnerable lower income nations the most," said Rachel Cleetus, policy director of the climate and energy program at the Union of Concerned Scientists. “The richest nation and the world’s biggest contributor to global heat-trapping emissions is choosing to punch down and walk away from its responsibility toward nations that have contributed the least to the climate crisis and yet are bearing an unjust burden from it.”Poorer nations, often in the global south, had long framed the fund as one of environmental justice. It was an idea that the U.S. and many rich nations blocked until 2022, when they accepted the creation but insisted it was not reparations.“Three long decades and we have finally delivered climate justice,” Seve Paeniu, the finance minister of Tuvalu, said when the UN climate negotiations established the fund. “We have finally responded to the call of hundreds of millions of people across the world to help them address loss and damage.”The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

Transportation secretary rescinds Biden memos prioritizing infrastructure resilience to climate change

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy rescinded memos from the Biden administration prioritizing infrastructure resilience to climate change, according to a Monday press release. According to the press release from the department, the announcement about the rescinding came from Duffy on Monday. The department said the memos “displaced the long-standing authorities granted to States by law, added...

Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy rescinded memos from the Biden administration prioritizing infrastructure resilience to climate change, according to a Monday press release. According to the press release from the department, the announcement about the rescinding came from Duffy on Monday. The department said the memos “displaced the long-standing authorities granted to States by law, added meritless and costly burdens related to greenhouse gas emissions and equity initiatives.” The Trump Transportation Department also put forth a memo of its own dated last Friday in which it called the memos “controversial” and asked for their rescinding. Webpages for the memos on the Federal Highway Administration’s (FWHA) website are both currently displaying “Page Not Found.”  According to a Government Accountability Office report from 2022, one of the memos from 2021 had aims including pushing for states to “invest in projects that upgrade the condition of streets, highways and bridges and make them safe for all users” and “modernizing” those same pieces of infrastructure to make the transport network “more sustainable and resilient to a changing climate.” An archived version of the other memo, which is from 2023, also states that the FWHA would carry on with focusing on “infrastructure that is less vulnerable and more resilient to a changing climate.” The 2021 memo was also superseded by the 2023 memo. Duffy said in the release that his department “is getting back to basics — building critical infrastructure projects that move people and move commerce safely.”  “The previous administration flouted Congress in an attempt to push a radical social and environmental agenda on the American people,” he continued. “This was an act of federal overreach. It stops now.”

Study Says Climate Change Will Even Make Earth's Orbit a Mess

A new study finds that climate change is already causing all sorts of problems on Earth, but soon it will be making a mess in orbit around the planet too

Climate change is already causing all sorts of problems on Earth, but soon it will be making a mess in orbit around the planet too, a new study finds.MIT researchers calculated that as global warming caused by burning of coal, oil, gas continues it may reduce the available space for satellites in low Earth orbit by anywhere from one-third to 82% by the end of the century, depending on how much carbon pollution is spewed. That's because space will become more littered with debris as climate change lessens nature's way of cleaning it up.Part of the greenhouse effect that warms the air near Earth's surface also cools the upper parts of the atmosphere where space starts and satellites zip around in low orbit, That cooling also makes the upper atmosphere less dense, which reduces the drag on the millions of pieces of human-made debris and satellites.That drag pulls space junk down to Earth, burning up on the way. But a cooler and less dense upper atmosphere means less space cleaning itself. That means that space gets more crowded, according to a study in Monday's journal Nature Sustainability.“We rely on the atmosphere to clean up our debris. There’s no other way to remove debris,” said study lead author Will Parker, an astrodynamics researcher at MIT. “It’s trash. It’s garbage. And there are millions of pieces of it.”Circling Earth are millions of pieces of debris about one-ninth of an inch (3 millimeters) and larger — the width of two stacked pennies — and those collide with the energy of a bullet. There are tens of thousands of plum-sized pieces of space junk that hit with the power of a crashing bus, according to The Aerospace Corporation, which monitors orbital debris. That junk includes results of old space crashes and parts of rockets with most of it too small to be tracked.“There used to be this this mantra that space is big. And so we can we can sort of not necessarily be good stewards of the environment because the environment is basically unlimited,” Parker said. But a 2009 crash of two satellites created thousands of pieces of space junk. Also NASA measurements are showing measurable the reduction of drag, so scientists now realize that that “the climate change component is really important,” Parker said.The density at 250 miles (400 kilometers) above Earth is decreasing by about 2% a decade and is likely to get intensify as society pumps more greenhouse gas into the atmosphere, said Ingrid Cnossen, a space weather scientist at the British Antarctic Survey who was not part of the research. Cnossen said in an email that the new study makes “perfect sense” and is why scientists have to be aware of climate change's orbital effects “so that appropriate measures can be taken to ensure its long-term sustainability.”The Associated Press’ climate and environmental coverage receives financial support from multiple private foundations. AP is solely responsible for all content. Find AP’s standards for working with philanthropies, a list of supporters and funded coverage areas at AP.org.Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See - Feb. 2025

What Kind of Workout Clothes Are Best for the Environment?

Every fabric has an environmental cost. Here’s how to make informed choices.

Chances are, your favorite exercise attire is synthetic, made from petroleum-based fibers like nylon, spandex and polyester. Materials that don’t exactly scream “climate friendly.”Natural fibers have issues, too: Growing cotton can use huge amounts of water and pesticides, the sheep that give us wool emit methane, and processing bamboo can produce a lot of pollution. Altogether, the apparel and footwear industries account for more than 8 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions.So if you want to keep your body fit while also keeping the planet healthy, what should you do?Consider recycled fibersThere’s a lot of plastic polluting our lands and waters. Some companies have capitalized on that, melting down plastic waste and extruding it into yarn.Karen Leonas, a professor of textile sciences at North Carolina State University, said those materials could be a good choice for workout clothes.“Any time you can find something that contains recycled fibers, that’s definitely a plus,” she said. “Whether you’re looking at climate, water, solid waste or even social sustainability issues.”Lewis Perkins, president of the nonprofit Apparel Impact Institute, also said he liked recycled fibers. But he cautioned that they’re a “transitional solution,” as he believes the ultimate goal should be reducing the prevalence of single-use plastic in the first place.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.

Suggested Viewing

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.