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 race to save glacial ice records before they melt away

News Feed
Sunday, July 14, 2024

When Margit Schwikowski helicoptered up to Switzerland’s Corbassière glacier in 2020, it was clear that things weren’t right. “It was very warm. I mean, we were at 4,100 meters and it should be sub-zero temperatures,” she says. Instead, the team started to sweat as they lugged their ice core drill around, and the snow was sticky. “I thought, ‘This has never happened before.’” What Schwikowski couldn’t see yet, but would find later in the lab, is that it wasn’t just the surface that was affected: Climate change had penetrated the ice and trashed its utility as an environmental record. Warming weather had created meltwater that trickled down, washing away trapped aerosols that researchers like her use as a historical record of forest fires and other environmental events. Because of the melt, she says, “we really lose this information.” Schwikowski, an environmental chemist at the Paul Scherrer Institut near Zurich, is the scientific lead for the Ice Memory Foundation, a collaborative group that aims to preserve glacial ice records before climate change wrecks them. Their goal is to get cores from 20 glaciers around the world in 20 years, and, starting in 2025, lock them away for long-term storage in an ice cave in the Antarctic — a natural freezer that will hold them at close to minus 60 degrees F (minus 50 degrees C). Since the program’s start in 2015 they have taken cores from eight sites, in France, Bolivia, Switzerland, Russia, Norway, and Italy. But the core attempted from Corbassière was a failure — and has the team wondering if they are already too late. The team, watching in despair as ice cores melt and muddle, is not alone in seeing climate change wreaking havoc with scientific records — often in unexpected ways. Geologists who hunt for meteorites on the ice in Antarctica are finding their mission thwarted by warming temperatures. And while archaeologists who study the artifacts spat out by ice patches are seeing a bonanza of new finds, they are also racing to get to those objects before they rot. Other heritage sites are slumping into thawing permafrost. What all these researchers have in common is a race to preserve what they can, while they can. When you are standing on a glacier that’s literally melting under your feet, says Schwikowski, “you really feel the urgency.” Researchers extract an ice core on an Ice Memory Foundation expedition to the Colle del Lys glacier in the Alps, October 2023. Riccardo Selvatico / CNR / Ice Memory Foundation Due to climate change, high mountain glaciers are now endangered, losing ice faster than they are gaining it. Studies of a few dozen well-monitored glaciers in the World Glacier Inventory have shown that the pace of glacial ice loss has accelerated from a few inches per year in the 1980s to nearly 3 feet per year in the 2010s. A 2023 model of some 215,000 mountain glaciers showed that nearly half of them could disappear entirely by 2100 if the world warms by just 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), the ambitious maximum warming target of the Paris Agreement. Glaciers have annual layers, just like tree rings. At the top, a single year might see a few feet of snow added to the surface. Hundreds of feet down, weight compresses ice that is thousands of years old into thin, flowing layers, where less than an inch may contain a century of snowfall. This ice preserves all kinds of information from the time when it was deposited. A spike in lead pollution comes at the height of the Roman Empire. A drop in pollen reveals the collapse of farming during the Black Death. The Chernobyl accident left a layer of radioactive cesium. Black carbon and the sugars from burned cellulose map out changes in forest fire activity across the globe. The ratio of different oxygen and hydrogen isotopes in the water also reveals the air temperature of the time. Many mountain glaciers have been cored and studied over the past decades. Since scientific methods and research questions change over time, researchers preserve some cores or sections intact for future reference — to study, say, the genetics of ancient DNA. The National Science Foundation Ice Core Facility in Colorado, for example, holds 82,000 feet of collected ice cores — mostly from Greenland and the Antarctic, but also from North American mountaintop glaciers. The problem of glacial ice melting has been apparent for many years, says paleoclimatologist Ellen Mosley-Thompson of Ohio State University. In 2000, when she and her colleagues drilled to bedrock on Mount Kilimanjaro, they found the surface dated to the 1950s. The top 50 years of snow was gone. “Everyone in our community is worried,” she says. Read Next What your gut has in common with Arctic permafrost, and why it’s a troubling sign for climate change Sachi Kitajima Mulkey Dorothea Moser, a PhD student who works on the ice core chemistry team at the British Antarctic Survey, says she has seen cores damaged by melt even in polar regions, including Greenland and coastal Antarctica. “I’ve got records from Young Island [in the Southern Ocean] that have been heavily melt affected,” she says. She is now working to see what kinds of information can still be salvaged from corrupted cores. Moser warns that ice cores are highly vulnerable to increased melting through global warming. “This is why we need to retrieve them, where possible,” she says. In 2015, glaciologist Jérôme Chappellaz of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and chemist Carlo Barbante of the University of Venice established the Ice Memory Foundation to capture archival cores from endangered mountain glaciers. “Ice Memory is attempting to answer the call of these glaciers before they disappear,” says Mosley-Thompson, who is not a member of the foundation. Fewer than a dozen teams around the world do coring work in high mountain settings, says Schwikowski — it takes skill and determination to haul the equipment up to these remote locations, she says, often in collaboration with mountaineers. Progress has been slow. And, just halfway into their collection effort, the work at Corbassière has shown it may already be too late to get pristine records from some sites. The team only retrieved around 60 feet of core from Corbassière, rather than the 260 feet down to bedrock that they had hoped for, because the drill got stuck in melted-and-refrozen ice. And a comparison of this truncated 2020 core with a 2018 sample from the same spot showed that the record was corrupted. While the temperature record was preserved, the spikes of nitrate, sulfate, and ammonia they had seen in the 2018 core had, by 2020, washed away. The team thinks the cumulative effect of meltwater is to blame. Deeper ice may or may not be damaged, too. Margit Schwikowski holds an ice core from the Corbassière glacier in the Alps, September 2020. Scanderbeg Sauer Photography The team has no idea how many other glaciers are affected: A core that the group took more recently from Svalbard in Norway was similarly muddled, says Schwikowski, while one taken from Monte Rosa in the Alps in 2021 seems to be intact. “I am afraid that most of them are already affected,” she says. “We will see what we can do.” The loss of paleorecords in glacial ice is also distressing to archaeologists, who use those signals to help unravel the behaviors of past societies and the environmental conditions they faced. Of course, archaeologists also have another category of study material: human artifacts. To find these, they often look to ice patches — wind-blown snow drift accumulations that can be thousands of years old. Christian Thomas, an archaeologist with the Yukon Territory’s Department of Tourism and Culture, says such patches typically overlap with traditional summer hunting grounds, so ancient weapons are often found there. The first documented find from an ice patch was an arrow in Norway during a particularly warm year in 1914. Discoveries were only random and occasional until the 1990s, when such finds sped up along with the rate of ice melt, says Lars Holger Pilø, co-director of the Secrets of the Ice program at Norway’s Department of Cultural Heritage. “We had no idea how intense the human use of the high mountains had been until all these artifacts started to emerge from the retreating ice,” he says. “In that way, we are unlikely beneficiaries of global warming.” Since Pilø started his own work in 2006, he says the number of finds and sites has exploded, from a few hundred finds and less than 10 sites in 2006 to more than 4,000 finds from 69 sites in 2023. Some objects date back 6,000 years. They have found more arrows, clothing (including a 1,700-year-old Iron Age tunic and a 3,400-year-old Early Bronze Age shoe), and even prehistoric skis. Such items are often in pristine condition, “frozen in time,” says Pilø. “But once they become exposed to the elements, the clock starts ticking fast, and they will [decompose and] be lost if they are not found and conserved.” “Our ice patch sites are considered imperiled,” says Thomas, who doesn’t expect the ones in the Yukon to survive the next 20 to 30 years. Both in the Yukon and in Norway, scientists are on a quest to collect archaeological finds as quickly as possible. Read Next A new satellite could help solve one of our climate’s biggest mysteries: Clouds Syris Valentine While markers of human history are being erased, other researchers are worried, too, about access to markers of the solar system’s history: meteorites. These inch-sized chunks of the moon, Mars, or the asteroid belt contain vital evidence about the elemental composition of celestial objects and their origins. These rocks fall to Earth everywhere but are easiest to spot against white snow. Hundreds of meteorites fall over the vast surface of the Antarctic each year, and, over millennia, this has built up to an estimated stock of 300,000 to 850,000 space rocks sitting out on the ice. Researchers typically go out and collect about 1,000 a year, from “blue ice” fields where the meteorites are brought to the surface by ice flow and where no fresh snow falls to hide them. Glaciologists Harry Zekollari and Veronica Tollenaar of the Université libre de Bruxelles set out to map the best places to hunt for these rocks, using an artificial intelligence model. Their work revealed that temperature is a major factor determining where meteorites can be found. The reason is simple: black rocks absorb heat from the sun. Even a brief spate of 16 degrees F (minus 9 degrees C) is warm enough for a meteorite to melt the snow beneath it, says Tollenaar, allowing it to sink — just as gravel thrown onto an icy driveway will drill down into tiny holes during the heat of the day. The team estimates that some 5,000 meteorites sink out of sight this way each year and that every tenth of a degree Celsius of warming adds an additional 5,000 to the loss. By the end of the century, they predict, some 25 to 75 percent of the meteorites sitting on Antarctic ice could disappear from view, taking scientific information with them. The Ice Memory Foundation is continuing on its mission to gather and store ice cores. But it’s hard going. Trips planned to take a core from Kilimanjaro in 2022, and in Tajikistan more recently, both fell through, says Schwikowski — it can be difficult to coordinate the necessary permits, people, and funding to get up these mountains and take samples away. The team does have permission to store their ice cores in the Antarctic. This November they plan to ship a balloon to Concordia Station, the French-Italian research base in East Antarctica, where it will be blown up and snow piled on top to make an ice cave big enough to drive into. The ice cores are due to be shipped there at the end of 2025, where they will be stored in insulated boxes to keep the temperature steady. Such a cave should be stable for at least a decade, after which another, similar cave can be built if needed. A 1,200-year-old birch distaff found near the shrinking Lendbreen ice patch in Norway. Espen Finstad / Secrets of the Ice Of course, you don’t have to go to the Antarctic to find cold. There are plenty of freezers capable of maintaining such low temperatures, including the National Science Foundation ice core facility in Denver. But Schwikowski points out that these facilities use energy and are vulnerable to temperature fluctuations and even failure. In 2017, a rare double malfunction caused the Canadian Ice Core Archive freezer in Alberta to warm up to around 100 degrees F (40 degrees C) without triggering the right alarms. Several valuable core sections melted. In a separate event, Thomas says that they, too, lost ice when walk-in freezers in the Yukon failed. Aside from logistical considerations, says Schwikowski, there’s a beauty to storing this ice in a place that sits outside of national ownership: “The Antarctic is a continent of peace and research.” She just hopes to get to the mountain glaciers quickly enough to store their ice. “It worries me a lot,” she says. “We are not so fast. It is not easy.” This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The race to save glacial ice records before they melt away on Jul 14, 2024.

As glaciers melt around the globe, scientists are racing to retrieve ice cores that contain key historical records of temperature and climate that are preserved in the ice.

When Margit Schwikowski helicoptered up to Switzerland’s Corbassière glacier in 2020, it was clear that things weren’t right. “It was very warm. I mean, we were at 4,100 meters and it should be sub-zero temperatures,” she says. Instead, the team started to sweat as they lugged their ice core drill around, and the snow was sticky. “I thought, ‘This has never happened before.’”

What Schwikowski couldn’t see yet, but would find later in the lab, is that it wasn’t just the surface that was affected: Climate change had penetrated the ice and trashed its utility as an environmental record. Warming weather had created meltwater that trickled down, washing away trapped aerosols that researchers like her use as a historical record of forest fires and other environmental events. Because of the melt, she says, “we really lose this information.”

Schwikowski, an environmental chemist at the Paul Scherrer Institut near Zurich, is the scientific lead for the Ice Memory Foundation, a collaborative group that aims to preserve glacial ice records before climate change wrecks them. Their goal is to get cores from 20 glaciers around the world in 20 years, and, starting in 2025, lock them away for long-term storage in an ice cave in the Antarctic — a natural freezer that will hold them at close to minus 60 degrees F (minus 50 degrees C). Since the program’s start in 2015 they have taken cores from eight sites, in France, Bolivia, Switzerland, Russia, Norway, and Italy. But the core attempted from Corbassière was a failure — and has the team wondering if they are already too late.

The team, watching in despair as ice cores melt and muddle, is not alone in seeing climate change wreaking havoc with scientific records — often in unexpected ways. Geologists who hunt for meteorites on the ice in Antarctica are finding their mission thwarted by warming temperatures. And while archaeologists who study the artifacts spat out by ice patches are seeing a bonanza of new finds, they are also racing to get to those objects before they rot. Other heritage sites are slumping into thawing permafrost.

What all these researchers have in common is a race to preserve what they can, while they can. When you are standing on a glacier that’s literally melting under your feet, says Schwikowski, “you really feel the urgency.”

Researchers extract an ice core on an Ice Memory Foundation expedition to the Colle del Lys glacier in the Alps, October 2023. Riccardo Selvatico / CNR / Ice Memory Foundation

Due to climate change, high mountain glaciers are now endangered, losing ice faster than they are gaining it. Studies of a few dozen well-monitored glaciers in the World Glacier Inventory have shown that the pace of glacial ice loss has accelerated from a few inches per year in the 1980s to nearly 3 feet per year in the 2010s. A 2023 model of some 215,000 mountain glaciers showed that nearly half of them could disappear entirely by 2100 if the world warms by just 1.5 degrees Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit), the ambitious maximum warming target of the Paris Agreement.

Glaciers have annual layers, just like tree rings. At the top, a single year might see a few feet of snow added to the surface. Hundreds of feet down, weight compresses ice that is thousands of years old into thin, flowing layers, where less than an inch may contain a century of snowfall.

This ice preserves all kinds of information from the time when it was deposited. A spike in lead pollution comes at the height of the Roman Empire. A drop in pollen reveals the collapse of farming during the Black Death. The Chernobyl accident left a layer of radioactive cesium. Black carbon and the sugars from burned cellulose map out changes in forest fire activity across the globe. The ratio of different oxygen and hydrogen isotopes in the water also reveals the air temperature of the time.

Many mountain glaciers have been cored and studied over the past decades. Since scientific methods and research questions change over time, researchers preserve some cores or sections intact for future reference — to study, say, the genetics of ancient DNA. The National Science Foundation Ice Core Facility in Colorado, for example, holds 82,000 feet of collected ice cores — mostly from Greenland and the Antarctic, but also from North American mountaintop glaciers.

The problem of glacial ice melting has been apparent for many years, says paleoclimatologist Ellen Mosley-Thompson of Ohio State University. In 2000, when she and her colleagues drilled to bedrock on Mount Kilimanjaro, they found the surface dated to the 1950s. The top 50 years of snow was gone. “Everyone in our community is worried,” she says.

Dorothea Moser, a PhD student who works on the ice core chemistry team at the British Antarctic Survey, says she has seen cores damaged by melt even in polar regions, including Greenland and coastal Antarctica. “I’ve got records from Young Island [in the Southern Ocean] that have been heavily melt affected,” she says. She is now working to see what kinds of information can still be salvaged from corrupted cores.

Moser warns that ice cores are highly vulnerable to increased melting through global warming. “This is why we need to retrieve them, where possible,” she says.

In 2015, glaciologist Jérôme Chappellaz of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and chemist Carlo Barbante of the University of Venice established the Ice Memory Foundation to capture archival cores from endangered mountain glaciers. “Ice Memory is attempting to answer the call of these glaciers before they disappear,” says Mosley-Thompson, who is not a member of the foundation.

Fewer than a dozen teams around the world do coring work in high mountain settings, says Schwikowski — it takes skill and determination to haul the equipment up to these remote locations, she says, often in collaboration with mountaineers. Progress has been slow. And, just halfway into their collection effort, the work at Corbassière has shown it may already be too late to get pristine records from some sites.

The team only retrieved around 60 feet of core from Corbassière, rather than the 260 feet down to bedrock that they had hoped for, because the drill got stuck in melted-and-refrozen ice. And a comparison of this truncated 2020 core with a 2018 sample from the same spot showed that the record was corrupted. While the temperature record was preserved, the spikes of nitrate, sulfate, and ammonia they had seen in the 2018 core had, by 2020, washed away. The team thinks the cumulative effect of meltwater is to blame. Deeper ice may or may not be damaged, too.

A man in a blue coat and a gray and black snow hat holds a column of ice.
Margit Schwikowski holds an ice core from the Corbassière glacier in the Alps, September 2020. Scanderbeg Sauer Photography

The team has no idea how many other glaciers are affected: A core that the group took more recently from Svalbard in Norway was similarly muddled, says Schwikowski, while one taken from Monte Rosa in the Alps in 2021 seems to be intact. “I am afraid that most of them are already affected,” she says. “We will see what we can do.”

The loss of paleorecords in glacial ice is also distressing to archaeologists, who use those signals to help unravel the behaviors of past societies and the environmental conditions they faced. Of course, archaeologists also have another category of study material: human artifacts. To find these, they often look to ice patches — wind-blown snow drift accumulations that can be thousands of years old. Christian Thomas, an archaeologist with the Yukon Territory’s Department of Tourism and Culture, says such patches typically overlap with traditional summer hunting grounds, so ancient weapons are often found there.

The first documented find from an ice patch was an arrow in Norway during a particularly warm year in 1914. Discoveries were only random and occasional until the 1990s, when such finds sped up along with the rate of ice melt, says Lars Holger Pilø, co-director of the Secrets of the Ice program at Norway’s Department of Cultural Heritage. “We had no idea how intense the human use of the high mountains had been until all these artifacts started to emerge from the retreating ice,” he says. “In that way, we are unlikely beneficiaries of global warming.”

Since Pilø started his own work in 2006, he says the number of finds and sites has exploded, from a few hundred finds and less than 10 sites in 2006 to more than 4,000 finds from 69 sites in 2023. Some objects date back 6,000 years. They have found more arrows, clothing (including a 1,700-year-old Iron Age tunic and a 3,400-year-old Early Bronze Age shoe), and even prehistoric skis. Such items are often in pristine condition, “frozen in time,” says Pilø. “But once they become exposed to the elements, the clock starts ticking fast, and they will [decompose and] be lost if they are not found and conserved.”

“Our ice patch sites are considered imperiled,” says Thomas, who doesn’t expect the ones in the Yukon to survive the next 20 to 30 years. Both in the Yukon and in Norway, scientists are on a quest to collect archaeological finds as quickly as possible.

While markers of human history are being erased, other researchers are worried, too, about access to markers of the solar system’s history: meteorites. These inch-sized chunks of the moon, Mars, or the asteroid belt contain vital evidence about the elemental composition of celestial objects and their origins. These rocks fall to Earth everywhere but are easiest to spot against white snow. Hundreds of meteorites fall over the vast surface of the Antarctic each year, and, over millennia, this has built up to an estimated stock of 300,000 to 850,000 space rocks sitting out on the ice. Researchers typically go out and collect about 1,000 a year, from “blue ice” fields where the meteorites are brought to the surface by ice flow and where no fresh snow falls to hide them.

Glaciologists Harry Zekollari and Veronica Tollenaar of the Université libre de Bruxelles set out to map the best places to hunt for these rocks, using an artificial intelligence model. Their work revealed that temperature is a major factor determining where meteorites can be found. The reason is simple: black rocks absorb heat from the sun. Even a brief spate of 16 degrees F (minus 9 degrees C) is warm enough for a meteorite to melt the snow beneath it, says Tollenaar, allowing it to sink — just as gravel thrown onto an icy driveway will drill down into tiny holes during the heat of the day.

The team estimates that some 5,000 meteorites sink out of sight this way each year and that every tenth of a degree Celsius of warming adds an additional 5,000 to the loss. By the end of the century, they predict, some 25 to 75 percent of the meteorites sitting on Antarctic ice could disappear from view, taking scientific information with them.

The Ice Memory Foundation is continuing on its mission to gather and store ice cores. But it’s hard going. Trips planned to take a core from Kilimanjaro in 2022, and in Tajikistan more recently, both fell through, says Schwikowski — it can be difficult to coordinate the necessary permits, people, and funding to get up these mountains and take samples away.

The team does have permission to store their ice cores in the Antarctic. This November they plan to ship a balloon to Concordia Station, the French-Italian research base in East Antarctica, where it will be blown up and snow piled on top to make an ice cave big enough to drive into. The ice cores are due to be shipped there at the end of 2025, where they will be stored in insulated boxes to keep the temperature steady. Such a cave should be stable for at least a decade, after which another, similar cave can be built if needed.

A swath of rocks on the edge of the ocean.
A 1,200-year-old birch distaff found near the shrinking Lendbreen ice patch in Norway. Espen Finstad / Secrets of the Ice

Of course, you don’t have to go to the Antarctic to find cold. There are plenty of freezers capable of maintaining such low temperatures, including the National Science Foundation ice core facility in Denver. But Schwikowski points out that these facilities use energy and are vulnerable to temperature fluctuations and even failure. In 2017, a rare double malfunction caused the Canadian Ice Core Archive freezer in Alberta to warm up to around 100 degrees F (40 degrees C) without triggering the right alarms. Several valuable core sections melted. In a separate event, Thomas says that they, too, lost ice when walk-in freezers in the Yukon failed.

Aside from logistical considerations, says Schwikowski, there’s a beauty to storing this ice in a place that sits outside of national ownership: “The Antarctic is a continent of peace and research.” She just hopes to get to the mountain glaciers quickly enough to store their ice. “It worries me a lot,” she says. “We are not so fast. It is not easy.”

This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The race to save glacial ice records before they melt away on Jul 14, 2024.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

Park Service orders changes to staff ratings, a move experts call illegal

Lower performance ratings could be used as a factor in layoff decisions and will demoralize staff, advocates say.

A top National Park Service official has instructed park superintendents to limit the number of staff who get top marks in performance reviews, according to three people familiar with the matter, a move that experts say violates federal code and could make it easier to lay off staff.Parks leadership generally evaluate individual employees annually on a five-point scale, with a three rating given to those who are successful in achieving their goals, with those exceeding expectations receiving a four and outstanding employees earning a five.Frank Lands, the deputy director of operations for the National Park System, told dozens of park superintendents on a conference call Thursday that “the preponderance of ratings should be 3s,” according to the people familiar, who were not authorized to comment publicly about the internal call.Lands said that roughly one to five percent of people should receive an outstanding rating and confirmed several times that about 80 percent should receive 3s, the people familiar said.Follow Climate & environmentThe Interior Department, which oversees the National Park Service, said in a statement Friday that “there is no percentage cap” on certain performance ratings.“We are working to normalize ratings across the agency,” the statement said. “The goal of this effort is to ensure fair, consistent performance evaluations across all of our parks and programs.”Though many employers in corporate American often instruct managers to classify a majority of employee reviews in the middle tier, the Parks Service has commonly given higher ratings to a greater proportion of employees.Performance ratings are also taken into account when determining which employees are laid off first if the agency were to go ahead with “reduction in force” layoffs, as many other departments have done this year.The order appears to violate the Code of Federal Regulations, said Tim Whitehouse, a lawyer and executive director of the nonprofit advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. The code states that the government cannot require a “forced distribution” of ratings for federal employees.“Employees are supposed to be evaluated based upon their performance, not upon a predetermined rating that doesn’t reflect how they actually performed,” he said.The Trump administration has reduced the number of parks staff this year by about 4,000 people, or roughly a quarter, according to an analysis by the National Parks Conservation Association, an advocacy group. Parks advocates say the administration is deliberately seeking to demoralize staff and failing to recognize the additional work they now have to do, given the exodus of employees through voluntary resignations and early retirements.Rep. Jared Huffman (D-California) said the move would artificially depress employee ratings:“You can’t square that with the legal requirements of the current regulations about how performance reviews are supposed to work.”Some details of the directive were first reported by E&E News.Park superintendents on the conference call objected to the order. Some questioned the fairness to employees whose work merited a better rating at a time when many staff are working harder to make up for the thousands of vacancies.“I need leaders who lead in adversity. And if you can’t do that, just let me know. I’ll do my best to find somebody that can,” Lands said in response, the people familiar with the call said.One superintendent who was on the call, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to avoid retaliation, said in an interview that Lands’ statement “was meant to be a threat.”The superintendent said they were faced with disobeying the order and potentially being fired or illegally changing employees’ evaluations.“If we change these ratings to meet the quota and violated federal law, are we subject to removal because we violated federal law and the oath we took to protect the Constitution?” the superintendent said.Myron Ebell, a board member of the American Lands Council, an advocacy group supporting the transfer of federal lands to states and counties, defended the administration’s move.“It’s exactly the same thing as grade inflation at universities. Think about it. Not everybody can be smarter than average. If everyone is doing great, that’s average,” he said.Theresa Pierno, president and CEO of the National Parks Conservation Association, said in a statement that the policy could make it easier to lay off staff, after the administration already decimated the ranks of the parks service.“After the National Park Service was decimated by mass firings and pressured staff buyouts, park rangers have been working the equivalent of second, third, or even fourth jobs protecting parks,” Pierno said.“Guidance like this could very well be setting up their staff to be cannon fodder during the next round of mass firings. This would be an unconscionable move,” she added.

Coalmine expansions would breach climate targets, NSW government warned in ‘game-changer’ report

Environmental advocates welcome Net Zero Commission’s report which found the fossil fuel was ‘not consistent’ with emissions reductions commitments Sign up for climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s free Clear Air newsletter hereGet our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcastThe New South Wales government has been warned it can no longer approve coalmine developments after the state’s climate agency found new expansions would be inconsistent with its legislated emissions targets.In what climate advocates described as a significant turning point in campaigns against new fossil fuel programs, the NSW Net Zero Commission said coalmine expansions were “not consistent” with the state’s legal emissions reductions commitments of a 50% cut (compared with 2005 levels) by 2030, a 70% cut by 2035, and reaching net zero by 2050.Sign up to get climate and environment editor Adam Morton’s Clear Air column as a free newsletter Continue reading...

The New South Wales government has been warned it can no longer approve coalmine developments after the state’s climate agency found new expansions would be inconsistent with its legislated emissions targets.In what climate advocates described as a significant turning point in campaigns against new fossil fuel programs, the NSW Net Zero Commission said coalmine expansions were “not consistent” with the state’s legal emissions reductions commitments of a 50% cut (compared with 2005 levels) by 2030, a 70% cut by 2035, and reaching net zero by 2050.The commission’s Coal Mining Emissions Spotlight Report said the government should consider the climate impact – including from the “scope 3” emissions released into the atmosphere when most of the state’s coal is exported and burned overseas – in all coalmine planning decisions.Environmental lawyer Elaine Johnson said the report was a “game-changer” as it argued coalmining was the state’s biggest contribution to the climate crisis and that new coal proposals were inconsistent with the legislated targets.She said it also found demand for coal was declining – consistent with recent analyses by federal Treasury and the advisory firm Climate Resource – and the state government must support affected communities to transition to new industries.“What all this means is that it is no longer lawful to keep approving more coalmine expansions in NSW,” Johnson wrote on social media site LinkedIn. “Let’s hope the Department of Planning takes careful note when it’s looking at the next coalmine expansion proposal.”The Lock the Gate Alliance, a community organisation that campaigns against fossil fuel developments, said the report showed changes were required to the state’s planning framework to make authorities assess emissions and climate damage when considering mine applications.It said this should apply to 18 mine expansions that have been proposed but not yet approved, including two “mega-coalmine expansions” at the Hunter Valley Operations and Maules Creek mines. Eight coalmine expansions have been approved since the Minns Labor government was elected in 2023.Lock the Gate’s Nic Clyde said NSW already had 37 coalmines and “we can’t keep expanding them indefinitely”. He called for an immediate moratorium on approving coal expansions until the commission’s findings had been implemented.“This week, multiple NSW communities have been battling dangerous bushfires, which are becoming increasingly severe due to climate change fuelled by coalmining and burning. Our safety and our survival depends on how the NSW government responds to this report,” he said.Net zero emissions is a target that has been adopted by governments, companies and other organisations to eliminate their contribution to the climate crisis. It is sometimes called “carbon neutrality”.The climate crisis is caused by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases being pumped into the atmosphere, where they trap heat. They have already caused a significant increase in average global temperatures above pre-industrial levels recorded since the mid-20th century. Countries and others that set net zero emissions targets are pledging to stop their role in worsening this by cutting their climate pollution and balancing out whatever emissions remain by sucking an equivalent amount of CO2 out of the atmosphere.This could happen through nature projects – tree planting, for example – or using carbon dioxide removal technology.CO2 removal from the atmosphere is the “net” part in net zero. Scientists say some emissions will be hard to stop and will need to be offset. But they also say net zero targets will be effective only if carbon removal is limited to offset “hard to abate” emissions. Fossil use will still need to be dramatically reduced.After signing the 2015 Paris agreement, the global community asked the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess what would be necessary to give the world a chance of limiting global heating to 1.5C.The IPCC found it would require deep cuts in global CO2 emissions: to about 45% below 2010 levels by 2030, and to net zero by about 2050.The Climate Action Tracker has found more than 145 countries have set or are considering setting net zero emissions targets. Photograph: Ashley Cooper pics/www.alamy.comThe alliance’s national coordinator, Carmel Flint, added: “It’s not just history that will judge the government harshly if they continue approving such projects following this report. Our courts are likely to as well.”The NSW Minerals Council criticised the commission’s report. Its chief executive, Stephen Galilee, said it was a “flawed and superficial analysis” that put thousands of coalmining jobs at risk. He said some coalmines would close in the years ahead but was “no reason” not to approve outstanding applications to extend the operating life of about 10 mines.Galilee said emissions from coal in NSW were falling faster than the average rate of emission reduction across the state and were “almost fully covered” by the federal government’s safeguard mechanism policy, which required mine owners to either make annual direct emissions cuts or buy offsets.He said the NSW government should “reflect on why it provides nearly $7m annually” for the commission to “campaign against thousands of NSW mining jobs”.But the state’s main environment organisation, the Nature Conservation Council of NSW, said the commission report showed coalmining was “incompatible with a safe climate future”.“The Net Zero Commission has shone a spotlight. Now the free ride for coalmine pollution has to end,” the council’s chief executive, Jacqui Mumford, said.The state climate change and energy minister, Penny Sharpe, said the commission was established to monitor, report and provide independent advice on how the state was meeting its legislated emissions targets, and the government would consider its advice “along with advice from other groups and agencies”.

Nope, Billionaire Tom Steyer Is Not a Bellwether of Climate Politics

What should we make of billionaire Tom Steyer’s reinvention as a populist candidate for California governor, four years after garnering only 0.72 percent of the popular vote in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, despite obscene spending from his personal fortune? Is it evidence that he’s a hard man to discourage? (In that race, he dropped almost $24 million on South Carolina alone.) Is it evidence that billionaires get to do a lot of things the rest of us don’t? Or is it evidence that talking about climate change is for losers and Democrats need to abandon it?Politico seems to think it’s the third one: Steyer running a populist gubernatorial campaign means voters don’t care about global warming.“The billionaire environmental activist who built his political profile on climate change—and who wrote in his book last year that ‘climate is what matters most right now, and nothing else comes close’—didn’t mention the issue once in the video launching his campaign for California governor,” reporter Noah Baustin wrote recently. “That was no oversight.” Instead, “it reflects a political reality confronting Democrats ahead of the midterms, where onetime climate evangelists are running into an electorate more worried about the climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance than a warming atmosphere.”It’s hard to know how to parse a sentence like this. The “climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance” is, indisputably, a climate issue. Renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, and home insurance is spiking because increasingly frequent and increasingly severe weather events—driven by climate change—are making large swaths of the country expensive or impossible to insure. The fact that voters are struggling to pay for utilities and insurance, therefore, is not evidence that they don’t care about climate change. Instead, it’s evidence that climate change is a kitchen table issue, and politicians are, disadvantageously, failing to embrace the obviously populist message that accompanies robust climate policy. This is a problem with Democratic messaging, not a problem with climate as a topic.The piece goes on: “Climate concern has fallen in the state over time. In 2018, when Gov. Gavin Newsom was running for office, polling found that 57 percent of likely California voters considered climate change a very serious threat to the economy and quality of life for the state’s future. Now, that figure is 50 percent.”This may sound persuasive to you. But in fact, it’s a highly selective reading of the PPIC survey data linked above. What the poll actually found is that the proportion of Californians calling climate change a “very serious” threat peaked at 57 percent in 2019, fell slightly in subsequent years, then fell precipitously by 11 points between July 2022 and July 2023, before rising similarly precipitously from July 2024 to July 2025. Why did it fall so quickly from 2022 to 2023? Sure, maybe people stopped caring about climate change. Or maybe instead, the month after the 2022 poll, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, the most significant climate policy in U.S. history, and people stopped being quite so worried. Why did concern then rise rapidly between July 2024 and July 2025? Well, between those two dates, Trump won the presidential election and proceeded, along with Republicans in Congress, to dismantle anything remotely resembling climate policy. The Inflation Reduction Act fell apart. I’m not saying this is the only way to read this data. But consider this: The percentage of respondents saying they were somewhat or very worried about members of their household being affected by natural disasters actually went up over the same period. The percentage saying air pollution was “a more serious health threat in lower-income areas” nearby went up. Those saying flooding, heat waves, and wildfires should be considered “a great deal” when siting new affordable housing rose a striking 12 percentage points from 2024 to 2025, and those “very concerned” about rising insurance costs “due to climate risks” rose 14 percentage points.This is not a portrait of an electorate that doesn’t care about climate change. It’s a portrait of an electorate that may actually be very ready to hear a politician convincingly embrace climate populism—championing affordability and better material conditions for working people, in part by protecting them from the predatory industries driving a cost-of-living crisis while poisoning people.This is part of a broader problem. Currently, there’s a big push from centrist Democratic institutions to argue that the party should abandon climate issues in order to win elections. The evidence for this is mixed, at best. As TNR’s Liza Featherstone recently pointed out, Democrats’ striking victories last month showed that candidates fusing climate policy with an energy affordability message did very well. Aaron Regunberg went into further detail on why talking about climate change is a smart strategy: “Right now,” he wrote, “neither party has a significant trust advantage on ‘electric utility bills’ (D+1) or ‘the cost of living’ (R+1). But Democrats do have major trust advantages on ‘climate change’ (D+14) and ‘renewable energy development’ (D+6). By articulating how their climate and clean energy agenda can address these bread-and-butter concerns, Democrats can leverage their advantage on climate to win voters’ trust on what will likely be the most significant issues in 2026 and 2028.”One of the troubles with climate change in political discourse is that some people’s understanding of environmental politics begins and ends with the spotted owl logging battles in the 1990s. This is the sort of attitude that drives the assumption that affordability policy and climate policy are not only distinct but actually opposed. But that’s wildly disconnected from present reality. Maybe Tom Steyer isn’t the guy to illustrate that! But his political fortunes, either way, don’t say much at all about climate messaging more broadly.Stat of the Week3x as many infant deathsA new study finds that babies of mothers “whose drinking water wells were downstream of PFAS releases” died at almost three times the rate in their first year of life as babies of mothers who did not live downstream of PFAS contamination. Read The Washington Post’s report on the study here.What I’m ReadingMore than 200 environmental groups demand halt to new US datacentersAn open letter calls on Congress to pause all approvals of new data centers until regulation catches up, due to problems such as data centers’ voracious energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and water use. From The Guardian’s report:The push comes amid a growing revolt against moves by companies such as Meta, Google and Open AI to plow hundreds of billions of dollars into new datacenters, primarily to meet the huge computing demands of AI. At least 16 datacenter projects, worth a combined $64bn, have been blocked or delayed due to local opposition to rising electricity costs. The facilities’ need for huge amounts of water to cool down equipment has also proved controversial, particularly in drier areas where supplies are scarce.These seemingly parochial concerns have now multiplied to become a potent political force, helping propel Democrats to a series of emphatic recent electoral successes in governor elections in Virginia and New Jersey as well as a stunning upset win in a special public service commission poll in Georgia, with candidates campaigning on lowering power bill costs and curbing datacenters.Read Oliver Milman’s full report at The Guardian.This article first appeared in Life in a Warming World, a weekly TNR newsletter authored by deputy editor Heather Souvaine Horn. Sign up here.

What should we make of billionaire Tom Steyer’s reinvention as a populist candidate for California governor, four years after garnering only 0.72 percent of the popular vote in the 2020 Democratic presidential primary, despite obscene spending from his personal fortune? Is it evidence that he’s a hard man to discourage? (In that race, he dropped almost $24 million on South Carolina alone.) Is it evidence that billionaires get to do a lot of things the rest of us don’t? Or is it evidence that talking about climate change is for losers and Democrats need to abandon it?Politico seems to think it’s the third one: Steyer running a populist gubernatorial campaign means voters don’t care about global warming.“The billionaire environmental activist who built his political profile on climate change—and who wrote in his book last year that ‘climate is what matters most right now, and nothing else comes close’—didn’t mention the issue once in the video launching his campaign for California governor,” reporter Noah Baustin wrote recently. “That was no oversight.” Instead, “it reflects a political reality confronting Democrats ahead of the midterms, where onetime climate evangelists are running into an electorate more worried about the climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance than a warming atmosphere.”It’s hard to know how to parse a sentence like this. The “climbing cost of electricity bills and home insurance” is, indisputably, a climate issue. Renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels, and home insurance is spiking because increasingly frequent and increasingly severe weather events—driven by climate change—are making large swaths of the country expensive or impossible to insure. The fact that voters are struggling to pay for utilities and insurance, therefore, is not evidence that they don’t care about climate change. Instead, it’s evidence that climate change is a kitchen table issue, and politicians are, disadvantageously, failing to embrace the obviously populist message that accompanies robust climate policy. This is a problem with Democratic messaging, not a problem with climate as a topic.The piece goes on: “Climate concern has fallen in the state over time. In 2018, when Gov. Gavin Newsom was running for office, polling found that 57 percent of likely California voters considered climate change a very serious threat to the economy and quality of life for the state’s future. Now, that figure is 50 percent.”This may sound persuasive to you. But in fact, it’s a highly selective reading of the PPIC survey data linked above. What the poll actually found is that the proportion of Californians calling climate change a “very serious” threat peaked at 57 percent in 2019, fell slightly in subsequent years, then fell precipitously by 11 points between July 2022 and July 2023, before rising similarly precipitously from July 2024 to July 2025. Why did it fall so quickly from 2022 to 2023? Sure, maybe people stopped caring about climate change. Or maybe instead, the month after the 2022 poll, Congress passed the Inflation Reduction Act, the most significant climate policy in U.S. history, and people stopped being quite so worried. Why did concern then rise rapidly between July 2024 and July 2025? Well, between those two dates, Trump won the presidential election and proceeded, along with Republicans in Congress, to dismantle anything remotely resembling climate policy. The Inflation Reduction Act fell apart. I’m not saying this is the only way to read this data. But consider this: The percentage of respondents saying they were somewhat or very worried about members of their household being affected by natural disasters actually went up over the same period. The percentage saying air pollution was “a more serious health threat in lower-income areas” nearby went up. Those saying flooding, heat waves, and wildfires should be considered “a great deal” when siting new affordable housing rose a striking 12 percentage points from 2024 to 2025, and those “very concerned” about rising insurance costs “due to climate risks” rose 14 percentage points.This is not a portrait of an electorate that doesn’t care about climate change. It’s a portrait of an electorate that may actually be very ready to hear a politician convincingly embrace climate populism—championing affordability and better material conditions for working people, in part by protecting them from the predatory industries driving a cost-of-living crisis while poisoning people.This is part of a broader problem. Currently, there’s a big push from centrist Democratic institutions to argue that the party should abandon climate issues in order to win elections. The evidence for this is mixed, at best. As TNR’s Liza Featherstone recently pointed out, Democrats’ striking victories last month showed that candidates fusing climate policy with an energy affordability message did very well. Aaron Regunberg went into further detail on why talking about climate change is a smart strategy: “Right now,” he wrote, “neither party has a significant trust advantage on ‘electric utility bills’ (D+1) or ‘the cost of living’ (R+1). But Democrats do have major trust advantages on ‘climate change’ (D+14) and ‘renewable energy development’ (D+6). By articulating how their climate and clean energy agenda can address these bread-and-butter concerns, Democrats can leverage their advantage on climate to win voters’ trust on what will likely be the most significant issues in 2026 and 2028.”One of the troubles with climate change in political discourse is that some people’s understanding of environmental politics begins and ends with the spotted owl logging battles in the 1990s. This is the sort of attitude that drives the assumption that affordability policy and climate policy are not only distinct but actually opposed. But that’s wildly disconnected from present reality. Maybe Tom Steyer isn’t the guy to illustrate that! But his political fortunes, either way, don’t say much at all about climate messaging more broadly.Stat of the Week3x as many infant deathsA new study finds that babies of mothers “whose drinking water wells were downstream of PFAS releases” died at almost three times the rate in their first year of life as babies of mothers who did not live downstream of PFAS contamination. Read The Washington Post’s report on the study here.What I’m ReadingMore than 200 environmental groups demand halt to new US datacentersAn open letter calls on Congress to pause all approvals of new data centers until regulation catches up, due to problems such as data centers’ voracious energy consumption, greenhouse gas emissions, and water use. From The Guardian’s report:The push comes amid a growing revolt against moves by companies such as Meta, Google and Open AI to plow hundreds of billions of dollars into new datacenters, primarily to meet the huge computing demands of AI. At least 16 datacenter projects, worth a combined $64bn, have been blocked or delayed due to local opposition to rising electricity costs. The facilities’ need for huge amounts of water to cool down equipment has also proved controversial, particularly in drier areas where supplies are scarce.These seemingly parochial concerns have now multiplied to become a potent political force, helping propel Democrats to a series of emphatic recent electoral successes in governor elections in Virginia and New Jersey as well as a stunning upset win in a special public service commission poll in Georgia, with candidates campaigning on lowering power bill costs and curbing datacenters.Read Oliver Milman’s full report at The Guardian.This article first appeared in Life in a Warming World, a weekly TNR newsletter authored by deputy editor Heather Souvaine Horn. Sign up here.

Takeaways From AP’s Report on Potential Impacts of Alaska’s Proposed Ambler Access Road

A proposed mining road in Northwest Alaska has sparked debate amid climate change impacts

AMBLER, Alaska (AP) — In Northwest Alaska, a proposed mining road has become a flashpoint in a region already stressed by climate change. The 211-mile (340-kilometer) Ambler Access Road would cut through Gates of the Arctic National Park and cross 11 major rivers and thousands of streams relied on for salmon and caribou. The Trump administration approved the project this fall, setting off concerns over how the Inupiaq subsistence way of life can survive amid rapid environmental change. Many fear the road could push the ecosystem past a breaking point yet also recognize the need for jobs. A strategically important mineral deposit The Ambler Mining District holds one of the largest undeveloped sources of copper, zinc, lead, silver and gold in North America. Demand for minerals used in renewable energy is expected to grow, though most copper mined in the U.S. currently goes to construction — not green technologies. Critics say the road raises broader questions about who gets to decide the terms of mineral extraction on Indigenous lands. Climate change has already devastated subsistence resources Northwest Alaska is warming about four times faster than the global average — a shift that has already upended daily life. The Western Arctic Caribou Herd, once nearly half a million strong, has fallen 66% in two decades to around 164,000 animals. Warmer temperatures delay cold and snow, disrupting migration routes and keeping caribou high in the Brooks Range where hunters can’t easily reach them.Salmon runs have suffered repeated collapses as record rainfall, warmer rivers and thawing permafrost transform once-clear streams. In some areas, permafrost thaw has released metals into waterways, adding to the stress on already fragile fish populations.“Elders who’ve lived here their entire lives have never seen environmental conditions like this,” one local environmental official said. The road threatens what remains The Ambler road would cross a vast, largely undisturbed region to reach major deposits of copper, zinc and other minerals. Building it would require nearly 50 bridges, thousands of culverts and more than 100 truck trips a day during peak operations. Federal biologists warn naturally occurring asbestos could be kicked up by passing trucks and settle onto waterways and vegetation that caribou rely on. The Bureau of Land Management designated some 1.2 million acres of nearby salmon spawning and caribou calving habitat as “critical environmental concern.”Mining would draw large volumes of water from lakes and rivers, disturb permafrost and rely on a tailings facility to hold toxic slurry. With record rainfall becoming more common, downstream communities fear contamination of drinking water and traditional foods.Locals also worry the road could eventually open to the public, inviting outside hunters into an already stressed ecosystem. Many point to Alaska’s Dalton Highway, which opened to public use despite earlier promises it would remain private.Ambler Metals, the company behind the mining project, says it uses proven controls for work in permafrost and will treat all water the mine has contact with to strict standards. The company says it tracks precipitation to size facilities for heavier rainfall. A potential economic lifeline For some, the mine represents opportunity in a region where gasoline can cost nearly $18 a gallon and basic travel for hunting has become prohibitively expensive. Supporters argue mining jobs could help people stay in their villages, which face some of the highest living costs in the country.Ambler mayor Conrad Douglas summed up the tension: “I don’t really know how much the state of Alaska is willing to jeopardize our way of life, but the people do need jobs.”The Associated Press receives support from the Walton Family Foundation for coverage of water and environmental policy. The AP is solely responsible for all content. For all of AP’s environmental coverage, visit https://apnews.com/hub/climate-and-environmentCopyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – December 2025

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.