Build your audience by listing your fall events in our Enviro-Events Calendar

Is your company, school, university or organization planning Fall events that involve energy or environmental themes?

One of the best ways to attract your ideal audience is to post your event information in our free Enviro-Events Calendar.

Follow our style and send details to: editor@enviropolitics.com

If you don’t see your event appear within a week, pleases resend.

Build your audience by listing your fall events in our Enviro-Events Calendar Read More »

197 billion tons of water poured into the North Atlantic from the Greenland ice sheet in July alone

Extreme melt event led to the greatest single-day volume loss from the ice sheet since 1950

By Andrew Freedman and Jason Samenow, Washington Post

When one thinks of Greenland, images of an icebound, harsh and forbidding landscape probably come to mind, not a landscape of ice pocked with melt ponds and streams transformed into raging rivers. And almost certainly not one that features wildfires.

Yet the latter description is exactly what Greenland looked like this week, according to imagery shared on social media, scientists on the ground and data from satellites.

An extraordinary melt event that began earlier this week continued through August 1 on the Greenland ice sheet, and there are signs that about 60 percent of the expansive ice cover saw detectable surface melting, including at higher elevations that only rarely see temperatures climb above freezing.

[Images show staggering extent of melting on Greenland Ice Sheet due to heat wave]

On Thursday, the ice sheet saw its biggest single-day volume loss on record, with 12.5 billion tons of ice lost to the ocean from surface melt, according to computer model estimates based on satellite and other data. Records of daily mass loss date back to 1950.

“This model, which uses weather data and observations to build a record of ice and snowfall, and net change in mass of the ice sheet, is remarkably accurate,” says Ted Scambos, a senior researcher at the National Snow and Ice Data Center (NSIDC) in Colorado. “I would accept the result as fact. 12.5 billion tons [lost] in one day, and the highest single-day total since 1950,” Scambos said.

July 31 was the biggest surface melt day since at least 2012, with about 60 percent of the ice sheet seeing at least 1 millimeter of melt at the surface, and more than 10 billion tons of ice lost to the ocean from surface melt, according to data from the Polar Portal, a website run by Danish polar research institutions, and the NSIDC.

Melting ice forms a lake on free-floating ice jammed into the Ilulissat Icefjord during unseasonably warm weather on July 30, 2019, near Ilulissat, Greenland. (Sean Gallup/Getty Images)

According to Ruth Mottram, a climate researcher with the Danish Meteorological Institute, the ice sheet sent 197 billion tons of water pouring into the Atlantic Ocean during July.

Read the full story

197 billion tons of water poured into the North Atlantic from the Greenland ice sheet in July alone Read More »

DuPont defense: Patriotism of the past created pollution of the present

World War 1 battlefield

By Michael Sol Warren | NJ Advance Media for NJ.com

They only did it to help win the war. Well, both wars.

Facing major lawsuits filed by New Jersey, chemical giant DuPont is making the argument that its toxic legacy in the Garden State was created at the behest of Uncle Sam as part of war efforts in World War I and World War II.

In court filings, the company says the federal government ordered millions of pounds of chemicals to be produced at four sites across New Jersey during the two World Wars. Because that work was done under a federal contract, DuPont argues that it does not have liability in recent lawsuits filed against the company by New Jersey Attorney General Gurbir Grewal.

The argument helped DuPont get the cased moved from state to federal court, though it’s unclear whether it will be enough to clear the company of liability in the case.

A DuPont spokesman could not be reached for comment.

Earlier this year, New Jersey sued chemical giants DuPont, 3M and Chemours for decades of pollution at four of New Jersey’s most toxic sites, from Carney’s Point to Pompton Lakes.

The resulting contamination left the sites soaked with a mess of health-threatening substances ranging from lead and mercury to volatile organic compounds and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), according to the state.

The lawsuits seek unspecified millions from the companies in natural resource damages claims — the same kind of legal action that the state took against ExxonMobil, a case settled for $225 million.

Like this? Click to receive free updates

DuPont’s federal contract defense offered a glimpse into how it will fight the suit.

In the move, which DuPont filed on July 5, the company argued that it was required to dramatically increase chemical production at all four sites as part of contracts with the U.S. government to support to war efforts in World War I and World War II. Because of this, DuPont asserts was an agent of the federal government.

Removing the cases from state court to federal court is in line with a common legal defense strategy, according to Steve Gold, an environmental lawyer who teaches at Rutgers law school.

“A lot of defendants in these cases would prefer to be in federal court,” Gold said “State courts, and in particular state court juries, many defendants view as a risk.”

A spokesman for the state Attorney General’s Office declined to comment. Among its legal options, the state could seek to have the cases remanded back to New Jersey Superior Court.

In the removal filings, DuPont also set up the defense that it is protected from liability for actions taken under government contract. The Federal Tort Claims Act restricts situations in which federal agencies, and civilian contractors acting on behalf of federal agencies, can be sued, Gold said.

This defense still leaves DuPont liable for pollution done by activities not related to a federal contract. But Gold said that the reality of figuring out just how much DuPont is liable could be tricky.

“If you have a giant contaminated mess, and if the court were to agree with DuPont on the government contractor defense, then what fraction of the total contamination ends up being DuPont’s liability and who has to prove that fraction?” Gold said. “That may be what their ultimate substantive strategy is.”

Read the full story

Don’t miss stories like this Click to receive free updates

DuPont defense: Patriotism of the past created pollution of the present Read More »

Plastics or people? At least 1 of them has to change

Christopher Joyce reports for WBUR (Boston)

A discarded plastic bottle lies on the beach at Sandy Hook, N.J. Packaging is the largest source of the plastic waste that now blankets our planet. (Wayne Parry/AP)
A discarded plastic bottle lies on the beach at Sandy Hook, N.J. Packaging is the largest source of the plastic waste that now blankets our planet. (Wayne Parry/AP)

The avalanche of plastic waste that’s rolling over land and sea has inspired numerous potential solutions. Some involve inventing our way out of the mess by creating new kinds of natural materials that will harmlessly degrade if they’re thrown away.

Others say it might be quicker to change people’s throwaway behavior instead.

Get the latest news Boston is talking about sent to your inbox each day. Subscribe here.

Among the first group is Stephen Mayfield. He’s a chemist who figured out how to turn various kinds of algae into raw plastic — polyurethane plastic. Then he turns it into stuff people want.

“What are the most important polyurethane products on the planet?” he asks. “Well, if you are from UC San Diego, they’re surfboards.”

Mayfield is a lifelong surfer whose lab in San Diego is walking distance from the beach. He works out of what looks like a machine shop on the University of California campus. His surfboards got him some attention (the mayor of San Diego has one), but that’s not what he really wants to make.

It was a surfing trip to the Maldives islands in the Indian Ocean that persuaded him to focus on something else. One day, he asked his local hosts to take him to their most remote island. “And when I got to the windward side of the island, it was covered with dead flip-flops,” Mayfield recalls.

Don’t miss stories like this Click to receive free updates

Flip-flops are the footwear for much of the world’s population. They’re made by the billions every year, mostly from various forms of rubber or plastic. The pile Mayfield saw in the Maldives had floated there on ocean currents from, presumably, all over the world. “And it was so sad to get there and think this is really … what we’ve done to the planet?” he says ruefully.

So Mayfield now makes flip-flops from algae grown in tanks. What makes them special is that they degrade if left out in the environment.

Replacing flip-flops is a personal mission, says chemist and fellow surfer Suri Sherman, who is the “polyurethane chef” in Mayfield’s lab. “I’ve traveled all over the world just to surf,” he says, “and I have family in India, so I’ve been out there a bunch of times. Everywhere you go there is trash all over the place, and a lot of it is flip-flops.”

Sherman starts with algae-based polymers, called polyols, then adds a catalyst and other polymers and chemicals in a gooey concoction not unlike a two-part epoxy mix. “It’s just kind of like cooking,” he says. The soupy mix goes into a mechanical spinner and then into a mold, where it’s heated for about half an hour. When it’s done, he pries it out — a bio-based polyurethane flip-flop sole.

Mayfield says there’s some traditional petroleum-based polymer in there, too. But all of the shoes will biodegrade into harmless materials. It just needs the right bacteria and moisture to break it down. “You throw them in your compost pile and they will disappear at about 3.5% to 4% per month,” he says, “meaning that within about two years that shoe will completely be gone.”

We’re always looking for stories that might interest our readers. If you come across something so interesting that it cries out to be shared, please send it to editor@enviropolitics.com  If we agree, you’ll see it here soon. 

 
Potentially two years as trash isn’t perfect, but Mayfield says it’s better than decades or even longer. The real problem, he says, is that new technology is a tough sell. Manufacturers are reluctant to take a risk on a new, unfamiliar product. “I cannot convince them,” he says. “The only thing that can convince them is the market.”

And the market is usually determined by what consumers want. So, what about changing people instead of the product? Changing their behavior, that is.

That’s Tom Szaky’s strategy. “I think the evil isn’t plastic — it’s using something once,” he says.

Szaky is founder and CEO of TerraCycle, in Trenton, N.J. He says the throwaway culture in the U.S. took shape in the mid-20th century. “There were advertisements in 1950 that talk about, ‘You don’t have to wash the dishes anymore, simply take the whole thing, — the cutlery, the dishes, the tablecloth itself — and throw it all out,’ ” he says. That disposability was made possible in large part by the invention of cheap plastic.

Szaky wants consumers to abandon the throwaway mentality and learn — or relearn — to reuse things, especially packaging, which is the largest source of plastic waste.

TerraCycle is a recycling company that’s running a pilot project called Loop. Here’s how it works: A company puts its products — say, shampoo or toothpaste — into custom-made, sturdy containers made of glass, metal or plastic. Loop packs the products into a picnic-basket-size tote bag and ships it to you. You use up the stuff, then UPS picks up the tote bag full of empties and ships it back to TerraCycle. The containers get washed, sent to consumer product companies for refilling and are sent out again to consumers.

TerraCycle’s Heather Crawford stands next to boxes of tote bags for a pilot project called Loop. The bags are filled with products in reusable containers and mailed to customers, who then return the bags and empty containers to be cleaned and refilled. (Chris Joyce/NPR)

Szaky says it isn’t the only solution to plastic waste, but it’s an inroad. He says he wants to encourage “unconscious” behavior change in consumers. “In Loop, we’re trying to say [that] it feels like throwaway,” he says, “but instead of throwing it away into a landfill or throwing it away into a recycling center, it’s going into a reuse facility.”

That facility is in a warehouse in Trenton. Boxes of consumer products line the walls. Heather Crawford, TerraCycle’s vice president of marketing and e-commerce, pulls out a sleek, metal cylinder with a brand label on the front.

“Snacks, trail mixes, raw nuts,” she says, noting they’re packed in metal instead of the usual plastic pouch. There’s containers of balsamic vinegar, shampoo, hand lotion, and juice, either in glass or heavy-duty, reusable plastic. There’s even a refrigerator with Häagen-Dazs ice cream in special insulated metal containers, frozen to minus 41 degrees Fahrenheit so it will stay that way for up to 30 hours. “That’s the very last thing to go into the tote” before it’s shipped out, Crawford says.

Read the full story

Plastics or people? At least 1 of them has to change Read More »

Fossil fuel investments cost world’s biggest fund manager $90 billion, report finds

Bob Chapman reports for the Independent

The world’s largest investment firm, managing more than $6.5 trillion (£5.4 trillion), has been accused of costing investors tens of billions of dollars in returns over the past decade by backing fossil fuel companies like Shell and ExxonMobil.

A new study suggests that New York-based fund manager BlackRock’s bets on oil and gas companies have underperformed the market to the tune of $90bn as the risks of climate change have become clearer.

Larry Fink, BlackRock CEO

BlackRock manages funds, including people’s life savings and pensions, that are worth more than the entire annual output of Japan’s economy. Its chief executive and chairman Larry Fink sends out a letter to investors each year in which he espouses the virtues of investing in with purpose and an eye on social responsibility.

But analysis of the investment giant’s holdings suggests that its rhetoric on climate change risks does not match its actions, according to the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis (IEEFA).

The researcher and analyst, which receives its funding from philanthropic organizations, calculated that BlackRock’s investments in oil and gas firms have dragged down returns as those companies have destroyed value by failing to properly adapt to climate change.

The study undermines arguments from some fund managers that they must invest in oil and gas firms in order to fulfill their duty to act in the best interests of investors.

Three-quarters of BlackRock’s estimated lost returns have stemmed from just four companies: ExxonMobil, Royal Dutch Shell, BP and Chevron, all of which have underperformed the market.

A fifth company, General Electric (GE), has lost BlackRock investors $19.1bn between 2008 and 2018, when compared to the returns it could have made by investing in shares that performed in line with the wider stock market.

BlackRock holds more than half a billion shares in GE which saw an unprecedented $193bn wiped off its stock market valuation between 2016 and 2018.

Read the full story

Fossil fuel investments cost world’s biggest fund manager $90 billion, report finds Read More »

Debate’s attempt to show candidates divided on climate finds unity instead

The Democrats may butt heads on climate policy details, but they all see growing risks to security, economy and health that the next president can’t ignore.

By Marianne Lavelle for Inside Climate News

Round two of the second Democratic primary debate, held in Detroit. Credit: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images
The second 2020 Democratic primary debate, held in Detroit, was conducted in two rounds over two nights with 10 candidates each. Climate change and environmental issues got about 21 minutes of attention. Credit: Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

In two nights of debates that seemed designed to highlight divisions among the candidates, the Democratic presidential hopefuls this week managed to display remarkable unity in their proclaimed commitment to aggressive action on climate change.

Barbed questions posed by a CNN panel produced sharp wrangling over the details of universal health care, immigration and crime. But when it came to decarbonizing the economy, few hard and fast differences surfaced.

“We have all put out highly similar visions on climate,” said Pete Buttigieg, the mayor of South Bend, Indiana.

Sign up for InsideClimate News Weekly

Our stories. Your inbox. Every weekend.I agree to InsideClimate News’ Terms of Service and Privacy Policy

Former Vice President Joe Biden sought to fend off the charge that his plan was “middling.” Rep. Tim Ryan of Ohio envisioned a manufacturing future centered around the electric car. Sen. Kamala Harris of California called for adopting a Green New Deal and getting the country to carbon neutral by 2030.

Yes, some of the moderates don’t like the Green New Deal. And the left-leaning politicians were more vociferous in their denunciation of the fossil fuel industry, with Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont accusing the corporations of “criminal activity that cannot be allowed to continue,” and Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts vowing to take on a Washington that “works great for the oil companies, just not for the people worried about climate change.”

But those differences belie the candidates’ fundamental agreement that transformative policy is needed to address climate change, including that:

  • emissions of greenhouse gases from fossil energy have to be brought to zero no later than 2050;
  • an expansive and rapid economic transformation with special attention to the needs of workers is key; and
  • trillions of dollars of federal investment will be necessary and worth the money given the scientific evidence that the alternative would be far costlier.

“I think it’s pretty clear from everyone on that stage that you can’t be serious about running for president if you are not committed to acting on the climate crisis,” said Tiernan Sittenfeld, vice president for government relations for the League of Conservation Voters, who watched the sessions live from the Fox Theatre audience in Detroit.

The first night of the two-night second debate of the Democratic presidential primary season. Credit: Scott Olson/Getty Images
Montana Gov. Steve Bullock, right, was the only new candidate on the stage who didn’t also participate in the first set of debates. The debates were held over two nights to accommodate most of the large Democratic primary field. Credit: Scott Olson/Getty Images

Read the full story

Debate’s attempt to show candidates divided on climate finds unity instead Read More »