Category Archives: Explainer

The ‘Great’, White Outdoors

Posted on by

 

Last year, Wellesley College invited Mardi Fuller, a black outdoorswoman, to speak at an event on campus. She shared her experience as the first black woman to summit all 48 peaks of the White Mountains, in New Hampshire. 

She spoke about her personal roots with the outdoors, as well as about the struggle of being a black woman in an often white outdoors community – she told her audience about the microaggressions, and sometimes flat out ignorance, she faces from other outdoors people. 

When I say ‘outdoors person’, as Mardi refers to herself as, I mean someone who actively engages in outdoors activities, especially ones that involve nature, such as hiking, rock climbing, cross country running/skiing, and more. For many of us, ‘systematic discrimination’- the way society discriminates against minorities- exists at work, in schools, the government,  the workplace, or on social media. 

Yet, as Mardi Fuller’s experiences make clear, it is everywhere — even in the outdoors

Outdoor activities and sports have always been dominated by white people. According to a study that surveyed a number of the largest Olympic teams’ socio demographic profiles, 95% of winter and 82% of summer athletes were white. 

According to research studies in recent years, white people are much more likely to visit state and national parks than BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, People of Color). Even more troubling, BIPOC are three times less likely to live in communities or neighborhoods with  access to nature. 

 

Why is the Environmental Movement So White?

It certainly isn’t that “POC just don’t care about the environment”. BIPOC tend to be less involved with the outdoors largely because of 1) historical segregation of BIPOC in specific activities, 2) financial freedom and leisure time, and 3) lack of inclusivity in those places.

 

Historical segregation of BIPOC in the Outdoors

Let’s talk more about one of these places: the U.S. National Parks.

John Muir, an early champion of the National Parks and the preservation movement (the movement that sought to start conserving areas of nature), ‘reenvisioned Native homelands as a spiritual home for white seekers’. He believed that nature was best preserved from the touch of man.

As an integral part of the Sierra Club,  he also made a number of derogatory comments about Black people and Indigenous peoples grounded in extremely racist stereotypes.

It comes as no surprise that the men who created the environmental movement merely 50 years after slavery was abolished subscribed to harmful and racist ideas like these.

 

Current Segregation of BIPOC in Environmental Movements

As it often goes, the history of racism led to the job market being exclusive towards the BIPOC community, rarely considering BIPOC for significant leadership positions in environmental organizations.

According to an NBC report, entitled The numbers don’t lie’: The green movement remains overwhelmingly white, many environmental organizations reported ‘having no people of color in senior levels, including Oceana, an ocean conservation nonprofit, and the BlueGreen Alliance, which works with labor unions to promote clean jobs and infrastructure’. As it often goes, that history has bled into and led to the current state of affairs– in which the BIPOC community remains excluded from these organizations. 

 

Less financial freedom and leisure time

Another part of the equation of course is that the BIPOC community as a whole has less financial freedom to engage in such activities. This is especially burdensome as rock climbing gears costs, transportation costs, and opportunity cost of time are all high for outdoor trips. Camping trips mean taking days off from potential work hours, or not having enough time for family. Traveling and participating in unpaid activities, like climate rallies, are just not financially feasible for many BIPOC.

The socioeconomic status of BIPOC is significantly lower than those of white communities. There is simply less time and financial freedom for BIPOC communities to engage with the outdoors in the first place. According to a study by Pew Research Center, “white households are about 13 times as wealthy as black households – a gap that has grown wider since the Great Recession”.

 

Lack of Inclusivity

Lastly, the BIPOC community doesn’t necessarily want to participate in outdoor activities, likely  due to the lack of inclusivity and representation in it. People facing microaggressions or racism, like Mardi Fuller, are common experiences for BIPOC, and reminders that outdoor activities have yet to become inclusive for the BIPOC community.

It is time for the environmental movement to transcend the legacies of history. This is already beginning to happen. Sierra Club owns up to its past, announcing in 2022 that their new CEO would be Ben Jealous, a BIPOC-identifying activist who has done significant work on human rights and the criminal system. Moreover, the BIPOC community has been making some noise, with a number of movements around the world, such as Brown Girls Climb, Latino Outdoors, Indigenous Women Hike, and Black Girls Run, all doing the important work to make the outdoors more accessible and inclusive for all.

 

From Haddock to You: Using New England Species to Answer Questions About Fisheries

Posted on by

Do you enjoy eating fresh seafood? Do you have fond memories of fishing trips or aquarium visits with family and friends? That means you have interacted with a fishery at least once in your life. In the northeastern United States, New England thrives on the fishing industry. Here are four things you should know about the hidden networks that provide the world jobs, food, and fun, explained through the aquatic life of New England. 

More than 100 species, including finfish, shellfish, urchins, and seaweeds, are landed in the Northeast. // Credit: NOAA Fisheries

 

What is a fishery?

Fisheries are often defined as geographic locations where a population of an aquatic animal, like fish or shellfish, are harvested for use. This definition is expanded in practice and language to include the fishers, and their industry, or the season of the year when fishing takes place. Fisheries can also refer to a certain species across many bodies of water or a cultural use of fish populations, expanding the meaning beyond just fish themselves. 

For the Northeastern United States, more than 100 species are important to the region’s fishing industries. Each of these species are their own fishery, overlapping to create the aquatic networks that are the foundation of the New England fishing industry.

 

What are the types? 

Fisheries can be broken down into three main types: commercial, recreational, and subsistence.  

Commercial fishing is professional fishing for profit. Large and small companies harvest wild caught aquatic animals or even raise animals in farms, also called aquaculture. All sizes and forms of commercial fisheries are connected in the desire to profit from harvest of aquatic animals on a larger scale. 

Recreational fishing is for leisure, exercise, or competition. This can range from individuals fishing in their backyards to major fishing competitions with cash prizes for the biggest fish to charter companies that take people fishing for certain big game. 

Subsistence fishing is fishing for survival and livelihood. This type of fishing is a means of survival for the people who participate, meaning they fish to feed their families and are dependent on small-scale or individual fishing in some way. In many parts of the United States, subsistence fishing is considered “invisible” and not regulated any differently than recreational fishing. However, in Connecticut a pilot study showed that fishing for food may have “substantial social and cultural significance to those who engage in the activity”.

 

Who manages them?

Fisheries management is determined by geography. In the United States, local and state governments control fisheries within a 3 mile boundary of shore while the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a federal agency, controls fisheries within the 3-200 miles before international waters begin. In New England, fisheries are controlled by state governments, organizations like the New England Fisheries Management Council (NEFMC) and the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission (ASMFC), and government agencies like NOAA.

Stock assessments, management plans, and catch limits are some of the ways that fisheries can be monitored. The condition of the fishery population, or the stock status, is used as an indicator of health to determine whether a fishery is overfished or sustainable. Depending on the stock status, scientists and researchers decide the necessary actions to maintain fisheries. In Massachusetts, regulators dictate the kinds of traps allowed to catch lobster in order to protect the overfishing of a declining population.

 

Why do fisheries matter?

Fisheries are important for cultures, economies, and overall environmental health as humans greatly rely on the work and products of the fishery industry to thrive. In the United States alone, fisheries provided 1.7 million jobs and $253 billion in sales in 2020. That ends up meaning that about 1 in every 100 dollars earned in the US came from fisheries.

However, now more than ever, fisheries are in danger.

Haddock are a staple fish in New England, feeding coastal families, engaging recreational fishers, and drawing in hungry tourists for hundreds of years. However, after the Atlantic cod fishery in New England reached a historic low in 2021, many commercial fishers fished  haddock instead. In 2022, commercial landings of haddock totaled 11 million pounds and earned around $18 million in sales. But now, as of April 2023, haddock catch has been reduced to around 80% by regulators in the Gulf of Maine in an attempt to correct drastic population declines due to overfishing. These instabilities affect the lives of thousands of fishers and disrupt already threatened ecosystems, and fishermen in Maine are bracing for the “gutpunch” that this major cut to stocks will bring to the economy.

A school of Atlantic cod. // Credit: GRID-Arendal, Flickr

 

Fisheries are essential to oceanic ecosystems. With the exploitation of target species in fisheries, ecosystems can collapse due to an imbalance in populations. As a keystone for thousands of species and millions of humans, the health of fisheries are vital to maintaining a structured and sustainable ecosystem. From cod to clams to cobia, fisheries and their issues are important to all.

 

What is the Weatherization Assistance Program?

Posted on by

Many homes in America are drafty and inefficient. In the depths of winter and the heat of summer, many households find themselves grappling with high energy bills, discomfort, and even health hazards. If this is an experience that you and your family are familiar with, then it’s worth learning more about the Weatherization Assistance Program.

The Weatherization Assistance Program was created in 1976 to provide funding to transform older houses into energy-efficient, comfortable, and healthier homes. When President Biden passed the infrastructure bill in March of 2021, weatherization assistance received a $3.5 billion boost. The goal is to lower energy costs for 700,000 low-income U.S. households over the next five years. WAP retrofit funding is designed to address the “whole home,” and to take actions that will make homes warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer with less energy usage. Here’s how it works.

 

How does the Weatherization Assistance Program work and what does it do?

At its core, the Weatherization Assistance Program aims to reduce energy consumption and lower energy costs for eligible, low-income households. It does this through a series of comprehensive measures like home energy audits, sealing leaks, upgrading heating and cooling systems, replacing older appliances with energy efficient models, and addressing health risks like carbon monoxide and radon.

Interfaith Housing Services, Inc. (IHS), a WAP agency serving 25 counties in southwestern Kansas, recently showcased the benefits of WAP for one family. The Garcia family requested IHS’s WAP services because of their high energy bills. During the initial home inspection, IHS discovered a hazardous situation: the hot water tank was venting carbon monoxide back into their attic, releasing life-threatening levels of this gas into the air they were breathing, nearly 100 times the safe threshold. The hot water tank was promptly replaced, carbon monoxide and smoke detectors were installed, and IHS weatherized the home.

Ms. Garcia, who had been taking multiple medications for depression without a clear diagnosis, decided to consult her doctor after IHS’s intervention. The doctor was astonished to observe a significant improvement in her health. Ms. Garcia explained that she had received WAP services, including a replacement for the hot water tank emitting dangerous carbon monoxide levels in her home. It became evident that her depression had been misdiagnosed for years. As a result of receiving WAP services and other home improvements that promote a healthier environment, Ms. Garcia was able to discontinue five different medications, saving her $120 per month in medical costs. That was on top of her lowered energy bills.

 

Who is eligible to be a part of this program?

Eligibility for weatherization services is primarily determined by income. According to the guidelines established by the U.S. Department of Energy, households with incomes at or below 200% of the poverty income threshold qualify for these services. 

Priority for the Weatherization Assistance Program is also given to specific groups that meet the income threshold, such as the elderly, households with one or more members with disabilities, families with children, those with high energy consumption, or households facing a substantial energy cost burden. 

To determine your eligibility, you should consult the eligibility guidelines specific to your state, territory, or tribe, which can be found using this map.  In California, for example, a family of 3 can be eligible for WAP if their monthly income is below $​​4,143.33.

 

Has WAP been effective?

Households living in weatherized homes typically save 18% on annual heating expenses and 7% on annual energy expenses. There are other benefits too. After weatherization, families have homes that are more livable, resulting in fewer missed days of work (e.g., sick days, doctor visits), and decreased out-of-pocket medical expenses by an average of $514. 

Despite these benefits, the Weatherization Assistance Program still is not reaching all eligible Americans. Participation rates are low.  Only a small fraction of eligible households apply for the program, and even fewer complete the weatherization process. For instance, in Michigan, a study found that only about 2% of likely eligible households enroll in the program and just around 0.2% of eligible homes undergo weatherization.

Potential reasons for low participation could be the complex application and screening processes. These often involve substantial paperwork and long wait times for home energy audits. If you find the paperwork difficult to navigate, don’t hesitate to ask for help. The local WAP office and community organizations may provide assistance or resources to make the process smoother. One such community organization to reach out to is the Community Action Partnership, which has chapters in every state, including Puerto Rico.  

Some income-eligible households cannot receive assistance due to significant maintenance issues in their homes.  Structural problems, moisture issues, or mold have to be fixed first before weatherization can proceed.  This also means that the homes that need the most help are left behind.

 

Why is the Weatherization Assistance Program important?

The Weatherization Assistance Program serves as a vital initiative aimed at addressing the energy efficiency and living conditions of low-income households across the United States. The savings from this program can greatly enhance the quality of life for many families in America, including yours. If you would like to check your eligibility or apply for WAP, visit this website: ​​https://www.benefits.gov/benefit/580.

Green Tax Credits: What Has Changed?

Posted on by

On August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) into law, marking the most significant action Congress has taken on clean energy and climate change in U.S. history. 

A key component of the IRA is a little-known provision known as tax credit transferability. Why does that matter? Consider a recent deal at Bank of America. The deal utilized the tax-credit transferability to help fund a $1.5 billion wind energy transaction. Specifically, the bank purchased $580 million in wind energy tax credits from renewable-power developer Invenergy. The funds helped Invenergy purchase a portfolio of renewable-energy projects from utility American Electric Power. And the funding eventually allowed the buyers to raise more debt and close the $1.5 billion deal.

But what are tax credits?

Tax credits reduce a company’s overall tax liability, which is the amount of money owed in taxes to the government. While tax credits are not new, the IRA expanded two types of tax credits targeting clean energy development: the clean electricity production tax credit (PTC) and the clean electricity investment tax credit (ITC). 

PTC subsidizes the production of clean electricity by awarding credits to clean energy sources on a per-kilowatt-hour basis. The more clean energy produced, the larger the tax break, making it a compelling incentive for investment in renewable energy.

ITC, on the other hand, supports new investment in clean electricity installations by giving qualified companies tax breaks based on the project’s total cost. The base credit is 30% of the project’s cost, making the new energy generation all the more appealing to project developers — especially since it is paid upfront, not based on a project’s performance. 

What is the problem with the old tax credits?

Despite their benefits, a big problem was that many companies couldn’t fully utilize their tax credits. The old tax credit system was only useful for taxpayers with large enough tax liability.

Who got left behind by tax credits?

Energy startups, for instance, had to navigate complex financing arrangements with tax-heavy banks since they don’t generate large enough profits to claim the tax benefits. This often ended up benefiting banks more than the projects themselves as banks charged fees to organize those complex arrangements. 

Additionally, the old tax credit system failed to incentivize entities that don’t pay income taxes at all, such as non-profits and universities. This limited their desire to transition towards cleaner energy, making the effect of the tax-credit system minimal. 

How was Bank of America able to purchase tax credits from another entity?

Bank of America took advantage of the IRA’s new tax credit transferability. Thanks to the IRA, taxpayers can transfer, or sell, all or a portion of their tax credits to other taxpayers. Since many green projects/companies do not generate profits yet, they have low tax liability and thus unused tax credits.

The IRA allowed green companies to sell their unused tax credits to entities with higher tax liability, infusing cash into those companies. 

What is the process for tax-credit transfer?

Tax credits from the ITC and PTC are expected to sell at a discount, much like how some off-season clothes sell below their original price. Purchasers, therefore, buy the tax credits at a reduced cost, even though the IRS credits them for their full value. This yields a net benefit. Prices for tax credits are expected to exceed 90 cents on the dollar so a large company might only pay $90 million for $100 million of tax credits. This is low enough that buyers make a meaningful profit, and it provides much-needed capital to cash-strapped start-ups.  

In addition to transferability, what else is modified from the old tax credit system? 

Although the Bank of America deal did not make use of this, another option known as “direct pay” was introduced along with transferability. The direct pay option allows untaxed private and public entities to receive a direct payment equivalent to 12 applicable tax credits, including renewable electricity production credit, clean hydrogen production credit, energy credit, and clean electricity investment credit, among others. A school district could get a direct payment for installing solar panels across campuses, for example. 

This new access to tax credits will be especially important for public utilities, which generate 15% of all power in the U.S. and serve one in seven Americans. Given the large proportion of power public utilities produce, the decision they make between traditional or renewable energy is impactful to the environment. With the direct pay option available, there should be greater incentives for them to choose the cleaner option. 

But now one might question, if tax credits can be converted directly into cash, why do we still need the transferability option? This is because only tax-exempt organizations, such as non-profits or tribal organizations, are applicable entities. The green start-ups that are expected to generate profit in the long term, for example, are not eligible for direct pay. 

What are the remaining uncertainties?

There are still uncertainties around how the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) determines whether certain projects are eligible for tax credits. While the system enables tax credits to be transferred, there might be limitations on the extent to which companies can use these transferred credits to reduce their tax liabilities. After all, it would be unrealistic if one could just take advantage of the transferability forever. 

Furthermore, the long-term impact of the green tax credit system on the clean energy sector and the overall transition to sustainable practices is uncertain. It remains to be seen whether the system will attract more investment and accelerate green initiatives, especially since there is no rigid requirement, other than large tax liability, on the buyer of transfer tax credits. It can become controversial if the companies taking advantage of the transferability are fossil fuel companies. 

In summary, what are the incentives behind the new guidance? 

Policymakers hope the new system will expand access to tax incentives that encourage investment in clean energy technologies. And since purchasers of tax credits can be any company with large enough tax liability, not just the large banks, renewable projects can bring money from different sources. 

By transferring tax credits directly to banks and other taxpayers, clean-energy businesses can now raise money more easily. The businesses buying the tax credits can use them to lower their tax bills, while sellers can make progress on their clean-energy developments. Nonprofits and public entities, under direct pay, also have stronger incentives to purchase green facilities and to participate in the green transition. 



The Green Energy Game Changer – Fuel Cells

Posted on by

Right now, there are cars on the road capable of zero emissions–and, surprise, they do not use batteries. Instead, these miraculous vehicles run on fuel cells, which can be topped off at certain gas stations, run without emissions, function efficiently, and ultimately prove that the next step in the green energy movement may just be stuck in traffic the next lane over.

The Hyundai NEXO, a Fuel Cell Electric Vehicle. Credit: Hyundai

What is a fuel cell?

Fuel cells are devices that produce electricity without combustion. Instead, an electrochemical reaction provides continuous energy as long as fuel is available. Those fuels include hydrogen, methanol, or BioGas. Fuel cells vary considerably in size, and are frequently combined to create larger fuel cell systems that produce more power.

A picture of a fuel cell system. Credit: accelera

How do fuel cells work?

Fuel cells work similarly to a battery, but will never run out of energy–so long as fuel is still available. To understand fuel cells in more detail, consider the most common type–a hydrogen fuel cell. In this case, hydrogen is combined with oxygen to generate heat, electricity, and water. 

Diagram of a hydrogen fuel cell in a car. Credit: Firehouse

Where can fuel cells be used?

Fuel cells are versatile. Fuel cells are already being used in cars and trucks, with gas stations also offering hydrogen fuel for these cells. Fuel cells may also be incorporated into energy systems as emergency backup power, or to further power other processes to create more green energy stores. For example, fuel cells may help in the creation of emission-free green hydrogen, which can then be used to power other hydrogen-utilizing fuel cells. 

How is this considered part of the green energy future?

For all its benefits, renewable energy is not reliable–a windless day, some clouds, or low tides can hinder energy availability. Thus, renewable energy is only one piece of the green energy puzzle. To complete the puzzle, we need systems that make renewable energy more stable. 

Enter the fuel cell. Fuel cells act as a key backup to securing reliable electricity on the grid on days where there are slumps in renewable energy, such as on cloudy or windless days. 

Unlike other energy storage systems, fuel cell production is capable of zero emissions. Hydrogen powered fuel cells produce no emissions, and hydrogen itself can be produced via the chemical separation of hydrogen from water. If that process is powered with renewable energy sources, there are no greenhouse gas emissions.

The closest comparable technology–batteries–require the mining of critical limited materials such as lithium, nickel, and cobalt, which fuel cells do not. Overall, fuel cells remain a much more sustainable alternative to current energy storage technologies.

What are the downsides?

Fuel cells come with their own challenges, mostly coming down to the use of hydrogen and the costs. Most fuel cells to date use hydrogen, which has a tendency to corrode systems over time, reducing the longevity of the fuel cells. It is also challenging to transport due to hydrogen explosivity. 

Additionally, current proponents of fuel cells must factor in the high costs of production–namely, an average of $200,000 for a 120kW system. A further challenge of hydrogen is that as a fuel source, it remains more expensive than more common-place alternatives like natural gas.

What makes fuel cells particularly important?

Acidifying oceans, climate change, acid rain and cancer-causing emissions. These are the consequences of burning coal, oil, and gas, and it is not on track to change soon. 80% of American energy needs are met by fossil fuels. Yet there are renewable energy sources which can help generate safer energy that directly powers the things we need–our vehicles, homes, businesses, industries. 

These renewable energy sources may have been lacking in the past due to concerns about reliability, but with fuel cells, energy consistency is achievable without emissions nor the mining of critical limited materials. Fuel cells are just the thing the green energy movement needs to secure an energized future without the environmental consequences.

AI is on (Wild)fire

Posted on by
Uncontrollable wildfire

Uncontrollable wildfire. Credits: rawpixel

This year in California, over 6,100 wildfires have burned more land than the size of Los Angeles. As climate change creates warmer, drier conditions, the frequency and intensity of wildfires has increased. Wildfires also lead to secondary effects such as lower water and air quality, erosion, and landslides. It’s not just a California thing. Wildfires are devastating communities all over the world.

Fighting these wildfires is a taxing job. At California’s primary firefighting service, Cal Fire, firefighters used to take shifts watching more than a thousand live video feeds for signs of smoke or fire. It was painstaking work.

Not anymore. Now Cal Fire’s firefighters get to sleep through the night. Why? AI is watching the cameras instead.

 

How can artificial intelligence (AI) be used in wildfire prevention?

AI wildfire prevention technology starts with training an AI model using computer vision machine learning. This means the model’s creators give the model thousands of pictures of smoke and fire to learn from, as well as images of things that look similar but aren’t (like dust clouds or smoke from a backyard barbeque). 

The AI model that Cal Fire uses has more than a thousand cameras that can each see up to 60 miles during the day and 120 miles at night. The AI monitors real-time smoke and heat sensors and historical wildfire data. Overall, the AI system is receiving billions of pieces of visual and sensor data at any given moment. 

The goal of this AI system is to process this data in realtime to identify abnormalities for firefighters.

 

How well does Cal Fire’s AI system work?

It works very well. Cal Fire’s AI system accurately alerts firefighters earlier than 911 calls 40% of the time. More than that, in the past three months, the system has detected dozens of fires that no one called into 911 at all. 

This has improved firefighter response times, meaning more fires get extinguished before they can grow into wildfires. Stopping wildfires early also prevents their secondary effects. 

All of this is why firefighters are sleeping better. AI does the realtime monitoring so that firefighters are less fatigued and better prepared to fight wildfires.

 

Is there a downside to Cal Fire’s AI system?

A dust cloud, which could look like smoke to AI.

A dust cloud, which could look like smoke to AI. Credits: PICRYL

Cal Fire’s AI system has been tricked before by things that aren’t smoke, such as haze, dust, and steam. The good news is that AI systems get more ‘intelligent’ over time, but accuracy cannot be 100% guaranteed.

In Cal Fire’s AI system’s early stages, it only worked for fires visible to their cameras. Although their cameras cover about 90% of their fire-prone land, that still left gaps. Luckily, the US military now lets Cal Fire use their spy satellites, drones, and other aircrafts to expand coverage.

There is also the question of the expansion of the surveillance state. When AI is watching through fire detection cameras, is it watching for anything else? 

 

What is the future of AI in wildfire prevention?

Not every firefighting agency uses cameras, so they can’t all use an AI system like Cal Fire’s. If they want the benefits of AI, they’ll need a new system. Luckily, people are already starting to work on strategies for the future that account for this.

Microsoft is in the process of creating AI models with climate, geospatial, and burn data to predict likely wildfire locations. They plan to open this technology to all first responders. 

Canada plans to enhance their existing AI wildfire prevention systems by installing sensors in the ground to monitor soil and weather conditions. This works with or without cameras and will allow their AI systems to better predict wildfires before they happen.

A German startup called OroraTech is pursuing the new strategy of launching low orbit mini satellites that use AI to analyze satellite images for smoke or fire. OroraTech was already helpful to Chile during their intense period of wildfires this year by providing thermal imaging during the night when wildfire spotting drones are less active. This strategy could be scaled up.

Pano AI is putting cameras on cell towers, which are common fire starters. In the future, this system could be expanded to include cameras on other fire hazards. Pano AI also analyzes data from social media posts and hotspot-detecting weather satellites. Both of these ideas can be expanded. Pano AI’s help is cutting up to two hours off of firefighter response times. 

These strategies will help make AI wildfire prevention systems more robust and flexible for different users. These systems will keep improving their speed and accuracy, and they will have to in order to keep up with climate change. While technology continues advancing, wildfires continue to get more threatening. That means furthering the development of tools like AI to limit wildfires is becoming a necessity.

The Impacts of Traditional Chinese Medicine on Poaching

Posted on by

 

Shark fins or dried seahorses might not be the first thing you think about  when you’re feeling sick.  For some people, they are. Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) relies on animal parts to heal their patients. TCM originated in China and remains one of the oldest medical systems in the world. People turn to animal-based TCM to combat illnesses ranging from arthritis to asthma. Though there is not much research to show that these remedies work, demand is high. Currently, thirty-six wild animal species are targeted by poachers to be used for TCM. 

What is the philosophy behind Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM)?

Those who practice TCM believe in the Yin/Yang Theory – the interactions and balance between Yin and Yang. Yang makes up the working systems of the body, while the bodily components (like blood) of essential activities are known as Yin. These interactions result in Qi – better known in the Western world as Chi. Qi is the “energy or life force within you and all around you,” which is kept in harmony by practicing TCM. When your Qi is unbalanced it means that your body is more susceptible to illnesses.

How does TCM impact animal poaching? 

Some TCM recipes rely on rare animal parts such as tiger bones to more common parts like dog testicles or snake vomit. There are rarely any legal or ethical ways of getting these animal parts. The use of TCM has also become increasingly present in places like South Africa which further strains wild animal populations. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports  that 70% of the population in Africa  now uses TCM as its primary means of healthcare. Although not all TCM remedies rely on animal parts, the uptick in TCM still  affects the population of endangered species like African white and black rhinos. Farmed animals are rarely a suitable substitute. In part, TCM prizes animals that are wild, because they are believed to be more pure or potent. The rarity of certain animals also attributes to the belief that they are more powerful remedies. One animal caught up in this trade is the Pangolin. It is prized for its scales, which practitioners say have anti-inflammatory properties.Forty-one TCM Doctors at 48 hospitals in China were interviewed regarding Pangolin use in TCM.  The interviews showed that only five out of forty-one TCM doctors knew Pangolins are a protected species. And only two knew that Pangolins could not be traded unless the scales came from a government or private inventory with specific quotas.  Unsurprisingly, doctors’ patients know even less about where the ingredients in TCM remediates come from. 

Does animal-based TCM actually work? 

Several studies have been done that explore the effectiveness of animal-based TCM. Chronic pains are treated using Tiger Bone (TB), which contains mainly calcium and collagen. TB showed some promise in treating patients with chronic pains, but that meant more Tigers would be killed for this treatment. This resulted in the creation of a man-made TB to replace the authentic TB. The man-made TB proved to be just as effective as authentic TB in treating pains.  Seahorses are considered a cure for asthma and arthritis by TCM practitioners. Researchers speculate that they actually have a special cell that can reduce inflammation and help patients with arthritis. Though, not much has been done to further explore this. Yet these studies seem to provide some insight as to why animal-based TCM is still used. Animal parts appear to offer some relief to human illnesses or the potential to. Scientists could provide replacements for these cures by studying what components they contain to make cruelty free remedies and lessen the need to poach animals.   

Why do people still practice TCM?

 TCM is a cultural practice that has been woven into Chinese society. Yet, increasingly, TCM has become a ritual that millions of people around the world engage in and appreciate. Practices like acupuncture and tai chi, or more simply, making sure that you are eating well, are all a part of TCM. Herbal TCM may be a part of your life too. Herbs have been meticulously studied by the Chinese people for their benefits.  Maybe it’s the ginseng tea you drink for an extra boost of energy or a cup of chamomile to calm you down before you go to bed. They are even used for more serious illnesses such as malaria, treated by the drug artemisinin, derived from  an herb called Qinghao. TCM strives to not only help people’s health issues but also works towards preventing any future problems. It emphasizes maintaining oneself and their relationship with the social and natural environment.  

___________

Unlike tai chi, animal-based TCM is deeply problematic. Poaching for the use of traditional medicines kills thousands of animals and boosts illegal trade in animal parts. Emphasizing the quota regulations so that animals are not overexploited and offering alternatives to stop using animal-parts could help regulate the trade. Educating those who engage in animal-based TCM about its impacts on the environment and effectiveness on human health can also encourage people to move away from this practice. 

 

Superfund Sites: What Are They and Why Do They Matter?

Posted on by

What do films such as A Civil Action and Dark Waters have in common? They both tell the story of towns struggling with the legacies of environmental pollution, Superfund sites. These films tell the story of the big-shot lawyers who fight for everyday people. These films have made towns like Woburn, MA and Parkersburg, VA well known. But for every infamous Superfund site, there are hundreds of others existing in obscurity but which are just as urgent

What is a Superfund site? 

A Superfund site is a place where industrial contamination has occurred and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is using funds—the Superfund—to clean the area. Superfund sites are unique to the United States as the cleanup process is overseen by the U.S. Federal government. 

How does an area get designated as a Superfund site? 

The process starts when someone, often a citizen or state agency, notifies the EPA of a location with possible contamination. Once the EPA has been notified, the site is entered into the Superfund Enterprise Management System (SEM) which is the EPA’s inventory of locations with hazardous waste. 

Next, the EPA conducts a site investigation: identifying what substances are at the site and how they are moving. Using this information, the EPA scores the site using the Hazard Ranking System. The score is based on traits such as the toxicity of waste and the people affected by the site. The score then qualifies or disqualifies a site to be cleaned under the Superfund program.  

Why does the U.S. even need the Superfund?

In an ideal world, companies would take responsibility for their own pollution.  In practice, companies often avoid taking responsibility, sometimes they go out of business, and sometimes there are polluted sites and no one knows who is responsible. In these cases, the Superfund can step in and cover costs.

How did the program first start? 

Congress established the Superfund in 1980 when it passed the  Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLA and the Superfund program are one and the same, Superfund is just easier to say. CERCLA was passed in large part due to the public outcry over sites such as Love Canal in New York where toxic waste contaminated a highly populated area. 

The Superfund of the 1980s is markedly different from the Superfund of today, however. The Superfund was originally financed by a trust fund consisting of money gained through taxes paid by polluting companies. In 1995, the Superfund tax expired and the fund was no longer financed by polluters. After the tax expired, the money which made up the Superfund was funded by taxes on U.S. citizens. For nearly 30 following years, the federal government, not polluters, funded the cleanup of Superfund sites. It was only in 2022 that a tax was reinstated on some polluters—petroleum and crude oil producers—to finance the Superfund.   

But really, what does it actually mean to be a Superfund site? 

Being designated as a Superfund site comes with more than just cleanup funds.  It often comes with a negative stigma as well. Being known as a Superfund site often results in an area being thought of as dangerous to live in and even financially impacting the town. 

Being a registered Superfund site also does not actually even guarantee timely cleanup of waste. In fact, the process of enacting cleanup at Superfund sites has slowed down over the years. This is mostly due to a lack of enforcement or technical challenges. The change in funding from polluter tax to general taxes has also resulted in the purchasing power of the Superfund decreasing roughly 40% from 2000 which has also slowed down the Superfund cleanup process.  

Does the Superfund program work? 

The answer is sort of. When considering sites such as the Tar Creek Superfund site in Oklahoma, which has been a Superfund site for over 40 years, it feels that the program hasn’t made much tangible progress in making the site a safe place to live. Communities near sites like Tar Creek often feel that the EPA and Superfund program have failed them. In contrast, at the Brick Township Landfill in New Jersey, site cleanup has been completed and the Superfund site is now a solar panel farm. This site is even listed on the EPA’s Superfund success stories list. 

Why do Superfund sites matter? 

These sites matter because they are in millions of people’s backyards, not just on movie screens. For roughly 78 million people living within 3 miles of a Superfund site, these sites are a part of everyday life. That includes 24% of all children under the age of 5 in the U.S., a group at high risk for health impacts often correlated with Superfund sites. Those who live within 3 miles of a Superfund site are also disproportionately minorities, live below the poverty line, are linguistically isolated, and/or hold less than a high school level of education. 

Superfund sites have the potential to directly impact millions of people and are found in nearly two thousand different communities. Sites are an environmental, health, and social justice issue. This means that removing Superfund sites is not only the premise for a movie but the key to a better future for everyone. 

Getting Environmental Justice Cases through the Courtroom Doors

Posted on by

Imagine that, every day for eight years, you wake up to find yourself coughing. It’s not because you keep getting sick. It’s because, just down the road, an ExxonMobil refinery is emitting thousands of pounds of toxic pollutants into the air every year. Between 2005 and 2013, this was reality for those living in Baytown, Texas. 

That is why residents of Baytown turned to the Clean Air Act to sue ExxonMobil. Citizens have exercised their powers given to them under the Clean Air Act (CAA) to enforce the CAA’s permitting requirements and emission restrictions upon ExxonMobil. 

Despite the pollution in Baytown and the lawsuit, ExxonMobil is avoiding responsibility or compensating Baytown residents for the harm inflicted. How? Well, ExxonMobil is trying to get the case thrown out of the courtroom, claiming that Baytown residents lack legal standing. 

 

What is legal standing? 

To have a case heard in court, parties need to have a valid reason for litigation. What does that mean? Basically, you need to have a legitimate reason to bring someone to court. You can’t just sue anyone. 

To establish legal standing, there is a requirement that plaintiffs have to sustain direct injury or harm that is redressable. This means that the plaintiff needs to be the person or group who were adversely affected.

At the federal level, three elements define legal standing. 

The Lujan vs. Defenders of Wildlife case in 1992 established three elements to meet legal standing in environmental cases. The first is that an injury against the plaintiff has to occur. In Lujan, the Supreme Court outlined that the injury must be concrete and actual or imminent. This has been established as “injury-in-fact”. 

The second element is that a causal connection between the injury and the action causing the injury is made. Thus, the injury must be traceable back to the defendants alleged action. 

Finally, the third element that needs to be met is redressability, meaning the court can make up for or correct the injury to the plaintiff. The court must find that the plaintiff’s injury has the ability to be redressed by the court. To meet this element, the court must have the ability to meaningfully address the problem by requiring the entity inflicting harm to change procedures and/or compensate for damages.

 

What are hurdles to the current requirements around legal standing? 

The courts have the potential to be a powerful avenue for advancing environmental justice. But, without legal standing, the doors to the courtroom close.

First, it can be difficult to establish that a harm has occurred. Many environmental contaminants harm people over time and space. This means people can be harmed by pollution emitted in the past or in a different location. Thus, establishing that an injury is concrete or imminent can be difficult. 

What if victims know that they have or will suffer injuries due to contamination? Well, there is some uncertainty about the effects of certain pollutants. Because of this, the plaintiffs might fail to meet the first criteria. 

The second element is also very difficult to meet. There needs to be a reasonable connection between the injured and the polluter. This is hard to establish. 

Say someone develops cancer due to environmental carcinogens. Standing requires that you show it is likely that a particular factory’s emissions are to blame. But what if the carcinogens came from a factory in the neighboring state? Or a different country? With pollution moving over space, it becomes increasingly difficult to establish a reasonable connection between the injured and the polluter.

Additionally, the current Supreme Court is a hurdle to environmental justice cases. Currently, we have a majority conservative Supreme Court that favors setting precedent based on their strict interpretations of the law. 

Standing has traditionally focused on economic injury with a clear perpetrator of the injury. But environmental justice cases aren’t as clear cut under the law. When the courts are made of judges with quite strict interpretations of the law, there is concern for their ability to codify their conservative interpretations for future generations.  

 

What is the future for legal standing in environmental justice cases?

The ExxonMobil case is the future for legal standing in environmental justice cases. This case could raise the bar for establishing standing in environmental cases. 

In May, 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court found in favor of the plaintiffs in Environment Texas Citizen Lobby v. ExxonMobil Corp, prompting Exxon to pay $14 million in penalties to the Clean Air Act. Exxon appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to rehear the case. 

Exxon claims that the plaintiffs could not trace their injuries directly back to the violations. This case can be detrimental to the future of environmental justice lawsuits. 

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed and a panel will hear arguments over the fine itself and if the plaintiffs have reached legal standing. 

The Fifth Circuit Court could side with Exxon. This could set the bar for meeting the second element of legal standing much higher for future cases. 

Or, if ExxonMobil is not content with the decision, they could appeal to the Supreme Court. Historically, the current bench of Supreme Court Justices have argued that the bar for legal standing is higher for environmental organizations and individuals suing under environmental regulations. If Environment Texas Citizen Lobby v. ExxonMobil Corp. goes to the Supreme Court, the Court can solidify the higher bar for these cases in precedent. 

Either way, this case can be damaging to the future of environmental justice cases. 

 

In 2023 alone, Earthjustice, a major environmental law advocacy firm, had 34 court victories. All of these victories were made possible by legal standing. Environment Texas Citizen Lobby vs. ExxonMobil Corp. has the potential to close the doors to environmental plaintiffs in courtrooms around the country.

LEED-ing The Fight or BLEEDing Energy?

Posted on by

Have you ever walked past one of those shiny, official-looking LEED plaques on the side of a building and wondered what it was? It’s meant to capture attention and signal how environmentally sustainable the building is. But, did you know that behind the plaque are criticisms like “false advertising,” “greenwashing,” “pricey” and “ineffective?” 

With building construction and operations accounting for more than ⅓ of all carbon dioxide emissions globally, advancing building sustainability is increasingly important. In an attempt to lower emissions, LEED plaques have been given to over 100,000 building projects in the world.

What is LEED?

Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) is the most prominent rating system for green building projects in the world. Started in 1998 by the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) non-profit, the voluntary program strives to make the building and construction sector more green by providing a 3rd-party metric of sustainability.

What does LEED evaluate?

LEED rates a project’s sustainability based on the site location, the materials and resources used, the amount of water and energy consumed, the indoor environmental quality (IEQ), and the total carbon footprint. Considering all these elements together, during construction and long-term operation, LEED emphasizes the importance of using an integrative green building approach to support human and environmental health.

How are LEED projects actually rated?

LEED uses a credit scoring system to rate sustainability. These ratings vary slightly depending on which type of development— broken down into several categories and subcategories— a project falls under. For example, Schools are a specific subcategory of Building Design and Construction projects while Warehouses and Distribution Centers are a subcategory of Operation and Maintenance Projects.

All LEED projects, regardless of category, are rated out of 110 possible points. To earn any points, projects must first meet basic green design standards. In the case of school buildings, for instance, it is required that they have an erosion and sedimentation plan in place during construction to prevent pollution. 

After meeting these basic prerequisites, projects can then earn points through design features or considerations. For example, a school project can earn a point by building on previously developed land or by avoiding sensitive land (i.e. prime farmlands, floodplains, endangered species habitats, or wetlands). In the case of the “sensitive land protection” point, the goal is to strengthen community resilience and to protect ecosystems.

These points add up to qualify projects for different levels of LEED certification. Platinum projects have 80+ points, gold have 60-79 points, silver have 50-59 points, and certified have 40-49 points. Now you know why those plaques come in different colors.  

Is the certification expensive?

Critics and the media often claim LEED has a big price tag. While it can, it really depends on the project. 

All LEED projects pay a flat-rate registration fee and an additional certification fee. For example, registration for a single-family home costs $150 and certification costs $225. For bigger commercial projects with a gross floor area of 250,000 to 499,999 square feet, the flat fee costs $4,500 (per building), registration costs $1,350, and certification- calculated per square foot- costs a minimum of $16,000. At the very least, these commercial projects cost $21,850.

In the long run, a building’s energy efficiency will likely save much more money than the expense of the certification fees for its owners.

Are LEED buildings more energy-efficient than traditional ones?

That last point on LEED’s energy efficiency is a controversial one. USGBC claims that LEED buildings use 25% less energy than their traditional counterparts. Yet, this claim is often challenged by concerned citizens and researchers who scrutinize LEED’s energy budgets. In one study, researchers found that LEED buildings consume equal energy or, in some cases, more energy than traditional buildings.

Another study found that while buildings with higher LEED certifications (i.e. Platinum or Gold) do consume less energy, that isn’t true for certified buildings that only meet LEED’s basic requirements. 

Unfortunately, for now, the energy efficiency of silver and certified LEED projects remains largely debated. 

Are LEED standards and regulations strict “enough”? 

With its energy performance under debate, people argue that LEED needs higher standards, starting with the point system. 

Building owners can earn points to get a shinier plaque (i.e. Platinum or Gold) through simple, cheap, and often random design components that have only minimal environmental benefits. For example, school projects can earn a point by installing a bike rack or by being within ¼  to ½ mile of an existing public transit stop. 

Critics point to these examples as reasons that the point system is flawed. In response, USGBC has made it clear that all LEED buildings have to meet certain standards (i.e. the prerequisites) before being able to earn points. They explain that there is no way to circumvent the required sustainability prerequisites, making the critics’ claims unfounded.

What if there is another way to game the system? 

LEED certifications are largely based on models of how building systems will function, not on actual performance. Because of this, design and construction projects can be certified before they are 100% complete. That means a building can be LEED-certified even if it doesn’t fulfill its sustainability goals in practice. For example, the Bank of America Tower in NYC earned a Platinum plaque based on its design. Now that it is in use, however, it turns out it consumes more energy than its neighboring skyscrapers. 

USGBC says that buildings must remain compliant after certification, stating that all projects must continue to record their energy and water consumption. But, like the Bank of America Tower, a building can be certified without meeting its sustainability goals.

As critics point out, LEED’s model-based forecasts, in addition to its point system, means sustainability slips through the cracks of even the greenest building designs. LEED’s gaps reveal the need for stricter standards.

******

Despite its controversies, LEED is striving to lead a green transition to support us and the places where we live. However, with its effectiveness and standards in question, the current version of LEED should only be seen as an early iteration of the sustainability programs to come. With tighter standards that are better informed by additional research, LEED has the potential to make development even more sustainable in the future. 

Image Credit: Flickr