# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Looking at much of the media reporting ahead of this week's climate conference in Glasgow, you'd think the world was subject to biblical plagues-blasted by fires, floods, hurricanes, drought and disease. But as Bjorn Lomborg has explained recently in these pages, while global warming does pose problems, it is hardly the unmitigated disaster often portrayed. At times, the solutions activists propose can be far worse than what they're trying to prevent.

Humanity has solved much more dangerous problems than climate change over the past century, Mr. Lomborg argues. Even if policy makers do little to slow the rise of global temperatures, it will cost only 2.8% of global gross domestic product a year-a small price compared to that of air pollution, the least of the other major problems mankind has tackled since 1900.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | The Real Risks of Global Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Looking at much of the media reporting ahead of this week's climate conference in Glasgow, you'd think the world was subject to biblical plagues-blasted by fires, floods, hurricanes, drought and disease. But as Bjorn Lomborg has explained recently in these pages, while global warming does pose problems, it is hardly the unmitigated disaster often portrayed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ROME (AP) - Leaders of the world's biggest economies were set to tackle climate change Sunday, the final day of a weekend summit in Rome that is widely expected to set the tone for a major conference on the same issue taking place in Glasgow, Scotland, over the next two weeks.

The Group of 20 countries, which represent more than three-quarters of the world's greenhouse gas emissions, are looking for common ground on how to reduce emissions while helping poor countries deal with the impact of rising temperatures.

If the G-20 summit ends with only weak commitments, momentum could be lost for the larger annual talks in Glasgow, where countries from around the globe will be represented including poor ones most vulnerable to rising seas, desertification and other effects.

The future of coal, a key source of greenhouse gas emissions, has been one of the hardest things for the G-20 to agree on. However, the U.S. and other countries are hoping to get a commitment to end overseas financing of coal-fired power generation, said a senior U.S. official who spoke on condition of anonymity to preview President Joe Biden's plans.

Western countries have moved away from financing coal projects in developing countries, and major Asian economies are now doing the same: Chinese President Xi Jinping announced at the U.N. General Assembly last month that Beijing would stop funding such projects, and Japan and South Korea made similar commitments earlier in the year.

China has not set an end date for building domestic coal plants at home, however. Coal is still China's main source of power generation, and both China and India have resisted attempts for a G-20 declaration on phasing out domestic coal consumption.

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said before the Rome summit that he tried but could not get a commitment on a coal phase-out from Xi, who did not travel to the gathering.

In Glasgow, Johnson said, "we want these leaders ... to focus on the commitments they can make, moving away from the use of fossil fuels, moving away from coal-fired power stations domestically."

Climate campaigners were hoping that rich G-20 countries would take steps to meet a long-standing but yet-to-be-fulfilled commitment to raise $100 billion annually to help developing countries move toward greener economies and adapt to the changing climate.

Prince Charles, a long-time environmentalist, was set to address the G-20 on Sunday.

G-20 leaders also discussed the COVID-19 pandemic and the uneven distribution of vaccines in the world. On Saturday they endorsed a global minimum tax on corporations, a linchpin of new international tax rules aimed at blunting fiscal paradises amid skyrocketing profits of some multinationals.

And after a meeting on the sidelines about Iran's nuclear program, Biden, Johnson, Germany's Angela Merkel and France's Emmanuel Macron made a joint statement expressing their "determination to ensure that Iran can never develop or acquire a nuclear weapon."

They also voiced concern that Tehran "has accelerated the pace of provocative nuclear steps" after halting negotiations on a return to the nuclear agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action.

___ Associated Press writers Jill Lawless, Josh Boak, Zeke Miller and David McHugh in Rome contributed to this report.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
G-20 leaders turn to climate change on last day of summit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ROME (AP) - Leaders of the world's biggest economies were set to tackle climate change Sunday, the final day of a weekend summit in Rome that is widely expected to set the tone for a major conference on the same issue taking place in Glasgow, Scotland, over the next two weeks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The costs of doing nothing vastly outweigh the costs of decarbonising a global economy which, since the Industrial Revolution, has been powered by fossil fuels. That may seem self-evident today, when catastrophic fires and floods offer daily reminders of how expensive continued inaction on climate change is. But 15 years ago, that insight was ground-breaking.

The 2006 Stern Review on the Economics of Climate Change, for which I was a senior economist, was the first time a G7 government had used economic analysis to spell out the case for urgently reducing greenhouse gas emissions. A decade and a half on, its conclusions and recommendations are as valid as ever.

The review also exposed the limitations of using conventional economic modelling to answer transformational questions. It prompted an unhealthy race among economists to insert their own cost presumptions to derive contradictory results.

This points to a lingering problem in economics. Conventional models assume economists know beforehand what the costs of new technologies, preferences and behaviour will be in the future. These are the things that will determine the cost of any green transition. In other words, our estimates of the things we are most interested in are predetermined by assumptions that may not be accurate.

The fact is that the technique known as "static cost benefit analysis", the workhorse of economic modelling, was simply not designed to evaluate the large risks and transitions involved in tackling climate change. This matters because conventional approaches have consistently understated the risks from unmitigated climate change and overstated the costs of a low-carbon transition, thereby delaying policy action.

Forecasting the cost of a systemic transition is fiendishly complex. Adopting new, clean technologies early induces creativity and innovation across the whole economy and generates new learning and experience along the way.

It unleashes economies of scale in discovery and production, as businesses make and distribute things more cleverly and efficiently, dramatically lowering costs. This in turn makes deploying new technologies even more attractive, generating a virtuous cycle of innovation, investment and falling costs.

The cost of generating electricity with solar panels and the cost of storing it in lithium-ion batteries has fallen more than 80% over the last decade. Regardless of the need to decarbonise, people are now set to benefit from cheaper electricity and better performing cars than they otherwise would have. Economists never predicted it and the markets alone would never have delivered it.

Climate Change Committee/IRENA (2020) Renewable Power Generation Costs in 2019.

What happened was that renewable energy generation capacity grew faster than anyone expected, because the costs of installing and running renewables fell sharply. And costs fell sharply because capacity grew faster than anyone expected.

Conventional economic models cannot cope with the destabilising dynamics generated by these amplifying feedbacks, so they miss them entirely, together with the rapid cost cutting they entail. As a result, standard economic and energy forecasting models have been demonstrably wrong for decades.

A self-fulfilling prophecy

No cost benefit analysis can adequately answer the question "What will it cost to decarbonise in the long run?" The answer depends on the choices and actions taken today and in the future.

Once a tipping point is reached, such reinforcing feedbacks make the transition to new technology networks a self-sustaining process. If people expect the low-carbon transition will be cost-effective, they will invest in it.

In this way, expectations of rapid transformation become self-fulfilling. This makes credible and predictable government policy vital to provide investors and companies with confidence that a low-carbon future will be a profitable one.

Ambitious policy to generate a clean energy transition could ultimately be costless. After initial investment costs, it would likely generate considerable savings.

And once the clean innovation machine has been switched on and is running, it has the potential to become more efficient, innovative and productive than the conventional alternative. By driving prices for disruptive technologies extremely low, growth in new sectors will have a positive impact on productivity growth.

Rather than embarking on a fruitless attempt to predict the future using the wrong economic tools, our interests are better served trying to steer and design it. The economics profession is in a better position to cope with the risk and uncertainty this entails. Fifteen years on from the Stern Review, we can say with great confidence that the risks of action are far lower than the risks of inaction. More than that, those risks are in our gift to tame.

The global community has it in its power to make a cleaner, more secure and sustainable but also more efficient, innovative and productive economy a self-fulfilling prophecy. As world leaders gather in Glasgow for the latest UN climate summit, the call for action has never been more urgent.

This story is part of The Conversation's coverage on COP26, the Glasgow climate conference, by experts from around the world.
Amid a rising tide of climate news and stories, The Conversation is here to clear the air and make sure you get information you can trust. More.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change: how economists underestimated benefits of action for decades

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The costs of doing nothing vastly outweigh the costs of decarbonising a global economy which, since the Industrial Revolution, has been powered by fossil fuels. That may seem self-evident today, when catastrophic fires and floods offer daily reminders of how expensive continued inaction on climate change is.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Your morning cup may depend on solving issues with a crop that both contributes to and is deeply affected by the changing climate.

A cupping session at Los Papales, a coffee farm in Jinotega, Nicaragua. Credit... Inti Ocon/Agence France-Presse, via Getty Images

This article is part of a special report on Climate Solutions, which looks at efforts around the world to make a difference.

Wilston Vilchez, a third-generation coffee farmer in the mountains of Nicaragua, has witnessed drastic climatic changes on his 25-acre coffee and cacao farm for years, but when two hurricanes hit within 15 days last year, many other farmers he knows realized they needed to be part of the solution.

"They might be small farmers, but they believe in doing something different that will benefit them all," he said.

Mr. Vilchez, who also manages an agricultural cooperative of about 300 farmers, said that the effects of climate change - rising temperatures, less predictable rainfall, wild swings from drought to flooding, new pests and more - were making it more and more difficult to earn a living from coffee, an experience felt by farmers around the world.

Various organizations and companies are seeking solutions to these challenges. They are helping farmers to improve production and efficiency, developing new strains of beans or farming wild species, and even growing coffee in labs. Producing coffee makes a significant environmental impact - estimates vary, but about 39 gallons of water are needed for one cup, according to UNESCO's Institute for Water Education.

However, people interviewed at these organizations and companies, and experts in the field, said that reducing greenhouse gas emissions would be the best way to ensure the future of coffee as we know it (or something close to what we know) and of the planet.

According to a 2014 study, under modest declines of greenhouse gas emissions, about 50 percent of the land with conditions suitable for growing the two main species of coffee, arabica and robusta, which account for 99 percent of commercial supply, "could disappear by 2050." Brazil and Vietnam, major producing countries, would be especially hard hit.

Denis Leonel, the manager of the farm Coqueiro, inspecting coffee crops that were affected by frosts in the Brazilian state of Minas Gerais in July. Credit... Roosevelt Cassio/Reuters

To the billions of people around the world who rely on drinking coffee (to put it mildly), that forebodes many difficult mornings and possibly rising prices. To the 100 million or so coffee farmers, to say nothing of the tens of millions more who work in transporting, packaging, distributing, selling and brewing coffee, the effects of climate change are making an already precarious existence even more so.

On his farm and across the co-op, Mr. Vilchez works with Blue Harvest, a program from Catholic Relief Services (C.R.S.), started in 2014, which helps Central American coffee farmers restore and protect their water resources, for their benefit and for others who share the watershed downstream.

The program, which built on the organization's earlier work, began as Central America was in the grips of a coffee leaf rust epidemic about a decade ago. Coffee leaf rust is a fungus that decimates coffee plants, often leaving farmers with few choices: cut down their crop and replant, plant something else, or give up the farm. Some have linked the spread of the fungus to climate change because it thrives in warmer conditions with more variable precipitation.

Since climate change is making droughts both more frequent and intense, said Kristin Rosenow, an expert in agricultural development for C.R.S., using water more efficiently and preventing pollution of existing sources are crucially important.

Mr. Vilchez has worked with C.R.S. to restore his soil by planting cover crops. He has also helped other farmers to retain more soil moisture by planting shade trees, a traditional practice, and to employ other low-tech solutions, he said, speaking in Spanish translated by a C.R.S. staff member.

Ms. Rosenow said that these sorts of techniques, among others, like more targeted fertilizer use, had led to an increase of 24 percent in their yields for the farmers, and a 28 percent rise in income, some of which can be attributed to these techniques and some to access to new markets.

Another tactic is planting different varieties that can better withstand both the leaf rust and other climate stressors, according to Hanna Neuschwander, the director of strategy and communications at World Coffee Research.

Next year, World Coffee Research will start a global breeding network, which aims to introduce modern breeding techniques and new varieties in coffee-producing countries to help farmers dealing with new climatic conditions. Based on the information that is obtained, the organization will evaluate how new species perform in different environments around the world, a sort of real-time lab trial.

But there are challenges. When a farmer plants a coffee tree, it takes several years for it to make money. And because coffee trees can live for several decades, a tree that suits today's climate may be completely unsuited to future conditions, said Vern Long, the chief executive of World Coffee Research.

Sacks of coffee in the Zona de los Santos area of Costa Rica. Credit... Jeffrey Arguedas/EPA, via Shutterstock

One possible upside, Ms. Long added: Coffee farmers would not have to expand or move to higher altitudes that may be more suitable in the future but could be heavily forested and biodiverse, leading to loss of carbon sequestration potential and animal and plant habitat.

At the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, in London, Aaron Davis, a coffee scientist who also specializes in climate change, is working on a different solution to ensure sustainability: introducing farmers to wild coffee species, which have not been widely cultivated previously, or at all, but are more tolerant of high temperatures and drought.

"Being a botanist and having done work in climatology, I can't emphasize enough that traditionally used species will not be enough," he said. "If you look at climate change models and projections, we need robust resilience and step change, not incremental change."

Maricel Saenz is also interested in step change, but in a different direction. She is the founder and chief executive of Compound Foods, a "beanless" coffee company that aims to produce coffee in a laboratory environment.

A coffee plant in Sierra Leone. Credit... Agence France-Presse, via Royal Botanical Gardens

Ms. Saenz, 29, is from Costa Rica, so naturally coffee and its future are important to her, she said. "It's a really complex situation, because coffee is one of the main victims and contributors to climate change," she said, citing the energy and water required to grow, transport and brew a cup of coffee.

Compound Foods does not grow any coffee - at least, not in the traditional sense. Instead, the company replicates the microbes from actual coffee cherries, which give a cup of coffee its flavor and aroma, Ms. Saenz said. The microbes are grown on their plant-based formula in bioreactors, a fermentation process similar to what happens naturally at a coffee farm.

At the moment, this makes a cold-brew style extract that mimics the flavor, color and smell of real coffee, but with much less energy and water. They plan to distribute this first product through coffee shops next year and, later, to create coffee grounds that can be brewed at home.

When asked about how her company might affect smallholder farmers who grow most of the world's coffee and often struggle to make a living, Ms. Saenz said that she was hoping to compete with the big industrial farmers and to find ways to support the farmers she grew up knowing.

In both the long and short term, that may mean addressing the root cause itself: greenhouse gas emissions.

As Vincent Amodoi, a project coordinator in Uganda for Farm Africa, a British charity that works with farmers, pastoralists and forest communities in East Africa, including coffee growers, said, "For me, climate change should be one of the major focuses for all governments in the world, and that is just not happening."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Coffee and Climate Have a Complicated Relationship

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your morning cup may depend on solving issues with a crop that both contributes to and is deeply affected by the changing climate. This article is part of a special report on Climate Solutions, which looks at efforts around the world to make a difference.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Navy Blue Illustrated Global Warming Poster

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.dw.com/en/cop26-paris-agreement-solutions-climate/a-59681099

# data[].attributes.body
https://reliefweb.int/report/world/how-global-warming-threatens-human-security-africa

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.economist.com/films/2021/10/30/this-is-what-3degc-of-global-warming-looks-like

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/article/global-warming-overview

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are dying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace. It has become clear that humans have caused most of the past century's warming by releasing heat-trapping gases as we power our modern lives. Called greenhouse gases, their levels are higher now than at any time in the last 800,000 years.

We often call the result global warming, but it is causing a set of changes to the Earth's climate, or long-term weather patterns, that varies from place to place. While many people think of global warming and climate change as synonyms, scientists use "climate change" when describing the complex shifts now affecting our planet's weather and climate systems-in part because some areas actually get cooler in the short term.

Climate change encompasses not only rising average temperatures but also extreme weather events, shifting wildlife populations and habitats, rising seas, and a range of other impacts. All of those changes are emerging as humans continue to add heat-trapping greenhouse gases to the atmosphere, changing the rhythms of climate that all living things have come to rely on.

What will we do-what can we do-to slow this human-caused warming? How will we cope with the changes we've already set into motion? While we struggle to figure it all out, the fate of the Earth as we know it-coasts, forests, farms, and snow-capped mountains-hangs in the balance.

Understanding the greenhouse effect

The "greenhouse effect" is the warming that happens when certain gases in Earth's atmosphere trap heat. These gases let in light but keep heat from escaping, like the glass walls of a greenhouse, hence the name.

Sunlight shines onto the Earth's surface, where the energy is absorbed and then radiate back into the atmosphere as heat. In the atmosphere, greenhouse gas molecules trap some of the heat, and the rest escapes into space. The more greenhouse gases concentrate in the atmosphere, the more heat gets locked up in the molecules.

Scientists have known about the greenhouse effect since 1824, when Joseph Fourier calculated that the Earth would be much colder if it had no atmosphere. This natural greenhouse effect is what keeps the Earth's climate livable. Without it, the Earth's surface would be an average of about 60 degrees Fahrenheit (33 degrees Celsius) cooler.

In 1895, the Swedish chemist Svante Arrhenius discovered that humans could enhance the greenhouse effect by making carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas. He kicked off 100 years of climate research that has given us a sophisticated understanding of global warming.

Levels of greenhouse gases have gone up and down over the Earth's history, but they had been fairly constant for the past few thousand years. Global average temperatures had also stayed fairly constant over that time- until the past 150 years. Through the burning of fossil fuels and other activities that have emitted large amounts of greenhouse gases, particularly over the past few decades, humans are now enhancing the greenhouse effect and warming Earth significantly, and in ways that promise many effects, scientists warn.

Aren't temperature changes natural?

Human activity isn't the only factor that affects Earth's climate. Volcanic eruptions and variations in solar radiation from sunspots, solar wind, and the Earth's position relative to the sun also play a role. So do large-scale weather patterns such as El Niño.

But climate models that scientists use to monitor Earth's temperatures take those factors into account. Changes in solar radiation levels as well as minute particles suspended in the atmosphere from volcanic eruptions, for example, have contributed only about two percent to the recent warming effect. The balance comes from greenhouse gases and other human-caused factors, such as land use change.

The short timescale of this recent warming is singular as well. Volcanic eruptions, for example, emit particles that temporarily cool the Earth's surface. But their effect lasts just a few years. Events like El Niño also work on fairly short and predictable cycles. On the other hand, the types of global temperature fluctuations that have contributed to ice ages occur on a cycle of hundreds of thousands of years.

For thousands of years now, emissions of greenhouse gases to the atmosphere have been balanced out by greenhouse gases that are naturally absorbed. As a result, greenhouse gas concentrations and temperatures have been fairly stable, which has allowed human civilization to flourish within a consistent climate.

Now, humans have increased the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere by more than a third since the Industrial Revolution. Changes that have historically taken thousands of years are now happening over the course of decades.

Why does this matter?

The rapid rise in greenhouse gases is a problem because it's changing the climate faster than some living things can adapt to. Also, a new and more unpredictable climate poses unique challenges to all life.

Historically, Earth's climate has regularly shifted between temperatures like those we see today and temperatures cold enough to cover much of North America and Europe with ice. The difference between average global temperatures today and during those ice ages is only about 9 degrees Fahrenheit (5 degrees Celsius), and the swings have tended to happen slowly, over hundreds of thousands of years.

But with concentrations of greenhouse gases rising, Earth's remaining ice sheets such as Greenland and Antarctica are starting to melt too. That extra water could raise sea levels significantly, and quickly. By 2050, sea levels are predicted to rise between one and 2.3 feet as glaciers melt.

As the mercury rises, the climate can change in unexpected ways. In addition to sea levels rising, weather can become more extreme. This means more intense major storms, more rain followed by longer and drier droughts-a challenge for growing crops-changes in the ranges in which plants and animals can live, and loss of water supplies that have historically come from glaciers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Glaciers are melting, sea levels are rising, cloud forests are drying, and wildlife is scrambling to keep pace.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Yellow & Green Organic Leaves Go Green Quote Instagram Post

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Credit... Illustration by The New York Times; Photograph by Alexander Spatari/Getty Images

Ms. Renkl is a contributing Opinion writer who covers flora, fauna, politics and culture in the American South.

NASHVILLE - Two good things happened here recently that I didn't see coming. First, our Metro Council passed a bill, which Mayor John Cooper signed, that increases protections for trees on city land. Second, the proposal for an outrageously terrible subdivision in Whites Creek, one of the few remaining rural tracts of Davidson County, was rejected by the Metro Planning Commission.

Positive as the recent environmental news here may be, small-scale victories like these don't normally rise to the level of national attention. But as a measure of what is possible, they have given me more hope for the future than I've had in a long time.

That's because these particular environmental wins were not the result of lawsuits or transfers of political power. They were the result of widespread and nonpartisan public outcry. And they tell us of what can happen in any city, anywhere, when people start recognizing trees as a kind of civic infrastructure and the natural world as a public good.

The new tree ordinance is the result of more than two years of work by the Nashville Tree Conservation Corps. This effort began in response to the city's decision, back in 2019, to allow the National Football League to cut down 21 mature cherry trees, in full bloom on Nashville streets, to make room for a lurid stage from which the league planned to conduct its annual draft.

When word got around, a great hue and cry rose up from Nashvillians who were sick and tired of city officials sacrificing municipal treasures on the altar of "progress." The city backed down, redesigning plans so that the stage affected only 10 trees, and digging up those to replant elsewhere.

The effort to suppress environmentally unsound development in Whites Creek has been in the works even longer than the new tree legislation; every time residents managed to defeat one effort, developers came back with a slightly altered proposal, and residents were forced to mobilize again. These tireless neighbors, aware that dense development increases the risk of severe flooding, demolishes wildlife habitat, and raises temperatures, will apparently keep fighting to preserve this tiny swatch of rural Nashville as often as it takes.

Both cases represent far more than a Not-in-My-Backyard attempt to suppress, or at least relocate, the inevitable. Trees absorb rainwater, prevent soil erosion, filter greenhouse gases from the air, cool the surrounding area, provide both habitat and food for wildlife, and improve the quality of life for human beings. Trees are also at the center of efforts to promote environmental justice within cities by making their allocation of green space more equitable. For now, it's still possible to measure the relative wealth of an urban neighborhood simply by counting its trees.

From 2008 to 2016, Davidson County lost the equivalent of 918 acres of trees, approximately 13 percent of our tree canopy. Even in this age of profound climate disruption, when a community's tree canopy is directly related to its climate resilience, nobody knows how many trees have been lost in the last five years. Nobody has counted.

Chances are, you've become at least a little bit worried about deforestation. You're probably aware of the role forests in general play in protecting global biodiversity, and of the role the Amazon basin specifically plays in stabilizing the global climate. The idea that the Amazon is being burned to the ground to turn the rain forest into fields for cattle grazing - cattle destined to become hamburgers - likely strikes you as the kind of moral abomination that might as well be called a mortal sin.

It can be overwhelming to consider the magnitude of the obstacles involved in protecting the world's forests, especially when those forests are being felled because human beings have need of timber, or grazing land, or homesites, or cornfields. We certainly have the power to stop eating imported beef, but many of the world's remaining forests exist in places far beyond the reach of political or economic pressure by ordinary Americans.

What is definitely within our reach is the kind of activism the people of Nashville have begun to show in protecting the urban forest: establishing mechanisms to monitor the health of trees, to protect as many as possible, to replace those that cannot be saved, to halt environmentally unsustainable growth. We still have a long, long way to go - there are no regulations here that protect trees on private property, for example - but there are signs now that many in this community understand the risks we face as the climate calamity unfolds. Residents are finally summoning the will to preserve what they can, and if construction-besotted Nashville can do that, any city can do it.

Urban green space plays a less profound role than great forests in limiting temperature rise, it's true, but it plays an outsize role in protecting communities from the worst effects of a changing climate. "Trees are, quite simply, the most effective strategy, technology, we have to guard against heat in cities," Brian Stone Jr., a professor of environmental planning at the Georgia Institute of Technology, told the Times reporter Catrin Einhorn.

Next Saturday is National Public Lands Day, a chance for Americans to participate in cleanup, trail maintenance and awareness-raising efforts at our treasured national parks, forests and marine estuaries, among other public lands. The celebration is particularly apt this year, as the pandemic reminds us again and again of how crucial natural areas are as safe places to gather, or as a source of solitude, quiet and calm.

With any luck it will also remind us that such places were not saved from development by accident. It took enormous political will to create them. It will also take enormous political will to preserve and enlarge them.

Here in the United States we have spent decades wringing our hands about deforestation in the developing world, despite having done an incredibly poor job of managing our own old-growth lands. Now is the time to protect what's left of the forests here at home, including the pocket parks and urban trees that cool our concrete jungles. The future of the planet depends, in part, on every tree we can save.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Opinion | We Need Trees, and Trees Need Us

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Ms. Renkl is a contributing Opinion writer who covers flora, fauna, politics and culture in the American South. NASHVILLE - Two good things happened here recently that I didn't see coming. First, our Metro Council passed a bill, which Mayor John Cooper signed, that increases protections for trees on city land.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjErLKV8fjzAhUTc3AKHWa8CwQ4ChDF9AEoAHoECBIQAg&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ecns.cn%2Fnews%2Fsociety%2F2021-11-01%2Fdetail-ihasnqih0806272.shtml&usg=AOvVaw2B1e9wI1Fgl6ka-5yHCOVF

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjErLKV8fjzAhUTc3AKHWa8CwQ4ChDF9AEoAHoECAQQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fphys.org%2Fnews%2F2021-11-limit-global-15c.html&usg=AOvVaw0cS_jn7yUx-yVQ8t0AlN4a

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Blue Beige Illustrated Space Earth Day Card

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwijvMSA8vjzAhXOF4gKHQCeAzU4FBDF9AEoAHoECBUQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.sky.com%2Fstory%2Fclimate-change-global-warming-greenhouse-gas-levels-in-atmosphere-hit-record-high-12444113&usg=AOvVaw0FG8YsAKamcrDxl8K0vRTj

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/20211005-global-warming-kills-14-percent-of-world-s-corals-in-a-decade

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dynamite fishing and pollution -- but mostly global warming -- wiped out 14 percent of the world's coral reefs from 2009 to 2018, leaving graveyards of bleached skeletons where vibrant ecosystems once thrived, according to the largest ever survey of coral health.

Hardest hit were corals in South Asia and the Pacific, around the Arabian Peninsula, and off the coast of Australia, more than 300 scientists in the Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network reported.

"Climate change is the biggest threat to the world's reefs," co-author Paul Hardisty, CEO of the Australian Institute of Marine Science, said in a statement.

Oceans absorb more than 90 percent of the excess heat from greenhouse gas emissions, shielding land surfaces but generating huge, long-lasting marine heatwaves that are pushing many species of corals past their limits of tolerance.

A single so-called bleaching event in 1998 caused by warming waters wiped out eight percent of all corals.

Coral reefs cover only a tiny fraction -- 0.2 percent -- of the ocean floor, but they are home to at least a quarter of all marine animals and plants.

Besides anchoring marine ecosystems, they also provide protein, jobs and protection from storms and shoreline erosion for hundreds of millions of people worldwide.

The value of goods and services from coral reefs is about $2.7 trillion per year, including $36 billion in tourism, the report said.

Loss of coral from 2009 to 2018 varied by region, ranging from five percent in East Asia to 95 percent in the eastern tropical Pacific.

- The 'Coral Triangle' -

"Since 2009 we have lost more coral worldwide than all the living coral in Australia," noted UNEP executive director Inger Anderson.

"We can reverse the losses, but we have to act now."

The UN's climate science advisory panel, the IPCC, projects with "high confidence" that global warming of 1.5 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels will see 70 to 90 percent of all corals disappear.

In a 2C world, less than one percent of global corals would survive.

Earth's average surface temperature has already increased by 1.1C above that benchmark.

The report, titled "Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2020", found reasons for cautious optimism.

"Some reefs have shown a remarkable ability to bounce back, which offers some hope for the future recovery of degraded reefs," Hardisty said.

East and Southeast Asia's "Coral Triangle" -- which contains nearly 30 percent of the world's coral reefs -- were hit less hard by warming waters over the last decade, and in some cases showed recovery.

This resilience could be due to species unique to the region, potentially offering strategies for boosting coral growth elsewhere, the authors said.

Based on nearly two million data points from 12,000 sites spanning 73 countries and 40 years, the report is the sixth such global survey and the first since 2008.

To measure change over time, the researchers contrasted areas covered by healthy live hard coral with areas taken over by algae, a sign of coral distress.

The report was undertaken with support from UNEP and the International Coral Reef Initiative, a partnership of governments and research organisations focused on preserving corals reefs and related ecosystems.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global warming kills 14 percent of world's corals in a decade - France 24

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dynamite fishing and pollution -- but mostly global warming -- wiped out 14 percent of the world's coral reefs from 2009 to 2018, leaving graveyards of bleached skeletons where vibrant ecosystems once thrived, according to the largest ever survey of coral health.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjv3PWm8vjzAhVQed4KHaytDZ44KBDF9AEoAHoECAUQAg&url=https%3A%2F%2Fnews.yahoo.com%2Fwhat-is-the-greenhouse-effect-and-how-does-it-lead-to-global-warming-155442397.html&usg=AOvVaw28YlEI86JV4CyoE7vfgfmO

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
carbon dioxide levels in 2020 reached a 3-million year high - cnn

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere reached a 3 million-year high in 2020

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The findings add to a sense of urgency ahead of the COP26 climate talks, which begin in Glasgow, Scotland on Sunday. There are expectations for some G20 nations that have not increased their ambitions since Paris to do so ahead of COP26.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Beige and Blue Ocean Great Outdoors Instagram Post (Facebook 게시물)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
CEO and Managing Partner at Infosys Consulting, a leading business and technology consultancy. Net Zero Is The Only Answer
The new devastating UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report paints a grim picture and confirms that it is indisputable that human activities have been the main driver for warming the earth to dangerous levels, triggering extreme climate events. The main culprit is carbon emissions, and if levels remain the same, the planet will reach the tipping point of 2 degrees of global warming by the middle of the century.

UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres has rightly said the report is a "code red for humanity." The alarm bells are deafening. We must take urgent action to arrest the damage before it is too late. Can technology hold the key to solving humanity's biggest existential crisis?

Greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels are choking our planet. The IPCC report has delivered a stark warning that the window to make immediate "deep cuts in emissions" is closing fast, and we must reach the minimum target of at least net zero by 2050.

Net zero refers to a state in which greenhouse gases released into the atmosphere are balanced by their removal from the atmosphere. Reaching net zero is vital because - for CO2 at least - this is the state at which global warming stops.
Healing With Blockchain And Cloud Computing
The UN's own Race to Zero campaign "mobilizes a coalition of leading net zero initiatives, representing 733 cities, 31 regions, 3,067 businesses, 173 of the biggest investors, and 622 higher education institutions." To stay within 1.5C of warming, we must drastically reduce other greenhouse emissions such as methane and deviate from an overreliance on carbon offsetting in our sustainability plans.

As a global leader in the consulting industry, I've had a front-row seat to how powerful new technologies and solutions are shaping our future and solving the world's most complex challenges. Here are a few initial ideas on how I believe technology can liberate us from this crisis and unlock a new sustainable society.

Data science and cloud computing have unlocked the opportunity to leverage highly elastic computational abilities to compute gross carbon product (GCP) across all carbon-generating sources. They can help define data-based macro-level policies on renewable consumption goals and carbon metrics for businesses and individuals, incentivizing them to reduce their footprint.
Cleansing The Planet with AI And Advanced Analytics
IoT devices enabled with edge computing can augment remote monitoring capabilities of carbon-generating sources and prevent unwarranted carbon emissions. For example, a 2015 report by Ericsson cites IoT surface transportation solutions, including traffic monitoring, that will lower emissions by optimizing routes through traffic.

Blockchain technology can create a universal carbon currency through global carbon trading ledgers, which will allow nations to buy carbon credits for their energy needs, developing a progressive framework toward reaching the net-zero goal. The World Economic Forum launched its Mining and Metals Blockchain Initiative, creating a Carbon Tracing Platform to ensure the end-to-end traceability of CO2 emissions using distributed ledger technology.
Eliminating E-waste With Innovation
The Amazon rainforest is now emitting more carbon dioxide than it absorbs, according to a study by researchers at the National Institute for Space Research in Brazil. Our oceans are clogged with pollutants, while fish resources are dwindling at an alarming rate as found in a well-known study by members of the Linking Marine Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services Working Group. Unsustainable use of natural resources continues to disrupt the delicate balance of our ecosystem.

Advanced analytics can greatly aid the fishing industry by increasing the total biomass of ocean resources while lowering operating costs and prices of seafood. Radio frequency identification (RFID) technology can improve the traceability of seafood supply chains. Predictive analytics, machine learning and artificial intelligence can provide precise recommendations on where to fish based on real-time ocean and species data. A recent article from the Environmental Defense Fund outlines several smart technologies such as AI, data sensors and analytics that are helping increase the efficiency of the fishing industry while reversing overfishing.
The Clock Is Ticking
The omnipresence of digital technology means our global e-waste is enormous. Based on Statista, the average U.S. household, consisting of 2.53 people, owns 10.37 connected devices. Hologram technology can help by substituting and reducing materials that are non-recyclable or cost-prohibitive to recycle.

Holographic technology can create a truly interactive device that can consolidate and replace all existing consumer electronics. In addition to features such as voice command, biometric authentication and motion detection, hologram devices can display digital keyboards, eliminating the need to produce electronic peripherals such as keyboards, mice and remote controls. The technology is quickly developing, as evidenced by New York startup Looking Glass Factory, which has developed a holographic interface that does not require an augmented reality or virtual reality headset.

It is irrevocable that humans have played a damning role in ailing our planet, but we also hold the cure. The innovative application of technology presents us with an opportunity to arrest, even reverse, climate change.

Industry initiatives and policies alone are not sufficient. To truly move the needle, we need an aware citizenry. Every consumer choice must be measured in terms of its carbon impact. Every purchase should have an associated carbon tag. Every ingredient/part should be tracked for its "E" score using IoT sensors that can measure the footprint of every batch of product based on energy utilization, factory floor efficiency and waste.

The impact will be wide-ranging. Supply chains will morph. Irrigation-intensive crops will gravitate toward low-carbon impact regions. The government's energy policies will yield to the need to compete on low carbon. This, along with the impact of smart energy grids that allow prescriptive AI to suggest energy optimization and incentivized behavioral alerts such as "Walk to destination. Save 4.5 tons CO2. Gain 5000 steps" will add up.

Once the world is comfortable with this paradigm, wearables, IoT and blockchain all wrapped in an AI framework will guide each of us to make a billion sustainable choices, helping us bleed the carbon from the planet.

Forbes Technology Council is an invitation-only community for world-class CIOs, CTOs and technology executives. Do I qualify?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
intergovernmental panel on climate change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Council Post: Can Technology Define The Hour Of Reckoning For Our Planet?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
CEO and Managing Partner at Infosys Consulting , a leading business and technology consultancy. Net Zero Is The Only Answer The new devastating UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report paints a grim picture and confirms that it is indisputable that human activities have been the main driver for warming the earth to dangerous levels, triggering extreme climate events.

# data[].attributes.body
https://theconversation.com/widespread-collapse-of-west-antarcticas-ice-sheet-is-avoidable-if-we-keep-global-warming-below-2-169651

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.carbonbrief.org/explainer-desertification-and-the-role-of-climate-change

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.lboro.ac.uk/news-events/news/2021/november/what-would-four-degree-global-warming-feel-like/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What would 4°C of global warming feel like?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
COP26 is underway and keeping 1.5°C within reach will feature prominently in world leaders’ discussions.

# data[].attributes.body
https://news.globallandscapesforum.org/55449/updated-ndcs-set-world-on-track-for-2-7-degrees-of-warming-by-2100/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As the world gets ready for the most important climate conference of the year, COP26, governments' climate targets remain far from sufficient.

New and updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) - the emission-curbing plans pledged by countries to the Paris Agreement on climate change - would reduce the expected level of 2030 emissions by 7.5 percent compared to previous NDCs, according to 2021's annual Emissions Gap Report released yesterday. For context, a 55 percent reduction is needed to keeping global warming within the Paris Agreement goal of 1.5 degrees Celsius, which scientists have said would limit the worst of climate-induced catastrophes.

"Climate change is no longer a future problem. It is a now problem," said Inger Andersen, the Executive Director of UN Environment (UNEP), which issued this the report.

"To stand a chance of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, we have eight years to almost halve greenhouse gas emissions: eight years to make the plans, put in place the policies, implement them and ultimately deliver the cuts. The clock is ticking loudly."

In a year marked by fires, floods, droughts and extreme heat, the stakes are high for COP 26, which will take place next week in Glasgow. So far, 116 countries have submitted new NDC targets, covering 61 percent of global emissions and half of the world's population. Some countries' plans, however, are not more ambitious than their previous plans.

In fact, the report states that the current NDCs put the world on the path to a temperature increase of at least 2.7 degrees by 2100 .

The formally submitted and announced targets of G20 countries would result in an annual reduction of roughly 3 gigatonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent compared to their previous NDCs. Nevertheless, G20 countries are collectively expected to fall short of this by 1.1 gigatonnes annually, as only 10 have measures in place to achieve their previous NDCs.

Seven G20 countries - including the U.S., Australia and Brazil - are not expected to fulfill their previous NDCs, let alone updated ones, without significant policy change. India and Turkey have not updated their NDCs.

Despite this, countries' net-zero targets are highlighted as a promising development. So far, 49 countries and the E.U. have net-zero targets, with most aiming to reach this by 2050. Current pledges cover more than half of global domestic greenhouse gas emissions, over half of the world's GDP and a third of the world's population. These targets could potentially shave 0.5 degrees off warming from current 2100 projections to 2.2 degrees Celsius.

The report notes, however, that many net-zero targets remain ambiguous, and most are unclear on aspects including aviation, shipping and progress reporting. It also calls for more short-term actions to reach net-zero because delayed action and then a sudden rush to decarbonize as 2050 approaches could still result in more warming overall.

Countries are also described as having mostly missed the opportunity that recovery programs in response to the COVID-19 pandemic could have presented to transform economies to emit less carbon.

The vast majority of pandemic-related funds have been for immediate rescue spending, such as unemployment payments or healthcare costs. Of the USD 2.25 trillion that countries used to invest in long-term recovery, only 17 to 19 percent (USD 390 to 440 billion) could help reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Although time is running dangerously short, the report says that reducing methane - the second-most important greenhouse gas for global warming - is an important opportunity for mitigating climate change.

Methane leaks can be prevented at a relatively low cost by the fossil fuel sector. Such low-cost measures alone could cut human-caused methane emissions by 20 percent by 2030. However, other measures like dietary changes or switching to renewables are needed to cut methane emissions by 44 percent and limit global warming to 1.5 degree Celsius.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Updated NDCs set world on track for 2.7 degrees of warming by 2100

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the world gets ready for the most important climate conference of the year, COP26, governments' climate targets remain far from sufficient. New and updated Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) - the emission-curbing plans pledged by countries to the Paris Agreement on climate change - would reduce the expected level of 2030 emissions by 7.5 percent compared to previous NDCs, according to 2021's annual Emissions Gap Report released yesterday.

# data[].attributes.body
https://climate.nasa.gov/resources/global-warming-vs-climate-change.amp

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Climate change" and "global warming" are often used interchangeably but have distinct meanings. Similarly, the terms "weather" and "climate" are sometimes confused, though they refer to events with broadly different spatial- and timescales.

Weather vs. Climate

"If you don't like the weather in New England, just wait a few minutes."

Weather refers to atmospheric conditions that occur locally over short periods of time-from minutes to hours or days. Familiar examples include rain, snow, clouds, winds, floods or thunderstorms.

Climate, on the other hand, refers to the long-term regional or even global average of temperature, humidity and rainfall patterns over seasons, years or decades.

What is Global Warming?

This graph illustrates the change in global surface temperature relative to 1951-1980 average temperatures, with the year 2020 tying with 2016 for warmest on record (Source: NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies). Learn more about global surface temperature here. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech

Global warming is the long-term heating of Earth's climate system observed since the pre-industrial period (between 1850 and 1900) due to human activities, primarily fossil fuel burning, which increases heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in Earth's atmosphere. The term is frequently used interchangeably with the term climate change, though the latter refers to both human- and naturally produced warming and the effects it has on our planet. It is most commonly measured as the average increase in Earth's global surface temperature.

Since the pre-industrial period, human activities are estimated to have increased Earth's global average temperature by about 1 degree Celsius (1.8 degrees Fahrenheit), a number that is currently increasing by 0.2 degrees Celsius (0.36 degrees Fahrenheit) per decade. Most of the current warming trend is extremely likely (greater than 95 percent probability) the result of human activity since the 1950s and is proceeding at an unprecedented rate over decades to millennia.

What is Climate Change?

Climate change is a long-term change in the average weather patterns that have come to define Earth's local, regional and global climates. These changes have a broad range of observed effects that are synonymous with the term.

Changes observed in Earth's climate since the early 20th century are primarily driven by human activities, particularly fossil fuel burning, which increases heat-trapping greenhouse gas levels in Earth's atmosphere, raising Earth's average surface temperature. These human-produced temperature increases are commonly referred to as global warming. Natural processes can also contribute to climate change, including internal variability (e.g., cyclical ocean patterns like El Niño, La Niña and the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) and external forcings (e.g., volcanic activity, changes in the Sun's energy output, variations in Earth's orbit).

Scientists use observations from the ground, air and space, along with theoretical models, to monitor and study past, present and future climate change. Climate data records provide evidence of climate change key indicators, such as global land and ocean temperature increases; rising sea levels; ice loss at Earth's poles and in mountain glaciers; frequency and severity changes in extreme weather such as hurricanes, heatwaves, wildfires, droughts, floods and precipitation; and cloud and vegetation cover changes, to name but a few.

Find Out More: A Guide to NASA's Global Climate Change Website

This website provides a high-level overview of some of the known causes, effects and indications of global climate change:

Evidence. Brief descriptions of some of the key scientific observations that our planet is undergoing abrupt climate change.

Causes. A concise discussion of the primary climate change causes on our planet.

Effects. A look at some of the likely future effects of climate change, including U.S. regional effects.

Vital Signs. Graphs and animated time series showing real-time climate change data, including atmospheric carbon dioxide, global temperature, sea ice extent and ice sheet volume.

Earth Minute. This fun video series explains various Earth science topics, including some climate change topics.

Other NASA Resources

Goddard Scientific Visualization Studio. An extensive collection of animated climate change and Earth science visualizations.

Sea Level Change Portal. NASA's portal for an in-depth look at the science behind sea level change.

NASA's Earth Observatory. Satellite imagery, feature articles and scientific information about our home planet, with a focus on Earth's climate and environmental change.
Shutterstock credits: wandee007 (left), Amy Johansson (middle), Avatar_023 (right).

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Overview: Weather, Global Warming and Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Climate change" and "global warming" are often used interchangeably but have distinct meanings. Similarly, the terms "weather" and "climate" are sometimes confused, though they refer to events with broadly different spatial- and timescales. "If you don't like the weather in New England, just wait a few minutes."

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nationalgeographic.org/encyclopedia/global-warming/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Earth Science, Climatology

Image

Photograph by Emory Kristof/ National Geographic

Global warming is the long-term warming of the planet's overall temperature. Though this warming trend has been going on for a long time, its pace has significantly increased in the last hundred years due to the burning of fossil fuels. As the human population has increased, so has the volume of fossil fuels burned. Fossil fuels include coal, oil, and natural gas, and burning them causes what is known as the "greenhouse effect" in Earth's atmosphere.

The greenhouse effect is when the sun's rays penetrate the atmosphere, but when that heat is reflected off the surface cannot escape back into space. Gases produced by the burning of fossil fuels prevent the heat from leaving the atmosphere. These greenhouse gasses are carbon dioxide, chlorofluorocarbons, water vapor, methane, and nitrous oxide. The excess heat in the atmosphere has caused the average global temperature to rise overtime, otherwise known as global warming.

Global warming has presented another issue called climate change. Sometimes these phrases are used interchangeably, however, they are different. Climate change refers to changes in weather patterns and growing seasons around the world. It also refers to sea level rise caused by the expansion of warmer seas and melting ice sheets and glaciers. Global warming causes climate change, which poses a serious threat to life on Earth in the forms of widespread flooding and extreme weather. Scientists continue to study global warming and its impact on Earth.

Director

Tyson Brown, National Geographic Society

Author

National Geographic Society

Production Managers

Gina Borgia, National Geographic Society

Jeanna Sullivan, National Geographic Society

Program Specialists

Sarah Appleton, National Geographic Society, National Geographic Society

Margot Willis, National Geographic Society

Last Updated

October 19, 2023

For information on user permissions, please read our Terms of Service. If you have questions about how to cite anything on our website in your project or classroom presentation, please contact your teacher. They will best know the preferred format. When you reach out to them, you will need the page title, URL, and the date you accessed the resource.

Media

If a media asset is downloadable, a download button appears in the corner of the media viewer. If no button appears, you cannot download or save the media.

Text

Text on this page is printable and can be used according to our Terms of Service.

Interactives

Any interactives on this page can only be played while you are visiting our website. You cannot download interactives.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Earth is warming up, and humans are at least partially to blame. The causes, effects, and complexities of global warming are important to understand so that we can fight for the health of our planet.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Graphical abstract. Credit: DOI: 10.1016/j.oneear.2021.10.010

Fearing a trade-off with economic growth, countries feel discouraged to cut their CO ₂ emissions. But do the two really not go together? Environmental scientist Ranran Wang and her colleagues investigated the relationship between economic growth and CO ₂ emissions in 73 countries from 1970 to 2016. Wang: "We also identified mechanisms by which countries drove down their CO ₂ emissions, especially during economic growth."
Five CO₂-reducing mechanisms
Fearing a trade-off with economic growth, countries feel discouraged to cut their CO ₂ emissions. But do the two really not go together? Environmental scientist Ranran Wang and her colleagues investigated the relationship between economic growth and CO ₂ emissions in 73 countries from 1970 to 2016. Wang: "We also identified mechanisms by which countries drove down their CO ₂ emissions, especially during economic growth."
What and how? The five mechanisms explained

Energy system decarbonisation: Replacing the fossil fuel energy sources by sources that emit far less carbon dioxide-such as wind, solar and nuclear energy. Also switching from oil and coal to natural gas (fuel switching) results in less carbon emission.

Electrification: Replacing technologies that use fossil fuels with those that use electricity, for example replacing gas furnaces with heat pumps. Electrification improves energy efficiency, thereby reducing energy use.

Increase in economic productivity: A measure of how efficiently production inputs are used to produce a given level of output. Fewer inputs of materials and energy often mean less CO₂ emissions from making those materials and energy products.

Deindustrialisation: When a country reduces its industrial capacity, the economic productions become less carbon-intensive, because agriculture and service activities are typically less carbon-intensive than industrial activities. Sidenote: When a country lowers its production, this often leads to the offshoring of production and increased trade. The subsequent emission effect remains controversial.

Winter warming: Warmer winters due to climate change lead to less heating demand and thus reduced energy use and emissions.

Increased productivity key role in emission reduction
In developing countries, the most important reduction factor was an increase in economic productivity. "Increased productivity has been widely recognized as a fundamental driver of economic growth," says Valentina Assevona, assistant professor at the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. "Now our findings reveal that it also plays an important role in reducing CO ₂ emissions. It explains around 47 percent of the total emission reduction that developing countries achieved during the 2000s."

In developed countries, energy decarbonisation was the dominant reduction mechanism. Since the 1970s, they have put more and more effort into sustainable, low carbon energy.
Growth must not be based on carbon
The findings can help underpin robust strategies for mitigating CO ₂ emissions. Edgar Hertwich, professor at the Norweigan University of Science and Technology: "Our research underlines that the effect of public policy on economic structure is indeed relevant for the climate. That's something that is yet often not recognized."

"As long as economic growth is based on fossil energy, it will keep increasing our emissions," Hertwich says. "So, that's where we can make our greatest gains. It is crucial that we first move away from fossil fuels and electrify. Leading European countries have already shown that decarbonisation can go hand-in-hand with economic growth. However, we need to strengthen this effort substantially to reach the Paris climate target. We hope our research can contribute to that."

More information: Ranran Wang et al, Energy system decarbonization and productivity gains reduced the coupling of CO2 emissions and economic growth in 73 countries between 1970 and 2016, One Earth (2021). DOI: 10.1016/j.oneear.2021.10.010

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
CO2 reduction and economic growth: Can they go hand-in-hand?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fearing a trade-off with economic growth, countries feel discouraged to cut their CO2 emissions. But do the two really not go together? Environmental scientist Ranran Wang and her colleagues investigated the relationship between economic growth and CO2 emissions in 73 countries from 1970 to 2016.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Science of Climate Change Explained: Facts, Evidence and Proof

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Definitive answers to the big questions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
global warming, the phenomenon of increasing average air temperatures near the surface of Earth over the past one to two centuries. Climate scientists have since the mid-20th century gathered detailed observations of various weather phenomena (such as temperatures, precipitation, and storms) and of related influences on climate (such as ocean currents and the atmosphere's chemical composition). These data indicate that Earth's climate has changed over almost every conceivable timescale since the beginning of geologic time and that human activities since at least the beginning of the Industrial Revolution have a growing influence over the pace and extent of present-day climate change.

Giving voice to a growing conviction of most of the scientific community, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was formed in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). The IPCC's Sixth Assessment Report (AR6), published in 2021, noted that the best estimate of the increase in global average surface temperature between 1850 and 2019 was 1.07 °C (1.9 °F). An IPCC special report produced in 2018 noted that human beings and their activities have been responsible for a worldwide average temperature increase between 0.8 and 1.2 °C (1.4 and 2.2 °F) since preindustrial times, and most of the warming over the second half of the 20th century could be attributed to human activities.

AR6 produced a series of global climate predictions based on modeling five greenhouse gas emission scenarios that accounted for future emissions, mitigation (severity reduction) measures, and uncertainties in the model projections. Some of the main uncertainties include the precise role of feedback processes and the impacts of industrial pollutants known as aerosols, which may offset some warming. The lowest-emissions scenario, which assumed steep cuts in greenhouse gas emissions beginning in 2015, predicted that the global mean surface temperature would increase between 1.0 and 1.8 °C (1.8 and 3.2 °F) by 2100 relative to the 1850-1900 average. This range stood in stark contrast to the highest-emissions scenario, which predicted that the mean surface temperature would rise between 3.3 and 5.7 °C (5.9 and 10.2 °F) by 2100 based on the assumption that greenhouse gas emissions would continue to increase throughout the 21st century. The intermediate-emissions scenario, which assumed that emissions would stabilize by 2050 before declining gradually, projected an increase of between 2.1 and 3.5 °C (3.8 and 6.3 °F) by 2100.

Many climate scientists agree that significant societal, economic, and ecological damage would result if the global average temperature rose by more than 2 °C (3.6 °F) in such a short time. Such damage would include increased extinction of many plant and animal species, shifts in patterns of agriculture, and rising sea levels. By 2015 all but a few national governments had begun the process of instituting carbon reduction plans as part of the Paris Agreement, a treaty designed to help countries keep global warming to 1.5 °C (2.7 °F) above preindustrial levels in order to avoid the worst of the predicted effects. Whereas authors of the 2018 special report noted that should carbon emissions continue at their present rate, the increase in average near-surface air temperature would reach 1.5 °C sometime between 2030 and 2052, authors of the AR6 report suggested that this threshold would be reached by 2041 at the latest.

The AR6 report also noted that the global average sea level had risen by some 20 cm (7.9 inches) between 1901 and 2018 and that sea level rose faster in the second half of the 20th century than in the first half. It also predicted, again depending on a wide range of scenarios, that the global average sea level would rise by different amounts by 2100 relative to the 1995-2014 average. Under the report's lowest-emission scenario, sea level would rise by 28-55 cm (11-21.7 inches), whereas, under the intermediate emissions scenario, sea level would rise by 44-76 cm (17.3-29.9 inches). The highest-emissions scenario suggested that sea level would rise by 63-101 cm (24.8-39.8 inches) by 2100.

The scenarios referred to above depend mainly on future concentrations of certain trace gases, called greenhouse gases, that have been injected into the lower atmosphere in increasing amounts through the burning of fossil fuels for industry, transportation, and residential uses. Modern global warming is the result of an increase in magnitude of the so-called greenhouse effect, a warming of Earth's surface and lower atmosphere caused by the presence of water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxides, and other greenhouse gases. In 2014 the IPCC first reported that concentrations of carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxides in the atmosphere surpassed those found in ice cores dating back 800,000 years.

Of all these gases, carbon dioxide is the most important, both for its role in the greenhouse effect and for its role in the human economy. It has been estimated that, at the beginning of the industrial age in the mid-18th century, carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere were roughly 280 parts per million (ppm). By the end of 2022 they had risen to 419 ppm, and, if fossil fuels continue to be burned at current rates, they are projected to reach 550 ppm by the mid-21st century-essentially, a doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations in 300 years.

A vigorous debate is in progress over the extent and seriousness of rising surface temperatures, the effects of past and future warming on human life, and the need for action to reduce future warming and deal with its consequences. This article provides an overview of the scientific background related to the subject of global warming. It considers the causes of rising near-surface air temperatures, the influencing factors, the process of climate research and forecasting, and the possible ecological and social impacts of rising temperatures. For an overview of the public policy developments related to global warming occurring since the mid-20th century, see global warming policy. For a detailed description of Earth's climate, its processes, and the responses of living things to its changing nature, see climate. For additional background on how Earth's climate has changed throughout geologic time, see climatic variation and change. For a full description of Earth's gaseous envelope, within which climate change and global warming occur, see atmosphere.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Global warming | Definition, Causes, Effects, Solutions, & Facts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Global warming, the phenomenon of rising average air temperatures near Earth's surface over the past 100 to 200 years. Although Earth's climate has been evolving since the dawn of geologic time, human activities since the Industrial Revolution have a growing influence over the pace and extent of climate change.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.niehs.nih.gov/health/topics/agents/air-pollution/index.cfm

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Air pollution is a familiar environmental health hazard. We know what we're looking at when brown haze settles over a city, exhaust billows across a busy highway, or a plume rises from a smokestack. Some air pollution is not seen, but its pungent smell alerts you.

It is a major threat to global health and prosperity. Air pollution, in all forms, is responsible for more than 6.5 million deaths each year globally, a number that has increased over the past two decades.

What Is Air Pollution?

Air pollution is a mix of hazardous substances from both human-made and natural sources.

Vehicle emissions, fuel oils and natural gas to heat homes, by-products of manufacturing and power generation, particularly coal-fueled power plants, and fumes from chemical production are the primary sources of human-made air pollution.

Nature releases hazardous substances into the air, such as smoke from wildfires, which are often caused by people; ash and gases from volcanic eruptions; and gases, like methane, which are emitted from decomposing organic matter in soils.

Traffic-Related Air Pollution (TRAP), a mixture of gasses and particles, has most of the elements of human-made air pollution: ground-level ozone, various forms of carbon, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and fine particulate matter.

Ozone, an atmospheric gas, is often called smog when at ground level. It is created when pollutants emitted by cars, power plants, industrial boilers, refineries, and other sources chemically react in the presence of sunlight.

Noxious gases, which include carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur oxides (SOx), are components of motor vehicle emissions and byproducts of industrial processes.

Particulate matter (PM) is composed of chemicals such as sulfates, nitrates, carbon, or mineral dusts. Vehicle and industrial emissions from fossil fuel combustion, cigarette smoke, and burning organic matter, such as wildfires, all contain PM.

A subset of PM, fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) is 30 times thinner than a human hair. It can be inhaled deeply into lung tissue and contribute to serious health problems. PM 2.5 accounts for most health effects due to air pollution in the U.S.

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) vaporize at or near room temperature-hence, the designation volatile. They are called organic because they contain carbon. VOCs are given off by paints, cleaning supplies, pesticides, some furnishings, and even craft materials like glue. Gasoline and natural gas are major sources of VOCs, which are released during combustion.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) are organic compounds containing carbon and hydrogen. Of more than 100 PAHs known to be widespread in the environment, 15 are listed in the Report on Carcinogens. In addition to combustion, many industrial processes, such as iron, steel, and rubber product manufacturing, as well as power generation, also produce PAHs as a by-product. PAHs are also found in particulate matter.

Air Pollution and Climate Change

Air pollution and climate change affect each other through complex interactions in the atmosphere. Air pollution is intricately linked with climate change because both problems come largely from the same sources, such as emissions from burning fossil fuels. Both are threats to people's health and the environment worldwide. Read more: Health Impacts of Air Quality.

What Is NIEHS Doing?

Over its 50-plus year history, NIEHS has been a leader in air pollution research. The institute continues to fund and conduct research into how air pollution affects health and the population groups who are most affected.

How does air pollution affect our health?

When the National Ambient Air Quality Standards were established in 1970, air pollution was regarded primarily as a threat to respiratory health. In 1993, NIEHS researchers published the landmark Six Cities Study, which established an association between fine particulate matter and mortality.

Air pollution exposure is associated with oxidative stress and inflammation in human cells, which may lay a foundation for chronic diseases and cancer. In 2013, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization (WHO) classified air pollution as a human carcinogen.

Research on air pollution and health effects continually advances. Public health concern now includes cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory diseases, diabetes mellitus, obesity, and reproductive, neurological, and immune system disorders

Cancer

A large study of more than 57,000 women found living near major roadways may increase a woman's risk for breast cancer.

The NIEHS Sister Study found other airborne toxic substances, especially methylene chloride, which is used in aerosol products and paint removers, are also associated with increased risk of breast cancer.

Occupational exposure to benzene, an industrial chemical and component of gasoline, can cause leukemia and is associated with non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

A long-term study, 2000-2016, found an association between lung cancer incidence and increased reliance on coal for energy generation.

Cardiovascular Disease

Fine particulate matter can impair blood vessel function and speed up calcification in arteries.

NIEHS researchers established links between short-term daily exposure by post-menopausal women to nitrogen oxides and increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke.

For some older Americans, exposure to TRAP can result in lowered levels of high-density lipoprotein, sometimes called good cholesterol, increasing their risk for cardiovascular disease.

According to a National Toxicology Program (NTP) , TRAP exposure also increases a pregnant woman's risk for dangerous changes in blood pressure, known as hypertensive disorders, which are a leading cause of pre-term birth, low birth weight, and maternal and fetal illness and death.

Respiratory Disease

Air pollution can affect lung development and is implicated in the development of , asthma, and other respiratory diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Increases in asthma prevalence and severity are linked to urbanization and outdoor air pollution. Children living in low-income urban areas tend to have more asthma cases than others. Research published in 2023 tied two air pollutants, ozone and PM2.5, to asthma-related changes in children's airways.

PM and nitrogen oxide are linked to chronic bronchitis.

In 2020, a major public health challenge was confluence of the COVID-19 pandemic and wildfires across the western U.S. Building on a well-established connection between air pollution and respiratory-tract infections, a study linked wildfire smoke with additional COVID-19 cases and deaths.

Whom does air pollution affect the most?

Air pollution affects everyone's health, but certain groups may be harmed more.
Almost 9 out of 10 people who live in urban areas worldwide are affected by air pollution.
Children
The NIEHS-funded Children's Health Study at the University of Southern California is one of the largest studies of the long-term effects of air pollution on children's respiratory health. Among its findings:

Higher air pollution levels increase short-term respiratory infections, which lead to more school absences.

Children who play several outdoor sports and live in high ozone communities are more likely to develop asthma.

Children living near busy roads are at increased risk for asthma.

Children with asthma who were exposed to high levels of air pollutants were more likely to develop bronchitis symptoms.

Living in communities with higher pollution levels can cause lung damage.

Other studies on women and children

NIEHS-funded researchers from the University of California, Davis, Environmental Health Sciences Center are conducting the Bio-Specimen and Fire Effects (B-SAFE) Study. This ongoing project seeks to discover if and how recent wildfires and their smoke affected pregnant women and their babies. Begun in 2017, study participants are pregnant women who were living in Northern California when the 2018, 2019, or 2020 wildfires occurred there.

Breathing PM 2.5, even at relatively low levels, may alter the size of a child's developing brain, which may ultimately increase the risk for cognitive and emotional problems later in adolescence.

Prenatal exposure to PAHs was associated with brain development effects, slower processing speed, attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms, and other neurobehavioral problems in urban youth.

In New York City, prenatal exposure to air pollution may play a role in childhood ADHD-related behavior problems.

Prenatal exposure to particulate matter was associated with low birth weight.

Women exposed to high levels of fine particulate matter during pregnancy, particularly in the third trimester, may have up to twice the risk of having a child with autism.

Second and third trimester exposure to PM 2.5 might increase the chance of those children having high blood pressure in early life.

In California's agricultural San Joaquin Valley, women who were exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, or nitrogen dioxide during their first 8 weeks of pregnancy were more likely to have a baby with neural tube defects.

In Marietta, Ohio, home to a ferromanganese refinery, manganese concentrations in blood and hair, a biomarker of air pollution exposure, were associated with lower child IQ scores.

Older adults

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias are a public health challenge for aging populations. NIEHS-funded researchers at the University of Washington identified a link between air pollution and dementias. This well-conducted study adds considerable evidence that ambient air fine particles increase risk of dementias. Conversely, a multi-year study published in 2022 shows improved air quality is associated with lower risk of dementia in older women. The researchers also stated this decline in dementia risk was equivalent to taking nearly 2 1/2 years off the age of the women studied.

Air pollution was linked to a greater chance of developing several neurological disorders, including Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and other dementias. Hospital admissions data from 63 million older adults in the U.S., obtained over 17 years (2000-2016), was analyzed along with estimated PM 2.5 concentrations by zip code to conduct the study.

In older adults, long-term exposure to TRAP may significantly hasten physical disabilities. The risk is more pronounced among racial minorities and lower-income people.

Osteoporosis affects women more than men. A large study associated high levels of air pollutants with bone damage, particularly in the lumbar spine, among postmenopausal women. This study expands previous findings linking air pollution and bone damage.

Nutrients may counter some harmful effects from air pollution. A 2020 study found omega-3 fatty acids, obtained by eating certain fish, may protect against PM 2.5-associated brain shrinkage in older women.

Rural dwellers

An NIEHS-funded study found that concentrations of PM 2.5 in rural Washington State were comparable to urban Seattle. In this study, as regional PM 2.5 increased, there were increased asthma symptoms, such as limitation of activities, more wheezing, and more nighttime waking, in rural children.

NIEHS supported a translational research project, Addressing Air Pollution and Asthma (1MB) , that may lead to improved health for children suffering from asthma. They found that certain agricultural practices contribute to poor air quality and asthma among children. The team combined high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) cleaners and a home-based education program to reduce children's exposure to pollutants in the home.

In the rural U.S., large-scale animal feeding operations might compromise regional air quality through emission of pollutants, such as ammonia gas. A study found acute lung function problems in children with asthma in such areas.

Different genes
Your genes play a role in respiratory health. NIEHS-funded research discovered that people with specific gene variants, which made them more likely to have lung inflammation, had a greater chance of suffering from asthma if they lived close to major roadways.

NIEHS and community involvement

NIEHS supports community participation in the research process and encourages collaborative approaches that build capacity in communities to address environmental health concerns. Community-engaged research and citizen science are two types of collaborative research approaches.

For example, NIEHS helps residents of Imperial County, California track air pollution through a network of 40 community-run monitors. In this county, long-term improvements in air quality were associated with significant lung-function improvement in children.

In another example, NIEHS grant recipients developed community-level tactics and public policies for reducing exposure to TRAP:

Using high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration.

Building land-use buffers and vegetation barriers.

Improving urban design with gardens, parks, and street-side trees.

Creating active-travel options, such as bicycling and walking paths.

THE (Trade, Health, Environment) Impact Project brings together researchers and community groups to find solutions for communities affected by trade-related pollution, such as ports and roadways with trucking.

Join an asthma study!

The goal of the Natural History of Asthma with Longitudinal Environmental Sampling (NHALES) study is to help scientists understand how bacteria and other factors in the environment affect people who have moderate to severe asthma.

Who can participate?

Moderate to severe asthmatics.

Males and females, aged 18-60.

Females should not be pregnant or breastfeeding at the start of the study, but may still participate if they become pregnant during the study.

Nonsmokers who are also not around significant amounts of secondhand smoke.

No history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, cystic fibrosis (CF), pulmonary fibrosis, non-CF bronchiectasis, sarcoidosis, unstable angina, or pulmonary hypertension.

Not allergic to methacholine.

Able to provide your own transportation to clinic visits on the NIEHS campus in North Carolina.

For more information about this study:

NHALES: Asthma Study

Tel 855-MYNIEHS (855-696-4347)
nhales@mail.nih.gov

Why improving air quality matters

Air pollution and birth outcomes are linked as global public health concerns. Researchers analyzed indoor and outdoor air pollution data from all inhabited continents along with key pregnancy outcomes. Their findings indicate efforts to reduce PM2.5 exposure could lead to significant reductions in the number of low-birth weight and pre-term birth infants worldwide. Air pollution reduction would be especially beneficial for children born in low- and middle-income countries.

Among children in Southern California, decreases in ambient nitrogen dioxide and PM 2.5 were associated with fewer cases of asthma.

An NIEHS-funded study found that a mixture of several B vitamins may protect DNA from changes attributable to PM 2.5 air pollution.

Bronchitis symptoms declined as pollution levels dropped in the Los Angeles region.

Improving air quality may improve cognitive function and reduce dementia risk, according to supported in part by NIH and the Alzheimer's Association.

When fossil-fuel power plants close, nearby air pollution is reduced. A study found the incidence of preterm births went down within 5 kilometers of retired coal and oil-powered plant locations.

Further Reading

Stories from the Environmental Factor (NIEHS newsletter)

Printable Fact Sheets

Podcasts

Additional Resources

Air Pollution Linked to Dementia Cases (September 2023) - In this edition of NIH Research Matters, read about findings from the Health and Retirement Study, funded by the National Institute on Aging, that showed higher air pollution exposure was linked to an increased risk of dementia. After consideration of all sources, fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, from agriculture and wildfires were specifically associated with an increased risk of dementia. Reducing such exposures might help lower the incidence of dementia. The study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

, a tool developed in partnership by several government agencies, allows you to monitor air quality in real time anywhere in the U.S. Simply enter your zip code as indicated on the website.

EPA's Air Sensor Toolbox provides information on the operation and use of air-sensor monitoring systems for technology developers, air-quality managers, citizen scientists, and the public.

NIH Climate Change and Health Initiative - This solutions-focused research initiative aims to reduce the health consequences associated with extreme weather events and evolving climate conditions. NIH has a strong history of creating innovative tools, technologies, and data-driven solutions to address global environmental problems.

Smoke-ready Toolbox for Wildfires is a compendium of resources from the EPA to help educate you about the risks of smoke exposure and actions that protect your health.

Wildfire Smoke Collection - The journal Environmental Health Perspectives has published high-impact papers and reviews exploring exposure and resulting health effects related to wildfires.

Related Health Topics

This content is available to use on your website.

Please visit NIEHS Syndication to get started.

Introduction

Air pollution is a familiar environmental health hazard. We know what we're looking at when brown haze settles over a city, exhaust billows across a busy highway, or a plume rises from a smokestack. Some air pollution is not seen, but its pungent smell alerts you.

It is a major threat to global health and prosperity. Air pollution, in all forms, is responsible for more than 6.5 million deaths each year globally, a number that has increased over the past two decades.

What Is Air Pollution?

Air pollution is a mix of hazardous substances from both human-made and natural sources.

Vehicle emissions, fuel oils and natural gas to heat homes, by-products of manufacturing and power generation, particularly coal-fueled power plants, and fumes from chemical production are the primary sources of human-made air pollution.

Nature releases hazardous substances into the air, such as smoke from wildfires, which are often caused by people; ash and gases from volcanic eruptions; and gases, like methane, which are emitted from decomposing organic matter in soils.

Traffic-Related Air Pollution (TRAP), a mixture of gasses and particles, has most of the elements of human-made air pollution: ground-level ozone, various forms of carbon, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, volatile organic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and fine particulate matter.

Ozone, an atmospheric gas, is often called smog when at ground level. It is created when pollutants emitted by cars, power plants, industrial boilers, refineries, and other sources chemically react in the presence of sunlight.

Noxious gases, which include carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides (NOx), and sulfur oxides (SOx), are components of motor vehicle emissions and byproducts of industrial processes.

Particulate matter (PM) is composed of chemicals such as sulfates, nitrates, carbon, or mineral dusts. Vehicle and industrial emissions from fossil fuel combustion, cigarette smoke, and burning organic matter, such as wildfires, all contain PM.

A subset of PM, fine particulate matter (PM 2.5) is 30 times thinner than a human hair. It can be inhaled deeply into lung tissue and contribute to serious health problems. PM 2.5 accounts for most health effects due to air pollution in the U.S.

Volatile organic compounds (VOC) vaporize at or near room temperature-hence, the designation volatile. They are called organic because they contain carbon. VOCs are given off by paints, cleaning supplies, pesticides, some furnishings, and even craft materials like glue. Gasoline and natural gas are major sources of VOCs, which are released during combustion.

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) are organic compounds containing carbon and hydrogen. Of more than 100 PAHs known to be widespread in the environment, 15 are listed in the Report on Carcinogens. In addition to combustion, many industrial processes, such as iron, steel, and rubber product manufacturing, as well as power generation, also produce PAHs as a by-product. PAHs are also found in particulate matter.

Air Pollution and Climate Change

Air pollution and climate change affect each other through complex interactions in the atmosphere. Air pollution is intricately linked with climate change because both problems come largely from the same sources, such as emissions from burning fossil fuels. Both are threats to people's health and the environment worldwide. Read more: Health Impacts of Air Quality.

What Is NIEHS Doing?

Over its 50-plus year history, NIEHS has been a leader in air pollution research. The institute continues to fund and conduct research into how air pollution affects health and the population groups who are most affected.

How does air pollution affect our health?

When the National Ambient Air Quality Standards were established in 1970, air pollution was regarded primarily as a threat to respiratory health. In 1993, NIEHS researchers published the landmark Six Cities Study, which established an association between fine particulate matter and mortality.

Air pollution exposure is associated with oxidative stress and inflammation in human cells, which may lay a foundation for chronic diseases and cancer. In 2013, the International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization (WHO) classified air pollution as a human carcinogen.

Research on air pollution and health effects continually advances. Public health concern now includes cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory diseases, diabetes mellitus, obesity, and reproductive, neurological, and immune system disorders

Cancer

A large study of more than 57,000 women found living near major roadways may increase a woman's risk for breast cancer.

The NIEHS Sister Study found other airborne toxic substances, especially methylene chloride, which is used in aerosol products and paint removers, are also associated with increased risk of breast cancer.

Occupational exposure to benzene, an industrial chemical and component of gasoline, can cause leukemia and is associated with non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma.

A long-term study, 2000-2016, found an association between lung cancer incidence and increased reliance on coal for energy generation.

Cardiovascular Disease

Fine particulate matter can impair blood vessel function and speed up calcification in arteries.

NIEHS researchers established links between short-term daily exposure by post-menopausal women to nitrogen oxides and increased risk of hemorrhagic stroke.

For some older Americans, exposure to TRAP can result in lowered levels of high-density lipoprotein, sometimes called good cholesterol, increasing their risk for cardiovascular disease.

According to a National Toxicology Program (NTP) , TRAP exposure also increases a pregnant woman's risk for dangerous changes in blood pressure, known as hypertensive disorders, which are a leading cause of pre-term birth, low birth weight, and maternal and fetal illness and death.

Respiratory Disease

Air pollution can affect lung development and is implicated in the development of , asthma, and other respiratory diseases, such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Increases in asthma prevalence and severity are linked to urbanization and outdoor air pollution. Children living in low-income urban areas tend to have more asthma cases than others. Research published in 2023 tied two air pollutants, ozone and PM2.5, to asthma-related changes in children's airways.

PM and nitrogen oxide are linked to chronic bronchitis.

In 2020, a major public health challenge was confluence of the COVID-19 pandemic and wildfires across the western U.S. Building on a well-established connection between air pollution and respiratory-tract infections, a study linked wildfire smoke with additional COVID-19 cases and deaths.

Whom does air pollution affect the most?

Air pollution affects everyone's health, but certain groups may be harmed more.
Almost 9 out of 10 people who live in urban areas worldwide are affected by air pollution.
Children
The NIEHS-funded Children's Health Study at the University of Southern California is one of the largest studies of the long-term effects of air pollution on children's respiratory health. Among its findings:

Higher air pollution levels increase short-term respiratory infections, which lead to more school absences.

Children who play several outdoor sports and live in high ozone communities are more likely to develop asthma.

Children living near busy roads are at increased risk for asthma.

Children with asthma who were exposed to high levels of air pollutants were more likely to develop bronchitis symptoms.

Living in communities with higher pollution levels can cause lung damage.

Other studies on women and children

NIEHS-funded researchers from the University of California, Davis, Environmental Health Sciences Center are conducting the Bio-Specimen and Fire Effects (B-SAFE) Study. This ongoing project seeks to discover if and how recent wildfires and their smoke affected pregnant women and their babies. Begun in 2017, study participants are pregnant women who were living in Northern California when the 2018, 2019, or 2020 wildfires occurred there.

Breathing PM 2.5, even at relatively low levels, may alter the size of a child's developing brain, which may ultimately increase the risk for cognitive and emotional problems later in adolescence.

Prenatal exposure to PAHs was associated with brain development effects, slower processing speed, attention-deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms, and other neurobehavioral problems in urban youth.

In New York City, prenatal exposure to air pollution may play a role in childhood ADHD-related behavior problems.

Prenatal exposure to particulate matter was associated with low birth weight.

Women exposed to high levels of fine particulate matter during pregnancy, particularly in the third trimester, may have up to twice the risk of having a child with autism.

Second and third trimester exposure to PM 2.5 might increase the chance of those children having high blood pressure in early life.

In California's agricultural San Joaquin Valley, women who were exposed to high levels of carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxide, or nitrogen dioxide during their first 8 weeks of pregnancy were more likely to have a baby with neural tube defects.

In Marietta, Ohio, home to a ferromanganese refinery, manganese concentrations in blood and hair, a biomarker of air pollution exposure, were associated with lower child IQ scores.

Older adults

Alzheimer's disease and related dementias are a public health challenge for aging populations. NIEHS-funded researchers at the University of Washington identified a link between air pollution and dementias. This well-conducted study adds considerable evidence that ambient air fine particles increase risk of dementias. Conversely, a multi-year study published in 2022 shows improved air quality is associated with lower risk of dementia in older women. The researchers also stated this decline in dementia risk was equivalent to taking nearly 2 1/2 years off the age of the women studied.

Air pollution was linked to a greater chance of developing several neurological disorders, including Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, and other dementias. Hospital admissions data from 63 million older adults in the U.S., obtained over 17 years (2000-2016), was analyzed along with estimated PM 2.5 concentrations by zip code to conduct the study.

In older adults, long-term exposure to TRAP may significantly hasten physical disabilities. The risk is more pronounced among racial minorities and lower-income people.

Osteoporosis affects women more than men. A large study associated high levels of air pollutants with bone damage, particularly in the lumbar spine, among postmenopausal women. This study expands previous findings linking air pollution and bone damage.

Nutrients may counter some harmful effects from air pollution. A 2020 study found omega-3 fatty acids, obtained by eating certain fish, may protect against PM 2.5-associated brain shrinkage in older women.

Rural dwellers

An NIEHS-funded study found that concentrations of PM 2.5 in rural Washington State were comparable to urban Seattle. In this study, as regional PM 2.5 increased, there were increased asthma symptoms, such as limitation of activities, more wheezing, and more nighttime waking, in rural children.

NIEHS supported a translational research project, Addressing Air Pollution and Asthma (1MB) , that may lead to improved health for children suffering from asthma. They found that certain agricultural practices contribute to poor air quality and asthma among children. The team combined high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) cleaners and a home-based education program to reduce children's exposure to pollutants in the home.

In the rural U.S., large-scale animal feeding operations might compromise regional air quality through emission of pollutants, such as ammonia gas. A study found acute lung function problems in children with asthma in such areas.

Different genes
Your genes play a role in respiratory health. NIEHS-funded research discovered that people with specific gene variants, which made them more likely to have lung inflammation, had a greater chance of suffering from asthma if they lived close to major roadways.

NIEHS and community involvement

NIEHS supports community participation in the research process and encourages collaborative approaches that build capacity in communities to address environmental health concerns. Community-engaged research and citizen science are two types of collaborative research approaches.

For example, NIEHS helps residents of Imperial County, California track air pollution through a network of 40 community-run monitors. In this county, long-term improvements in air quality were associated with significant lung-function improvement in children.

In another example, NIEHS grant recipients developed community-level tactics and public policies for reducing exposure to TRAP:

Using high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration.

Building land-use buffers and vegetation barriers.

Improving urban design with gardens, parks, and street-side trees.

Creating active-travel options, such as bicycling and walking paths.

THE (Trade, Health, Environment) Impact Project brings together researchers and community groups to find solutions for communities affected by trade-related pollution, such as ports and roadways with trucking.

Join an asthma study!

The goal of the Natural History of Asthma with Longitudinal Environmental Sampling (NHALES) study is to help scientists understand how bacteria and other factors in the environment affect people who have moderate to severe asthma.

Who can participate?

Moderate to severe asthmatics.

Males and females, aged 18-60.

Females should not be pregnant or breastfeeding at the start of the study, but may still participate if they become pregnant during the study.

Nonsmokers who are also not around significant amounts of secondhand smoke.

No history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, emphysema, cystic fibrosis (CF), pulmonary fibrosis, non-CF bronchiectasis, sarcoidosis, unstable angina, or pulmonary hypertension.

Not allergic to methacholine.

Able to provide your own transportation to clinic visits on the NIEHS campus in North Carolina.

For more information about this study:

NHALES: Asthma Study

Tel 855-MYNIEHS (855-696-4347)
nhales@mail.nih.gov

Why improving air quality matters

Air pollution and birth outcomes are linked as global public health concerns. Researchers analyzed indoor and outdoor air pollution data from all inhabited continents along with key pregnancy outcomes. Their findings indicate efforts to reduce PM2.5 exposure could lead to significant reductions in the number of low-birth weight and pre-term birth infants worldwide. Air pollution reduction would be especially beneficial for children born in low- and middle-income countries.

Among children in Southern California, decreases in ambient nitrogen dioxide and PM 2.5 were associated with fewer cases of asthma.

An NIEHS-funded study found that a mixture of several B vitamins may protect DNA from changes attributable to PM 2.5 air pollution.

Bronchitis symptoms declined as pollution levels dropped in the Los Angeles region.

Improving air quality may improve cognitive function and reduce dementia risk, according to supported in part by NIH and the Alzheimer's Association.

When fossil-fuel power plants close, nearby air pollution is reduced. A study found the incidence of preterm births went down within 5 kilometers of retired coal and oil-powered plant locations.

Further Reading

Stories from the Environmental Factor (NIEHS newsletter)

Printable Fact Sheets

Podcasts

Additional Resources

Air Pollution Linked to Dementia Cases (September 2023) - In this edition of NIH Research Matters, read about findings from the Health and Retirement Study, funded by the National Institute on Aging, that showed higher air pollution exposure was linked to an increased risk of dementia. After consideration of all sources, fine particulate matter, or PM2.5, from agriculture and wildfires were specifically associated with an increased risk of dementia. Reducing such exposures might help lower the incidence of dementia. The study was published in JAMA Internal Medicine.

, a tool developed in partnership by several government agencies, allows you to monitor air quality in real time anywhere in the U.S. Simply enter your zip code as indicated on the website.

EPA's Air Sensor Toolbox provides information on the operation and use of air-sensor monitoring systems for technology developers, air-quality managers, citizen scientists, and the public.

NIH Climate Change and Health Initiative - This solutions-focused research initiative aims to reduce the health consequences associated with extreme weather events and evolving climate conditions. NIH has a strong history of creating innovative tools, technologies, and data-driven solutions to address global environmental problems.

Smoke-ready Toolbox for Wildfires is a compendium of resources from the EPA to help educate you about the risks of smoke exposure and actions that protect your health.

Wildfire Smoke Collection - The journal Environmental Health Perspectives has published high-impact papers and reviews exploring exposure and resulting health effects related to wildfires.

Related Health Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Air pollution is a familiar environmental health hazard. We know what we're looking at when brown haze settles over a city, exhaust billows across a busy highway, or a plume rises from a smokestack. Some air pollution is not seen, but its pungent smell alerts you.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
AZoCleantech speaks to Luca Schiavoni from Assembly Research about the need for connectivity and its links to reducing carbon emissions. Schiavoni discusses Assembly Research's latest report, which was commissioned by Huawei, on how connectivity in transport is a key factor in reaching net-zero clim

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Incorporating Zinc to Stabilize Indium Sulfide for CO2 Reduction Reaction

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
AZoCleantech speaks to Luca Schiavoni from Assembly Research about the need for connectivity and its links to reducing carbon emissions. Schiavoni discusses Assembly Research's latest report, which was commissioned by Huawei, on how connectivity in transport is a key factor in reaching net-zero clim

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.limerickleader.ie/news/national-news/686044/water-pollution-revealed-as-main-environmental-concern-for-irish-households.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Water pollution revealed as main environmental concern for Irish households

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Water pollution has been revealed as the primary environmental concern for Irish households. That's according to the Central Statistics Office's (CSO) General Household Survey, which found that over 79% of households around the country rated water pollution as "very important". ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Taken from the October 2021 issue of Physics World. Members of the Institute of Physics can enjoy the full issue via the Physics World app.

Laura Hiscott reviews Small Gases, Big Effect: This is Climate Change by David Nelles and Christian Serrer

(Courtesy: Shutterstock/Bruce Rolff)

It might sound impossible to explain something as complex as the mechanisms of climate change both simply and accurately. But this is exactly what David Nelles and Christian Serrer - students at the University of Friedrichshafen, Germany - have achieved with their book Small Gases, Big Effect: This is Climate Change.

Approved by more than 100 scientists, Small Gases, Big Effect starts with a breakdown of the components of the Earth's climate, before detailing the many interconnected factors that can influence it. The book then lays out evidence on how climate change is affecting different regions of the globe and their ecosystems; the positive and negative feedback loops that come into play; and ultimately the impacts on humans, both direct and indirect.

Fitting with its aims of concisely presenting the "nuts and bolts of climate change", the book is written very matter-of-factly, in short, easily digestible chunks that don't tire the reader's attention. Every double-page spread features a graphic, either illustrating a concept to help you properly grasp it or showing the data on various impacts that global warming has had.

While the book acknowledges that the people worst affected by climate change are generally those who have contributed the least to the problem, it includes many examples of effects already being observed in European countries.

For instance, one graphic shows that some animal and plant species in Switzerland have migrated to higher altitudes in the mountains in recent years, while another highlights the increasing spread of tiger mosquitoes - which can transmit the Dengue virus - into European countries between 2000 and 2017. For readers in Europe, it's a timely reminder that climate chaos is not a distant problem but something that will also manifest close to home.

2021 Particular Books £7.99hb 128pp

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate change in a nutshell: the causes and effects of global warming, simply put - Physics World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Taken from the October 2021 issue of Physics World. Members of the Institute of Physics can enjoy the full issue via the Physics World app. Laura Hiscott reviews Small Gases, Big Effect: This is Climate Change by David Nelles and Christian Serrer It might sound impossible to explain something as complex as the mechanisms of climate change both simply and accurately.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fendo.2018.00680/full

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.bigissue.com/news/environment/why-englands-rivers-are-so-polluted-and-will-be-for-years-to-come/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Here’s why sewage is being dumped into seas and rivers - and what you can do about it - The Big Issue

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Water companies are dumping sewage into UK seas and rivers at an astonishing rate. Here’s why it’s happening - and how we can fix it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A: Since the Industrial Revolution, the global annual temperature has increased in total by a little more than 1 degree Celsius, or about 2 degrees Fahrenheit. Between 1880-the year that accurate recordkeeping began-and 1980, it rose on average by 0.07 degrees Celsius (0.13 degrees Fahrenheit) every 10 years. Since 1981, however, the rate of increase has more than doubled: For the last 40 years, we've seen the global annual temperature rise by 0.18 degrees Celsius, or 0.32 degrees Fahrenheit, per decade.

The result? A planet that has never been hotter. Nine of the 10 warmest years since 1880 have occurred since 2005-and the 5 warmest years on record have all occurred since 2015. Climate change deniers have argued that there has been a "pause" or a "slowdown" in rising global temperatures, but numerous studies, including a 2018 paper published in the journal Environmental Research Letters, have disproved this claim. The impacts of global warming are already harming people around the world.

What causes global warming?

A: Global warming occurs when carbon dioxide (CO ₂) and other air pollutants collect in the atmosphere and absorb sunlight and solar radiation that have bounced off the earth's surface. Normally this radiation would escape into space, but these pollutants, which can last for years to centuries in the atmosphere, trap the heat and cause the planet to get hotter. These heat-trapping pollutants-specifically carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, water vapor, and synthetic fluorinated gases-are known as greenhouse gases, and their impact is called the greenhouse effect.

How is global warming linked to extreme weather?

A: Scientists agree that the earth's rising temperatures are fueling longer and hotter heat waves, more frequent droughts, heavier rainfall, and more powerful hurricanes.

In 2015, for example, scientists concluded that a lengthy drought in California-the state's worst water shortage in 1,200 years-had been intensified by 15 to 20 percent by global warming. They also said the odds of similar droughts happening in the future had roughly doubled over the past century. And in 2016, the National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine announced that we can now confidently attribute some extreme weather events, like heat waves, droughts, and heavy precipitation, directly to climate change.

The impacts of global warming are being felt everywhere. Extreme heat waves have caused tens of thousands of deaths around the world in recent years. And in an alarming sign of events to come, Antarctica has lost nearly four trillion metric tons of ice since the 1990s. The rate of loss could speed up if we keep burning fossil fuels at our current pace, some experts say, causing sea levels to rise several meters in the next 50 to 150 years and wreaking havoc on coastal communities worldwide.

What are the other effects of global warming?

A: Each year scientists learn more about the consequences of global warming, and each year we also gain new evidence of its devastating impact on people and the planet. As the heat waves, droughts, and floods associated with climate change become more frequent and more intense, communities suffer and death tolls rise. If we're unable to reduce our emissions, scientists believe that climate change could lead to the deaths of more than 250,000 people around the globe every year and force 100 million people into poverty by 2030.

Global warming is already taking a toll on the United States. And if we aren't able to get a handle on our emissions, here's just a smattering of what we can look forward to:

Disappearing glaciers, early snowmelt, and severe droughts will cause more dramatic water shortages and continue to increase the risk of wildfires in the American West.

Rising sea levels will lead to even more coastal flooding on the Eastern Seaboard, especially in Florida, and in other areas such as the Gulf of Mexico.

Forests, farms, and cities will face troublesome new pests, heat waves, heavy downpours, and increased flooding. All of these can damage or destroy agriculture and fisheries.

Disruption of habitats such as coral reefs and alpine meadows could drive many plant and animal species to extinction.

Allergies, asthma, and infectious disease outbreaks will become more common due to increased growth of pollen-producing ragweed, higher levels of air pollution, and the spread of conditions favorable to pathogens and mosquitoes.

Though everyone is affected by climate change, not everyone is affected equally. Indigenous people, people of color, and the economically marginalized are typically hit the hardest. Inequities built into our housing, health care, and labor systems make these communities more vulnerable to the worst impacts of climate change-even though these same communities have done the least to contribute to it.

Where does the United States stand in terms of global-warming contributors?

A: In recent years, China has taken the lead in global-warming pollution, producing about 26 percent of all CO2 emissions. The United States comes in second. Despite making up just 4 percent of the world's population, our nation produces a sobering 13 percent of all global CO2 emissions-nearly as much as the European Union and India (third and fourth place) combined. And America is still number one, by far, in cumulative emissions over the past 150 years. As a top contributor to global warming, the United States has an obligation to help propel the world to a cleaner, safer, and more equitable future. Our responsibility matters to other countries, and it should matter to us, too.

Is the United States doing anything to prevent global warming?

A: We've started. But in order to avoid the worsening effects of climate change, we need to do a lot more-together with other countries-to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and transition to clean energy sources.

Despite the lack of cooperation from the Trump administration, local and state governments made great strides during this period through efforts like the American Cities Climate Challenge and ongoing collaborations like the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Meanwhile, industry and business leaders have been working with the public sector, creating and adopting new clean-energy technologies and increasing energy efficiency in buildings, appliances, and industrial processes. Today the American automotive industry is finding new ways to produce cars and trucks that are more fuel efficient and is committing itself to putting more and more zero-emission electric vehicles on the road. Developers, cities, and community advocates are coming together to make sure that new affordable housing is built with efficiency in mind, reducing energy consumption and lowering electric and heating bills for residents. And renewable energy continues to surge as the costs associated with its production and distribution keep falling. In 2020 renewable energy sources such as wind and solar provided more electricity than coal for the very first time in U.S. history.

Is global warming too big a problem for me to help tackle?

A: No! While we can't win the fight without large-scale government action at the national level, we also can't do it without the help of individuals who are willing to use their voices, hold government and industry leaders to account, and make changes in their daily habits.

Wondering how you can be a part of the fight against global warming? Reduce your own carbon footprint by taking a few easy steps: Make conserving energy a part of your daily routine and your decisions as a consumer. When you shop for new appliances like refrigerators, washers, and dryers, look for products with the government's ENERGY STAR ® label; they meet a higher standard for energy efficiency than the minimum federal requirements. When you buy a car, look for one with the highest gas mileage and lowest emissions. You can also reduce your emissions by taking public transportation or carpooling when possible.

And while new federal and state standards are a step in the right direction, much more needs to be done. Voice your support of climate-friendly and climate change preparedness policies, and tell your representatives that equitably transitioning from dirty fossil fuels to clean power should be a top priority-because it's vital to building healthy, more secure communities.

You don't have to go it alone, either. Movements across the country are showing how climate action can build community, be led by those on the front lines of its impacts, and create a future that's equitable and just for all.

This story was originally published on March 11, 2016 and has been updated with new information and links.

This NRDC.org story is available for online republication by news media outlets or nonprofits under these conditions: The writer(s) must be credited with a byline; you must note prominently that the story was originally published by NRDC.org and link to the original; the story cannot be edited (beyond simple things such as grammar); you can't resell the story in any form or grant republishing rights to other outlets; you can't republish our material wholesale or automatically-you need to select stories individually; you can't republish the photos or graphics on our site without specific permission; you should to let us know when you've used one of our stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What is global warming? Global warming causes, effects, extreme weather, facts, and relation to climate change.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/causes-effects-solutions-of-air-pollution.php

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-019-12808-z

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-24021772.amp

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
6 charts that show what climate change is doing to our planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As the COP26 summit in Glasgow meets to discuss global action on climate change, atmospheric scientist Betsy Weatherhead explains what the science says about greenhouse gases and global warming

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10962247.2014.1001884

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.axios.com/local/chicago/2021/10/06/chemical-runoff-increases-illinois-water-pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Chicagoans were shocked last week to see a rust-colored substance from an Indiana water treatment plant ooze into Lake Michigan.

Why it matters: Water polluted with these chemicals [including nitrogen and phosphorus] can cause "blue baby syndrome," a condition that starves infants of oxygen. High levels have also been linked to cancer in adults.

They can also reduce the amount of oxygen in the water, harming wildlife and causing algal blooms.

And, in some estimates, Illinois runoff is responsible for 20% of the nitrate causing the growing dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

Driving the news: A new Illinois Environmental Protection Agency (IEPA) report shows these chemicals - including nitrate and phosphorus - rising in our waters by double digits even though the goal was to reduce them by 45% by 2025.

Context: Environmental group The Prairie Rivers Network published a report this summer saying rural drinking water is under-tested for nitrate.

High levels of nitrite have been found in public wells along the Illinois River but little testing is done on private wells.

Yes, but: Trevor Sample, the IEPA's Nutrient Loss Reduction Strategy coordinator, acknowledged that in the last five years, nitrogen levels were up 13% and phosphorus was up 35%, but also pointed out that water flow was up 25% due to increased rain.

"When you have increased flow you have increased runoff and you have increased nutrient loads," he told Axios.

Looking forward: In a world where we expect more heavy precipitation events, there are still ways to prevent severe runoff.

Sample says the IEPA is working to give farmers more education and resources, one being the Partners for Conservation cost share programs that, among other things, gives farmers money to use cover crops rather than chemicals to replace nutrients in their soil.

Sample says more funding for that program could help since, "the demand for it far exceeds what's allocated."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Chicagoans were shocked last week to see a rust-colored substance from an Indiana water treatment plant ooze into Lake Michigan. Why it matters: Water polluted with these chemicals [including nitrogen and phosphorus] can cause "blue baby syndrome," a condition that starves infants of oxygen. High levels have also been linked to cancer in adults.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2902-8

# data[].attributes.body
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/fact-sheets/simple-solutions-help-reduce-air-pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
It is clear that good air quality is important to Californians, but sometimes it is unclear how to commit to an environmentally friendly lifestyle. If you want to contribute less to air pollution but don't know where to start, look here to find resources that will show you the way to eliminating air pollution in your life.

There are simple steps you can take in your everyday life to help improve air quality. Every time you drive to work or school, use your heater or air conditioner, clean your windows or even style your hair, you make choices that can reduce or increase air pollution.

On the road

In California, about half the air pollution comes from cars and trucks. Fewer trips in your car or truck can help improve air quality. Even how you drive can reduce your car's footprint. Take these into consideration when your are traveling on California roads:

At home

There are many ways air quality can be improved in the home. By reducing energy consumption, choosing sustainable products and eliminating your exposure to chemicals, we can all contribute to a cleaner California.

Reducing energy consumption helps reduce air pollution. If less gasoline, natural gas and electricity (power plants burn fossil fuels to generate electricity) are used, not only do your bills decrease but less pollutants are emitted.

There are also many products in the home, garden and garage that emit smog-forming chemicals that pollute the air when used. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and particulate matter (PM) contained in these products penetrate deep into the lungs and can trigger asthma attacks or worsen respiratory illnesses. The suggestions below will help reduce exposure in your home:

At Work

There are multiple ways of reducing consumption at the workplace. Considering we spend a good portion of every week at the office, use the suggestions below to keep your workplace environmentally friendly:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Simple Solutions to Help Reduce Air Pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
There are simple steps you can take in your everyday life to help improve air quality. Every time you drive to work or school, use your heater or air conditioner, clean your windows or even style your hair, you make choices that can reduce or increase air pollution.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.lboro.ac.uk/news-events/news/2021/november/what-would-four-degree-global-warming-feel-like/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What would 4°C of global warming feel like?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
COP26 is underway and keeping 1.5°C within reach will feature prominently in world leaders’ discussions.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02990-w

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160412014002992

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/amp/s/amp.telegram.com/amp/8434647002

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Geothermal heating/cooling system to cut greenhouse gases at new UMass Med School facility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Work has begun on a geothermal heating and cooling system that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions at a new UMass Med School building by 55%.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.newscientist.com/article/6-6-charts-that-show-what-climate-change-is-doing-to-our-planet/

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/amp/s/elemental.medium.com/amp/p/51921f190da2

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Microplastic Pollution Is a Much Bigger Problem Than You Realize

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The latest research suggests that our bodies, like our oceans and ground soils, are now dumping grounds for microplastic waste

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.economist.com/climate-change?utm_medium=cpc.adword.pd&utm_source=google&utm_campaign=a.a_21climatechange.2021-10-07&utm_content=conversion.other-brand.anonymous&gclsrc=aw.ds&gclid=Cj0KCQjw5oiMBhDtARIsAJi0qk3Qv_7GkcLBHf2AFrKk-yLCUlLeNZSm5cizSokcgcYm1N546Vr41SIaAtgqEALw_wcB

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.euronews.com/green/2021/11/03/water-shortages-caused-by-global-warming-threaten-global-stability

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.nrdc.org/stories/air-pollution-everything-you-need-know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Air pollution refers to the release of pollutants into the air-pollutants that are detrimental to human health and the planet as a whole. According to the World Health Organization (WHO) , each year, indoor and outdoor air pollution is responsible for nearly seven million deaths around the globe. Ninety-nine percent of human beings currently breathe air that exceeds the WHO's guideline limits for pollutants, with those living in low- and middle-income countries suffering the most. In the United States, the Clean Air Act , established in 1970, authorizes the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to safeguard public health by regulating the emissions of these harmful air pollutants.

What Causes Air Pollution?

"Most air pollution comes from energy use and production," says , director of the Clean Air team at NRDC. Driving a car on gasoline, heating a home with oil, running a power plant on fracked gas : In each case, a fossil fuel is burned and harmful chemicals and gases are released into the air.

"We've made progress over the last 50 years in improving air quality in the United States, thanks to the Clean Air Act. But climate change will make it harder in the future to meet pollution standards, which are designed to protect health ," says Walke.

Air pollution is now the world's fourth-largest risk factor for early death. According to the 2020 State of Global Air report -which summarizes the latest scientific understanding of air pollution around the world-4.5 million deaths were linked to outdoor air pollution exposures in 2019, and another 2.2 million deaths were caused by indoor air pollution. The world's most populous countries, China and India, continue to bear the highest burdens of disease.

The effects of air pollution on the human body vary, depending on the type of pollutant, the length and level of exposure, and other factors, including a person's individual health risks and the cumulative impacts of multiple pollutants or stressors.

Smog and soot

These are the two most prevalent types of air pollution. Smog (sometimes referred to as ground-level ozone) occurs when emissions from combusting fossil fuels react with sunlight. Soot-a type of particulate matter -is made up of tiny particles of chemicals, soil, smoke, dust, or allergens that are carried in the air. The sources of smog and soot are similar. "Both come from cars and trucks, factories, power plants, incinerators, engines, generally anything that combusts fossil fuels such as coal, gasoline, or natural gas," Walke says.

Smog can irritate the eyes and throat and also damage the lungs, especially those of children, senior citizens, and people who work or exercise outdoors. It's even worse for people who have asthma or allergies; these extra pollutants can intensify their symptoms and trigger asthma attacks. The tiniest airborne particles in soot are especially dangerous because they can penetrate the lungs and bloodstream and worsen bronchitis, lead to heart attacks, and even hasten death. In 2020, a report from Harvard's T.H. Chan School of Public Health showed that COVID-19 mortality rates were higher in areas with more particulate matter pollution than in areas with even slightly less, showing a correlation between the virus's deadliness and long-term exposure to air pollution.

Hazardous air pollutants

Another category of toxic compounds, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), are by-products of traffic exhaust and wildfire smoke. In large amounts, they have been linked to eye and lung irritation, blood and liver issues, and even cancer. In one study , the children of mothers exposed to PAHs during pregnancy showed slower brain-processing speeds and more pronounced symptoms of ADHD.

Greenhouse gases

While these climate pollutants don't have the direct or immediate impacts on the human body associated with other air pollutants, like smog or hazardous chemicals, they are still harmful to our health. By trapping the earth's heat in the atmosphere, greenhouse gases lead to warmer temperatures, which in turn lead to the hallmarks of climate change: rising sea levels, more extreme weather, heat-related deaths, and the increased transmission of infectious diseases. In 2021, carbon dioxide accounted for roughly 79 percent of the country's total greenhouse gas emissions, and methane made up more than 11 percent. "Carbon dioxide comes from combusting fossil fuels, and methane comes from natural and industrial sources, including large amounts that are released during oil and gas drilling," Walke says. "We emit far larger amounts of carbon dioxide, but methane is significantly more potent, so it's also very destructive."

Pollen and mold

Mold and allergens from trees, weeds, and grass are also carried in the air, are exacerbated by climate change, and can be hazardous to health. Though they aren't regulated, they can be considered a form of air pollution. "When homes, schools, or businesses get water damage, mold can grow and produce allergenic airborne pollutants," says Kim Knowlton, professor of environmental health sciences at Columbia University and a former NRDC scientist. " Mold exposure can precipitate asthma attacks or an allergic response, and some molds can even produce toxins that would be dangerous for anyone to inhale."

Pollen allergies are worsening because of climate change . "Lab and field studies are showing that pollen-producing plants-especially ragweed-grow larger and produce more pollen when you increase the amount of carbon dioxide that they grow in," Knowlton says. "Climate change also extends the pollen production season, and some studies are beginning to suggest that ragweed pollen itself might be becoming a more potent allergen." If so, more people will suffer runny noses, fevers, itchy eyes, and other symptoms. "And for people with allergies and asthma, pollen peaks can precipitate asthma attacks, which are far more serious and can be life-threatening."

Air Pollution in the United States

More than one in three U.S. residents-120 million people-live in counties with unhealthy levels of air pollution, according to the by the American Lung Association (ALA). Since the annual report was first published, in 2000, its findings have shown how the Clean Air Act has been able to reduce harmful emissions from transportation, power plants, and manufacturing.

Recent findings, however, reflect how climate change-fueled wildfires and extreme heat are adding to the challenges of protecting public health. The latest report-which focuses on ozone, year-round particle pollution, and short-term particle pollution-also finds that people of color are 61 percent more likely than white people to live in a county with a failing grade in at least one of those categories, and three times more likely to live in a county that fails in all three.

In rankings for each of the three pollution categories covered by the ALA report, California cities occupy the top three slots (i.e., were highest in pollution), despite progress that the Golden State has made in reducing air pollution emissions in the past half century. At the other end of the spectrum, these cities consistently rank among the country's best for air quality: Burlington, Vermont; Honolulu; and Wilmington, North Carolina.

Air Pollution and Environmental Justice

No one wants to live next door to an incinerator, oil refinery, port, toxic waste dump, or other polluting site. Yet millions of people around the world do, and this puts them at a much higher risk for respiratory disease, cardiovascular disease, neurological damage, cancer, and death. In the United States, people of color are 1.5 times more likely than whites to live in areas with poor air quality, according to the ALA.

Historically, racist zoning policies and discriminatory lending practices known as have combined to keep polluting industries and car-choked highways away from white neighborhoods and have turned communities of color-especially low-income and working-class communities of color-into sacrifice zones, where residents are forced to breathe dirty air and suffer the many health problems associated with it. In addition to the increased health risks that come from living in such places, the polluted air can economically harm residents in the form of missed workdays and higher medical costs.

Environmental racism isn't limited to cities and industrial areas. Outdoor laborers, including the estimated three million migrant and seasonal farmworkers in the United States, are among the most vulnerable to air pollution-and they're also among the least equipped, politically, to pressure employers and lawmakers to affirm their right to breathe clean air.

Recently, cumulative impact mapping , which uses data on environmental conditions and demographics, has been able to show how some communities are overburdened with layers of issues, like high levels of poverty, unemployment, and pollution. Tools like the Environmental Justice Screening Method and the EPA's provide evidence of what many environmental justice communities have been explaining for decades: that we need land use and public health reforms to ensure that vulnerable areas are not overburdened and that the people who need resources the most are receiving them.

Controlling Air Pollution

In the United States, the Clean Air Act has been a crucial tool for reducing air pollution since its passage in 1970, although fossil fuel interests aided by industry-friendly lawmakers have frequently attempted to its many protections. Ensuring that this bedrock environmental law remains intact and properly enforced will always be key to maintaining and improving our air quality.

But the best, most effective way to control air pollution is to speed up our transition to cleaner fuels and industrial processes. By switching over to renewable energy sources (such as wind and solar power), maximizing fuel efficiency in our vehicles, and replacing more and more of our gasoline-powered cars and trucks with electric versions, we'll be limiting air pollution at its source while also curbing the global warming that heightens so many of its worst health impacts.

And what about the economic costs of controlling air pollution? According to a report on the Clean Air Act commissioned by NRDC, the annual benefits of cleaner air are up to 32 times greater than the cost of clean air regulations. Those benefits include up to 370,000 avoided premature deaths, 189,000 fewer hospital admissions for cardiac and respiratory illnesses, and net economic benefits of up to $3.8 trillion for the U.S. economy every year.

How to Help Reduce Air Pollution

"The less gasoline we burn, the better we're doing to reduce air pollution and the harmful effects of climate change," Walke explains. "Make good choices about transportation. When you can, ride a bike, walk, or take public transportation. For driving, choose a car that gets better miles per gallon of gas or buy an electric car ." You can also investigate your power provider options-you may be able to request that your electricity be supplied by wind or solar. Buying your food locally cuts down on the fossil fuels burned in trucking or flying food in from across the world. And most important: "Support leaders who push for clean air and water and responsible steps on climate change," Walke says.

How to Protect Your Health

"When you see in the news or hear on the weather report that pollution levels are high, it may be useful to limit the time when children go outside or you go for a jog," Walke says. Generally, ozone levels tend to be lower in the morning.

If you exercise outside, stay as far as you can from heavily trafficked roads. Then shower and wash your clothes to remove fine particles.

The air may look clear, but that doesn't mean it's pollution free. Utilize tools like the EPA's air pollution monitor, , to get the latest conditions. If the air quality is bad, stay inside with the windows closed.

If you live or work in an area that's prone to wildfires, stay away from the harmful smoke as much as you're able. Consider keeping a small stock of masks to wear when conditions are poor. The most ideal masks for smoke particles will be labelled "NIOSH" (which stands for National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health) and have either "N95" or "P100" printed on it.

If you're using an air conditioner while outdoor pollution conditions are bad, use the recirculating setting to limit the amount of polluted air that gets inside.

This story was originally published on November 1, 2016, and has been updated with new information and links.

This NRDC.org story is available for online republication by news media outlets or nonprofits under these conditions: The writer(s) must be credited with a byline; you must note prominently that the story was originally published by NRDC.org and link to the original; the story cannot be edited (beyond simple things such as grammar); you can't resell the story in any form or grant republishing rights to other outlets; you can't republish our material wholesale or automatically-you need to select stories individually; you can't republish the photos or graphics on our site without specific permission; you should to let us know when you've used one of our stories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Air Pollution: Everything You Need to Know

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The effects of air pollution wreck havoc on human health and our planet as a whole. Learn about what causes air pollution and how to help reduce the effects.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/are-you-recycling-your-plastics-the-right-way-well-tell-you-how/

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.ecowatch.com/air-pollution-cancer-us-2655487516.html

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An extensive analysis by ProPublica reveals a detailed map of more than 1,000 American communities that are hotspots for carcinogenic air pollution.

The worst three are in Louisiana's " Cancer Alley," five of the top 20 are in Texas, and predominantly Black areas experience double the cancer risk of white areas.

"Go read this investigation on the toxic air crisis plaguing American communities," the Verge wrote of ProPublica's investigation.

As reported by The Verge:

The ProPublica investigation underscored weaknesses in how the EPA regulates air pollution. While the agency strictly regulates "criteria" air pollutants like particulate matter, it doesn't set limits on emissions of over 180 so-called hazardous air pollutants. And instead of tracking the cumulative emissions of dangerous chemicals in each area, it looks at pollution like refineries and shipyards one by one - an approach that underestimates the extent to which people living around multiple chemical plants are exposed to toxic air.

"The public is going to learn that EPA allows a hell of a lot of pollution to occur that the public does not think is occurring," Wayne Davis, an environmental scientist who used to work at the EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, told ProPublica.
For a deeper dive:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top Cancerous Air Pollution Sites in U.S. Revealed

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An extensive analysis by ProPublica reveals a detailed map of more than 1,000 American communities that are hotspots for carcinogenic air pollution. The worst three are in Louisiana's "Cancer Alley," five of the top 20 are in Texas, and predominantly Black areas experience double the cancer risk of white areas.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.livescience.com/amp/arctic-sea-ice-polar-bear-extinction-warning

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Polar bears could vanish by the end of the century, scientists predict

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If the ice disappeared during the summer, many creatures that rely on it would be driven to extinction, scientists warn.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59105963

# data[].attributes.body
https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/explained-climate-change-11-charts-7605571/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
More than half of premature deaths from air pollution worldwide in 2010 were the result of economic consumption in just 11 G20 countries

Nearly two million premature deaths from air pollution in 2010 were caused by the production of goods for consumers in G20 nations.

That's according to a model by Keisuke Nansai at the National Institute for Environmental Studies in Tsukuba, Japan, whose group sought to identify the impact of each nation's economic consumption on air pollution and the health problems they cause.

In 2010, the latest year for which all figures were available, consumption of goods in the 19 nations of the G20 (the European Union is the other member) resulted in almost two million air pollution-related premature deaths worldwide, with 78,600 of these in infants. The team has called for more collaboration between G20 countries to curb air pollution-related deaths caused as a direct result of the purchasing of goods.

To calculate these figures, the team mapped ambient fine particulate matter (PM2.5) - microscopic particles that are small enough to enter the lungs and blood where they can cause disease - and estimated the health impacts in 199 countries.

These fine particles arise from the manufacture, transport and disposal of goods. They include black carbon, or soot, which is emitted when diesel, coal and other biomass fuels are burned, together with secondary particles that form in the atmosphere as a result of other emissions.

Globalised trade means that consumption in one country can lead to PM2.5 pollution in another, so the team used trade data from 19 of the G20 nations to create "footprints" that represented the health impact of one country's consumption in another.

China had the largest number of premature deaths caused by PM2.5 particles, followed by India, the US, Russia and Indonesia. With the exception of the US, most of these deaths were within their own borders. However, the consumption of goods in the US and 10 other G20 nations resulted in more than 50 per cent of the PM2.5-related premature deaths in other countries.

G20 countries need to take more responsibility for their entire footprint, says Nansai, rather than focusing solely on the emissions created from transporting goods across borders.

Francesca Dominici at Harvard University says that the "great majority of the responsibility is on the government and big industry".

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions should also eventually decrease PM2.5 levels, says Dominici: "Air pollution and greenhouse gases share the same emission sources, and both affect the most vulnerable."

Several higher-income countries, including the UK and the US, have pledged to reach net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by the middle of the century, although these promises have been criticised by leaders of lower-income countries for not being accompanied by clear plans. China and Russia have pledged to reach net zero by 2060. Indian prime minister Narendra Modi said at the COP26 summit this week that the country will hit net-zero emissions by 2070.

"Honouring climate change agreements will save millions of lives now and also in the future," says Dominici.

Nansai says that individual consumers can also make a difference. "We believe that consumers should pay attention to whether companies disclose their efforts to deal with air pollution throughout the life cycle of their products, and include this as a criterion for their consumption choices," he says.

The researchers are currently analysing data from 2015 to update their findings, but are unable to say how the picture may have changed in more recent years. The covid-19 pandemic has decreased air pollution temporarily, but it is already returning to pre-pandemic levels, says Nansai.

"The air quality in developed countries will continue to improve as a result of climate change measures such as renewable energy. However, if nothing changes in developing countries, the number of premature deaths in these countries due to consumption will not change significantly," says Nansai. "In fact, it will probably rise due to population growth and an increasing number of elderly people vulnerable to disease."

Journal reference: Nature Communications, DOI: 10.1038/s41467-021-26348-y
Sign up for Today at COP26, our free daily newsletter covering the crucial climate summit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Air pollution from G20 consumers caused two million deaths in 2010

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than half of premature deaths from air pollution worldwide in 2010 were the result of economic consumption in just 11 G20 countries Nearly two million premature deaths from air pollution in 2010 were caused by the production of goods for consumers in G20 nations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
WIRRAL, MERSEYSIDE - MAY 31: A giant sand artwork adorns New Brighton Beach to highlight global ... [+]
Getty Images

According to the International Energy Agency (IEA), the majority of CO2 emission reductions through 2030 will come from technologies on the market today. Achieving net-zero by 2050 is nothing short of a momentous endeavor, and the energy sector is playing a key role in reaching it. Technology is critical in achieving carbon neutrality, and to no surprise, startups have a unique role to play.

Business leaders all over the world must scrutinize the impact of their organizations on the climate and, thus, respond to the critical threats of global warming impacting our planet. Boston Consulting Group (BCG) emphasizes that " we must reduce these carbon emissions by 50% by the end of this decade."

According to Charlotte Degot, Managing Director and Partner at BCG GAMMA, "We cannot reduce what we cannot measure. Corporations ' climate action does not match our ambitions: one of the main reasons is that corporations don't accurately measure their climate impact and track it enough over time. Fortunately, tools & techniques to help us exist, one of the most powerful ones is artificial intelligence." No AI solutions that matter more to humanity than decarbonizing the atmosphere and winning the war on climate change.

LONDON, UNITED KINGDOM - FEBRUARY 4: British Prime Minister Boris Johnson (L) and British ... [+]
Getty Images

Beyond Limits

To tackle complicated business challenges on Earth, California-based Beyond Limits delivers sophisticated cognitive AI solutions with the resilience, reasoning, and autonomy required by the vast scale and ever-changing space conditions. Beyond Limits is creating revolutionary AI technology that is an evolutionary step forward from traditional AI ability to perceive, understand, connect, learn, teach, reason, and solve issues. The company's solution combines deep learning and machine learning technologies with symbolic AI to mimic human intuition. Beyond Limits is directed by CEO and Co-Founder AJ Abdallat and has raised $158.5M in funding by investors such as BP Ventures and Group 42.

BCG CO2 AI

An AI-powered solution to help corporations measure accurately, simulate, track and optimize their emissions at scale. CO2 AI patented cutting edge technology leverages deep learning, graph theory, among other techniques, to increase the accuracy of the emissions measurement, automate the calculations, and support decision-making with advanced features such as automated abatement levers recommendations. CO2 AI unlocks significant accuracy gains in the emissions measurement and enables 30-40% emission reduction for large corporations. It has already been implemented across many industries (from consumer goods, retail, pharma, to cement) across the globe.

Watershed

California-based Watershed is on a mission to accelerate the adoption of large-scale, clean, renewable energy and power desalination. They provide end-to-end solutions that span from early-stage market assessment through technology implementation. Watershed shows companies where every kilogram of carbon comes from. It uses AI to analyze Scope 3 emissions with granular data on specific suppliers, benchmark against their industry, and identify high-emitting vendors and categories. Co-founder Taylor Francis leads the company.

BrainBox

According to the site, Montreal-based BrainBox AI utilizes self-adapting artificial intelligence technology to proactively optimize one of the world's largest energy consumers and GHG emitters: buildings. It is often unperceived that one of the leading contributors of this energy usage comes from buildings' Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC) systems. 45% of commercial buildings' energy consumption comes from HVAC, of which 30% is usually wasted. Chief Executive Officer leads the company & Co-Founder Sean Neely has raised $12M in funding and is backed by Desjardins Venture Capital and Esplanade Venture s.

Plan A

Berlin-based Plan A has developed an AI- and digital-driven SaaS platform for automated carbon accounting, decarbonization, ESG management, and reporting that serves customers across the globe and is TÜV certified. Their technology allows companies to manage their carbon accounting while also reducing their negative environmental impact. Plan A empowers firms to play a vital role in the effort to attain net-zero carbon emissions. CEO & Co-Founder Lubomila Jordanova leads the company has raised $5M to date and is backed by SoftBank and Demeter.

Albo

Tel-Aviv-based Albo uses deep learning to analyze satellite imagery and map, measure, and AI-powered spatial and temporal monitoring for carbon sequestration in natural-based projects. They are revolutionizing the carbon credit market by making carbon removal more scalable. The company is led by CEO Jacques Amselem and is backed by Techstars accelerator.

Kayrros

By leveraging machine learning, natural language processing, and complex mathematics to satellite pictures, geolocation data, textual information, and other raw alternative data, Paris-based Kayrros assesses and monitors worldwide energy, natural resources, and industrial activity. According to the site, "Kayrros extracts value from the integration of alternative and market data into unique solutions and customer product offerings while measuring environmental impact and delivering insight into climate and energy-transition risk." Alexandre d'Aspremont founded the company, Antoine Halff, Antoine Rostand, Jean-Michel Lasry, Laurent El Ghaoui, which have raised $34.5M in funding to date and are backed by Index Ventures and Koreyla Capital.

Tomorrow

Danish-based Tomorrow is a technology startup that uses data and machine learning to quantify the climate impact of our daily actions automatically. Tomorrow was founded in 2016 by a group of data scientists, machine learning engineers, and climate change experts to automate carbon accounting and enable large-scale environmental activism. The company was founded by Olivier Corradi and is backed by investment firm Revent.

FoldAI

Munich-based FoldAI brings the latest fast-changing technologies and algorithms to ecosystem monitoring. They use local multidimensional sensing, sensor networks, edge computing and AI, Cloud AI, and energy harvesting for ecosystem health tracking, risk assessments, biodiversity quantification, and environmental impact assessment. The company was founded by Friedrich Foerstner, Giovanni Carmantini, and Jake Turner and is backed by XPRENEURS incubator.

Blue Sky Analytics

India-based Blue Sky Analytics built a data analytics platform to extract environmental intelligence from satellite imagery. They do this by using AI-powered infrastructure that analyzes every pixel on the planet for relevant insights such as air quality and water pollution to make it easier for people worldwide to access the information they need about their surroundings to live healthier lives without stress fear of danger. They are building a first-of-its-kind planetary digital twin called SpaceTime, which is set to launch soon. The company was founded by Abhilasha Purwar and Kshitij Purwar have raised $1.5M in funding and are backed by International Finance Corporation and Stellaris Venture Partners.

Patch

Patch is an API-based carbon removal solution and platform that enables companies to calculate activity emissions and neutralize that footprint through the purchase of carbon removal and offsets. Patch allows users to custom-build their purchase portfolio from a vast network of both nature-based and frontier negative emissions technology projects, while enabling developers to build climate-positive features using its API-based infrastructure. Patch was founded by Brennan Spellacy and Aaron Grunfeld, and recently raised $20.75M in its Series A round led by Coatue Management. Patch is also backed by Andreessen Horowitz, Version One and Pale Blue Dot.

Global network concept. Robot hand. Sustainable Development Goals. SDGs. Elements of this image ... [+]
getty

The Path Forward

Climate change is a serious global problem, and there's no end in sight. Many organizations are employing sophisticated tools and technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) to reduce carbon emissions and increase energy efficiency.

These eleven companies offer software and hardware solutions that leverage AI tools to improve the quality of life for everyone while reducing environmental impacts throughout industry sectors.

Artificial intelligence algorithms and machine learning analytics can offer a range of benefits to companies, cities, and individuals. Carbon emissions can be reduced across a variety of industries, from manufacturing to transportation. There's tremendous potential for AI-driven software and hardware solutions to address the challenges associated with climate change. The race is on as companies continue to develop and design AI-powered products that reduce emissions. Now is the time to accelerate this momentum and reap the benefits of AI in reducing carbon emissions - hence, improving the climate.

As the battle for emissions reduction pushes forward, one thing is clear: with so many innovative new technologies on the horizon; we may very well reach carbon neutrality in our lifetime.

... Read More

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
ai climate change solutions for zero carbon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
11 Examples Of AI Climate Change Solutions For Zero Carbon

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Achieving net-zero by 2050 is nothing short of a momentous endeavor, and the energy sector is playing a key role in reaching it. No AI solutions that matter more to humanity than decarbonizing the atmosphere and winning the war on climate change.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.google.co.kr/amp/s/www.cnet.com/google-amp/news/recycling-paper-and-cardboard-heres-the-right-way-to-do-it/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you order pizza regularly or receive multiple deliveries from Amazon every month, you've likely got empty boxes piled up somewhere in your house. And while you may think you can recycle any cardboard and paper, that's not the case. We'll help make sure you're recycling them the right way, especially as -- the UN Climate Change Conference -- has kicked off.

For example, the pizza boxes you've been "recycling" are actually getting thrown away by employees at the recycling center (more below). The same goes for the glossy wrapping paper you thought would be fine to put into the paper recycling.

According to the University of Southern Indiana, one billion trees' worth of paper are thrown in the trash annually -- and that's just in the US. I spoke with some recycling experts and here's what I found out about the right way to recycle paper and cardboard.

How to recycle cardboard

There's a right way to recycle your paper and cardboard. For example, you can recycle an Amazon box, but not a greasy pizza box. This is because the oils from the pizza saturate the cardboard, making it unrecyclable. However, it's not completely impossible to recycle contaminated boxes. A recycling center employee told CNET to cut out the part of the cardboard that has residue on it. You can place the soiled part in your compost bin.

From the lab to your inbox. Get the latest science stories from CNET every week.

Before you bring the cardboard to your nearest recycling center or put it in a bin for pickup, break the boxes down so that they're lying flat. This helps make more room in the bin and helps the recycling team to easily put the cardboard into their processing machines. Also, remove all contents from the inside, like bubble wrap.

Also, if you're placing cardboard into a recycling bin without a lid, make sure it's covered in case it rains. Wet cardboard can clog up the machines, causing an entire batch of cardboard to become contaminated.

If possible, remove the tape from the boxes before taking the cardboard to the recycling center, as well. Saving the employees a step can help make the recycling process more efficient.

The Environmental Protection Agency suggests checking with your local recycling provider for the proper way to recycle cardboard to ensure you're following their standards.

How to recycle paper

Just like cardboard, there are certain types of paper you shouldn't recycle. For example, the paper towel you used to wipe up spilled milk or gift wrap with a glossy finish. The EPA recommends looking for paper that has already been recycled when you go shopping so you know that the paper can be recycled again.

When it comes time to recycle the paper you've used, avoid getting it wet as it reduces the value in the recycling market. Instead, keep it separate from other recyclables, like anything that could leak liquid. Also, wait until the morning of pickup to take the paper out to the curb if your bin doesn't have a lid to prevent it from becoming wet due to rain.

Also, many recycling companies won't accept shredded paper because it can get stuck in the machinery, so avoid shredding your paper. Instead, if there are confidential documents you want to recycle, like bank statements, use a marker to mark out important information.

What else can I do?

Recycling is one way to help reduce waste, but there are other ways to prevent it in the first place.

Limit your use of paper.

Reuse cardboard boxes or donate them to someone who will use them -- for example, someone who's moving.

See if the companies sending you boxes will take them back for reuse.

Reuse gift bags and tissue paper, and consider using paper gift wrap.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recycling paper and cardboard? Here's the right way to do it

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you order pizza regularly or receive multiple deliveries from Amazon every month, you've likely got empty boxes piled up somewhere in your house. And while you may think you can recycle any cardboard and paper, that's not the case.

# data[].attributes.body
https://theconversation.com/sewage-pollution-our-research-reveals-the-scale-of-englands-growing-problem-170763

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The UK has around 1,500 individual river systems, totalling over 200,000km in length. It's common for sewers here to accept both untreated human waste and rain water in a combined system. Water and sewerage companies are permitted to release this wastewater into inland and coastal waters without treatment under exceptional conditions, such as following heavy rainfall.

Environment Agency figures, mapped by The Rivers Trust, show that there were more than 400,000 untreated discharges in 2020, lasting a total of 300 million hours. Stormwater overflows act as pressure relief valves, preventing large volumes of mixed human waste and stormwater from overwhelming the system and backing up into homes and businesses during downpours.

Numerous high-profile sewage pollution events have focused public attention on the activities of water and sewerage companies, which under existing law are required to report any sewage releases they lack permits for to the regulator - the Environment Agency in England and Wales.

Our recent analysis of pollution incident data from every water and sewerage company in England sheds light on the failings of this approach. We found that, while various companies have very different records on pollution, pollution incidents have been on an upward trend since 2018.

As much as 5% of pollution incidents from sewage treatment works and pumping stations could be going unreported. The results also indicated that pollution events which aren't reported promptly by a company are likely to cause more severe damage to the environment.

The UK government recently amended legislation to oblige water and sewerage companies to progressively reduce damage to rivers and waterways from sewer overflows. This means the water industry will be required by law to show it has reduced the amount of untreated wastewater being released into waterways over the next five years. But by leaving it up to private companies to disclose their wrongdoing, the government is unlikely to make much progress.

Cracking down on pollution

The nine water and sewerage companies operating in England reported 1,730 pollution incidents in 2019. Non-company sources, which includes the public, reported a further 462. Another recent study suggested that water and sewerage companies have been under-reporting pollution incidents since at least 2009.

Inadequate and inconsistent reporting by water and sewerage companies makes it difficult to get an accurate understanding of how much sewage pollution there really is. The government's reluctance to toughen the protection of inland and coastal waters is particularly worrying at a time when more and more people are enjoying open-water swimming.

Wastewater releases when water flow is low, such as during dry weather, can be particularly damaging to ecosystems and bathers. This is when waters are likely to contain more disease-causing microbes, such as norovirus.

More extreme weather as a result of climate change will ramp up the strain on Britain's ageing sewers. That will make it difficult enough reducing approved stormwater discharges. Illicit pollution incidents must be stopped entirely where possible.

Standardising the process for reporting pollution could make this process easier. In the long-term, Britain should change its combined sewerage system to one in which wastewater and stormwater are collected and dealt with separately. In the meantime, improving natural flood management by regenerating wetlands and removing surfaces like concrete where possible could also help.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sewage pollution: our research reveals the scale of England's growing problem

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The UK has around 1,500 individual river systems, totalling over 200,000km in length. It's common for sewers here to accept both untreated human waste and rain water in a combined system. Water and sewerage companies are permitted to release this wastewater into inland and coastal waters without treatment under exceptional conditions, such as following heavy rainfall.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.gponline.com/5-ways-gps-help-patients-affected-air-pollution/respiratory-system/article/1732175

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 ways GPs can help patients affected by air pollution

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As world leaders work out how to solve the wider problem of air pollution at COP26, Dr Andrew Whittamoreexplains what GPs and primary care clinicians can do to help patients stay as well as they can when they are breathing in dirty air.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2021/1102/1257500-water-quality/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EPA lists towns releasing raw sewage into environment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
More than 30 towns and villages released raw sewage into the environment every day in 2020 because they did not have treatment plants, according to a new report by the Environmental Protection Agency. A third of these 34 areas will not have a functional water treatment plant until after 2024.

# data[].attributes.body
https://pearlglobal.com.au/the-waste-problem/

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.propublica.org/article/can-air-pollution-cause-cancer-risks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You may be one of millions of people across the country who has lived in an area with an increased estimated cancer risk because of the chemicals industrial facilities release into the air.

A number of residents have asked for more information about what this means, what the laws are, and what - if anything - they can do to protect themselves and their communities when the regulatory system does not. To answer their questions, we spoke to health experts and academics who study toxic air pollution, government officials and other residents who have lived in hot spots for decades. We also dug into reports and data.

This guide answers the following questions:

About industrial air pollution and its risks About evaluating your own cancer risk About environmental laws and regulations About ProPublica's reporting

Can air pollution cause cancer?

Yes. Different types of air pollution have been linked to a variety of cancers. Regulators and scientists use the term "air toxics" to describe chemicals that can cause cancer or other serious health impacts such as asthma and heart disease.

Even though air pollution can cause cancer, it is rarely possible to identify a single cause for one person's cancer diagnosis. There are many factors that impact someone's chances of developing cancer, including:

Exposure to air toxics from living near or working in industrial facilities

Exposure to pesticides, other chemicals or diesel and car exhaust

Genetics

Whether someone smokes tobacco, drinks alcohol or eats healthy foods and exercises regularly

These risk factors can sometimes compound one another, increasing the chance that cancer may develop.

Just like cars have brake pedals and emergency brakes to avoid accidents, the human body has defense mechanisms against the growth of damaged or abnormal cells that can cause cancer, said Edward Trapido, the chair of cancer epidemiology at Louisiana State University's School of Public Health. If a car has a history of brake line leaks and the driver is riding through a heavy rainstorm, it can be more likely that an accident will occur. Similarly, if you have a family history of certain cancers and are exposed to additional toxic air pollution that can mutate DNA, damaged or abnormal cells may be more likely to slip by your body's defense systems, leaving you at a higher risk of developing cancer.

What is an industrial facility?

Industrial facilities are spaces companies own and operate to create products. Take BASF and Dow, two of the largest chemical companies worldwide. The companies run dozens of industrial facilities across the United States, where they make chemicals that go into everyday household items like laundry detergent and dish soap. Other industrial facilities include oil refineries and companies that sterilize medical equipment. ProPublica's reporting is focused on the largest polluters with the greatest potential to affect local cancer risk.

How can I know where industrial air pollution is?

Because many industrial facilities have to make this information public. They are required to report the types and amount of toxic air pollutants they release to the federal government's Environmental Protection Agency. The agency has a screening tool that models how the chemicals industrial facilities emit spread across communities nationwide. You can see how far this toxic air pollution spreads on ProPublica's interactive map.

It is important to note that this data collection process is imperfect and prone to inaccuracies. ( More on that here.) One of the best ways to know what a facility is releasing is by testing the air coming out of the facilities' smokestacks. But this rarely happens. (More on that in a later story.)

How can chemicals from industrial facilities affect health?

People living in areas with industrial air pollution may have a higher additional risk of developing cancer over their lifetime.

Toxic air pollution can enter your body when you breathe it in. If the toxic air pollutant is a known carcinogen, that means it can increase your risk of developing certain cancers by disrupting the way cells are produced in your body and mutating their DNA. These cancerous cells can then crowd out healthy cells, causing a cascade of effects. There can be other health consequences from this toxic air, ranging from headaches to heart disease. ( More on the types of cancers and health effects below.)

These pollutants can enter your body through other pathways, too. Toxic pollution can seep into nearby soil or water systems. Your skin can be exposed by touching surfaces with toxics on them, though this is likely to result in smaller doses of exposure. You may also be exposed by eating food grown in toxic soil or by drinking contaminated water.

About evaluating your own cancer risk

How much extra cancer risk is my neighborhood facing from industrial facilities?

Scientists and regulators assess additional cancer risk using a figure they call Incremental Lifetime Cancer Risk. This lets them compare how many more people in a given community are likely to get cancer assuming they are exposed to a chemical 24 hours a day for 70 years (a presumed human lifetime).

For example, let's say you are in an area where elevated cancer risk from industrial air pollution is estimated to be 1 in 10,000. That means of every 10,000 people living in this area over a presumed lifetime of 70 years, it is estimated that at least one additional person will get cancer.

You can find the estimated elevated cancer risk in your area by visiting ProPublica's interactive map. ProPublica analyzed and mapped five years of modeled data to understand how toxic air pollution may increase communities' estimated cancer risk. The data models added cancer risk between 2014 and 2018. As you read the map, remember that the elevated risk is an estimate and a starting point to identify areas of potential concern. There are also other associated health risks not captured by the data.

There is cancer risk everywhere. What level of elevated cancer risk is considered unacceptable?

This depends on who you ask, but the EPA generally considers any estimated additional cancer risk that reaches 1 in 10,000 not sufficiently protective of public health, according to the agency's Office of Inspector General. The agency can - yet will not always - intervene when the estimated elevated cancer risk reaches this level.

The agency also maintains that it strives to "protect the greatest number of people possible" from an estimated additional cancer risk level higher than 1 in a million but generally views this amount of risk as acceptable.

According to our analysis, about 250,000 people live in areas where the estimated increased lifetime cancer risk is above 1 in 10,000 because of toxic air pollution. Tens of millions of people live in areas where this estimated additional risk is higher than 1 in a million.

How long do I have to live somewhere for my estimated cancer risk to be elevated?

It depends on the toxic air pollutant, and how much of it is in the air you are breathing. Scientists assume people live continuously in an area for 70 years and are exposed to this toxic air pollution for 24 hours a day when evaluating elevated cancer risk. But research has found that exposure to chemicals for even shorter periods of time can lead to cancer cases.

The time between exposure and diagnosis, known as the latency period, is different for each chemical and depends on how much of the chemical you were exposed to.

What does it mean if I work in an area with elevated industrial cancer risk?

You may be exposed to toxic air pollution, especially if you work in an industrial facility.

In that case, you have a legal right to request more information on your exposure levels from your employer. (If you're interested in getting this information, let ProPublica know by filling out the form at the bottom of this article.) Workplace regulations on chemical safety are different from air pollution laws for the general public. Workers within these facilities are likely exposed to higher concentrations of toxic chemicals than residents who live nearby.

What kinds of cancer are associated with the toxic air pollution in my area?

It depends which toxic air pollutants you are exposed to. To find out more about your own situation:

1. You can reach out to your local emergency planning committee. These groups are responsible for providing you and your neighbors with information about the chemicals nearby industrial facilities are using. You can find your local committee by reaching out to your state emergency response commission members. Find their contact information here.

You can also ask the part of the EPA that oversees the overall risk assessment by calling (202) 566-1676 or emailing[email protected] .

2. You can check out the risk associated with each chemical on the EPA's website here. After you search for the particular chemical, you can click on the IRIS, or Integrated Risk Information Summary, for more detailed information on studies examining its specific cancer risk. There may also be "Supporting Documents" for the toxic air pollutants that get into more detail about certain cancers. These documents are technical and can be hard to understand, so you may want to reach out to a public information officer at your local health or environment department for more information. Your health care provider may also be a good person to ask about this.

Are children at greater risk?

Toxic air pollution that is carcinogenic, meaning it can mutate DNA, may put children at a greater risk than adults.

How can I learn more about the facilities putting me or people I know at elevated risk?

Here are some other resources with more information on industrial facilities, the toxic air pollution they release and estimated health risks:

The National Air Toxics Assessment, an EPA screening tool that suggests what the long-term cancer and health risks might be if toxic air emissions were to remain the same over a lifetime.

The Toxic Release Inventory program, an EPA database where you can find which chemicals a facility is using and how much of the chemicals the facility is releasing into the air each year.

The University of Massachusetts Amherst's Political Economy Research Institute, which has searchable reports and rankings for the top air polluters in the country.

The National Emissions Inventory, a federal collection of data on local air pollution emissions that is published every three years.

The Enforcement and Compliance History site, an EPA tool where you can look up industrial facilities and their past compliance with environmental regulations and find any enforcement actions agencies have taken against them.

EJSCREEN, an EPA mapping tool that combines information on cancer and health risks from pollution with demographic information.

You may also want to consult the federal government's plain English guide to the Clean Air Act as you learn more.

About environmental laws and regulations

What is the government supposed to be doing to protect me from toxic air pollution?

The EPA publishes and reviews standards for the pollution-reducing technologies industrial facilities use to reduce the amount of toxic pollution released into the air. The agency then relies on air modeling to screen for areas with estimated increased cancer risk. If the EPA finds an area where the estimated additional lifetime cancer risk around industrial facilities is higher than 1 in 10,000, officials can - but are not required to - investigate whether the risk is actually that high, why it might be that high and what steps to take to lower the risk levels.

Industrial facilities also need permits to operate, which is where state officials come in. These officials are largely responsible for approving and denying these permits, which are called Title V permits. When deciding whether a permit should be approved, states are not always required to consider how proposed new sources of pollution may add onto the risk nearby communities already face from other types of pollution. State officials usually approve these permits with little pushback, according to environmental law experts.

Residents can petition the EPA to set stricter standards for facilities or file a petition with the state if the modeled elevated cancer risk is more than 1 in 10,000. Victor B. Flatt, an environmental law professor at the University of Houston, said this is a years-long process that has rarely led to significant changes for residents living near facilities.

Even with these processes, ProPublica found that people are being exposed to estimated cancer levels the EPA considers not acceptable ( more on that here). When ProPublica spoke with EPA officials about its findings, Matthew Tejada, director of the agency's Office of Environmental Justice, acknowledged that the system for regulating and reducing toxic air pollution is inadequate. "We haven't regulated for these things," Tejada said.

Tejada said the agency is working on solutions, but explained that some will take time, maybe even decades.

Pollution disproportionately affects people of color. Are there any laws that protect me?

A number of communities have used the National Environmental Policy Act to push back against companies looking to build or expand industrial facilities. Under the law and an ensuing executive order, federal agencies have to consider the overall environmental consequences before approving a project, as well as the potential for disproportionate impact on communities of color. People who may be impacted by the potential pollution are guaranteed the opportunity to provide comments and feedback. To learn more about the law, check out this guide.

The EPA's Office of Environmental Justice also has a hotline people can call or email with concerns or questions.

What else have communities near industrial facilities done to protect themselves?

Pushed for better information. Lydia Gerard, an environmental activist who lives in Reserve, Louisiana, where much of the industrial cancer risk is higher than what the government considers safe, said: "If you have to get in touch with local agencies to get information, find out where you need to go to get it. If the levels are high, make sure you stay on top of the EPA and your local agencies to make sure they are doing what they are supposed to do."

Tested the air.

Campaigned for air monitors to be installed and for the associated data to be released publicly.

Secured funding to conduct independent air monitoring. Environmental activist Penny Dryden, for example, has a grant from a local health care system to monitor fine soot pollution in communities near chemical facilities surrounding New Castle and Wilmington, Delaware - her hometown. While she would like to monitor air toxics next, the technology is expensive and requires significant scientific expertise.

Asked to be notified. Residents have worked with industrial facilities and local authorities to get notified by facilities, local emergency response groups or other local officials when facilities release more toxic air pollution than usual.

Some residents told us that they decide not to go to the grocery store or the pharmacy when a monitor shows high levels of pollutants. You can check your local air quality at airnow.gov, but this does not include information specifically on air toxics levels from industrial facilities.

Set up carbon filters. Wilma Subra is an environmental scientist who has been helping communities across the South understand and reduce their exposure to toxic air pollution since the 1980s. She advises that people use carbon filter units to reduce the concentration of compounds like benzene inside their homes. However, these filters can be too expensive for many families and need to be changed on a regular basis. The California Air Resources Board published a list of portable air filters. The equipment ranges in cost from about $10 to $30 per month.

Consulted with lawyers. To know your legal rights, it can be helpful to get in touch with a lawyer. Under the Clean Air Act, residents, environmental groups and industrial facilities have sued the EPA for failing to carry out its legally mandated actions. Groups have also sued to challenge the air-quality-related standards the agency develops.

Over the EPA's decades-long history, lawsuits have prompted the agency to carry out its responsibilities. For example, the EPA agreed to review and update emissions standards for dozens of toxic air pollutants after environmental groups filed a lawsuit alleging the agency failed to do so within the required time frame.

The EPA did not respond to a specific request for comment about the role of lawsuits in the agency's work. But Joe Goffman, acting assistant administrator for the EPA's Office of Air and Radiation, told ProPublica in an emailed statement that the agency recognized the need to "develop regulatory solutions" to reduce toxic air pollution from industrial facilities.

About ProPublica's reporting

How did ProPublica do this research?

Here's a link to our methodology for this project. To read more about how these hot spots formed, read our overview story.

We are a nonprofit investigative newsroom with reporters across the country. Here's where you can learn more about the kind of work we do.

Tell us about your questions, experiences or tips using the form below. If you live or work in an affected area, we would like to hear from you.

If you have a story to share or question to ask, we invite you to fill out our form.
Submit A Tip While specific tips are most helpful for future stories, we would also welcome general help and advice from subject-matter experts. Just include your contact information and some details about what you do.

If you wish for additional anonymity, please get in touch via one of these methods:

If you can't access our form, call or text our reporters at:
(347) 558-2844

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can Air Pollution Cause Cancer? What You Need to Know About the Risks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You may be one of millions of people across the country who has lived in an area with an increased estimated cancer risk because of the chemicals industrial facilities release into the air.

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.wired.co.uk/article/clean-water-wayout-machine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
This tiny solar-powered factory cleans up dirty water

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
For large parts of the world, good quality drinking water is hard to come by. The first solar-powered beverage factory is helping fix the problem

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.conserve-energy-future.com/various-waste-disposal-problems-and-solutions.php