# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PLASTIC PROJECT SOME COOL HACKS FROM INSTAGRAM We can't do it all at once but we can do one or two changes to avoid plastic. You might start with a toothbrush form bamboo or with a coffee mug for your...

# data[].attributes.body
Recycling boxes within school

•Pfandflaschen collection

•Paper, plastic, restmüll in each classroom and collect this during advisory

•Other plastics

•Separation bins for easier recycling?

•Different collection of rubbish within the school

Increased bike parking space to encourage cycling

Decrease paper use by:

•More use of computers

•More use of text books and make sure text books are brought to school
Use recycled and less bleached paper in school

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Efforts to save the giant panda, a worldwide symbol of wildlife conservation for half a century, are paying off: The iconic black-and-white bear is no longer endangered, the international body for species protection said on Sunday.

Native to Chinese bamboo forests, the panda was upgraded from endangered to vulnerable on the Red List of Threatened Species, managed by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). The newest update to the list includes 82,954 species, 23,928 of which are threatened with extinction. (Also see " 20,000 Species Are Near Extinction: Is it Time to Rethink How We Decide Which to Save?")

Giant panda populations in the wild have risen steadily by 17 percent in the decade up to 2014, when a nationwide census found 1,850 giant pandas in the wild in China. That's up from the last census of 1,600 animals in 2003.

"It's a good day to be a panda," said Ginette Hemley, senior vice president for wildlife conservation at WWF, a nonprofit whose logo is the giant panda. "We're thrilled."

Success for the giant panda, endangered since 1990, is thanks to two factors: A marked decrease in poaching, which was rampant in the 1980s; and a huge expansion of the animal's protected habitat. (Also read " Pandas Get to Know Their Wild Side.")

China now has 67 panda reserves, which are similar to U.S. national parks, says Hemley. She also noted that the Tibetan antelope, an endangered species slaughtered in past decades for its fine fur, is also recovering. The mountain species is now listed as near-threatened, according to the Red List.

"This is a deserved status," says M. Sanjayan, senior scientist at the nonprofit Conservation International. "The Chinese government has put in 30 years of hard work in pandas-[they are] not going to let the panda go extinct."

However, Marc Brody, senior adviser for conservation and sustainable development at China's Wolong Nature Reserve, says "it is too early to conclude that pandas are actually increasing in the wild-perhaps we are simply getting better at counting wild pandas."

"While the Chinese government deserves credit and support for recent progress in management of both captive and wild giant pandas ... there is no justifiable reason to downgrade the listing from endangered to threatened," he says.

"In fact, 'suitable' or quality panda habitat is in fact decreasing from ongoing fragmentation from highway construction, active tourism development in Sichuan Province, and other human economic activities."

However, the announcement had sobering developments for some of our kin: The largest living primate, Africa's eastern gorilla, is now critically endangered, having declined 70 percent over the past 20 years.

"We are the only one species of great ape that is not threatened with extinction," says Carlo Rondinini, who coordinates the IUCN's Global Mammal Assessment Program.

Poaching for wildlife trade and bush meat, as well as massive habitat destruction, has devastated most populations.

"We are eating our closest living relatives into oblivion," says Sanjayan.

Hunting is the biggest problem for the Grauer's gorilla, a subspecies that has fallen from nearly 17,000 in 1994 to fewer than 4,000 in 2015.

"Critical endangered status will raise the profile of this gorilla subspecies and bring attention to its plight," Andrew Plumptre, lead author of the revised Grauer's listing and senior conservationist in the Uganda Program at the Wildlife Conservation Society, said in a statement. "It has tended to be the neglected ape in Africa, despite being the largest ape in the world."

The report also highlighted "devastating impacts of invasive species"-87 percent of the 415 plants native to Hawaii are threatened with extinction, according to the Red List. "When we lose plants, we lose irreplaceable cultural treasures," says Matt Keir, a member of the IUCN's Hawaiian Plant Specialist Group.

One bright spot is the mountain gorilla, a subspecies of the eastern gorilla whose population is not decreasing largely due to ecotourism in the Democractic Republic of the Congo, Uganda, and Rwanda, WWF's Hemley says.

However, Hemley notes that the mountain gorilla population is still very small, under a thousand animals.

Likewise, the giant panda, at fewer than 2,000 individuals, is not out of the woods yet, she cautions. Several models predict climate change will wipe out more than 30 percent of the panda's bamboo habitat in the next 80 years. (Read " Who Discovered the Panda? ")

So no one is resting on their laurels: Conservation is a "long-term endeavor," Hemley says. ( Get an exclusive look into how keepers raise a baby panda.)

Conservation International's Sanjayan agrees: "You celebrate the small victories, but you keep track of the war."

Overall, the panda's recent growth is a reminder "that conservation works," adds Inger Andersen, IUCN's director general.

"We can move the dial on that barometer of life."
Join the conversation at the #IUCNCongress with #BoldSteps

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Giant Pandas, Symbol of Conservation, Are No Longer Endangered

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Efforts to save the giant panda, a worldwide symbol of wildlife conservation for half a century, are paying off: The iconic black-and-white bear is no longer endangered, the international body for species protection said on Sunday.

# data[].attributes.headline
Cold weather can be a consequence of climate change!

# data[].attributes.subject
Cold weather can be a consequence of climate change!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Polar vortex: what is it and how is it linked to climate change?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The polar vortex has broken into 'two swirling blobs of cold air', bringing the most frigid conditions in decades to the midwest

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Avoiding meat and dairy products is the single biggest way to reduce your environmental impact on the planet, according to the scientists behind the most comprehensive analysis to date of the damage farming does to the planet.

The new research shows that without meat and dairy consumption, global farmland use could be reduced by more than 75% - an area equivalent to the US, China, European Union and Australia combined - and still feed the world. Loss of wild areas to agriculture is the leading cause of the current mass extinction of wildlife.

The new analysis shows that while meat and dairy provide just 18% of calories and 37% of protein, it uses the vast majority - 83% - of farmland and produces 60% of agriculture's greenhouse gas emissions. Other recent research shows 86% of all land mammals are now livestock or humans. The scientists also found that even the very lowest impact meat and dairy products still cause much more environmental harm than the least sustainable vegetable and cereal growing.

The study, published in the journal Science, created a huge dataset based on almost 40,000 farms in 119 countries and covering 40 food products that represent 90% of all that is eaten. It assessed the full impact of these foods, from farm to fork, on land use, climate change emissions, freshwater use and water pollution (eutrophication) and air pollution (acidification).

"A vegan diet is probably the single biggest way to reduce your impact on planet Earth, not just greenhouse gases, but global acidification, eutrophication, land use and water use," said Joseph Poore, at the University of Oxford, UK, who led the research. "It is far bigger than cutting down on your flights or buying an electric car," he said, as these only cut greenhouse gas emissions.

"Agriculture is a sector that spans all the multitude of environmental problems," he said. "Really it is animal products that are responsible for so much of this. Avoiding consumption of animal products delivers far better environmental benefits than trying to purchase sustainable meat and dairy."

The analysis also revealed a huge variability between different ways of producing the same food. For example, beef cattle raised on deforested land result in 12 times more greenhouse gases and use 50 times more land than those grazing rich natural pasture. But the comparison of beef with plant protein such as peas is stark, with even the lowest impact beef responsible for six times more greenhouse gases and 36 times more land.

Greenhouse gas emissions for meat, dairy and pulses

The large variability in environmental impact from different farms does present an opportunity for reducing the harm, Poore said, without needing the global population to become vegan. If the most harmful half of meat and dairy production was replaced by plant-based food, this still delivers about two-thirds of the benefits of getting rid of all meat and dairy production.

Cutting the environmental impact of farming is not easy, Poore warned: "There are over 570m farms all of which need slightly different ways to reduce their impact. It is an [environmental] challenge like no other sector of the economy." But he said at least $500bn is spent every year on agricultural subsidies, and probably much more: "There is a lot of money there to do something really good with."

Labels that reveal the impact of products would be a good start, so consumers could choose the least damaging options, he said, but subsidies for sustainable and healthy foods and taxes on meat and dairy will probably also be necessary.

One surprise from the work was the large impact of freshwater fish farming, which provides two-thirds of such fish in Asia and 96% in Europe, and was thought to be relatively environmentally friendly. "You get all these fish depositing excreta and unconsumed feed down to the bottom of the pond, where there is barely any oxygen, making it the perfect environment for methane production," a potent greenhouse gas, Poore said.

The research also found grass-fed beef, thought to be relatively low impact, was still responsible for much higher impacts than plant-based food. "Converting grass into [meat] is like converting coal to energy. It comes with an immense cost in emissions," Poore said.

The new research has received strong praise from other food experts. Prof Gidon Eshel, at Bard College, US, said: "I was awestruck. It is really important, sound, ambitious, revealing and beautifully done."

He said previous work on quantifying farming's impacts, including his own, had taken a top-down approach using national level data, but the new work used a bottom-up approach, with farm-by-farm data. "It is very reassuring to see they yield essentially the same results. But the new work has very many important details that are profoundly revealing."

Prof Tim Benton, at the University of Leeds, UK, said: "This is an immensely useful study. It brings together a huge amount of data and that makes its conclusions much more robust. The way we produce food, consume and waste food is unsustainable from a planetary perspective. Given the global obesity crisis, changing diets - eating less livestock produce and more vegetables and fruit - has the potential to make both us and the planet healthier."

Dr Peter Alexander, at the University of Edinburgh, UK, was also impressed but noted: "There may be environmental benefits, eg for biodiversity, from sustainably managed grazing and increasing animal product consumption may improve nutrition for some of the poorest globally. My personal opinion is we should interpret these results not as the need to become vegan overnight, but rather to moderate our [meat] consumption."

Poore said: "The reason I started this project was to understand if there were sustainable animal producers out there. But I have stopped consuming animal products over the last four years of this project. These impacts are not necessary to sustain our current way of life. The question is how much can we reduce them and the answer is a lot."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Avoiding meat and dairy is 'single biggest way' to reduce your impact on Earth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Biggest analysis to date reveals huge footprint of livestock - it provides just 18% of calories but takes up 83% of farmland

# data[].attributes.body
Buy Local (food and other items)

Use more environmentally friendly paper

Educate classmates about better recycling: e.g separating the Bio mull from the wertstoffe

Reduce plastic use
Use reusable lunch boxes
Reusable water
Mehrwegflasche vs einwegflasche

Workshop? Environmental impacts of everyday choices

BSR people to come to school?
-how to recycle properly
-what happens to our rubbish

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dear Pablo: I have a tough one for you: shall we recycle our paper? There are both the CO₂ and the chemical aspects to consider, and there's arguments against recycling paper in each case. Getting rid of the ink used on paper implies bleaching, and the chemical used goes on to pollute rivers. As for the CO₂, growing a tree is a carbon sink but, in most cases, the trees are not replaced and the industry just clear-cuts the forest. Considering this, is it really a good thing to recycle paper?
For those of us that grew up with the book 50 Simple Things You Can Do to Save the Earth, recycling is second nature. We never questioned recycling and were shocked when the Financial Times declared that recycling is utter rubbish and when Michael Moore proclaimed that he stopped recycling in Stupid White Men. But maybe they were right.

Recyclables often do not get recycled due to food contamination ( pizza boxes and paper plates), low commodity values ( glass), and lack of the required infrastructure ( TetraPaks). Perhaps the act of recycling just lulls us into a false sense of virtuousness that enables us to consume more materials goods without the guilt, forgetting that Reduce and Reuse come before Recycle. So, is paper really worth recycling?

How is Paper Made?

Paper production begins with the harvesting of trees, which are delimbed and debarked before being chipped into a steaming chemical bath to be turned into pulp. The chemical pulping process removes lignin, the "glue" that holds the cellulose together, leaving long cellulose fibers to be pressed into thin sheets. These sheets pass through large rollers that not only flatten the paper but interlock the cellulose and remove water. Finally, the sheets are spooled onto large rolls to be sent to a printing company or to be cut down to size as office paper.

To produce the bright white paper that companies have come to expect for their printers and copiers, the pulp is also "bleached," a process which removes the remaining lignin. This "delignification" process was once done with sodium hypochlorite (household bleach) but was replaced by chlorine, which was often dumped into waterways.

Now the processes are performed with a combination of various chemicals such as chlorine dioxide, lye, oxygen, ozone, hydrogen peroxide, and enzymes.

How is Paper Recycled?

The paper recycling process begins with your recycle bin; from there it is transported to a sorting facility, and then to a paper mill. Paper is sorted into various categories including office paper, magazines, newsprint, paperboard and cardboard.

Because each successive pass through the recycling system shortens the fibers, cellulose can only be recycled four to six times before it begins to degrade paper quality. Therefore paper from each category can only be recycled into products of the same, or lesser quality. For example, office paper gets turned into office paper or magazines, magazines get turned into magazines or newsprint, etc.

At the paper mill, the paper goes through cleaning and screening, ink removal, which involves mechanical agitation in a water bath and a froth flotation deinking process, and bleaching with peroxides or hydrosulfites to enhance brightness. After that, the renewed pulp is turned into paper.

Since the early 1990s, great strides have been made in paper processing and global use of chlorine has dropped off significantly in favor of Elementary Chlorine Free (ECF) and Total Chlorine Free (TCF) processes. The practice of dumping untreated effluent into rivers has also been replaced with environmental best practices in most developed nations and some developing nations but many environmental concerns still exist.

Worldwide, the pulp and paper industry is the fifth largest consumer of energy, accounting for 4 percent of all the world's energy use. The pulp and paper industry uses more water to produce a ton of product than any other industry. -Earth Greetings

Global paper demand for paper and paperboard is expected to reach 490 million tons by 2020

What is the Greenhouse Gas Impact of Recycling Paper?

Thirty-five percent of municipal solid waste consists of paper products and paper recycling rates reached 63.4% in 2009, so 12.8% of new landfill waste consists of paper.

In the anaerobic (without oxygen) environment of a landfill, paper will eventually be decomposed into methane by microbes. Since methane is a potent greenhouse gas, the impacts are much greater than the equivalent amount of paper being turned into CO ₂ by microbes in the aerobic (with oxygen) environment, such as a compost bin. In fact, 1 ton of paper in a landfill will turn into 1.38 tons of CO₂-equivalents.

Recycling, on the other hand, avoids these emissions, as well as the emissions from logging, raw material transportation and processing, and pulping. Recycling one ton of office paper reduces these emissions by a further 2.85 tons, for a total reduction of 4.23 tons of CO ₂. To put this into context, the average US passenger car emits 5.2 tons of CO ₂ per year.

While composting your paper is possible, this only cuts down on the landfill emissions but doesn't offset the production of virgin paper. If you do compost, use paper and other 'brown' material like leaves in a 50:50 ratio with 'green' materials such as kitchen scraps and lawn clippings to maximize your compost's performance. Of course, be aware of adding paper that possible contains chemicals from processing or printing, avoid glossy papers, receipts ( which can contain BPA), and colored ink.

So, Should I Recycle Paper?

From a greenhouse gas perspective it is clear that recycling paper is the better choice.

From a chemical pollution perspective it is also evident that the process of deinking and peroxide bleaching has a lower impact than virgin pulp production with its mechanical processing, steam, delignification, and bleaching.

Unfortunately both virgin and recycled paper production require a lot of water (virgin paper requires 24,000 gallons per ton and recycled paper requires 12,000 gallons per ton), emphasizing the importance of Reduce and Reuse before Recycle.

Deforestation is certainly another reason to recycle your paper. While it is true that most developed nations require replanting of cut trees, even where clear-cutting is practiced, there are many more impacts than simply the loss of trees. These include habitat loss, erosion, river and stream siltation, and impacts on local tourism. While replanted trees sequester more CO ₂ during their first years of rapid growth than old stands do, the replanting often favors a monoculture of species desirable for future harvest, rather than a more natural diversity of tree species.

So keep in mind: Reduce the amount of paper and other resources that you consume, Reuse them whenever possible (paper has two sides!), and always Recycle! Finally, when you must buy paper look for 100% post-consumer recycled paper to support the value of recycled commodities.
Pablo Päster has been writing Ask Pablo since 2006 and is Principal Environmental Consultant at Hara. Send your questions to Pablo(at)TreeHugger.com and connect to his RSS feed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Ask Pablo: Is It Really Better To Recycle Paper?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dear Pablo: I have a tough one for you: shall we recycle our paper? There are both the CO2 and the chemical aspects to consider, and there's arguments against recycling paper in each case. Getting rid of the ink used on paper implies bleaching, and the chemical used goes on to pollute rivers.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The world's insects are hurtling down the path to extinction, threatening a "catastrophic collapse of nature's ecosystems", according to the first global scientific review.

More than 40% of insect species are declining and a third are endangered, the analysis found. The rate of extinction is eight times faster than that of mammals, birds and reptiles. The total mass of insects is falling by a precipitous 2.5% a year, according to the best data available, suggesting they could vanish within a century.

The planet is at the start of a sixth mass extinction in its history, with huge losses already reported in larger animals that are easier to study. But insects are by far the most varied and abundant animals, outweighing humanity by 17 times. They are "essential" for the proper functioning of all ecosystems, the researchers say, as food for other creatures, pollinators and recyclers of nutrients.

Insect population collapses have recently been reported in Germany and Puerto Rico, but the review strongly indicates the crisis is global. The researchers set out their conclusions in unusually forceful terms for a peer-reviewed scientific paper: "The [insect] trends confirm that the sixth major extinction event is profoundly impacting [on] life forms on our planet.

"Unless we change our ways of producing food, insects as a whole will go down the path of extinction in a few decades," they write. "The repercussions this will have for the planet's ecosystems are catastrophic to say the least."

Butterflies and moths
There has been a "severe reduction" in butterflies and moths in the Kullaberg nature reserve in Sweden compared with 50 years ago. Scientists found more than a quarter of the 600 species once found had been lost. Butterflies were hardest hit, losing almost a half of species, including the large tortoiseshell and scarce copper. In England, two-thirds of 340 moth species declined from 1968-2003.

Bumblebees
Museum records enabled scientists to assess the fate of 16 species of bumblebees in the US midwest from 1900 to 2007. They found four had completely died out, while eight were declining in number, and blamed intensive agriculture and pesticides.

Dragonflies
Red dragonfly populations have fallen sharply in Japan since the mid-1990s, which scientists link to insecticides in rice paddies that stop the water-living nymphs emerging into adults. In the US, recent surveys across California and Nevada found 65% of dragonflies and damselflies had declined in the 100 years since 1914.

Leafhoppers
Leafhoppers and planthoppers often make up a large proportion of the flying insects in European grasslands. But scientists found their abundance in Germany plunged by 66% in the 50 years to 2010. Soil acidification, partly due to heavy fertiliser use, was the main cause.

Ground beetles
In the UK, dramatic declines in ground beetles have been seen in almost three-quarters of the 68 carabid species studied from 1994-2008. A few species increased, but overall one in six of all the beetles was lost in that time.

Thank you for your feedback.

The analysis, published in the journal Biological Conservation, says intensive agriculture is the main driver of the declines, particularly the heavy use of pesticides. Urbanisation and climate change are also significant factors.

"If insect species losses cannot be halted, this will have catastrophic consequences for both the planet's ecosystems and for the survival of mankind," said Francisco Sánchez-Bayo, at the University of Sydney, Australia, who wrote the review with Kris Wyckhuys at the China Academy of Agricultural Sciences in Beijing.

The 2.5% rate of annual loss over the last 25-30 years is "shocking", Sánchez-Bayo told the Guardian: "It is very rapid. In 10 years you will have a quarter less, in 50 years only half left and in 100 years you will have none."

One of the biggest impacts of insect loss is on the many birds, reptiles, amphibians and fish that eat insects. "If this food source is taken away, all these animals starve to death," he said. Such cascading effects have already been seen in Puerto Rico, where a recent study revealed a 98% fall in ground insects over 35 years.

The new analysis selected the 73 best studies done to date to assess the insect decline. Butterflies and moths are among the worst hit. For example, the number of widespread butterfly species fell by 58% on farmed land in England between 2000 and 2009. The UK has suffered the biggest recorded insect falls overall, though that is probably a result of being more intensely studied than most places.

Bees have also been seriously affected, with only half of the bumblebee species found in Oklahoma in the US in 1949 being present in 2013. The number of honeybee colonies in the US was 6 million in 1947, but 3.5 million have been lost since.

There are more than 350,000 species of beetle and many are thought to have declined, especially dung beetles. But there are also big gaps in knowledge, with very little known about many flies, ants, aphids, shield bugs and crickets. Experts say there is no reason to think they are faring any better than the studied species.

A small number of adaptable species are increasing in number, but not nearly enough to outweigh the big losses. "There are always some species that take advantage of vacuum left by the extinction of other species," said Sanchez-Bayo. In the US, the common eastern bumblebee is increasing due to its tolerance of pesticides.

Most of the studies analysed were done in western Europe and the US, with a few ranging from Australia to China and Brazil to South Africa, but very few exist elsewhere.

"The main cause of the decline is agricultural intensification," Sánchez-Bayo said. "That means the elimination of all trees and shrubs that normally surround the fields, so there are plain, bare fields that are treated with synthetic fertilisers and pesticides." He said the demise of insects appears to have started at the dawn of the 20th century, accelerated during the 1950s and 1960s and reached "alarming proportions" over the last two decades.

He thinks new classes of insecticides introduced in the last 20 years, including neonicotinoids and fipronil, have been particularly damaging as they are used routinely and persist in the environment: "They sterilise the soil, killing all the grubs." This has effects even in nature reserves nearby; the 75% insect losses recorded in Germany were in protected areas.

The world must change the way it produces food, Sánchez-Bayo said, noting that organic farms had more insects and that occasional pesticide use in the past did not cause the level of decline seen in recent decades. "Industrial-scale, intensive agriculture is the one that is killing the ecosystems," he said.

In the tropics, where industrial agriculture is often not yet present, the rising temperatures due to climate change are thought to be a significant factor in the decline. The species there have adapted to very stable conditions and have little ability to change, as seen in Puerto Rico.

Sánchez-Bayo said the unusually strong language used in the review was not alarmist. "We wanted to really wake people up" and the reviewers and editor agreed, he said. "When you consider 80% of biomass of insects has disappeared in 25-30 years, it is a big concern."

Other scientists agree that it is becoming clear that insect losses are now a serious global problem. "The evidence all points in the same direction," said Prof Dave Goulson at the University of Sussex in the UK. "It should be of huge concern to all of us, for insects are at the heart of every food web, they pollinate the large majority of plant species, keep the soil healthy, recycle nutrients, control pests, and much more. Love them or loathe them, we humans cannot survive without insects."

Matt Shardlow, at the conservation charity Buglife, said: "It is gravely sobering to see this collation of evidence that demonstrates the pitiful state of the world's insect populations. It is increasingly obvious that the planet's ecology is breaking and there is a need for an intense and global effort to halt and reverse these dreadful trends." In his opinion, the review slightly overemphasises the role of pesticides and underplays global warming, though other unstudied factors such as light pollution might prove to be significant.

Prof Paul Ehrlich, at Stanford Universityin the US, has seen insects vanish first-hand, through his work on checkerspot butterflies on Stanford's Jasper Ridge reserve. He first studied them in 1960 but they had all gone by 2000, largely due to climate change.

Ehrlich praised the review, saying: "It is extraordinary to have gone through all those studies and analysed them as well as they have." He said the particularly large declines in aquatic insects were striking. "But they don't mention that it is human overpopulation and overconsumption that is driving all the things [eradicating insects], including climate change," he said.

Sánchez-Bayo said he had recently witnessed an insect crash himself. A recent family holiday involved a 400-mile (700km) drive across rural Australia, but he had not once had to clean the windscreen, he said. "Years ago you had to do this constantly."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plummeting insect numbers 'threaten collapse of nature'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The world's insects are hurtling down the path to extinction, threatening a "catastrophic collapse of nature's ecosystems", according to the first global scientific review. More than 40% of insect species are declining and a third are endangered, the analysis found. The rate of extinction is eight times faster than that of mammals, birds and reptiles.

# data[].attributes.headline
Creating the largest wildlife preserve on earth

# data[].attributes.subject
Creating the largest wildlife preserve on earth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Antarctica to Become Home to the World's Largest Wildlife Preserve

When you think of Antarctica, you most likely envision penguins, whales, orcas, seals, maybe even sea lions. And, of course, vast stretches of frozen tundra. Probably, you also imagine large swaths of land, unspoiled by human hands and commercial development. Unfortunately, while the climate and topography of Antarctica have kept away commercial development, the surrounding waters have suffered from decades of exploitation. Our vision of Antarctica is slowly disappearing due to abuse of the environment, leading ultimately to global warming and diminishing resources around the planet.

Greenpeace and the UK Lead the Way

The good news is that a massive effort is now underway, under the leadership of Greenpeace, to create the largest wildlife preserve in the world around the Antarctic Peninsula. The reserve will cover 1.8M square kilometers, around five times the size of Germany. The goal is to protect the fragile Antarctic wildlife and stem the tide of global warming.

The global effort to develop a wildlife preserve in Antarctica was initiated by the UK, and has already secured the backing of several other nations. This fall, in October 2018, the proposal will be reviewed by the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources. The Commission consists of 24 member nations, plus the EU.

Building Constituent Support and Momentum

According to Greenpeace, the project has already garnered the support of a quarter-million people around the world. Will McCallum, head of the Greenpeace Protect the Antarctic Campaign, says that the months leading up to the October conference are a crucial time for solidifying public-private sector buy-in. McCallum says that there is precious little time to take assertive and aggressive action to save the world's fragile ocean resources. He points to the creation of a sanctuary around the Ross Sea in the Antarctic in 2016 as a successful precedent for the Protect the Antarctic Campaign.

Banning Krill Fishing

Establishment of the Antarctic wildlife preserve will stop one of the most dangerous threats to the ecosystem -industrial-scale krill fishing. The Antarctic Wildlife Preserve will ban all fishing around the Antarctic Peninsula and specifically in the Weddell Sea.

Large krill fishing companies - primarily from Russia, China, Norway and South Korea - are depleting the Antarctic Ocean waters. Primarily, they are emptying the ocean of shrimp and other small crustaceans. They use their catch to produce domestic fish food, but their actions have severely diminished the food supply for Antarctica's fish and mammal populations. The impact can be seen, for instance, in penguin colonies, which are suffering from the lack of food and adequate habitat.

Protecting the Antarctic is Key to Global Health

This is not the first time environmentalists and conservation activists have taken on large global companies. An international movement in the 1980s created protective measures for Antarctica's land. Proponents and leaders of the Protect the Antarctic Campaign say the time has come to apply the same restraint on companies who are harming the ocean habitats around Antarctica.

The impact will be felt well beyond the Antarctic waters. Protecting biodiversity and sustaining rich ecosystems in the ocean waters will be a major step forward in addressing the impacts of climate change.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An Initiative to Create the Largest Wildlife Preserve in the World - Finally Good News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you think of Antarctica, you most likely envision penguins, whales, orcas, seals, maybe even sea lions. And, of course, vast stretches of frozen tundra. Probably, you also imagine large swaths of land, unspoiled by human hands and commercial development.

# data[].attributes.body
Hello Ms Macleod.
I wanted to ask if you could add another pad with the title, what we are working on and what we have already done. We thought about putting a note over the bins in the MPR. One for the eat leftovers and one for the plastic things. Sophie and I are almost finished with the note. It is not a real poster, but for now that may be enough until we informed everybody personally. I also asked Stefan, the one who gives us the food, and he said that he will definitely put the bins under the notes.
Thank you.
Lee Lee

# data[].attributes.body
Great that you started this already! Do you want a whole new padlet, or just some new columns on this one? I made two new ones for now, so scroll right and you will see them :-)

# data[].attributes.body
Thank you.

# data[].attributes.body
So, I found something, but I don’t know where to put it. Like in which category.
https://www.greatgreenwall.org/about-great-green-wall

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
ist ein wundervoller Werkstoff. Leicht, bruchfest, elastisch, langlebig. Kein Material verwendet die weltweite Industrie dieser Tage häufiger. Kunststoffe stecken in Medizinprodukten wie Herzklappen, in Baumaterialien zum Beispiel in der Wärmedämmung und in Autoteilen. Doch gerade weil Plastik so verführerisch flexibel einsetzbar ist, ist es auch ein weltweites Problem.

Mehr als 200 verschiedene Arten von Kunststoffen stehen der Industrie heute für Produkte zur Verfügung. Sie nutzt diese mittlerweile ausgiebig, um billigen Kram in Massen herzustellen. Plastikbecher, Plastikgabeln, Plastikstrohhalme, Plastikstühle, Plastikeimer, Plastikzahnbürsten. Plastikshirts, Plastiktüten, Plastikverpackungen. Zahlreiche Gebrauchsartikel des täglichen Lebens sind dabei von vornherein als Wegwerfartikel konzipiert.

Jährlich gelangen ungefähr acht Millionen Tonnen Plastik in die Meere und Ozeane; selbst in der Tiefsee, der Arktis, der Antarktis und auf den entlegensten Inseln finden Forscherinnen Partikel. Das entspricht etwa einer Müllwagenladung pro Minute. Vollständig entfernen lassen sich die Teile, von denen manche nur Bruchteile eines Millimeters messen, nicht mehr. In der Folge zerstört Plastikmüll den Lebensraum zahlreicher Arten und seine giftigen Inhaltsstoffe bedrohen die Gesundheit von Tier und Mensch - wie genau, dazu wird noch geforscht.

Das Zeitalter der Kunststoffe ist zugleich das Zeitalter der Plastikkrise. Auch, weil wir mehr nutzen, als nötig ist. Zu Recht fordern Umweltschützerinnen und Artenschützer seit Jahrzehnten, die Politik möge dem Plastik Einhalt gebieten. Nun hat diese zumindest ein Zeichen gesetzt: Nachdem in der Europäischen Union die kostenlose Ausgabe von bestimmten Plastiktüten bereits seit 2016 verboten ist, haben sich die Politikerinnen und Politiker der EU am Mittwoch unter anderem darauf geeinigt, auch Einmalplastikteile wie Wattestäbchen und Plastikgabeln zu verbieten, wenn es dafür Alternativen gibt. Ab 2021 sollen die Einwegprodukte vom Markt verschwinden. Ausgehandelt worden war das bereits Ende 2018.

Da passiert doch längst was!

Es ist die einzig richtige Entscheidung. Das Verbot mag spät kommen, deutlich ausbaufähig sein und nur die Staaten der EU betreffen. Aber es zeigt, dass ein unbekümmerter Umgang mit Plastik nicht mehr zu dulden ist. Und Wegwerfplastik an sich überhaupt nicht.

Manch einer möge nun einwenden, es gebe längst Alternativen zu Plastiktüten und anderen Plastikgütern. Dank Recycling würden zudem Großteile von Plastik aufbereitet, statt wie Restmüll in Flammen aufzugehen. Da passiert doch längst was! Stimmt. Insofern sind all diese Maßnahmen wichtig und entsprechend zu fördern. Doch sie begrenzen bloß die Folgen und können weder all die bereits verursachten Schäden beheben, noch ändern sie das grundsätzliche Problem: Die Menschheit produziert mehr Plastik, als gut für den Planeten ist. Statt die Menge zu reduzieren, kommen jedes Jahr Milliarden Tonnen Kunststoffe hinzu.

Alina Schadwinkel

Redakteurin im Ressort Wissen, ZEIT ONLINE

zur Autorenseite
Sicherlich wäre es selbstbestimmter, freier, sympathischer, wenn jeder und jede Einzelne Beutel wiederverwendet, auf dünne Plastiktüten im Supermarkt verzichtet und keine Strohhalme nutzt. Es wäre schöner, wenn es reichte, Geschäftsinhaberinnen und Barbetreiber, die sie anbieten, entsprechend zu rügen, damit einer nach dem anderen sie aus dem Laden verbannt und Herstellern damit den Markt nimmt. Aber die eigenen Gewohnheiten zu verändern ist bekanntermaßen schwierig. Das eigene Leben nach Gutdünken von Plastik zu befreien, kostet Zeit, Geld sowie Nerven; ohne Kompromisse ist es nicht möglich.

Es ist naiv zu erwarten, dass das Plastikproblem durch Selbstregulierung lösbar ist. Nicht nur das: Es wäre fahrlässig, darauf zu setzen, denn die Lage ist längst zu dramatisch, um abzuwarten. Wer fordert, jeder Bürger und jede Bürgerin solle selbst erkennen, wie schädlich Plastik ist und entsprechend handeln, darf sich nie wieder über die langwierigen Verhandlungen innerhalb der EU beschweren. Damit Plastik aus dem Alltag verschwindet, vernünftig entsorgt und sinnvoll ersetzt wird, müssen Staaten weltweit das Konsumverhalten mit ihren Bürgerinnen und Bürgern strategisch politisch verändern und Hersteller mit in die Pflicht nehmen. Verbote, entstanden aus einer fundierten Debatte, sind dazu ein ganz wundervoller Werkstoff.

Müllschwerpunkt: Leben im Wegwerfmodus

Lebensmittel, Verpackungen, Elektroschrott, Plastik: Die Menschheit müllt sich zu. Allein jeder Deutsche wirft pro Jahr 627 Kilogramm weg. Wohin mit dem Abfall? Mit dem Schwerpunkt Leben im Wegwerfmodus folgen wir den unübersehbaren Spuren des Mülls. Diese Inhalte dazu sind bereits erschienen:

Mehr zum Thema: Lebensmittel, Verpackungen, Elektroschrott, Plastik - die Menschheit müllt sich zu. Mit dem Schwerpunkt "Leben im Wegwerfmodus" ist ZEIT ONLINE den Routen des Abfalls gefolgt, zeigt, was er mit Mensch und Tier macht und wie er sich besser vermeiden ließe.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wegwerfplastik: Plastik ist außer Kontrolle

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
ist ein wundervoller Werkstoff. Leicht, bruchfest, elastisch, langlebig. Kein Material verwendet die weltweite Industrie dieser Tage häufiger. Kunststoffe stecken in Medizinprodukten wie Herzklappen, in Baumaterialien zum Beispiel in der Wärmedämmung und in Autoteilen. Doch gerade weil Plastik so verführerisch flexibel einsetzbar ist, ist es auch ein weltweites Problem.

# data[].attributes.headline
Meeresspiegel stieg 2018 mehr denn je!!!!!!!

# data[].attributes.subject
Meeresspiegel stieg 2018 mehr denn je!!!!!!!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Die Weltwetterorganisation hat einen Rekordanstieg des Meeresspiegels festgestellt. Die vergangenen vier Jahre waren die wärmsten seit Beginn der Aufzeichnung.

Der Meeresspiegel ist im vergangenen Jahr außergewöhnlich stark gestiegen. Der globale Mittelwert lag 2018 einem Bericht der Weltwetterorganisation (WMO) zufolge etwa 3,7 Millimeter über dem Wert von 2017. Der durchschnittliche Anstieg seit 1993 betrage 3,15 Millimeter pro Jahr. "Die in diesem Bericht veröffentlichten Daten geben Anlass zu großer Sorge", schreibt UN-Generalsekretär António Guterres in dem Bericht.

Die vergangenen vier Jahre sind laut dem WMO-Bericht die wärmsten seit Beginn der Aufzeichnungen gewesen. Die globale Durchschnittstemperatur an der Oberfläche habe im Jahr 2018 rund ein Grad Celsius über dem Referenzwert für die vorindustrielle Zeit gelegen.

"Zum Zögern ist keine Zeit mehr", sagte Guterres in New York. Der Bericht sei ein "Weckruf". Er warnte insbesondere vor den Folgen des Klimawandels für die Gesundheit der Menschen. "Die Kombination von extremer Hitze und Luftverschmutzung stellt sich als immer gefährlicher heraus, besonders dort, wo Hitzewellen länger, intensiver und häufiger werden."

Zu dem WMO-Bericht haben zahlreiche Experten weltweit sowie verschiedene UN-Institutionen beigetragen. Er befasst sich unter anderem mit extremen Wetterereignissen zu denen auch der jüngste Zyklon Idai gehört. Der Wirbelsturm hatte am vergangenen Wochenende zu Überschwemmungen in weiten Teilen von , Simbabwe und Malawi im südöstlichen Afrika geführt. "Er könnte sich als eine der tödlichsten wetterbedingten Katastrophen auf der Südhalbkugel erweisen", sagte der WMO-Generalsekretär Petteri Taalas.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
UN-Klimaexperten: Meeresspiegel stieg 2018 stärker denn je

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Die Weltwetterorganisation hat einen Rekordanstieg des Meeresspiegels festgestellt. Die vergangenen vier Jahre waren die wärmsten seit Beginn der Aufzeichnung. Der Meeresspiegel ist im vergangenen Jahr außergewöhnlich stark gestiegen. Der globale Mittelwert lag 2018 einem Bericht der Weltwetterorganisation (WMO) zufolge etwa 3,7 Millimeter über dem Wert von 2017.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Kommunikationsbüro Ulmer GmbH
Teckstraße 56
70190 Stuttgart

Vertreten durch
Frank Ulmer

Kontakt
Telefon: +49 (0) 711 259 717 20
Telefax: +49 (0) 711 259 717 26
E-Mail: post[at]kommunikationsbuero.com

Registereintrag
Eintragung im Handelsregister
Registergericht:Amtsgericht Stuttgart
Registernummer: HRB 741307

Umsatzsteuer
Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer gemäß §27 a Umsatzsteuergesetz: DE284330012

Design: Kommunikationsbüro Ulmer GmbH
Haftungshinweis:
Trotz sorgfältiger inhaltlicher Kontrolle übernehmen die Betreiber von www.lassmamachen.de keine Haftung für die Inhalte externer Links. Für den Inhalt der verlinkten Seiten sind ausschließlich deren Betreiber verantwortlich.

Die Betreiber von der Website sind nicht verantwortlich für Informationen Dritter, die im Rahmen der Community durchgeleitet, zwischengespeichert oder dauerhaft gespeichert werden. Die Betreiber von www.lassmamachen.de stellen die hierzu erforderlichen Kommunikationsdienste lediglich bereit (§ 7 - 9 MDStV). Daher sind die Betreiber von www.lassmamachen.de nicht dazu verpflichtet, die übermittelten oder gespeicherten Informationen Dritter zu überwachen oder nach Umständen zu forschen, die auf rechtswidrige Tätigkeiten hinweisen (§ 6 MDStv).

Die Betreiber von www.lassmamachen.de übernehmen keine Garantie dafür, dass die auf dieser Website bereitgestellten Informationen vollständig, richtig und in jedem Fall aktuell sind. Die Betreiber von www.lassmamachen.de behalten sich das Recht vor, ohne vorherige Ankündigung, Änderungen, Ergänzungen oder Löschungen der bereitgestellten Informationen vorzunehmen.

Die Betreiber der Website haften nicht für konkrete, mittelbare und unmittelbare Schäden oder Schäden, die durch fehlende Nutzungsmöglichkeiten, Datenverluste oder entgangene Gewinne entstehen können, die im Zusammenhang mit der Nutzung von Dokumenten oder Informationen entstehen, die auf dieser Web Site zugänglich sind.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Kommunikationsbüro Ulmer GmbH Teckstraße 56 70190 Stuttgart Vertreten durch Frank Ulmer Kontakt Telefon: +49 (0) 711 259 717 20 Telefax: +49 (0) 711 259 717 26 E-Mail: post[at]kommunikationsbuero.com Registereintrag Eintragung im Handelsregister Registergericht:Amtsgericht Stuttgart Registernummer: HRB 741307 Umsatzsteuer Umsatzsteuer-Identifikationsnummer gemäß §27 a Umsatzsteuergesetz: DE284330012 Design: Kommunikationsbüro Ulmer GmbH Haftungshinweis: Trotz sorgfältiger inhaltlicher Kontrolle übernehmen die Betreiber von www.lassmamachen.de keine Haftung für die Inhalte externer Links.