# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Screen Time and Anxiety - Dr. Jim Dhrymes

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Spending so much time in front of a screen? This has negative consequences. Excessive screen time contributes to increased anxiety.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Health Matters: Excessive Screen Time Linked to Anxiety, Depression, ADHD, and Obesity in Children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Excessive screen time has been linked to effects in children such as anxiety, depression, ADHD, and childhood obesity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Can Technology Be Used For The Good Of Society?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The use of technology is now ubiquitous in our daily lives. Technology has transformed the way we communicate, work, and interact with each other.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
We've all experienced that foggy feeling after a late night and little sleep. It's hard to focus. Productivity wanes. We can feel agitated, anxious, negative, even depressed. If drinking or drug use was involved the night before, we might feel even more lethargic and disoriented.

These days, many of us experience these feelings, even when we get enough rest and don't drink too much. Endless hours in front of our phones and computer screens are causing digital information overload. The result is brain rot, which can have far-reaching effects on young adult mental health.

Key Takeaways

Brain rot is a condition of mental fogginess, lethargy, reduced attention span, and cognitive decline that results from an overabundance of screen time.

One brain rot behavior is doomscrolling, which involves long periods of searching for negative and distressing news online.

Consequences of brain rot include difficulty organizing information, solving problems, making decisions, and recalling information.

To prevent or reduce brain rot, try limiting screen time, deleting distracting apps from your phone, and turning off unnecessary notifications.

What Is Brain Rot?

Brain rot, sometimes written as one word, "brainrot," is a state of mental fogginess and cognitive decline that results from excessive screen engagement. Is brainrot real? It's not a medically recognized condition, but it is a real phenomenon.

When we spend hours surfing and scrolling, we consume huge quantities of meaningless data, negative news, and perfectly retouched photos of friends and celebrities that make us feel inadequate. Trying to absorb and cope with massive amounts of content creates mental fatigue. And that can lead to a drop in motivation, focus, productivity, and energy over time, especially in young people.

How Brain Rot Behavior Affects Young Adults' Mental and Emotional Well-Being

On the surface, spending a lot of time on your smartphone or in front of a computer may seem harmless. Over the long term, however, brain rot behavior can damage your well-being mentally and emotionally.

Activities like doomscrolling affect the brain's reward system. That's because humans tend to prioritize and remember negative information more than positive. So landing on another distressing piece of news prompts the search for more disheartening information.

Doomscrolling can desensitize people to negative stimuli, making it harder for them to experience positive feelings or derive pleasure in other ways. One study showed that doomscrolling may lead to higher levels of psychological distress and lower levels of mental well-being. Another found that people who have high levels of negative news consumption also have poorer mental and even physical health.

The Impact of Brain Rot Behavior on Young Adults' Cognition

Research has shown that the Internet can produce acute and sustained alterations in cognition related to attention and memory, which may be reflected in changes in the brain's gray matter.

Repeated scrolling can have a negative effect on individuals' mental faculties by disrupting the brain's capacity to encode and retain information. As well, constant overstimulation can lead to a reduced attention span.

For example, according to a study of 1,051 young adults between 18 and 27 years old, social media addiction has a significant negative association with executive functioning skills such as planning, organization, problem-solving, decision-making, and working memory.

What Brain Rot Behavior Does to Young Adults' Self-Concept

Self-concept is also affected by brain rot. As the number of social interactions that occur on social networking sites has exploded, the online world has become its own social universe, especially for young adults. How many "friends," "followers," or "likes" you have is visible for all to see, making it easy to fall prey to the comparison trap.

In addition, the bombardment of posts flaunting people's professional successes, exotic vacations, blissful relationships, and picture-perfect bodies (often digitally manipulated with filters) can lead to negative self-talk. The brain becomes so cluttered by the constant overstimulation that it struggles to parse out truth from fiction. Self-worth can suffer, leading to heightened levels of stress, anxiety, and depression.

How to Prevent Brain Rot

Preventing brain rot requires that being intentional about your media consumption. Your mental health and emotional well-being are likely to improve when you control your screen engagement. Some of the best strategies include:

Set Limits on Screen Time

Start by tracking how much time you spend browsing, scrolling social media, watching videos, and gaming. You may be shocked to discover just how much time you invest in digital pursuits.

Next, set boundaries around the number of hours you sit in front of screens each day. Delete distracting apps from your phone. Turn off notifications for news and social media. And don't consume content right before bed. As you limit your screen time, notice how you feel.

Curate Your Feeds

Protect your headspace by being mindful of what you consume. Don't succumb to sensationalistic and negative news. Diversify your media sources so you maintain a more balanced world perspective. Furthermore, unfollow accounts that regularly generate angry or anxious feelings. Populate your feeds with positive content that uplifts and inspires you.

Pursue Non-Digital Interests

There's a huge world beyond your screen. Reacquaint yourself with it by digging into hobbies and activities you enjoy. Go camping. Listen to music. Play an instrument or learn one. Write in a journal. Volunteer for an organization you believe in. Exercise. Practice yoga or meditation. Structure time each day to do things that make you happy and calm.

Connect Offline with Positive People

Your first instinct may be to pick up your phone to connect with others. Instead, make an effort to socialize with people in the real world. Developing and nourishing authentic connections with supportive friends, family, and colleagues in person lowers stress and provides a deeper sense of belonging. One survey of 18- to 25-year-olds found that young adults had the lowest levels of depressive symptoms when they enjoyed more offline emotional support.

Strengthen Your Mind

If you're concerned your mind could be turning to mush, challenge it. The mind is like a muscle. It grows with exertion. Rather than scrolling, learn a foreign language or a new technical skill. Study a philosophical concept that expands your worldview. Sharpen your mind with mathematical or word puzzles. Develop your writing ability or read about a period in history you know nothing about. Resist the urge to slide into comfort scrolling. Retrain your brain instead.

Do a Digital Detox

Limiting screen time is good, but unplugging completely gives non-stop thinking a rest. It also allows you to become more aware of your thoughts, perceptions, and habits. One study found that taking just seven days off social media significantly increased perceived mental well-being, as compared to seven days of social media use.

A digital detox can take different forms. Start by taking short breaks from technology, by unplugging for 15 minutes at a time. Gradually extend that time, or take more frequent breaks. Go out with friends and agree beforehand not to look at your phones the whole time. Work up to taking a day trip-and keep your phone off the whole time.

Get Support

If you sense that your brain rot has grown into a more serious problem, reach out for support. Don't isolate behind a screen where you may develop a full-blown digital addiction. Enlist the services of a therapist or counselor who can help you face your issue, develop healthy habits, manage triggers, and set realistic goals.

Young Adult Treatment at Newport Institute

At Newport Institute, we recognize that it's unrealistic to expect young adults to disengage from technology completely in their everyday lives. However, we also understand the risks of screen dependency and digital addiction. Our clinicians focus on the underlying factors that lead to problematic digital behaviors such as social anxiety, low self-esteem, trauma and PTSD, and loneliness and depression.

To help young people jump-start behavioral change, our tailored treatment plans include Cognitive Behavioral Therapy. Clients also participate in Adventure Therapy, Mixed Martial Arts, yoga, and creative arts therapies (depending on location. The goal is to build real-life, hands-on connections and engagement to replace virtual experiences.

Contact us today to schedule a free assessment and learn more about our nationwide young adult treatment locations.

Frequently Asked Questions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Brain Rot: The Impact on Young Adult Mental Health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Brain rot is a condition of mental fogginess, lethargy, and low attention span that can have negative effects on young adult mental health.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With most schools in the U.S. following a nine-month calendar, it's easy to assume that's how all schools are. But in some districts, the calendar looks completely different.

In fact, of the just under 133,000 K-12 schools in the U.S., around 3,200 run a year-round calendar. Having no summer break may sound awful at first blush, but many year-round calendar options consist of the same number of student-contact days as the calendar we're used to. Breaks are just distributed throughout the calendar year.

Most of us won't get to experience year-round schooling firsthand, but it's worth taking a moment to understand different educational structures as we work to become well-rounded educators. Here are the pros and cons of a year-round school.

Pros

Summer slide is also the reason why teachers spend the first month of school reviewing what was previously taught. Less instructional time is spent on review in year-round schools.

Teaching at a year-round school means receiving a year-round salary. This is a pro that any teacher can get behind.

Cons

Summer vacation provides a much-needed break for teachers and students who need time to refresh rejuvenate after working hard for nine straight months.

Spending time at the beginning of a school year explaining classroom routines and expectations can feel like a waste of instructional time. However, it gives students a chance to practice important soft skills like adapting to new procedures, handling different work styles, and learning new schedules.

With most schools on a nine-month schedule, extracurricular activities have learned to plan their programs accordingly. Therefore, students at a year-round school may not have availability to experience certain outside activities like summer sports teams or camps.

It costs more to run a school year-round. Along with paying staff, the school building itself will require more funds for heating and cooling to keep the school running comfortably.

It's tough to say definitively which school structure provides the most optimal learning environment, but it's eye-opening to consider those we may not be familiar with in our quest to be the best educators we can be.
With nine different start dates every year, it's never a bad time to start at American College of Education. Explore all our graduate-level programs in the field of education.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of American College of Education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Curious about why some schools use a year-round structure instead of the more conventional nine-month academic calendar? We break down the pros and cons of having school all year round.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Explainer

Debates about the ethics of zoos abound - but when it comes to animal welfare, there are certainly more cons than pros.

For many people, zoos are the only chance they'll have in their entire lives to see beautiful animals native to far-flung ecosystems - lions, elephants, pandas, lemurs - the list goes on. And they're popular - over 181 million people visit a U.S. zoo every year. But zoos face criticism from animal welfare organizations and environmental activists for inhumane treatment of the animals they claim to protect. Zoos maintain that they are important aspects of conservation and education.

So, what are the advantages and disadvantages of zoos? Let's take a look at the pros and cons of these controversial organizations.

What Are Some Pros and Cons of Zoos?

First, not all zoos are created equal. While it is easy to imagine animal ethics as a binary of evil and moral, zoos can vary widely on how they treat their animals, how much space they are given and how the animals are obtained. Still, most zoos tend to have the same positives and negatives overall.

Arguments Against Zoos

Poor Conditions for Animals
Animals Often Only Have Quite Limited Space
Many zoos' enclosures are too small, especially for animal species that are used to roaming, flying or swimming large distances in the wild. For example, polar bears are used to home ranges of about 1,000 square kilometers in the wild - large swaths of land and ice they enjoy exploring. In zoos, they get a couple hundred square feet.
Zoos Are Crowded
In addition to limited space, many zoos cram in as many animals as possible into the enclosures. Many visitors prefer seeing animals up close, instead of peering at them from afar, hidden in their dens or nests. This encourages zoos to increase the number of animals per exhibit, increasing the likelihood of visitors seeing animals on the move near the boundaries of the enclosure.
Animals Are Trapped in Unnatural Environments
Anyone who has visited a zoo knows the exhibits are a far cry from the natural landscape they are trying to imitate. Nearly all zoo enclosures contain fences, glass or other barriers for visitors to look through, which are inherently artificial. And the natural-seeming landscapes can sometimes be made out of astroturf, concrete or plastic.
Confinement May Alter the Behavior of Animals
The lack of space, unnatural environments and crowded conditions can directly affect the behavior of animals; most notably in the form of what's known as "stereotypy." Stereotypy is a condition in which non-human animals engage in repetitive behaviors with no apparent purpose, such as pacing for hours on end, wagging tails abnormally or picking their own fur.

The structure of zoos increases the likelihood of stereotypic behavior due to a lack of enrichment, mundane environments and boring, repetitive schedules. This prevalence of stereotypy in zoos even has its own name: "zoochosis," or psychosis caused by zoos.
'Surplus' Animals Can Be Killed
After an animal has reproduced successfully and the zoo no longer requires the animal to maintain an exhibit, the animal is deemed "surplus." At this point, the animal's welfare is no longer profitable. Zoos can sell the animal to private owners (who may keep the animal in tiny cages for amusement or kill the animal for taxidermy purposes), sell the animal to other zoos or enclosures, or "euthanize" the animal.
Animals Are Often Mistreated
Animal mistreatment is much more than hitting or beating an animal. It also includes harmful training techniques, separation from family members and forcing animals to behave in abnormal ways.

In a report from World Animal Protection, three-fourths of zoos include human-animal interactions, many of which can be very stressful or physically harmful for animals. In some extreme cases, visitors rode on the backs of animals (causing injury) or encroached on the animals' enclosure (causing stress).

Investigations into popular zoos sometimes reveal that caretakers don't always clean the exhibits frequently, leaving the animals to live near their feces. The research also reveals many zookeepers hitting animals who "misbehave," and not helping animals with injuries sustained in the enclosures. While not all animal caretakers behave this way, the reporting suggests many zoos around the world are lax with animal welfare.
Animals Don't Like Being Visited
The mere presence of human beings can negatively affect wild animals, especially in massive crowds that are common at zoos. Being bombarded by the sounds, smells and appearances of swaths of humans can trigger the stress responses of some animals. Some studies show that the number of visitors correlates with the amount of stress hormones in many animal species.
Animals Struggle to Form Connections
Many animals are highly social creatures. Elephants, lions, pigs, cows and many more species are shown to have complex connections, hierarchies and relationships with members of their own kind - especially with friends and family. However, zoo animals rarely stay with the same herd or family for their entire lives. Instead, zoos opt to transfer, sell, buy or relocate animals throughout their lifespans, making it difficult for animals to form social connections. This lack of bonding can harm the animals emotionally.
Zoos Are for Humans, Not Animals
Most zoos are for-profit enterprises, meaning they have one goal in mind: maximizing revenue. It is easy to see how making more money can come at the expense of animal welfare. For example, a zoo is unlikely to fund an exhibit expansion if it isn't cost-effective, regardless of its benefits for the animals inside. While many zookeepers form real bonds with their animal companions, the animals still exist under a for-profit, human-centered organization.
Zoos Promote Human Superiority
The aesthetic nature of zoos - animals in panopticon-like enclosures, viewed 24/7 by members of a different species - can reinforce human superiority. As moral philosopher Lori Gruen writes in her book, "visitors leave the zoo more convinced than ever of human superiority over the natural world." Of course, zoos also reinforce the idea that humans have a right to take away animals' freedom and bodily autonomy.

Zoos Don't Always Help with Conservation - Some Wild Animals Have to Be Caught to Bring Them to Zoos

Many animals in zoos are born in captivity, but that's not the case for all. Many animals are taken directly from the wild, often when they are babies, to make the transition to captivity a bit easier. At times, this is done in the name of conservation, or when a wild animal is very ill. But many zoos will take animals from the wild, or buy animals from unethical animal traders.
It's Often Not Possible to Return Animals to the Wild
Releasing an animal into the wild isn't always successful, especially if the animal has spent time in climates different from their native regions, like jungles, savannas or ice caps. Properly preparing animals for success in the wild is a multi-stage process that can require thousands of dollars - and it doesn't always work. Captive-born predator species - disadvantaged by being born and raised in an artificial environment - only have a survival rate after being released into the wild of 33 percent, according to one study. As a result, re-release is not a priority for many zoos.
Zoos Are Poorly Regulated
While there exist many laws that protect animals, such as the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and the Endangered Species Act, they only offer minimum protections. For example, the AWA excludes entire species of animals, like mice, farmed animals, birds and all cold-blooded animals. Its "minimum" standards of care usually ensure the animals' safety, not their welfare or happiness. Many animal law experts say these regulations don't go far enough.
What Are the Pros of Having Zoos? They Can Be Important for Researchers
Biologists and zoologists can benefit from studying animals in zoos. Some breakthroughs in animal behavior and treatment, like why elephants swing their trunks or how gorillas develop heart disease, have been made possible because of zoos' ease of access. However, not all animals behave the same in captivity as they do in the wild, so not all research is possible in zoos.

Zoos Are Educational - People May Behave "Eco-friendlier" After Going To the Zoo

Zoos can kickstart individuals' interest in biodiversity, which is a critical aspect of environmental protection. Many zoos include calls to action in their exhibits, highlighting how endangered animals are being poached, driven away, or otherwise killed by human activity. This can inspire some people to behave more conscientiously. One limited survey found that 35 percent of eco-friendly people learned sustainable behavior from zoos. '
Zoos Can Help Educate Children About Animals
Zoos are a quintessential school experience for many young people. Children love learning about animals up-close in a safe environment - in fact, education is possibly the biggest advantage of modern zoos. Many programs, like school presentations, guided tours, informational exhibits, and talks with zookeepers can trigger a lifelong love of animals in children.

But zoos aren't perfect in this regard. According to a study of zoo visitors in the UK, only 34 percent of children learned more about animals at zoos (the result was slightly better when the children were given a guided tour). Worse, children did not feel empowered to help with conservation efforts after visiting a zoo. This suggests that if zoos care about education, they need to more actively reach out to schoolchildren for empowerment and education.
Going to the Zoo Is Affordable
More ethical ways of engaging with animals without removing them from their natural habitats - like whale watching, safaris, hikes, or excursions - are usually expensive or inaccessible for many people. Zoos tend to be relatively cheap for the average family that wants to learn about animals.
Conservation Zoos Can Protect Endangered Species from Extinction
Zoos often claim they can protect entire species from extinction through conservation programs that involve breeding more animals in captivity and then releasing them into the wild. This is especially important for endangered species like pandas.

While these conservation efforts are truly important, they don't represent the majority of a zoo's activities, nor are zoos leaders in conservation worldwide. At the National Zoo, for example, only one-fifth of animals are endangered. In North America, zoos only contribute about 14 percent of all animals reintroduced into the wild as part of a conservation program. Zoos also tend to focus on headline-grabbing endangered animals to bring in visitors, like pandas, elephants or tigers, as opposed to lesser-known but crucial species, like tamarins, kakapos or wombats.
Are Zoos Good or Bad for the Environment?
Zoos claim to support global biodiversity through conservation efforts like protecting endangered animals. This is somewhat true, although it varies greatly from zoo to zoo.

On the other hand, zoos are big polluters and use up lots of resources, especially energy and water. Aquariums in particular use tons and tons of water. Zoo animals also generate waste that may or may not be composted or disposed of correctly.
Should Zoos Exist or Be Banned?
Given the many ways that zoos are unethical to animals, the flawed attempts to contribute to conservation, and the positioning of humans as superior to animals, many animal ethicists believe zoos should not exist - or at least, not exist in their current form.

For example, animal philosopher Dale Jamieson says in his book Ethics on the Ark that zoos primarily "alleviate our sense of guilt for what we are doing to the planet, but they do little to help the animals we are driving to extinction." He continues to argue that zoos exist for humans alone, and that it is very difficult to wave away the inherent immorality of depriving animals their liberty for the sake of human amusement.

Instead, private conservation programs can benefit endangered animals without showcasing them to the public. Animal sanctuaries, which are areas of land in which endangered and other animals are protected by humans, are also advantageous for both individual animals and global biodiversity.

Zoos do have advantages - fostering curiosity and education chief among them. But experts believe there are other ways of accomplishing these goals without resorting to zoos with tiny enclosures. Excursions, nature documentaries, safaris, local gardens, hikes, boat tours and other ways of interacting with nature don't involve taking animals out of their natural habitats.
The Bottom Line
If you do choose to visit a zoo, opt for zoos that have certifications from independent animal welfare organizations. If you are interested in animal conservation, you'd be more impactful donating to a non-zoo animal protection organization instead. And if you do want to visit animals, consider an animal sanctuary or an ethical safari, where you can see animals in their native environments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are Zoos Good or Bad for Animals? The Argument, Explained

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Debates about the ethics of zoos abound - but when it comes to animal welfare, there are certainly more cons than pros.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Pros and cons of zoos: Should animals be kept in zoos?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Animal cruelty or protection? Learn about the pros and cons of zoos and join our debate / poll: Should there be zoos? Should animals be kept in captivity?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Zoos be Banned? Pros & Cons of Zoos - UPDATED 2024

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should zoos be banned? Animal abuse vs human entertainment. All you need to know about the pros and cons of zoos!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Reusable plastic containers used to transport large amounts of fruits and vegetables to grocery stores can continue to harbor potentially harmful bacteria directly on their surfaces, even after undergoing industry-standard cleaning and sanitizing, according to a new study conducted by researchers from the University of Arkansas and WBA Analytical Laboratories. The study took a microscopically close look at the materials used to make the reusable plastic containers (RPCs) that have gained a foothold in the grocery industry in recent years as a preferred method of transporting produce. The findings suggest that a return to single-use containers for fresh produce might reduce the risk of foodborne illness outbreaks associated with those products, said Steven Ricke, co-author of the study and a professor at the University of Arkansas Center for Food Safety. The researchers allowed Salmonella, Listeria monocytogenes, and E. coli O157:H7 bacteria to grow on the RPC surface and then subjected sample surfaces to cleaning and sanitizing practices typical in the industry. In all cases, the materials still harbored biofilms that protected the bacteria and would theoretically allow bacteria to colonize the next shipment of fruits and vegetables to be put in the containers. "Any time you start using these things over and over again, you increase the opportunities for pathogens to propagate," Ricke told Food Safety News. "It's really increasing the chance of bacteria getting fixed to the surface." He said the study's objective was to see whether or not bacterial biofilms could survive on the surface of RPC material. After cleaning, they examined RPC samples with a scanning electron microscope (SEM) and found the bacteria on every sample cleaned. "One of the interesting things we saw in the SEM is that it might look fine to the naked eye, but when you look closer it has almost a lunar landscape to it," Ricke said, suggesting the rough surfaces might be easier for bacteria to colonize. In a future study, the researchers hope to measure the exact percentage of bacteria that remains after the cleaning process, but they don't have that information based on this study, Ricke said. For now, they were just interested in seeing if the bacteria could survive the cleaning at all. There is no hard evidence linking any foodborne illness outbreaks to lingering contamination on RPCs, and Ricke said he did not want to make any speculations about illnesses caused without evidence. However, he added, the presence of bacteria after cleaning meant that the possibility of disease transmission could not be ruled out. Ricke said that industry needs to look into doing a risk assessment and cost assessment of using RPCs for transporting produce, adding that he knew the suggestion makes him sound "like an academic." Reusable plastic containers have been under scrutiny from certain food safety academics in recent years. Researchers from both the University of California-Davis and the University of Guelph have conducted studies finding that RPCs are often still contaminated when delivered to produce packers. In November 2014, the president of the Reusable Packaging Association responded to the criticisms, saying that there have been no cases of illness linked to RPCs and that the association had established a food safety standards committee to strengthen the safety of the containers even more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Study: Reusable Plastic Produce Containers Harbor Bacteria Even After Being Cleaned, Sanitized | Food Safety News

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reusable plastic containers used to transport large amounts of fruits and vegetables to grocery stores can continue to harbor potentially harmful bacteria directly on their surfaces, even after undergoing industry-standard cleaning and sanitizing, according to a new study conducted by researchers from the University of Arkansas and WBA Analytical Laboratories.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hot topic: is it time for zoos to be banned?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A hangover of the Victorian sideshow or an integral part of wildlife conservation? We ask if zoos should be consigned to the history books along with the bearded lady.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can Plastic Straws Really Change the World? – Podcast Perspectives of Environmental Geopolitics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
Chatham House - International Affairs Think Tank

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A future entirely without plastic is neither realistic nor desirable. But the world should aim for a future of drastically reduced plastic consumption and eliminated plastic pollution.

This article explains the extent and nature of the plastic waste problem, and the political barriers to dealing with it.

Why is plastic use so widespread?

Plastic is used so commonly because it is tremendously versatile, more so than any other material. It can be used for almost any application imaginable. It offers enormous flexibility in colour, strength, shape, weight, and durability. It's also very cheap, as it's produced by the subsidized fossil fuel industry.

Plastic has many uses beyond the production of consumer goods like electronics, white goods, cars, and toys. It offers important hygiene applications through disposable garments like surgical gloves and face masks, or as packaging to protect fragile or perishable items such as food and medical supplies from contamination. It's also used to improve safety, having applications in everything from bicycle helmets to electrical insulation.

However, plastic pollution is one of the gravest threats facing the world. According to the UN environment programme, plastics account for nearly 85% of marine pollution, with around 75-199 million tons in the ocean. And plastics production is expected to double over the next 20 years.

Plastic pollution presents a serious threat to biodiversity, particularly for marine life as it can be easily ingested thereby resulting in the choking, injuring, poisoning, or starving of marine animals.

Plastic waste can also block up natural waterways, polluting the water and disrupting the natural flow. And the scale of plastic pollution is expected to rise dramatically over the coming decades unless urgent global action is taken. If this trajectory continues, it is estimated there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish by 2050 (by weight).

Why does plastic pollution contribute to climate change?

Plastic is not only an issue for marine and terrestrial biodiversity. It also directly contributes to climate change. The growth in plastics will result in substantial increases in global greenhouse gas emissions - from 1.7 Gt (billion tonnes) of CO₂-equivalent (CO₂e) in 2015, to 6.5 GtCO₂e by 2050. The International Energy Agency (IEA) estimates that it will become the largest driver of oil demand, accounting for almost 50% of the growth in oil demand by 2050.

Open burning of plastic waste is also a major cause of toxic emissions. Open burning is common in many parts of the world where there is a lack of established waste collection and sorting services and is a major source of air pollution.

A recent study by the UN High Level Climate Champions and the Royal Academy of Engineering estimates that open burning of waste produces 11% of global black carbon emissions. Emissions from solid waste driven by open dumps and landfills account for about 5-12% of total global GHG emissions.

The world is a long way from where it needs to be. 15% of plastics are collected for recycling globally, with only 9% actually being recycled. Meanwhile, emissions of plastic waste into aquatic ecosystems are projected to nearly triple by 2040 without meaningful action. Parts of the recycling industry, meanwhile, are associated with serious malpractice around labour abuse, child labour and corruption.

The chemistry around plastics has also grown more and more advanced, with thousands of plastic types emerging. These types create incredible complexity and have far outpaced governments' attempts to develop effective recycling schemes.

Why is plastic waste still traded internationally?

Many countries are still exporting their plastic waste to developing countries. Europe has improved domestic waste collection practices over the years, but still exports waste to developing nations - an environmentally unsound practice.

China was a preferred destination for the shipment of plastics and other types of waste. However, in February 2017, China introduced restrictions on the types and quality of plastic waste it would accept, through its National Sword Initiative. This diverted the flow of low-quality plastics to other countries like India, Indonesia and Turkey. Even these countries are now introducing restrictions.

In 2021, strong limits on the export of plastics were introduced to the Basel Convention, a multilateral environmental agreement which regulated global trade in waste. Signatories to the convention now have the right to reject the import of plastic waste and return it to the exporting country.

These developments have strengthened the argument that developed nations must reduce their plastics production overall, better manage their plastic waste locally, and simplify the types of plastics being produced (so as to make them easier to recycle).

Why is it important to reduce plastic waste?

Plastic waste is very harmful to human health and wildlife. There are over 700 species threatened directly by plastic pollution through ingestion. Seabirds, for example, consume the plastic waste, which fills up their stomachs, makes them unable to feed and causes them to starve to death.

Plastics break down into microplastics, which become magnets for contaminants in the oceans, creating a concentration of toxins. These are ingested by marine life and travel all the way up through the food chain. It's thought that the average person consumes a credit card of plastic every week.

Microplastics can also get into human tissues through inhalation and absorption, with unknown but almost certainly bad consequences for human health. In middle- and low-income countries, where there are very low waste collection rates, plastic waste blocks waterways and provides havens for mosquitoes, contributing to flooding and disease.

Burning plastic waste creates air pollution, which affects local populations' health, with children particularly affected. Every 30 seconds a person dies from a disease caused by mismanaged waste.

Plastic production and waste are very bad for the wider environment. The level of greenhouse gas emissions associated with the production, use and disposal of conventional fossil fuel-based plastics is forecast to grow to approximately 2.1 gigatons of carbon dioxide equivalent (GtCO2e) by 2040, or 19% of the global carbon budget.

Plastic waste is also expensive to manage. The estimated global cost of municipal solid waste management is set to increase from $38 billion in 2019 to $61 billion in 2040 without action to address the issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A future entirely without plastic is neither realistic nor desirable. But the world should aim for a future of drastically reduced plastic consumption and eliminated plastic pollution. This article explains the extent and nature of the plastic waste problem, and the political barriers to dealing with it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Disadvantages Of Plastic: Every Way In Which Plastic Impacts Us

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore the disadvantages of plastic, including pollution, health risks, and long-term environmental damage. Learn about safer alternatives and tips to reduce plastic use

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A zoo is a place where captive animals are put on display for humans to see. While early zoos (shortened from zoological parks) concentrated on displaying as many unusual creatures as possible-often in small, cramped conditions-the focus of most modern zoos is conservation and education. While zoo advocates and conservationists argue that zoos save endangered species and educate the public, many animal rights activists believe the cost of confining animals outweighs the benefits, and that the violation of the rights of individual animals-even in efforts to fend off extinction-cannot be justified.

A Brief History of Zoos

Humans have kept wild animals for thousands of years. The first efforts to keep wild animals for non-utilitarian uses began about 2500 BCE, when rulers in Mesopotamia, Egypt kept collections in enclosed pens. Modern zoos began to evolve during the 18th century and the Age of Enlightenment, when scientific interest in zoology, as well as the study of animal behavior and anatomy, came to the fore.

Early zoos were a dismal affair. Animals were kept in small enclosures with little if any, greenery. With a scant understanding of what the various animals needed, many perished relatively quickly. In accredited U.S. zoos (and elsewhere) things are better now, fortunately. Primates, for example, have gone from barren cages with little furniture to naturalistic and sometimes semi-free-ranging designs. But is it enough?

Arguments for Zoos

By bringing people and animals together, zoos educate the public and foster an appreciation of other species.

Zoos save endangered species by bringing them into a safe environment, where they are protected from poachers, habitat loss, starvation, and predators.

Many zoos have breeding programs for endangered species. In the wild, these individuals might have trouble finding mates and breeding, and species could become extinct.

Some zoos have conservation programs around the world that use the zoo's expertise and funding to help protect wildlife against poaching and other threats.

Reputable zoos accredited by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums are held to high standards for the treatment of their resident animals. According to AZA, its accreditation guarantees that the organization has undergone strict evaluation by recognized experts to ensure the highest standards of "animal management and care, including living environments, social groupings, health, and nutrition."

A good zoo provides an enriched habitat in which the animals are never bored, are well cared for, and have plenty of space.

Seeing an animal in person is a much more personal and more memorable experience than seeing that animal in a nature documentary and is more likely to foster an empathetic attitude toward animals.

Some zoos help rehabilitate wildlife and take in exotic pets that people no longer want or are no longer able to care for.

Both accredited and unaccredited animal exhibitors are regulated by the federal Animal Welfare Act, which establishes standards for animal care.

Arguments Against Zoos

From an animal rights standpoint, humans do not have a right to breed, capture, and confine other animals-even if those species are endangered. Being a member of an endangered species doesn't mean the individual animals should be afforded fewer rights.

Animals in captivity suffer from boredom, stress, and confinement. No pen-no matter how humane-or drive-through safari can compare to the freedom of the wild.

Intergenerational bonds are broken when individuals are sold or traded to other zoos.

Baby animals bring in visitors and money, but this incentive to breed new baby animals leads to overpopulation. Surplus animals are sold not only to other zoos, but also to circuses and hunting facilities. Some zoos simply kill their surplus animals outright.

Some captive breeding programs do not release animals back into the wild. The offspring may be forever part of the chain of zoos, circuses, and petting zoos.

Removing individual specimens from the wild further endangers the wild population because the remaining individuals will be less genetically diverse and may have greater difficulty finding mates. Maintaining species diversity within captive breeding facilities is also a challenge.

If people want to see wild animals in real life, they can observe wildlife in the wild or visit a sanctuary. (A true sanctuary does not buy, sell, or breed animals, but instead takes in unwanted exotic pets, surplus animals from zoos, or injured wildlife that can no longer survive in the wild.)

The federal Animal Welfare Act establishes only the most minimal standards for cage size, shelter, health care, ventilation, fencing, food, and water. For example, enclosures must provide "sufficient space to allow each animal to make normal postural and social adjustments with adequate freedom of movement. Inadequate space may be indicated by evidence of malnutrition, poor condition, debility, stress, or abnormal behavior patterns." Violations often result in a slap on the wrist and the exhibitor is given a deadline to correct the violation. Even a long history of inadequate care and AWA violations, such as the history of Tony the Truck Stop Tiger, does not necessarily ensure abused animals will be freed.

Animals sometimes escape their enclosures, endangering themselves as well as people. Likewise, people ignore warnings or accidentally get too close to animals, leading to horrific outcomes. For example, Harambe, a 17-year-old western lowland gorilla, was shot in 2016 when a toddler accidentally fell into his enclosure at the Cincinnati Zoo. While the child survived and was not badly injured, the gorilla was killed outright.

Petting zoos have been linked with numerous incidents of diseases including E. coli infection, cryptosporidiosis, salmonellosis, and dermatomycosis (ringworm).

The Last Word on Zoos

In making a case for or against zoos, both sides argue that they're saving animals. Whether or not zoos benefit the animal community, they certainly do make money. As long as there is demand for them, zoos will continue to exist.

Since zoos are likely an inevitability, the best way to move forward is to ensure that zoo conditions are the best possible for the animals that live in captivity and that individuals who violate animal care health and safety sanctions are not only duly punished but denied any future access to animals.

One day we may look back at zoos and marvel at their barbarity. Or, one day we may look back at zoos and be grateful for the species they saved from extinction. Of these two scenarios, only time will tell.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Are Zoos Ethical? Arguments for and Against Keeping Animals in Zoos

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Zoos, if done right, could be a good thing for the animals and the public-yet many so-called zoos get it terribly wrong.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
future of zoos presents an ethical dilemma

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The future of zoos presents an ethical dilemma and highlights the need for a balance between human interest and animal welfare.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Zoos | Pros, Cons, Debate, Arguments, Scientific Research, & Conservation | Britannica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Should zoos exist? Learn the pros and cons of the debate.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Year-round schooling schedules offer the same 160 to 180 days of schooling as the traditional nine-month school calendar. The difference is that the school vacations are distributed over the year rather than primarily in the summer. The long summer break is believed to have been created to ensure children were home to help parents harvest crops on family farms, a need that is no longer relevant for most American families.

While the year-round schedule is not what most adults remember from their own school experience, it may not be as challenging or undesirable as many assume it to be-in fact, year-round schooling might make life easier for some families. Children are not given less time off of school, rather the usual nine months on, three months off schedule is redistributed. The schedule of instruction is altered to accommodate shorter breaks across the whole calendar year.

Keep reading to learn more about the pros and cons of year-round schooling.

The Debate Over Year-Round Schooling Schedules

Proponents of year-round schooling schedules say that year-round school may be a way to increase academic achievement and be beneficial to many working families, but opponents have also identified potential drawbacks. Here's a closer look at the pros and cons:

Reduces learning loss over summer break

Costs of implementing a new schedule

No need for summer break

Potential for higher operating costs in the summer

Evenly distributed breaks for vacations

Teens could not have summer jobs

Consistent year-round child care need

Siblings may be on different multi-track schedules

Uses a multi-track system to maximize school use

Loss of summer sport and camp opportunities

Makes teaching a full-time profession

Could be challenging to pay teachers for year-round work

Pros of Year-Round School

Some of the pros of year-round schooling include:

Decreased need to re-teach skills after long vacations, allowing teachers to use classroom time more efficiently. In fact, one of the strongest arguments for the year-school calendar is that it combats so-called "summer achievement loss," according to one study.

Extending the school year may help make teaching a more lucrative full-time profession for educators if year-round schools can cut costs through multi-tracking programs.

Families who struggle to find or pay for child care during the summer will benefit, as will children who are in sub-par child care during summer vacation.

Multi-tracking programs, in which groups of students are on different school schedules, may allow for more school consolidation.

Remediation needs can be addressed during the school year as opposed to during summer programs, possibly decreasing the need to include summer school in local budgets.

Shorter summer breaks mean students are less likely to incur summer learning loss, which may increase academic performance for underprivileged children and decrease the number of students being served by intervention programs.

Vacation time can be more evenly distributed throughout the year, making it easier to schedule family vacations and for students to revitalize themselves more frequently.

Cons of Year-Round School

Some of the arguments against year-round schooling include:

Children in year-round schools may not be able to participate in special programs like summer camp or summer sports that currently operate in the summertime.

Initial costs associated with starting or changing a traditional school to a year-round school are high.

Multi-tracking programs mean that parents could possibly have children that are on different schedules.

School budgets and staffing issues may not allow for extended school-year programs and the cost of teaching as a full-time endeavor may not be feasible either locally or federally.

School maintenance costs, including day-to-day upkeep, air-conditioning, and utilities, can increase significantly if schools are open during the warmer summer months.

Teens who need to work to help support themselves or make money for college may have difficulty holding or finding a job if they don't have the entire summer off.

One study conducted all the way back in 2007 by Ohio State University found that students who participate in the year-round school calendar don't actually learn more than those who participate in the traditional school system, and both groups score about the same on tests.

Increasing Popularity of Year-Round School

Frederick M. Hess, director of Education Policy Studies at the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research, notes that few countries offer more than seven consecutive weeks of vacation for students. This contrasts with the United States' average of 13 weeks. However, some research does show that children who given the opportunity for extensive summer activities and socialization see positive effects on their mental health and physical development.

In a 2008 report titled "Summer Vacation Is No Longer Necessary," Hess suggested that following the agrarian calendar is an anachronistic way of running schools. Although year-round school calendars are not a uniform solution, Hess believes that families should have more options for schools that operate year-round.

That opinion is gaining traction. In fact, a growing number of schools have opted to transition to a year-round calendar model. According to an education policy report prepared for members of Congress in 2014, the number of year-round schools went from 410 (educating 350,000 students) in the 1980s to more than 3,700 (educating 2 million students) across 45 states in 2012.

Such growth in the numbers has school officials looking into research that examines both benefits in learning for students, but also how year-round schools affect the overall cost of education for all parties involved.

Parents uses only high-quality sources, including peer-reviewed studies, to support the facts within our articles. Read our editorial process to learn more about how we fact-check and keep our content accurate, reliable, and trustworthy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A year-round schooling schedule offers the same 180 days as the traditional nine-month school calendar, but school vacations are distributed differently. Here are some potential downsides to this style of schooling.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Saint Louis Zoo is dedicated to saving species and bringing people and wildlife together. Home to over 16,000 animals, many of which are endangered, entry is free every day for everyone, an important part of our commitment to people and animals – always.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For a kid, there is nothing better than summer break. No pencils, no books, no more teachers with dirty looks; for a kid, an endless summer would be the best thing in the world. Unfortunately for all the giddy children, summertime needs to come to an end. Right now America's education system is on the ropes, and one of the ways Americans can help fix its education system is to implement year-round education. Here's why year-round school is a good idea.

10) Year-round school is easier to schedule vacations

The three-month summer vacation block may sound great for planning vacations, but in reality, it's not all it's cracked up to be. By having one large vacation block, parents have to compete in the workplace to get the appropriate time off and travel is more expensive because everyone else is traveling. Year round schooling offers more breaks and more opportunities for everyone to take a well-deserved vacation

9) It has the potential to solve overcrowding

Some schools with year-round schooling utilize something called the "multi-track" system. Essentially, the school is divided into four or five different "tracks." Vacations are staggered between the tracks in such a way so that while three out of four tracks are currently in school, the other track is on vacation. When one track returns, another track goes on vacation. By staggering vacations, overcrowded schools can alleviate some of the stress of having too many students. Overcrowding is especially prevalent during pandemics

To accommodate the flux in student enrollment throughout the year, some schools have also created more flexible space within their facility. School architects have discovered using portable room dividers allows school districts to quickly change the look and use of any given space at any time. One company, Screenflex Portable Partitions, even offers clear room dividers to designate a separate space but also allows light and vision into the area. Students have found these clear dividers useful to use as dry erase boards during group discussions and team learning.

8) Year round schooling benefits low-income families

Studies have shown the children from low-income families stand to benefit the most from year-round schooling. Part of it has to do with the fact that shorter breaks help the children retain the information better, and part of it is that it helps keep the impoverished children out of trouble.

While wealthier parents can afford summer camps and babysitters; many low-income parents have to leave their child home alone unattended while they go to work. Year round schooling keeps children in the books and off the streets.

7) Breaks would be more frequent

Currently, schools that are on the summer vacation model, usually have two breaks, summer vacation, and a handful of holidays. Although cumulatively there would fewer days off, the frequency of school breaks would be much higher. While year round schooling systems vary, typically schools usually take a two-week break quarter semester. Frequent breaks are good for both students and teachers as they help keep both from burning out early in the year.

Having more frequent breaks also has a dramatic effect on student dropout rates. In 2018, the national dropout rate is about 5%, while the dropout rate for students enrolled in year-round schooling is only 2%. This 3% difference shows a clear benefit year-round school has on keeping students in school, which in turn affects the amount of material they learn in the classroom.

6) Teachers will earn more money

During the summer, many teachers have to take on second jobs to supplement their loss of income. This forces many to take lower-paying jobs because there are very few education jobs during the summer.

This leads to embarrassing and degrading moments for teachers when inevitably they have to wait on one of their students or their parents. If schools were open year round, not only would teachers not have to work a second job, but they also see an increase in their yearly income.

5) The current system was designed for a different America in a different century

A hundred years ago; most Americans still worked some form of agricultural jobs. Aside from high infant mortality rates, most people had a lot of children because they required help on their farms.

Children would wake up before the sun, help with the crops, and go to school.
Summer breaks were not designed for family fun and vacations; they were designed to allow children to help their parents with crops during a critical time in the agricultural season.

4) Year round schooling will increase respect for teachers

There is an old and vile adage that says "Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach." It's a hateful phrase that reveals our culture's underlying disrespect for teachers. Many see educators as lazy people who get frequent breaks and have little responsibility. Year round schooling offers to change that perception of teachers. If people see teachers going to work every day like they do; people will stop thinking of them like part-time babysitters and instead think of teachers like full-time professionals.

3) Teachers are no longer constrained by time

When you were going through school; did any of your classes finish the textbook? I know mine didn't. Those three months students take for summer break severely shortens the time a teacher has with their students. By switching to a year-round schedule, teachers will have much more time to go over lessons and help students. Critical lessons will no longer be shortened to fit the calendar.

2) Students will be able to advance more quickly

A by-product of the summer break is the dividing of classes based on age. If schooling was year round, there would be less distinction between year X and year Y. Instead of waiting for the next school year to start, more advanced children would be able to just go to the next level.

Also, the constant learning environment takes away the emphasis of when the student started school and instead emphasizes skill and aptitude.

1) It cuts down on brain drain

Summers are not all they're cracked up to be. While kids love summers, their brains do not. By going three months without using critical thinking, children are losing a good bit of what they have learned each year. At the end of the long break, teachers are finding themselves having to take extra time out of their day to re-teach their students the things they already learned the previous year.

Three months might not sound very long, but for a child, it can seem like a lifetime. It's all about scale. Think of it like this: Three months in the life of a ten-year-old makes up 2.5 percent of their life. For a thirty-year-old adult, 2.5 percent of their life is nine months. Could you just take off from work for nine months, never use your work skill in that time, and expect to work as well as you did beforehand?

According to the National Association for Year-Round Education, the trend for year-round schools is growing. Do you think that having year-round schooling would be beneficial for students and the education system in general? Or is it simply too much? Is year-round school too much of a strain on the cost and maintenance of the building? Do schools need to look at creating a more flexible space by using room dividers to accommodate the change in the use of the facility throughout an entire year?

Last Updated:
By: Julie Wenckowski

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Top 10 Reasons to be Pro Year Round School

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As schools implement Common Core Standards, is it also time to change when students attend school? See the top reasons why year round school is a good idea.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
(New Research) The Argument For Year Round Schooling

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
With most schools in the U.S. following a nine-month calendar, it's easy to assume that's how all schools are. But in some districts, the calendar looks completely different.

In fact, of the just under 133,000 K-12 schools in the U.S., around 3,200 run a year-round calendar. Having no summer break may sound awful at first blush, but many year-round calendar options consist of the same number of student-contact days as the calendar we're used to. Breaks are just distributed throughout the calendar year.

Most of us won't get to experience year-round schooling firsthand, but it's worth taking a moment to understand different educational structures as we work to become well-rounded educators. Here are the pros and cons of a year-round school.

Pros

Summer slide is also the reason why teachers spend the first month of school reviewing what was previously taught. Less instructional time is spent on review in year-round schools.

Teaching at a year-round school means receiving a year-round salary. This is a pro that any teacher can get behind.

Cons

Summer vacation provides a much-needed break for teachers and students who need time to refresh rejuvenate after working hard for nine straight months.

Spending time at the beginning of a school year explaining classroom routines and expectations can feel like a waste of instructional time. However, it gives students a chance to practice important soft skills like adapting to new procedures, handling different work styles, and learning new schedules.

With most schools on a nine-month schedule, extracurricular activities have learned to plan their programs accordingly. Therefore, students at a year-round school may not have availability to experience certain outside activities like summer sports teams or camps.

It costs more to run a school year-round. Along with paying staff, the school building itself will require more funds for heating and cooling to keep the school running comfortably.

It's tough to say definitively which school structure provides the most optimal learning environment, but it's eye-opening to consider those we may not be familiar with in our quest to be the best educators we can be.
With nine different start dates every year, it's never a bad time to start at American College of Education. Explore all our graduate-level programs in the field of education.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of American College of Education.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Curious about why some schools use a year-round structure instead of the more conventional nine-month academic calendar? We break down the pros and cons of having school all year round.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
A Powerful Guide on 10 Reasons Why Year-Round School Is Bad 2025

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Discover 10 reasons why year-round school is bad for students, families, and educators. Dive into the debate and gain insights into why this alternative

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Examining the Effectiveness of Year-Round School Calendars on Improving Educational Attainment Outcomes Within the Context of Advancement of Health Equity: A Community Guide Systematic Review

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Students may lose knowledge and skills achieved in the school year during the summer break, with losses greatest for students from low-income families. Community Guide systematic review methods were used to summarize evaluations (published…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Busting the Myths About Year-Round School Calendars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
“Balanced” calendars have no academic benefit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
For most children in the United States, the word "summer" evokes images of a carefree two- to three-month-long escape from the classroom.

But that summer break looks different for those on year-round school calendars, also known as balanced school calendars.

What Is Year-Round Schooling?

School districts using a year-round or balanced calendar redistribute the standard 180 days of classroom instruction more evenly over the course of a year.

Although students at a school with a balanced calendar might only get four or five weeks off in the summer, they'll also get two weeks or so off in the fall, winter and spring. Some schools on this calendar also use a multi-track system, meaning that students are assigned to different groups, each with its own vacation schedule.

Though the vast majority of schools using a year-round calendar feature 180 days of instruction, some districts have tried extended year-round calendars, which add on extra school days in an effort to increase student achievement. Experts note, however, that these are fairly rare in the United States.

There are many different ways to divide up the balanced calendar, but a common model is the 45/15 version, wherein students attend school for a 45-day period, followed by a 15-day vacation. This cycle repeats four times throughout the school year, taking into account holidays that take place throughout the year (students on a balanced calendar still receive three days off around Thanksgiving, for example).

How Year-Round Schooling Got Started

Though longer, year-round school calendars were fairly common in the early days of American schooling, the traditional nine-month calendar prevailed as the norm by the beginning of the 20th century.

The year-round calendar as we know it today was introduced in the 1970s, as school districts looked for a way to deal with rapidly increasing student populations. By scheduling students on different tracks with staggered vacations, administrators could expand the capacity of existing school buildings. However, the number of public schools using this calendar declined from 6% in 1999 to just 3% in 2018, according to an analysis published in EducationNext. Many districts that do year-round schooling are in the South and West.

But since the COVID-19 pandemic, a few states and districts are looking at balanced calendars as a way to combat the learning loss that occurred following the shift to remote and hybrid learning in 2020. For example in Washington, the state superintendent's office used some of its emergency pandemic funding to introduce the Balanced Calendar Initiative, which has provided grants to more than 40 school districts to study the balanced calendar's potential for their district.

And in South Carolina, about a quarter of the state's school districts have switched over to the balanced calendar in the past three years, according to local news reports, with even more planning to make the change.

"The COVID-19 pandemic really gave school districts a reason to look at how we organize when teaching and learning happens," says Latoya Dixon, assistant superintendent of academic innovation and professional learning at York School District 1 in South Carolina, which will be transitioning to a balanced calendar for the 2023-2024 school year.

Here are some of the pros and cons of year-round calendar systems.

Pros of Year-Round School

More Frequent, Evenly Spaced Breaks

One of the advantages of a balanced calendar is that students get more frequent breaks throughout the year, which proponents of the model say can help reduce burnout among teachers and students.

Daniel Jones, a public high school teacher and doctoral student in educational leadership at St. Louis University, says he suspects that longer breaks during the school year could have a positive effect on students' mental health, particularly in a post-pandemic world.

Dixon also notes that in her state, students on the traditional calendar have a slightly longer semester in the spring than they do in the fall.

"In terms of instruction, a student who takes Algebra I first semester receives 87 days of instruction, versus a student who takes Algebra I second semester gets 93 days," she says, noting that the balanced calendar levels out this difference by creating more even periods of instruction.

Intercession Instruction

Year-round education allows for additional enrichment opportunities during the short breaks or "intercessions" that occur throughout the school year, allowing students to either catch up or get ahead in their studies.

Jones and Dixon agree that the year-round calendar can create some challenges for working parents who need to coordinate childcare during the added breaks throughout the year. To make up for that, many schools on balanced calendar systems offer additional instruction during those breaks.

"Some people have a misconception that year-round schools just let the kids go," Jones says. "But they understand a lot of parents are working, so a lot of those schools will offer programming or enrichment opportunities during those intercessions."

Less Summer Learning Loss

Advocates of year-round calendar systems often cite reduced summer learning loss as a reason to shift away from the traditional calendar.

The logic here seems sound - since students have shorter summer breaks, there's less time to forget what they learned during the school year.

That said, a study by Paul von Hippel, associate dean for research at the University of Texas-Austin's School of Public Affairs, found that while the year-round approach did increase summer learning, learning decreased during other times of the year, ultimately evening out the amount of learning loss between both calendars.

Cons of Year-Round School

Little Evidence of Academic Benefits

Von Hippel notes that much of the research cited in favor of the year-round calendar falls flat upon further scrutiny, as studies showing significant academic benefits tend to look at a fairly small sample size, and are often not even peer-reviewed.

He says studies that analyze data from several school districts show little in the way of significant educational improvements when schools switched to a year-round calendar - and some even see slight declines in academic performance.

"This is really what policymakers should be looking at," von Hippel says.

Childcare Difficulties

Year-round education can pose a challenge for working parents who need to arrange childcare during breaks that don't align with their work schedules. When her district was voting on whether or not to adopt the balanced calendar system, Dixon says this was the most frequent complaint that skeptics of the calendar brought up.

Though childcare may be hard enough to figure out during the summer, it can be even more challenging to schedule ways to keep your child safe and occupied during those additional breaks, when most full-day camps and recreation programs are not available. This challenge might even discourage some parents from staying in the workforce altogether - von Hippel cites a 2013 study that found mothers in districts on the year-round calendar were less likely to enter the workforce when their children started kindergarten.

Shorter Summers

It's no secret that the summer is a popular time for families to take time off. Shortening the season can make it harder for families to find the time for traditional summer vacations like hiking, camping or spending time at a nearby beach.

A briefer summer break also makes it harder for kids to attend a sleepaway camp or for teens to work a summer job or internship.

For families with multiple children, planning a vacation on the year-round calendar can be especially tricky. This is particularly difficult on a multi-track system, where one child might be on break while another child is in class, von Hippel says.

And given the fact that families often plan vacations well in advance, the transition from a traditional calendar to a balanced one can also be challenging. In addition to childcare troubles, Dixon says some parents in her district voted against the switch because they'd already scheduled their summer vacations and would have to go through the trouble of rescheduling to accommodate the new calendar.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Pros and Cons of Year-Round School Calendars

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A balanced calendar replaces summer with shorter, more frequent breaks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The very thought of sending kids to school year-round makes some parents cringe. They balk at the idea of kids attending schools with no summer break. They question the value of a continuous school year interspersed with several short breaks. While the schedule is definitely not what the majority of adults grew up with, it's not nearly as onerous as some people think. Rather than giving kids less time off, a year-round schedule offers the same 180 days of schooling as the traditional calendar, created long ago to ensure children were home to help their parents harvest crops.
Want recommended books and reading ideas? Sign up for our Scholastic Parents newsletter.
Kids in year-round schools attend classes for anywhere from six to nine weeks in a row, broken up by two- to four-week vacations. That, say some educators, keeps the learning process ongoing with minimal disruption. A Duke University study even suggested kids attending year-round schools are at a slight advantage, because they don't forget what they learned during the long summer break.

Schools in fast-growing areas transition to year-round schedules as a way to ease overcrowding. When that occurs, kids are placed on multi-tracks, and alternate tracking in and out of the school, a process that keeps the buildings in constant use.

Frequent breaks are a mainstay of year-round schooling, but they aren't for everyone. Patricia McCracken, who grew up attending a year-round school in Virginia Beach, Virginia, says she found the two-week breaks, which occurred every six weeks at her school, to be disruptive. "It was really hard to get involved in the work because as soon as you geared up, you had to gear back down again."

Mary Brown, a middle-school teacher in Wake County (where three-week breaks occur every nine weeks), says she doesn't see that as a problem at her school. "Our schedule offers the kids a break from school right when they need it," she says. Earlier this year, after their first three-week break, she says, the kids seemed refreshed. "They didn't have the bored, glazed-over look of kids who had been in school for weeks on end with no break in sight."

Juggling different school schedules is one of the toughest problems parents of children in both year-round and traditional schools face. Many high schools don't employ a year-round calendar because of sports schedules. And teens want to be able to take summer jobs.

The year-round schedule can make finding appropriate childcare a problem too. Because her mom was a teacher in a traditional school, McCracken says, "It meant my sister and I were basically latchkey kids for two or three years because it was impossible to find a babysitter for two weeks every six weeks." As year-round schooling becomes more common, however, communities are meeting the demand by offering track-out programs for kids who aren't in school.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find out about families that swap a shorter summer break for learning time that's more continuous.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This is the holiday season in the United States. People are buying gifts and carrying them home, usually in plastic shopping bags. They are only a small amount of the huge number of disposable plastic bags that are used all year long to contain groceries and other items.

Janet Larsen directs research for the Earth Policy Institute in Washington, D.C. She says too many plastic bags end up as litter, polluting waterways.

"They get caught in bushes and trees. In storm water systems, they end up clogging up sewers."

In an effort to keep plastic bags out of the environment, California recently became the first state to ban businesses from giving new plastic bags to customers. Some other states and cities charge a small amount of money for every bag given out. That is meant to encourage people to bring their own bags when they go shopping.

Mark Daniels is senior vice president for environmental policy at Hilex Poly, one of the country's largest plastic bag manufacturers and recyclers. He says people should be able to get new plastic bags without paying. Mr. Daniels says they are a good environmental choice.

"Every single scientific litter study that has been done always show that plastic retail are a fraction of one percent."

Some environmentalists claim that plastic bags are clogging landfills. However, Mark Daniels points to a study by the Environmental Protection Agency that says that is not always true.

"All plastic bags, not just retail bags, are 4/10ths of one percent the waste stream."

Five years ago, Washington D.C. placed a 5-cent fee on every plastic bag given out by businesses in the city. The money is being used to clean up the local Anacostia watershed.

And the effort is making a difference. Brian Van Wye heads storm waterprogram implementation at the city's Department of the Environment. He says once people started to pay for plastic bags, they used less of them. Fewer bags ended up in the waterways.

"The stream clean-up groups are telling us that they've seen a 60 percent reduction in the disposal bags that they find while they're doing stream cleanups."

He also says that's helping to save water life.

"We also know that plastic bags, they break down over time. It's something aquatic life will consume and ingest and that can cause serious harm and potentially death for aquatic life like fish and turtles."

But customers who say they need shopping bags aren't always happy about paying for them. At a Washington restaurant, Bill Ford says he has to use a bag to carry out his lunch.

"I don't know why some people need to pay because, some people, a small minority of people are throwing stuff into rivers and waterways."

Still, Carol Powers, who also paid for a bag, approves of Washington's program.

"It seems kind of silly to pay five cents for a bag, but if that's what it takes to help save the environment, then it's a good idea."

Hilex Poly and other manufacturers are recycling the bags. Mark Daniels says that is a better alternative than taxing or banning them.

"We reprocess it, we clean it, we shred it, we make new post-consumer recycle product and put that back into the manufacturing of new bags."

But Janet Larsen of the Earth Policy Institute doesn't think that's the answer.

"The plastic bag industry has often used recycling as a deterrent for communities that, even when residents are saying, we want to limit these. It really doesn't help to minimize the problems. What we would advocate for would be a washable, reusable bag to take the place of all those plastic bags."

Bags like the one Carol Chastang uses to carry her lunch...

"This is my contribution to keeping the environment cleaner and safer."

More than 18 million Americans now live in communities that tax or ban plastic bags, and that number is expected to go up again next year.

I'm Anne Ball.
This story came from VOA reporter Deborah Block. Marsha James wrote it for VOA Learning English. Jeri Watson was the editor.
______________________________________________________________

Words in This Story

litter - n. things that have been thrown away and are lying on the ground in a public place

disposable - n. something that is made to be thrown away after it is used once

clog - v. to slowly form a block in (something, such as a pipe or street) so that things cannot move through quickly or easily

alternative - adj. offering or expressing a choice.
Now it's your turn to use these Words in this Story. In the comments section, write a sentence using one of these words and we will provide feedback on your use of vocabulary and grammar.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This is the holiday season in the United States. People are buying gifts and carrying them home, usually in plastic shopping bags. They are only a small amount of the huge number of disposable plastic bags that are used all year long to contain groceries and other items.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
From Australia to the U.K., and all across the U.S., politicians and corporations are pondering banning or taxing plastic bags.

A hefty surcharge that began in 2003 in Ireland has spurred the public there to spurn plastic bags almost completely in favor of reusable cloth totes.

Plastic sacks are also taxed in Italy and Belgium. Grocery shoppers must pay for the bags in Switzerland, Germany, and Holland. Spain, Norway, and now the U.K. are considering a ban or tax as well.

The political action in the U.K. on single-use plastic bags follows similar gestures earlier this year in Australia.

There a national ban or tax is being hotly debated, though the state of South Australia, which includes the city of Adelaide, has promised a ban on free single-use bags by year's end no matter what.

The state's premier, Mike Rann, listed familiar reasons for the ban: The bags contribute to greenhouse gases, clog up landfills, litter streets and streams, and kill wildlife.

Banished Bags

Unsightly pollution appears to be behind China's January announcement of a countrywide ban on the thinnest totes and a tax on others. It begins June 1, two months before the Summer Olympics in Beijing.

Taiwan taxes the bags, and the cities of Dhaka, Bangladesh, and Mumbai, India, ban them to prevent flood-inducing storm-drain clogs during monsoon season.

Once jokingly called the "national flower," thin plastic bags have been banned in South Africa since 2003; thicker ones are taxed. Similar measures exist in Eritrea, Rwanda, Somalia, Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda.

In the U.S., the cities of San Francisco and Oakland, California, ban the bags and promote reusable and compostable sacks. Elsewhere in the state supermarkets are required to take back and recycle the bags.

Similar take-back and recycle initiatives are on the books or under consideration in New York, New Jersey, and Maryland.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastic-Bag Bans Gaining Momentum Around the World

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
From Australia to the U.K., plastic bags seem to be going out of style.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unsightly plastic bottles, bags and other trash give just a hint of the largely unseen problem of plastic pollution. Scientists have found tiny bits of it throughout the ocean. The bad news: Sea life can’t tell the difference between plastic and food.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Journal Reports: Energy Big Issues

Should There Be a Price on Carbon?

October 5, 2012 at 4:01 AM ET

That question divides even those who agree the government needs to pursue clean-energy policies. Three experts debate the issue.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many cities around the globe have already banned the ubiquitous bags from stores, and activists are pushing for bans elsewhere. But skeptics say that science doesn't support the idea that plastic bags do any genuine harm.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Untitled infographic by calopes - Infogram

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The main argument to be against a ban of plastic bags is they are useful and help carrying things. Some people think that a ban is not necessary if people take care and dispose plastic bags in the right places. Investing in recycling systems and environme

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Paper or Plastic: Which Bags Hurt the Environment More?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
California Becomes First State to Ban Plastic Bags

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gov. Jerry Brown signed a historic bill on Tuesday, ending a long fight between manufacturers and environmentalists

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This type of packaging flattens out on the MRF's conveyor belt and ends up being incorrectly sorted and mixed with paper, rendering the whole baleunsellable.

Even if pouches were collected and separated by recyclers, there would be no one to buy them because there aren't yet products or end markets for which this type of plastic would beuseful.

Flexible packaging such as potato chip bags are made from layers of different types of plastic and often are lined with aluminum. It's not possible to easily separate the layers and capture the desiredresin.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastics: What's Recyclable, What Becomes Trash - And Why

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Knowing what to recycle is confusing. Here's a look at the process, from store to recycling facility.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
July 29, 2013, a sperm whale was stranded on Tershelling, a northern island in the Netherlands. A rescue attempt was attempted, but unfortunately the whale died. A young adult at 13.5 meters was taken for a necropsy at the port of Harlington. The sperm whale had plastic in its stomach, an increasing common phenomenon say researchers at the Biodiversity Centre Naturalis.

In March of this year, a 10 meter long sperm whale washed up on Spain's South Coast. This whale had swallowed 59 different plastic items totaling over 37 pounds. Most of this plastic consisted of transparent sheeting used to build greenhouses in Almeria and Grenada for the purpose of tomatoes for the European market. The rest was plastic bags, nine meters of rope, two stretches of hosepipe, two small flower pots, and a plastic spray canister. Cause of death was intestinal blockage.These are not uncommon incidents.
In 1989, a stranded sperm whale in the Lavezzi Islands in the Tyrrhenian Sea died of a stomach obstruction after accidentally ingesting plastic bags and 100 feet of plastic sheeting. In 1990, a sperm whale examined for pathology in Iceland died of an obstruction of the gut with plastic marine debris.

In August of 2008, a sperm whale washed up in Point Reyes, California with 450 pounds of fishing net, rope, and plastic bags in its stomach. The California Marine Mammal Stranding Database tells of another sperm whale stranded in 2008 with stomach contents that included an extensive amount of netting from discarded fishing gear.

The sperm whale that stranded in the Netherlands had a large part of its lower jaw missing. Among hundreds of thousands of sperm whales that whalers harpoon, regularly encountered are sperm whales with broken or deformed lower jaws. Most of these whales have full stomachs and are healthy right before being slaughtered.

This, and the fact squids are found in their stomachs whole and seldom show bite marks, lead to a theory that the lower jaw plays no significant role in catching of prey and that these sperm whales instead suck their food in.

If this theory is true, sperm whales are just as vulnerable as baleen whales to the ingestion of marine debris. Another family of deep diving, squid eating cetaceans is the beaked whales. May 2011, a female juvenile Gervais' beaked whale was found on a beach in Puerto Rico with ten pounds of plastic in her stomach.

In July 2006, a 20-year old female Cuvier's beaked whale died in the Cook Islands, Rarotonga after ingesting a single plastic bag. Sperm whales and beaked whales are especially susceptible to swallowing plastic and fishing gear as they resemble their natural prey, squid, the same way a sea turtle is susceptible to swallowing plastic bags because they resemble jelly fish.

Baleen whales suffer the same fate, not for the fact trash resembles their food, but because they gulp large amounts of water when feeding. In August 2000, a Bryde's whale was stranded near Cairns, Australia. The stomach was found to be tightly packed with six square meters of plastic rubbish, including supermarket bags, food packages, and fragments of trash bags.

In April 2010, a gray whale that died after stranding itself on a west Seattle beach was found to have more than 20 plastic bags, small towels, surgical gloves, plastic pieces, duct tape, a pair of sweat pants, and a golf ball, not to mention other garbage contained in its stomach.

Plastic is not digestible, and once it finds its way into the intestines, accumulates and clogs the intestines. For some whales, the plastic does not kill the animal directly, but cause malnutrition and disease, which leads to unnecessary suffering until death.

Whales are not the only victims to our trash. It is estimated that over one million birds and 100,000 marine mammals die each year from plastic debris. In September 2009, photographs of albatross chicks on Midway Atoll were brought to the public's eye.

These nesting chicks were fed bellies full of plastic by their parents who soar over vastly polluted oceans collecting what looks to them to be food. This diet of human trash kills tens of thousands of albatross chicks each year on Midway because of starvation, toxicity, and choking.

We can all do our part by limiting our use of plastic products such as shopping bags, party balloons, straws, and plastic bottles. Be a frugal shopper and recycle!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Gray whale dies bringing us a message - with stomach full of plastic trash

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A sperm whale was stranded on Tershelling, a northern island in the Netherlands. A rescue attempt was attempted, but unfortunately the whale died. A young adult at 13.5 meters was taken for a necropsy...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What's sterile, strong, and everywhere around us? Plastic. Used in everything from food containers to shoe soles, this popular polymer is quickly revealing itself to have adverse health effects. Find out how you can protect yourself from endocrine-disrupting chemicals, and learn proper recycling protocol to minimize impact on the environment.

Plastic Fantastic

The benefits of plastics are unmatched by any other material, says the Society of the Plastics Industry (SPI). It is light, easily shaped, strong, and inexpensive. Its ability to guard against contamination makes it useful in sterile medical environments such as hospitals.

Plastic kitchenware offers a practical alternative to glass and ceramic dishes. Plastic preserves flavour and freshness when used to store food and beverages. Leak-proof and child-resistant plastic containers are useful for holding dangerous household products such as bleach, ammonia,and other caustic cleaners.

Plastic packaging withstands the rigors of shipping, and plastic containers provide good storage solutions at home and in the office. It seems that the benefits of using plastic are boundless-but are they really?

Problems With Plastic

"Our obsession with plastic is loading up the planet with toxic chemicals, and we're only beginning to understand the serious consequences these substances have on health," says Lisa Gue, environmental health policy analyst with the David Suzuki Foundation.

Gue says that chemicals contained in plastic migrate into the environment when the plastic products containing them are discarded. These chemicals are building up in our bodies and in our environment.

But according to the SPI, only 9 percent of waste in landfills is plastic. They say plastic can be an environmentally friendly, low-cost alternative to other products. Think for a moment of plastic grocery bags. They take up one-seventh of the space paper bags do in landfills and don't produce toxic fumes when incinerated, says the SPI, who also note that incinerated plastic helps the waste mix burn more efficiently.

Is It Safe?

When it comes to the impact on public health, the widespread use of plastics is a contentious issue.

"There are some places that plastics just don't belong," says Jill Thompson, Citizens for Change coordinator with the BC Chapter of the Sierra Club of Canada. "Our food and water shouldn't touch plastic, at least not in the way it is currently manufactured."

The concern is that plastic food-storage containers are leaching chemicals such as bisphenol A into our food. Bisphenol A (BPA) is a chemical used during the manufacturing of certain hard, clear plastics (the kind reusable water bottles, baby bottles, and sippy cups are made from). It mimics the hormone estrogen and disrupts reproductive functions, Gue explains.

Studies have linked bisphenol A to prostate cancer, miscarriages, and birth defects. However, Health Canada says that the level of BPA in these products is low and normal use doesn't pose a risk to your health.

Also of concern are phthalates (pronounced thay-lates), which give plastic its pliable, flexible properties, and polybrominated diphenyl ethers, or PBDEs, used as a fire retardant. Studies link both to hormone- and reproductive-system damage.

What Should You Do?

"Plastics can and do make sense in some contexts," says Thompson, noting that plastic automobile parts have made lighter cars that consume less fossil fuel. "But we aren't yet doing enough when it comes to plastic recycling," she says.

Still, like 'em or not, plastics are here to stay. So do your part and become plastic savvy. Familiarize yourself with what plastics can be recycled, and keep reusable plastics out of landfills.

For more detailed info on plastics recycling in Canada, visit cpia.ca/epic. Check out myplasticbags.ca for lists of municipalities and retailers in your area that recycle their own plastic bags.

Plastic Recycled-What Your Common Household Plastics Can Be Recycled Into:

household product: disposable utensils, meat packing type of plastic: polystyrene recycled into: CD cases, office accessories

household product: bottles, peanut butter jars type of plastic: polyethylene terephthalate (PET or PETE) recycled into: stuffing for pillows, carpet backing, and even certain types of sweatshirts

household product: shampoo bottles type of plastic: high-density polyethylene recycled into: other bottles, plastic lumber

household product: most bottle tops type of plastic: polypropylene recycled into: ice scrapers, industrial packing cases

household product: bottles, film for wrapping meat type of plastic: polyvinyl chloride recycled into: insulation for cables and drain pipes

household product: bags, grocery bags type of plastic: low-density polyethylene recycled into: plastic lumber and compost bins

Tips for Consuming Less Plastic:

Make an effort to purchase products with minimal plastic packaging.

Use cloth bags for grocery shopping.

Reuse plastic containers within your home. For example, plastic grocery bags can be reused for additional trips to the grocery store, as lunch bags, gym bags, and garbage can liners. Yesterday's yogourt container can become tomorrow's lunch pail. Old margarine containers can become storage vessels for an assortment of household items.

Familiarize yourself with plastic recycling in your community.

BPA and You

BPA is a chemical used during the manufacturing of polycarbonate plastic.

What products is it in?

It's found in baby bottles, sippy cups, and reusable water bottles.

Should you be concerned?

Studies link it to prostate cancer, miscarriages, and certain birth defects, but Health Canada says it does not pose a health risk.

If you're concerned about the health and environmental risks, avoid reusable plastic water bottles, other hard plastic bottles, and sippy cups.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Your complete source for natural health and wellness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Editor's Note (11/27/2017): This post was updated with new statistics on plastic waste generation and recycling, as well as new information on methods of reuse.
What would modern life be like without plastic? According to The World Economic Forum, plastic production has exploded over the last half-century, growing from 16.5 million tons in 1964 to 343 million tons in 2014; it is projected to double by 2036. Where does all of it go when we're done with it?

In 2014, Americans discarded about 33.6 million tons of plastic, but only 9.5 percent of it was recycled and 15 percent was combusted to create electricity or heat.

Most of the rest ends up in landfills where it may take up to 500 years to decompose, and potentially leak pollutants into the soil and water. It's estimated that there are already 165 million tons of plastic debris floating around in the oceans threatening the health and safety of marine life. And an average of 8.8 million more tons enter the oceans each year, including microplastics, tiny particles less than five millimeters long from cosmetics, fabrics or the breakdown of larger pieces, which may be ingested by marine wildlife.

Relatively little of our plastic waste is recycled because there are various types of plastic with different chemical compositions, and recycled plastics can be contaminated by the mixing of types. Plastic waste is also contaminated by materials such as paper and ink. Separating plastics from other recyclables, and different types of plastic from each other, is labor-intensive and so far there has been no easy solution.

Although the Society of Plastic Industries developed seven codes to distinguish types of plastic for recycling, in reality, only two-polyethylene terephthalate (PET, used for synthetic fibers and water bottles) and high density polyethylene (HDPE, used for jugs, bottle caps, water pipes)-are routinely recycled. But in more and more cities like New York and Chicago, low-density polyethylene (LDPE) plastic bags are now being recycled too. And increasingly, the recycling industry's use of near‐infrared spectroscopy, which can identify the chemical composition of plastics, is improving the efficiency and speed of recycling.

Plastics that can be recycled are first sorted, shredded and rid of impurities like paper. The shreds are then melted and formed into pellets, which can be made into other products.

MoistureShield in Arkansas, and Virginia-based Trex recycle polyethylene into outdoor decking material, fencing, and doors and windows. Coca Cola is increasing the amount of recycled plastic in its bottles to 50 percent.

Plastic is made from petroleum or natural gas in a chemical process that combines smaller molecules into a large chainlike molecule, often with other substances added to give it particular qualities. (Some, like phthalates and bisphenol A, can have harmful health effects.) Plastic production is estimated to use four percent of global oil production-both as the raw material and for energy in the manufacturing process. Because these polymers embody energy from fossil fuels (and actually have a higher energy value than coal and wood), leaving so much of it in landfills is not only an environmental hazard, it is a huge waste of a valuable resource that could be used to produce electricity, heat, or fuel.

The Plastics Division of the American Chemical Council asked the Earth Institute's Earth Engineering Center to explore ways of recovering the energy inherent in non-recycled plastics. The 2011 report, which was updated in 2014, determined that the amount of energy contained in the millions of tons of plastic in U.S. landfills is equivalent to 48 million tons of coal, 180 million barrels of oil, or one trillion cubic feet of natural gas. If all this plastic were converted into liquid fuel, it could produce 5.7 billion gallons of gasoline, enough to power 8.9 million cars per year. And the fact is, there are now technologies that can put all this waste to good use.

The report examined three ways of utilizing non-recycled plastic for energy production: converting it directly into liquid fuel, using separated plastics as fuel in special types of power plants, and increasing the amount of garbage burned in waste-to-energy facilities.

Plastics can be converted into crude oil or other types of products through pyrolysis, a high heat process that does not use oxygen. Agilyx, an Oregon-based company, has developed a system that heats polystyrene from foam cups, packaging materials, and Styrofoam to create a styrene monomer, a building block of the plastic industry. The final liquid product can be sold to other refiners to produce oil or to make more polystyrene.

Plastic2Oil in Niagara Falls, NY, uses unwashed, unsorted waste plastic to produce ultra-low sulfur fuels that do not require further refining. The company maintains that its process is "highly green, clean and scalable."

A number of other companies in the U.S., Africa, Asia and Europe are investing in technology that produces liquid fuel from plastic wastes.

According to the updated Earth Engineering Center report, power plants specially designed to use non-recycled plastics as fuel could theoretically produce 61.9 million MWh of electricity, enough to power 5.7 million homes.

Burning more garbage inwaste-to-energy facilities would recover the energy inherent in plastics and reduce greenhouse gas emissions since landfills emit methane (a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide) as garbage decomposes. Unlike incinerators of the past, modern waste-to-energy facilities produce electricity and heat in boilers designed for complete combustion. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has said they produce electricity "with less environmental impact than almost any other source of electricity."

If the amount of garbage sitting in U.S. landfills in 2011 was burned in waste-to-energy facilities, it could theoretically yield enough electricity to power 13.8 million households and reduce coal use by 100 million tons a year. In 2015, 71 waste-to-energy facilities and four other power plants in the United States burned 29 million tons of garbage, generating nearly 14 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity.

A 2009 United Nations Environmental Programme report on converting plastic waste into a resource described the production of gaseous fuels, using high heat to decompose plastic waste, and solid fuel derived from a mixture of waste plastic, paper, and wood. The materials are first shredded, sorted then made into pellets. A number of companies in Japan are producing both solid and gaseous fuels. The Showa Denko company, headquartered in Tokyo, uses heat gasification to recycle plastic waste into ammonia, used to manufacture many products, and CO2 for carbonization.

Liter of Light, a grassroots movement with partnerships around the world, has found another way to recycle plastic bottles. It helps energy-poor communities convert discarded soda bottles into solar bottle bulbs to illuminate homes and streets. The organization has installed over 350,000 bottle lights in more than 15 countries.

The best solutions for our plastic problem are still to reduce our use of them, and to reuse and recycle whenever possible. More policies that ban plastic bag use, require bottle deposits and expand recycling would help. But millions of tons of plastic waste still sit in landfills around the country; technologies that are able to tap this waste as a resource can offer multiple benefits, helping to clean up the environment, lessen our dependence on foreign oil, decrease our use of non-renewable virgin resources, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and generate energy.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Americans discard about 33.6 million tons of plastic each year, but only 9.5 percent of it is recycled and 15 percent is combusted in waste-to-energy facilities. What happens to the rest of it?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Whenever my adolescent clients tell me they're always tired or can't seem to concentrate at school, one of the first questions I ask is where they keep their cellphones at night.

Because, although evidence suggests that cell phone use before bedtime is detrimental to sleep quality and, in turn, overall health and wellbeing, sleeping with their phones is the norm rather than the exception for my teen clients. (It's also the norm for parents, apparently-see my follow-up to this post on this topic here).

I find this concerning, given recent research published online this month in the Journal of Youth Studies that adds even more clout to the no-cell-phones-in-bed argument. The authors of the study (Power et al., 2017) surveyed over 900 adolescents between 12-15 years and found that 1 in 5 reported "almost always" waking up to check social media or messages throughout the night. Those who logged onto their cell phones every night, or who woke up at inconsistent times each morning, were about three times more likely to report feeling "constantly tired" at school compared to their peers. Moreover, the former youth reported significantly lower levels of wellbeing than their classmates.

However, the temptation for teens to bring their cell phones to the bedroom is a strong one. In fact, research suggests that youth can form strong attachments to their cell phones, and there's even a scale (the Young Adult Attachment to Phone Scale) that's been recently developed to measure this attachment. A validation study of this scale suggested that some youth experience a heightened sense of safety in the presence of their phones, and, contrarily, feelings of separation anxiety upon its removal. As such, for many parents it can turn into a power struggle when they suggest that their teens turn off their phones-or, even more challengingly, leave their phones outside their bedrooms-before hitting the hay.

So what's a parent to do?
Talk with your teen about their cell phone use
Before suddenly creating new rules about no cell phones in the bedroom, I think it's critical to have an open discussion with your teen about their cell phone use and whether they believe it is impacting their sleep quality and wellbeing. Parents can empower teens to make smart choices by engaging them in a conversation about the importance of sleep during the teen years, and how checking social media right before bed or throughout the night can negatively impact health, wellbeing, and emotions. At the same time, if an adolescent is waking up multiple times during the night and checking their phone, there could be something else going on that is interfering with their sleep quality. Are they feeling worried or stressed out about something and using their phone for comfort or distraction? Or, has checking their phone during the night simply become a habit? Parents can become "information-gatherers" to find out what's actually going on for their teens before making any big changes. This not only shows teens respect and that their voices matters, but also can strengthen the parent-adolescent relationship.
Create a family culture of (realistic) bedtime routines
We often hear about creating bedtime routines for toddlers and younger children, but bedtime rituals are important for teens, too. Although this likely won't involve reading a 16-year-old a bedtime story, modeling healthy pre-bedtime behaviors can help set teens up for sleep success. It can be helpful to encourage adolescents to engage in a quiet activity before bed that works for them - be that reading, taking a shower, or writing in a journal. It's also important to make prioritizing sleep quality a family affair; for example, by designating a communal spot in the house where everyone can deposit their phones before tucking in for the night. At the same time, some teens use mindfulness apps or listen to music on their phones that help them relax before bed, and these can be helpful tools. In such circumstances, parents can talk to their teens about, for example, turning their phones to "sleep mode" at a decided-upon hour. There aren't black-or-white solutions that work for each family, and it's often about meeting adolescents halfway.
Prepare for excuses
Some teens will offer every excuse in the book to get out of unplugging before bed, and having some counter-excuses ready can be handy:

Teen: But I use my phone as an alarm!

Parent: We'll get you a digital alarm clock!

Teen: But I need to check my messages!

Parent: I can guarantee they'll still be there in the morning!

For parents needing a bit more of a boost, I direct them to the National Sleep Foundation's list of consequences for teens who are lacking in the sleep department. My favorite? That insufficient sleep can contribute to acne (nothing like the threat of a pimple to inspire some teens to get more shut-eye).

In sum, the National Sleep Foundation suggests that teenagers get 8-10 hours of shut-eye per night; however, lack of sleep is one of the most common health risks for adolescents, for whom chronic sleep loss has become the norm (Adolescent Sleep Working Group: Committee on Adolescence, 2014). Of course, the solution is not as simple as powering down before turning in for the night, but, at the very least, this conversation should be put on the table between parents and their teens.

(See my follow-up to this piece, "Should Bedrooms Be No-Phone Zones for Parents?)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Should Bedrooms Be No-Phone Zones for Teens?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Whenever my adolescent clients tell me they're always tired or can't seem to concentrate at school, one of the first questions I ask is where they keep their cellphones at night. Because, although evidence suggests that cell phone use before bedtime is detrimental to sleep quality and, in turn, overall health and wellbeing, sleeping with their phones is the norm rather than the exception for my teen clients.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The plastic problem: how does plastic pollution affect wildlife?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plastic pollution causes great harm to the organisms big and small that encounter it. From tiny corals to majestic whales, more than 700 marine species…

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Screen school: watch, listen and learn

(Image: plainpicture/apply pictures)

It is an issue many parents will have grappled with. Is the peace you get by handing your child a touchscreen or sitting them in front of the TV worth the undefined damage you worry it's causing? The subject resurfaced last week with one study claiming that screen time was linked with increased BMI and another finding it adversely affected children's emotional well-being.

The headlines may have struck a chord, but each study faced different criticisms. So just what can we say about screen time?

First of all, lumping all screens into one category is not helpful. "Screen time is a really enticing measure because it's simple - it's usually described as the number of hours a day using screen-based technology. But it's completely meaningless," says Pete Etchells at Bath Spa University, UK, who studies the effects of video games on behaviour. "It doesn't say anything about what you're using that time for."

When you separate the different types of screen out, the effects start to vary. Passively watching TV is not the same as learning to read on a touchscreen, which is not the same as killing monsters on a console. For instance, a recent longitudinal study of 11,000 British children found that those who watched TV for 3 hours or more a day at age 5 had a small increase in behavioural problems two years later compared with those who watched for under an hour. But they found no effects at all for those who played computer games.

Watch and learn

It's not just the type of screen that matters, but what is on that screen. "The best research suggests that the content children view is the best predictor of cognitive effects," says Heather Kirkorian who studies cognitive development at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. "Children will learn from what they watch, whether that means learning letters and numbers, slapstick humour or aggressive behaviour," she says, adding that children who watch age-appropriate, educational TV programmes often do better on tests of school readiness.

When it comes to physical effects, a number of studies have found similar results to the latest research, which shows that increased screen time is associated with a rise in BMI. But it can be hard to tease apart whether screen time actually causes the effects or whether they are linked in some other way. "It is impossible to determine with certainty that TV is causing obesity, and it is likely that other factors are involved in the complex problem of childhood obesity," says Kirkorian.

The rise of portable devices has compounded the issue. According to one study, 40 per cent of children aged 8 and younger in the US had tablets in their homes in 2013 compared to 8 per cent in 2011. Rosie Flewitt who studies Early Years and Primary Education at the Institute of Education in London says touchscreens are particularly motivating for children, allowing them to use a tool they can see is important to adults. "There is an unquestionable body of research showing that new technologies can engage children," she says. Her own studies have shown that children who struggle to learn using books often made more progress with iPads.

Motivating multimedia

Flewitt's research in schools also found that iPads made children more cooperative and helped quieter kids to speak up. She thinks that is partly because children receive immediate feedback, and because the devices are multimedia. "You don't need to be able to read words to access knowledge - you can follow icons, hear words spoken," she says.

A survey of more than 1000 parents with children aged 3 to 5 and their teachers, out this month, backs up the idea that tablets can promote learning. The study found that all the children enjoy reading more when they look at stories using books and a touchscreen compared to just books.

Importantly, the performance of children from low socio-economic backgrounds who use both at home is less likely to be below average at school than if they only look at books.

What is becoming clear is that it's not the technologies themselves we should be worried out but how they are used and how people interact with them. The advantages seen in the school environment can be translated into the home - if you choose your children's digital distraction wisely.

A lot of it is common sense. Don't unthinkingly hand over your device. There are educational apps whose benefits are backed up by research, says Flewitt. Consider the type of screen time, says Etchells. Five hours sitting in front of the TV is not the same as 5 hours of some TV, a couple of hours playing on Dance Dance Revolution or some other kind of active game, followed by a Skype session with a grandparent.

And take heart&colon; this generation's iPad is another's Jane Austen. "It's a new era," says Flewitt. There is a lot of scepticism just like there was when novels took off in the 18th century, she says.

Topics:

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Children benefit from the right sort of screen time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It is an issue many parents will have grappled with. Is the peace you get by handing your child a touchscreen or sitting them in front of the TV worth the undefined damage you worry it's causing? The subject resurfaced last week with one study claiming that screen time was linked with increased BMI and another finding it adversely affected children's emotional well-being.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An official from Starbucks reached out to disability rights activists on Saturday, the day before a planned protest against its recent ban on plastic straws, in what several disability rights groups said was the start of a direct conversation about the ban.

After Starbucks announced on July 9 it would phase out plastic straws from its stores by 2020, disability rights activists were concerned the policy would exclude some people with disabilities. Several New York City-based groups, including the Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled and Disabled in Action, had planned to protest outside a Union Square Starbucks on Sunday after the annual Disability Pride Parade.

"We have something that works. We have something that keeps people alive, and until we have an alternative, this is what we need to use." - Joseph Rappaport, Executive Director at the Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled

The activists had hoped the protest would help spread awareness about their concerns, but cancelled it after a phone call with Starbucks Global Director for Environment Rebecca Zimmer, who reached out to the Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled to discuss the policy.

"It was clearly a response to our plans to protest," said Joseph Rappaport, Executive Director at the Brooklyn Center for Independence of the Disabled (BCID).

Starbucks released a statement on Friday specifying that straws would be available for anyone who asks to use them. "Starbucks offers, and will continue to offer, straws to customers who need or request them in our stores," the statement said.

Leaders from the BCID say they want Starbucks to make sure single-use plastic straws are available, no questions asked, to those who asks for them. On Saturday's call, Zimmer said Starbucks would provide straws to anyone who asked, but didn't confirm they would be plastic, according to Rappaport.

"To be clear, they haven't met our demands, but we're hoping they will after continuing the conversation," Rappaport said.

Zimmer was not available for comment on Sunday. "We are pleased with the outcome and look forward to ongoing conversations on this topic," Sanja Gould, a Starbucks spokesperson, told the NewsHour Weekend via email.

Starbucks' announcement that they would phase all plastic straws out from their stores has gained praise from many environmentalists. But people with disabilities who rely on plastic straws to eat, drink and live their daily lives say banning straws would harm many in their community and that they were not included in the conversation.

"If you think about it, a straw, it seems so small and insignificant. But this seemingly insignificant thing just shows how little those policy makers and business owners pay attention to us, or want to get our feedback," said Sharon Shapiro-Lacks, a BCID board member and executive director of Yad HaChazakah, a Jewish organization that advocates for people with disabilities.

"Eliminating plastic straws can cause many people with disabilities like myself not to be able to eat or drink in a restaurant, in a cafe ... it's more than just a convenience. It is a necessity for people like us," she said.
READ NEXT: Growing advocacy and awareness bringing accessible design to more people than ever
Starbucks isn't the only company taking steps to eliminate plastic straws. Plastic straw bans have become increasingly popular online, with celebrities throwing their weight behind the issue and social media users using the hashtags #stopsucking and #plasticfreeocean to show their support. Companies like McDonalds, American Airlines, Alaska Airlines, Ikea and Hyatt are working on phasing plastic straws out, too.

Seattle became the first major city to ban straws earlier this month, and others like New York City, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., are considering legislation to do the same. Scotland, Taiwan, Australia and Costa Rica have passed plastic straw legislation, too. Seattle's law enables companies to keep plastic straws for people who require them.

A painful viral video from 2015, which shows a marine biologist removing a plastic straw wedged in a sea turtle's nose, inspired an outpouring of support for plastic straw bans, according to environmentalists working to ban straws. That, plus growing public concern about the Great Pacific Garbage Patch and microplastics in oceans and seafood, had made banning straws seem like an easy win to many environmentalists and politicians, according to Rafael Espinal, who authored a bill that would ban plastic straws in New York City.

Starbucks has said they're committed to finding plastic straw alternatives that work for everyone. But disability rights advocates say those may not exist yet. Plastic straws are flexible, durable, and can withstand hot temperatures in case the user needs it to drink hot coffee or soup, for example. As of now, advocates agree no straw alternatives seem to be able to do the same.

"Other types of straws simply do not offer the combination of strength, flexibility, and safety that plastic straws do," said several groups, including Disability Rights Washington and the Seattle Commission for People with Disabilities, in an open letter to the Seattle City Council.

Paper straws get soggy and disintegrate, a potential choking hazard. Biodegradable straws can't handle hot temperatures. Stainless steel straws aren't flexible, and can be potentially dangerous, cutting the mouth and gums if used improperly. If you're someone who has seizures, or poor motor function, or have difficulty controlling muscle groups, steel and glass straws may not be a safe option. And Starbucks' new "adult sippy cups" may not work for people who can't raise a cup to their mouth.

"People want to solve this problem in a nanosecond, and it's not that simple," said Rappaport. "We have something that works. We have something that keeps people alive, and until we have an alternative, this is what we need to use."

Shapiro-Lacks, who has cerebral palsy, recently testified at a New York City Council hearing about not being able to access a straw on an outing with her husband.

"My husband has had to hold the cup to my mouth in order for me to drink in a manner that draws public attention," she said. "This compromises my privacy and dignity."

Starbucks is important because it sets an example for other companies who plan to ban straws, Shapiro-Lacks said.

"If we do reach a good solution with Starbucks, that will be major. And they're if they're off track, it sets a very poor example," she said.
Editor's note: This post has been updated to reflect that an open letter to the Seattle City Council was co-authored by several groups.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Disability rights groups voice issues with Starbucks' plastic straw ban as company responds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An official from Starbucks reached out to disability rights activists on Saturday, the day before a planned protest against its recent ban on plastic straws, in what several disability rights groups said was the start of a direct conversation about the ban.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I never quite fell in love with smartwatches, but I do credit my brief time with one for sparking the most positive change to my life for years: relegating my smartphone to the hallway.

With only one plug socket by my bed, and no space for an adaptor, I had to choose one device to win the hallowed bedside charging position. Thanks to my desire to eke out one final hour of standing time to goose my activity tracking, the watch won.

It turns out that keeping your bedroom a phone-free zone is a really, really good thing. Within days, I was reading more in the evening, and getting out of bed faster in the morning. Within weeks, I was sleeping noticeably better, and feeling fewer symptoms of my anxiety disorder at night.

Not that any of this should have surprised me. There's a growing body of evidence that pulling out your phone in bed is one of the worst things you can do.

Matthew Walker, UC Berkley professor and author of Why We Sleep, places the blame on light in general, and screens in particular: "Stay away from screens, especially those LED screens - they emit blue light that actually puts the breaks on melatonin. And those blue-light emitting devices fool your brain into thinking that it's still daytime, even though it's nighttime and you want to get to sleep."

Some phones now attempt to compensate for the blue light emission. Since 2016, iPhones have had an optional feature, Night Shift, which changes the colour balance of the phone after sunset. As an optional feature, though, with a sliding scale of intensity, it's not really clear whether it actually works: even Apple will only go so far as to note that "this may help you get a better night's sleep".

And anyway, the physiological effects of blue light are only one reason to keep devices out of the bedroom. Far worse - in my experience, at least - is the psychological damage.

In short, social media sucks, and if you have a phone near your bed, it all but guarantees that some social network will intrude into your consciousness in those precious minutes before sleep. A study published in 2017 in the journal Sleep found that "social media use in the 30 minutes before bed is independently associated with disturbed sleep among young adults". And the trend seems to be linear: the more social media use there is, the more likely sleep is to be disturbed.

It feels telling that I exiled my phone from my bedroom around the same time I began reading the horror bestseller House of Leaves, yet still found myself with fewer sleepless nights. Although, admittedly, what nightmares there were were much worse until I moved on to lighter fare.

Lest it sound like I'm presenting myself as a virtuously technology-free ascetic, living a life of paper, ink and face-to-face conversations, don't worry: the phone has been replaced with a Kindle.

In fact, the starkest biggest advantage of changing my habits? I get out of bed quicker. Not because I've had more sleep, though - just that, well, I've still got to check my notifications within seconds of waking up. Now, though, that involves getting on my feet first. Look, it's a start, OK?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
My bedroom is a phone-free zone and I feel so much better for it | Alex Hern

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I never quite fell in love with smartwatches, but I do credit my brief time with one for sparking the most positive change to my life for years: relegating my smartphone to the hallway. With only one plug socket by my bed, and no space for an adaptor, I had to choose one device to win the hallowed bedside charging position.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Gift this Article Send this article to anyone, no subscription is necessary to view it

Senate File 756 was recently introduced in the Minnesota Senate. It would make the unrequested distribution of plastic straws by places of accommodation a petty misdemeanor. The passage of this legislation would be a significant affront to the rights of Minnesotans living with disabilities.

Over the past few years, the environmentalist lobby has made much progress with accomplishments such as the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement. Now, faced with a different political climate and the current occupant of the White House, they are taking matters into their own hands where they can, including advocating for cutting pollution like plastic waste. But they are ignoring the unintended consequences, including in the case of plastic straw bans, which in part became popular because of a viral video of a sea turtle that was injured by one.

While protecting our natural resources is important, straw bans are severely misguided. In their shortsighted rush to ban plastic straws, people have missed two critical facts.

First, according to a study published in Marine Policy, straws account for less than 0.03 percent by weight of plastic pollution entering the oceans every year, so the straw ban is symbolic at best.

Second, this is a quality-of-life issue for individuals with disabilities. Able-bodied people see straws as ubiquitous and they don't think about how essential these simple devices are for anyone with a disability.

Without straws, it's impossible for millions of disabled people to go anywhere without worrying about being able to drink, about becoming dehydrated, spilling their drinks or aspirating liquid into their lungs. Individuals with autism also experience oral sensory problems that often are alleviated by the use of a straw.

Where able-bodied people see waste, my community sees a simple device that opens up the world to people with disabilities.

Proponents of the bans will suggest that we use alternatives to plastic straws, such as paper, metal, glass or biodegradable straws. But all of those options have major drawbacks for people with disabilities. For example, metal straws are unusable for people with tremors or sensory issues. Paper straws do not work because they often disintegrate before an individual can finish and they don't handle heat well. Straws made of sugar cane are problematic for diabetics.

Others have suggested that we carry around straws, instead of getting them from restaurants, but that has problems of its own because it's another expense for disabled people, who are already likely to suffer lower income and extremely high medical costs. Plus, there's no way for those straws to be kept sanitary.

The authors argue that the bill language doesn't actually explicitly ban plastic straws, and that one can request a straw or establishments can use any other sort of straw. But business owners aren't going to buy paper straws for some people and plastic straws for others. They're going to get one or the other because of the economic advantages. If plastic straws are more heavily regulated, which one do you think they're going to buy?

The burden of reducing plastic waste by a measly 0.03 percent should not fall on disabled people, who already face barriers to participating in the daily activities of their communities. Yes, we should reduce pollution, but it is unethical to force already marginalized groups to pay the price. We need to search for alternative environmentally friendly solutions. Blanket plastic straw bans are irresponsible, unnecessary, unreasonable and immoral.
Noah McCourt, of Waconia, is policy director of the Minnesota Autism Council and a member of the Governor's Council on Disabilities. He has chaired the state subcommittee on children's mental health since fall 2017.

Officials move to cut passage on George Floyd's murder from a middle school textbook.

David Goldenberg and George Selim

The Minnesota Legislature can supplement federal laws to strengthen our defenses.

Legislators should heed Mayo Clinic's concerns, as well as those voiced by the state's other medical centers.

Lewis Zeidner and Mary Beth Lardizabal

Hospitals are playing an outsized role in caring for people with disabilities. As a state and a community, we are not meeting our obligations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
OPINION EXCHANGE | Blanket bans on plastic straws: Irresponsible, unnecessary, immoral

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Gift this Article Send this article to anyone, no subscription is necessary to view it Senate File 756 was recently introduced in the Minnesota Senate. It would make the unrequested distribution of plastic straws by places of accommodation a petty misdemeanor. The passage of this legislation would be a significant affront to the rights of Minnesotans living with disabilities.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
End-to-end new product development support

We deliver the capabilities healthcare manufacturers need to rapidly turn new innovations into market-leading products. Tap into our comprehensive design services, from initial concept and product development to verification and validation testing. Receive expert support throughout the regulatory submission process. And get the final precision components and products you need from our FDA registered facilities. Paragon Medical can manufacture initial prototypes, products, and individual components in a wide range of surgical materials and in volumes ranging from a few hundred parts to multiple millions.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Medical Component & Product Manufacturing Paragon Medical works with ambitious medical manufacturers, helping accelerate new product development with medical device manufacturing and high-precision components for everything from implants and surgical instrumentation to single-use disposable devices and assemblies. Our divisions will partner with you to refine your designs, improving performance and

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Watch purified YouTube videos. Just for teachers, professors, social influencers, homeschoolers, and parents...like you.

How To Use ViewPure?

Let's use the actual video below to see the differences. We have always felt that videos speak louder than words. See below.

As you have seen, ViewPure removes all distracting comments and side-bar related videos. Which makes the videos you use for your school or social media group purified without all the distractions or "inappropriate content".

What can it be used for?

Honestly, what can it not be used for? Common uses include:

Removing inappropriate ads and comments from videos to show kids

Removing unwanted related videos at the end to show students

Memorable URLs (youtube.com/watch?v=_JmA2ClUvUY vs viewpure.com/BabyDebate)

YouTube search with a cleaner UI and filtered results

Cleaner interface to view YouTube videos

The list goes on and on - but you will find a use for ViewPure.

ViewPure has been used by teachers, students, college professors, educators, parents, homeschoolers, social influencers, organizers, and more.

How do I purify a video?

Step 1: Find a YouTube video you like.
Step 2: Paste it into the field on the homepage that says "Enter YouTube URL or search term..."
Step 3: Click Purify and enjoy.

Take the tour for more information.

How do I purify a video using the Bookmarklet?

Step 1: Install the Bookmarklet into your Bookmarks in your Browser (Chrome, Safari, Firefox, Microsoft Edge, Opera, Android, and more)

Purify Youtube: Drag this Purify button to your bookmarks. Click the bookmark on any Youtube page to purify!

Step 2: Find a YouTube video you like and click the ViewPure Bookmarklet
Step 3: The Bookmarklet will take you to the "purified" page on ViewPure.com to watch your video...free of YouTube distractions. Yeah!

Why are there still ads?

Our videos don't have ads. But some other parts of the site do. They help pay for domain fees, server costs, Clicky Analytics, and other maintenance costs so we can keep ViewPure going.

Some videos will always have ads, no matter where they are viewed or embedded. Unfortunately, there is nothing that can be done from ViewPure, however, at least there aren't trolls and distasteful comments, right?

What is the Viewpure Membership Area?

The Viewpure Members Area is the place where viewpure can give you additional tools and resources. The Members Area is FREE. There is a lot of cool stuff in there for clean viewing of videos. You'll love it.

This is the link to the FREE Signup Here: https://members.viewpure.com/signup

Why was my custom URL rejected?

Your custom URL has to be both alphanumeric (A-Z, 0-9, no special characters) and available. In addition it cannot be exactly 11 characters, to avoid conflicts with YouTube IDs (which are 11 characters long).

If you are sure your custom URL follows the rules, then it's likely that somebody else already took the custom URL you wanted, in which case try variations such as viewpure.com/TheCustomURL or viewpure.com/CustomURL2.

How do I use the filters?

Click the dropdown select menu to select between the three main filters for searches:

SafeSearch: Controls the content you want shown in search results (default: strict)

Sort By: Controls how the results are sorted (default: relevance)

Results Per Page: Controls how many results are shown at once (default: 12)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Watch purified YouTube videos. Just for teachers, professors, social influencers, homeschoolers, and parents...like you. Let's use the actual video below to see the differences. We have always felt that videos speak louder than words. See below. As you have seen, ViewPure removes all distracting comments and side-bar related videos.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Growing public concern has led to calls to ban single-use plastics, most notably straws. But can that have a meaningful effect?

Plastic waste, mostly in the form of tiny particles, floats in huge blobs that together cover as much as 40 percent of the Earth's ocean surface.

In California, a bill to ban straws unless requested at dine-in restaurants is awaiting a signature from the governor. Other states such as Hawaii, cities such as Seattle and New York, and corporations such as Amazon and Starbucks are also considering or have initiated plastic phase-out plans.

Here, Jim Leape, co-director of the Center for Ocean Solutions, and Craig Criddle, a professor of civil and environmental engineering, both at Stanford University, discuss the path to reducing ocean plastic pollution. Leape has long been a leader in ocean conservation efforts. Criddle has evaluated use of microorganisms to biodegrade plastic materials and to synthesize biodegradable bioplastics from waste feedstocks.

Stay Connected. Subscribe to our Newsletter.

Add your information below to receive daily updates.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Can banning plastic straws save the oceans?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Growing public concern has led to calls to ban single-use plastics, most notably straws. But can that have a meaningful effect? Plastic waste, mostly in the form of tiny particles, floats in huge blobs that together cover as much as 40 percent of the Earth's ocean surface.

# data[].attributes.headline
5 Steps That Could End the Plastic Crisis

# data[].attributes.subject
5 Steps That Could End the Plastic Crisis

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Pick it up. Image: REUTERS/Jon Nazca

Stay up to date:

Future of the Environment

Follow

Exponential growth in production. Image: WWF Solving Plastic Pollution Through Accountability

More plastic is entering the food chain. Image: WWF Solving Plastic Pollution Through Accountability

Five ways to tackle the global plastics problem. Image: WWF Solving Plastic Pollution Through Accountability

Discover

How UpLink is helping to find innovations to solve challenges like this

Show more

Don't miss any update on this topic

Create a free account and access your personalized content collection with our latest publications and analyses.

Sign up for free

License and Republishing

World Economic Forum articles may be republished in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International Public License, and in accordance with our Terms of Use.

The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone and not the World Economic Forum.

Global Agenda

The Agenda Weekly

A weekly update of the most important issues driving the global agenda

More on Future of the Environment

See all

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 steps that could end the plastic pollution crisis - and save our ocean

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
It's time to think positively about reducing plastics and take effective action to tackle the global problem. This report outlines some tactics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Little boy in the dark playing with a digital tablet or iPad, the touch screen 's shine as a main light source. (iStock) Keywords: Child, Toddler, Dark, Night, Computer Monitor, Little Boys, Using Computer, Playful, Education, Computer, Digital Tablet, Glowing, Computer Equipment, Playing, Equipment, modern times, Lifestyles, Technology, Illuminated, Caucasian, Lying Down, 2-3 Years, Touch Screen, Multimedia, iPhone, iPad, screen, children, kids, kid, boy, young, (iStock)

Comment Gift Article
Youngsters who spend too much time staring at televisions and computers may be more depressed than those who abstain completely, but kids who enjoy screen time in moderation may be the happiest of all, a recent analysis suggests.

Many pediatricians recommend that parents limit screen time to less than two hours a day because excessive use of television, computers and mobile devices is linked to obesity and other health problems and is also thought to impair cognitive development.

In the new study, researchers analyzed data from earlier studies involving more than 125,000 participants and found evidence that limiting screen time makes sense for children and young teens. Youth who spent at least five hours a day staring at screens were 80 percent more likely to be depressed than their peers who spent no time in front of screens.

There was, however, little difference in depression risk between children who didn't have any screen time and those who got about two hours a day.

And the connection between screen time and depression was only statistically meaningful for children younger than 14, the study found. Screen time didn't appear connected to depression in older teens.

Overall, in smaller doses, screen time appeared to be a good thing. Compared with children who had no screen time at all, those who got a half-hour daily were 8 percent less likely to be depressed, and kids allowed an hour a day had 12 percent lower odds.

"The finding of the lower depression risk with a relatively low quantity of screen time may suggest that exposure to screen/media, when in moderation, can have potentially positive impacts on adolescents' mental health," said senior study author Yao Shuqiao of the Medical Psychological Institute, Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University in Hunan, China.

Longer screen time may mean fewer hours in the day for more productive or active endeavors, whether exercise or interacting with friends, and may negatively affect physical and mental health, Shuqiao added by e-mail.

"We suggest that parents may consider limiting their children's screen time to under two hours a day, preferably about one hour," Shuqiao said.

It's also possible that the type of screen time matters, said Larry Rosen, a professor emeritus at California State University at Dominguez Hills, who wasn't involved in the study.

While passive activities such as watching television may be linked to a greater depression risk, active pursuits such as texting on mobile phones or chatting on social media don't necessarily carry the same risk, Rosen said by e-mail.

It's not surprising that the teens who had only moderate amounts of screen time had a lower risk of depression, said Gary Goldfield, a psychology researcher at the University of Ottawa, who wasn't involved in the study.

"People with such low levels of screen time are probably engaged in many other activities, such as organized sport, dance, music or other hobbies that involve interpersonal interaction, which may protect them from depression," Goldfield said by e-mail.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Moderate amounts of screen time may be good for kids, a new study finds

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Comment Gift Article Youngsters who spend too much time staring at televisions and computers may be more depressed than those who abstain completely, but kids who enjoy screen time in moderation may be the happiest of all, a recent analysis suggests.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Environmental groups and concerned members of the public are attempting to make plastic straws a thing of the past. But many alternatives present other problems for the planet or are unsuitable for people with disabilities, critics say.

Plastic straw bans have made their way into both local and national stages with a movement that gained traction last year. California governor Jerry Brown signed legislation aimed at reducing straw waste, while Seattle has banned all plastic utensils from businesses.

Starbucks will get rid of its straws by 2020, and McDonalds has phased out plastic straws in their UK restaurants, replacing them with paper straws.

Plastic straws are bad for the planet because they "cannot be recycled because of their weight," and thus contribute to the eight million tons of plastic trash that flow every year into the world's oceans, said Dr. Tony Walker, assistant professor of environmental science at Dalhousie University in Canada, to USA TODAY.

Critics have called the government bans too oppressive and have said the statistic many of these bans are based on, that Americans throw away 500 million drinking straws daily, is outdated and unverified.

Over 300 million metric tons of single use plastics - which include plastic bags, cutlery, and yes, straws - are produced annually, and 50% are discarded after a single-use, according to Walker.

But finding a good alternative has proven tricky, with advocates for people with disabilities as well as environmental activists finding fault with many options.

Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund Communications Director Lawrence Carter-Long told USA TODAY that reusable straws don't work "as well as plastic straws" for people with disabilities.

The disabilities affected by the plastic straw ban "run the gamut," he said, ranging from people with quadriplegia to people with down syndrome or Parkinson's.
That anti-straw movement?:Editorial: Plastic straws ban is quite a straw man It's all based on one 9-year-old's suspect statistic
Most straws pose injury risks, and are expensive, says the Center for Disability Rights.

A 60-year-old U.K. woman with mobility issues died in July after using a metal straw while drinking from a glass with a fixed lid. When she accidentally fell onto the straw, it impaled her left eye socket and pierced her brain.

And two of the most common straw alternatives - paper and metal - have drawn criticism for environmental experts such as Walker.

Paper straws use a lot of raw materials, and because of their single-use nature, do not lessen one's carbon footprint, Walker told USA TODAY.

Stainless steel, on the other hand, uses a fair amount of energy as well as mining resources to make.
Dangers: Laws: McDonald's to test plastic-straw alternatives in U.S. later this year Metal drinking straw fatally impales woman through her eye after fall
"[Single use plastic] straws have been described as a 'gateway plastic', which if curbed, can help change the behavior of consumers and retailers to reduce other SUP items," Walker said in a 2018 study.
Want to be eco-friendly?:20 ways you can save the planet this summer
To be sure, most of the straws use energy or materials that are less than beneficial for the environment. But if you keep them on your person and use them whenever possible, Walker says, you should have a net positive impact.

Forgoing a plastic straw for a reusable one will definitely not singlehandedly save the environment. But if you do not have disabilities and want to cut down on plastic usage, a reusable straw might be for you.

Paper is not included in the below list of good alternatives. Why? Mostly, because it isn't much better for the environment than plastic straws are. They are still a single-use waste item, similar to paper bags.

Here are five of the best options for people who want to stop using plastic straws:

1. Metal

Pros: Metal straws are arguably the most popular of the reusable straws. They come in many varieties, including curved, straight and silicon capped. There's also evidence that metal straws make drinks taste better, and they can beeasily packed and carried around.

Cons: Although there are a variety of metal straws, some of which are cheaper, metal straws tend to be more expensive than other alternatives. They also conduct heat, making them possibly unpleasant to use with hot or cold beverages. Metal straws are also hard to clean, and bacteria or mold can grow inside a dirty straw.

2. Glass

Pros: Glass straws are clear, allowing for easy cleaning - and are dishwasher safe as well. They're also hypoallergenic, safe for people with sensitivities.

Cons: Glass straws break easily - so they may not be the best option for children. Glass is also a conductor of hot and cold liquids, but it maintains similar temperature to the vessel you're drinking out of.

3. Silicon

Pros: Silicone is flexible and soft, meaning these straws don't pose a risk of injury. They also don't leak tiny particles into what you're drinking - something that metal and plastic straws tend to do when they're under heat.It's alsogreat for kids who like to bite down on their straws.

Cons: Silicon isn't known as the most aesthetically pleasing of reusable straws. Make sure to clean them, for the same reason as metal straws.

4. Bamboo
Follow Elinor Aspegren on Twitter: @elinoraspegren.
Pros: Bamboo straws don't conduct heat or cold, so they're a great option for people sensitiveto that. You can also use them whenever you want to pretend you're on vacation.

Cons: These kinds of straws are the hardest of the straws to clean and can have a little bit of a chalky aftertaste. Also, the absorbent bamboo material can soften, warp, and crack if left soaking in liquid.

5. No straw

Pros: Go strawless - You'll be saving money and saving the planet. "Over 95% [of people] are quite okay without straws," Walker says.

Cons: This can cause some spillage, so this may not be the best option for children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastic straws are trash. Are there alternatives that don't suck?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Environmental groups and concerned members of the public are attempting to make plastic straws a thing of the past. But many alternatives present other problems for the planet or are unsuitable for people with disabilities, critics say. Plastic straw bans have made their way into both local and national stages with a movement that gained traction last year.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Twenty-one years ago in Costa Rica, three girls brought Judy Avey-Arroyo a surprise. They stood at her gate with a baby sloth whose mother had been hit by a car. Avey-Arroyo wanted to help, but she was unsure how to care for the tiny sloth. She owned a hotel and had no training in the care of wild animals. Looking for information, she contacted zoos. But even they didn't know much about these peaceful tree-dwellers.

Avey-Arroyo named the baby sloth Buttercup. She gave Buttercup leaves that she'd seen sloths eating in the surrounding rainforest. The sloth hungrily crunched them up. With Avey-Arroyo's care, Buttercup survived.

After her success, more people brought Avey-Arroyo injured and orphaned sloths they had found. She then opened a rescue center. Today, the Sloth Sanctuary has saved more than 500 animals.

Fit for the Forest

Sloths live in the rainforests of Central America and South America. There, they hang on to branches with curved claws. There are two main types of sloths. You can tell them apart by the number of claws they have on their front paws.

Sloths rarely move. They spend their time napping and nibbling on leaves. Their slow, quiet ways make it difficult for jaguars and other predators to detect them.

Adult sloths are covered in shaggy green-tinted fur. The color comes from algae growing in their hair. The algae's smell hides a sloths' natural scent from predators. It also helps them blend in with the treetops.

Sloths are amazingly adapted to life in their habitat. "They're masters of the rainforest," says Becky Cliffe, a scientist at the sanctuary. But some still arrive at the center needing help.

Shrinking Habitat

Costa Rica's increasing human population means that the rainforest--and the sloths--isn't as isolated as it used to be. Humans can cause a lot of problems for the animals, says Cliffe. Deforestation is chief among them. When trees are cut down, adult sloths can fall and break bones. Sloths living in deforested areas can run into human-made dangers. Some sloths suffer burns while climbing on power lines. Others are hit by cars or attacked by dogs.

At the center, workers care for the injured animals. Their goal is to return the sloths to the wild once the creatures are healthy enough. But some are too severely wounded to survive on their own. These animals remain at the center for the rest of their lives.

The sanctuary also cares for orphaned sloths whose mothers died or abandoned them. Why their mothers leave them is a mystery, says Cliffe. "Most of the babies are seemingly healthy and are found alone on the ground."

Infants who have lost their mothers before they're 6 months old can never live on their own: Their mothers haven't taught them the skills for surviving in the rainforest. Unfortunately, people don't know how to teach them.

"We desperately need to learn more about sloths," says Cliffe.

Sloth Sleuths

To gather data, Cliffe is outfitting some of the animals with high-tech backpacks. They hold electronic devices she calls daily diaries. The diaries contain cameras, compasses, and various sensors. They tell Cliffe what the sloths eat, where their favorite trees are, how far they roam, and when they mate.

Cliffe hopes that a deeper understanding of sloths will help people learn how to better protect them. She thinks more knowledge might also make it possible to teach sloths raised by people how to survive in the wild.

We have a lot to learn about sloths. But we can learn lessons from them too. Avey-Arroyo tries to live by the following sloth-inspired advice: "Live in peace and harmony, and chew your food slowly."

words to know

rainforest--a dense forest in a wet region

predator--an animal that hunts and eats other animals

algae--plant-like organisms without leaves or roots adapt-to develop traits for surviving in a particular habitat

deforestation--removal of trees so the land can be used for something else, like farming

Brown-Throated Three-Toed Sloth

LENGTH: 40-77 centimeters (16 to 30 inches)

WEIGHT: 2.5-5.5 kilograms (5.5 to 12 pounds)

APPEARANCE: Gray-brown coat with a pate patch on the forehead. Three claws on the front paws.

DIET: Exclusively leaves

RANGE:

Hoffmann's Two-Toed Sloth

LENGTH: 54-70 centimeters (21 to 28 inches)

WEIGHT: 4-8 kilograms (9 to 18 pounds)

APPEARANCE: Brown coat with a pale patch on the throat. Two claws on the front paws.

DIET: Leaves, fruits, and flowers

RANGE:

LIFE SCIENCE

Lexile Level 790; Guided Reading Level P

OBJECTIVE

Learn how and why the sloth sanctuary rescues injured and orphaned sloths.

SET UP

1. Use the Internet to obtain and print a photo depicting deforestation.

2. Write the following statements on the board:

a. Tropical rainforests are home to more than 50 percent of all species on the planet.

b. Sixty percent of the world's rainforests are protected.

c. Human activity is the primary cause of rainforest destruction.

BEFORE READING

1. Project the deforestation photo. Ask: What do you observe? (Answers will vary but may include trees cut down and cutting caused by humans.)

2. Have students preview the Words to Know box on page 4. Ask: Which word represents what you observed in the photo? (deforestation)

3. Ask students to write whether each statement on the board is true or false. Give them five minutes to discuss their reasoning with a partner.

4. Tally and discuss the correct answers (a- true; b false: only 11% are protected; c -true).

AFTER READING

* Why is the sloth sanctuary needed? (Mysterious sloth behavior and human-related hazards can result in sloths being injured or orphaned.)

RESOURCE

For more on rainforests, visit: http://teacher.scholastic.com/scholasticnews/indepth/rainforest/rainforest.asp.

READING AND LITERACY CONNECTION

Go to www.scholastic.com/superscience to download the skills sheet "Sloths in Danger." Students identify cause-and-effect relationships within the text.

Common Core State Standard Reading Informational Text: 3

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Saving sloths: a sanctuary in Costa Rica rescues injured and orphaned sloths.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Free Online Library: Saving sloths: a sanctuary in Costa Rica rescues injured and orphaned sloths.(life science, Sloth Sanctuary, Cover story) by "SuperScience"; Science and technology, general Education Family and marriage Animal sanctuaries Aims and objectives Sloths Behavior Protection and preservation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Is PLASTIC POLLUTION? | What Causes Plastic Pollution? | The Dr Binocs Show | Peekaboo Kidz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Conservation Status: IUCN Red List – VulnerableThreats to Survival: Habitat loss and fragmentation; poaching; human-elephant conflict; climate change A Long History of InvolvementAn umbrella species and ecosystem engineer, the conservation of the African elephant is of global significance. For more…

# data[].attributes.headline
Using wax worms for biodegrading plastic

# data[].attributes.subject
Using wax worms for biodegrading plastic

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Instructional Content Platform

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visiting the San Diego Zoo and the San Diego Zoo Safari Park helps the giant rock iguanas of the West Indies, which are the most endangered group of lizards in the world. Our rock iguana breeding program has been so successful that a new facility was built to accommodate the growing population.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
No longer are zoo habitats with green tile walls and floors, looking more like a large bathroom than an animal's natural environment, the norm. Today, many zoologic institutions strive to create habitats for their collections that are hospitable and stimulating.

In his Oct. 11 AVMA Animal Welfare Forum presentation, "Steering the ark toward Eden: facility design for animal well-being," zoo design expert Jon C. Coe explained how zoological habitats can enhance animals' lives.

In the 1970s, large, lushly landscaped displays modeled after natural settings replaced the sterile, tiled enclosures. The shift toward naturalistic settings was followed by a rather hands-off approach to husbandry. Naturalistic displays were considered by many to be stimulating enough for the captive animals.

Coe noted that, although this approach worked well, it did not stop animals from growing bored with their environment. Boredom can have harmful effects, he added.

"Some people think the key to zoo animal welfare is to provide large, natural enclosures," said Coe, senior principal at CLR Design in Philadelphia. "An exhibit may look great, but it isn't doing much for the animal unless it also incorporates a choice of behavioral opportunities, variety, and novelty."

Behavioral and physical problems were once thought to be unrelated to an animal's environment. Yet there is growing evidence of a link between these problems and a lack of physical activity and inhospitable habitats. Research has also shown that providing captive animals with choices through an enriched environment lowers stress levels.

Several zoo exhibits over this past decade have done just that. The Woodland Park Zoo in Seattle and Sea World Florida allow some of their animals to search for and catch their food. Orangutans at the National Zoological Park in Washington, D.C., are able to travel across the zoo on overhead ropes to visit friends and potential mates.

One recent innovation brought to the United States from Europe is the rotating exhibit. In traditional displays, animals might spend their entire lives in the same space. The rotation concept allows the animals to visit several areas each day. Gorillas at the Louisville Zoo, for instance, can choose between large, naturalistic outdoor habitats or a circular arrangement of indoor rooms.

Rotation exhibits are in the works at zoos in California, Washington state, and Sydney, Australia.

Stimulating environments enhance animal well-being by promoting activity and curiosity, resulting in improved physical and mental fitness. These exhibits aren't inexpensive, however, because additional staff with greater expertise are needed, and mechanical failure is a risk. But the benefits to animal well-being far outweigh the costs, according to Coe.

In addition, zoos in Honolulu and Australia are planning elephant exhibits featuring large pools in which the animals can participate in low impact aerobic exercise.

Coe advocates more research into these activity-based zoo exhibits to more accurately assess their effects on animal health and well-being. He envisions the next stage in the evolution of zoologic designs to be when the "monkeys really do run the monkey house."

In today's paradigm, animals are entirely dependent upon their human keepers. Yet for millions of years, ancestors of today's captive animals prospered in a world of fierce competition. Indeed, it has been demonstrated that captive primates can lower their stress levels by taking control of the situation.

Coe is looking forward to the day when captive species can acquire their food through foraging or simulated hunting, and can customize their own environments, as when bears and elephants trigger fans or cooling showers without the aid of their human keepers.

These kinds of environments, Coe noted, will have their greatest applicability in wildlife sanctuaries and those institutions that reintroduce animals into the wild.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Designing zoo habitats that promote animal well-being

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Many zoologic institutions strive to create habitats for their collections that are hospitable and stimulating.

# data[].attributes.headline
Podcast: Why is there a big patch of garbage in the ocean?

# data[].attributes.subject
Podcast: Why is there a big patch of garbage in the ocean?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
‎But Why: A Podcast for Curious Kids: Why Is There A Big Patch Of Garbage In The Pacific Ocean? on Apple Podcasts

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
‎Show But Why: A Podcast for Curious Kids, Ep Why Is There A Big Patch Of Garbage In The Pacific Ocean? - Feb 15, 2019

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
At the Monkey Park wildlife-rehab center near Tamarindo, Costa Rica, volunteers clean animal cages, wash dirty dishes, and even prepare the animals' meals.

"It's a labor of love," said Cinde Jeheber, a California native and frequent volunteer at the park. One of her duties might be cutting up fruit for the white-faced monkeys or slicing beef parts to feed to the resident ocelot.

"To be surrounded by all these amazing animals that might someday be released back into the wild-I wouldn't miss it for the world," she said. "Plus, I get to feed an ocelot!"

Yet Monkey Park and other such facilities are facing an unprecedented crunch as Costa Rica struggles with how to care for its captive wildlife, most of which will soon be without a home.

In July, the government announced controversial plans to close the country's two public zoos, citing concerns about animal captivity and welfare. More than 400 animals currently residing in the zoos will be transferred to private animal-rescue centers around the country, where those that are able will be rehabilitated and released back into the wild.

"We are getting rid of the cages and reinforcing the idea of interacting with biodiversity in botanical parks in a natural way," Environment Minister René Castro said at a press conference to announce the planned closures in July. ( See pictures of seven energy-smart zoos and aquariums.)

"We don't want animals in captivity or enclosed in any way unless it is to rescue or save them."

While animal-rights groups have praised the government's decision, a new law that makes keeping wildlife as pets illegal has resulted in the inundation of many of the same animal-rescue centers that will be receiving the zoos' former residents.

Already in 2013, the rescue centers have taken in more than 2,000 new animals-that's more than they usually get in a year.

"We have received so many animals this year that we have been forced to turn away animals," said Maria Pia Martin, wildlife veterinarian at Kids Saving the Rainforest, a rescue center near Manuel Antonio National Park. (See rain forest pictures.)

"The idea of turning down an animal is quite difficult. But we need to prioritize who we can save in order to do the best for them."

Rescue Centers Strapped

Most of Costa Rica's animal-rescue centers are nonprofits that receive little to no government funding. Many operate with limited budgets and have a finite amount of space, making expansion difficult.

Officials from the Ministry of Environment and Energy (MINAE), which oversees the country's zoos and rescue centers, say the planned zoo closings and the new law are further steps to ensure the long-term health of the country's incredible biodiversity-Costa Rica is home to 5 percent of all animal species on the planet. Yet, those same officials also recognize they have a serious problem on their hands.

Jose-Joaquin Calvo, wildlife manager for MINAE's National System of Conservation Areas, calls the situation an "emergency" and said his organization and others are working to house the animals.

Since the no-wildlife-as-pets law passed in December, MINAE has created a loophole that allows longtime pet owners to keep their pets, at least for now. The government is also working with wildlife experts and conservation groups, including Humane Society International, to write protocols that will help establish best practices for the facilities.

"The government has recognized the crisis and is trying to educate the public so they don't further inundate the rescue centers," said Cynthia Dent, regional director of Humane Society International, which is working through a U.S. State Department agreement to establish model rescue centers throughout Central America.

"We're also in the process of evaluating the more than 200 facilities around the country that house [wild] animals."

Making Do With Little

In the short term, however, the overcrowded rescue centers continue to struggle, coping as best they can with limited resources.

For example, many are turning to volunteers: These short-term, unpaid staffers, who can range from high school students to retirees, pay a fee in exchange for food, housing, and the opportunity to get up close and personal with some of Costa Rica's most adorable-and often endangered-species.

Other centers are making room for more critters. "Since the law took effect, we've had to build three new cages to host the new animals because we don't have a place to relocate them all," said Adriana Aguilar Borbon, marketing manager for Proyecto Asis, a facility in the Arenal region.

"We have eight acres-it's a large property, but not big enough. It's going to be even more difficult finding a place for all the animals from the zoos."

While Costa Ricans try to figure out the most effective way to move forward, everyone seems to agree that the country's wildlife is their priority. (See more Costa Rica pictures.)

Said the Humane Society's Dent, "The more effective the rescue centers are at rehabilitating and releasing the animals, the better opportunity visitors will have at catching [a] glimpse of Costa Rica's wildlife in its natural environment."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Costa Rica Closes Zoos-Where Will the Animals Go?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Costa Rica's animal-rescue facilities are facing a crunch as much of the country's captive wildlife will soon be out of a home.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
When you sit down on a park bench to read, watch kids play, or just chill, do you ever really notice what you're sitting on? That bench could be made with recycled plastics.

Park benches, playground equipment, and even backyard decks and furniture made with recycled plastics have become increasingly popular, thanks in large part to the material's combination of good looks, durability, and environmental benefits.

Plus a little civic-minded competition. Several local and national recycling initiatives seek to incorporate more recycled plastic lumber in the parks, schools, and playgrounds that bring communities together.

For example, Keep America Beautiful's 2016 " Recycle-Bowl " involved nearly 1,300 schools in 47 states and the District of Columbia that competed to collect the most recyclables. The winning school was awarded a park bench made from recycled plastics.

And TerraCycle, Colgate, and ShopRite host a recycling program for schools that compete by collecting used oral care products (toothpaste tubes and caps, brushes, floss containers) for recycling. The winning school gets a new playground made from-you guessed it-materials made from previously used oral care products!

Why choose recycled plastic lumber?

The countless communities and homeowners who have embraced recycled plastic lumber have great reasons for doing so. It's weather-resistant, virtually maintenance-free, and tough enough to last for years and years, making it a great choice for outdoor use.

Recycled plastics can be molded into just about any shape and made to replicate the look of textured wood. It's a great solution for your backyard if you're looking to build a beautiful deck without the maintenance, splintering, rotting, and splitting associated with traditional outdoor decking materials.

And you can top off your deck with furniture such as lounge chairs, dining tables, and swings... also made with recycled plastics.

So whether you need a sturdy picnic table to enjoy a meal, a relaxing Adirondack chair to finish a good book, or a low maintenance, splinter-free deck for the kids to play on, you can feel good about recycled plastic lumber.

How is recycled plastic lumber made?

It all starts with a very important person: you-by recycling your everyday plastics. It's easier than ever to recycle your plastics, and recycled plastic lumber is just one of many ways your used plastics can live another life as new, useful products.

One of the largest plastic lumber makers takes used plastic bags and wraps, cleans and grinds them into granules, and then combines that with sawdust to create a composite material that is formed into lumber. The company reports using 140,000 plastic bags in an average 500-square foot deck. Others companies use the plastic from milk jugs and similar containers collected in recycling programs. The plastic is ground up, cleaned, heated, and made into little plastic pellets that then are formed into lumber.

So... that means you likely have plastics throughout your home that could come back as recycled plastic lumber-if you recycle them. For example:

Kitchen: milk jugs, margarine tubs, plastic bags, and product overwraps

Bedroom: dry cleaner bags

Bathroom: some shampoo and conditioner bottles

Laundry room: laundry detergent and fabric softener bottles

Plastic bottles, jugs, and containers-rigid plastics-typically are collected in curbside recycling bins. Can plastic bags be recycled? Yes! BUT plastic bags and wraps-film plastics-should be brought back to participating grocery and retail stores for recycling.

When we recycle the plastics we use in our everyday lives, we're doing our part to help the environment by reducing waste and greenhouse gas emissions. And durable, long-lasting plastic lumber can be replaced less often, which also diminishes our environmental footprint.

So kick back and relax on your sturdy neighborhood park bench or your recycled plastic lounge chair on your recycled plastic deck. And remember: keep recycling...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Recycled Plastic Lumber: Coming to a Park Near You

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you sit down on a park bench to read, watch kids play, or just chill, do you ever really notice what you're sitting on? That bench could be made with recycled plastics. Park benches, playground equipment, and even backyard decks and furniture made with recycled plastics have become increasingly popular, thanks in large part to the material's combination of good looks, durability, and environmental benefits.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why Plastic Straws Are Actually Better For The Planet Than Paper Straws

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Don’t be convinced you’re saving Earth by drinking out of a terrible straw. Plastic straws aren’t killing the planet, and science can’t stop proving it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Costa Rican Environment Ministry officials yesterday announced the closing of its two national zoos, the Simon Bolivar zoo and Santa Ana Conservation Center. But they're not just shuttering; they're going to become wild botanical gardens, with animals allowed to prance in and out as they please. And the officials plan to release as many of the current zoo animals back into the wild as possible. It's the latest in an impressive line of conservationist initiatives pushed by the Environment Ministry.

Reintroduction of zoo animals into the wild is not, actually, a simple task at all. Very few species have been successfully reintroduced; among the few winners are the black-footed ferret, California condor, and the grey wolf. But there are far more problems; many reintroduced animals have adjusted to zoo life too thoroughly to be successful in the wild (especially if they were born in the zoo). Some animals may spread microbes or viruses picked up thanks to close proximity with other animals (including humans) they wouldn't normally be in contact with. Reintroduction is far from impossible, but it's also not nearly as simple as opening a cage door and saying "you're free now!"

Costa Rica's Environment Ministry has said that animals which cannot be reintroduced will be sent to rescue centers. There's no more information than this; which rescue centers? What are the criteria for reintroduction?

Fundazoo, the national organization in charge of zoos, requested to block the closing of the zoos, arguing that the government is breaking a contract with more than a decade left on it. The more persuasive argument is that only the zoos have the specialists in zoology, nutrition, and veterinary medicine required to care for these animals during the move.

It's a fascinating idea; zoos certainly have mixed records from a conservation perspective. Many species survive only thanks to zoos, much quality research has been done at zoos, and many people have been educated about conservation and zoology thanks to zoos. But they're also still cages for animals, which is the side of the debate taken by the Environment Ministry of Costa Rica. Costa Rica, not for nothing, has become an unlikely star of the conservation movement, having already banned circuses and all sport hunting within its borders.

[via AP]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Costa Rica To Close Its Zoos And Release Animals Into The Wild

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The silky anteater, shown here, could be climbing trees in its native forests soon.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Animals in Entertainment: Circuses, SeaWorld, and Beyond | PETA

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Animals in entertainment suffer immensely. Find out how PETA is putting an end to elephant rides, horseraces, roadside zoos, and safari parks.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Trash Collector Engineering Article for Students | Scholastic SuperScience Magazine

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Meet the litter-gobbling machine in Baltimore's harbor

# data[].attributes.headline
Plastic straw bans prompt questions, concern for people with disabilities

# data[].attributes.subject
Plastic straw bans prompt questions, concern for people with disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastic straw bans prompt questions, concern for people with disabilities

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Reintroduction programs, by which animals raised or rehabilitated in AZA-accredited zoos or aquariums are released into their natural habitats, are powerful tools used for stabilizing, reestablishing, or increasing in-situ animal populations that have suffered significant declines. Reintroductions may include animals that have spent some of their early life-stages being cared for in a "headstart" program that gives them a greater chance of survival than those born in the wild, those brought in for rehabilitation from illness or injury, those moved from one area for release elsewhere, or those that are offspring of animals that have had several generations cared for by AZA-accredited institutions.

Examples of AZA Reintroduction Programs

Asian wild horse: Equus ferus przewalskii, also known as takhi and Przewalski's horse, roamed the grassland steppes of Europe and Asia for millennia. But by the late 1960's, it was driven to extinction in the wild due to human persecution, grazing competition, and high mortality from harsh winters. Over the next several decades, zoos worldwide bred rescued individuals and worked with in-country partners to reintroduce the descendants back to the wild. Today, there are more than 500 Asian wild horses running free in Mongolia and China. In 2014, the Asian Wild Horse SSP launched the True Wild Horse Initiative to support in situ research and conservation efforts for Asian wild horses.

Black-footed Ferrets: In 1987, 18 of the remaining black-footed ferrets were placed into the care of AZA-accredited institutions as well as partner organizations and agencies. Due to the efforts of the AZA Black-footed Ferret SSP Program and their partners, these animals have successfully reproduced and thousands have been reintroduced into their historic range since 1991. Learn more about this species' road to recovery.

California Condors: In 1982, only 22 California condors existed in the wild. Conservation breeding and management of these animals in AZA-accredited institutions, overseen by the California Condor SSP, increased this population to almost 200 birds within 20 years. By 2014, their population totaled 425 animals, including 219 living in the wild. To learn more about the condor's ex-situ rearing efforts visit the San Diego Zoo website. Visit the USFWS Endangered Species Program to view a video of this success story.

Ohio River Basin Freshwater Mussels: Freshwater mussels are an imperiled group of North American animals with an estimated 43% of the species found in the Ohio River basin. In 2001, the Columbus Zoo and Aquarium, the Wilds, Ohio State University, Ohio Department of Natural Resources Division of Wildlife, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the Columbus Recreation and Parks Department founded the Freshwater Mussel Conservation and Research Center. This Center has developed innovative conservation methods which have yielded the exceptional propagation, culture, translocation, and reintroduction of numerous state and federally listed freshwater mussel species back into Ohio's streams, rivers, and lakes.

Golden Lion Tamarin: In 2003, the previously Critically Endangered golden lion tamarin was downlisted by the IUCN to Endangered after nearly thirty years of conservation efforts involving the Golden Lion Tamarin Conservation Program (GLTCP) at the Smithsonian National Zoological Park and the Associação Mico-Leao-Dourado in Rio de Janeiro. New populations were established in Brazil's União Biological Reserve through the translocation of 47 individuals in six isolated groups from their original isolated habitats. This reintroduction program has also contributed to the protection of 3,100 hectares of forests within the tamarins' range.

Karner Blue Butterfly: While healthy populations of the federally endangered Karner blue butterfly remain in a handful of its historic range states, the species disappeared from Ohio in 1992. In 1998, the Toledo Zoological Gardens became the first institution to breed the Karner blue butterfly for reintroduction into the wild at restored sites and later offered assistance to the Detroit Zoological Park with releasing butterflies to a site in southeast Michigan.

Oregon Spotted Frog: In 2014, the Oregon spotted frog was listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act, after having been lost from almost 80% of its historic range. The Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Centre, working with the Oregon Spotted Frog Recovery Team in Canada on a headstart program, bred this species for the first time in 2010 and released tadpoles and metamorphs into native habitat. Other partners, led by the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife, are engaged in its recovery in the United States, including the Oregon Zoo, Northwest Trek Wildlife Park, Point Defiance Zoo & Aquarium, and Woodland Park Zoo.

Palila: The palila is an endangered Hawaiian honeycreeper species that has suffered population declines due to the destruction of the dry forests it inhabits. Efforts to expand the palila population back to its historic range at Pu'u Mali have included successful releases of birds bred at the Keauhou Bird Conservation Center as part of the Hawaii Endangered Bird Conservation Program run by San Diego Zoo Global, as well translocation of wild birds by the US Geological Survey.

Red Wolf: Red wolf populations had declined significantly by the 1960s due to intensive predator control programs and loss of habitat. 14 wolves out of a remnant population found along the Gulf Coast of Texas and Louisiana became the founders of a successful breeding program involving AZA-accredited institutions and the AZA Red Wolf SSP.

Wyoming Toad: The Wyoming toad was officially classified as Extinct in the Wild in 1994, when only one ex-situ population remained. This population was brought into the care of AZA-accredited institutions and, under the supervision of the Wyoming Toad SSP, it successfully managed to produce tadpoles and toadlets that continue to be reintroduced into the wild. AZA institutions and their partners continue to conduct regular releases of this species, as wild populations of the Wyoming toad are not yet self-sustaining.

More Reintroduction Projects

To learn about other reintroduction projects AZA-accredited zoos and aquariums are studying, developing, or conducting, explore the Conservation and Research Database. For reintroduction-related research projects, select "Research" as the project category, "Species and/or Habitat Conservation" as the keyword category, and "Reintroduction and Translocation" as the keyword. For field projects, select "Field Conservation" as the project category, "Ex Situ-Related" as the keyword category, and "Reintroduction" as the keyword.

Reintroduction-related Resources

AZA, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the International Union for the Conservation of Nature's Species Survival Commission (IUCN/SSC) play key roles in advancing the science of reintroduction programs in which AZA Animal Programs or its accredited institutions participate. Numerous reference materials and tools have been developed to advance the science and success of reintroductions.

AZA Guidelines for Reintroduction of Animals

AZA asserts that the scientific and ethical complexity of reintroduction necessitates guidelines for those who plan, conduct, fund, regulate and publicize reintroductions and in 1992 developed a bibliography that identified a variety of documents addressing reintroduction guidelines. These guidelines are often contradictory and AZA has suggested that sincere consideration be given to all bibliographic sources and guidelines during the planning stages of reintroduction, and that reintroduction be regarded as science, with surveys of the pertinent literature, interdisciplinary participation, formulation of testable hypotheses and goals, thorough documentation, rapid publication of results, and review of the program by independent referees be incorporated. Read more about the AZA Guidelines for Reintroduction of Animals.

IUCN/SSC Reintroduction Specialist Group

The Reintroduction Specialist Group (RSG) promotes the reintroduction of viable populations of animals and plants back to their natural ecosystems, contributing to conservation efforts worldwide. The RSG manages a network of global voluntary members to provide reintroduction practitioners with tools such as reintroduction guidelines, networking resources, and publications to provide a means for distributing information on reintroduction projects. Practitioners are encouraged to explore the RSG's website for the most current resources about reintroduction and other conservation translocation efforts.

Avian Reintroduction and Translocation Database

In 2008, Lincoln Park Zoological Gardens established an Avian Reintroduction and Translocation Database (ARTD) to centralize information about the avian species, release sites, and release events that take place around the world. The database describes every aspect of the reintroduction effort for each species including the variables that impact the efficacy of releases, species biology and ecology, habitat suitability, demography, and genetics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Reintroduction programs, by which animals raised or rehabilitated in AZA-accredited zoos or aquariums are released into their natural habitats, are powerful tools used for stabilizing, reestablishing, or increasing in-situ animal populations that have suffered significant declines.

# data[].attributes.headline
Schools in Indonesia Built from Eco Blocks 

# data[].attributes.subject
Schools in Indonesia Built from Eco Blocks 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
An earthquake-resistant school has been built in Lombok, Indonesia.

The five-classroom school was built from Eco-Blocks made from recycled plastic. Lombok suffered a series of earthquakes in2018 that killed 563 people and displaced more than 417,000.

Now, instead of learning in temporary shelters, students will have classroom buildings made from stronger material.

Read the entire article here.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
School in Indonesia Built from Eco-Blocks

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
An earthquake-resistant school has been built in Lombok, Indonesia. The five-classroom school was built from Eco-Blocks made from recycled plastic. Lombok suffered a series of earthquakes in2018 that killed 563 people and displaced more than 417,000. Now, instead of learning in temporary shelters, students will have classroom buildings made from stronger material.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The Nashville Zoo was pitched a new idea for an exhibit, thanks to 19 Williamson County high school students.

The students, who are involved in the ACE (architecture, construction or engineering) Mentor Program, presented the plan for a native Tennessee wildlife exhibit to Dale McGinnity, curator of Ectotherms, at the Nashville Zoo on April 22.

"If the Zoo goes forward with their concept, the thinking these young professionals-to-be have done, as well as the detailed preliminary narratives, site plans and 3-D model they've created, will hopefully help better refine the educational exhibit and aid in securing the funds necessary to build it," team leader Brittany Shepherd, an estimating engineer with Turner Construction Company and representative of the Nashville ACE affiliate, said in a prepared statement.

The Tennessee Aquatic Conservation Center would provide a look at the state's wildlife before European immigrants arrived and focus on endangered species. It would also include a facility for breeding and scientific studies, and be open for patrons to view.

The team included Lukas Barr, Jonathon Cole, Ryley Fodra, Stedman Howard, Claudia Santiago, Elijah Slaughter, Seth Thomason and Cross Yang of Independence High School; Nicholas Buhl, A.J. Fekete and William Woods of Centennial High School; Matthew Crispi of Summit High School; Lillian Powell of Page High School; and Jack Butler, Kyra Frank, Jacob Hunter, Francis Nunez, Austin Pytleski and Matthew Yeomans of Franklin High School.

Mentor companies were Turner Construction, Envision Advantage, Johnson Johnson Crabtree Architects, Littlejohn and Stanley D. Lindsey & Associates.

For more information about the ACE Mentor Program, visit www.acementor.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Williamson high school students pitch exhibit to zoo

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Williamson high school students pitched an idea for an exhibit to the Nashville Zoo.

# data[].attributes.body
username: guest
password: follett

# data[].attributes.headline
Why plastic straw bans aren’t the answer.

# data[].attributes.subject
Why plastic straw bans aren’t the answer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Why plastic straw bans aren’t the answer.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is WATER POLLUTION? | What Causes Water Pollution? | The Dr Binocs Show | Peekaboo Kidz

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Too Much Screen Time Can Have Lasting Consequences for Young Children's Brains

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new study found that too much screen time is linked to developmental delays in very young children

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Straw No More | Molly Steer | TEDxJCUCairns

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Owl attacks on Dutch town- Residents in the northern Dutch town of Purmerend have been advised to take umbrellas out at night after a series of attacks by an owl. Dozens of residents have suffered head injuries over the past three weeks because of a European eagle owl. Two runners were attacked on Tuesday, with one requiring stitches for five separate head wounds. The European eagle owl's usual prey are small mammals and birds. One of the sites of the attacks has been a home for the disabled. A Spokeswoman for the home said that residents and workers had suffered at least 15 separate attacks by the nocturnal bird, which remains still on site. During the day there is no problem for the town, but at night people now only go outside armed with umbrellas, helmets and hats, to protect themselves.

Animals rescued from overcrowded zoo in Mexico- More than 100 animals have been rescued from an overcrowded private zoo in Mexico, after complaints from visitors. Mexican environmental officials raided the zoo after many visitors had complained about the potential danger. The officials found overcrowded and cramped cages piled on top of each other and unsafe conditions for visitors. Among the animals rescued were lions, tigers, jaguars, pumas, bears, buffalos and camels. The zoo in Tehuacan in the south east of Mexico City is owned by Sergio Gomez (senior Mexican politician). Officials said they had seized 101 of the 240 animals held at the zoo.their hands into the cages. However the officials say they are trying their hardest to find suitable homes for the animals.

The animals were kept in terrible and unsafe conditions and lacked proper care and had no proper ventilation, the animals were cramped together which was making the animals aggressive. Visitors were also not properly protected and said that they could insert