# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Identify an environmental issue and how it affects human health. Include a source.

# data[].attributes.headline
Water Pollution, water pollutions is hurting our health, BUT IT'S OUR FAULT

# data[].attributes.subject
Water Pollution, water pollutions is hurting our health, BUT IT'S OUR FAULT

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

# data[].attributes.body
Sadly we contaminate our waters
not thinking it will end us, but we are helping our Earth come to an end faster.

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

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Introduction

Water is essential for life. People depend on safe water for their health and livelihood. But contaminated water leads to millions of deaths and even more illnesses every year.

Water pollution is any contamination of water with chemicals or other hazardous substances that are detrimental to human, animal, or plant health.

Possible sources of water contamination are:

Corroded water pipes that leach harmful chemicals, such as lead

Hazardous waste sites and industrial discharges

Pesticides and fertilizers from agricultural operations

Naturally occurring hazardous chemicals, such as arsenic

Sewage and food processing waste

Drinking Water

Drinking water in the U.S. comes from a variety of sources, including public water systems, private wells, or bottled water. Worldwide, nearly 2 billion people drink contaminated water that could be harmful to their health. Though more of a concern in developing countries, safe drinking water is a U.S. public health priority.

Health Effects

Examples follow of potential drinking water contaminants and reported health effects, which can range from subtle to severe depending on the chemical and total exposure.

Arsenic - a known human carcinogen associated with skin, lung, bladder, kidney, and liver cancer

Lead - behavioral and developmental effects in children; and cardiovascular and kidney problems

Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) chemicals - damage to the immune and reproductive systems

Pesticides - neurodevelopmental effects and Parkinson's disease

Waterborne Disease From All Water Sources

Scientists at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimated the burden and direct healthcare cost of infectious waterborne disease in the U.S. When drinking, recreational, and environmental water sources were considered together, they found more than 7 million cases of 17 different waterborne illnesses occur annually. New waterborne disease challenges are emerging due to factors such as aging infrastructure, chlorine-tolerant and biofilm-related pathogens, and increased recreational water use.

What Is NIEHS Doing?

NIEHS research examines potential health effects of contaminants in water and explores ways to protect the public from contact with unsafe water.

The (Gulf Long-term Follow-up Study), funded by NIEHS and the National Institutes of Health Common Fund, studies the health of people who helped with the oil spill response and clean-up, took training, signed up to work, or were sent to the Gulf of Mexico to help in some way after the Deepwater Horizon disaster. NIEHS is leading this research effort with the support of many community groups. Nearly 33,000 people joined the study, making it the largest study ever conducted on the health effects of an oil spill. The study has tracked numerous health issues reported by cleanup workers, including skin rashes, wheezing and difficulty breathing, headaches, nausea, depression and anxiety, and heart attacks. However, the most recent publication to emerge from the research suggests that some health effects associated with the spill may resolve over time.

Read about previous and current Gulf Oil Spill Response Efforts.

NIEHS and the National Science Foundation jointly fund research on marine-related health issues through the Centers for Oceans and Human Health. Grantees, for example, develop techniques for more accurate and earlier detection of harmful algal blooms with the goal of preventing and reducing exposure. They also study the health effects of eating seafood containing toxins produced by harmful algal blooms. Contaminants of emerging concern, such as microplastics, are also studied.

NIEHS offers time-sensitive grants that enable researchers to launch studies quickly in response to natural disasters, industrial accidents, or policy changes that affect water quality. In addition, the National Toxicology Program, located at NIEHS, reviews available toxicology studies and conducts short- and long-term studies to help public health officials respond to threats to the safety of drinking water. For example:

Researchers measured PFAS exposures in residents near Colorado Springs whose water was contaminated with the PFAS perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), as well as contamination of the Cape Fear River in North Carolina by the PFAS GenX.

Scientists were able to address the concerns of residents of Flint, Michigan about their exposure to lead, giving them rapid information on how great the risk was and ways they might limit the exposure.

NTP completed a series of studies on the toxicity of chemicals that spilled into the Elk River in West Virginia, January 2014.

NTP is evaluating individual PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), which is a group of widely produced industrial-use chemicals that are found in some waterways. NTP studies seek to understand the effects of certain PFAS on metabolism, biological activity in cell-based systems, and health effects related to cancer and the immune system.

The NIEHS Superfund Research Program funds grants to study the health effects of potentially hazardous substances and to investigate effective and sustainable ways to clean up those substances at hazardous waste sites, which may include waterways.

The program's grant recipients have developed online tools to inform local communities about potential environmental health risks.

At Texas A&M University, scientists created the HGBEnviroScreen. (HGB stands for the eight-county Gulf Coast region of Houston-Galveston-Brazoria.) Residents may use the tool to better understand how health, environmental, and socioeconomic factors can combine to increase their susceptibility to health problems.

Scientists at University of California, Berkeley launched the Drinking Water Tool, an interactive website that helps California residents identify areas where water quality may be of concern.

SRP-funded researchers developed therapeutic sorbents that can bind to hazardous chemicals in water, potentially reducing health problems following natural disasters, chemical spills, and other emergencies. Sorbents are insoluble materials that may be used to bind and remove contaminants from water or food. In the form of enterosorbents, they can be safely consumed by people as a way to remove certain harmful substances from the gut.

NIEHS supports the NIH Disaster Research Response (DR2) Program. This program includes ready-to-go data collection tools, research protocols, and a network of trained responders. These tools assist timely gathering of environmental and toxicological data that compliments health information collected during disaster responses. Many disasters can affect water safety.

Further Reading

Stories from the Environmental Factor (NIEHS newsletter)

Printable Fact Sheets

Podcasts

Additional Resources

Arsenic Literature Collection - This curated collection of scientific articles, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, reports on the prevalence of arsenic exposure, its toxicity, the complex mechanisms involved, and the implications for society and communities.

Medline Plus: Drinking Water - Consumer information from Medline Plus, a service of the National Library of Medicine.

CDC: Drinking Water - Public health information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Environmental Wellness Toolkit - What surrounds you each day in your home, work, or neighborhood and the resources available to you can affect your health. You can't always choose what's in the environments you live, work, or play in. But taking small steps to make your environments safer and limiting your exposure to potentially harmful substances can help keep you healthier.

Ground Water and Drinking Water - Information from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Investigating Methods to Improve Drinking Water - NIEHS grant recipient David Sedlak, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, has devoted his career to improving drinking water quality. Read about his research efforts and findings.

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

PFAS Literature Collection - This curated collection of scientific articles and reviews, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, report on the prevalence and accumulating health effects associated with PFAS exposure.

Report on Carcinogens - This congressionally mandated, science-based, public health document is prepared by NTP for the HHS Secretary. The current report lists 248 agents, substances, mixtures, and exposure circumstances that are known or reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans.

Related Health Topics

Corroded water pipes that leach harmful chemicals, such as lead

Hazardous waste sites and industrial discharges

Pesticides and fertilizers from agricultural operations

Naturally occurring hazardous chemicals, such as arsenic

Sewage and food processing waste

Arsenic - a known human carcinogen associated with skin, lung, bladder, kidney, and liver cancer

Lead - behavioral and developmental effects in children; and cardiovascular and kidney problems

Hydraulic fracturing (fracking) chemicals - damage to the immune and reproductive systems

Pesticides - neurodevelopmental effects and Parkinson's disease

Researchers measured PFAS exposures in residents near Colorado Springs whose water was contaminated with the PFAS perfluorohexane sulfonate (PFHxS), as well as contamination of the Cape Fear River in North Carolina by the PFAS GenX.

Scientists were able to address the concerns of residents of Flint, Michigan about their exposure to lead, giving them rapid information on how great the risk was and ways they might limit the exposure.

NTP completed a series of studies on the toxicity of chemicals that spilled into the Elk River in West Virginia, January 2014.

At Texas A&M University, scientists created the HGBEnviroScreen. (HGB stands for the eight-county Gulf Coast region of Houston-Galveston-Brazoria.) Residents may use the tool to better understand how health, environmental, and socioeconomic factors can combine to increase their susceptibility to health problems.

Scientists at University of California, Berkeley launched the Drinking Water Tool, an interactive website that helps California residents identify areas where water quality may be of concern.

Arsenic Literature Collection - This curated collection of scientific articles, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, reports on the prevalence of arsenic exposure, its toxicity, the complex mechanisms involved, and the implications for society and communities.

Medline Plus: Drinking Water - Consumer information from Medline Plus, a service of the National Library of Medicine.

CDC: Drinking Water - Public health information from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Environmental Wellness Toolkit - What surrounds you each day in your home, work, or neighborhood and the resources available to you can affect your health. You can't always choose what's in the environments you live, work, or play in. But taking small steps to make your environments safer and limiting your exposure to potentially harmful substances can help keep you healthier.

Ground Water and Drinking Water - Information from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.

Investigating Methods to Improve Drinking Water - NIEHS grant recipient David Sedlak, Ph.D., University of California, Berkeley, has devoted his career to improving drinking water quality. Read about his research efforts and findings.

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

PFAS Literature Collection - This curated collection of scientific articles and reviews, published in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives, report on the prevalence and accumulating health effects associated with PFAS exposure.

Report on Carcinogens - This congressionally mandated, science-based, public health document is prepared by NTP for the HHS Secretary. The current report lists 248 agents, substances, mixtures, and exposure circumstances that are known or reasonably anticipated to cause cancer in humans.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Water is essential for life. People depend on safe water for their health and livelihood. But contaminated water leads to millions of deaths and even more illnesses every year. Water pollution is any contamination of water with chemicals or other hazardous substances that are detrimental to human, animal, or plant health.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
UPDATE: On April 4, 2022, the IPCC released the Working Group III Sixth Assessment report on climate change mitigation. The report describes how, despite gains in the clean energy revolution, nations are falling far too short of reducing climate pollution quickly enough to avoid severe damage, cost, and upheaval. "The good news is that we have the climate solutions needed, and they work," says NRDC president Manish Bapna. "For our economic and national security, and for the future of all life on earth, lawmakers must act without delay."
It's normal to feel temporarily paralyzed in the face of terrifying news. Obstacles never seem more insurmountable-and foes never seem more invincible-than they do at the moment you finally realize what you're up against: the scale of the battle that awaits you, the consequences of losing it, the amount of time you've been given to organize and rally. No matter how much time you have, it never feels like enough.

Earlier this week, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a chilling report that has sent most people (with the notable exception of the current president of the United States) into a deep funk. In it, some 90 climate scientists from 40 countries conclude that if humans don't take immediate, collective action to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius by 2040, the consequences will effectively be baked into the natural systems of the planet. With so much heat-trapping carbon in the atmosphere, there will be, in effect, no turning back. The extreme droughts, devastating wildfires, massive floods, deadly hurricanes, and widespread famines that we're seeing more and more of these days will cease to be statistical anomalies and instead be more like seasonal markers, as regular as the changing of the leaves.

If such imagery shocks, the time line stuns. To avoid global catastrophe, according to the report, we'll need to reduce global carbon emissions by as much as 40 percent by 2030. Despite all the evidence at our feet showing that climate change is an indelible part of our present-day lives, there are still some people who think of it as something far-off-a problem primarily for future generations to solve. But children who entered kindergarten last month will be high school sophomores in 2030. The "far-off" generation is no farther off than the next one.

In the three decades since it was founded, the IPCC has released many reports, each one coming with its own unique warnings. This one feels different, though. The authors aren't just telling us what could happen if we don't mend our ways and limit warming to less than 1.5 °C-the droughts, the wildfires, the melting permafrost, the coastal flooding, and so on. They state unequivocally that governments must make "rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society" if we're to beat the clock and save the planet.

Many of us are now trying to wrap our heads around what these changes might look like and how we might achieve them given our current political and economic realities. The details might vary around the edges, but fundamental to any escape plan will be energy policies that phase out coal entirely and replace it with renewables. Also essential will be global efforts to electrify our vehicle fleets, exponentially ramp up energy efficiency in our buildings, and-crucially-preserve our carbon-trapping forests. The cost of all this, the IPCC soberly estimates, will be nothing less than 2.5 percent of global GDP. To help pay this tremendously large bill, the authors propose a worldwide carbon tax of as much as $27,000 per ton.

With everything else the world's governments are currently dealing with, could we ever really come together so quickly and collectively embark on this singular act of civilizational self-defense? There's just not enough time, some say. We don't have the technology yet. The deck is stacked against us. We can't possibly hope to win.

But history says otherwise. After that feeling of temporary paralysis subsides, human beings are actually quite good at rising to the occasion-tapping into hidden reservoirs of energy, ingenuity, and resolve and doing whatever it takes to solve a problem or even to bend the arc of history. In the early 1950s, polio, which had been literally plaguing America for decades, was still paralyzing and killing tens of thousands of Americans, including thousands of children, each year. Jonas Salk's vaccine was the culmination of a worldwide race among scientists to find a way of ending the annually recurring epidemics. A polio vaccine was first made available to the public in 1955, and by the early 1960s the epidemics were 97 percent contained.

It's precisely when the stakes are high that humans show they're capable of uniting toward a shared goal. World War II ended in Europe exactly 5 years, 8 months, and 7 days after Germany invaded Poland in 1939. Nations-even those that normally thought of themselves as antagonists-set aside their differences and united to defeat a seemingly unstoppable force. In other words, when confronted with the image of a bleak future, greater humanity fought back. And ultimately, greater humanity won.

It took us 5 years, 8 months, and 7 days to save the world last time. We don't have much more time than that now. But we do still have some time to act. And unlike WWII, it's a fight we know up front we can win. We have not only the technology and the solutions to do it, but also the twin benefits of scientific foresight and historical hindsight at our disposal. The former tells us what awaits us if we don't come together. The latter tells us what we can accomplish if we do.

This article was originally published on onEarth, which is no longer in publication. onEarth was founded in 1979 as the Amicus Journal, an independent magazine of thought and opinion on the environment. All opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the policies or positions of NRDC. This article is available for online republication by news media outlets or nonprofits under these conditions: The writer(s) must be credited with a byline; you must note prominently that the article was originally published by NRDC.org and link to the original; the article cannot be edited (beyond simple things such grammar); you can't resell the article in any form or grant republishing rights to other outlets; you can't republish our material wholesale or automatically-you need to select articles individually; you can't republish the photos or graphics on our site without specific permission; you should drop us a note to let us know when you've used one of our articles.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Climate Scientists to World: We Have Only 20 Years Before There's No Turning Back

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
UPDATE: On April 4, 2022, the IPCC released the Working Group III Sixth Assessment report on climate change mitigation. The report describes how, despite gains in the clean energy revolution, nations are falling far too short of reducing climate pollution quickly enough to avoid severe damage, cost, and upheaval.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Honey bees - wild and domestic - perform about 80 percent of all pollination worldwide. A single bee colony can pollinate 300 million flowers each day. Grains are primarily pollinated by the wind, but fruits, nuts and vegetables are pollinated by bees. Seventy out of the top 100 human food crops - which supply about 90 percent of the world's nutrition - are pollinated by bees.

"In the last four years, the chemical industry has spent $11.2 million on a PR initiative to say it's not their fault, so we know whose fault it is."
Jon Cooksey, writer, director, How to Boil a Frog.

What's Killing the Bees - and Why It Matters

Worldwide bee colony collapse is not as big a mystery as the chemical industry claims.

The systemic nature of the problem makes it complex, but not impenetrable. Scientists know that bees are dying from a variety of factors-pesticides, drought, habitat destruction, nutrition deficit, air pollution, global warming and more. Many of these causes are interrelated. The bottom line is that we know humans are largely responsible for the two most prominent causes: pesticides and habitat loss.

Worker bees (females) live about six weeks in summer and several months in the winter. Colonies produce new worker bees continuously during the spring and summer, and then reproduction slows during the winter. Typically, a bee hive or colony will decline by 5-10 percent over the winter, and replace those lost bees in the spring. In a bad year, a bee colony might lose 15-20 percent of its bees.

In the U.S., winter losses have commonly reached 30-50 percent, in some cases more. In 2006, David Hackenberg - a bee keeper for 42 years - reported a 90 percent die-off among his 3,000 hives. U.S. National Agricultural Statistics show a honey bee decline from about 6 million hives in 1947 to 2.4 million hives in 2008, a 60 percent reduction.

The number of working bee colonies per hectare provides a critical metric of crop health. In the U.S. - among crops that require bee pollination - the number of bee colonies per hectare has declined by 90 percent since 1962. The bees cannot keep pace with the winter die-off rates and habitat loss.

Pesticides and Bees

Biologists have found more than 150 different chemical residues in bee pollen, a deadly "pesticide cocktail" according to University of California apiculturist Eric Mussen. The chemical companies Bayer, Syngenta, BASF, Dow, DuPont and Monsanto shrug their shoulders at the systemic complexity, as if the mystery were too complicated. They advocate no change in pesticide policy. After all, selling poisons to the world's farmers is profitable.

Furthermore, wild bee habitat shrinks every year as industrial agribusiness converts grasslands and forest into mono-culture farms, which are then contaminated with pesticides. To reverse the world bee decline, we need to fix our dysfunctional and destructive agricultural system.

Solutions That Save the Bees

Common sense actions can restore and protect the world's bees. Here's a strong start:

1. Ban the seven most dangerous pesticides.

2. Protect pollinator health by preserving wild habitat.

3. Restore ecological agriculture.

Ecological farming is the overarching new policy trend that will stabilize human food production, preserve wild habitats, and protect the bees. The nation of Bhutan has led the world in adopting a 100 percent organic farming policy. Mexico has banned genetically modified corn to protect its native corn varieties. Eight European countries have banned genetically modified crops and Hungary has burned more than 1,000 acres of corn contaminated with genetically modified varieties. In India, scientist Vandana Shiva and a network of small farmers have built an organic farming resistance to industrial agriculture over two decades.

Ecological, organic farming is nothing new. It is the way most farming has been done throughout human history. Ecological farming resists insect damage by avoiding large monocrops and preserving ecosystem diversity. Ecological farming restores soil nutrients with natural composting systems, avoids soil loss from wind and water erosion, and avoids pesticides and chemical fertilizers.

By restoring bee populations and healthier bees, ecological agriculture improves pollination, which in turn improves crop yields. Ecological farming takes advantage of the natural ecosystem services, water filtration, pollination, oxygen production, and disease and pest control.

Organic farmers have advocated better research and funding by industry, government, farmers, and the public to develop organic farming techniques, improve food production, and maintain ecological health. The revolution in farming would promote equitable diets around the world and support crops primarily for human consumption, avoiding crops for animal food and biofuels.

What the U.S. Can Learn From Europe About Saving the Bees

In Europe, Asia and South America, the annual bee die-off lags behind the U.S. decline, but the trend is clear and the response has been more appropriate. In Europe, Rabobank reported that annual European die-offs have reached 30-35 percent and that the colonies-per-hectare count is down 25 percent.

A European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) scientific report determined that three widely used pesticides - nicotine-based clothianidin, imidacloprid and thiametoxam - pose "high acute risks" for bees. The nicotinoid pesticides-used in soils, on foliage, and embedded in seeds-persist at the core of the toxic pesticide cocktail found in bee hives.

A Greenpeace scientific report identifies seven priority bee-killer pesticides-including the three nicotine culprits-plus clorpyriphos, cypermethrin, deltamethrin, and fipronil. The three neonicotinoids act on insect nervous systems. They accumulate in individual bees and within entire colonies, including the honey that bees feed to infant larvae. Bees that do not die outright, experience sub-lethal systemic effects, development defects, weakness, and loss of orientation. The die-off leaves fewer bees and weaker bees, who must work harder to produce honey in depleted wild habitats. These conditions create the nightmare formula for bee colony collapse.

Bayer makes and markets imidacloprid and clothianidin; Syngenta produces thiamethoxam. In 2009, the world market for these three toxins reached more than $2 billion. Syngenta, Bayer, Dow, Monsanto, and DuPont control nearly 100% of the world market for genetically modified pesticides, plants and seeds.

In 2012, a German court criminally charged Syngenta with perjury for concealing its own report showing that its genetically modified corn had killed livestock. In the U.S., the company paid out $105 million to settle a class-action lawsuit for contaminating the drinking water for over 50 million citizens with its "gender-bending" herbicide Atrazine. Now, these corporate polluters are waging multi-million-euro campaigns to deny responsibility for bee colony collapse.

In May, the European Commission responded, adopting a two-year ban on the three necotinoid pesticides, and later added the non-neonicotinoid fibronil. Scientists will use the two years to assess the recovery rate of the bees and a longer-term ban on these and other pesticides.

Meanwhile, the U.S. dithers and supports the corporations that produce and market the deadly pesticides. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) continues to allow the use of neonicotinoid pesticides, in spite of a U.S. Department of Agriculture report warning about the dangers of the bee colony collapse.

Also in 2014, President Obama signed the now infamous "Monsanto Protection Act" - written by Monsanto lobbyists - which gives biotech companies immunity in federal U.S. courts from damages to people and the environment caused by their commercial compounds.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Honey bees - wild and domestic - perform about 80 percent of all pollination worldwide. A single bee colony can pollinate 300 million flowers each day. Grains are primarily pollinated by the wind, but fruits, nuts and vegetables are pollinated by bees.

# data[].attributes.body
Fluoride in Water (By By Eros ViDemantay)
Avatar of anonymous
Anonymous
1m
Fluoride in Water (By By Eros ViDemantay)
Do YOU have fluoride in you water? Fluoride is normally used in your toothpaste, but most water is enriched in the chemical. It causes cancer.

"If you live in the United States, it is highly likely that the tap water you use is enriched with fluoride, a substance that helps prevent tooth decay. However, due to concerns that fluoridated water may increase the risk of other diseases, the capital city of Alaska stopped this practice. What happened?"

Plastic bags in the ocean
Avatar of anonymous
Anonymous
1m
Plastic bags in the ocean
Jacob Hilsinger
more_vert
Ozone Depletion (Death is immeni
Avatar of anonymous
Anonymous
1m

# data[].attributes.body
KayLyn Handley

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
As the world seeks to slow the pace of climate change, preserve wildlife, and support more than eight billion people, trees inevitably hold a major part of the answer. Yet the mass destruction of trees-deforestation-continues, sacrificing the long-term benefits of standing trees for short-term gain of fuel, and materials for manufacturing and construction.

We need trees for a variety of reasons, not least of which is that they absorb the carbon dioxide we exhale and the heat-trapping greenhouse gases that human activities emit. As those gases enter the atmosphere, global warming increases, a trend scientists now prefer to call climate change.

There is also the imminent danger of disease caused by deforestation. An estimated 60 percent of emerging infectious diseases come from animals, and a major cause of viruses' jump from wildlife to humans is habitat loss, often through deforestation.

But we can still save our forests. Aggressive efforts to rewild and reforest are already showing success. Tropical tree cover alone can provide 23 percent of the climate mitigation needed to meet goals set in the Paris Agreement in 2015, according to one estimate.

Causes of deforestation

Forests still cover about 30 percent of the world's land area, but they are disappearing at an alarming rate. Since 1990, the world has lost more than 420 million hectares or about a billion acres of forest, according to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations-mainly in Africa and South America. About 17 percent of the Amazonian rainforest has been destroyed over the past 50 years, and losses recently have been on the rise. The organization Amazon Conservation reports that destruction rose by 21 percent in 2020, a loss the size of Israel.

Farming, grazing of livestock, mining, and drilling combined account for more than half of all deforestation. Forestry practices, wildfires and, in small part, urbanization account for the rest. In Malaysia and Indonesia, forests are cut down to make way for producing palm oil, which can be found in everything from shampoo to saltine crackers. In the Amazon, cattle ranching and farms-particularly soy plantations-are key culprits.

Logging operations, which provide the world's wood and paper products, also fell countless trees each year. Loggers, some of them acting illegally, also build roads to access more and more remote forests-which leads to further deforestation. Forests are also cut as a result of growing urban sprawl as land is developed for homes.

Not all deforestation is intentional. Some is caused by a combination of human and natural factors like wildfires and overgrazing, which may prevent the growth of young trees.

Why it matters

There are some 250 million people who live in forest and savannah areas and depend on them for subsistence and income-many of them among the world's rural poor.

Eighty percent of Earth's land animals and plants live in forests, and deforestation threatens species including the orangutan, Sumatran tiger, and many species of birds. Removing trees deprives the forest of portions of its canopy, which blocks the sun's rays during the day and retains heat at night. That disruption leads to more extreme temperature swings that can be harmful to plants and animals.

With wild habitats destroyed and human life ever expanding, the line between animal and human areas blurs, opening the door to zoonotic diseases. In 2014, for example, the Ebola virus killed over 11,000 people in West Africa after fruit bats transmitted the disease to a toddler who was playing near trees where bats were roosting.

(How deforestation is leading to more infectious diseases in humans.)

Some scientists believe there could be as many as 1.7 million currently "undiscovered" viruses in mammals and birds, of which up to 827,000 could have the ability to infect people, according to a 2018 study.

Deforestation's effects reach far beyond the people and animals where trees are cut. The South American rainforest, for example, influences regional and perhaps even global water cycles, and it's key to the water supply in Brazilian cities and neighboring countries. The Amazon actually helps furnish water to some of the soy farmers and beef ranchers who are clearing the forest. The loss of clean water and biodiversity from all forests could have many other effects we can't foresee, touching even your morning cup of coffee.

In terms of climate change, cutting trees both adds carbon dioxide to the air and removes the ability to absorb existing carbon dioxide. If tropical deforestation were a country, according to the World Resources Institute, it would rank third in carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions, behind China and the U.S.

What can be done

The numbers are grim, but many conservationists see reasons for hope. A movement is under way to preserve existing forest ecosystems and restore lost tree cover by first reforesting (replanting trees) and ultimately rewilding (a more comprehensive mission to restore entire ecosystems).

(Which nation could be the first to be rewilded?)

Organizations and activists are working to fight illegal mining and logging-National Geographic Explorer Topher White, for example, has come up with a way to use recycled cell phones to monitor for chainsaws. In Tanzania, the residents of Kokota have planted more than 2 million trees on their small island over a decade, aiming to repair previous damage. And in Brazil, conservationists are rallying in the face of ominous signals that the government may roll back forest protections.

(Which tree planting projects should you support?)

Stopping deforestation before it reaches a critical point will play a key role in avoiding the next zoonotic pandemic. A November 2022 study showed that when bats struggle to find suitable habitat, they travel closer to human communities where diseases are more likely to spillover. Inversely, when bats' native habitats were left intact, they stayed away from humans. This research is the first to show how we can predict and avoid spillovers through monitoring and maintaining wildlife habitats.

For consumers, it makes sense to examine the products and meats you buy, looking for sustainably produced sources when you can. Nonprofit groups such as the Forest Stewardship Council and the Rainforest Alliance certify products they consider sustainable, while the World Wildlife Fund has a palm oil scorecard for consumer brands.

Editor's note: This story was originally published on February 2019. It has been updated.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Deforestation and Its Effect on the Planet

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Large scale destruction of trees-deforestation-affects ecosystems, climate, and even increases risk for zoonotic diseases spreading to humans.

# data[].attributes.body
Jacob Hilsinger

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Plastic bags in our oceans are a source of dioxin and other pollutants that are changing marine habitats and polluting our food chain.

No matter how much we try to keep our cities clean, many plastic bags end up as litter. If your city is like mine, Los Angeles, you see them on the streets every day. Some are cleaned up at public expense, but most get washed into the gutter and into our waterways. There, they break up into tiny pieces as they make their way to the oceans.

Plastic from cities around the world is accumulating at an alarming rate. In 2004, researchers found 6 pounds of plastic for every pound of plankton in the North Pacific Gyre. In 2008, researchers from Algalita Marine Research Institute found 42 pounds of plastic for every pound of plankton. That's 8 times more plastic in just 4 years.

A recent study by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation and the World Economic Forum claims that the equivalent of one dump truck full of plastic enters the ocean every minute. Scientists estimate that there will be more plastic in the ocean than fish by 2020 unless we drastically change our plastic habits.

Thousands of marine animals choke and die from ingesting this plastic, and many more are being slowly poisoned by the dioxin and other pollutants introduced by this mass of plastic. Dioxin is an endocrine disrupter, a so-called gender-bender pollutant because it causes gender mutations in fish and land animals that eat fish, like sea bass, seals, and even polar bears.

The plastic in our oceans affects us all. It enters our food chain. It contributes to extinction. It pollutes the very water that replenishes our planet.

Help stop the accumulation of plastic in our oceans by using reusable bags and reducing plastic in your other consumer choices as well. Every bag counts and you can help!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastic Bags in Our Oceans | 1 Bag at a Time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
No matter how much we try to keep our cities clean, many plastic bags end up as litter. If your city is like mine, Los Angeles, you see them on the streets every day. Some are cleaned up at public expense, but most get washed into the gutter and into our waterways.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ozone Depletion (Death is imminent) - Kevin

# data[].attributes.subject
Ozone Depletion (Death is imminent) - Kevin

# data[].attributes.body
The ozone layer is being destroyed. We will die if we don't stop polluting the air.

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/global-warming/ozone-depletion/

# data[].attributes.body
It hurts us by releasing harmful chemicals that affect our health and body.
~Lizzy~

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Localized Health Impacts of Fossil Fuels | Climate Nexus

# data[].attributes.body
Me when I see these

# data[].attributes.body
global warning- Faith

# data[].attributes.body
Global Warming
https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/

# data[].attributes.body
Because of all the terrible things were doing to the ocean. We are putting trash in the water, plastic, and non reef safe sunblock. our reefs used to be beautiful. THE REEFS MAKE UP 70% OF OUR OXYGEN AND WE ABUSED THEM. Even with the sources we have like recycling, only 9% of the world recycles. The younger generation soon won't even be able to g outside because there won't be fresh air. How can you live with yourself knowing you are killing yourself by using plastic and non reef safe sunblock. we are all using gasoline which we could fix using an alternative that's just as good. Honestly I wonder if its really that hard to at least stop using plastic straws or even start using reef safe sunblock. If you didn't know reefs dying is not helping fish, sharks or turtles. If you care so much about the turtles, SAVE THE REEF.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
50 minutes to save the world by Amir Zakeri.

# data[].attributes.body
(using of resources faster than making)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Humans are depleting the earth's resources at an ever-increasing rate. This is the product of an increasing global population multiplied by an ever-increasing level of consumption per person. More people on the planet leads to more:

Sewerage and stock effluent

Fertilisers, herbicides and pesticides

Fossil fuels extracted and burned

Oil leaked and spilled

Land deforested and developed

Soil eroded and degraded

Minerals mined

Waste and toxic byproducts of manufacturing

All of these things deplete or degrade the earth's natural resources. It is estimated that humanities' ecological footprint (a measure of consumption) is one and a half times the earth's capacity to sustainably provide the resources to meet that demand. The shortfall between the supply of resources and the demand for them is being met through the depletion (or degradation) of natural capital - things like fresh water, soil, forest land, wetlands and biodiversity.

Water

Water is critical to all life. Too little clean water can have enormous negative impacts. Water quality and conservation are acute issues that must be addressed.

Water quality

Water pollution is caused by a change in it's composition due to human activity. The three major sources of water pollution are municipal, industrial and agricultural.

The hydrological cycle is the cycle where water evaporates from the sea and is precipitated on land - rain, hail and snow - and is stored in the ground as groundwater (which is ultimately discharged into waterways) or if it cannot be absorbed it returns to the sea through run-off.

Much of the pollution discharged - deliberately or accidentally - onto the land or directly into waterways will ultimately finds it's way to the sea where it will affect marine ecosystems.

All discharges if they can't be stopped must be treated or otherwise managed properly.

Fossil fuels

Fossil fuels are by far the largest source of energy in modern economies - coal and gas for electricity generation; and petrol, diesel and kerosene-type fuels for land, sea and air transport.

Some two-thirds of the world's electricity is generated by coal-fired power plants, and coal is responsible for more than a quarter of global CO ₂ emissions. Coal is the dirtiest fossil fuel in terms of greenhouse gas emissions. For instance about 0.92kg of CO ₂ is typically released for every kilowatt hour of electricity produced in a coal-fired electricity generation station. Gas is a comparatively less carbon intensive fuel - about 0.52kg of CO ₂ is typically released for every kilowatt hour of electricity produced in a gas-fired station.

Unfortunately, we are not reducing our dependence on coal. In fact, coal emissions are set to increase hugely because of a tidal wave of new coal-fired power plants in the pipeline. In November 2012 World Resources Institute reported that 1,199 new coal-fired plants with a total installed capacity of 1,401,268 megawatts (MW) are being proposed globally. If all of these projects are built, it would add new coal power capacity that is almost four times the current capacity of all coal-fired plants in the United States.

Burning petrol and diesel for transport also releases huge amounts of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. About 2.3kg of CO ₂ is released when a litre of petrol is burned and about 2.7kg for each litre of diesel.

Peak oil

Unfortunately, from a climate change point of view, there are enough reserves of coal to last for hundreds of years. However it is believed we have reached, or are near, peak oil production at which point the amount of oil produced will decline as reserves become depleted. Read more about Peak Oil"

Land use and soil

Land use and land management practices have a major impact on natural resources including water, soil, nutrients, plants and animals. Land use information can be used to develop solutions for natural resource management issues such as salinity and water quality. For instance, water bodies in a region that has been deforested or having erosion will have different water quality than those in areas that are forested.

Two of the biggest issues relating to land-use are:

Contamination

Soil contamination is the human-induced deposition of harmful substances which are not a product of natural accumulation or soil formation. Many human activities, ranging from mining activities, industrial and agricultural production to road transport, result in pollution that can accumulate in the soil or result in biological and chemical reactions in the soil.

Erosion

Soil erosion is the removal of soil by wind and water. This natural process is intensified by human activities, such as deforestation for agricultural purposes, changes in hydrological conditions, overgrazing and other inappropriate agricultural activities. Erosion can lead to soil degradation and eventually complete destruction.

Land use for agriculture

Agriculture uses soils and water as a resource for food production, and at the same time impacts on these resources. The extent and causes of the environmental impacts of agriculture, notably by farm and crop type, vary significantly. Nevertheless, the continuing search for efficiency, lower costs and increased scale of production is resulting in substantial pressures on the environment, landscapes and biodiversity, particularly in the most intensively farmed areas. At the same time, agriculture remains essential to the maintenance of many cultural landscapes.

Agricultural production throughout New Zealand continues to rely on non-farm resources such as inorganic fertilisers and pesticides. However, there has been a decline in the use of these resources and, particularly in eastern Europe, a reduction in the pressure on the environment.

Recent shifts to environmentally-friendly production systems are apparent, for example, organic production and conservation tillage systems.

In terms of resource conservation, the most important impacts of arable and livestock production are those relating to soil erosion and nutrient leaching, respectively. Soil erosion increases with the share of arable land of total land use, mitigated by physical background factors (slope, soil type, rainfall patterns) and farming practices.

Nutrient leaching is caused where the application of livestock manure and mineral fertilisers exceeds the nutrient demand of crops.

While agriculture can exert significant pressure on the environment, it is itself subject to negative environmental impacts linked to air pollution and urban development.

Soil sealing by transport or housing infrastructure also eliminates hundreds of hectares of agricultural land every year.

Mining & mineral resources

The term "minerals" refers to a variety of materials found in the earth. It includes metals such as iron, copper, and gold; industrial minerals, like lime and gypsum; construction materials such as sand and stone; and fuels, such as coal and uranium.

Mining by definition is an extractive industry, often with huge environmental and social impacts that persist long after the mine has closed. For example acid drainage (where sulphuric acid is created from rain falling on exposed tailings) is an especially long-lived problem.

The fact is that modern society is totally dependent on the products of mining-from cellphones, to ipods, to plows, cars and even roads. The challenge is further complicated given that many mining areas overlap with ancestral domains, forests and biodiversity-rich habitats.

In 2000, mines around the world extracted some 900 million tons of metal-and left behind some 6 billion tons of waste ore. This figure does not include the overburden earth moved to reach the ores. There is no reliable way to dispose of billions of tons of materials discreetly. Catastrophic spills of mine wastes in recent years have resulted in enormous fish kills, soil and water pollution, and damage to human health.

The human cost

Hundreds of thousands of people have been uprooted in order to make way for mine projects. Many others have had to forsake traditional occupations and endure the effects of living beside a mine that poisons their water supplies or near a smelter that pollutes the air they breathe.

Each year 14,000 mine workers are killed at accidents on the job, and many more are exposed to chemicals or particulates that increase their risks of respiratory disorders and certain kinds of cancers.

Inefficiency

Mining is highly inefficient. Based on figures from the late 1990s mining consumed close to 10% of world energy, it is responsible for 13% of sulphur dioxide emissions and it is estimated that it threatens nearly 40% of the world's undeveloped tracts of forest. Yet it directly accounts for 0.5% of employment and 0.9% of GDP.

In 'Scrapping Mining Dependence' (Chapter 6 of State of the World 2003), Payal Sampat presents alternative ways in which the world can meet its demand for minerals. For example, it takes 95 percent less energy to produce aluminum from recycled materials than from bauxite ore; recycling copper takes between five and seven times less energy than processing ore; while recycled steel uses two to three-and-a-half times less. Yet, government policies still favor extraction, leaving recycling's potential poorly realized.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Human activity has affected the quality and quantity of natural resources available to life on earth including: Water Fossil fuels Land and soil Minerals Resource depletion Humans are depleting the earth's resources at an ever-increasing rate. This is the product of an increasing global population

# data[].attributes.body
By: stephanie

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Humankind is revealed as simultaneously insignificant and utterly dominant in the grand scheme of life on Earth by a groundbreaking new assessment of all life on the planet.

The world's 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study. Yet since the dawn of civilisation, humanity has caused the loss of 83% of all wild mammals and half of plants, while livestock kept by humans abounds.

The new work is the first comprehensive estimate of the weight of every class of living creature and overturns some long-held assumptions. Bacteria are indeed a major life form - 13% of everything - but plants overshadow everything, representing 82% of all living matter. All other creatures, from insects to fungi, to fish and animals, make up just 5% of the world's biomass.

Another surprise is that the teeming life revealed in the oceans by the recent BBC television series Blue Planet II turns out to represent just 1% of all biomass. The vast majority of life is land-based and a large chunk - an eighth - is bacteria buried deep below the surface.

"I was shocked to find there wasn't already a comprehensive, holistic estimate of all the different components of biomass," said Prof Ron Milo, at the Weizmann Institute of Science in Israel, who led the work, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

"I would hope this gives people a perspective on the very dominant role that humanity now plays on Earth," he said, adding that he now chooses to eat less meat due to the huge environmental impact of livestock.

All life graphic

The transformation of the planet by human activity has led scientists to the brink of declaring a new geological era - the Anthropocene. One suggested marker for this change are the bones of the domestic chicken, now ubiquitous across the globe.

The new work reveals that farmed poultry today makes up 70% of all birds on the planet, with just 30% being wild. The picture is even more stark for mammals - 60% of all mammals on Earth are livestock, mostly cattle and pigs, 36% are human and just 4% are wild animals.

"It is pretty staggering," said Milo. "In wildlife films, we see flocks of birds, of every kind, in vast amounts, and then when we did the analysis we found there are [far] more domesticated birds."

Livestock graphic

The destruction of wild habitat for farming, logging and development has resulted in the start of what many scientists consider the sixth mass extinction of life to occur in the Earth's four billion year history. About half the Earth's animals are thought to have been lost in the last 50 years.

But comparison of the new estimates with those for the time before humans became farmers and the industrial revolution began reveal the full extent of the huge decline. Just one-sixth of wild mammals, from mice to elephants, remain, surprising even the scientists. In the oceans, three centuries of whaling has left just a fifth of marine mammals in the oceans.

Wildlife losses graphic

"It is definitely striking, our disproportionate place on Earth," said Milo. "When I do a puzzle with my daughters, there is usually an elephant next to a giraffe next to a rhino. But if I was trying to give them a more realistic sense of the world, it would be a cow next to a cow next to a cow and then a chicken."

Despite humanity's supremacy, in weight terms Homo sapiens is puny. Viruses alone have a combined weight three times that of humans, as do worms. Fish are 12 times greater than people and fungi 200 times as large.

Humans v other life comparison graphic

But our impact on the natural world remains immense, said Milo, particularly in what we choose to eat: "Our dietary choices have a vast effect on the habitats of animals, plants and other organisms."

"I would hope people would take this [work] as part of their world view of how they consume," he said. "I have not become vegetarian, but I do take the environmental impact into my decision making, so it helps me think, do I want to choose beef or poultry or use tofu instead?"

The researchers calculated the biomass estimates using data from hundreds of studies, which often used modern techniques, such as satellite remote sensing that can scan great areas, and gene sequencing that can unravel the myriad organisms in the microscopic world.

They started by assessing the biomass of a class of organisms and then they determined which environments such life could live in across the world to create a global total. They used carbon as the key measure and found all life contains 550bn tonnes of the element. The researchers acknowledge that substantial uncertainties remain in particular estimates, especially for bacteria deep underground, but say the work presents a useful overview.

Paul Falkowski, at Rutgers University in the US and not part of the research team, said: "The study is, to my knowledge, the first comprehensive analysis of the biomass distribution of all organisms - including viruses - on Earth."

"There are two major takeaways from this paper," he said. "First, humans are extremely efficient in exploiting natural resources. Humans have culled, and in some cases eradicated, wild mammals for food or pleasure in virtually all continents. Second, the biomass of terrestrial plants overwhelmingly dominates on a global scale - and most of that biomass is in the form of wood."
Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Humans just 0.01% of all life but have destroyed 83% of wild mammals - study

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Humankind is revealed as simultaneously insignificant and utterly dominant in the grand scheme of life on Earth by a groundbreaking new assessment of all life on the planet. The world's 7.6 billion people represent just 0.01% of all living things, according to the study.

# data[].attributes.headline
Save the turtles, don't throw plastic into the ocean. 

# data[].attributes.subject
Save the turtles, don't throw plastic into the ocean. 

# data[].attributes.body
Manuel Aguilar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Plastic is everywhere: In your home, your office, your school - and your ocean. Among the top 10 kinds of trash picked up during the 2017 International Coastal Cleanup were food wrappers, beverage bottles, grocery bags, straws, and take out containers, all made of plastic. How did it all get there? Why is it a problem? What can we do?

The problem with plastic

While it's tough to say exactly how much plastic is in the ocean, scientists think about 8 million metric tons of plastic entered the ocean in 2010. That's the weight of nearly 90 aircraft carriers, and the problem continues to grow.

These plastics come in many different forms. Just think about all the plastic items you use daily: the toothbrush you grab first thing in the morning, the container your lunch comes in, or the bottle you drink water from after your workout.

All these things get used and, eventually, thrown out. Many plastic products are single-use items that are designed to be thrown out, like water bottles or take out containers. These are used and discarded quickly. If this waste isn't properly disposed of or managed, it can end up in the ocean.

Unlike some other kinds of waste, plastic doesn't decompose. That means plastic can stick around indefinitely, wreaking havoc on marine ecosystems. Some plastics float once they enter the ocean, though not all do. As the plastic is tossed around, much of it breaks into tiny pieces, called microplastics.

The first thing that comes to mind for many people when they think of microplastics are the small beads found in some soaps and other personal care products. But microplastics also include bits of what were once larger items.

Microfibers, shed from synthetic clothing or fishing nets, are another problematic form of microplastic. These fibers, beads, and microplastic fragments can all absorb harmful pollutants like pesticides, dyes, and flame retardants, only to later release them in the ocean.

What can you do?

There are many ways to keep plastic out of the ocean! Here are two strategies:

Reduce plastic use.
Think about all the plastic items you use every day. Can you count them all? Look around you. How many plastic things can you see? Being more aware of how and why you use the plastics that you do is the first step to reducing plastic use. Commit to changing your habits by reducing your use of disposable and single-use plastic items, reusing items and/or recycling them.

Participate in a cleanup.
Volunteer to pick up marine litter in your local community. Find a cleanup near you!

NOAA's Marine Debris Program (MDP) works to understand how plastics - and other marine debris - get into our ocean, how they can be removed, and how they can be kept from polluting our marine environment in the future.

Infographic text:

Commonly found Plastics include cigarette butts, food wrappers, beverage bottles, straws, cups and plates, bottle caps, and single-use bags.

How to help? Reduce, reuse, recycle. Dispose of waste properly no matter where you are. Get involved and participate in local cleanups in your area. Remember that our land and sea are connected.
Impacts include:

Entanglement: Marine life can get caught and killed in derelict fishing nets and other plastic debris.

Ingestion: Animals can easily mistake plastic debris for food.

Sources include:

Boats/nets: Fishing gear can become marine debris when it is lost or abandoned.

Littering: Intentional littering or improper disposal of trash can cause marine debris.

Debris can enter the water via:

Rain and winds: Rain and wind can sweep debris into nearby waterbodies.

Streams and storm drains: Streams and storm drains can carry debris directly into the ocean or Great Lakes.

Microplastics are small plastics less that 5mm. They can come from large plastics breaking down, or can be produced as small plastics such as microbeads, which can be found in products such as toothpaste and face wash.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
national oceanic and atmospheric administration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Plastic is everywhere: In your home, your office, your school - and your ocean. Among the top 10 kinds of trash picked up during the 2017 International Coastal Cleanup were food wrappers, beverage bottles, grocery bags, straws, and take out containers, all made of plastic.

# data[].attributes.body
There is too much trash, and that brings to much bacteria, and the cycle keeps on repeating.
Elijah Brown

# data[].attributes.headline
Fluoride in Water (By By Eros ViDemantay)

# data[].attributes.subject
Fluoride in Water (By By Eros ViDemantay)

# data[].attributes.body
Do YOU have fluoride in you water? Fluoride is normally used in your toothpaste, but most water is enriched in the chemical. It causes cancer.

"If you live in the United States, it is highly likely that the tap water you use is enriched with fluoride, a substance that helps prevent tooth decay. However, due to concerns that fluoridated water may increase the risk of other diseases, the capital city of Alaska stopped this practice. What happened?"

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Great Pacific Garbage Patch is a collection of marine debris in the North Pacific Ocean. Marine debris is litter that ends up in the ocean, seas, and other large bodies of water.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
What is biodiversity?

It is the variety of life on Earth, in all its forms and all its interactions. If that sounds bewilderingly broad, that's because it is. Biodiversity is the most complex feature of our planet and it is the most vital. "Without biodiversity, there is no future for humanity," says Prof David Macdonald, at Oxford University.

The term was coined in 1985 - a contraction of "biological diversity" - but the huge global biodiversity losses now becoming apparent represent a crisis equalling - or quite possibly surpassing - climate change.

More formally, biodiversity is comprised of several levels, starting with genes, then individual species, then communities of creatures and finally entire ecosystems, such as forests or coral reefs, where life interplays with the physical environment. These myriad interactions have made Earth habitable for billions of years.

A more philosophical way of viewing biodiversity is this: it represents the knowledge learned by evolving species over millions of years about how to survive through the vastly varying environmental conditions Earth has experienced. Seen like that, experts warn, humanity is currently " burning the library of life ".

Bugs are the base of the many wild food chains that support ecosystems. Illustration: Frances Marriott

Do animals and bugs really matter to me?

For many people living in towns and cities, wildlife is often something you watch on television. But the reality is that the air you breathe, the water you drink and the food you eat all ultimately rely on biodiversity. Some examples are obvious: without plants there would be no oxygen and without bees to pollinate there would be no fruit or nuts.

Others are less obvious - coral reefs and mangrove swamps provide invaluable protection from cyclones and tsunamis for those living on coasts, while trees can absorb air pollution in urban areas.

Others appear bizarre - tropical tortoises and spider monkeys seemingly have little to do with maintaining a stable climate. But the dense, hardwood trees that are most effective in removing carbon dioxide from the atmosphere rely on their seeds being dispersed by these large fruit-eaters.

When scientists explore each ecosystem, they find countless such interactions, all honed by millions of years of evolution. If undamaged, this produces a finely balanced, healthy system which contributes to a healthy sustainable planet.

The sheer richness of biodiversity also has human benefits. Many new medicines are harvested from nature, such as a fungi that grows on the fur of sloths and can fight cancer. Wild varieties of domesticated animals and crops are also crucial as some will have already solved the challenge of, for example, coping with drought or salty soils.

If money is a measure, the services provided by ecosystems are estimated to be worth trillions of dollars - double the world's GDP. Biodiversity loss in Europe alone costs the continent about 3% of its GDP, or €450m (£400m), a year.

From an aesthetic point of view, every one of the millions of species is unique, a natural work of art that cannot be recreated once lost. "Each higher organism is richer in information than a Caravaggio painting, a Bach fugue, or any other great work," wrote Prof Edward O Wilson, often called the "father of biodiversity", in a seminal paper in 1985.

75% of flying insects were lost in the last 25 years in Germany, according to a recent study. Illustration: Frances Marriott

Just how diverse is biodiversity?

Mind-bogglingly diverse. The simplest aspect to consider is species. About 1.7 million species of animals, plants and fungi have been recorded, but there are likely to be 8-9 million and possibly up to 100 million. The heartland of biodiversity is the tropics, which teems with species. In 15 hectares (37 acres) of Borneo forest, for example, there are 700 species of tree - the same number as the whole of North America.

Recent work considering diversity at a genetic level has suggested that creatures thought to be a single species could in some cases actually be dozens. Then add in bacteria and viruses, and the number of distinct organisms may well be in the billions. A single spoonful of soil - which ultimately provides 90% of all food - contains 10,000 to 50,000 different types of bacteria.

The concern is that many species are being lost before we are even aware of them, or the role they play in the circle of life.

How bad is it?

Very. The best studied creatures are the ones like us - large mammals. Tiger numbers, for example, have plunged by 97% in the last century. In many places, bigger animals have already been wiped out by humans - think dodos or woolly mammoths.

The extinction rate of species is now thought to be about 1,000 times higher than before humans dominated the planet, which may be even faster than the losses after a giant meteorite wiped out the dinosaurs 65m years ago. The sixth mass extinction in geological history has already begun, according to some scientists.

Lack of data means the "red list", produced by the International Union for Conservation of Nature, has only assessed 5% of known species. But for the best known groups it finds many are threatened: 25% of mammals, 41% of amphibians and 13% of birds.

Species extinction provides a clear but narrow window on the destruction of biodiversity - it is the disappearance of the last member of a group that is by definition rare. But new studies are examining the drop in the total number of animals, capturing the plight of the world's most common creatures.

The results are scary. Billions of individual populations have been lost all over the planet, with the number of animals living on Earth having plunged by half since 1970. Abandoning the normally sober tone of scientific papers, researchers call the massive loss of wildlife a "biological annihilation" representing a "frightening assault on the foundations of human civilisation".

More than half the ocean is now industrially fished. Illustration: Frances Marriott

What about under the sea?

Humans may lack gills but that has not protected marine life. The situation is no better - and perhaps even less understood - in the two-thirds of the planet covered by oceans. Seafood is the critical source of protein for more than 2.5 billion people but rampant overfishing has caused catches to fall steadily since their peak in 1996 and now more than half the ocean is industrially fished.

What about bugs - don't cockroaches survive anything?

More than 95% of known species lack a backbone - there are about as many species in the staphylinidae family of beetles alone as there are total vertebrates, such as mammals, fish and birds. Altogether, there are at least a million species of insect and another 300,000 spiders, molluscs and crustaceans.

But the recent revelation that 75% of flying insects were lost in the last 25 years in Germany - and likely elsewhere - indicates the massacre of biodiversity is not sparing creepy crawlies. And insects really matter, not just as pollinators but as predators of pests, decomposers of waste and, crucially, as the base of the many wild food chains that support ecosystems.

"If we lose the insects then everything is going to collapse," says Prof Dave Goulson of Sussex University, UK. "We are currently on course for ecological Armageddon."

Even much-loathed parasites are important. One- third could be wiped out by climate change, making them among the most threatened groups on Earth. But scientists warn this could destabilise ecosystems, unleashing unpredictable invasions of surviving parasites into new areas.

A single spoonful of soil contains 10,000 to 50,000 different types of bacteria. Illustration: Frances Marriott

What's destroying biodiversity?

We are, particularly as the human population rises and wild areas are razed to create farmland, housing and industrial sites. The felling of forests is often the first step and 30m hectares - the area of the Britain and Ireland - were lost globally in 2016.

Poaching and unsustainable hunting for food is another major factor. More than 300 mammal species, from chimpanzees to hippos to bats, are being eaten into extinction.

Pollution is a killer too, with orcas and dolphins being seriously harmed by long-lived industrial pollutants. Global trade contributes further harm: amphibians have suffered one of the greatest declines of all animals due to a fungal disease thought to be spread around the world by the pet trade. Global shipping has also spread highly damaging invasive species around the planet, particularly rats.

The hardest hit of all habitats may be rivers and lakes, with freshwater animal populations in these collapsing by 81% since 1970, following huge water extraction for farms and people, plus pollution and dams.

Could the loss of biodiversity be a greater threat to humanity than climate change?

Yes - nothing on Earth is experiencing more dramatic change at the hands of human activity. Changes to the climate are reversible, even if that takes centuries or millennia. But once species become extinct, particularly those unknown to science, there's no going back.

At the moment, we don't know how much biodiversity the planet can lose without prompting widespread ecological collapse. But one approach has assessed so-called " planetary boundaries ", thresholds in Earth systems that define a "safe operating space for humanity". Of the nine considered, just biodiversity loss and nitrogen pollution are estimated to have been crossed, unlike CO2 levels, freshwater used and ozone losses.

By weight, 97% of the world's vertebrate land animals are humans or their livestock - just 3% are thought to be wild. Illustration: Frances Marriott

What can be done?

Giving nature the space and protection it needs is the only answer. Wildlife reserves are the obvious solution, and the world currently protects 15% of land and 7% of the oceans. But some argue that half the land surface must be set aside for nature.

However, the human population is rising and wildlife reserves don't work if they hinder local people making a living. The poaching crisis for elephants and rhinos in Africa is an extreme example. Making the animals worth more alive than dead is the key, for example by supporting tourism or compensating farmers for livestock killed by wild predators.

But it can lead to tough choices. "Trophy hunting" for big game is anathema for many. But if the shoots are done sustainably - only killing old lions, for example - and the money raised protects a large swath of land, should it be permitted?

We can all help. Most wildlife is destroyed by land being cleared for cattle, soy, palm oil, timber and leather. Most of us consume these products every day, with palm oil being found in many foods and toiletries. Choosing only sustainable options helps, as does eating less meat, particularly beef, which has an outsized environmental hoofprint.

Another approach is to highlight the value of biodiversity by estimating the financial value of the ecosystem services provided as "natural capital". Sometimes this can lead to real savings. Over the last 20 years, New York has spent $2bn protecting the natural watershed that supplies the city with clean water. It has worked so well that 90% of the water needs no further filtering: building a water treatment plant instead would have cost $10bn.

What's next?

Locating the tipping point that moves biodiversity loss into ecological collapse is an urgent priority. Biodiversity is vast and research funds are small, but speeding up analysis might help, from automatically identifying creatures using machine learning to real-time DNA sequencing.

There is even an initiative that aims to create an open-source genetic database for all plants, animals and single-cell organisms on the planet. It argues that by creating commercial opportunities - such as self-driving car algorithms inspired by Amazonian ants - it could provide the incentive to preserve Earth's biodiversity.

However, some researchers say the dire state of biodiversity is already clear enough and that the missing ingredient is political will.

A global treaty, the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), has set many targets. Some are likely to be reached, for example protecting 17% of all land and 10% of the oceans by 2020. Others, such as making all fishing sustainable by the same date are not. The 196 nations that are members of the CBD next meet in Egypt in November.

In his 1985 text, Prof E O Wilson, concluded: "This being the only living world we are ever likely to know, let us join to make the most of it." That call is more urgent than ever.

Further reading
The Biological Diversity Crisis (1985). Edward O Wilson. BioScience (Vol 35) The Sixth Extinction: An Unnatural History (2014). Elizabeth Kolbert (Bloomsbury) What Has Nature Ever Done for Us? (2013) Tony Juniper (Profile)
The Economics of Ecosystems and Biodiversity (2010). Pushpam Kumar et al. (Earthscan)

Illustrations: Frances Marriott

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is biodiversity and why does it matter to us?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The air you breathe, the water you drink and the food you eat all rely on biodiversity, but right now it is in crisis - because of us. What does this mean for our future and can we stop it, asks Damian Carrington?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Each year, billions of pounds of trash and other pollutants enter the ocean.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
(Image credit: Shutterstock)

In the coming decades, more than a quarter-million people may die each year as a result of climate change, according to a new review study.

In 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that climate change would lead to about 250,000 additional deaths each year between 2030 and 2050, from factors such as malnutrition, heat stress and malaria.

But the new review, published Jan. 17 in The New England Journal of Medicine, said this is a "conservative estimate." That's because it fails to take into account other climate-related factors that could affect death rates - such as population displacement and reductions in labor productivity from farmers due to increased heat, study co-author Dr. Andrew Haines, epidemiologist and former director of the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, told CNN.

In addition, the WHO estimate didn't take into account illnesses and deaths tied to disruptions in health services caused by extreme weather and climate events, the review said.

The new review didn't give an updated estimate of climate-change-related deaths, but noted that reduced food production alone is predicted to lead to a net increase of 529,000 adult deaths by 2050, according to a 2016 study.

Climate change could also force more than 100 million people into extreme poverty by 2030, according to World Bank estimates, which in turn, would make them more vulnerable to the health effects of the changing climate.

All of this underscores the need for investments and policies to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions and promote ways to mitigate the health effects of climate change, the report said.

"Climate change is causing injuries, illnesses and deaths, with the risks projected to increase substantially with additional climate change, threatening the health of many millions of people," the report said. "The pervasive threats to health posed by climate change demand decisive actions from health professionals and governments to protect the health of current and future generations."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
More Than 250,000 People May Die Each Year Due to Climate Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
(Image credit: Shutterstock) In the coming decades, more than a quarter-million people may die each year as a result of climate change, according to a new review study. In 2014, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that climate change would lead to about 250,000 additional deaths each year between 2030 and 2050, from factors such as malnutrition, heat stress and malaria.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In the past two decades, the number of Americans at risk of experiencing a wildfire has doubled. Learn what you need to do if one is near you.

In the wake of Maui's deadly wildfires-where many died, and a historic town once known as the capital of Hawaii's monarchy was destroyed-residents and tourists are reeling from the damage.

The fires that burned through the island were worsened by intense winds from a nearby hurricane and drought conditions. Some experts have also said invasive grasses not native to the island created more flammable conditions that fed the fire's flames. Hawaii is not historically known for wildfires, but-like many parts of the world-is seeing more intense fires because of climate change and mismanaged land.

Wildfires can burn millions of acres of land at shockingly fast speeds, consuming everything in their paths. These rolling flames travel up to 14 miles an hour, which converts to about a four-minute-mile pace, and can overtake the average human in minutes.

Destruction caused by wildfires in the United States has significantly increased in the last two decades. An average of 72,400 wildfires cleared an average of 7 million acres of U.S. land each year since 2000, double the number of acres scorched by wildfires in the 1990s. In 2015, the largest wildfire season recorded in U.S. history burned more than 10 million acres of land.

Because much of the U.S. is expected to get hotter and drier with climate change, wildfire risk is generally expected to rise. At the same time, as the population in the United States rises and people increasingly move into rural and wilderness areas, more homes and other structures are likely to be placed in harm's way.

That's why it's critical to understand how wildfires get started, how to stop them, and what to do when they occur.

Introducing Nat Geo Kids Book Bundle!

How wildfires start

Though they are classified by the Environmental Protection Agency as natural disasters, only 10 to 15 percent of wildfires occur on their own in nature. The other 85 to 90 percent result from human causes, including unattended camp and debris fires, discarded cigarettes, and arson.

Naturally occurring wildfires can spark during dry weather and droughts. In these conditions, normally green vegetation becomes bone-dry, flammable fuel; strong winds spread fire quickly; and warm temperatures encourage combustion. With these ingredients, the only thing missing is a spark-in the form of lightning, arson, a downed power line, or a burning campfire or cigarette-to wreak havoc.

Firefighters battle the Woolsey Fire in Malibu, California, on November 12, 2018. That blaze burned nearly 97,000 acres in Southern California, killing three people and damaging an estimated $6 billion in property.

Photograph by Eric Thayer, Reuters

Natural or man-made, three conditions must be present for a wildfire to burn: fuel, oxygen, and a heat source. Firefighters call these three elements the fire triangle.

Fuel is any flammable material surrounding a fire, including trees, grasses, brush, even homes. The greater an area's fuel load, the more intense the fire is likely to be. The most wildfire-prone state is California, which lost 2,569,386 acres of land to 7,396 wildfires in 2021.

Air supplies the oxygen a fire needs to burn. California wildfires are often made worse by the hot, dry Santa Ana winds, which can carry a spark for miles. In Hawaii, Hurricane Dorian's winds helped feed the flames burning on Maui.

Heat sources help spark the wildfire and bring fuel to temperatures hot enough to ignite. Lightning, burning campfires or cigarettes, and even the sun can all provide sufficient heat to spark a wildfire.

Violent infernos are most common in the western states, where heat, drought, and frequent thunderstorms create ripe conditions. Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and California experience some of the worst conflagrations. Wildfires also occur around the world and in most of the 50 states.

How they are stopped

Firefighters battle blazes by depriving them of one or more of the fire triangle fundamentals. One traditional method is to douse existing fires with water and spray fire retardants. Firefighters also sometimes work in teams, often called hotshots, to clear vegetation from the land around a fire to contain and eventually starve it of fuel. The resulting tracts of land are called firebreaks.

Firefighters may also employ controlled burning, creating backfires, to stop a wildfire. This method involves fighting fire with fire. These prescribed-and controlled-fires remove undergrowth, brush, and litter from a forest, depriving an otherwise raging wildfire of fuel.

Benefits of wildfires

Although they can be dangerous to humans, naturally occurring wildfires play an integral role in nature. By burning dead or decaying matter, they can return otherwise trapped nutrients to the soil. They also act as a disinfectant, removing disease-ridden plants and harmful insects from an ecosystem.

High winds and hot temperatures fanned a 1996 wildfire in the foothills around Boise, Idaho, into an inferno that burned for seven days. When it was finally extinguished, the outbreak-dubbed the Eighth Street Fire-had scorched some 15,000 acres (6,000 hectares) and stripped bare two of the region's major watersheds.

Photograph by Mark Thiessen

Wildfires thin forest canopies and undergrowth, allowing sunlight to reach the forest floor and a new generation of seedlings to grow. In fact, some species of trees, like sequoias, rely on fire for their seeds to even open.

In Hawaii, however, invasive grasses not native to the state may have worsened Maui's fires. This flammable grass now covers about a quarter of Hawaii's total land area, and the average area burned by wildfires has grown 400 percent in the past 100 years, according to the Hawaii Wildfire Management Organization.

What to do in a wildfire

Wildfires devastate anything in their path. And while they are difficult to stop, there are many steps people can take before, during, and after wildfires to limit their damage.

Before:

If you know a wildfire is traveling toward your area, the best thing to do is leave. Immediately.

If you live in a fire-prone area, it's best to prepare ahead of time. Have an evacuation plan in mind and a "go bag" with emergency supplies already packed during fire season.

Trim brush, weeds, and other potential fuels on your property, especially around your home.

Put away grills, propane tanks, or other flammable materials that may be in your yard.

Close all doors and windows and fill sinks, tubs, and other containers with water to discourage fire.

Shut off natural gas, propane, or fuel oil supplies.

When you purchase a home in a wildfire-prone area, avoid neighborhoods on slopes that are steep or barren, suggests the California Chaparral Institute. Although some people fear that houses near shrubs are more likely to burn, that's not necessarily the case, the institute says. Rather, a landscape without vegetation can be the perfect runway for winds to bring embers, which are one of the biggest threats to homes during a wildfire.

Wetting your roof may help reduce the risk of airborne embers catching, says the California Chaparral Institute. In fact, some people in fire-prone areas even install rooftop sprinklers for that purpose.

If you cannot leave as a fire approaches, dial 911. Then don an N95 respirator to help reduce smoke and particle inhalation.

During:

Listen for emergency alerts.

Stay inside. Go to the safest building or room with the lowest smoke levels. Crouch low for the best air. If you don't have a mask, breathe through a wet cloth.

If you are caught outside, try to find a body of water to crouch in. If you can't, find a depression with the least vegetation and lie low, covering yourself with wet blankets, clothes, or soil if possible.

After:

Do not return until instructed to do so.

Listen to authorities before drinking water from the area.

Avoid items that are hot, smoky, or charred.

Text friends and family, but don't call. Lines may be busy.

Wear a dust mask and document property damage.

Beware of the risk of flooding, since trees and protective vegetation might have been removed, exposing loose soil.

This article originally published in August 2019 and has been updated with new information.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What caused Maui's wildfires to move shockingly fast? Here's what we know.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the past two decades, the number of Americans at risk of experiencing a wildfire has doubled. Learn what you need to do if one is near you.

# data[].attributes.body
Wil

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.freedomfromhunger.org/world-hunger-facts

# data[].attributes.body
18 million acres are lost each year, the size of panama, to make land available for other uses.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Deforestation can include clearing the land for farming or livestock, or using the timber for fuel, construction or manufacturing.

# data[].attributes.body
Everyday when we breathe in air, we are breathing in bad chemicals because of pollution.

# data[].attributes.body
only 1 in 10 bottles are recycled and they end up in our oceans killing our animals

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Plastics in the Ocean - Ocean Conservancy

# data[].attributes.body
This affects our human health because we breathe air everyday so if there are bad things and chamicals in the air and we breathe them in, we'll eventually all get sick.
https://www.theworldcounts.com/stories/How-Does-Pollution-Affect-Humans