Packaged Foods for Kids Often Fall Short of Global Nutrition Standards Mac and cheese from a box again? ©eurobanks/iStock The first years of life help shape lifelong eating habits, making nutrition especially important during infancy and toddlerhood. Yet new research presented at the American Society for Nutrition's Nutrition 2026 meeting suggests that the majority of packaged foods marketed specifically for toddlers are ultraprocessed, and nearly half fail to meet at least one nutrient standard established by the World Health Organization (WHO). The study complements earlier peer-reviewed research from the European Journal of Nutrition, which found that toddlers in the United Kingdom obtain nearly half of their daily calories from ultraprocessed foods—a proportion that increases substantially by middle childhood. Together, the studies suggest that ultraprocessed foods are becoming a dominant part of children's diets during a critical stage of growth and development. Key Data Researchers evaluated 2,783 packaged food products marketed for children 6–36 months old from 21 grocery stores in Austin, Texas. Infant formula, beverages, and first-food purees were excluded. According to the internationally recognized NOVA food classification system, 81% of the products were classified as ultraprocessed. Of all products intended for young children, 49% failed to meet at least one nutrient standard in the WHO Nutrient and Promotion Profile Model for commercial foods. WHO recommendations for sodium content were exceeded by 25% of products. WHO recommendations for sugar content were exceeded by 17% of products. While 11% exceeded recommended fat levels, 12% failed to meet WHO recommendations for energy density. Examples of products exceeding WHO recommendations included fruit pouches (high in sugar), oat bars (high in sugar and calories), macaroni and cheese (high in sodium and fat), turkey sticks (high in sodium and fat), and cheese or peanut butter puffs (high in calories, sodium, and/or fat). Source American Society for Nutrition (Nutrition 2026). 80% of Toddler Foods on Grocery Shelves Are Ultra-Processed (conference presentation).

A Clean Technology Has a Dirty Side—but It’s Improving By Rick Laezman* In this video, workers in a silicon smelting plant describe how their job is “like working inside a volcano.” To a world desperate to break its fossil fuel habit, solar energy looks almost like magic: a free, infinite wellspring of electricity pulled directly from the heavens with no carbon footprint at all. It is the wunderkind of the clean energy revolution, multiplying across rooftops and desert basins at breakneck speed. But beneath this gleaming, ecofriendly surface lies an uncomfortable paradox. Every solar panel deployed to save the planet carries a dirty secret—a heavy environmental debt incurred before it ever generates a single watt. From the emissions spewed by coal-powered silicon smelters to the toxic metals and resins in discarded panels, the assets powering the clean future remain tied to the very pollutants society is trying to eradicate. If solar is truly going to deliver on its promise as the ultimate green savior, it must first confront its own dark side. 70 Years of Solar First developed in the 1950s, solar photovoltaic (PV) cells have in recent decades expanded to utility-scale power generation. This application is growing rapidly. According to the US Energy Information Agency, utility-scale solar is the fastest-growing source of electricity generation in the United States, and that trend is projected to continue. Yet, the technology still has a long way to go. It currently accounts for less than 10% of total US electricity generation. However, at current growth rates, and coupled with other rapidly expanding forms of clean power, such as wind and geothermal, these renewable sources could conceivably displace fossil fuels at some point in the future and perhaps even make them obsolete. In this scenario, the energy industry would have finally cured itself of its fossil fuel dependence. [Silicon is extracted] in smelting furnaces fueled by sustained and intensive heat currently generated mostly by fossil fuel–produced electricity. Unpacking this issue reveals that the problem spans both ends of the technology’s life cycle. Solar cells are composed of highly refined silicon, a gray, shiny “metalloid” that has properties of both a metal and a semiconductor. It is extracted from quartz rock or sand through a process that consumes carbon-emitting materials such as coal. Furthermore, the process occurs in smelting furnaces fueled by sustained and intensive heat currently generated mostly by fossil fuel–produced electricity. A coal storage yard in Ningbo City, People’s Republic of China. As the leading suppliers of solar panels in the world, the Chinese use mountains of coal to smelt the silicon necessary for their manufacture. Tao Wang/iStock At the other end of the life cycle, solar panels contain numerous potentially toxic materials that create hazards for landfills or require expensive and energy-intensive steps to recycle. Finally, the world’s dominant provider of solar technology, China, produces most of its cells using coal-burning furnaces on a grand scale. These issues present a contradiction, making solar a source of clean power that is far from clean throughout the entirety of its life cycle. How the industry addresses these issues may determine how green its electricity generation can actually become. Why Are Solar Cells Dirty? All solar cells require routine cleaning to remove grime and dust so they can capture the rays of the sun and convert that energy to the electrons that constitute electricity. Unfortunately, the manufacturing process for PV cells is not so easily cleansed. Dr. Lars Schernikau is an energy economist and a visiting fellow at the National Center for Energy Analytics in Washington, DC. He is also the author of The Unpopular Truth ... About Electricity and the Future of Energy. He emphasizes that the dirty side of solar panels is often overlooked and largely unavoidable. “The idea that solar is carbon free or green is not correct,” he told The Earth & I. “The idea that solar is carbon free or green is not correct.” This contradiction within the life cycle of solar panels is largely attributable to the essential role of various carbon-based materials in the manufacturing process, most notably coal. “There is not one single solar cell possible without coal,” Schernikau added. To understand this essential truth requires a return to some basic principles of chemistry. A solar panel converts sunlight to electricity using a thin layer of silicon, which is number 14 on the periodic table of elements, with the symbol Si. This abundant natural material is, unfortunately, not available in a free or independent state. It is almost always found bonded with other elements. Releasing silicon from its tight chemical bond with oxygen requires an elaborate process that involves a heat-induced chemical reaction. This is a carbon-intensive process for a couple of reasons. Typically, silicon is found in nature bonded with oxygen as quartz or quartz sand (silicon dioxide or SiO2). To extract pure silicon, the quartz is first melted in an electric arc furnace. Then other ingredients are introduced into the furnace to trigger the chemical separation. These are referred to as “reductive agents” and include a combination of wood chips, charcoal, coke, and coal. The common denominator in these items is carbon (a chemical element with the symbol C). During the process, the carbon (C) in the reductive agents bonds with the oxygen (O2) in the quartz, separating out the pure silicon, Si. Yet, as the carbon strips away the oxygen, it forms a hazardous by-product: carbon monoxide (CO). Much of the CO then reacts with oxygen in the atmosphere to produce carbon dioxide (CO2). Both CO and CO2 are well-known greenhouse gases. Furthermore, the intense heat used to power the furnaces and sustain the chemical reaction is almost always created by electricity that is generated from fossil fuels. This is largely because fossil fuel–generated electricity has historically been the most available source capable of delivering the extremely high‑power, uninterrupted electricity required to keep a silicon furnace at 1,700–2,000°C (3,100–3,600°F) weeks or months at a time. The key here is grid stability and sustained power. This video shows a French startup’s approach to recycling solar panels. Solar Panels’ ‘End of Life’ The other end of silicon’s life cycle is also dirty, although in a different way. Solar panels do not have an endless lifespan. Historically, they have lasted for about 20 years. While the technology has improved—with panels installed more recently being more durable and lasting up to 35 years—the problem of waste remains. Regardless of their duration, the so-called “end of life” for solar panels is an important phase that must be managed. While the toxicity of silicon is not a primary concern, other metals in the panels may be harmful if not disposed of properly. These can include cadmium, selenium, silver, and tin, depending on the panels and how they are constructed. In some cases, panels also include trace amounts of lead for electrical connections and conductivity. Most decommissioned panels currently end up in landfills because recycling costs an average of $28 per module, whereas landfilling averages only $1.38. Most decommissioned panels currently end up in landfills because recycling costs an average of $28 per module, whereas landfilling averages only $1.38. This economic disparity is driven by the technical complexity of separating tightly bonded materials like glass, silicon, and metals, which requires energy-intensive processes. With a deluge of solar panels reaching their end of life within the next 20 years, without proper management the world could face 80 million metric tons of solar waste by 2050, overwhelming existing waste infrastructure. Chinese Solar Power and Coal When considering the dirtier side of solar panels, the role of China cannot be overlooked. According to the International Energy Administration (IEA), “China remains by far the largest producer of solar PV modules and components in the world.” In recent years, it has supplied 80% of the world’s solar modules and 90% of the silicon wafers that go into these modules. Thus, while the country is the world-leading contributor of hardware for producing green, renewable solar energy, its responsibility for the dirty side of solar tech is equally great. Indeed, the process for manufacturing solar panels in China is actually compounded by a heavy reliance on coal in the specific provinces of China where most of the world’s PV panels are manufactured. The IEA reports that global solar PV manufacturing gets about 60% of its electricity from coal. This number is significantly higher than the share of electricity the world gets from coal for all purposes, currently only 36%. The IEA attributes this divergence to two provinces in China, Xinjiang and Jiangsu, where the country’s PV production is concentrated and where coal accounts for more than 75% of the annual power supply. If society wants to make solar completely green, it will have to address these weak spots in the technology’s life cycle, and China, more than any other country, will have to address its role. The numbers don’t lie. If society wants to make solar completely green, it will have to address these weak spots in the technology’s life cycle, and China, more than any other country, will have to address its role. One of the products made from silicon is ferrosilicon, seen here being manufactured at the Elkem ASA plant in Mo i Rana, Norway. Ferrosilicon is a mixture of iron and up to 90% silicon and has a variety of metallurgy applications. Jarle Vines Jarvin/Wikipedia Solar’s Promise Still Shines Despite these unsettling realities, there is good news to report. First of all, the problem may not be as bad as it seems in light of all the clean energy that solar panels generate over their operational lives. Prof. Vasilis Fthenakis, an adjunct professor and the founding director of the Center for Life Cycle Analysis at Columbia University, told The Earth & I that the emissions generated in the manufacturing of solar panels are tiny compared to the pollution from the fossil fuels that solar power replaces. In other words, solar panels generate electricity from the sun with almost zero emissions throughout their lifespan of 20–35 years. Even when we add up the emissions from building the panels, the professor said, that total is still far less than what a coal or natural gas plant of the same size would release over those same years. Fthenakis added that when it comes to carbon footprint, solar panels “are the lowest among all electricity-generating technologies.” Another way to understand the potential of solar panels to offset carbon emissions is to look at the concept of “net zero.” Simply defined, this refers to a balancing, or canceling out, of emissions. When a technology removes or eliminates the same amount of emissions it has generated, it has achieved net zero. Annick Anctil, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering at Michigan State University, told The Earth & I that solar panels can achieve net zero, and that they do so “very quickly.” “The carbon payback time, which is the time it takes to pay back the carbon emitted during manufacturing, is usually one to two years,” Anctil noted. “This is very short, considering solar modules are designed for 25 to 30 years operation.” Furthermore, the environmental impact is even less alarming at the disposal phase. A study conducted by the IEA in 2020, entitled Human Health Risk Assessment Methods for PV Part 3: Module Disposal Risks, found that the health risk from solar panel disposal is minimal. Even in a supposed worst-case scenario, in which panels are disposed of in “nonsanitary landfills”—defined as landfills that do not have standard protections, such as leachate protection, groundwater monitoring, or liners—the risks of human exposure to cancer-causing elements and other toxic chemicals is “several orders of magnitude below” the maximum required by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The report also noted that solar panels “are unlikely to be disposed of in this manner.” A More Efficient Solar Is a Greener Solar While the environmental harm caused by solar panels may not be as bad as imagined, advancements in the technology are diminishing the harm even more. As panels become more efficient, the relative impact of emissions in the manufacturing phase decreases. Furthermore, a grid that is increasingly powered by clean, renewable energy means that the emissions generated in the silicon manufacturing phase increasingly approach net zero. At an Elkem silicon smelting plant in Norway, a front-end loader carries quartz rocks destined for an electric-arc furnace that will melt them to manufacture silicon. Elkem’s operations are powered 83% by renewables-generated electricity. Photo courtesy of Elkem/Einar Aslaksen Fthenakis, of Columbia, confirms this, noting that “emissions per unit of electricity generation are continuously lowered as PV module efficiencies increase.” Encouragingly, some of this change is visible even in China, where so much of the emissions from solar cell manufacturing originate. The nation is also greening its own power grid. However, it should be noted that China is also adding a record amount of new coal-fired power to maintain its grid stability, although generation from coal has declined. But Beijing's expansion of renewables does offer a positive prognosis for the greening of the country’s solar manufacturing industry. Fthenakis notes that “the sustainability of PV life cycles in China is improving as they introduce more PV to their grids.” Ultimately, if coal can be systematically replaced in the high-heat manufacturing process—in China and across the globe—the environmental debt of solar power will shrink toward zero, allowing clean energy to finally live up to its pure, green promise. *Rick Laezman is a freelance writer in Los Angeles, California, US. He has a passion for energy efficiency and innovation. He has covered renewable power and other related subjects for over 10 years.

Europe on a globe. Suzy Hazelwood/Pexels Earth’s major climate indicators continued to move into unprecedented territory in 2025, according to the newly released 36th annual State of the Climate report from the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society. The peer-reviewed assessment, produced with contributions from 625 scientists in 60 countries, draws on observations from land, oceans, ice, and space to provide what the American Meteorological Society (AMS) describes as an annual physical of the global climate. Key data from the report include: Major greenhouse gases reached global highs in 2025: The average concentration of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂) reached a record 425.6 ± 0.1 ppm in 2025—about 53% above the preindustrial concentration of approximately 278 ppm. Methane and nitrous oxide also reached record concentrations, standing approximately 166% and 26% above preindustrial levels, respectively. Global fossil-fuel carbon emissions reached a record estimated 10.3 ± 0.5 petagrams of carbon per year in 2025, more than three times the roughly 3.0 ± 0.2 petagrams emitted annually during the 1960s. All five major global temperature datasets assessed in the report agree that 2015 through 2025 were the 11 warmest years on record. The global land-and-ocean temperature in 2025 ranked among the three warmest in records in more than 175 years. The year 2025 was the warmest on record without El Niño conditions. Europe experienced its warmest year on record, while Russia, China, South Korea, and Argentina each recorded their second-warmest year. The annual global sea-surface temperature was 0.38°C (0.68°F) above the 1991–2020 average, making 2025 the third-warmest year in a 172-year record despite relatively cool conditions in the equatorial Pacific. Over the past half-century, the oceans have absorbed nearly 90% of the excess energy trapped in Earth's climate system. Ocean heat content from the surface down to 2,000 meters (about 6,560 feet) reached another record high in 2025. Global mean sea level reached a record 111.2 mm (4.38 inches) above the 1993 average, marking the 14th consecutive year in which satellite-era global sea level set a record high. The Arctic experienced its second-warmest year in a 126-year record. Arctic surface air temperatures are increasing at approximately three times the global average rate. Arctic maximum sea-ice extent was the lowest in the 47-year satellite record. By September 2025, only about 95,000 square kilometers (36,700 square miles) of Arctic sea ice more than four years old remained, compared with roughly 1.5 million square kilometers (579,000 square miles) during the 1980s—a decline of more than 90%. Antarctica experienced its warmest year since records began in 1979. Antarctic sea ice also remained unusually low, with the year's maximum extent ranking third lowest and its minimum extent fourth lowest on record. The world's land-based glaciers recorded a negative annual mass balance for the 38th consecutive year. For the fourth year in a row, glaciers lost the equivalent of more than 1 meter (3.3 feet) of water thickness on average. Since 1970, glaciers have lost approximately 9,000 gigatons of water, with about 41% of that loss occurring during just the past decade. Carbon emissions from global fires fell 26% from 2024 and reached their lowest level since the record began in 2003. Africa, responsible for roughly 40% of global fire emissions, recorded its lowest emissions in the dataset, as did South America. However, severe forest-fire activity persisted in regions including Canada and the European Union. Canada experienced its second-worst wildfire season on record, with approximately 8.9 million hectares (22 million acres) burned over five months. Another roughly 2 million hectares (4.9 million acres) burned across the contiguous United States. Sources: BAMS State of the Climate in 2025 Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society

Conservation Efforts and Nature Itself Are Rejuvenating and Expanding Many Coastal Forests By Jana Perez-Angelo* Mangroves, like this forest in Kampong, Cambodia, grow where land meets sea, in the narrow band of tidal ground that few other trees tolerate. Sean Phillips/Pixabay For decades, the world’s mangrove forests, which protect many coastlines around the world, have been struggling to survive, but a new study has reported evidence that many are rebounding, thanks both to natural forces and conservation efforts. Researchers at Tulane University published a study in June 2026 in the journal Science that found significant regrowth and expansion of mangrove forests, using four decades of Landsat satellite imagery, from 1984 through 2023. By 2023, global mangrove area sat within about 1% of its 1980s level, with the turnaround appearing around 2010. “After decades of loss, we’re finally seeing a global turning point for mangroves,” said Zhen Zhang, a postdoctoral scholar at Tulane and the study’s lead author, in an article released by Tulane. More surprising still was the mechanism. The recovery came largely through natural regeneration and expansion onto newly formed coastal ground, helped along by conservation policy and restoration, a result that suggests mangroves are more resilient than scientists had assumed and changes what effective conservation should look like. A Loss, Then a Turn Mangroves and their complex root systems, which typically grow in saltwater, are essential to many coastal regions. Mangrove forests provide habitat for thousands of species, stabilize shorelines, prevent erosion, and protect the land—and the people who live there—from waves and storms, according to the American Museum of Natural History. In addition, mangroves are part of the “blue carbon” sinks that capture and store large amounts of carbon in coastal and marine environments, according to Oceans Research News. However, for years, these extraordinary forests, which exist in 123 countries around the world, were disappearing. From the mid-1980s to roughly 2010, mangrove forests shrank by nearly 2,900 square kilometers (1,120 square miles), an area about the size of Rhode Island. Southeast Asia accounted for nearly 60% of that loss, which peaked between 1990 and 2005. In Indonesia, Zhang told Mongabay, the main drivers were agricultural expansion and the construction of aquaculture ponds. Then the trend reversed. Over the following decade and a half, regrowth and expansion outpaced clearing. Degradation slowed too, and forests that survived did not merely persist, they thickened, adding canopy year after year. “What we’re seeing now is a real shift,” said Daniel Friess, Cochran Family Professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences at Tulane University, director of its Mangrove Lab, and coauthor of the recent Science study, in the Tulane news article. “Mangroves are now showing a net increase globally, and the rate of degradation is slowing,” he said. The gains came largely from natural regeneration and from mangroves colonizing newly formed coastal ground, alongside restoration and legal protection. In river deltas, fresh mudflats offered ideal sediment conditions, and the trees moved in on their own. Tulane’s release names the US Gulf Coast, China, and Australia as among the places where mangroves are expanding. Zhang told Mongabay that scientists had “systematically underestimated the ability of mangroves to expand” on their own. Researchers also found mangroves reclaiming abandoned aquaculture ponds, which, in Zhang’s words, “provide a very suitable place for mangroves to recover.” “When mangroves are cleared, large amounts of long-stored carbon are released into the atmosphere.” Zhang’s own prescription follows from that finding. “The most immediate and effective way to protect mangroves is to stop deforestation,” he said. “When mangroves are cleared, large amounts of long-stored carbon are released into the atmosphere. But when deforestation stops, mangroves can continue to accumulate carbon naturally over time.” He cautioned, though, that the study does not mean mangroves are healthy everywhere, and that their recovery depends on continuing to slow the clearing of forests. Southeast Asia Mangroves Thriving The most noticeable example of mangrove resurgence is Southeast Asia. This region was the epicenter of the earlier losses. Myanmar was historically the most severely deforested major mangrove country. Southeast Asia supplied roughly 43% of the world’s mangrove gain between 2010 and 2023. Indonesia stopped seeing steep declines after 2005, and Myanmar has added about 10% to its mangrove area since 2010. Zhang pointed to stronger legal protection, heightened awareness after the 2004 Indian Ocean tsunami, and the resilience of the trees themselves as the likely reasons for the resurgence. Four decades of Landsat satellite observations (a 23-year interval shown here) revealed new mangrove forests forming along deltas and sediment-rich coastlines. NASA Science What the Satellites Could Finally See Counting mangroves from orbit is harder than it sounds. The forests grow in narrow tidal bands that shift with the water, and, as Mongabay reported, most earlier studies relied on radar, which struggles to tell mangroves from other forest types. The new dataset maps both mangrove forest extent and canopy density every year from Landsat imagery at 30-meter (98-foot) resolution, which let the team separate outright loss from thinning and thinning from recovery. That distinction produced the study’s second finding, which is arguably the more consequential one. Forests that were never cleared have been steadily filling in. A denser canopy holds more carbon and shelters more wildlife than the same hectares did a generation ago, so the world’s mangroves are in better condition than a simple area measurement would suggest. Mangroves, Biodiversity, and Flood Prevention Mangroves occupy roughly 15 million hectares (37 million acres) worldwide, a rounding error in global forest terms, yet they carry an outsized load. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) puts their average carbon stock at near 1,000 metric tons per hectare (446 tons per acre), including their soil, the highest of any terrestrial or marine ecosystem measured. Emissions from mangrove loss account for close to a fifth of all deforestation emissions. Mangroves have a flood-protection value that is much more easily pictured. Mangrove forests quell wave energy by up to 66% in the first 100 meters (330 feet) of forest width. More than 45 coastal stretches, many near cities, each receive over $250 million annually in flood protection benefits from mangroves. Loss of mangroves would increase global flood damages by $65 billion annually and expose 15 million additional people to flooding. Mangrove snapper swim among mangrove roots. Juvenile fish and shellfish shelter in the root tangle before moving out to open water. Everglades National Park/Wikimedia They are also nurseries. Young fish and shellfish shelter in the submerged root tangle before moving out to reef and open water, which means mangrove health propagates outward into fisheries that feed coastal economies far from the shoreline. UNEP values the full bundle of mangrove services—fisheries, water filtration, storm buffering, and tourism among them—at tens of thousands of dollars per hectare each year, which makes their clearance for aquaculture a bad trade even in narrow economic terms. Planted in the Wrong Place: A Philippine Lesson Few countries have tried harder or offer a better warning than the Philippines. The nation has been replanting mangroves since the 1930s through community initiatives, government programs, and large international development projects. Yet a review by Jurgenne Primavera and Jonathan Esteban in Wetlands Ecology and Management found that long-term survival across those decades generally ran between 10% and 20%. The problem with the Philippines’ effort was not money or commitment; it was placement. Planters favored the mangrove genus Rhizophora, whose heavy propagules can be pushed straight into the mud without a nursery, and put them on seaward tidal flats and seagrass beds, the lower intertidal zone where mangroves do not naturally establish, the Wetlands review said. The colonizers of that exposed fringe are normally the mangrove genera Avicennia and Sonneratia. Seedlings of the wrong genus set down in the wrong zone were battered by waves, encrusted with barnacles, and died. The reason was not ecological, and that is what makes the case instructive. The middle and upper intertidal ground where mangroves actually thrive had long since been excavated into brackish water fishponds held under private lease. The seaward flats were open access, with no one to object. Trees went where the paperwork was easy rather than where they would live. The correction is now underway. In 2024, the Philippine Department of Environment and Natural Resources issued guidelines requiring species–site matching and ordered an assessment of abandoned and underutilized fishponds as candidates for reversion to forest. That is the harder path and the only one with a record of working. New Ground, Including Louisiana Some of the mangrove gains are due to arrival rather than recovery. In the Mississippi River Delta, mangrove area dipped slightly from the 1980s through the late 1990s, then began to climb, with expansion more pronounced after 2012. Researchers attribute that mainly to warming temperatures, which let a tropical tree creep into higher latitudes, and Tulane’s Mangrove Lab is now studying what the newcomers do to a coastline built around marsh grass. In this video, Prof. Daniel Friess explains the importance of mangrove forests vis-à-vis climate in Louisiana and around the world. It is a genuinely mixed development. The Lens reports that species such as black mangrove are moving north as temperatures climb and are also being spread through coastal restoration efforts, and a tree that protects against erosion and stores large amounts of carbon is welcome on a coast that is losing ground. But a mangrove stand is not a marsh, and the species that depend on marshes do not automatically transfer. The same caution applies to the global picture: Mangrove expansion onto newly formed mudflats counts as a gain in hectares, but it replaces habitats that may have been themselves ecologically valuable. Recovery May Be Fragile Nothing in the new data says the threat to mangroves has passed. Sea-level rise is the one pressure the recovery cannot simply outgrow, and Friess has called it the biggest threat to these trees right now. Mangroves keep pace by trapping sediment and building soil upward, and where that supply is cut off by dams upstream, or where seawalls and shrimp ponds block retreat inland, the forest drowns with nowhere to go. The older threats have not gone anywhere either: coastal development and seawalls that leave no ground for the forest to retreat into continued conversion of coastal land for agriculture and development, which Tulane’s release flags as an ongoing threat pollution and altered river flow from upstream dams and water diversion. These [mangrove] forests rebound quickly when pressure lifts, a statement about their resilience as much as about our stewardship. Climate extremes can also undo progress quickly. In Texas, mangroves expanded for decades before an extreme freeze in 2021 caused a sharp decline, a case Tulane’s release cites as proof of how vulnerable the gains can be. A worldwide average also conceals a great deal. A net gain in one delta does not restore a cleared estuary somewhere else, and newly established forests are often young and less capable of providing the full ecological benefits of the mature stands they offset in the hectare count. The deeper caution is about what the recovery proves. It is evidence that these forests rebound quickly when pressure lifts, a statement about their resilience as much as about our stewardship. Natural regrowth, conservation policy, and restoration all played a part, and the evidence points to a combination rather than a single cause. Friess, for his part, hopes the story will help conservation by “showing how mangroves can grow back if we give them the chance.” Stopping the clearing, protecting what stands, and returning the right ground to the water is unglamorous work, but it is the work that shows up in the satellite record. That is the useful lesson for every other degraded ecosystem awaiting rescue. The Philippines spent 90 years proving that planting is not the same as restoring. And the mangroves have spent the last 15 showing what they can do when the pressure lifts. *Jana Perez-Angelo is a Denver-based writer and multidisciplinary creative and digital strategist passionate about brand storytelling and purpose-driven content. Her work has been featured in Relevant Magazine, Medium, and Faithful Life.

Worrisome for the Environment? A pro-life woman clashes with a group of pro-choice demonstrators outside the US Supreme Court building in Washington, DC. ©DJ McCoy/iStock Solving global environmental problems requires something that cannot be manufactured in a laboratory or legislated into existence: trust. Climate change, biodiversity loss, pollution, food security, and other environmental challenges cross national, cultural, political, and economic boundaries, making cooperation among people with different interests and perspectives essential. Yet the 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer suggests that this social foundation is weakening. Edelman describes a shift from polarization and grievance toward what it calls “insularity”—a reluctance to trust people whose values, information sources, approaches to societal problems, or cultural backgrounds differ from one’s own. The findings come from Edelman Trust Institute's 26th annual survey, based on online interviews with 33,938 people in 28 countries, conducted from October 25 through November 16, 2025. The data are designed to be representative of the general population by age, gender, and region within each country. Key Data Globally, 70% of respondents are hesitant or unwilling to trust someone who differs from them in core values, accepted facts and information sources, approaches to societal problems, or cultural background and lifestyle. A majority exhibited this mindset in 25 of the 28 countries surveyed. Japan had the highest reported level, at 90%, followed by Germany at 81%. The rate was 76% in the UK, 73% in Canada, and 70% in the US. Across the 28 countries, just 32% said the next generation would be better off than people are today—a 4-percentage-point decline from 2025. The report found double-digit declines in optimism in Singapore, Thailand, India, and China. Supplemental data presented in the report found 54% of low-income respondents expected people like themselves to be left behind by generative AI rather than benefit from it, compared with 44% of middle-income and 31% of high-income respondents. In the US, the respective figures were 65%, 50%, and 47%. Globally, 76% considered it at least a moderate problem that people with different beliefs, experiences, values, or ideas distrust each other so deeply that they actively try to make things worse for one another. Among people with open mindsets, trust in institutions headed by people different from themselves ranged from 65% to 71%. Among those with insular mindsets, it fell to 36% to 43%. Only 53% of respondents worldwide said they trusted government to do what is right, and government was classified as distrusted in 14 of the 28 countries measured. Global trust in media stood at 54%, despite rising 2 percentage points from 2025. Media remained distrusted in 13 of the 28 countries surveyed. Trust in nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) averaged 58%, unchanged from the previous year. NGOs reached Edelman's “trusted” threshold in only 12 of 28 countries. Edelman's Trust Index—the average percentage level of trust in business, government, media, and NGOs—stood at 57% globally, but developing countries averaged 66%, compared with just 49% in developed countries. Why It Matters Taken together, the findings suggest that while societies retreat into familiar circles, large majorities recognize that deep distrust itself has become a problem. Problems that ignore borders ultimately require people and institutions to cooperate despite differences. Source: 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer: Global Report

Agentic AI’s Toll on Energy, the Environment, and Human Well-being By Dhanada Kanta Mishra* What are the costs of agentic AI? ©Suchat longthara/iStock In early September 2026, an artificial intelligence firm reported a proposed solution to one of the seven Millennium Prize Problems of mathematics. Roughly 10,000 AI agents, running through OpenAI, worked in parallel for 88 hours to produce a 165-page proof resolving key parts of the 90-year-old Navier–Stokes problem. They exchanged some 2.7 million messages and consumed around 130 billion output tokens—basic units of data processed by artificial intelligence models—at an estimated cost of $10 million to $40 million. Days earlier, the same company released GPT-6 “Astra,” a model trained on more than 100,000 GPUs, with the company’s president declaring that “the AGI era” had begun—a GPU being a graphics processing unit, an electronic circuit that adds speed and efficiency to computers, and AGI being artificial general intelligence, a digital-based intelligence that can not only just answer questions but that can reason, learn, and apply knowledge creatively from one field to another to independently solve complex problems. Agentic AI—artificial intelligence that employs individual AI “agents” that each manage a part of an overall massive task and plans and pursues goals on its own—is no longer a research curiosity or a science-fiction fantasy. It is here, it is working, and it is consuming resources at a scale that’s only beginning to be understood. A single complex agentic query can draw 136.5 times more electricity than a standard chatbot response, and agentic token usage, which overtook human-driven queries in February 2026, grew 14-fold to 7.3 trillion tokens by August. As these autonomous systems reshape how we work and live, the question is no longer whether they are coming, but at what cost—to the planet and to ourselves. From Chatbots to Agents The differences between traditional AI and agentic AI are significant. An AI chatbot answers a question and stops. An agent plans, calls tools, checks its own work, and keeps going until a goal is met, with far less human oversight. Astra itself is marketed in the terms of agentic AI: It fills online forms, updates customer records, organizes calendars, conducts research, and builds websites. The shift matters environmentally because agentic workloads involve far more tool calls, more tokens, and more idle GPU cycles per task than a simple query—every planning loop, every moment of reflection, every “thinking token” can multiply compute cost a hundredfold or more per prompt. A human asking a chatbot for directions is cheap; a teammate walking beside you, checking every step, is not. A human asking a chatbot for directions is cheap; a teammate walking beside you, checking every step, is not. A visualization of an artificial neural network with a chip—the “thinking” behind agentic AI. Image: mikemacmarketing via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0). The Hidden Cost of ‘Thinking’ The Navier–Stokes milestone turns an abstraction into a concrete number: A single research result burned through 130 billion output tokens and millions of dollars of computation. It is an extreme case of a general pattern, not an anomaly. An audit by the South Korean public research university KAIST found agentic tasks can consume 136 times more energy than a comparable chatbot response, largely because GPUs idle while waiting for tools to respond. A Stanford study of agentic coding workloads found they can use up to 1,000 times more tokens than simple code chat, with input tokens—context and tool definitions—driving most of the cost. Navveen Balani, executive director of the Green Software Foundation, describes how planning loops, tool calls, retries, and compounding context can escalate a 2,000-token interaction into a 2 million-token workflow. OpenAI, for its part, declined to claim the $1 million prize associated with the Navier–Stokes challenge, and the proof has yet to be independently verified. The “milestone” was as much a demonstration of scale as of mathematics. But the impact is already clear: Real-world data from OpenRouter, a major AI gateway, shows agentic token usage has already overtaken human-driven queries and is growing exponentially. The same Stanford study, coauthored by Erik Brynjolfsson and Sandy Pentland, maps how unpredictably agentic tasks spend tokens, arguing that token economics deserve the same scrutiny as model accuracy. “The token is the unit we bill on,” writes Balani of the Green Software Foundation. “The kilowatt-hour, the gram of CO₂e, and the liter of water are the units that cost the planet.” Every token means GPU time, grid energy, emissions, and cooling water. The International Energy Agency expects data centers’ roughly 1.5% share of global electricity to more than double by 2030, while their water use climbs toward 1.2 trillion liters a year. Server racks in a data center, exemplifying the electricity and water cost of AI. Image: BalticServers.com via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 3.0). The International Energy Agency expects data centers’ roughly 1.5% share of global electricity to more than double by 2030, while their water use climbs toward 1.2 trillion liters a year. The Future of Work What agentic AI means for employment is still unknown—rigorous longitudinal data does not yet exist. However, the early evidence suggests the shift may reshape work more than replace it outright. A new report from the Boston Consulting Group estimates AI could reshape roughly half of jobs in the coming years, while tech researcher IDC projects that 40% of roles at the world’s 2,000 largest companies will involve direct engagement with AI agents. The likelier near-term results are agentic AI programs absorbing tasks requiring routine cognitive skills while humans shift toward oversight, judgment, and relationship work—even as the boundary between an “always-on” digital colleague and personal time begins to blur. The practical question is less whether jobs disappear than who is equipped to oversee, audit, and correct the agents doing them—a gap that may prove hard to close. The “AGI era” framing deserves a closer look. Nvidia’s chief executive posted that “AGI has arrived,” but the ARC Prize team, whose benchmark OpenAI cited, declined to endorse the label. Capability is real; the rhetoric around it is contested. Well-being vs. Anxiety How do people react to advanced AI in their workplaces? AI-based tools show early promise for supporting workers’ mental health. A recent systematic review in the British Medical Bulletin finds encouraging but still maturing evidence. Yet surveys now show AI-driven change as one of workers’ top concerns. Gallup research across more than 30,000 employees finds the difference comes down to trust and clarity. Frequent AI use without a clear strategy is associated with higher anxiety and burnout, while in high-trust workplaces, the same tools yield larger productivity gains. On the positive side, delegating drudgery to agentic AI may ease some forms of stress—the relief of a task finally done. But this must be weighed against new anxieties around obsolescence, oversight, and the always-on pull of a digital colleague that never logs off. A May 2026 report by CES-IFO found that 14% to 19% of workers believe their job is “somewhat” or “very likely” to be eliminated within five years. Frequent AI use itself raises that perceived risk. Writers fear AI use will result in loss of work and compensation. ©David James Henry/Wikimedia CC BY-SA 4.0 Christos Makridis, a senior researcher at Gallup, puts the human factor plainly: “The success of any AI initiative depends on the people, starting with whether employees feel that management creates a trusting work environment that is safe to experiment in. AI can help with tasks, generate insights, and sometimes validate results, but humans have a competitive edge in connecting with customers through empathy, applying creativity to shape and use AI-driven ideas, and developing the tasks of the future.” “AI can help with tasks, generate insights, and sometimes validate results, but humans have a competitive edge in connecting with customers through empathy, applying creativity to shape and use AI-driven ideas, and developing the tasks of the future.” Aligning Agentic AI with People and Planet The cost of agentic AI is not fixed; it is a design choice. Balani calls energy “the lever—the dimension that practitioners directly control but rarely measure. Reducing the tokens reduces the GPU-seconds and reduces the kilowatt-hours.” Three approaches to cut token and energy waste are to adopt “smarter reasoning budgets,” have fewer redundant tool calls, and cache information promptly. Asked which single design change matters most, Balani suggests eliminating needless “repeated reasoning,” e.g., designing agents to “reuse validated outcomes where appropriate, and invoke additional reasoning only when the situation genuinely requires it.” Organizations like the Green Software Foundation are codifying this into “Lean Agentic AI,” an efficiency-first approach that pairs token-aware design with carbon-intensity measurement. Two more elements—transparency about an agent’s environmental footprint and workplace policies that protect well-being alongside productivity—complete the responsible path. Systemic Considerations with Agentic AI The environmental question is not whether to use the agent, but whether the whole system reduces life cycle impacts. Consider a building-maintenance agentic AI that gathers inspection photographs, checks them against the building’s digital model, queries maintenance histories, drafts a work order, and routes it for approval. Used well, this AI can cut repeat site visits, catch defects earlier, and save the material and travel emissions of preventive maintenance. But used carelessly—with redundant scans, oversized models, and constant reanalysis—it simply adds a new layer of digital waste on top of the old one. Local inference—executing AI models directly on a user’s device, rather than relying on remote servers—is the other side of that coin, and it is coming faster than it once seemed. Distilled and quantized models already run on hardware that would have been unthinkable a few years ago—a five-year-old laptop with no dedicated GPU can handle lightweight models, if slowly and short of what agentic workloads demand. The trajectory points toward frontier-class capability on ordinary devices. And the gains are real: less strain on water supplies and energy-hungry data centers described above, lower per-query cost, and data that never leaves the user’s machine. The honest caveat is that the energy is not eliminated, only relocated—the tokens still draw power, now on a desk instead of a rack, and the training behind the model happened in a data center regardless. Local inference is best read as a complement to the efficiency levers already described rather than a substitute: It offloads the edges, while the heaviest agentic workloads continue to lean on centralized compute. There is a cautionary thread in recent news, too. OpenAI’s own chief scientist has acknowledged that more capable models are harder to audit, while Nvidia’s chief executive celebrated that 400,000 more GPUs are coming online. The trajectory is steep in both directions: capability and consumption rising together. Agentic AI has begun to do the work. Whether it becomes a burden on the planet and its people—or a tool we learn to lead wisely—depends on the choices being made now, not on the technology itself. *Dhanada Kanta Mishra is a PhD in civil engineering from the University of Michigan and is currently working as the managing director of a Hong Kong-based AI startup for building technology for the sustainability of built infrastructure (www.raspect.ai). He writes on environmental issues, sustainability, the climate crisis, and built infrastructure.

The International Year of the Woman Farmer Honors Women’s Role in Agriculture Women make up 60% of the agricultural workforce in sub-Saharan Africa. Safari Consoler/Pexels Women are indispensable to the farms and food systems that sustain the world, but their access to land, financing, agricultural training, technology, and positions of influence often falls far short of their contribution. That disparity is receiving special attention in 2026, which the United Nations has designated the International Year of the Woman Farmer. The observance recognizes women’s contributions throughout agrifood systems—from growing and harvesting crops to processing and trading food—while calling for policies and investment to address barriers involving land tenure, finance, technology, education, and decision-making. A 2026 compilation from Worldmetrics brings together 106 statistics on women in agriculture. The figures portray a striking contradiction: Women perform a substantial share of the work required to feed the world, particularly in developing regions, but often have considerably less access to the resources that can make farming more productive and profitable. Women Farmers by Worldmetrics Numbers Women constitute 60% of sub-Saharan Africa's agricultural workforce. In South Asia, they account for 43% of agricultural workers. An estimated seven out of 10 smallholder women farmers in the developing world are responsible for producing food for their households. Only 12% of women in low-income countries have access to agricultural credit. This stands in sharp contrast to women's substantial participation in agricultural labor and illustrates one of the financial barriers confronting women farmers. Land ownership varies widely: In South Asia, 12% of women own land compared with 35% in Latin America. In sub-Saharan Africa, 30% of women have secure land tenure. Women account for less than one-third of agricultural students globally. Access to technology represents another potential gender divide. Worldmetrics reports that just one-quarter of women working in agriculture use digital tools for farming. The productivity gap between women- and men-managed farms of equal size is 24%, according to the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). It attributes this gap to inequalities that include women's less secure land tenure and more limited access to credit, training, and decision-making. Women agricultural wage workers earn 82 cents for every $1 earned by men. The pay gap persists alongside the farm productivity gap, according to FAO's The Status of Women in Agrifood Systems. FAO estimates that closing gender gaps in farm productivity and agricultural wages could raise global gross domestic product by nearly $1 trillion, or about 1%. Closing those same gender gaps could reduce the number of food-insecure people worldwide by 45 million. FAO estimates that if half of small-scale producers benefited from development interventions focused on women's empowerment, the incomes of an additional 58 million people could increase. Such programs could also improve the resilience of another 235 million people. The numbers help explain why the International Year of the Woman Farmer is about more than recognition. FAO argues that improving women's access to land, finance, technology, education, and decision-making can increase agricultural productivity, strengthen resilience to climate change, reduce hunger, and help create more sustainable agrifood systems. Sources: Worldmetrics, “Women in Agriculture Statistics — 2026 Edition” FAO, International Year of the Woman Farmer 2026 FAO, “About the International Year of the Woman Farmer” FAO, “The Status of Women in Agrifood Systems” FAO, “Women’s Equality in Agrifood Systems Could Boost the Global Economy by $1 Trillion”

Why Countries from Europe to the Far East Are Rethinking the Future of Clean Energy By Leniva Leon* Workers stand outside the Grafenrheinfeld nuclear power plant in Germany before it was taken out of service in 2015. Fierce debate has erupted in Germany over the wisdom of previous governments’ antinuclear stance. Christian Visual/Beo Horvat/Wikipedia For decades, nuclear power seemed to have a time problem. A reactor took many years to build and sometimes decades to shut down, but its waste stayed radioactive for thousands of years. After the disasters of Chernobyl in 1986 and Fukushima in 2011, many governments decided the future would arrive before the nuclear industry could fix its problems. Now, several things are happening at the same time that are making governments rethink their policies on nuclear power. Electricity demand is growing faster than expected. Data centers running artificial intelligence need power around the clock. Countries are trying to move away from fossil fuels to meet climate goals. And the wars in Ukraine and the Middle East have shown how depending on imported energy can quickly become a serious problem. Nuclear energy, which many countries were ready to quit altogether, is back in the conversation. Nuclear power accounts for just under 10% of global electricity generation and remains the second-largest source of low-emissions electricity, behind hydropower. The International Energy Agency says that more than 40 countries currently support some form of nuclear expansion. Nuclear power accounts for just under 10% of global electricity generation and remains the second-largest source of low-emissions electricity, behind hydropower. That does not mean the old problems are gone. Cost, safety, radioactive waste, and long construction times are still real. But governments are weighing them differently now. Why So Many Countries Wanted Out For much of the late 20th century, phasing out nuclear power felt like the responsible choice. The Chernobyl disaster demonstrated that a nuclear accident could have consequences far beyond the site where it occurred. Decades later, Fukushima showed that even a technologically advanced country was not immune to catastrophe. At the same time, nuclear projects became associated with high costs and delays, while solar and wind energy gained ground in power systems. The Fukushima disaster sparked this and many other antinuclear rallies in Germany and throughout Europe and the world. Bündnis 90/Die Grünen Nordrhein-Westfalen - Flickr: Aufgebrachte Menge!, CC BY-SA 2.0/Wikipedia Germany made its nuclear exit part of its Energiewende, its energy transition. Belgium passed a law in 2003 to close its reactors step by step. Italy went first: After a 1987 referendum, it began phasing out nuclear, and by 1990 it had stopped producing it completely. The plan seemed simple. Close the old plants, build more renewables, and run a low-carbon grid without nuclear. But it turned out to be harder than that. War in Ukraine When Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022, it exposed something that years of energy planning had not fully prepared for: A country can be making progress on clean energy and still be deeply vulnerable if it depends on imported fuel. Belgium is one of the clearest examples. During the energy crisis that followed the invasion, the Belgian government extended the operation of two reactors—Doel 4 and Tihange 3—by 10 years. In May 2025, the parliament went further and repealed the 2003 phase-out law, removing the ban on new nuclear capacity. This does not mean Belgium is giving up on renewables. The country now sees nuclear and renewables as working together, because it wants to cut carbon and also keep its power supply secure. Keeping Old Plants Running Spain is dealing with a different version of the same problem. The country still plans to phase out nuclear power, but in August 2026 it approved an extension of the Almaraz plant, its oldest reactor, until June 2030. When announcing the decision, the government pointed directly to the conflict in the Middle East and its effects on gas prices and market uncertainty as the reason. For a country without significant domestic fossil fuel resources, that kind of instability makes a strong case for energy sources that do not depend on imports. At the same time, Spain said renewables and storage are still its long-term answer for reducing dependence on imported fuels. As Mycle Schneider, a German nuclear energy consultant and lead author of The World Nuclear Industry Status Report, told The Earth & I in an email interview, “Combined solar-plus-battery systems can now be deployed within months at competitive cost, providing a long-term [energy] solution. Implementation happens at breathtaking speed, as more than three-quarters of grid-connected battery capacity in the world has been added since 2022.” Spain’s Almaraz nuclear power plant. Frobles – Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0/Wikipedia Almaraz shows why this debate is not simply nuclear versus renewables. Closing a reactor means losing a source of electricity that works regardless of weather conditions. Replacing it without increasing emissions requires not just solar panels and wind turbines, but also storage, updated grids, and backup power for when the sun is not shining and the wind is not blowing. Choosing between [nuclear and renewables] based only on price per unit of electricity misses a big part of the picture. Solar and wind have a clear advantage in cost. New installations are now significantly cheaper than building new large nuclear plants. But nuclear produces electricity continuously and with low emissions. Choosing between these sources based only on price per unit of electricity misses a big part of the picture. The Demand Nobody Fully Predicted Something else changed the conversation in ways that few energy forecasts from 10 years ago anticipated: the rise of artificial intelligence. Data centers need large, steady amounts of electricity, and they need it all day and all night. The IEA points to this, along with the electrification of transportation and industry, as one of the main reasons governments are looking at nuclear again. Small modular reactors (SMRs)—which produce up to 300 megawatts of electricity (MWe) per unit—have become a big part of these discussions. Unlike the large plants built in previous decades, which produce 1,000–1,600 MWe per unit, SMRs are designed to be smaller, more standardized, and potentially faster to build, with modular parts being manufactured off site and then shipped to the building site. The idea is that smaller nuclear units could reduce the financial risks that have made large projects so difficult in recent years. The US has 28 siting announcements for SMRs, more than Canada (9), the UK (7), and Russia (5) combined. There are also designs being developed for microreactors, which are designed to generate 50 MWe to less than 20 MWe. The IEA estimates the first commercial SMR projects could be running by around 2030, but that still needs to be proven in practice. Two Countries Reconsidering Nuclear Taiwan shut down its last reactor in May 2025. Less than a year later, in March 2026, national utility Taipower submitted a plan to regulators exploring whether its third nuclear plant could restart. Even if approved, the company would still need safety checks, inspections, and a new operating license before producing any electricity. The pressure is significant for an island at the center of global semiconductor production, an industry that uses enormous amounts of power and is growing alongside AI. Italy is taking a different path. Nearly 40 years after the public vote that ended its nuclear program, Italy's Senate gave final approval on September 23, 2026, to legislation paving the way for a return to nuclear power, passing 81 votes in favor, 51 against. The bill gives the government 12 months to set up rules covering reactor licensing, safety standards, and waste management. Energy Minister Gilberto Pichetto Fratin called it a historic step, saying nuclear energy “when integrated with renewables, is a winning technology.” Countries That Never Left While some governments are still debating whether to reverse course, France, the United States, China, and Russia never really stopped believing in nuclear. France gets about 70% of its electricity from nuclear power, the highest compared to any country in the world. That was a choice made after the 1973 oil crisis, and France never looked back. Now it is going further, with plans to build six new reactors and possibly eight more. The Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant near San Luis Obispo, California. The US has had a longtime and robust reliance on nuclear energy to aid its electricity needs. Marya from San Luis Obispo, USA - Flickr, CC BY 2.0 The United States never stopped considering nuclear power either and today gets 18% of its electricity from nuclear generation. That endorsement is growing stronger, with SMRs being developed to power data centers and the US Army committing $2.2 billion to put microreactors on military bases. The investment is clearly there, and there is no hesitation. And with the US being so much like the world’s economic engine, commitments like these send signals to other countries that nuclear is a valid road to follow. The People’s Republic of China and Russia, for their part, have fully embraced nuclear power generation and are expanding their global footprint. With 34 nuclear reactors in operation, Russia produces about 19% of its electricity from nuclear and is building five new reactors domestically, with 23 more in the planning stage. While China generates only some 5% of its electricity from nuclear, it has 60 operational reactors and 37 under construction (the highest globally) with scores more planned or proposed. Both countries are aggressively building nuclear reactors in foreign countries and promoting their respective reactor technologies, while the US and France are lagging behind. The Hard Part But enthusiasm does not mean much when the big challenge is building a reactor on time and on budget. Large reactors are still expensive and slow to build. Recent projects in wealthy countries have gone significantly over budget and behind schedule. Large reactors are still expensive and slow to build. Recent projects in wealthy countries have gone significantly over budget and behind schedule. Financing remains difficult; big interest payments must be made to lenders over the many years of construction while no electricity is being produced for profit. The industry needs to rebuild the workforce and supply chains that were allowed to shrink during the phase-out years. And no country has fully solved the question of what to do with radioactive waste over the long term. SMRs might ease some of this, but they still have to show they can be faster and cheaper. How the public feels about it is another issue, and no technology can fix that alone. Germany is a good example. It shut down its last three reactors in April 2023 but has been consumed since then by a fierce debate over reinstating nuclear power. However, talking about such a reinstatement is not the same as changing course. In May 2026, a committee of the Bundestag, the German parliament, rejected a proposal to cancel the exit and restart the reactors that had closed. So nuclear power is gaining ground politically in many countries, but they are not all reaching the same answer. Where This Leaves Us The most important shift may not be in the reactors themselves but in how governments are now thinking about the question. They need to cut carbon while moving cars and factories to electricity. They need to power a growing digital world. And they are doing it at a time when energy dependence has become a national security worry. None of that fixes nuclear power's history of problems. It is also too early to say whether this will make nuclear a lasting part of power grids or just a bridge while renewables, storage, and grids get better. Belgium, Spain, Taiwan, Italy, and Germany are all going in different directions, so the answer is still being worked out. All that we can say is that national attitudes toward nuclear energy today are in flux, and that many governments no longer see quitting nuclear power as the obvious choice. But with the US in the West and China and Russia in the East now putting political, economic, and technical muscle behind nuclear, the door may be opening wider for this form of clean though controversial utility-scale energy. *Leniva Leon is a freelance author living in Prince George’s County, Maryland.

Rachel Wheeler Says Ancient People Knew How to Celebrate Life in Nature By Yasmin Prabhudas* An elderly Indigenous shaman of Cofan nationality praying in the Amazon rainforest. ©alejomiranda/iStock How do spirituality and ecology combine to promote a closer relationship with nature? What lessons can be learned from the ancient desert Christians? How can Christians move beyond the biblical command to “subdue” and “have dominion over” the natural world and acquire a more positive and harmonious view of the world? Dr. Rachel Wheeler, associate professor and chair of the Theology and Religious Studies Department at the University of Portland (Oregon), grapples with these questions in her publications and work at the institution. She is also cofounder and director of spirituality at the Heaven Human Earth Institute, a new center for adult education that unites classical Chinese medicine, depth psychology, ecospirituality, and mysticism. Its inaugural event will take place in Portland, Oregon, in July 2027. Author of three books, Desert Daughters, Desert Sons: Rethinking the Christian Desert Tradition; Ecospirituality, An Introduction; and Radical Kinship: A Christian Ecospirituality, Wheeler focuses on the intersection between religious practice, spirituality, ecology, ethics, and psychology. Rachel Wheeler at the Painted Hills in Oregon. Photo courtesy of Rachel Wheeler Ecospirituality Ecospirituality is fundamental to her philosophy. She told The Earth and I that “ecospirituality is a way of describing our relationship of belonging within a sacred cosmos.” Eco, from the Greek oikos, means home, while spirituality highlights the “sacred and life-giving in the context of earthly belonging,” she says. As such, ecospirituality celebrates humanity’s connection to the natural world. While ecospirituality could appear contemplative, it can also empower individuals to influence institutions and systems. “We need to allow our own hearts to be changed,” Wheeler explains, “in order to foment the radical, persistent, system-wide changes we need and Earth needs.” “We need to allow our own hearts to be changed in order to foment the radical, persistent, system-wide changes we need and Earth needs.” Her outlook is influenced by Indigenous wisdom. “There is so much wisdom already evident,” she says, “in the land-based communities around the world that informs and inspires my own outlook and approach to ecospirituality. I gravitate toward being intentional in appreciating rather than appropriating Indigenous wisdom as a method in my own work and practice, and responding to the invitation of some Indigenous thinkers to explore my own lineages of land-based spiritual practices that go back not too far. Partnering with and giving over the power some of us hold to people who haven’t had it and learning to hold it together differently feels like an important challenge for this time.” One of the few remaining Indigenous Kalahari Desert Bushmen at home. ©poco_bw/iStock Radical Kinship The idea of radical kinship sits in tandem with ecospirituality. “We’re kin with all by virtue of various levels of genetic sharing. New scientific understanding helps us trace kinship lineages pretty far back to the materiality that predates and includes the stars. Getting to the rootedness of that connection is what is evoked by the radicalness of this kinship,” says Wheeler. The concept is open to all. She emphasizes: “Whether or not the sacred is how another person would refer to this new scientific understanding could involve faith commitments and language of religion but doesn’t have to. We can all hold sacred what gives and sustains life, what nourishes us to be nourishing for others,” she explains. “We can all hold sacred what gives and sustains life, what nourishes us to be nourishing for others.” Language has a part to play. Terms like “save,” “protect,” “manage,” “creation care,” and “stewardship” can imply standing apart from and taking charge of nature. Other words, like “kinship,” “interbeing,” and “love,” can help preserve “our sense of ourselves as human earthlings working with the rest of nature.” Creation, Luther Bible, 1534. Workshop of Lucas Cranach, Public domain via Wikimedia Commons It's instructive to listen to a podcast interview with Gary Alan, cofounder of The Sophia Society, where Wheeler explains ecospirituality and radical kinship. Overcoming a Negative Legacy As a Christian, Wheeler believes people of her faith must address the religion’s damaging legacy, which includes anthropocentrism (human-centeredness) and a belief that preparing for the “afterlife” is more important than caring for the health of this world. Discussing the biblical idea of human dominion over creation, she comments: “People of faith have often misunderstood other ways to look at the Genesis creation stories that focus on the intrinsic goodness of creation. These other aspects of the creation stories in Genesis emphasize other elements that it’s been more convenient to forget than to hold on to.” Lessons from the Christian Desert Tradition Wheeler draws lessons from the desert Christians, who, in the third to the fifth centuries, lived in the deserts of Egypt, Palestine, and Syria. They led ascetic, contemplative lives, which influenced later spiritual traditions. “Desert Christians were withdrawing from systems of oppression and injustice in a way that many of us long to do today. I love the stories of their voluntary simplicity and nonownership and noncoercion. I think we can learn from them still,” she states. One of the oldest Christian cemeteries in the world in Kharga Oasis, Egypt. ©Siempreverde22/iStock One of the stories that Wheeler points to can be found in John Wortley’s translation of The Book of the Elders. A teaching of Abba Pambo, one of the desert Christians, discusses the quality of a person’s clothing, outlining that a monk should wear the sort of clothing that, if they were to leave it outside their cell, nobody else would take it. This story, says Wheeler, “speaks to me of a radical detachment from things or the consumerism that’s running rampant in our world today.” A similar lesson can be learned from the tale of two elders who wonder about the novelty of fighting over possession of a brick. They can’t maintain the fiction that either of them owns anything. Anonymous depiction of Pambo of Nitria. Public domain via Wikimedia Commons Wheeler explains: “The kind of desert spirituality expressed in the Christian desert tradition involves radical acceptance of limits and of cultivating a disposition of flourishing within, not despite, limits which our ecological homes ask and even require of us.” Rewilding in Practice Like the desert Christians, an individual’s own “rewilding” means “getting closer to our lives in relationship with the rest of nature,” says Wheeler. That could mean, for example, getting away from devices, growing something, limiting our diet to what’s available nearby, or getting outside and watching nature. Through “terra-spiritual inquiry,” or listening to place, we can recognize wisdom where there is wildness. “I definitely think that love, affection, and care arise from specificity,” Wheeler says. “When we, too, feel loved by the place we live, we want to care for the place more.” “I definitely think that love, affection, and care arise from specificity. When we, too, feel loved by the place we live, we want to care for the place more.” Her own practices involve reading and study. She is a vegan and is car-free, helping her “regrow a sense of my intimate relationship of care and contact with the rest of nature.” She walks through a nearby public park “with a sense of companionship and belonging.” These practices can help promote positive experiences “of ourselves as Earth beings in relationship with others to generate wonder, beauty, joy, curiosity, and gratitude,” she comments. Prompting Change If humans began thinking of other species as kin, everything would change. “We would not treat animals with such cruelty in our factory farming,” Wheeler says, “or despoil the ground with our agribusiness practices. We would no longer segregate ourselves in cities from the wildlife that persists with us but would rewild our cities more thoroughly to accommodate the wild kin living among us.” “What gives me hope,” she concludes, “is that so much is already happening among humans and communities to recover a deeper sense of belonging amid so much creaturely otherness.” *Yasmin Prabhudas is a freelance journalist working mainly for nonprofit organizations, labor unions, the education sector, and government agencies.

Increase Longevity with Exercise, Diet, and a Healthful Environment by Julie Peterson* Like their ancestors in the wild, dogs love to “roam” in “packs.” ©LuckyBusiness/iStock Some pet lovers may find this surprising, but lifestyle medicine is not just for humans. A growing body of research shows that dogs and cats, just like Homo sapiens, thrive when their daily lives include healthful foods and activities along with preventive care. And while pets are never with their humans long enough, people are looking less these days at increasing their pet’s lifespan and leaning more toward boosting their pet’s “health span”— the years of life lived in good health and vitality—to ensure the best life for their beloved fur babies. Pets come with genetics that may influence their lives, but lifestyle and environmental factors, largely controlled by humans, are equally important. In 2025, the Journal of Veterinary Science published a scientific review on aging in companion animals, finding that lifestyle factors such as physical activity, nutrition, obesity prevention, gut health, environmental conditions, and stress management play major roles in canine and feline aging outcomes. The study’s findings coincide with an increasing demand for veterinarians who practice integrative or lifestyle medicine using practical, science-backed approaches. The American Holistic Veterinary Medical Association (AHVMA) states that Integrative Veterinary Medicine (IVM) looks at the “whole patient—body, mind, and spirit”—including the pet’s relationship with humans and the environment. Exercise Body and Mind Cats love windows with a view. Photo Credit: Savannah Westby Hess Research consistently links physical activity with healthier aging in companion animals. A 2022 nationwide research study, published by GeroScience, looked at more than 11,500 companion dogs enrolled through the Dog Aging Project to better understand factors that impact health span and lifespan. The study concluded that “physical activity was the only lifestyle factor that was robustly associated with reduced risk of cognitive dysfunction” in dogs. Dogs and cats have instinctive behaviors built around primal needs. When these needs are met, caregivers support their pets and build a more mindful relationship with them. Dogs flourish when they can explore, connect socially, and be active in purposeful ways, as did their ancestors in cooperative, roaming packs. Cats instinctively want to hunt, enjoy vertical spaces with a view, and prefer to choose when they engage. Dogs may benefit from agility exercises, scent games, swimming, and other exercises adapted to breed. Cats love to climb, stalk, play with toys, or join their humans in interactive games. Activity boosts a pet’s mood immediately, further contributing to that all-important health span. A dog enjoying a swim at a beach in Rio de Janeiro. ©Murilo Fonseca/Pexels The study concluded that “physical activity was the only lifestyle factor that was robustly associated with reduced risk of cognitive dysfunction” in dogs. In play and exercise, think about incorporating your pet’s natural talents—like sniffing, listening, hunting, or pouncing—into daily activities. Cats will exercise inside when given vertical territory such as cat trees, tall scratching posts, or wall shelves to encourage jumping and climbing. They benefit from interactive play and will use their stalk-and-chase skills to pounce on laser pointer dots (give them a real toy to pounce on at the end of the game to prevent frustration), wand toys with dangling feathers, or a ball of yarn. Some cats will even play fetch with lightweight toys. “Toys should be hidden so the cat can discover the toy in the course of the day,” says Suzanne Denk, animal enrichment specialist at Animal Friends, in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. “Toys should be rotated so they stay new and interesting.” Dogs like to play hide and seek. ©Ольга А/Pexels Dogs enjoy a game of hide-and-seek in the house. Combine teaching “stay” with their hunting drive, memory skills, and social needs. Put them in a sit-stay, go to another room to hide, call the dog to come, and watch their delight when they find their target. It’s a reunion that will bring out the tail wags every time. When venturing outside, dogs are usually fine with a fitted collar, but cats can wiggle out. “It’s very important to use a harness, not just a collar, and to let your cat get accustomed to short periods of time wearing the harness indoors before going outside,” says Shelby Neely, VMD, at Banfield Pet Hospital. Make sure your cat wears a harness outdoors and doesn’t eat chemically-treated grass. ©Baramyou0708/iStock “It’s very important to use a harness, not just a collar, and to let your cat get accustomed to short periods of time wearing the harness indoors before going outside.” A pet’s brain also needs exercise. The 2025 Journal of Veterinary Science review states, “Environmental enrichment, including cognitive stimulation, social interaction, and stress reduction, supports cognitive function and overall well-being in aging pets.” Fortunately, there are many ways to engage pets in mentally stimulating activities that keep them sharp. Feed for Life An obese cat. ©Panini!/Wikimedia CC0 Pet obesity is increasingly common. The American Animal Hospital Association (AAHA) warns that excess weight contributes to arthritis, diabetes, cardiovascular strain, reduced mobility, and shortened lifespan in pets. A 2025 assessment of dietary strategies relating to aging in dogs and cats stated: “The expression of an animal’s maximum health potential can be achieved by nutrition tailored to its needs.” Most pet foods come with a “feeding chart” that indicates how much an animal should eat based on age and/or weight. But every pet has unique nutrient needs for long-term health outcomes, which is why it’s essential that a veterinarian considers any health conditions and provides an individualized, breed-specific, evidence-guided nutritional assessment for canine and feline patients. AAHA weight management guidelines stress that obesity prevention should be a priority for companion animals, which involves measuring food portions and limiting treats. Quality food is also important. Pet owners can make more educated choices in food and treat purchases by reading about ingredients used in commercial pet foods at Clean Label Project and by better understanding ingredient labels. Pet owners can make more educated choices in food and treat purchases by reading about ingredients used in commercial pet foods at Clean Label Project. Take Away Toxins A clean, toxin-free environment around your pet is also important. A simple mistake in choosing cleaners could result in extreme irritation or even a dangerous health hazard. For example, synthetic fragrances and other ingredients in carpet cleaning powder, liquid cleaning solutions, or laundry products may be too harsh for pet respiratory systems or skin and could cause vomiting or other illnesses. According to Michelson Found Pets, essential oils are especially dangerous: “Many oils are basically poisonous or toxic, because their reactions mess up a pet’s natural body chemistry. Human bodies can process a lot of weird stuff, but animals are often much more limited in what is safe for them.” This can be true, even if the oils are diffused in the air or mixed into mop water. A cat sleeping near an essential oil diffuser might not be a good idea. ©Ekaterina Fedulyeva/iStock Pesticides on lawns are another danger. A product may be advertised as safe for people and pets, but pets are more sensitive to toxins than previously realized. The chemicals may not do obvious harm in the short term, but long-term accumulation has been shown to cause cancer and myriad health issues. It’s worth researching, and for the benefit of pets, people, and pollinators, it’s advised to go organic. Integrative Veterinary Care Pet parents can control many lifestyle factors, but finding the root of their pet’s illness is what integrative veterinarians are trained to do. The American Veterinary Medical Association says that IVM is “a comprehensive approach to animal health care that combines conventional veterinary practices with complementary and alternative therapies, such as acupuncture and chiropractic care.” Other modalities may include herbal medicine, kinesiology, or laser therapy. Some IVM practitioners use acupuncture as a treatment. ©humonia/iStock “With conventional medicine, we tend to treat the symptoms versus treating the root cause of disease, which is why a majority of the time, the symptoms return when the drug is finished. However, when you use a holistic approach to your pet’s health, we are looking for the root cause of disease,” says veterinarian Katie Woodley in Fort Collins, Colorado, who blogs at TheNaturalPetDoctor.com. “With a holistic approach, we look at the nutrition, gut health, and how all the systems are connected and resolve the imbalance.” Holistic veterinarians in the US must have the Doctor of Veterinary Medicine (DVM) degree prior to pursuing optional holistic training. It’s a choice that can require a great deal of time and effort, which is one reason IVM clinics are difficult to find. Supply is definitely behind demand for IVM, and pet parents may need to travel an hour or more for an appointment. To find a practitioner, AHVMA has a search-by-state feature that also lists the modalities of each veterinarian. Woodley and many IVM practitioners also offer telehealth when possible. In lieu of finding an IVM clinic, some DVM clinics follow a similar approach, without the extra modalities such as herbal medicine. The AHVMA states that the holistic approach is “gentle, minimally invasive, and incorporates patient emotions and well-being. Holistic thinking is centered on love, empathy, and respect.” Certainly, many veterinarians use a holistic approach while administering conventional medical techniques. Our pets are often unaware of the choices we make for them. By supporting their well-being and quality of life, we will be part of furthering a world where more mindful relationships with other living beings is the norm. We can elevate pet care to conscious stewardship, guided by empathy and rooted in respect and the awareness that a pet’s health span depends on us. *Julie Peterson writes science-based articles about holistic health, environmental issues, and sustainable living.

Could Princeton Theological Seminary’s Regenerative Ag Program Be the Future of Faith? By Gordon Cairns* Rev. Dr. Nathan Stucky (rear, in white, checkered shirt) with future harvesters of food and leaders of faith-filled communities. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary For generations, seminaries have prepared future clergy in classrooms, libraries, and sanctuaries. Today, at Princeton Theological Seminary’s Farminary, many of the most important lessons begin in compost piles, vegetable beds, chicken coops, and shared meals. The New Jersey school’s Farminary—a blend of “farm” and “seminary”—is reimagining theological education by integrating regenerative agriculture with spiritual formation, ecological stewardship, and community life. The Farminary also offers an unexpected model for healing. Students learn not only theology but also how healthy soil, seasonal rhythms, food justice, and honoring the Sabbath can reshape the way future faith leaders understand ministry. Rather than treating environmental stewardship as a niche concern, the program presents care for creation as central to spiritual life: Students from diverse backgrounds are invited to rediscover their relationship with the land—and with one another. Rev. Dr. Nathan Stucky (left) leads new student orientation. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary Reviving Faith and Earth In an age marked by environmental anxiety, loneliness, and relentless productivity, could working the land become a pathway toward restoring both faith communities and the Earth? Rev. Dr. Nathan Stucky, founder and director of the Farminary, didn’t always believe so. When he moved across country with his family to begin eight years of studying theology at the venerable Princeton Theological Seminary—the nation’s second-oldest seminary—he naturally assumed he would be abandoning his life of wrestling with soil for one of wrestling with theological questions. “When I left farming in 2007 to move to the seminary to be a student, it was simply beyond my own theological or vocational imagination that [farming and theology] could go together,” he told The Earth and I via a Zoom call. “When I left farming in 2007 to move to the seminary to be a student, it was simply beyond my own theological or vocational imagination that [farming and theology] could go together.” Rev. Dr. Nathan Stucky, founder/director of Princeton Theological Seminary’s Farminary, stands in front of a barn on the program’s working farm. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary Stucky grew up on a farm in Kansas and worked in youth ministry before becoming a farmer himself. Those years were where his love of the land, farming, and his Christian faith all took root. As he studied theology, the connections between the natural world and the word of God became crystal clear to him. It was from these initial thoughts that the idea of the Farminary began to grow. As Stucky’s theological studies were concluding, he approached the president of the seminary about his idea for a Farminary, having already been offered the use of a farm in Kentucky. Although ideal in many ways, the farm in Kentucky was a 10-hour drive from Princeton. He then learned that Princeton’s seminary had its own 21-acre farm that he could use to establish his unique way of teaching future faith leaders. The Parable of the Sower Rev. Dr. Stucky speaking in front of the compost that is bringing the Farminary’s soil back to life. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary Having the land was one thing, but growing crops on land exhausted by its previous tenure as a turf farm was another. “We wanted to plant a garden, but there was no topsoil,” Stucky explained. He cited a sermon he had preached on the Parable of the Sower, found in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, to show the connection between the Farminary’s land and the farmer in the parable who plants seeds on four types of ground. “I can no longer read it as a story of three failures and one success. I can only see it as one long story that encompasses countless generations, endless cycles of life, death, and new life that in time can bring about a rich harvest even from the places and spaces that today seem most lifeless,” Stucky said. “I can only see [the Parable of the Sower] as one long story that encompasses countless generations, endless cycles of life, death, and new life that in time can bring about a rich harvest even from the places and spaces that today seem most lifeless.” The physical land of the Princeton farm “bears the wounds” of previous stewards, he said. “Too many of the norms of these relationships in our world are built on the same assumptions of extraction, exhaustion and exploitation.” Fresh, healthy growth shows that the former sod farm’s days of extraction, exhaustion, and exploitation are over. Images courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary These lessons from the land suggest that the Farminary can benefit everyone who works with it. Growing Faith Leaders, Too Over the life of the Farminary, as director of the project, Stucky said his own relationship with the word of God has altered radically: “I [now] read Christian scriptures completely differently from the way I did 12 years ago. Simply because when you read the Bible at the farm, or in the forest or with the stream, all of a sudden you recognize these are all characters in the story.” This shifting perception about the natural world helped create the Farminary’s purpose: “The mission of the Farminary is ultimately about shaping this different kind of faith and faith leader that recognizes much of what has gone wrong in the world [is] because humans have placed themselves at the top of some kind of hierarchy. Now, we are learning to reposition ourselves.” And that repositioning reframes what happens on the Farminary. The land grows tomatoes, squash, beans, and chickens, but it also impacts the people. “We hope to be growing on the farm a different kind of leader. I put myself in that pool of leaders needing to be reformed or shaped anew,” Stucky said. Future faith leaders in the classroom. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary “Our teachers are the Spirit who is ever recreating the trees and the insects and the soil and the waters,” he added. Learning from nature is emphasized on their very first day for students pursuing the Master of Arts in Theology and Ecology. They are told to find a tree to befriend, then spend time with it, observing it closely: “The exercise is how we reframe ourselves relative to these nonhuman creatures.” Learning from nature is emphasized on their very first day for students of the Master of Arts in Theology and Ecology. They are told to find a tree to befriend, then spend time with it, observing it closely. The Farminary’s chickens. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary. Not all activities are so benign. One of Stucky’s colleagues teaches a course on the theology of food ethics, which requires spending time with the farm’s chickens. When it is time for the birds to be slaughtered, the students must be on the farm as a minimum requirement and can be as closely involved in the butchering as they can handle. Finally, the class eats a communally prepared meal with those chickens as the main course. “We can sit in a library or a traditional classroom and read those texts about the theology and ethics of food, where you can learn good things,” Stucky said. “But the power of the farm makes the subject matter self-evident; it is not just about ideas in the ether but about flesh-and-blood reality. We are talking about the actual lives of creatures.” As would be expected from graduates from such a unique seminary, their destinations are not necessarily within ministry. Many go on to work for nonprofit organizations, including those that tackle food security or food justice. One graduate returned to his previous role as a landscape architect with the new understanding that all decisions are rooted in values of some kind, even if not necessarily religious. Another graduate became a minister to a Presbyterian Church that had lost its church building and now worships almost exclusively outdoors. Honoring the Sabbath As much as the Farminary is about working towards a better world, it is also about rest. As Stucky, author of Wrestling with Rest: Inviting Youth to Discover the Gift of Sabbath, explained: “Life is a pressure cooker for young people; never stop achieving, never stop producing, never stop consuming. Sabbath is the release from that. The exhaustion of people and of the land [are] two sides of the same coin; exhaustion is not God’s desire for creation.” Sharing the Farminary’s bounty and vision with guests. Image courtesy of Princeton Theological Seminary. To make a lasting difference, the power of the Farminary cannot be limited to 21 acres of farmland in New Jersey, and Stucky is enthusiastic about creating future relationships outside its boundaries. “I think the most exciting work in the next 10 years will be to get multidiscipline, multi-institutional people together with their hands in the soil, hands in the compost pile, thinking about what’s possible and how to reimagine the world.” *Gordon Cairns is a freelance journalist and teacher of English at the Forest Schools, based in Scotland.

Farmer spraying pesticides on soil and crops. Aleksander Dumala/Pexels New research suggests that the danger of pesticide use extends beyond the sheer volume of chemicals being applied. A 2026 study published in Science found that the overall ecological toxicity of pesticides has risen significantly worldwide because many of today's pesticides are more harmful to nontarget species than those they replace. The findings also coincide with growing concerns about children's health and expanding global pesticide markets. Recent reports from UNICEF and other researchers warn that children are especially vulnerable to pesticide exposure. Meanwhile, the use of pesticides is projected to intensify. Key Data More than 600 pesticides were analyzed across 65 countries, representing approximately 79.4% of the world's cropland, making the study one of the most comprehensive global assessments of pesticide toxicity to date. Researchers found that total applied toxicity (TAT) increased for six of eight major groups of organisms studied between 2013 and 2019, indicating that ecological risks are increasing despite international biodiversity goals. Toxicity affecting terrestrial insects increased by approximately 42.9%, the largest increase observed among all species groups. Toxicity toward soil organisms increased by 30.8%, raising concerns about soil fertility and ecosystem functioning. Just 20 pesticide active ingredients account for more than 90% of the global toxic impacts on insects, worms, and many other forms of wildlife, suggesting that reducing use of a relatively small group of chemicals could substantially lower ecological risks. China, Brazil, the United States, and India together account for 53%–68% of global applied pesticide toxicity, making them critical to worldwide risk-reduction efforts. Five crop groups—fruits and vegetables, corn, soybeans, cereals, and rice—generate 76%–83% of global pesticide toxicity because of the intensity and types of pesticides used in their production. Among the countries evaluated, only one—Chile—is currently on track to meet the United Nations' target of reducing pesticide risk by 50% by 2030. Global pesticide use has roughly doubled between 1990 and 2022, according to UNICEF. UNICEF identifies children under age five, pregnant women, and agricultural communities as among the populations at greatest risk. Children are listed because their developing brains and bodies are especially sensitive to pesticide exposure. A 2026 review in One Health Advances concludes that pesticide exposure continues to be associated with adverse effects on human health, biodiversity, soil organisms, pollinators, aquatic ecosystems, and food security, reinforcing calls for more sustainable pest management strategies.