SEARCH

The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES)*, founded in Panama in 2012 by the governments of 94 nations, has issued a report estimating that some 37,000 invasive alien species have been introduced worldwide, typically via human activity. The September 2023 report by the independent, 143-member state IPBES [the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) provides secretariat services to IPBES] calls invasive alien species a “major global threat” to the natural world and to human food security, economic development, and health. According to the IPBES’ Assessment Report on Invasive Alien Species and their Control: Invasive alien species are one of the five major drivers of biodiversity loss. More than 3,500 of the 37,000 invasive alien species are “harmful” or “threatening to nature, nature’s contribution to people and good quality of life.” In 2019 alone, the global cost of invasive alien species exceeded $423 billion; costs have quadrupled each decade since 1970. To date, 1,061 alien plants are known to be invasive worldwide, as are 1,852 alien invertebrates (22%), 461 alien vertebrates (14%), and 141 alien microbes (11%). Prof. Anibal Pauchard of Chile, co-chair of the assessment, said that around 218 invasive alien species have been responsible for over 1,200 local extinctions, and 85% of the impacts of alien invasions on native species are negative. About 80% of the documented impacts of invasions on nature’s contributions to people are negative, with the report citing the impact of the European shore crab on commercial shellfish beds in New England as an example. In addition, an estimated 85% of documented impacts (3,208) negatively affect human quality of life, such as the health impacts of malaria, Zika, and West Nile Fever spread by invasive mosquito populations. (The remaining 15% or 575 had positive impacts.) The “world’s most widespread” invasive alien species is the water hyacinth. In Uganda’s Lake Victoria, for instance, the invasive weed has clogged shorelines; blocked access to fishing areas and reduced catches; interrupted electricity from hydropower plants; and encouraged mosquito populations. Sources: https://www.ipbes.net/IASmediarelease https://www.ipbes.net/ *The Intergovernmental Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is an independent intergovernmental body established by states to strengthen the science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being and sustainable development. It was established in Panama City, on April 21, 2012, by 94 Governments. It is not a United Nations body. However, at the request of the IPBES Plenary and with the authorization of the UNEP Governing Council in 2013, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) provides secretariat services to IPBES.

Report Highlights Projected Growth in Solar, Storage, and Clean Hydrogen Deloitte Insight is a global provider (with offices in 134 countries) of advisory, audit, assurance, consulting, risk management, and tax services, along with propriety research. Their US renewable energy industry outlook report for 2024 sees growth in solar, storage, and clean hydrogen, with minimal growth in wind. The report, released in December 2023 by Deloitte’s Research Center for Energy & Industrials, projects around 100,000 new jobs will be created this year. A Deloitte survey found that only 2% of respondents saw no constraints on their renewable energy deployment plans for 2024. For others, the top concerns were costs (32%), permits (24%), and resilience during adverse weather events (18%). The same respondents said gas (46%) and nuclear (34%) were likely to be the most resilient to extreme weather events in their territories. Coal and solar (8% each) and wind (4%) were deemed less reliable. Current solar module capacity is 13.1 gigawatts-direct current (GWdc), and this is projected to increase to a total of 57.3 GWdc in 2024. Meanwhile, production of solar module components (polysilicon, ingots, wafers, and cells) are projected to increase by 4.5 GWdc (polysilicon), 3.3 GWdc (ingots and wafers), and 14.3 GWdc (cells), respectively. Current battery storage is 28.3 GWh/year. This is projected to increase by 212.0 GWh/year to a total of 240.3 GWh/year, more than an eight-fold increase. Clean hydrogen through electrolyzers is currently 1.0 GW/year, which is projected to double to 2.0 GW/year in 2024. Some 72,557 construction (five-year) jobs and 24,193 operations (permanent) jobs are expected to be created for solar, storage, wind, and clean hydrogen plants, for a total of 96,750 jobs. Among these, 30,088 will be for solar, 40,236 for storage, 8,059 for wind, and 18,367 for clean hydrogen. Sources: https://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/insights/industry/renewable-energy/renewable-energy-industry-outlook.html

According to a Science Daily news brief, a recent study—published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by a research team primarily from Columbia University—has used a new technique to count nanoplastic particles in bottled water for the first time. The technique, called “stimulated Raman scattering microscopy,” probes water samples with two simultaneous lasers that have been tuned to make targeted molecules resonate. According to the study’s authors, the team’s technique, coinvented by Columbia University biophysicist Prof. Wei Min, found that an average liter of bottled water contained approximately 240,000 detectable plastic fragments. This, according to Science Daily, was “10 to 100 times greater than previous estimates.” Scientists have shown that potable bottled water typically contains tens of thousands of tiny microplastic fragments (per bottle) and that microplastics break down further into smaller pieces known as nanoplastics (measuring one micrometer or less—1/70th of the width of a human hair). Little has been known, however, about what numbers, sizes, and types of the tinier nanoplastic particles are in bottled water. That may be about to change. "This opens a window where we can look into a world that was not exposed to us before,” Associate Professor Beizhan Yan, study coauthor and Columbia University environmental chemist, said in the Science Daily brief. The team tested bottled water for seven common plastic particulates down to 100 nanometers in size, focusing on three popular bottled water brands sold in the US. Their findings ranged from 110,000 to 370,000 particles per liter, of which 90% were nanoplastics and 10% were microplastics. They were also able to distinguish between the seven types of plastic and determine their distinguishing shapes, a feat that could be helpful in future research. Unsurprisingly, a plastic commonly found in the samples was the plastic used to make the water bottle, polyethylene terephthalate (PET). However, a type of nylon called polyamide, which is commonly used to purify water before bottling it, was found in greater quantities than PET. Moreover, the seven targeted plastics only made up about 10% of the nanoparticles found in the samples, leaving 90% unidentified. This demonstrates "the complicated particle composition inside the seemingly simple water sample," the study authors wrote. “The common existence of natural organic matter certainly requires prudent distinguishment," they added. What is next for the researchers? “There is a huge world of nanoplastics to be studied," said Min. He noted that the mass of nanoplastics is far less than the mass of microplastics, but "it's not size that matters. It's the numbers, because the smaller things are, the more easily they can get inside us." Indeed, compared with microplastics, nanoplastic particles can more readily make their way into body tissues—including lung tissues—with unknown, potentially serious health impacts. Sources: https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2024/01/240108153132.htm https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2300582121

Known for its natural beauty, the US state of Wyoming may soon be known for something buried beneath its stunning topography: An estimated 2.34 billion metric tons of rare earth minerals (REMs), which make the world’s computing-dependent technologies possible, were recently discovered near Wheatland, a town in southeastern Wyoming. According to American Rare Earths, the company’s wholly-owned deposits have a potential volume far greater than China’s estimated 44 million metric tons of the minerals, which could establish the US as the world’s largest supplier. At present, China supplies about 95% of the global supply of REMs, 74% of which are imported by the US. In a technical report issued earlier this month, American Rare Earths—the US division of a Sydney, Australia-registered exploration company—disclosed that it had discovered 64% more REMs than it had originally speculated in a March 2023 land assessment. Donald Schwartz, CEO of American Rare Earths, explained the surprise upgrade to Cowboy State Daily: “Typically, you’ll see the resource decrease as infill drilling takes place—instead we’re seeing the opposite, with only 25% of the project being drilled to this point.” The upgraded estimate came from a Fall 2023 drilling conducted by American Rare Earths that reached a depth of 1,000 feet, about double the depth of the initial, more shallow exploration in March 2023. The company expects to mine and process neodymium and praseodymium, in particular, from its Wyoming deposits, via its Wyoming Rare (USA) Inc. unit. Next month, they plan to disclose the value of the REMs that could potentially be mined over the next 30 years. But don’t expect a sudden, dramatic increase in REM supply. Schwartz told Cowboy State Daily that the annual global demand for REMs is about 60,000 tons. “If you build a really big mine, can the market take all of that material?” he said. “We’re trying to make something that’s modular and scalable, that can grow in the market over time.” Sources: https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/markets/revealed-2-34bn-metric-tons-of-rare-earth-minerals-found-in-wyoming/ss-BB1hZWOR https://www.unilad.com/news/us-news/rare-earth-minerals-found-wyoming-859792-20240209 https://cowboystatedaily.com/2024/02/07/rare-earths-discovery-near-wheatland-so-big-it-could-be-world-leader/ https://www.mining.com/american-rare-earths-boosts-tonnage-at-halleck-creek-project-in-wyoming/

The US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s (NOAA) National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) released its 2023 Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters report at the end of 2023. It found 2023 a “historic year” for costly disasters and weather extremes in the US. The NCEI report identified 28 billion-dollar “weather and climate disasters” for the year, topping the prior record of 22 billion-dollar disasters set in 2020. The total estimated 2023 cost of these disasters is $92.9 billion. This may be adjusted upward when late-year East Coast storms are included. The 28 billion-dollar disasters in 2023 also took at least 492 human lives, either directly or indirectly. This makes 2023 the eighth most deadly for the contiguous US since 1980. The disasters of 2023 included the tragic wildfires in Maui, Hawaii, and two “tornado outbreaks” that pummeled central and eastern US. In addition, there were two tropical cyclones—Hurricane Idalia in Florida and Typhoon Mawar in Guam—and 17 “severe weather/hail events” in many areas of the country. The US also recorded one drought/heat wave event centered in central and southern portions of the nation. This drought and heat wave event was the costliest 2023 disaster, totaling $14.5 billion. Since the initiation of such records in 1980, the US has recorded 376 “weather and climate disasters” with costs of $1 billion or more—with a total price tag of more than $2.660 trillion. The annual average from 1980–2023 is 8.5 events (CPI-adjusted); however, the annual average for the past five years (2019–2023) is 20.4 such events (CPI-adjusted). The last seven years (2017–2023) have seen 137 separate billion-dollar disasters with a total death toll of approximately 5,500 people. Sources: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/blogs/beyond-data/2023-historic-year-us-billion-dollar-weather-and-climate-disasters NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) U.S. Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters (2024). https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/billions/, DOI: 10.25921/stkw-7w73

An international study led by the 5 Gyres Institute, published in March (2023) in the journal Plos One, reported on ocean plastic contamination data that included recent samplings and prior published data from 1979 to 2019. In a news brief published by Stockholm University’s Stockholm Research Centre (SRC), study co-author, Patricia Villarrubia-Gómez, described the situation as “much worse than expected.” Lead author Markus Eriksen, of the 5 Gyres Institute, cautioned that cleanup attempts will be “futile if we continue to produce plastic at the current rate.” The team examined data from over 11,000 samplings of “floating ocean plastics.” Villarrubia-Gomez said, “In 2014, it was estimated that there were 5 trillion plastic particles in the ocean. Now, less than ten years later, we’re up at 170 trillion.” According to the SRC, the researchers found a “rapid increase” in both “mass and abundance” of floating plastics starting from 2005. The SRC brief says rates of plastic entering aquatic environments is “expected to increase approximately 2.6-fold from 2016 to 2040.” The study’s authors estimated the present accumulation of aquatic plastic at 82 trillion–358 trillion plastic particles, weighing approximately 1.1 million–4.9 million tons. The authors cited earlier samplings that showed increasing trends of microfiber presence since the 1960s, with an increasing trend of “microplastic entanglement” from the late 1950s. Also cited were reports of an increase of microplastics in the North Pacific between 1976 and 1985, and in the western North Atlantic from 1986 to 2015, with “a rate of increase paralleling global cumulative plastic production.” The authors called for "more standardization and coordination” to build more reliable reports on plastic waste trends. Sources: https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-64889284 https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0281596 https://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2023-03-08-growing-plastic-smog-of-170-trillion-particles-afloat-in-the-ocean.html https://microplastics.springeropen.com/articles/10.1186/s43591-020-00002-8?trk=public_post_comment-text

By Dean Radin* The following article is a revised version of a presentation given by Dr. Dean Radin at the Second International Conference on Science and God (ICSGII). The original title of the author’s presentation was “Revising Our Concepts about Reality: The Challenge of Consciousness.” Scientific ideas about the nature of the universe radically evolved in the twentieth century. Advancements in many areas, from physics to psychology, caused major changes in how people thought about themselves, their place in the universe, and their understanding of the physical “fabric of reality.” Science will continue to evolve in the twenty-first century, with some of the most revolutionary advancements coming from the study of consciousness. A growing number of scientists are asking, for instance, how the physical brain can account for nonphysical, subjective experience (qualia). They are looking at evidence of exceptional cognitive skills, as well, such as genius, and nonlocal forms of awareness, such as telepathy, and wondering how this evidence will influence our understanding of the mind-brain relationship. Questions such as these not only challenge the established belief (in neuroscience) that the mind is solely a product of brain activity, but they also challenge the accepted scientific doctrine called materialism. After twentieth century historian Thomas Kuhn wrote on the “structure of scientific revolutions,” it was better understood that unexpected phenomena (anomalies) encountered in a scientific field are strongly resisted by the status quo. Evidence supporting the existence of anomalies is seen as insufficient—or worse, labeled as pseudoscience. Eventually, evidence improves and accumulates until it becomes overwhelming and forces a shift in thinking. The scientific, technological, and sociological reverberations of such an ideological shift could dwarf all previous advancements in human knowledge. As anomalous (unexpected) phenomena associated with consciousness are better understood, the materialistic foundations of science could experience a meta shift in thinking by the turn of the next century. Materialism may come to be seen as a special case within a more comprehensive worldview, one that sees consciousness as fundamental. The scientific, technological, and sociological impacts of such a shift could dwarf all previous advancements in human knowledge. Such a surprising turn of events—one of many found in the history of science—reminds us why unexpected phenomena deserve very close attention. Sometimes, like clouds on the horizon, they evaporate after slight revisions to existing ideas. But sometimes they persist like puzzles for decades or centuries. In such cases, their solutions may usher in startlingly new concepts, technologies, and even new forms of civilization. Consciousness Clouds Today, we are faced with two very persistent clouds, commonly known as qualia and quanta. The word “qualia” refers to the nature of subjective experience and “quanta” to the fact that quantum objects are exquisitely sensitive to being observed. Both clouds raise questions about the nature and role of consciousness in the physical world. Both are major challenges to the scientific model called reductive materialism—the assumption that everything, including mind, consists of matter and energy, and that any system, no matter how complex, can be completely understood by reducing it to its basic physical components. Some neuroscientists insist that qualia are a nonproblem because consciousness is an illusory side effect of brain processing (Churchland 1986; Crick 1994). Others propose that any physical system as complex as the brain will spontaneously develop conscious awareness through some yet unknown process. Some physicists believe that the quantum observer effect is also a nonproblem because consciousness plays no role in physics or that the problem is already solved by concepts like decoherence (Schlosshauer 2007). Many scientists today undoubtedly assume that these two “consciousness clouds” will eventually be understood in conventional terms. I believe that sentiment is wrong. These two clouds have stubbornly resisted orthodox explanations. Instead of fading away in the light of existing theories, qualia and quanta are omens of paradigm-shifting superstorms. They are also the leading edge of related clouds, each more challenging than the last. These related clouds include the phenomena of genius, savants, near-death experiences, mediumship, reincarnation cases, and laboratory studies of psychic phenomena. All these phenomena suggest that the mind is not limited to the operations of the physical brain. Genius No one who studies the lives and works of Mozart, da Vinci, Copernicus, Shakespeare, Einstein, or Ramanujan can doubt that genius is real, though rare. True genius is a persistent source of paradigm-shattering creativity that defies our understanding of mindless electrochemical activity in a brain that is strictly limited to ideas it has already absorbed. The challenge presented by genius is to imagine how the mind, seen solely as a product of brain processing, could generate world-changing mathematical theorems, breakthrough scientific ideas, hypercreative inventions, and masterwork books and musical compositions, all seeming to appear out of the blue, often uninvited, and fully formed (Schwartz 2010, Heilman 2016). If these ideas appeared once in a person’s lifetime, we might dismiss them as a fluke. But true genius is a persistent source of paradigm-shattering creativity that defies our understanding of mindless electrochemical activity in a brain that is strictly limited to ideas it has already absorbed (Lingg and Frank 1973; Pandey 2001). Savants Autistic savants have little to no social skills and low IQs, and yet they can display supernormal capacities of memory, musical talent, artistic talent, or lightning-fast mathematical calculations (Dossey 2012; Cowan and Frith 2009; Welling 1994). The Academy Award-winning movie, Rain Man, was based partially on the life of savant Kim Peek, who among other things could correctly and instantly recall every word of the estimated 12,000 books he had read. Psychiatrist Darold Treffert, discussing autistic savants, wrote that “Kim Peek possesses one of the most extraordinary memories ever recorded. Until we can explain his abilities, we cannot pretend to understand human cognition.” Treffert also described the case of Leslie Lemke, who “is blind, severely cognitively impaired, and has cerebral palsy. Yet he played back Tchaikovsky’s Piano Concerto No. 1 flawlessly after hearing it for the first time at age 14.” If one were to test normally healthy pianists who had not previously heard this concerto, it is safe to say that none of them would be able to do this. Treffert describes the phenomenon of acquired savants, in which case, as the result of an accident, a normal person suddenly gains savant skills. There are also the completely astonishing cases of sudden savants, apparently normal people who spontaneously gain savant skills for no known reason. How the brains of autistic savants work is a major problem for the neurosciences. Perhaps at some point such savants’ skills might be explainable via conventional concepts—but how similar skills can arise in acquired or sudden savants remains a baffling mystery. Psychic Phenomena There are no broadly accepted explanations for the talents of geniuses and savants. Because they are so rare, they are easy for skeptics to set aside while they concentrate on understanding “ordinary” people. This is why commonly reported psychic phenomena, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, and psychokinesis, are important to consider. These experiences have been reported by ordinary people throughout history, across all cultures, and at all levels of educational experience. Commonly reported psychic phenomena, such as telepathy, clairvoyance, precognition, and psychokinesis, are important to consider [because] these experiences have been reported by ordinary people throughout history. Rather than having to rely on astonishing anecdotes for evidence, a wealth of strictly controlled experimental studies in this field can be found in the peer-reviewed scientific literature (Radin 1997, 2006, 2013, 2018). Today, this topic is still regarded as controversial—but not because empirical data are lacking. The implications of these phenomena are so difficult to accommodate within a materialistic model that critics find it easier to imagine that the evidence is surely flawed in some unspecified way. Some insist on a suitable explanation before they will even look at the data. Testing for Telepathy To illustrate the kind of evidence that is available, we will briefly review one type of telepathy experiment. Telepathy involves communications between minds without the use of the ordinary senses, and without regard to distance or shielding. One of the most successful methods for testing telepathy in the laboratory is called the ganzfeld method (meaning “whole field” in German). In this experiment, a “receiver” of telepathic information has a halved ping-pong ball placed over each eye, the face is illuminated by a soft red light, and white noise is played over headphones. This state of mild, unpatterned sensory stimulus is thought to be conducive to sensing telepathic impressions. While in this state, the receiver is asked to be open to any ideas or feelings gained while holding a distant “sender” in mind. One photo is randomly selected out of a pool of four photos, where each image depicts a real object or scene with a clearly identifiable theme. The colors, shapes, and content of the four photos are as different from one another as possible. The selected photo is given to a sender—who is strictly isolated from the receiver—and he or she is asked to mentally send that photo to the receiver. Note that the use of the words sender and receiver emphasizes that these terms are descriptive only; they do not suggest underlying mechanisms. The sender now tries to mentally transmit the contents of the target photo to the receiver for 20 minutes. During that time, the receiver is relaxing in the ganzfeld state. After the sending period, the receiver—still strictly isolated from the sender—is taken out of the ganzfeld state and shown all four photos, one being the chosen target along with the three nonchosen decoys. If telepathy does not exist, then the chances of the receiver correctly selecting the actual target in this design is one in four, or 25%. If telepathy does exist, and the experiment followed the strict isolation rules, then the hit rate would be higher than 25%. Because chance is 25% in a single trial, performing this test just once would not provide confidence that telepathy does or does not exist. However, what if the same test were independently performed by dozens of laboratories around the world for a half-century, and during that time nearly 4,000 such tests were performed? The statistical power provided by that many trials would then provide strong evidence either in favor of or against the existence of telepathy. Meta-analysis A meta-analysis is a statistical method for combining the results of numerous experiments based on similar designs. It provides a way to tell if the effects studied in an experiment are repeatable and whether those effects are attributable to chance. Meta-analysis is used in virtually all the experimental sciences today—but especially in the psychological, social, and medical sciences. Effects in those areas tend to be highly variable, so it is not possible to establish repeatability in a single experiment. From 1974 to 2018, dozens of authors published 117 articles describing the results of their ganzfeld experiments. Meta-analyses of these studies were conducted seven times, spanning different time scales   Each of these seven meta-analyses resulted in independently significant outcomes in favor of telepathy. [See the following associated reference links: (Honorton 1985; Bem and Honorton 1994; Milton and Wiseman 1999; Storm and Ertel 2001; Bem, Palmer, and Broughton 2001; Storm, Tressoldi, and Di Risio 2010; Storm and Tressoldi 2020)]. Repeatable telepathic effects have been observed by dozens of independent investigators around the world for nearly a half-century. This means that repeatable telepathic effects have been observed by dozens of independent investigators around the world for nearly a half-century. Taking into account all 3,885 reported ganzfeld tests using four targets, there were 1.188 hits, for an overall hit rate of 30.6. 5% over the chance rate of 25 may not seem very impressive, but from a statistical perspective, the overall result is associated with odds against chance at 10,000 trillion to one (Figure below, left side). One common critique of this result is that some ganzfeld experiments probably failed, which discouraged the investigators from reporting their studies. Selective reporting would indeed bias the overall result to make it seem stronger than it really was. Critics who have studied the relevant literature in detail have agreed, however, that selective reporting cannot eliminate the overall positive results. In addition, meta-analytical estimates of the number of presumed unreported “failed” experiments that would be required to nullify the known results confirms that that explanation is implausible. Other critics have questioned whether there might be flaws in the experimental design that would allow the receiver to somehow gain information about the target. Over the years, as critics suggested potential loopholes, each potential flaw was systematically eliminated, and yet the same results continued to be observed. After fifty years of such critiques, skeptics familiar with these studies admit that they can no longer identify any plausible explanations other than telepathy for these results. Even skeptics who had disavowed belief in any sort of psychic phenomena, but conducted this experiment themselves, obtained the same results as found in the meta-analyses. Conclusion If reductive materialism does not easily accommodate the challenges presented by the existence of genius, savants, and telepathy—and many more examples—then what alternative model might be considered? A viable approach is the philosophical view of idealism, which holds that consciousness is fundamental. Explaining this proposal in detail would take more space than is available for this article, so it can simply be said that most physicists who founded quantum theory were idealists, and yet their worldview did not prevent them from developing the most successful physical theory in history. Their achievements demonstrate that science can advance perfectly well, even when based on a very different set of assumptions about the nature of reality. Unlike materialism, from an idealistic perspective the various anomalies associated with consciousness are far easier to accommodate. This is because in idealism, consciousness is not constrained by physical concepts like space, time, matter, or energy. If consciousness is not limited by such physical laws, then it is plausible that it is also not limited to gaining information through the ordinary physical senses—nor is it limited to the operations of the brain. This opens the door to understanding a variety of subjective experiences. Despite the undeniable success of materialism as an ideology for understanding the physical world, the empirical and historical facts are that unexpected experiences do happen, even in controlled laboratory experiments. Thus, it is no longer a matter of whether materialism will be superseded by a more comprehensive worldview, but when. [Image 009] *Dr. Dean Radin is Chief Scientist, Institute of Noetic Sciences, Novato, California; Associated Distinguished Professor of Integral and Transpersonal Psychology, California Institute of Integral Studies; Founding Board Member, Academy for the Advancement of Postmaterialist Sciences; and Editor of the Elsevier journal Explore since 2009. References: Radin, Dean I. 1997. The Conscious Universe. San Francisco: HarperOne. ———. 2006. Entangled Minds. New York: Simon & Schuster. ———. 2013. Supernormal. New York: Random House. ———. 2018. Real Magic. New York: Penguin Random House.

In a new report, the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) said 2023 had the highest average global surface temperature on record: The 20th century average was 13.9°C (57.0°F), and the 2023 average was 1.18°C (2.12°F) above that average. Other highlights of NOAA’s annual Global Climate Report for 2023: 2023 was considered the warmest year since 1850 globally for the land and oceans with a few exceptions—land in the southern hemisphere ranked second, Arctic land and ocean ranked fourth, and Antarctic land and ocean ranked 40th. By region, 2023 was the warmest for North America (since 1850), South America (since 1910), Africa (since 1910), and second warmest (since 1910) for Europe and Asia. It was less warm in Oceania and Antarctica, being the 10th highest and 40th highest, respectively. Heavy rains brought flooding to Chile, Ghana, Pakistan, and India. As a result, 20,000 people were affected in Chile, nearly 26,000 people were evacuated in Ghana, and over 100,000 people were evacuated in Pakistan and India. Globally, there were 78 storms. These included 45 major storms, such as a cyclone in the Brazilian states of Rio Grande do Sul and Santa Catarina, Cyclone Mocha in Myanmar, and Cyclone Ilsa in western Australia. California experienced 32 trillion gallons of rain and snow in January 2023 due to nine back-to-back atmospheric rivers. Global ocean heat content (OHC) for 0 to 700 meters (2,296 ft) was warmest for the entire basin of the Atlantic, Indian, and “World,” with the Pacific being second warmest since 1955. Global OHC has been on a rising trend since about 1970. The annual global OHC for 2023 for the upper 2,000 meters (1.2 miles) was a record high, beating the previous record in 2021. Sources: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/access/monitoring/monthly-report/global/202313

GDP Projected to Slow in Developed Countries, Grow in Developing Countries The UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs released its flagship annual economic report, World Economic Situation and Prospects 2024, on January 3. The report offers a somber economic outlook for the near term, citing high interest rates, instability and conflict, sluggish international trade, and increasing climate disasters. Global GDP growth is projected to slip from 2.7% in 2023 to 2.4% in 2024. The US is projected to see the largest percentage decrease, from 2.5% in 2023 to 1.4% in 2024. Western Asia has the largest projected increase, from 1.7% in 2023 to 2.9% in 2024. Global headline (total) inflation is expected to decline to 3.9% in 2024, a welcome change from the 8.1% inflation seen in 2022. However, food prices remain high: In 2023, acute food insecurity rose to an estimated 238 million people, an increase by 21.6 million people from 2022. Real gross fixed capital formation is expected to remain lackluster. It rose by around 1.9% in 2023, but this was far below the average 4.0% growth rate seen 2011–2019. Global trade decreased to 0.6%, significantly below 5.7% in 2022, but it is expected to recover to 2.4% in 2024. Services in tourism and transport continued to rebound, while exports from developing countries suffered setbacks. World energy investment is estimated to have increased by 7% to $2.8 trillion in 2023, while the share of clean energy in total energy investment increased from 60% in 2020 to 62% in 2022. Meanwhile, investment in fossil fuels surpassed pre-pandemic levels in 2022 and 2023. Source: https://desapublications.un.org/

By Robert R. Selle* Planet Earth is marvelously constructed of biological, geological, climatological, hydrological, and oceanic elements. Today, however, anthropological, or human, intervention is threatening to irreversibly sicken the delicately balanced terrestrial system. To mitigate this threat, many Earth watchers believe that a global monitoring network is needed to assess the condition of the “Earth-body,” much as a human being in a hospital is hooked up to an array of digital monitoring devices. Today, there is no such Earth-wide digital monitoring system to help “patient planet” get better. But efforts are now underway by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Coalition for Digital Environmental Sustainability (CODES), the latter having been co-founded in 2021 by UNEP and a variety of international environmental organizations. Enter artificial intelligence (AI), which can be defined as computer systems or algorithms that can imitate the human ability to analyze data and make inferences and decisions. AI is fed by digitized data. All interactions in the world—whether related to business, government, science, sports, entertainment, or personal (social media)—are becoming ever more digitalized. This means that—once all environment-related data can be collected and funneled through AI-based analytics—a system can be created to monitor all of Earth’s vital signs—at once and in real time. Once all environment-related data can be collected and funneled through AI-based analytics—a system can be created to monitor all of Earth’s vital signs—at once and in real time. Despite the concerns about the increasing energy consumption of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) and AI infrastructures as well as the potential for in-built biases of data flows, “[t]here’s a lot of opportunities out there,” says David Jensen, coordinator of the Digital Transformation subprogram at UNEP, “but harnessing [them] will require unprecedented collaboration between public sector, private sector, civil society, and [subject matter experts]—everybody is going to have to collaborate to come together.” Jensen is also UNEP’s point man at CODES and one of the two chief authors of the CODES Action Plan for a Sustainable Planet in the Digital Age. World Environment Situation Room CODES and its associated UNEP program, the World Environment Situation Room (WESR), envision the vast array of platforms, apps, and algorithms in the world’s sprawling digital economy adopting a built-in orientation toward environmental-health sustainability. WESR, launched in 2022, is much like the White House Situation Room, where senior White House officials gather in emergencies to analyze complex unfolding threats and decide how to address them. By contrast, WESR uses AI’s capabilities to crunch multifaceted climate datasets. The agency’s goal, through collecting and analyzing data from the leading Earth observation platforms, is to create a picture of Earth’s health in real time—from atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) to glacier mass, deforestation, and sea-level rise. WESR’s goal is, through collecting and analyzing data from the leading Earth observation platforms, to create a picture of Earth’s health in real time. “WESR is being developed to become a user-friendly, demand-driven platform that leverages data into government offices, classrooms, mayor’s offices, and boardrooms,” Jensen says in an article on the UNEP website. “It provides credible, trustworthy, and independent data to inform decisions and drive transparency. Over time, the goal is for WESR to become like a mission control center for Planet Earth, where all our vital environmental indicators can be seamlessly monitored to drive actions.” Jensen, pointing to what he calls the “five hard problems” of climate action, is confident that solutions can be found through sustainability-driven digital transformation. Monitoring at the Global Level The first of these problems is monitoring and modeling environmental systems and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions at the global level. For example, to hold themselves accountable to the goals of the Paris Agreement, countries decided to create a global stocktaking process, which “is a two-year process that happens every five years.” However, to properly guide global environmental action, this really should be done annually or, better yet quarterly—a monumental task that can be handled by AI. Some examples of progress in this direction are Climate Trace and IQAir. Climate Trace is a digital analytics tool that is plugged into a global network of satellites and sensors. It tracks daily CO2 emissions. IQAir is a Swiss company that, together with UNEP, has built an international web of 80,000 air-quality sensors. The firm’s public dashboards, accessible online, can warn citizens about air pollution threats. Achieving Full Supply Chain Transparency The second hard problem, also a task for AI, is achieving full supply chain transparency, from procuring materials to manufacturing, advertising, and disposal or reuse. Moreover, there should be disclosure of every step’s impact on the environment, whether a benefit or a detriment. One company that is moving strongly in this direction is the German multinational software firm SAP SE. They have created what is known as enterprise resource planning software that now is part of 87% of all world commerce. SAP is poised to develop this sort of worldwide supply chain transparency, disclosing the details to the public, perhaps through a QR code for each product or service. “[AI] can help calculate the [environmental] footprint of products across their full life cycles and supply chains,” Jensen says, “and enable businesses and consumers to make the most informed and effective decisions. … This kind of data is essential for sustainable digital nudging on e-commerce platforms, such as Amazon.com, Shopify, or Alibaba.” “The use of information and communications technology, which is what feeds AI, can lead to 20% less production of CO2 from the transportation, manufacturing, agriculture, housing, and energy sectors.” The third hard problem is all about automating and optimizing sustainability decisions. According to Global e-Sustainability Initiative’s SMARTer2030 report from 2015 , the use of information and communications technology, which is what feeds AI, can lead to 20% less production of CO2 from the transportation, manufacturing, agriculture, housing, and energy sectors. The development of “smart cities” is a notable example, where homes, vehicles, factories, farms, and the grid are digitally connected to use energy in the most efficient way. Developing Environmental Governance The fourth conundrum is how to develop environmental governance processes driven by citizen participation. An example in this direction is the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), which has mobilized more than 1 million people to observe fauna and flora around the globe and provide notes to GBIF on various species’ occurrence. AI analyzes and keeps track of all the input. This type of environmental crowdsourcing could be harnessed to get otherwise hard-to-obtain large amounts of information on many other ecological variables. Eco-conscious Consumption The fifth problem is enabling consumers to select green products and lifestyles. Amazon, for example, now stamps various products with seals of approval in 34 different climate-friendly categories, giving eco-conscious shoppers a guide to desirable purchases. And Alipay, the huge Chinese payment platform, with 1.3 billion connected consumers, is using incentives and gamification to encourage participation in reducing CO2-producing behaviors. After all is said and done, Jensen exudes optimism that these five mammoth hurdles can be overcome through the use of digital innovations to accelerate worldwide sustainable development. *Robert R. Selle is a freelance writer with a background in biochemistry and ecology who lives in Bowie, Maryland.

By Robin Whitlock* While advances have been made in plastics recycling technologies, it still faces many challenges. Plastic waste is now ubiquitous in our natural environment, and currently about 400 million tons of plastic waste is produced every year. An astounding 91% of plastics produced from 1950 to 2015 were not recycled, according to a 2017 study. Instead, 12% of these plastics were incinerated, while the bulk—79%—were sent to landfills or left in the environment, where it can take decades to millennia to degrade. Also, only clean plastics (such as those without food residues) can be recycled, and the recycling process itself is energy intensive and costly. This means that, for a manufacturer, it is often more economical to buy new, cheaper plastic than it is to use recycled plastic. Meanwhile, the global plastic market is expected to grow significantly at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 4% to 5% to 2030. This means the value of the global plastics market, which was $712 billion in 2023, could grow to more than $1.050 trillion by 2033, according to statistica.com. Given the insatiable demand for plastic, there is keen interest in new recycling technologies. The Earth & I talked to Novoloop CEO Miranda Wang to discuss the Menlo Park, California-based company’s innovative approach to plastic waste “upcycling” and its potential impacts on the recycling industry once it is established at scale. Thermoplastics versus Thermosetting Plastics To understand upcycling, a brief review of the plastics landscape is in order. There are seven different types of plastics [see The Earth & I August 2023 article, "Keeping Plastics Out of Landfills and Public Spaces"], each with varying physical and chemical properties. Plastics are advantageous from an industrial perspective, given their low production costs, light weight, high chemical stability, durability, high impact resistance, and good electrical insulation. Their versatility makes them ubiquitous in the production of a wide variety of manufactured goods and packaging. Most plastics produced—around 75%—are thermoplastics, known for their malleability at high temperatures and stability once cooled. Thermoplastics include polyethylene and polystyrene (PS) in the form of single-use plastics, as well as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polycarbonate (PC). In theory, thermoplastics can be melted and remolded continuously to produce recycled plastic material. Most plastics produced—around 75%—are thermoplastics, known for their malleability at high temperatures and stability once cooled; these include polyethylene and polystyrene (PS) in the form of single-use plastics, as well as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) and polycarbonate (PC). In reality, however, thermoplastic pollution is proving to be a major environmental problem, particularly the prevalence of microplastics in the water cycle (as in the microplastic cycle). The incineration of thermoplastics can generate energy, although at the cost of greenhouse gas emissions and toxic substances in open field situations. The remaining 25% of plastics are thermosetting plastics (thermosets), which generally cannot be recycled given how they typically burn when heated. Examples of thermosets include polyester, epoxy, and phenolic, and, given their durability and heat resistance, thermosets are found in cars and electrical appliances. There is also research underway to produce recyclable thermosets, such as through additives or photopolymerization. Thermosets are not thrown away as often into the environment as thermoplastics given their enhanced durability. Types of Plastic Recycling Currently, the recycling industry mostly considers mechanical recycling to be the foremost approach to recycling plastic waste. Mechanical recycling is used to recycle thermoplastics, such as polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and high-density polyethylene (HDPE). This involves collection, washing, first and second sorting, shredding, and extrusion (reforming into plastic pellets). These pellets are then used to manufacture new products. Challenges in mechanical recycling include polymer scission, lack of sorting methods at scale, and inconsistent product quality, although it can be the most effective in terms of time, economic cost, and environmental impact. Chemical recycling … utilizes a number of technologies in which the chemical structure of the plastic is altered, including pyrolysis, gasification, hydro-cracking, and depolymerization, such as for PET, nylon (PA), polyurethane (PU), and polypropylene (PP). Chemical recycling is becoming more popular given its scalability of operations. This approach utilizes a number of technologies in which the chemical structure of the plastic is altered, including pyrolysis, gasification, hydro-cracking, and depolymerization, such as for PET, nylon (PA), polyurethane (PU), and polypropylene (PP). Dissolution of plastics in solvents (solvolysis) is also included in depolymerization, such as through hydrolysis, glycolysis (ethylene glycol), acidolysis (acids), and alcoholysis (methanol). Challenges in chemical recycling include potential toxic and hazardous byproducts being released into the environment. Finally, organic recycling (or biological recycling) utilizes microbiological treatment, either in an aerobic environment (a composting process) or an anaerobic environment (utilizing biogasification). Challenges in biological recycling include high start-up costs, limited applications of enzymes, and potential risks of using enzymes. Plastic Upcycling and Novoloop Given the limitations of recycling alone, research is underway on upcycling (the conversion of “by-products or waste products into valuable and new materials”) to convert post-consumer plastic waste into valuable products—such as footwear, automotive materials, and sporting goods. In a review of chemical upcycling methods, there have been numerous examples of using metal catalysts for depolymerization under high pressure conditions. Meanwhile, Wang has indicated that the company has been working on upcycling polyethylene over the past eight years and is now nearing completion of the planning phase for its first industrial facility. A proprietary four-step process called accelerated thermal-oxidated decomposition (ATOD) is used to produce materials for shoes and bonding products from polyethylene. E&I: What is Novoloop’s innovation in upcycling plastic waste? Miranda Wang: “Novoloop is the original developer of a novel chemical technology to transform hard-to-recycle plastic waste into performance materials. We oxidize polyethylene into chemical building blocks; then we harvest, purify, and build back up into a platform of materials that are indistinguishable from normal plastics made from fossil fuels. The formation of monomers is achieved through the addition of oxygen, which means that the mass of monomers produced can exceed the mass of plastic waste entering the process. Novoloop has demonstrated that we can reproducibly exceed 100% yields using the ATOD process.”“After monomers are created from digesting polyethylene, we implement a robust purification process that allows us to harvest virgin quality monomers for further processing. Because we build our intermediates and polymers out of virgin quality monomers, the quality of our products are high performance and consistent.” E&I: How effective is ATOD? Miranda Wang: “ATOD takes polyethylene and digests it over three to four hours and reliably makes chemical monomers for performance materials. We have successfully run this chemistry process more than a thousand times in the lab at various scales, and it has been successfully replicated by three separate contract manufacturers. We're now building a continuous integrated pilot plant for it and the support systems enabling cost competitive operations.” “What sets us apart … is our ability to upgrade commodity plastic waste into virgin quality performance materials worth 40 times more. We offer chemically upcycled products at quality and price parity to fossil-based virgin materials while delivering a significant carbon reduction.” E&I: What is unique about ATOD? Miranda Wang: “What sets us apart from existing recycling solutions is our ability to upgrade commodity plastic waste into virgin quality performance materials worth 40 times more. We offer chemically upcycled products at quality and price parity to fossil-based virgin materials while delivering a significant carbon reduction. Novoloop holds 51 patents worldwide and is uniquely advantaged over other chemical recycling.” “Novoloop offers a range of products from dicarboxylic acid monomers, polyol intermediates, and thermoplastic polyurethane resin. These are all made through Lifecycling post-consumer polyethylene using our ATOD technology. Our monomers and intermediates can be used to make products with total addressable markets of $140B, including various polyurethanes, coatings, and nylons.” E&I: How will your process be implemented on an industrial scale? Miranda Wang: “We are building chemical operations (plants) around the world to transform plastic waste from that region into monomers. Then, by partnering with a network of existing capacity in the industry, we build back up those monomers into various chemical and performance material products, which we sell around the world. We are in early stages of planning our first commercial factory. Tentative timelines point to a first project operational in 2027.” E&I: What are environmental considerations you have made for your process and factory? What are the implications once the factory is up and running? Miranda Wang: “Based on our ISO-compliant lifecycle assessment, each 20,000-metric-ton (plastic intake capacity) deployment increases our impact, diverting an additional 20,000 tons of plastic waste, preventing 120,000 tons of carbon emissions, and saving 66,000 L [about 17,435 gal] of water per year. Novoloop recovers and recycles the predominant waste products back into the system.” A Pressing Challenge Given the rate of the growth of the plastics industry and the relative ineffectiveness of current recycling approaches, it would be easy to become despondent about the idea of a waste-free world. However, Novoloop’s entry into the recycling industry with a new and innovative approach shows that humanity’s capacity to adapt and develop new ways of solving global trash problems isn’t exhausted. *Robin Whitlock is an England-based freelance journalist specializing in environmental issues, climate change, and renewable energy, with a variety of other professional interests, including green transportation.

The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences announced its decision, on October 5, 2021, to award the 2021 Nobel Prize in Physics to three Laureates for their studies of “chaotic and apparently random phenomena.” According to the official press release, two of this year’s recipients, Syukuro Manabe of Princeton University and Klaus Hasselmann of the Max Planck Institute of Meteorology “laid the foundation of our knowledge of the Earth’s climate and how humanity influences it.” The third recipient, Giorgio Parisi of Sapienza University of Rome, Italy, was lauded “for the discovery of the interplay of disorder and fluctuations in physical systems from atomic to planetary scales.” Manabe was honored for demonstrating how increased levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere led to increased temperatures at the Earth’s surface. Early in his career, he helped develop physical models of the Earth’s climate and was the first to explore interactions between radiation balance and vertical transport of air masses, thus laying the foundation for today’s climate models. Hasselmann created a model linking weather and climate that showed how climate models can be reliable despite weather being changeable and seemingly chaotic. He helped identify certain signals or “fingerprints” that natural and anthropogenic phenomena leave on the climate. His methods helped to prove that increasing temperatures in the atmosphere are the result of human emissions of carbon dioxide. “The discoveries being recognized this year demonstrate that our knowledge about the climate rests on a solid scientific foundation, based on a rigorous analysis of observations. This year’s Laureates have all contributed to us gaining deeper insight into the properties and evolution of complex physical systems,” stated Thors Hans Hansson, chair of the Nobel Committee for Physics.