SEARCH

By Stuart Nathan* (Updated on March 12, 2024) Water is the most abundant substance in all living things. On average, 60% of the human body is composed of water. As you read this, your 75%-water brain is processing information gathered by your 98%-water eyes. That level of water must be maintained. The simple actions of breathing, sweating, and digestion, all cause the body to lose water. Rehydration is vital for regulating body temperature and maintaining healthy body systems and joints. For many years, health authorities recommended that adults should drink two liters of water per day. However, estimates of the actual amount needed vary. In the United States, the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine recommended that men should drink 3.7 liters of fluid every day, and women 2.7 liters. In Britain, the National Health Service recommends between 1.2 and 1.5 liters per day, depending on air temperature and activity level. It does not all have to be pure water to meet the quota. The water content of food and other drinks also contributes to the total. Despite this, most adults in Europe and the US are thought to function in a constant state of slight dehydration. We should all be drinking more. But in today’s society, there is a dizzying array of different types of water available. You can get it from the kitchen sink, or you can buy it in bottles. Even then, commercial water brands compete with claims that theirs is the healthiest. Should we be drinking spring water, artesian water, mineral water, distilled water, alkaline water, hydrogen water, or even collected rainwater? Despite the names and claims, is there really any difference? What Makes Bottled Waters Unique? If your water comes from a bottle, the International Bottled Water Association regulates what it says on the label. For example, only water that flows naturally to the surface from an underground source can be called spring water. It can only be collected directly from the spring or from a borehole tapping the underground formation that feeds it. Mineral water must contain no less than 250 parts per million of dissolved solids, and no additional minerals can be added after extraction. Industrially purified water should be labeled with the process by which it was treated—for example, distilled water, deionized water, or reverse osmosis water. This way, consumers can be aware of what “type” of water they are drinking. But are any of these waters “better” than the rest? Doctors and researchers are still investigating potential health benefits. Hydrogen Water Shows Promising Results In the western world, municipal water suppliers have to meet stringent levels of purity and quality for potable water. Despite well-publicized cases where such standards were not met (such as the water crisis in Flint, Michigan), the tap water in most places in America or Europe should be perfectly safe. The US Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics says there is little evidence supporting or refuting the claimed health benefits of alkaline water. Commercial operators, eager to make a profit, publicize health claims for their products. In recent years, the bottled water most promoted by influencers and celebrities has been alkaline water, whose pH has been raised (through additives or by picking up minerals naturally) above neutral 7 to around 8 or 9. For a healthy human, blood pH is neutral, and the liver and kidneys do a good job of keeping it that way. People with diabetes can have slightly acidic blood while kidney disorders can cause alkalinity. But according to Melina Malkani, spokeswoman for the US Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, there is little evidence supporting or refuting the claimed health benefits of alkaline water. Debunking Distilled Water Concerns: Not as Bad as Previously Assumed Beyond “healthy” water, there are also persistent beliefs that some kinds of water can be unhealthy. For example, distilled water is claimed to absorb carbon dioxide from the air, leach essential minerals from the body when consumed, and reduce nutrient levels in vegetables when used for cooking. Each of these claims is false. However, because distilled water contains very low, even negligible, levels of minerals, it is also not a source of nutrition. This is not a serious problem since most people get their nutrients from food, not water. Distilled water tends to taste “flat,” but otherwise is perfectly healthy to drink. Drink Enough Water As long as you live in an area where the municipal water supply is free from contaminants, the most cost-effective way to stay hydrated is just to turn on your kitchen tap and glug away. You save money, avoid polluting the planet with bottles, and enjoy the life-sustaining benefits that water provides. *Stuart Nathan is a London-based freelance science writer, specializing in science, engineering, and technology.

By Dhanada K Mishra* Scientists have long been intrigued by the durability of Roman-built buildings. For instance, the famed Pantheon, which has the world's largest unreinforced concrete dome, was built in 128 CE and still stands today. A Roman-era aqueduct, the Aqua Virgo, built of the same concrete, still supplies water. A little over a year ago, Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Admir Masic and his Italian and Swiss collaborators published a startling discovery about the concrete used in ancient Rome. The researchers uncovered the presence of so-called lime clasts—granules of calcium carbonate that gave concrete self-healing properties—according to their paper published in the journal Science Advances. The key was using hot mixing of quick lime (a reactive form of calcium that generates heat on mixing with water) instead of slaked lime (a cooler, slow-acting form). Because of the presence of the resulting lime clasts, cracks formed in concrete could heal themselves when they came in contact with moisture and pozzolanic materials, such as volcanic ash contained in the mix. Ticking Time Bombs Emerging knowledge like this could have incalculable value. Since English bricklayer Joseph Aspdin invented and patented Portland cement in 1824, reinforced concrete has been used worldwide in buildings, highway bridges, offshore platforms, dams, roads, etc. The typical service life of such structures is expected to be 50 years on average and up to 200 years if built with extra care and special provisions. Compared to concrete used in the Roman period, the massive infrastructures built in the last couple of centuries are ticking time bombs. However, compared to concrete used in the Roman period, the massive infrastructures built in the last couple of centuries are ticking time bombs. They require frequent repair and maintenance during their service lives. They will also eventually need to be demolished or rebuilt. There is an environmental impact, too: The buildings and infrastructure construction sector is estimated to contribute around 40% of greenhouse gas emissions in terms of embodied and operational carbon footprint, according to the UN Environment Programme and its Global Alliance for Buildings and Construction. The race is now on to use this new knowledge about “self-healing” concrete and modify modern-day concrete to mimic the longevity and much lower carbon footprint of the ancient construction material. The Need for Resilience Resilience is the ability of any structure to withstand extreme load events, such as an earthquake, typhoon, explosion, etc., and recover from it as quickly as possible. The frequency of extreme natural (see Figure 1) and man-made disaster events, such as hurricanes, storms, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, heat waves, fires, terrorism, etc., has been increasing in recent decades. It has underscored the need for durable, safe, and securely built infrastructure. As a tragic example, a magnitude 7.8 earthquake hit the Turkey-Syria region on February 6, 2023. More than 160,000 buildings were destroyed or severely damaged, and more than 53,000 people died. Some 2.7 million were left homeless. War-torn Syria is estimated to have 40 million tons of cement rubble, in addition to the cement debris from the 2023 earthquake. According to a 2023 article in The Guardian, which cited a study in the Journal of Materials in Civil Engineering, efforts are underway that demonstrate how to prepare—and strengthen—local rubble to rebuild the nation. New Lower Carbon Footprint Material In recent years, there has been a concerted effort to reduce the environmental impact of cement production as rapid urbanization occurs in Asia and Africa (see Figure 2). Traditional Portland cement contributes significantly to carbon dioxide emissions (around 5% to 8% of the global emissions). Its production requires an energy-intensive process to create clinker, composed of mostly limestone, that is then ground into cement powder. However, several lower-carbon alternatives to clinker are now available. Pozzolanic Cement Concrete Historically, supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) have long been used in construction. The Romans used volcanic ash, while other parts of the world used various forms of reactive clay, etc., as a supplement to the primary binder, such as lime and, more recently, cement. Supplementary cementitious materials (SCMs) have long been used in construction; the Romans used volcanic ash. SCMs, or pozzolans, are materials with weak binding properties in the presence of water and calcium hydroxide resulting from the primary reaction of cement or lime. Modern industrial byproducts—such as fly ash (a coal combustion residue from thermal power plants), slag (residue from the blast furnace), and silica fume (residue from the ferro-silicon industry)—can be used as partial replacements for Portland cement. Incorporating SCMs reduces the need for clinker production, resulting in lower carbon dioxide emissions. In countries like China and India, higher quantities of SCMs are incorporated directly in the cement-making process itself to make products like Portland Pozzolanic Cement (PPC), Portland Slag Cement (PSC), and composite cement (using both fly ash and slag). Besides reducing embodied carbon and reducing waste, SCMs improve the long-term performance and durability of concrete structures. Despite their advantages and potential, these emerging SCMs do have their drawbacks and limitations when compared to Portland cement. For instance, there may be problems with incomplete dispersion of some composites throughout the mix, as well as increased water consumption requirements which can affect workability, among other issues. As these SCMs are relatively new, there is also an obvious lack of testing of some for their long-term mechanical properties. Geopolymer Concrete One of the primary sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Portland cement manufacturing is the high-temperature process of producing clinker from limestone and clay. If one can imagine a room-temperature process to make Portland cement without using limestone, then geopolymer cement would be that wonder material. It is produced by activating aluminosilicate materials, such as fly ash or slag, with a strong alkaline solution. This alternative cementitious material offers comparable or even superior mechanical properties compared to Portland cement-based concrete. Geopolymer concrete has a significantly lower carbon footprint and exhibits excellent resistance to fire, chemicals, and fatigue. Unfortunately, Portland cement production approaches over 4 billion tons a year—making Portland cement concrete the second-most-used material by humans (after water). This leaves an insufficient amount of pozzolanic source material available to meet demands by geopolymer concrete alone. Limestone Calcined Clay Cement (LC3) In South Asia, the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS) last year released an exclusive Indian Standard (IS 18189: 2023) for a new type of low-carbon cement called LC3. This cement is produced from about 50% Portland cement clinker, 30% calcined clay, 15% limestone, and 5% gypsum. Among the various new cement formulations, LC3 has been the most successful emerging commercial product in several countries. Each ton of calcined clay produced saves 600 kilograms (1,322 pounds) of CO2. By the end of 2025, it is expected that LC3 will have saved 45 million tons, according to the Swiss-supported LC3-Project. Real-Life Examples High-volume pozzolanic concrete made from PPC, PSC, and composite cement is commonplace in every type of construction where ordinary Portland cement concrete is used. The same is increasingly the case with LC3 cement-based concrete. New cementitious materials have undergone extensive testing and have also been successfully utilized in pavements, retaining walls, water tanks, and precast bridge decks. The University of Queensland's Global Change Institute (GCI) has been constructed using geopolymer concrete. It is a four-story building for public use and is claimed to be the first of its kind. New cementitious materials have undergone extensive testing and have also been successfully utilized in pavements, retaining walls, water tanks, and precast bridge decks. Ultra-High-Performance Concrete Several cementitious materials show significant promise in terms of disaster resilience. Ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC), for example, is a material that has outstanding mechanical properties. It offers high strength, ductility (can be shaped without losing strength), and energy absorption capacities, making it suitable for blast-resistant structures. UHPC can withstand extreme loads and impacts. It is an ideal choice for structures exposed to potential terrorist attacks. UHPC consists of carefully chosen ingredients based on particle-packing principles to give a dense microstructure that is further reinforced with micro-steel fibers. It is also known as reactive powder concrete (RPC) or densified system of particles (DSP). Its dense microstructure provides impact resistance, high strength, and excellent durability properties, providing extended service life. Fiber-Reinforced Concrete and Engineered Cement Composites (ECC) As their names suggest, fiber-reinforced concrete (FRC) and engineered cement composites (ECC) are composites that combine fibers with cementitious materials with a range of strength, ductility, and durability properties. They can be designed to help resist impact and energy absorption capacities. By incorporating fibers, these materials can effectively distribute and dissipate energy during extreme load events, reducing the potential for structural failure. ECC has resulted from the pioneering work of Professor Victor C Li and his co-workers at the University of Michigan, based on a design framework illustrated in Figure 3. Their approach considers multi-hazard extreme load conditions—such as a levee breaking apart in an earthquake or hurricane—and the future impact of climate change-induced increases in loading. The goal is to develop an optimal design that can justify the initial investment in high-performance materials such as UHPC or ECC, which can provide the desired level of resilience and sustainability. While many real-life applications of UHPC and ECC are available in almost every type of construction project, their adaptation needs to be more widespread. The increased availability of these materials for use depends on various factors, including research and development, standardization, production scalability, and market demand. While some of these materials are commercially available, others are still in the research and testing phase. Advancements in these materials are expected to continue, and their availability is likely to increase in the coming years as their benefits are recognized and demand grows. Towards a Safe and Sustainable Infrastructure Developing and adopting new cementitious materials with a lower carbon footprint and enhanced disaster resilience are crucial steps toward sustainable and safe infrastructure development for the future. These materials offer superior performance during natural disasters, such as earthquakes, typhoons, and explosions, while reducing the environmental impact of traditional Portland cement. Geopolymer concrete, limestone calcined clay cement (LC3) concrete, ultra-high-performance concrete (UHPC), and fiber-reinforced composites (FRC) are promising materials. As awareness grows and regulations focus on sustainability and resilience, adoption of these materials is expected to increase, contributing to a more resilient and environmentally friendly construction industry. *Dhanada K Mishra has a Ph.D. in civil engineering from the University of Michigan and is currently based in Hong Kong, working for an AI start-up, RaSpect (www.raspect.ai). He writes on environmental issues, sustainability, climate crisis, and built infrastructure.

By Rick Laezman* As the U.S. considers alternative sources of clean power to wean itself off fossil fuels, offshore wind energy (OWE) has emerged as a promising option with tremendous potential. However, like many other renewable energy sources, it faces its own unique set of challenges, some of which test the premise of “clean.” OWE may not create greenhouse gases, aside from those generated during initial construction and maintenance, but it does negatively impact the environment in other ways. Environmental groups and scientists have voiced concern about how the development and operation of offshore wind farms can harm marine life in the waters where they are built. Responding to that concern, multiple studies are examining this negative impact, such as those being conducted in the Mediterranean Sea, to confirm a pattern of disturbance and also to develop protocols for mitigating the impacts. Proponents hope these findings will provide guidance to the industry so that it can avoid the most harmful effects and continue its current trajectory of growth. The Expanding Role of OWE While wind power is commonly associated with land-based turbine farms, the offshore version has emerged with great potential. The American Clean Power Association (ACPA) describes OWE as “America’s next major energy source, representing a generational opportunity.” OWE offers several advantages over other means of clean energy production. It is an abundant, relatively consistent, reliable source of clean and renewable power. In contrast, the variability factors associated with solar and land-based wind energy have always been their biggest drawbacks. OWE could help compensate for this. The variability factors in solar and land-based wind have always been their biggest drawbacks. Offshore wind energy could help compensate for this. OWE also offers logistical advantages. The greatest concentrated demand for electricity typically occurs in large urban areas; since many of these megacities are also located in coastal zones, they could be serviced readily by OWE. Furthermore, OWE offers good economics. Because of its steady and sustainable nature, favorable prices can be locked in for many years. All these factors have boosted interest in and enthusiasm for the industry. Reuters reports that total U.S. OWE capacity is set to jump from 41 megawatts (MW) in 2023 to almost 1,000 MW in 2024. Much of this momentum is coming from the federal government. In 2021, U.S. President Biden set the goal of deploying 30 gigawatts of offshore wind electricity generation by 2030—enough to power more than 10 million American homes. Good But Not So Good As is the case with so many other promising solutions, not everyone is sanguine about the prospects of OWE. Projects have drawn protesters just about everywhere. Their ranks include environmentalists, fishermen, coastal residents, and no small number of politicians. They have cited numerous reasons for their opposition, but the negative impacts on sensitive marine animals seem to have attracted the greatest amount of attention. Offshore wind energy farms can impact marine life in many ways, both from their development and operations. Concerns are not unfounded. OWE farms can impact marine life in a variety of ways, both from their development and operations. While not necessarily aligning itself with the opposition, the French maritime data analysis company Sinay has identified several issues with OWE. Ocean-based wind turbines are typically larger than their land-based counterparts. They are often built on huge towers that are anchored into the bedrock on equally substantial foundations. This construction is an efficient conduit of the noise that is generated by the turbine blades, even though they are spinning in the sky, over 100 meters (about 328 feet) above the water. The sound of the vibrating turbine travels down through the tower into the base and then into the sea floor. These unnatural or anthropogenic (generated by humans) sounds in the aquatic environment create "noise pollution" that interferes with the marine animals living in the area. These animals have developed ways of navigating, communicating, interacting, feeding, and reproducing that often involve the processing of naturally occurring ambient noise in their surroundings. The introduction of noise pollution from wind turbines may alter these sound-reliant behaviors. Noise from heavy machinery, such as pile drivers that are used to drive the large [wind] towers into the sea floor, generate pronounced noise pollution that can harm wildlife. Some of the most acute noise pollution comes from the construction of OWE farms. Noise from heavy machinery, such as pile drivers that are used to drive the large towers into the sea floor, generates pronounced noise pollution that can harm wildlife. Sinay also notes that cables installed to carry the power from turbines to onshore distribution centers emit electromagnetic fields (EMFs) into the surrounding water. The issue of EMFs from land-based high-voltage transmission lines has been controversial, and similar concerns have been raised about the effect of EMFs from offshore turbines on marine life. EMFs are naturally occurring in the ocean environment, and many aquatic species are naturally adapted to their presence. They are highly sensitive to these energy waves and use them to navigate, forage, hunt for food, and avoid predators. But the man-made EMFs generated by underwater cables can alter the behavior of these animals. OWE turbines can generate other forms of pollution besides noise. The saltwater in the ocean is highly corrosive and breaks down the metal structures used to support turbines. This metallic breakdown can also become a source of pollution in the ocean environment. Finally, wind turbines and their bases on the sea floor attract marine life looking for cover. This “artificial reef effect” has positive and negative outcomes. It can help compensate for the disruption of habitat caused by the construction of the wind farm, but it can also harbor invasive species and otherwise alter the natural balance in surrounding habitats. Birds, Whales, and Turtles In response to concerns voiced by various groups, including fishermen and environmentalists, studies have been conducted to assess the potential damage to marine ecosystems from the development and operation of OWE farms. A few studies have found that some of the worst fears may be overblown. For example, a study conducted in 2019 on the effects of European and Danish OWE farms on birds found evidence of “widespread avoidance of offshore turbines by large-bodied birds.” In other words, the birds don’t die as feared because they simply fly around the turbines. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) also has found that “there is no scientific evidence that noise resulting from OWE site characterization surveys could potentially cause mortality of whales.” Recognizing the controversy and the potential problems with offshore wind energy technology, the U.S. federal government approved funding to conduct comprehensive studies of its effects. However, concerns remain, and much of the research and knowledge about the effects of OWE on marine life is in its infancy. Recognizing the controversy and the potential problems with the technology, the U.S. federal government approved funding to conduct comprehensive studies of its effects on the natural marine environment and wildlife. In October 2021, the Department of Energy (DOE) announced $13.5 million in funding to provide “critical environmental and wildlife data to support OWE development.” The funding went to four separate projects. Two of these were to support wildlife and fisheries monitoring on the East Coast. The other two focused on West Coast waters. On the East Coast, Duke University received $7.5 million to examine the effect of OWE development on marine animals, including birds, bats, whales, and turtles. The Coonamessett Farm Foundation received $3.3 million to survey changes in commercial fish populations and aquatic environments at an OWE development site. On the West Coast, Oregon State University received $2 million to conduct acoustic monitoring of marine mammals and seabirds. The Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution also received $750,000 to develop robotic technology to monitor the effect of wind energy development on marine life. In 2022, the DOE and the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) announced an additional award. The Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) received $1.6 million to conduct bat acoustic monitoring at fixed and mobile (floating) sites along the West Coast. These and other efforts are underway. While strong correlations have yet to be established, the goal is to develop a database of knowledge that can help guide the industry, so that as it grows, it takes the necessary precautions to minimize the effects of OWEs on the environment. BOEM, the federal agency that grants leases, easements, and rights-of-way for OWE development, has developed measures to mitigate impacts. Some of these measures are already being implemented. BOEM, the federal agency that grants leases, easements, and rights-of-way for OWE development, has developed measures to mitigate impacts. These include the selection of potential sites that will have the least amount of conflict with marine life and human activities, such as fishing. Seasonal restrictions are also designed to avoid conflict with the migration patterns of certain species. One of the most consequential activities in wind farm development may be the pile driving of wind turbine towers, mentioned earlier. Construction can last between two and four years, and the noise is intense and may be harmful to resident marine life. However, a so-called “bubble curtain technique” is being deployed to minimize its impact. This entails using steel-encased, perforated rubber hoses sunk to the seafloor in rings or circles around the base where the tower will be driven into the sea floor. Air is pumped into the hoses, where it escapes through the holes and rises to the surface. As it rises, it creates a “curtain” of bubbles that acts as a buffer that prevents the pile driving noise from escaping into the surrounding ocean environment and can reduce the sound generated by pile driving by as much as 80 to 90 percent. Sustainable Offshore Wind Energy The fight against climate change is not just about ending the nation's dependence on carbon-emitting fossil fuels. All forms of energy generation have drawbacks, risks, and harmful impacts. In this sense, the challenge presenting itself to an energy-dependent society is to account for the harmful impacts of all forms of energy production and to sufficiently mitigate them. Just as scientists, innovators, engineers, and governments have demonstrated the ingenuity to develop alternative fuel sources, they have an equal capacity to refine and improve upon even the most seemingly clean and sustainable forms of energy generation. As the U.S. strives to enlist diverse resources in the fight against carbon emissions, offshore wind has emerged as an energy alternative with potential. To fully meet the challenge of climate change, the OWE industry will have to mitigate the impacts of this very plentiful and otherwise sustainable fuel source. Industry leaders and many policymakers have shown the will to address these challenges. In time, OWE may prove to be one of the nation's leading sources of clean energy with minimal impact on the aquatic environments whose resources it harnesses. *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 ten years.

Culinary Pioneer Pays Tribute to Nature By Mark Smith* “In nature I find a friend, a companion, and a mother. My job is to pay tribute to her, to preserve her, and present her to the world.”—Claire Vallée It can be hard to stand out in the culinary world when one hails from a nation synonymous with fine cuisine. But French chef Claire Vallée is a true gastronomic pioneer. Entirely self-taught, her restaurant, ONA, was the first vegan restaurant in France to earn a coveted Michelin star award, and she has become one of the world’s leading advocates for both vegan and sustainable cooking. But her passion for vegan food transcends simple taste and ingredients. It is rooted in spiritualism, philosophy, and a wider fascination with nature itself. A former archaeologist, it is perhaps no surprise that her love of the treasures buried in the Earth helped inspire her culinary creations. But it was a journey to the East that lit the fire of inner discovery that set her on the path to success. Inspired by Temple Cuisine After working as a chef on a catamaran, Vallée journeyed to Thailand in 2012—and things would never be the same again. “It was a revelation,” she told The Earth & I. “I discovered vegetarian cooking through the Buddhist culture. Herbs, roots, spices— nothing escaped my library of tastes, textures, and smells.” “I discovered vegetarian cooking through the Buddhist culture. Herbs, roots, spices—nothing escaped my library of tastes, textures, and smells. I familiarized myself with umami, the famous fifth taste. And I realized that temple cuisine was just as tasty as that on offer in France.” When she returned to France, she settled down in Arès, in Gironde, on the Arcachon Basin, and was hired as a chef in a traditional restaurant. But she quickly realized that that kind of cooking was no longer for her. “I took a deeper interest in animal distress in farms, slaughterhouses, and during transport. I became aware that, in addition to the cruelty inflicted on these sentient beings, there is also the pollution of soil, rivers, and oceans caused by animal dejecta; the deforestation linked to the cultivation of soya to feed these animals; the methane released into the air which contributes to global warming; and the antibiotics and growth hormones injected and which we humans reciprocally ingest by consuming meat and dairy products,” she said. ‘Animal-Free Origin’ Fueled by a desire to do things differently, coupled with the skills she had picked up in the East, Vallée decided to open ONA— which stands for Origine non animale (animal-free origin)—in Arès near Bordeaux. But that would be easier said than done. Mainstream banks thought her dream was a “crazy idea,” so she went about funding things differently. She started a crowdfunding campaign. Some 126 people helped raise €10,000 (about $10,753). That money was pooled with a loan from La Nef, a bank that specializes in lending for ethical projects. She then mobilized a volunteer workforce of painters, masons, electricians, plumbers, gardeners, friends, future customers, strangers, helpers, and local businesses. In less than two months, ONA opened its doors to the public in 2016. Not only did the restaurant serve vegan food from the onset, it used no animal products in its decorations or furnishings and won praise for its commitment to renewable practices. Success soon followed. ONA was named in the Michelin Guide for 2021 and received a Michelin star—a first for a vegan restaurant in France. It was also one of 33 restaurants in France to receive a Green Star, a new Michelin Guide category awarded for sustainable practices. Nature as Friend, Companion, Mother When it comes to her culinary ideas, it is in the natural world that Vallée said she finds true inspiration. “In nature I find a friend, a companion, and a mother. My job is to pay tribute to her, to preserve her, and present her to the world. I find her as fragile as she is strong, as moving as she is cruel, as beautiful as she is sometimes sad.” She believes that plant-based cooking allows people to break free from traditional cooking constraints, get out of their comfort zones, and think more deeply about the living world and the plate. “It offers an unrivaled playground for renewed creativity, thanks to the complexity and the thousands of plant varieties that exist,” she said. People Eat with Their Eyes People eat with their eyes, or so the saying goes, and as a former art historian, Vallée likes things to look good on the plate. But she doesn’t advocate any hard and fast rules for budding chefs when it comes to presentation. “I don't really have any advice on culinary aesthetics. Personally, I'm a keen observer of nature and its changing colors over time. I also like to bring harmony to proposals and the positioning of food on and around the plate,” she said. The 'Stars' of Her Kitchen In addition to her creativity and achievements with food, she is also known for her passion for using renewable materials. This is perhaps best illustrated by the relatively small and trusted team of suppliers she keeps around her. “They are the stars of my kitchen,” she enthused. “Carole my greengrocer; Claire my ceramist; Pierre my baker; Philippe my wine merchant; Benoît my grocer, and Cyril my horticulturist. Their work is sourced from organic, ecological, or sustainable agriculture. They all live within a 20 km (12 mile) radius of the restaurant.” “Carole my greengrocer; Claire my ceramist; Pierre my baker; Philippe my wine merchant; Benoît my grocer, and Cyril my horticulturist. All six are passionate about their respective fields. Their work is sourced from organic, ecological, or sustainable agriculture. They all live within a 20 km (12 miles) radius of the restaurant and add value to the region through their know-how and techniques.” Changing Seasons and Stories Despite her reputation in the kitchen, chef Vallée is never one to rest on her laurels and likes to change things up when it comes to putting new creations on the menu. “My cooking is rather unusual in that I regularly change the dishes according to the seasons and my inspirations,” she said. “What's more, my culinary approach focuses on the message and the story. All dishes are important in this sense and contribute to the narrative.” Keep It Sustainable at Home "I wrote my book, Origine Non Animale, Pour Une Gastronomie Végétale, published in 2023. So, my customers can easily draw inspiration from some of my recipes to cook at home.” When it comes to creating delicious vegan dishes and helping support sustainability at home, Vallée said it is the “small, simple gestures” that make a difference every day. “Be careful not to let the water run for hours on end. With basins, you can reduce this impact by washing your vegetables, and then rinsing them in another, and the same goes for washing up. Even in an apartment, uneaten peelings can be fed into worm composters. Prefer bulk packaging to reduce packaging consumption. And, of course, give preference to local and seasonal produce—organic is even better,” she told The Earth & I. Cooking as a Virtue She added: “Cooking for yourself is also a virtuous act for yourself, others, and the planet. We spend less and pay more attention to what we eat when we cook. Making your own household products doesn't actually take much time, and it's frankly 1,000 times more environmentally friendly. Also, people can stop wasting food “by drying your food, preserving it by fermenting it, salting it ... just like our grandparents did!” she advised. From her self-taught beginnings and art history and archaeology background to her success in bringing people together to help realize a dream, it is clear Vallée is no ordinary chef. She has blazed a trail that is kinder to nature, inspiring many others along the way, and will hopefully continue to do so long into the future. *Mark Smith is a journalist and author from the UK. He has written on subjects ranging from business and technology to world affairs, history, and popular culture for the Guardian, BBC, Telegraph, and magazines in the United States, Europe, and Southeast Asia.

By Dr. Eric Larson* The following article is the second part of Dr. Eric Larson’s presentation, entitled “Negative Emission Technologies in US Decarbonization Pathways,” at the Twenty-Eighth International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences (ICUS XXVIII) in 2022. (See here the first part of his presentation.) In this [second] part of my talk, I will look at the potential role that negative emissions technologies might play in the United States if the US is to achieve its government-announced goal of net-zero emissions by 2050. For this, I want to draw on a study that I co-led, which we published in 2021, called Net-Zero America: Potential Pathways, Infrastructure, and Impacts. It can be accessed at https://netzeroamerica.princeton.edu. We tried to paint a picture in as much detail as possible of what the US energy economy would look like if net-zero emissions were achieved by 2050. What Might the US Energy/Industrial System Look Like as the Country Reduces Emissions to Net-Zero by 2050? We started with the knowledge that today’s US net emissions are about 6 gigatons (Gt) CO2/year. We drew a straight line for the net emissions to reach zero by 2050 (Figure 1). The analysis takes into account that there is a land sink today, with trees growing and soils absorbing carbon, and that we would enhance that land sink through various measures. There were experts on our team who helped us to understand that. There are also non-CO2 emissions that have to be considered, like methane and nitrous oxide that come from agricultural production. These tend to be more difficult to completely eliminate. Therefore, when you have non-CO2 emissions and a land sink, the difference between those is what the energy system will need to provide. In our study, we modeled the energy and industrial system and ended up with basically slightly negative emissions for those sectors by 2050 to meet the net-zero economywide target. We did a variety of other modeling that I will not go into detail on, but Figure 2 shows the results of our study. This shows the primary energy supply in 2050 under different pathways to net-zero emissions. 5 Net-Zero Pathways Deliver the Same Energy Services, But With Different Energy Demand and Supply Mixes The left bar shows the 2020 mix of energy sources of over 80% fossil fuels. By 2050, our reference scenario (second-from-the-left bar), without any new policy measures, looks quite similar. Then there are five scenarios that all meet the target of net-zero emissions by 2050. They all deliver the same energy services—that is, the vehicle miles traveled, the square meters of building space heated and cooled, and so on are the same. However, they do this with different mixes of energy-demand and energy-supply technologies. As an example, what we call the E+ scenario is a high-electrification scenario where buildings and vehicles are electrified very aggressively. The E− scenario involves less aggressive electrification. As one can see, electrification gives you some efficiency benefits. In fact, an electric vehicle, for example, has maybe three times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engine vehicle, so we have less of an energy requirement overall in the E+ scenario versus the E− scenario. An electric vehicle, for example, has maybe three times the efficiency of a comparable internal combustion engine vehicle. I want to point out the green bars in Figure 2 represent biomass. In all our scenarios, biomass is a very important contributor by 2050. Most of the biomass is used with CO2 capture and storage as well. In four of the five scenarios (scenarios E+, E-, and E+ RE-, E+ RE+, excluding scenario E- B+), we limited the amount of biomass that could be used in the energy system to that which could be delivered without changing land use from today. Taking land for bioenergy that might otherwise be used for agriculture has its potential problems. Therefore, we wanted to minimize that issue. One can see that in these four scenarios, bioenergy is at about the same level. In the scenario E- B+ (the middle pathway of the five net-zero bars), we allowed more biomass, including some land use change, and you can see that much more biomass is adopted there. In all five of our pathways, biomass is a very valuable energy resource when coupled with CO2 capture and storage. In the last two scenarios E+ RE- and E+ RE+ (right two bars), we changed the level of wind and solar generation. In the fourth bar (E+ RE-), we limited the amount of wind and solar capacity that could be added annually to about 40% more than the maximum single-year addition achieved in the recent past. In the last pathway E+ RE+ (the bar on the right), we did not place any constraint on wind or solar additions, and we required the energy system to be completely fossil-fuel free by 2050. 2050 Energy Mix in the Five Net-Zero US Pathways In the first four pathways (scenarios E+, E-, E- B+, and E+ RE-) (see Figure 2 excerpt), we still have fossil fuel use in 2050. Part of the reason we can continue using fossil fuels there is because we have CO2 capture and storage involved and, in fact, in these first four scenarios, we have between 1 billion and 2 billion tons per year of CO2 capture and storage. In the fifth scenario, E+ RE+, we did not allow carbon storage, but there is still capture of CO2, with the carbon being recycled back into fuels that are needed in the energy system. Part of the reason we can continue using fossil fuels … is because we have CO2 capture and storage involved. All five of our pathways rely on six decarbonization pillars (Figure 3) deployed at unprecedented rates. “Unprecedented” means we have not seen such rates of change historically in the US; it does not necessarily mean they are impossible rates of change. Our study delved into each of these important pillars. Here, I will show a snapshot of some results for the BECCS (bioenergy with carbon capture and storage) and DAC (direct air capture) technologies—in other words, the engineered negative-emissions technologies included in our model. Unprecedented Rates of Physical Change Across Six Essential Pillars of Decarbonization We did detail mapping and prospective siting of bioenergy facilities. Figure 4 displays our map for 2050. We did this mapping in five-year time steps. I am just showing the 2050 map. The green point sources represent bioenergy conversion with CCS (carbon capture and storage). The sites are widespread, particularly around the Midwest, but also in the Southeast as well as along the western part of the US. For the Five Net-Zero Pathways, Annual Capture at BECCS Facilities Ranges from 0.4–1.5 Gt CO2 in 2050 We designed a pipeline network for CO2 collection and transportation to underground storage locations. The gray-shaded regions in Figure 4 represent the most prospective regions for CO2 storage in the country. The volume of CO2 capture and storage that is going on in the E+ scenario, which is not our most aggressive one, is comparable to total current US oil production. This gives you an indication that CO2 capture, transport, and storage is a very significant new industry in our net-zero pathways. CO2 capture, transport, and storage is a very significant new industry in net-zero pathways. Annual Direct Air Capture (DAC) in 2050 Reaches 0.7 Gt CO2 in the Most DAC-Intensive Pathway (E-) In the upper panel of Figure 5, we see all the sources of CO2 capture in 2050 in each of our five net-zero scenarios. The lower panel in Figure 5 shows where captured CO2 (from all sources) goes. The gray in the lower panel represents CO2 stored. Most of the CO2 that is captured in the first four scenarios is stored underground. You can see that bioenergy (BE) with carbon capture and storage (CCS—BE+CCS = BECCS) plays a big role in all five of these scenarios. Direct air capture (DAC) really comes in only in the E− scenario. That is the case where we did not electrify vehicles and buildings as aggressively as we did in the E+ pathway. That leads to additional fossil fuel use in 2050, so, that then the emissions from those need to be offset. Since we have consumed the full biomass potential, here we need to adopt DAC, which in our modeling is a more expensive CO2 removal option than BECCS, and that is why it comes in later and mainly in that one scenario. Thus, both the BECCS and DAC technologies play very important roles in the US in potentially getting to net-zero emissions—and potentially in other countries as well. Just to recap, why are we interested in negative emissions? Cumulative emissions of CO2 determine future global warming. To stay below 1.5–2 °C of warming, the carbon budget that we have left to spend is shrinking quite rapidly. Negative emissions can essentially help us stay within our budget and meet those emissions thresholds. What are the various net-zero emissions or negative emissions technologies? I reviewed a number of them, including restoring and managing terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems, mineralizing carbon, BECCS, and DAC with CO2 storage. All of these have a role to play in meeting the carbon challenge. But BECCS and DAC prospectively have the largest roles. I showed some results from our US study, including quite detailed modeling results, that really highlight the critical roles for those two future industries in reaching net-zero targets. *Eric Larson has a Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering and is the Senior Research Engineer at the Andlinger Center for Energy and the Environment, Princeton University, USA. Supporting websites: IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change). 2018. “Summary for Policymakers.” In Global Warming of 1.5 °C: An IPCC Special Report on the Impacts of Global Warming of 1.5 °C  https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009157940.001. “Negative Emissions Technologies and Carbon Capture and Storage to Achieve the Paris Agreement Commitments.” https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2016.0447. “Co-production of Synfuels and Electricity from Coal + Biomass with Zero Net Carbon Emissions: An Illinois Case Study.” Energy and Environmental Science 3 (1): 28–42. https://doi.org/10.1039/B911529C. “A Review of Direct Air Capture (DAC): Scaling Up Commercial Technologies and Innovating for the Future.” Progress in Energy 3 (3): 032001. https://doi.org/10.1088/2516-1083/abf1ce. “Federal Research, Development, and Demonstration Priorities for Carbon Dioxide Removal in the United States.” Environmental Research Letters 13 (1): 015005. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-9326/aaa08f.

Portions of Mexico, the US, and Canada will experience a rare total solar eclipse on April 8, 2024, an event attracting broad public interest and launching a host of scientific experiments to study such things as animal behavior during the short-lived daytime darkness. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has set up a special website for the eclipse to provide safety recommendations and important data to assist eclipse- watchers and residents within the narrow band of darkness as it travels northeast across the continent. NASA reports that, with cooperating local weather conditions, Mexico’s Pacific coastline will mark the phenomenon’s North American debut at approximately 11:07 a.m. PDT. After traveling northeastward across portions of Mexico, the eclipse will pass over portions of several US states from Texas to Maine prior to exiting the Atlantic coastline of Newfoundland, Canada, at 5:16 p.m. NDT. According to Scientific American, planned coinciding experiments include equipping volunteer citizen scientists with “small, microphone-equipped electronic devices” that will “listen for shifts in animal noises” during the brief period of “false night.” NASA aircraft will take images during the eclipse in hopes of capturing enormous plasma eruptions arising from the Sun’s surface. Engineers and physicists will also be measuring effects on radio wave transmissions resulting from the drop in ionization that occurs when the moon’s shadow passes over an area. Source: https://science.nasa.gov/eclipses/future-eclipses/eclipse-2024/where-when/

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