Innovations for Food Preservation and Waste Prevention By Danielle Nierenberg, Founder of Food Tank* Every year, the world’s farmers and other food producers provide a prodigious amount of food for humanity—around 4 billion metric tons. But out of that bounty, a stunning one-third—or 1.3 billion metric tons—is estimated to be lost due to production-to-processing problems and wasteful discarding of consumable foods, says the United Nations' Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Thus, the safe preservation and reliable distribution of food are essential tasks to resolve world hunger and food insecurity. Focusing on what it takes to protect food from waste and loss, including greater investment in locally appropriate practices and improved storage policies, will help make sure that food gets to people who need it the most. The Dimensions of Food Waste In developing countries, 40% of harvests never reach people’s stomachs, says the FAO. In sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the developing world, equal proportions of food are lost because of poor infrastructure, pests, and disease. Food loss and waste tend to be insidious—a little bit is lost in the field; a little bit is lost in storage; a little is lost in transport; and finally, a small percent is lost at home. In industrialized countries, the latter is the larger issue: In the United States, for instance, as much as one-half of consumable food is thrown away. This is because people buy too much, misjudge expiration and “sell by” dates, and deem too much produce to be “blemished;” and there is massive “plate waste,” in which people in homes, hospitals, schools, restaurants, and nursing facilities discard food that has been served to them. Food loss is a major reason 1 in 10 people in the world are malnourished, says the World Resources Institute. Food loss is a major reason 1 in 10 people in the world are malnourished, says the World Resources Institute. Inexpensive Techniques Prevent Food Loss and Waste The good news is that preventing food loss and waste can be simple and inexpensive. For instance, the World Vegetable Center has research centers across sub-Saharan Africa devoted to finding ways to breed vegetables for taste and resilience—and helping farmers figure out how to keep those crops from going to waste. According to estimates from the World Vegetable Center, more than half of fruits and vegetables, around half of roots and tubers, and almost a third of oilseeds and pulses in Africa are lost post-harvest. In Bamako, Mali, researchers at the local World Vegetable Center office are working with farmers to develop preservation techniques to make vegetables available year-round and transform them in the ways women want and need. Okra powder, for example, is commonly used in Mali for sauces. The World Vegetable Center is also working with women farmers to develop recipes to make greater use of vegetable products. As these powders and dried vegetables become more available year-round, they can combat micronutrient deficiencies while also providing an extra source of income. The same is true for preserving fruits like mangoes that have abundant but short growing seasons. As these powders and dried vegetables become more available year-round, they can combat micronutrient deficiencies while also providing an extra source of income. In Burkina Faso, for example, an entrepreneur named Christiane Coulibaly started a mango-drying business in 2008 with help from a project funded by the World Bank. As of February 2020, she had expanded her workforce to a dozen employees and nearly 500 seasonal workers, most of whom were women. Her business is also providing an incredible nutritional resource. Mangoes are often the only source of vitamin A in local communities. In fishing communities in The Gambia and other coastal areas, women are also drying fish, providing an inexpensive and important source of protein throughout the year. Storage Makes a Difference Carefully designed and executed storage systems that use locally sourced materials can help farmers protect their crops. These include solar dryers and zeer pots that use evaporation to cool foods, and “mud silos,” or storehouses made of mudbrick and wood, to reduce losses of grain and other foods. A new technology has been introduced by Apeel Sciences. The company has developed an invisible, edible skin, which is applied postharvest, that acts as a second peel to protect and preserve crops like apples and avocadoes. Grains and pulses are at high risk from a variety of storage hazards, such as rats and other vermin, fungi, and toxins. The organization One Acre Fund is helping farmers improve their storage techniques for maize crops by tracking what they are growing and how much is lost. The farmers can use simple tracking sheets—literally using pencil and paper—to see how much they grow and how much is saved from each season. The sheets let the farmers understand how to adjust their storage use so that they lose as little product, nutrition, and income as possible. Good Nature Agro, an organization that works in Chipata, Zambia, is creating a network of farmer-led extension workers who attend agronomy courses. In addition to learning about new growing practices, students study harvesting and storage techniques. This organization is also helping farmers use hermetic storage products, like Purdue Improved Crop Storage (PICS) bags, which were developed several decades ago in Cameroon by Purdue University researchers and partners. PICS bags are a simple and cost-effective way of storing grain and seed without using chemicals to control insects. A typical bag holds about 50 kilograms (110 pounds) and has three layers—two liners fitted inside a woven sack. The bags allow farmers to store a variety of legume and cereal crops for more than a year after harvest. That enables farmers to preserve their crop for household consumption or wait for higher market prices. Infrastructure to Prevent Loss and Waste Infrastructure is a vital part of the solution for food loss and waste. Infrastructure means secure, reliable, and well-maintained roads and bridges as well as rail and port systems. Transportation routes are critically needed in rural, sub-Saharan Africa, and Asia to link fields to markets. Food that rots in transit does not get sold or eaten. Poor market systems also lead to large food losses in developing countries. There are not many wholesale, supermarket, and retail facilities that can provide adequate storage for food when it is ready for market. In addition, markets in developing countries are often lacking sanitary conditions or cooling equipment. Poor market systems also lead to large food losses in developing countries. There are not many wholesale, supermarket, and retail facilities that can provide adequate storage. Investment in alternative forms of refrigeration is part of the solution. It may not be realistic to expect developing countries to have refrigeration systems like those in wealthy countries, but developing countries may have the opportunity to leapfrog and develop more energy-efficient systems. For example, investment in solar-powered refrigeration systems and evaporative cooling systems should reduce food loss due to rotting. Having insulated on-farm buildings to keep crops cool before shipment can also help maintain the quality of crops. There is growing global interest and investment in climate-friendly cooling and cold chain systems. Food Waste in Wealthy Nations Food waste and loss are not just issues for developing countries. In the Global North and other industrialized nations, food waste occurs for a variety of reasons—cosmetic standards; confusing “sell by,” “use by,” and expiration dates; oversized portions; consumer expectations; perceptions of abundance by retailers and restaurants; and perhaps most important, the low value placed on food because it tends to be inexpensive and plentiful. Food waste happens in the Global North for a variety of reasons—cosmetic standards, confusing sell by, use by, and expiration dates, oversized portions, [and] consumer expectations… In the US, the Food Recovery Network (FRN) recovers food from events on and off college campuses. The student-led organization has recovered and donated millions of pounds of food that otherwise would have gone to waste, corresponding to more than 3.2 million meals that have gone to those in need. Their work has diverted food waste from landfills, thus preventing more than 6.8 million pounds of carbon dioxide from reaching the atmosphere. Tapping the Power of New Technologies Fortunately, new technologies are enabling many companies to make tremendous strides in preventing food waste. For example, Winnow Solutions is cutting food waste in hospitality and food services in more than forty countries by using the power of artificial intelligence. The system takes photographs of wasted food as it is thrown away, and using the images, the machine trains itself to recognize what has been thrown in the bin. This technology helps commercial chefs and kitchen staff track food waste and guides them on how to adjust their menus and food servings for efficiency. Winnow Solutions estimates that each year it has saved more than $32 million for food service, diverted more than 36 million meals from the bin, and saved about 61,000 tons of carbon dioxide emissions. Meanwhile, in Nigeria, software engineer Oscar Ekponimo has developed an app called Chowberry that connects bargain-hunting consumers to supermarket foods that would ordinarily end up in the trash. Retailers use the Chowberry app to scan the barcodes of food products. The app informs them when these products have reached their “best before” date and automatically offers the items for sale at a reduced price via the app and the accompanying website. As products near their latest possible selling date, their prices fall. As a result, consumers have access to affordable products, and retailers end up saving money because they throw away much less food. Ekponimo understands that low-income people may not have smartphones to use the app. So, his company also works with nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to connect Chowberry to a larger group of people who purchase and distribute the lower-cost food as part of their own outreach projects. Better Policies, Less Waste Governments are also tackling food loss and waste. In 2018, for example, Australia became the first country to set a target to reduce the amount of food waste it generates by 50% by 2030. The financial cost of food waste to the Australian economy is currently estimated to be $20 billion per year. Australia became the first country to set a target to reduce the amount of food waste it generates by 50% by 2030. To achieve its food waste target, the Australian government decided to invest $1.2 million over two years to support food rescue organizations, including Second Bite, FareShare, OzHarvest, and Food Bank Australia. In 2016, France became the first country to prohibit supermarkets from throwing away unsold food, requiring them, instead, to donate it to charities and food banks. South Korea is also proving that government policies can make a huge difference. In Seoul alone, the volume of food waste has been reduced by 10% (more than 300 tons per day), compared to a few years ago. Also, in 2013, a policy was implemented in Seoul that required households to pay for recycling according to the amount of food they throw out. This policy has been adopted in sixteen other Korean cities. Conclusion Preventing food loss and food waste holds many benefits for nations, farmers, entrepreneurs, consumers, and other stakeholders. Moreover, young people are seeing they have a role in managing food systems so that waste, loss, and hunger all become minimal or nonexistent. According to UNICEF, more than 820 million people go to bed hungry every night, while 1.3 billion tons of food goes to waste every year. This is unacceptable. The time to act is now. *Danielle Nierenberg is President and co-founder of Food Tank: The Think Tank for Food, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. She has conducted fact-finding missions to more than 70 countries, meeting thousands of farmers, researchers, government leaders, academics and journalists, documenting what is working to help alleviate hunger and poverty while protecting the environment. Editorial Note: Author Title: “Key Issues in the Preservation and Distribution of Food,” Presentation by Danielle Nierenberg at the Twenty-Sixth International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences (ICUS XXVI), February 2020, Seoul, Korea.

By Daniel Kobei* The Ogiek are a forest-dwelling, hunter-gatherer community who are officially identified as one of Kenya’s indigenous people.* They are also known as the ancestral guardians of Kenya’s largest, closed-canopy, forest ecosystem, the Mau Forest complex. The 52,000 members of the Ogiek tribe live in and around a forest that once stretched over 400,000 hectares (1,544 sq miles) in southwestern Kenya. Most Ogiek live within Mau Forest, inhabiting the Nakuru, Narok, Baringo, Kericho, Nandi and Uasin Gishu counties. The remainder of the population inhabit Mount Elgon in the area of Chepkitale, Bungoma County. The Ogiek, whose name means “caretakers of flora and fauna,” are experts at thriving within a forest ecosystem, conserving resources, and maintaining biodiversity. The Forest as Home, Market and Holy Place The Ogiek community has a close affinity with their environment: They live, eat, and cure ailments using natural resources within their ecosystem. To the Ogiek, the forest is like a supermarket—it provides food, medicines, and materials for building homes and other structures. Every shrub, tree, twig, tuber and all else that is in the forest has a meaning to the Ogiek community. The forest is also where spiritual and traditional rituals and ceremonies are performed. Ogiek shrines, “Mabwaita,” are where cleansing, performing sacrifices to the gods and making covenants as a community take place. Every family has a Mabwaita erected in their homestead facing the eastern side of the house where the sun rises. It is erected using specific sacred trees and shrubs, which are tied together; it is always redone during a new ceremony. Additionally, the Mabwaita is appeased with fresh plants and honey wine poured on it, accompanied by prayers offered by elders. Elders are mostly men accompanied by elderly women who are beyond childbearing age. Water as a Blessing from the Gods to Sustain Life The Ogiek believe water (peek) is supplied by the gods for the survival of biodiversity. Proper care of biodiversity ensures that the community never lacks water. Water is also believed to have a cleansing power. This is why, before circumcision, the initiate is taken to the river to bathe, ensuring he enters adulthood clean from any unwanted act committed during childhood. According to Ogiek beliefs, rainmakers are men blessed by elders to have the ability to stop rain. The Ogiek live in areas where it rains constantly. Therefore, they depend on rainmakers to stop the rain to allow ceremonies to take place. Similarly, during the occurrence of a drought, women gather at a designated point along the river and pray. A virgin girl or a virtuous married woman will stand in the river during the ceremony. This act causes the skies to open to accept the prayers and offer rain in return. The connection between water, forest, and livelihood of the Ogiek, portrayed through culture, traditions and norms, has been reckoned to follow international conventions, protocols and declarations. Traditional knowledge on conservation is embedded within the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) as well as the Nagoya Protocol. There are three objectives of CBD: the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of the components of biological diversity, and the fair and equitable sharing of the benefits arising out of the utilization of genetic resources. The Ogiek Livelihood and the Bee Culture For generations, Ogiek life revolved around hunting and gathering. But the 1970s wildlife hunting ban in Kenya forced the Ogiek lifestyle to undergo drastic changes, including adoption of subsistence agriculture. Despite the changes, however, the Ogiek community maintained its beekeeping culture. Honey is at the core of the Ogiek culture; it is the main component of their food and livelihood. At the turn of the 19th century, the Ogiek traded honey for ceremonial livestock from the Maasai. The Ogiek now use commercial practices, such as branding and packaging, to enhance the market value of their honey and capture a wider portion of the market. The Ogiek use their traditional knowledge to conserve the Mau Forest, thereby ensuring an abundance of flowers for bees to gather nectar and increase production of honey. Minimizing pressure on biodiversity The Ogiek community has traditionally lived in small groups or clans, which were distributed throughout their given territories in the Mau Forest. This division into small groups, as well as their seasonal migrations through their territories, ensured that little pressure was put on the forest’s biodiversity. The community also endeavored to minimize their disturbances to biodiversity through other means. For instance, they only hunted older game that were past young-rearing stage, and gathered roots sparingly to ensure that trees would not dry up or fall. Modern agriculture, however, has disrupted these kinds of practices. The clearing of large tracts of forest lands for agricultural activities has been a leading cause of biodiversity destruction within the Mau Forest. Additionally, the use of agrochemicals to maximize crop yields is interfering with honey production in the ecosystem; natural flora is cleared out while cultivated plants’ flowers are poisoned with agrochemicals. Conservation efforts Through the leadership of the Ogiek Peoples’ Development Program (OPDP), in partnership with the Kenya Forest Service (KFS) and the Community Forest Scouts, the Ogiek community has been able to conserve and restore the Mau Forest. This initiative is focused on rehabilitating degraded forest areas and preventing destruction of forest biodiversity. This has led to the restoration of more than 40 ha (98 acres). Through this initiative, the Ogiek are restoring Mau to its former glory, step by step. Ogiek Prayer Tororo ripe-ech, Konech konye-eng Konyeg oop samak, Konech panda nemocheygei Tororo konech konye-eg op koriron Ripwech timtonyon, emenyon nepo Tirap, Tirap, Tirap nemi Tegeltit Emetop sasaondendet, Emenyon nepo Setyot, Emenyon mo-o netepes Tororo konech lagog, konech komeg Konech konyegap ongweg, Ripwech mosotig, poponik, murguywet, Ripwech moingonigchog po mogonjog Konech keldop kugo nimokinochiy Tororo rip kotop Ogiot Tororo tomoyon kotop SOGOOT Sere! Sere! Sere!) (Ogiek prayer by Daniel Kobei, 2009) (The prayer is asking God to bless their biodiversity, forest, and hunting grounds. It asks for protection against misfortunes and requests for food, biodiversity, bees, and their hunting and gathering protection. The prayer ends with a call of blessing, blessing, blessing!) *This is per the guidelines given by the Working Group on Indigenous Populations/Communities in Africa, a special instrument of the African Commission on Human and Indigenous Peoples Rights (ACHIPR). The claim to indigeneity was further echoed by the African Court on Human and Peoples Rights on 26th May 2017, in Arusha, Tanzania, during the landmark judgement in favor of the Ogiek community and its land rights, as well as cultural rights, to the forest’s ecosystem. *Daniel Kobei is the Executive Director and Founder of the Ogiek Peoples' Development Program (OPDP), an NGO based in Kenya, with ECOSOC Status since 2019, promoting the human and land rights of the indigenous Ogiek Community and other Indigenous Peoples (IPs) of Kenya and Africa. He is the focal point on IPs matters in the International Indigenous Forum for Biodiversity (IIFB) under the Collaborative Partnership for Wildlife Management (CPW) established by the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD). He has an MBA in Strategic Mgt. from Egerton University, Kenya, and a Post Graduate Diploma in Project Appraisal and Management from Maastricht School Management (MSM) in the Netherlands.

By Daniel Kobei* How the Ogiek Community in Kenya Relies on Indigenous Herbs and Traditional Medicines The ancient, forest-dwelling Ogiek community of Kenya is famed for its cultural practices, such as beekeeping and using nature for healing illnesses and injuries. The 2020 emergence of COVID-19 posed a serious potential threat to the world’s communities—and it did not bypass the Ogiek people, who live across six counties in Kenya in the 400,000-hectare (1,544-square mile) Mau forest complex. How did this ancient hunter-gatherer population fare with this 21st century illness? Since time immemorial, the Ogiek community has depended on its indigenous forest for food, water, herbal medicine, and honey harvesting. The Ogiek’s honey is believed to have strong healing properties and be capable of preventing ailments such as the common cold and cough. Thus, honey is taken with many herbal medicines and plants. The indigenous forest in Mau has a variety of herbal plants, including certain tree species whose roots, barks, leaves, gums, and seeds are useful for herbal medicine. Skilled Ogiek medicine men and women know how to recognize and gather these materials and can prepare many kinds of herbal medicines. The Ogiek Have Relied on Traditional Medicines and Practices to Deal with Health Issues Some of the herbal plants used as medicines by the Ogiek community include: Chepindorwet,Narubat, Kurpanyat, Nukiat, Soget, Segetetik, Tangaratwet, Kosisitiet, Maironget, and Ororwet. Some are boiled with bone soup while others are chewed as per instructions from an experienced herbalist or elder. These herbs are believed to be very effective in curing various ailments, and, for some community members, these herbal medicines are their only means of treating illness. Indeed, some community members in Nkareta have never visited a health center and have only used traditional Ogiek herbal medicine. Among the diseases faced by the Ogiek community are tuberculosis, asthma, and other respiratory diseases. Waterborne illnesses, such as typhoid and cholera, are also common. Malaria has been reported in Narok County, and cancer and HIV/AIDS have also been reported among the general Ogiek community. In places where there are no health centers, community members depend solely on herbal medicine; only serious cases are taken to a hospital. Improving Community Health The Ogiek Peoples Development Program (OPDP) has sought to improve community health and well-being by raising up Community Health Volunteers (CHVs). These youths from the community receive training in basic health practices and are then deployed to assist public health officers with community outreach services. The Ogiek community has also begun building the capacity of its herbalists. Traditional knowledge is being documented to preserve and protect the knowledge for future generations, and community members are developing herbariums to grow plants for medicinal purposes. The Ogiek Community During the COVID-19 Pandemic The emergence of COVID-19 posed a serious potential threat to the Ogiek community. They have limited access to basic infrastructure, such as clean water, electricity, and roads. In some areas, such as Keneti in Narok West and Nkareta in Narok North, there are no health centers where community members can receive vaccines. Moreover, testing to confirm COVID-19 cases was absent in areas inhabited by the Ogiek community. The cases of Ogiek who tested positive were those staying in cities, such as Nakuru. In addition to logistical and supply limitations, the COVID-19 vaccines were not trusted by many in the Ogiek community. Some believed that COVID-19 vaccines were lethal, while others believed the vaccines would cause infertility in both men and women. In the Nessuit dispensary, for instance, vaccines were available, but a health practitioner in Nessuit health center confirmed that community members rarely came to the health center for vaccines. Community outreach at the grassroot level has persuaded some to be vaccinated against COVID-19. However, COVID-19 vaccination is not a common practice in the Ogiek community, and COVID-19 vaccination rates among the community remain low. Most of those vaccinated are civil servants who were required to do so by the state. In contrast to Ogiek suspicion of COVID-19 vaccines, the community’s apprehensions towards COVID-19 itself may have promoted social distancing and social isolation. For instance, Ogiek who live in Mau Forest did not warmly welcome community members traveling back from urban areas. There was even a case in Sasimwani, Narok County, where an elder took all his family members and camped deep inside an indigenous forest, as he believed there was no way the virus could find them there. Community members believe that the forest will sieve the air, clearing all the virus, and that the forest and forest products will protect them from the COVID-19 pandemic. In the absence of sufficient health care facilities and conventional COVID-19 treatments, the Ogiek community turned to their traditional medical practices and treatments to mitigate instances of COVID-19-like symptoms. The actual protective benefits conferred on COVID-19 patients by Ogiek herbal medicines cannot be ascertained due to the lack of COVID-19 testing. Yet, the centuries-old Ogiek medical practices and natural herbal treatments should not be summarily dismissed; such treatments may have alleviated specific COVID-19 symptoms to some degree, or even possibly boosted immune responses, thereby protecting against COVID-19 viral infection. The perceptions, attitudes, and responses of the Ogiek community during the COVID-19 pandemic provide a real-world example of how an indigenous people responded to a devastating disease amidst a paucity of conventional treatments and health care facilities. The lessons learned from the example of the Ogiek community during the COVID-19 pandemic may improve health care efforts in other regions of the world. *Daniel Kobei is the Executive Director and Founder of the Ogiek Peoples' Development Program (OPDP), an NGO based in Kenya, with ECOSOC Status since 2019, promoting the human and land rights of the indigenous Ogiek Community and other Indigenous Peoples (IPs) of Kenya and Africa. He is the focal point on IPs matters in the International Indigenous Forum for Biodiversity (IIFB) under the Collaborative Partnership for Wildlife Management (CPW) established by the Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD). He has an MBA in Strategic Mgt. from Egerton University, Kenya, and a Post Graduate Diploma in Project Appraisal and Management from Maastricht School Management (MSM) in the Netherlands.

By Christian Happi* One of the fundamental principles presented by the ancient Chinese military strategist Sun Tzu for victory in battle was to “know your enemy.” Thus, a major tool in the war chest of the modern virus fighter is genomic surveillance (GS), which allows scientists to decode the nature, evolution, and even the virulence of pathogens such as COVID-19. To be more precise, GS is consistent, coordinated genome sequencing of positive samples at multiple sites within a country or region. During the current pandemic, genomic sequencing was used to identify the nature of SARS-CoV-2, the microbe that causes COVID-19, and trace its relationship to other coronavirus species. It also helped to detect and track the UK, South African, and other variants of the virus that struck deep in the pandemic. Besides virus identification, GS helps in vaccine development by speeding up the mapping of the genomic structure of infectious agents. Thanks to GS, there are up to 150 vaccine candidates today that target COVID-19 in varying ways. To make nations and regions resilient to pandemics, GS is one of the most important tools to deploy. How Africa Was Prepared The African Center of Excellence for Genomics of Infectious Diseases (ACEGID) at Redeemer's University in Ede, Nigeria, is one of two so-called reference centers for the World Health Organization and for all of Africa. ACEGID is funded by the World Bank. The other reference center is the KwaZulu-Natal Research Innovation and Sequencing Platform (KRISP), located in Durban, South Africa. At ACEGID, scientists have researched the various pandemics and epidemics that have pummeled Africa in recent decades. Over these difficult years, they have addressed Ebola and Lassa fever, monkeypox, and yellow fever, to name a few. Without a doubt, the continent’s bitter experience with these diseases prepared and shaped its response to COVID-19. So far, Africa has managed to get through the pandemic more successfully than many other regions of the world—which is actually not surprising. To put the situation in perspective, there have been over 4 million cases now for the entire continent, with over 105,000 deaths (as of April 2021), a remarkably low case rate and death rate. One might ask, then, “How did Africa manage this pandemic so well compared to the rest of the world?” The reason is simple. African public health authorities have managed several epidemics in the past and have learned a lot, especially from the Ebola outbreak in West Africa from 2014 to 2016 that killed about 11,000 people. In the aftermath of that deadly outbreak, the African heads of state wisely created the Africa Centers for Disease Control. This institution, under the auspices of the African Union, chose integrated genomics as a tool for disease surveillance in Africa. To make that happen, African officials, together with various international groups, set up the Africa Pathogen Genomics Initiative (PGI), which has a mandate to integrate genomics in disease surveillance for the continent. This network was up and running before COVID-19 struck Africa. The Africa PGI is built around centers of excellence and research hubs on the continent. It leverages national and regional laboratories all across Africa. There are also two continental centers of excellence, namely ACEGID and KRISP. As continental reference centers, they have the mandate to support the national and regional laboratories, build the latter’s capacity, and support African countries that do not have genomics facilities to help them sequence pathogen samples. The ACEGID sequencing network has five major tasks: 1) mobilize resources, 2) establish routine surveillance, 3) support sample collection and shipment, 4) support sequencing, and 5) support data analysis. To do this important work, the Center has built a strong, coordinated organization capable of leveraging its existing capacity and providing access to sequencing facilities other countries do not have. COVID-19 in Africa: The First Wave From very early on, ACEGID employed robotics to assist with analyses for other diseases. The Center had platforms in place like the NovaSeq 6000 system, which can output over six thousand viral sequences in a week. Thus, when the first case of COVID-19 hit sub-Saharan Africa, ACEGID quickly responded. The Ede laboratory became the first in Africa to perform genome sequencing for SARS-CoV-2. It did so within forty-eight hours—a speed no other country in the world has ever matched. That important feat established clearly where the virus came from. The first patient was from Italy and was infected with a viral sample that was very close to the one that was circulating in Switzerland. The Center went on from there to do additional sequencing on the continent, not only to identify the initial cases of infection and to demonstrate that these cases were imported, but to identify localized spread or transmission. In Nigeria, after ACEGID identified and sequenced the earliest cases, the government set up a lockdown. From there, the Center started to identify community transmission. This demonstrates how such information has been used to guide policies in many African countries. Using genomic sequencing across the continent, the Center has been able to show that there were over fifteen hundred introductions of the virus to Africa, most coming from Europe, Asia, Oceania, and the United States. Europe tops the list, likely because of its geographical proximity, and because there is a lot of business and commerce between Europe and Africa. South Africa has established a GS network within the country, where authorities are able to monitor the situation almost in real time. ACEGID has done the same in Nigeria, where it monitors and tracks the hotspots as well as where the transmission is low. This information is used to guide the government’s understanding of where the hotspots are and to inform public health interventions in the country. To make public health intervention better focused, two things are needed: 1) speed of execution and 2) accuracy of execution. This is exactly what has been accomplished in Africa over the past few years. There continues to be SARS-CoV-2 sequencing information coming out of Africa, data that are being produced across countries. As most African countries are coming on board, they are generating more data as time goes on. Africa’s Pandemic Dashboard ACEGID has created a dashboard that helps the Nigerian Center for Disease Control to see how the pandemic is evolving in real time. Through the dashboard, we can identify the hotspots, and then the government can see how the cases are spreading. We know that in Nigeria alone there were fifty-five different lineages of the disease circulating, with the situation changing fast. Through the use of this interactive dashboard, we have been able to map and track thousands of lineages. In the case of South Africa, their dashboard showed how the famous B.1.351, or South African variant, began to take over. The ability to monitor that development shows the firepower behind genomic epidemiology. Here you had a case where a new lineage of concern was taking over, a lineage that could have had the ability to escape a vaccine. This is a clear example of how genomic epidemiology has been used on the African continent. Africa’s very first lineage of concern, or its first variant, was identified as the D614G mutation, which is associated with increased transmissibility of the disease. ACEGID was one of the first groups to describe it and has been monitoring its spread over time. In the case of Nigeria, 90% of the variants have this mutation, which is not peculiar to that country. In South Africa, for example, the number of variants with this mutation is almost 100%. We also use genomic epidemiology to examine the disease in terms of diagnostics. In terms of molecular diagnostics, if we look, for instance, at the Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention primer (the nucleic acid used in DNA synthesis), we see that almost 60% of the circulating virus has a mutation in the area where the primers are supposed to bind. This tells us that those primers may not be reliable for diagnostic purposes. You can see this clearly across other primers, such as those from the Pasteur Institute, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Charité (Berlin). So, when asked to monitor the virus, we have evidence as to whether the assay (analysis) may or may not work for that primer. The Second Wave: Tracking Down Variants Africa did pretty well in managing the first wave. But around November and December 2020, we started to see a spike or surge across all of Africa. ACEGID analyzed and tested to discover what the reasons were. The spike in South Africa, for instance, may have been due to the occurrence of a new variant of concern (501Y.V2). There were many mutations associated with that one. The latter may be responsible for the surge that we see not only in South Africa but in many other African countries. ACEGID tracks these variants together with its continental partners. In the case of Mozambique, for instance, the Kwazulu-Natal Research Institute, a partner in South Africa, established that this variant was introduced to Mozambique twelve times from South Africa. ACEGID was able to identify three clusters of localized transmission as well. It was demonstrated that all the mutations identified from this variant, B.1.351, have affected the transmission and spread of the disease in Mozambique. Samples from Mozambique were sent to South Africa. Then South Africa did its analysis and sent the results back to Mozambique. This is what is done within our network. In the case of the surge in Nigeria, ACEGID detected a B.1.1.7 lineage, which is a UK variant of concern. The surge in Nigeria was due to this lineage spreading across the country. Apart from identifying this lineage, what was especially interesting to learn was that the age group affected is very different from the other lineages. The largest number affected by this lineage are people between thirty-one and fifty years of age, followed by those in the age group of thirty years and younger. This is a group of working-age victims, which suggests they are exposed to the virus on the job. In the process, we identified a new variant, the B.1.525, which emerged from Nigeria and spread across the rest of the world. It is one of the leading variants in the UK, along with B.1.1.7. This variant has not been described as a variant of concern but is now characterized as a variant of interest, because it has the E484K mutation, which has been involved in immune escape. Immune escape means that it has the ability to evade targeting by vaccines and to avoid neutralizing by antibodies. In conclusion, we have been able to use GS as a critical component of the epidemic response. In the case of Africa, we were able to identify multiple lineages, both new and old. We identified two major lineages in Africa, which are the 501Y.V2 from South Africa and the B.1.525 from Nigeria, both of which have the ability to decrease neutralizing antibody efficacy and to diminish the effectiveness of certain new vaccines. All told, we in Africa have been able to effectively use genomic epidemiology as a way to respond to this COVID-19 outbreak, guide public health agencies, and provide information critical to Africa’s response to the pandemic. *Christian Happi is a Professor of Molecular Biology and Genomics at Redeemer University, the Director of the African Center of Excellence for Genomics of Infectious Diseases (ACEGID), and Director of the Directorate of Research Innovations and Partnerships (DRIPs). Editorial Note: This article is based on a presentation by Dr. Happi at the Twenty-Seventh International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences held in April 2021.

By Chris Laszlo* Common sense—and solid scientific evidence—recognizes the benefits of spending time in nature. John Muir, the well-known American naturalist, called readers into nature with his captivating 1894 book, The Mountains of California. “Climb the mountains and get their good tidings,” he wrote. “Nature's peace will flow into you as sunshine flows into trees. The winds will blow their own freshness into you, and the storms their energy, while cares will drop away from you like the leaves of Autumn.” How much time in nature is actually needed to notice a difference in oneself? According to one study, just five hours per month is sufficient to improve mood, vitality, and feelings of relaxation (Williams 2017). Moreover, time in nature can be spent in a city park as easily as in a forest, beach, mountain, desert, or grassy plain. Why is this so important? Because modern populations are often cooped inside buildings or homes. A 2016 survey by The National Trust in the United Kingdom found that almost 50% of preschoolers lacked regular outdoor play sessions while older children, aged ten to sixteen, spent only thirteen minutes a day on vigorous outdoor activity. The modern world’s sedentary lifestyle stands in contrast to those seen throughout human history, where people lived and worked outdoors in nature. Nature, the Ultimate Restorative It shouldn’t be a surprise that spending a beautiful day outside, among trees, birds, flowers, and perhaps gently flowing water, can increase happiness and a sense of well-being. Harvard naturalist E. O. Wilson is one of many scientists who has hypothesized that nature has a restorative power over people (Wilson 2009). He noted that we have a natural affiliation with nature that is ingrained in our biological heritage. Phrased more poetically, the pioneering environmentalist Rachel Carson wrote (Carson 1962): Those who contemplate the beauty of the Earth find reserves of strength that will endure as long as life lasts. ... There is something infinitely healing in the repeated refrains of nature—the assurance that dawn comes after night, and spring after winter. ‘Forest Bathing’ and Other ‘Connectedness’ Activities In the Seiwa Prefectural Forests of Japan, city residents practice shinrin-yoku or “forest bathing,” which means taking in the forest air on long walks. Forest bathing became popular in Japan in the 1980s and today is a recognized preventive health-care practice. One research study measuring the physiological effects of forest bathing on 280 young adults concluded: “Forest environments promote lower concentrations of cortisol (a hormone associated with stress), lower pulse rate, lower blood pressure, greater parasympathetic nerve activity, and lower sympathetic nerve activity than do city environments.” Such immersions in nature have also been proven to bring a host of psychological benefits, as people engage in fewer negative emotions and less self-referential thinking. In addition to nature immersion, there are ways to practice “connectedness.” We can set aside time for mindfulness meditation, journaling, or doing a body-scan or emotional scan. There are relationship-type practices of connectedness, such as loving-kindness meditation, gratitude practice, and appreciative inquiry. Also, there are practices that connect us to God or the transcendent, which include prayer and spiritual reflection. On a personal note, I consider this a distinct category in my research and teaching—a way to be more connected and whole as a human being. This connectedness and wholeness can take either the form of observing—in a focused way—flora or fauna in nature, or a more immersive experience, where you go into nature and just allows yourself to be present in it. A hypothesis of my research—together with colleagues for six to seven years now—is that people who experience a greater sense of connection to nature are more likely to care for others and future generations. It also changes people's behavior, as will be explained shortly. There are many studies that show the benefits of nature connectedness. One study, a meta-analysis, examined “nature connectedness” and “happiness” across a great number of different studies and found a statistically significant correlation. While a relationship or correlation does not imply causation, in this case, the findings show that, generally speaking, more time in nature is associated with a greater sense of happiness and well-being. Highly recommended books on the subject are Richard Louv’s The Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder and, more recently, The Nature Fix: Why Nature Makes Us Happier, Healthier, and More Creative by Florence Williams. Physics Reveals Connection, Not Absence Physics is in some ways the most fundamental of the sciences in describing the behavior of the world. Physics, for much of the last 300 years, has been based on the concepts of particles and forces. Actually, the idea of atoms seen as separate particles in empty space goes all the way back to Greek philosophers like Democritus, who first came up with the term atomos in Greek. The figure below shows an illustration of two atoms, with their protons and neutrons in the nucleus, and electrons spinning around them at great distances from them, and the atoms are somehow separated in empty space. In such models, the only forces acting on them are gravity, electromagnetic fields, and the strong and weak nuclear forces. That was the paradigm of the science that many people grew up with. However, quantum physics in particular is giving rise to a new idea that, in fact, at the most infinitesimal level of the universe, there is a connected and coherent unified field, a field of energy and information that connects everything (above right). Rather than thinking about space as being a vacuum, space, in fact, is a plenum (full). It is now known that the universe contains dark matter, dark energy, and gravitational waves. Along with these fields of energy, vibrational fields of energy connect everything, not just metaphorically—but actually. Quantum physicists speak about objects or living systems as excitations of the quantum field, which is now a proven domain. Experiments such as the double-slit experiment, as well as Bell's theorem experiment (see below), show this interdependence and describe fundamental reality. Bell's theorem experiment was a way to examine the behavior of paired particles. The figure above shows a Source that generates particles V1 and V2, which are paired in the sense of having the same wave phase. Once they are paired, they are shot off in opposite directions to crystal A and crystal B, each of which has a mirror in it. Each mirror has a 50% chance of shooting the particle up and 50% chance of shooting the particle down. This experiment has shown that paired particles that are shot out remain paired even across great distances. Thus, if V1 and V2 are paired, and if V1 hits crystal A and goes up (+1), then V2 (shot out at the same time) will hit crystal B and also go up (+1). This can be repeated tens of thousands of times, as this is what the coincidences detector shows, and you will never once find the case in which paired particles emerging from the crystals go in opposite directions. This includes cases in which V1 goes up and V2 goes down (-1) or the reverse, with V2 going up and V1 going down. This is what quantum physicists call entanglement, not nonlocality, and it can happen across very great distances. Considering a person’s relationship with nature at this most fundamental level, it is a relationship of oneness. That degree of instant correlation, holding over very great distances, suggests that it happens faster than the speed of light. Thus, Erwin Schrödinger, one of the early great quantum physicists, concluded that quantum physics reveals a basic oneness of the universe. This is important because, considering a person’s relationship with nature at this most fundamental level, it is a relationship of oneness. There are other sciences, such as epigenetics, that show that it is not only genes that determine things such as life expectancy and disease, but also a person’s relationship with nature. What that relationship is, whether exposed to pollution or to healthy nature, affects the proteins that wrap the genes and lead to gene expression, either good or bad. Finally, from the nineteenth century onward, the rise of Darwinism and then Neo-Darwinism, as well as the economics of William Stanley Jevons and John Stuart Mill, led us to believe that human beings were essentially selfish, competitive, and separate—what the existentialist called the “bounded human being.” However, we are more recently starting to see that there are, in fact, lessons from nature by which we can better understand human nature as relational, cooperative, and connected. Consciousness also is undergoing an interesting controversy, with physicalist theory versus universal field theory. Physicalist theory maintains that we generate consciousness just inside our brain, like a supercomputer, while universal field theory suggests that consciousness is actually a property of the universe that we can tap into. Thus, our brains are almost instruments that tap or tune into a universal consciousness through microtubular lattices (see the figure below), and there is good scientific research emerging on this. All of the science now tends to converge with spiritual traditions. For example, in the teachings of the Vedanta from the Hindu tradition, or Vedic tradition, starting with the Rig Vedas and then the Upanishads, there has always been this idea of “Brahma,” the background field from which the manifest universe comes. Native American traditions consider human beings as relatives of animals and plants. “All My Relatives” refers to how a Native American would see a rabbit or fox or even a tree. In Africa, you have Ubuntu, the idea that “I am who I am because of who we all are.” In China, Japan, and elsewhere, we have Taoism (Daoism), the notion that there is the “Way” (Dao) and that in practice we can become one with the Way. In Buddhism as well, he who experiences the unity of life sees his own Self in all beings and all beings in his own Self. Then, you have Ein Sof, which is an ancient symbol from the Kabbalah, an early thread in Judaism, that also has this notion of an ineffable background to the reality you experience. Consciousness and Connectedness In conclusion, many people see the world as made up of separate objects, like separate vortices in a river. The image below shows a river in which vortex A and vortex B seem stable and separate, as if they have their own structure in time and space. But perhaps a better way to see them is how they are merging dynamically in the river. David Bohm, the quantum physicist, called it “undivided wholeness in flowing movement.” The benefits of connecting to nature are shown by contemporary research. These include overall health improvement; stress relief; reduced negative emotions, such as decreased fear and anger; enhanced positive effects; improvements in mood and increased subjective well-being; feelings of joy and happiness; a sense of reconnection with self; kinship ties in teams; a heightened sense of community, kinship, egalitarianism, and belongingness, along with increased empathy (Florence 2017); a stronger sense of place; and improved cognitive abilities, including creativity, cognitive flow, and mental performance in problem solving. Connecting to nature also increases personal well-being. It can raise awareness of how our actions impact others, and it can transform people and leaders, in particular, by increasing their emotional, social, and spiritual intelligence. It can increase entrepreneurial creativity and collaboration, and perhaps, very importantly at this time in human history, can strengthen pro-social and pro-environmental behaviors. In the business courses I teach on flourishing enterprise, it is becoming clear that flourishing in business requires both a strong financial business case and behavioral change, and that the consciousness of connectedness—including a consciousness and connectedness to nature—are central to lasting behavioral change. Acknowledgments The content above draws on selected works of Albert Einstein, Niels Bohr, John Archibald Wheeler, Erwin Schrödinger, Wolfgang Pauli, David Bohm, Richard Feynman, Werner Heisenberg, and Max Planck. It benefits greatly from pioneers who sought to integrate quantum physics and philosophy: David Bohm’s Wholeness and the Implicate Order (1980), Ken Wilber’s Quantum Questions (1984); Margaret Wheatley’s Leadership and the New Sciences (1994); Ervin Laszlo’s The Interconnected Universe (1995) and The Self-Actualizing Cosmos (2014); among others. I owe a further debt to Paul Levy’s Quantum Revelation: A Radical Synthesis of Science and Spirituality (2018), Lothar Schäfer’s Infinite Potential: What Quantum Physics Reveals About How We Should Live (2013), and Allan Combs’ Consciousness Explained Better: Towards an Integral Understanding of the Multifaceted Nature of Consciousness (2009). Revisiting these works were part of a broader research program on Quantum Leadership at Case Western Reserve University, starting in 2014 and funded by the businessman and philanthropist Fred Chavalit Tsao. Extensive field research led to our book, Quantum Leadership: New Consciousness in Business, published by Stanford University Press in 2019. *Chris Laszlo is Professor of Organizational Behavior, Weatherhead School of Management, Case Western Reserve University, USA. He researches and teaches flourishing enterprise and is the co-founder of Sustainable Value Partners, USA. Editorial Note: This article was adapted from a presentation by Prof. Laszlo at the Third International Conference on Science and God, a virtual meeting held in April 2022.

By Chelsea Noack* The city of Jacobabad in Pakistan’s Sindh province set a blistering record temperature of 126°F this summer—a temperature too punishing for the city’s 200,000 people to withstand. In that same summer seven thousand miles away from Jacobabad, the Pacific Northwest experienced a once-in-a-millennium heat dome causing a dangerous health hazard for its population of 13 million people. As a result, 200 people perished. Extreme heat is here, and new communities must now urgently plan for a scorching future inflicted by climate change. Cities must re-evaluate their infrastructures to keep communities safe and, ultimately, individuals must prepare for their own safety when confronted with an unbearable climate. Extreme Heat 101 Many factors lead to extreme heat events such as heat domes. The concept that many elements contribute to climate events is known as extreme event attribution. However, most scientists agree that climate change is human-induced, and our warming climate is due to excess greenhouse gas emissions. The most common and well-known greenhouse gas is carbon dioxide. Our oceans absorb excess greenhouse gases, and in consequence, almost all warming occurring on Earth over the past fifty years was in the ocean. Our oceans are now carbon sinks: Prior to the industrial era, the ocean was, for the most part, carbon neutral. But now, hot air hovers above our oceans, which allows the atmosphere to trap heat under a tight lid. Because oceans do not warm equally—for example, the western Pacific is considerably warmer than the eastern Pacific—a temperature gradient forms causing wind to carry the tight lid of heat to land. This event creates the heat dome as experienced in the Pacific Northwest. While the Pacific Northwest is known for its drafty and rainy climate, the heat dome created a stifling and intolerable environment blocking temperate airflow. Experts suggest that heatwaves will become more common for communities that previously were immune. Such areas must now reconsider how they are built and how they should repave for the extreme heat. Home Is Where the Heat Is Historically, a vicious cycle exists between buildings and climate change: buildings placed in locations with extreme heat often use inefficient air conditioning, which then contributes to the extreme temperature they experience. This cycle has the building sector responsible for roughly 40% of energy usage and 30% of greenhouse gas emissions. For places such as the Pacific Northwest where the vicious cycle was delayed—since they never had to be deeply concerned about air conditioners and cooling centers—the unprecedented heat waves have now brought the issue front and center. New communities are forced to consider urban planning that is both energy efficient and improves upon existing methods that have contributed to urban heat island effect, noticeable in cities such as Manhattan. Some communities are already making headway. Portland, a major city in the Pacific Northwest, promotes “ecoroofs,” otherwise known as green roofs, which are a beneficial way to temper heat. Researchers in Phoenix, Arizona, a destination painfully familiar with heatwaves, are committed to cool pavement research, an alternative to street pavement which can reach up to 150°F. Cool pavement can either be reflective or evaporative, depending on if the city experiences rain during its warmest months or not. Nonprofits in the Midwest, such as Trees Forever in Iowa, commit their resources to urban forestry, setting landmark goals of planting one thousand trees in a single year. Urban forestry not only helps with shading on hot roads but also fosters carbon sequestration, a method of reducing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. For cities that don’t know where to start, the CDC also suggests that cities update building codes and landscaping laws which could improve extreme heat protection. Cities have an obligation to protect their citizens, with homes or without. If a once-in-a-millennium event occurs, however, individuals must use the resources they have to protect themselves and others. “Put On Your Oxygen Mask First” If you have flown an airplane, you know that, in the case of an emergency, you must always put on an oxygen mask before helping someone else. The same goes for a heat wave. To best assist others, we must make sure we are healthy enough to help. If your city sends out a heat wave alert, which can vary from warnings to outlooks, assess whether you are prepared: Consumption: Drink more water than usual and avoid dehydrating liquids such as caffeine and alcohol. Consider also eating hydrating foods such as fruits, cucumbers, and soups. Attire: It is best to opt for loose-fitting clothing and light colors, as constrictive and dark clothes will make the heat feel claustrophobic. Where to go: If you are not near air conditioning, try to stay near the lowest floor of a building or home. If you are home insecure, find your local cooling centers found on maps such as this one provided by PG&E. Take note, however, that extreme heat can dramatically affect city infrastructure by warping roads, railways, and even airport runways. Do not solely rely on transportation for safety. Once you feel confident about your safety, check on your family, animals, friends, and neighbors who may not have access to air conditioning, shade, or enough water. Consider checking in on those who are aging or have chronic illnesses, as they may be more at risk. The symptoms of someone who is suffering from a heat-related illness, such as heat exhaustion or heat stroke, are a weak pulse, dizziness, nausea, and high body temperature. Such symptoms should not be overlooked and should be treated as soon as they occur. While you may be able to help with early-stage heat illness such as starting a cool shower, most recommend you call 911 for immediate medical attention. Climate change is here, which means additional unprecedented heat waves in new communities. A home is not only a house, but it is also a body and planet Earth. While we can all anticipate warmer days ahead, we also can protect the homes in which we inhabit. *Chelsea Noack is a science writer and editor based in Manhattan. She is passionate about climate change, ocean science, bioethics, technology, and the future of human health.

By Chelsea Noack* As a boundless, invisible, and naturally odorless gas, methane is often overlooked as a climate issue. But this global gas accounts for nearly a quarter of anthropogenic (human-caused) greenhouse gas emissions, and reducing its emissions could greatly help the planet’s health. Methane is a short-lived and powerful greenhouse gas which has nearly eighty times the warming power the first twenty years it reaches the Earth’s atmosphere compared to its better-known counterpart, carbon dioxide. Within the next decade, researchers estimate that cutting methane emissions could reduce potential warming by thirty-three percent. Reducing methane emissions through smart policy and new means of monitoring the problem will buy time in the short term to address the growing climate crisis. The Key Players in Methane Emissions While a significant amount of methane is emitted naturally, roughly sixty percent is anthropogenic. Agriculture is one of the biggest emitters of anthropogenic methane emissions. In the International Energy Agency’s 2020 Methane Tracker report, agriculture was deemed responsible for nearly a quarter of methane emissions, closely followed by coal, oil, natural gas, and biofuels. In California, for example, nearly half its methane emissions come from ruminant (cud-chewing) livestock, such as cows. Livestock and other ruminants, including sheep, goats, buffalo, deer, elk, giraffes, and camels, have a unique digestive system that contains microbes adept at digesting tough plant material. As these animals ruminate, they produce significant quantities (thirty or more quarts per hour) of methane and carbon dioxide; this causes these animals to belch and release these gases. The cows are not all to blame, however. While agriculture reigns supreme in methane emissions, oil and gas industries are also part of the mix—and how they can cut their emissions offers a realm of opportunities. If oil and gas industries made fundamental changes to their practices, three-quarters of methane emissions could be reduced. For example, one oil field in the United States, located in Texas and New Mexico, emits more than twenty-two pounds of methane per hour, as reported in a recent study by NASA, the University of Arizona, and Arizona State University. While oil fields already vent methane intentionally through pressure-relief valves, unintended leaks exacerbate the problem. Gargantuan orange and black methane plumes should only be visible infrequently. But if equipment breaks, blazing and billowing clouds of methane will be visible for a longer amount of time. Leaks can be repaired, but stronger regulation of planned methane emissions is a potential, albeit heavily debated, solution. Is a ‘Methane Tax’ Fantasy or Future? Economists have considered taxing methane as an avenue of reduction, but how does that look? Norway, a leading producer in the oil and gas industry, has a strict regulate-and-tax approach to carbon which applies to methane flaring. While such regulation is not mirrored in large countries such as the United States, individual states such as Wyoming and North Dakota have considered a methane tax since the 1980s. Unfortunately, their multiple proposals were met with vehement opposition from oil and gas companies. A large hurdle to creating an effective methane tax is the stark variability of how regulations would be implemented. A methane tax would depend on the local environment, the industry, the size of emissions, and the goal. In other words, it would not be “one tax fits all.” That is not to say that larger countries, such as the United States, haven’t attempted such a feat. The Methane Emissions Reduction Act of 2021, for example, hopes to charge $1,800 per emission ton, though it is currently met with opposition and apprehension. Although the variables involved make it difficult to establish a potential methane tax, implementing basic regulatory and monitoring requirements is an important step forward. The data compiled could then be used to require super-emitters to quickly address the events as they occur, rather than face the dire consequences of a long-term leak. Technology Can Keep an Eye on Methane New technologies, such as satellite and AI tracking, are a beacon of hope in monitoring methane emissions. Whereas leak detection and repair (LDR) has been used historically, new technologies are now considering planes, drones, and even satellites to monitor methane emissions from oil and gas systems. The Sentinel-5 Precursor satellite, launched by the European Space Agency, orbits our Earth sixteen times a day and is on the lookout for methane concentrations in our atmosphere. Another pair of satellites named after its innovator’s children, Iris and Hugo, orbit less frequently than the Sentinel-5 Precursor, but can identify leaks using fine-grained imagery. Miraculously, these complex devices can detect the smallest methane emissions with unique specificity. Launched in Europe, the Honeywell Rebellion Gas Cloud Imaging (GCI) camera can help facility operators track plume types, locations, direction, size, and concentration using easy-to-read visualizations to prevent catastrophic leaks. Buzzing drones, such as the RMLD-Sentry, can be deployed over various oil and gas facilities. Each drone can detect leaks using an infrared laser and change flight patterns based on methane emissions of a particular facility. Reducing methane emission, in comparison to addressing carbon dioxide, can swiftly deliver results and provide nations a fighting chance to reach the Paris Agreement targets. Cattle producers have considered alternative approaches to reducing methane emissions. In the case of cows and other ruminant livestock, farmers and ranchers are experimenting with adding supplements, such as fat, oil, or even seaweed, to their feed. Such changes could reduce methane emissions by 18%. Farming sustainability conferences, such as the UN Food Systems Summit in September 2021, can help set concrete goals for an environmentally friendly approach to agriculture. Cutting methane emissions may appear to be a small part of the battle since carbon dioxide remains in the atmosphere for a much longer time—nearly hundreds to thousands of years. However, cutting carbon dioxide is the long game. Reducing methane, in comparison, can swiftly deliver results and give nations a fighting chance to reach the Paris Agreement targets. Beyond the environmental perspective, cutting methane could also prevent serious health harm such as asthma-related hospital visits and crop loss. Like an unanticipated magic trick, humans have made an invisible gas undeniably visible in the climate crisis spotlight. How we proactively decide to cut methane emissions will buy us time for the Earth’s ticking clock. *Chelsea Noack is a science writer and editor based in Manhattan. She is passionate about climate change, ocean science, bioethics, technology, and the future of human health.

By Chelsea Noack* When it comes to climate change, the consequences felt in one country are felt in all others. While each country around the globe contributes to climate change in some way or another, some are more responsible than others. For example, an estimated 70% of global emissions come from just China, the United States, the European Union, India, the Russian Federation, and Japan. Developing countries, such as those in the Global South, are not well-equipped to manage their own emissions and are given the short end of the stick when it comes to financial or technological support to decrease their emissions without compromising their national development. While their emissions per capita can be high, their total emissions remain starkly lower than those of the developed countries. The unequal playing field between developed and developing countries is a danger to environmental efforts and affects everyone, no matter their country of origin. Transnational climate financing is a joint effort between developed and developing countries to provide financial and technological support to combat climate change, which may ignite hope to overcome the current inequality. However, to be successful, promises between countries must be kept. Bright Spots in Eco-Financing for Developing Nations For example, the Green Climate Fund (GCF) works in collaboration with 194 countries with a current goal to mitigate 2 billion tons of carbon emissions in developing countries. GCF prioritizes countries such as small island developing states (SIDS), African states, and the least developed countries (LDC). As of 2021, Costa Rica is collaborating with the GCF to build a low emission metropolitan light rail system powered by 98% renewable energy. NGOs such as CARE recognize that nearly 132 million people will be thrust into poverty by 2030 if action to mitigate is not taken. CARE works with poverty-stricken rural communities and households throughout the Global South through their Seed System initiative to improve sustainable agricultural practices. Local farmers are able to access services to increase and diversify crop yields and to adapt to climate change Additionally, the sustainable development goals (SDGs), adopted by the UN in 2015, recognize the inextricable link between climate change and the need for sustainable development. Goal 13 in particular is an urgent call to combat climate change. The SDGs have inspired some countries to consider transnational climate financing strategies. For example, The UK and China established joint Green Investment Principles (GIP) to keep financial institutions accountable for their effects on the environment. The GIP outlines how the two countries’ joint ventures can commit to “embedding sustainability into corporate governance” through regular environmental impact assessments, incorporating “ESG” (environmental, social, and governance) metrics throughout their supply chains, and green financing. While SDGs are ideal landmarks for every nation, not every nation can reach them with the same expediency. Robust partnerships between developed and developing nations are key for poorer countries to not be left behind in terms of global climate action. The opposite is also true. When promises to transnational climate financing are broken, they can cause harm to all. Climate Financing’s Broken Promises In 2009 at COP15 in Copenhagen the wealthiest countries in the world promised developing nations to provide $100 billion for climate change support per year by 2020. While all parties were eager to see this promise fulfilled, by the time COP26 convened in Glasgow, experts found that the promise had fallen short. The intergovernmental Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) estimated that developed nations had provided $78 billion in 2018 and $80 billion in 2019 with no sign of substantial improvement since then. Falling behind on climate financing promises makes it that much harder for the globe to collectively overcome climate change in the present and into the future. So, how did the $100 billion broken promise happen? The $100 billion promise would only make a small dent towards reaching the 2015 Paris Agreement target to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Realistically, experts say that it would cost trillions of dollars to meet the Paris target. Some argue that, when the agreement for $100 billion was made, developed nations did not clarify who would pay how much and how. The ambiguity led to some countries believing others would pay more. It was estimated, for example, that the United States should pay roughly 40 – 47% of the $100 billion annually, based on considerations around national wealth, past emissions, and population size. However, from 2016 to 2018, the US only contributed around $7.6 billion annually. Even then, the $100 billion promise would only make a small dent towards reaching the 2015 Paris Agreement target to keep global warming below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. Realistically, experts say that it would cost trillions of dollars in order to meet the Paris Agreement target. Researchers from Scotland’s Glasgow University have also found that climate financing initiatives were provided more to middle-income countries rather than the poorest. For example, only 18% of the fund from the aforementioned GCF reached the poorest countries in 2019, whereas 65% of the fund reached middle-income countries. When promises are not kept, alternative solutions can offer hope. Alternative Climate Solutions for Developing Countries As developing nations wait for funding, local governments have an opportunity to consider alternate approaches amidst the climate crisis. The options vary from renewable energy investments to agricultural innovations: Cheap, renewable energy: Renewables, such as solar and wind, are now considered the world’s cheapest source of energy, according to the World Economic Forum. In 2020 alone, despite the pandemic, experts have found that more than 260GW of renewable energy capacity was added globally. The clean energy sector is now booming with jobs, and it has helped countries such as Zambia create their first large-scale solar powered plant, bringing clean energy to thousands of homes and businesses. Transportation: Energy-efficient transportation, formerly quite expensive, has now become more affordable. The EV car market has grown by 20 million within the past ten years, although other options exist beyond electric cars. Bangladesh, on the forefront of climate change with rising sea levels and the melting of Himalayan glaciers which flood the country, has introduced cargo transport on inland waterways to reduce emissions by 4 to 10% by 2030. Urban development: Cities, home to most of the planet’s population, can greatly benefit from targeted climate adaptation. Mozambique, for example, revised their stormwater drainage system which resulted in 70% less risk of flooding (a common climate change threat). Local leadership is key to enacting sustainable urban development, even without transnational climate financing. Agriculture: Agricultural innovations can improve the sustainability of food grown, help protect local ecosystems, and even support carbon sequestration. Cattle ranchers in Colombia combine trees with pastures, called silvopastoral systems, to reduce the environmental impacts of their cattle herds and to promote natural regeneration within the region. While alternative strategies are not limited to the ideas listed above, the amount of research and resources already committed to helping developing countries mitigate climate change is encouraging. As a global society, we operate in a sensitive ecosystem; when one nation hurts, we all hurt. Our promises to climate financing are not only a commitment to others but a promise to the planet and to each other. *Chelsea Noack is a science writer and editor based in Manhattan. She is passionate about climate change, ocean science, bioethics, technology, and the future of human health.

By Chelsea Noack* Almost a century ago, the splendor of the Winter Olympics began in Chamonix, France. The archived footage from the first games shows athletes skating, skiing, and bobsleighing (bobsledding) through a picturesque, snowy landscape. Since then, the Winter Olympics has become a global tradition to show the best athleticism and character of individuals from around the world. Researchers warn, however, that by 2080 few cities will be able to host the games due to increasing global temperatures. In fact, across all of the nineteen cities having hosted the Winter Olympics, February temperatures have increased by 4.8°F since 1950. Even in a low-emission scenario, by 2050 only nine of the 21 host cities will have reliable conditions in February to host the Winter Olympics. Winter is also now occurring in shorter intervals. From the 1950s to the 2000s, the winter season decreased by three days. If we do not deduct or maintain our emissions, the worst-case scenario could mean the winter season would last a mere twenty-seven days by 2100—certainly not a period long enough for training, preparations, and the facilitation of an Olympics event. As the winters become warmer and shorter, host cities, the International Olympic Committee (IOC), and athletes must take sustainability more seriously than ever in order to preserve the magic of the Winter Olympics. Beijing’s Climate Solutions and Further Questions Government officials in Beijing, China, are well-aware of the mounting pressure to make this year as green and clean as possible. For those who remember the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, viewers were astounded to see sunbathers and people in swimsuits rather than in parkas and scarves. This pattern of a less than ideal winter climate is expected to continue, and Beijing is no exception. One such climate hurdle was that the host zones in Beijing are both cold and dry. For example, temperatures at one host zone went as low as 1.4°F (-17°C), yet the zone did not have any natural snowfall. To combat this, the Beijing Winter Olympics was the first to exclusively use artificial snow. Artificial snow is not new to the Winter Olympics; it was first used at Lake Placid in 1980 and has been used frequently since then. Researchers remain divided on its overall benefit for the athletes and its net sustainability. Some argue that it makes the ground harder due to it being mostly composed of ice, raising the concern of potential injuries. Additionally, it requires an extensive use of local water supply from reservoirs and rivers. Others say that artificial snow is reliable and durable, making the games fair for all athletes to compete in the same environment. Optimistically, researchers are developing methods to make artificial snow more environmentally friendly. "Researchers are developing methods to make artificial snow more environmentally friendly." Fortunately, Beijing made significant improvements on its smog. In Beijing, air pollution from last year was down three-fifths from its worst year in 2013. Additionally, Beijing figured out several methods to keep to their sustainable promise such as using electric vehicles for transport; using natural CO2 refrigeration systems in most of Beijing’s Olympic ice venues, decreasing the overall carbon footprint; and it also repurposed construction, such as the Beijing National Stadium, the “Bird’s Nest,” which is great considering construction is notorious for being a heavy hitter of carbon. However, much of the country’s energy relies on coal, unlike places such as Ontario, which primarily has a hydropower grid. According to Reuters, China broke their record of over 380m tons of raw coal mining in December 2021. When a coal grid is the sole provider of energy, it becomes elusive as to how net sustainable such efforts are. “When countries do their own monitoring, they're going to pick the best information to present themselves. That's no different for any country,” said Professor Daniel Scott, University Research Chair in Global Change and Tourism at the University of Waterloo. Instead, Prof. Scott suggested that frameworks be brought to a unified global stage, which is an undertaking the IOC has prepared for. The IOC and Athletes’ Response The IOC has made progress in its own sustainability initiatives. After recognizing its poor record of environmental impacts in the 1990s, sustainability was added as a third pillar of Olympism in 2014. Olympism is a “philosophy of life” which emphasizes the importance of not only sports, but also education, culture, and social responsibility. In 2018, the United Nations and various sports organizations created the Sports for Climate Action Framework. Participants of the framework set five principles with an overarching aim to not only lower sports-related GHG emissions, but to also make sports an industry that advocates climate literacy. Athletes and coaches are also concerned about the future of the Winter Olympics. “Sports can be an important agent for change for many people. Athletes want to be a bigger part of the solution,” said former Canadian elite skier and current PhD student Natalie Knowles, in a press release by the University of Waterloo. Additionally, a survey conducted from November 2020 to August 2021 with over 300 responses from winter athletes and coaches showed that 94% of respondents fear climate change will impact their sports. Notably, not all winter sports are equally affected. Sports such as hockey and ice-skating could very well be hosted in an arena in Florida. It is the snow sports that face a more troubling future if we remain on a high emission pathway lest we forget that the threat against snow sports does not only pertain to the Winter Olympics of today, but the Winter Olympics of tomorrow. “The athletes and coaches’ real concern is not just the Olympics or competitions, but their local ski hills. If local ski hills close due to lack of snow, that's the pipeline to the next generation of athletes, and the athletes know that,” Prof. Scott remarked. If kids do not have access to snow sports, they may pick up others; this pattern leaves the future of snow sports in jeopardy. Our Future Is Our Choice Sporting organizations have a duty for their athletes, and future athletes, to fight for a low emission future. More urgently, Winter Paralympians are up next in March, with even larger hurdles to overcome as their games will be during an even less reliable month based on certain indicators. However, there are options to overcome these unequal conditions: the Winter Paralympics could merge with the February Winter Olympics, which would allow all athletes to compete under equal environmental conditions but also lead to heavy tourism for host cities. Alternatively, host cities could band together to share one single Olympic event. Another option is to alternate Olympics and Paralympics so both have the opportunity to compete in February. At the end of the day, if the global community wants to keep the Winter Olympics, they will. But we’re left to postulate if the glowing freshness of snow cascading from mountaintops will be replaced with white ribbons of artificial snow against a dry mountain canvas. The choice is ours, Prof. Scott commented: “The outcome for the Winter Olympics is our choice. It's in our hands to choose the path for a low emission future.” *Chelsea Noack is a science writer and editor based in Manhattan. She is passionate about climate change, ocean science, bioethics, technology, and the future of human health.

By Cassie Journigan* Water quality and agricultural practices in the United States are fundamentally bonded. In most cases, our health directly corresponds to the quality of food and water we consume. Farming practices, particularly the process of fertilization, send nitrogen and other nutrients into the freshwater supply. The resulting decline in water quality affects all who use that water source. But what are nutrients, and why is runoff from farming such a problem? Every living thing requires nutrients. Nutrients such as minerals, vitamins, proteins, carbohydrates, fats, and water are compounds in foods essential to life and health. Nutrients provide energy, promote growth, and maintain the chemical reactions necessary to maintain life. Soil, a major source of nutrients, obtains them naturally from decaying organic material, rain, and eroded rocks and minerals. Vigorous soil has all the essential nutrients in the right proportions to support plant growth. Most soils, however, need additives to produce healthy crops and pastures. And all those additives affect water quality. Soil also holds metals and pathogens which together with the nutrients often end up in agricultural runoff. The runoff flows into surface waters–lakes, rivers, and oceans–and leaches downward to groundwater. Here’s how it typically happens: a farmer fertilizes a field or pasture and is rewarded with abundant crops. However, the fertilizers, pesticides, and other soil enhancements wind up as polluted agricultural runoff. Waterways Gather Pollution from Every Source Nutrient overloads can cause great harm to the environment by polluting freshwater sources. The nutrients and bacteria-laden runoff can cause water to become smelly and slimy, prompting officials to close waterbodies to swimming and fishing. And while some algae are necessary to aquatic life, an overload, called an algal bloom, kills much of that life. Excess algae consume the water’s oxygen resulting in dead zones in which aquatic plants and animals cannot survive. Two types of pollution impact water quality: point source pollution and nonpoint source pollution (NPS). Point source pollution comes from only one discrete source, a manufacturer’s smokestack, for example. Historically, drainage pipes from farms and industry dumped excess water directly into water bodies. The Clean Water Act stopped much of that. Now, facilities that want to pipe discharge directly into surface waters must first obtain a permit from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Nonpoint source pollution occurs from contaminating activities coming from multiple starting places. One example would be water deposited from rain that picks up various contaminants as it flows across the land. It picks up everything from fertilizers, herbicides, and insecticides to the excess salt from irrigation. Livestock waste contributes bacteria and more nutrients to the flowing water. Soil erosion adds sediment. All those substances, organic and inorganic alike, significantly impact water quality. Solutions Start with Smart Farming Techniques Much can be done to solve the problem of agricultural runoff. Farmers can manage the fertilizers they use by following the 4 “R”s of nutrient management: The right source – spreading the fertilizer that best meets the soil’s needs The right rate – applying only the amount the crops require The right time – adding fertilizers when the crops most need them The right place – spreading the fertilizer on the crops without touching adjacent fields or waterways Farmers can also engage in best management practices (BMPs). Some BMPs can be conducted relatively easily and often cost less than indiscriminate use. Conservation drainage techniques can be employed, such as adapting drainage design or digging trenches to hold woodchips and other carbon sources for water drainage. Or farm workers can create a buffer zone between a crop and its adjacent land or waterway by planting groundcover, shrubs, and trees. With ordinary tilling, the land is broken to a depth up to several inches. Alternatively, infrequent tilling can be employed, which reduces erosion. In no-till farming, a farmer creates rows just deep enough for seed placement. By not plowing, plant remnants are left on the soil surface that minimize soil erosion, and also improve the nutrient content of the soil. Pesticide use can be decreased by using predatory insects like ladybugs and spiders to control crop-destroyers such as Japanese beetles. Finally, keeping livestock out of water bodies helps prevent bank erosion and contamination with manure. Plant Genetics, Careful Irrigation, and Buffer Zones Reduce Harm to Water Technologies developed in the past decade to combat NPS pollution include seed genetics, which combines cultivated plants with wild ones to produce plants resistant to drought and disease. Precision agriculture enables farmers to use their tractors’ GPS, sensors, and satellites to monitor the health of their crops and precisely place fertilizer where and when it is needed. This method saves money and cuts down on NPS pollution. Another tool considers soil, topography, and farming methods being used. Information garnered aids the farmer in buffer zone placement and in deciding when and where to use fertilizer. An additional solution includes installing a retention pond to catch runoff and filter pollutants. Restored or created wetlands can collect sediments and pollution. Governments Monitor and Safeguard Water Health State governments, tribal entities, academic institutions, and volunteers monitor water quality through the EPA’s National Nonpoint Source Monitoring Program. When officials consider the status of freshwater quality, several factors determine its health. Water is sampled for pollutants such as pesticides, metals, and oil, and naturally occurring substances like nutrients, bacteria, and dissolved oxygen. Some states promote good nutrient and runoff management, although they all have blind spots according to project scientist and aquatic ecologist Doug Strom. One notable example is the Chesapeake Bay watershed, which covers the District of Columbia and portions of six other US states. Increasing populations, such as those of the Chesapeake region, need to grow more food, possibly leading to excessive nitrogen and phosphorus levels throughout the watershed. Increased industry and agriculture may necessitate forest clearing and wetlands destruction. On the bright side, Strom referred to a new project being conducted by scientists at Florida’s Saint John’s River Water Management District. A harvesting device will collect algae from a lake. New technology will be employed to separate the algae from the water. Workers will then return the clarified water to the lake and the algae will be treated at a wastewater treatment plant. The Right Resources Empower Everyone to Take Action American farmers, ranchers, and foresters can find financial and technical help from the USDA’s National Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). The website also has information about programs listed by state. Agricultural operations take a huge toll on water quality. Through the use of best management practices, new technologies, and government-run programs, there is much that can be done. But with many bodies of water badly polluted, significant work remains. Even so, individuals, communities, and policymakers can support water resiliency efforts. Americans can learn about local water issues, volunteer, or even contact elected officials. Visit the US EPA website, “How’s My Waterway?” to learn more about specific waters throughout the nation. To be informed and proactive is to be one step closer to clean freshwater sources. And that will benefit us all. *Cassie Journigan is a writer and editor who lives in the north-central region of Florida in the United States. She focuses on issues related to sustainability. She is passionate about numerous topics include the Earth’s changing climate, pollution, social justice, and cross-cultural communications.

By Cassie Journigan* Much of the debris that collects in the Earth’s oceans begins its journey as plastic waste riding along river currents. Some of it winds up as toxic substances on your dinner plate. The Great Pacific Garbage Patch, estimated to be twice the size of Texas, is a well-known accumulation of ocean-based plastic. However, how a garbage patch is created or the source of its trash is not so widely spoken of. The patches occur when gyres—circling ocean currents that pull objects into themselves—build up trash collections stretching from the ocean’s surface to its floor. The debris ranges in size and material, from the nearly invisible microplastics up to sizable items made of varied materials. The main component of that trash? Plastic. An estimated eight million tons end up as ocean debris annually. Much of that is carried by rivers with mouths opening to the ocean, where they dump their loads of trash. Smaller Rivers Responsible for Ocean Pollution, Study Finds Scientists formerly believed just ten of the world’s largest rivers carried most of the plastic into the oceans. However, a recent study published in Science Advances asserts this is not the case, that the majority of ocean plastic—80%—comes from more than 1,000 smaller rivers, especially those in urbanized areas located along rivers close to an ocean. The study also found that the majority of rivers emitting the most plastic tended to have a small total land size, large coastal areas, and high precipitation. The rivers contributing the most plastic are largely concentrated in Asia, particularly in the Philippines, India, Malaysia, China, and Indonesia. The Philippines alone with its nearly 5,000 rivers was found to contribute more than double that of India which produces the second-most tonnage emitted. The study’s authors suggest that mitigation efforts, those designed to lessen the plastic reaching the oceans, should be concentrated along small to mid-sized rivers to make a significant difference. Plastic Pollution Kills and Poisons Wildlife, Also Risking Humans Plastic impacts ocean life in many ways. It can trap animals who live on or near the sea, ensnaring them in tangles. It can cause drowning, starvation, or suffocation. Additionally, when plastics break down into small particles, toxic chemicals can bind to them and then be ingested by aquatic wildlife, eventually contaminating the food chain. Plastic affects corals as well. A report published in the journal Science found that the chance that coral will catch a disease drastically increases when plastic invades the coral. The report's authors believe that corals in the Asian portion of the Pacific Ocean are burdened with more than 11 billion plastic items. That number is projected to increase by 40% by 2025. Worldwide Efforts Are Reducing the Flow of Trash According to the World Economic Forum, several effective mitigation strategies are being undertaken on the community and global levels. Active projects include: Ten conveyor belts are located along Kenya’s Athi River and its tributaries. Fencing traps river debris and conveyor belts remove the waste, which is then taken to be recycled. The Ocean Cleanup nonprofit created solar-powered floating collection stations for placement along the world’s most polluted rivers. The Interceptor system picks up trash as the current carries it into the device’s mouth. The plastic is then routed to a conveyor belt that plunks the waste into dumpsters. Three Interceptors are currently being used: one along the Cengkareng Drain in Indonesia, another on the Klang River in Malaysia, and the third on the Rio Ozama in the Dominican Republic. The fundraising campaign #TeamSeas has partnered with two organizations in the quest to rid water bodies of plastic: the Ocean Conservancy for ocean and beach cleanup and The Ocean Cleanup for rivers. So far, they have removed more than 16 million pounds of trash and hold the goal of removing another 14 million by 2025. The TerraCycle Global Foundation has installed booms outfitted with nets to collect debris from a canal off the Chao Phraya, a river in Thailand. In Vietnam's Song Hong River, mesh attached to two floating booms corral river waste that is then fed into a trap on the shore. In Mexico, the international team WILDCOAST has installed a metal screen attached to two booms along a tributary of the Tijuana River to capture plastic waste before it can reach the river. Global Vision: Commitment to Circular Economies, End of Single-Use Plastics The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) and the Ellen MacArthur Foundation urge world leaders to commit to a circular economy based on the principles of using modern designs to rid the world of waste and pollution; keeping products in use rather than throwing them away; and using nontoxic, biological substances to create consumable products. Single-use plastics are discouraged. Several countries in the European Union have embraced facets of such an economy as well as Australia, Japan, and China. The Global Plastic Action Partnership, an association of government, business, and civil society, also seeks the adoption of a circular economy to answer the plastic pollution problem. The UNEP instituted the Clean Seas Campaign as another answer to plastic waste. More than sixty nations have pledged to reduce single-use plastics or remove them entirely. Countries signing on plan to accomplish their goal through legislation or regulation, increased investment in recycling plants, and other measures. The innovative consortium of multinational corporations, NextWave Plastics, sees opportunity in pollution. Touted as the first global network of ocean-bound supply chains, NextWave seeks to rebrand plastic waste as a commodity. Several well-known corporations including Dell Technologies, Trek Bicycles, HP Inc., and IKEA, among others, have begun creating products or packaging from plastic waste otherwise headed for oceans. Community-Based and Individual Efforts: We Can All Answer the Call A wide variety of technological solutions are being deployed to rid the planet’s most polluted rivers of waste products, especially plastics. Some efforts are international in scope, while others are community-based or volunteer operations at the local level. The most potent solution would be to stop plastic waste at its source before it reaches the rivers that carry so much waste to the oceans. Communities are uniquely situated to answer the crisis. Because up to 80% of ocean plastic begins in rivers, cleanup there is much easier than when undertaken after it has accumulated in the ocean. Individuals can help too. If everyone takes responsibility by limiting their reliance on single-use plastic, the rivers, oceans, and living things will all benefit. So do your part: Skip the plastic straws, carry reusable water bottles and grocery bags, join local river or coastal cleanup campaigns, or donate to one of the many organizations engaging in plastic cleanup. And don’t forget the three Rs of pollution control: reduce, reuse, and recycle. *Cassie Journigan is a writer and editor who lives in the north-central region of Florida in the United States. She focuses on issues related to sustainability. She is passionate about numerous topics including the Earth’s changing climate, pollution, social justice, and cross-cultural communications.

By Cassie Journigan* Corals may lead a plant-like existence, but they are animals. Specifically, they are polyps that require outside sources of food and oxygen. They get much of both from algae called zooxanthellae, organisms that live on coral reefs and bestow upon the reefs their vivid colors. The algae also provide the polyps with the nutrients they need. In return, the polyps give the algae shelter. Coral reefs are created when free-floating larvae settle on hard surfaces like rocks. Polyps secrete calcium carbonate underneath them, forming reefs in the process. Reef build-up happens slowly: it can take from one hundred thousand to thirty million years for a barrier reef to mature. Related to jellyfish, many coral polyps are coin-sized or smaller. But as they grow and collect, they can form reefs weighing in the tons. The reefs are among the most diverse ecosystems on the planet. They give habitat to more than 25% of all known varieties of marine life including fish, sponges, clams, and crabs. They are important to nearby seagrass, mangrove, and mudflat communities. Found in the waters of more than one hundred countries, over 500 million people base their livelihoods or are otherwise dependent upon the reefs. Coral reefs add about $375 billion annually to the worldwide economy, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a US government agency. Revenue based on tourism, coastal development, and commercial and recreational fishing heavily contribute to this economic value. Coral reefs offer protection from angry ocean waters churned up by tropical storms, thereby mitigating erosion and flooding, and protecting against loss of life. Coral reefs are also a source of new medicines: chemical compounds produced from reef organisms are being developed to combat cancer, heart disease, and viruses. Many indigenous people tie their existence to the reefs. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders base spiritual and cultural values on Australia’s Great Barrier Reef, using it responsibly and sustainably in the process. Natural Phenomena and Human Activities Threaten Coral Reefs Natural threats to coral reefs can come from powerful storms like hurricanes and cyclones. El Niño events can cause warmer water temperatures, rising sea levels, and higher salt content—all are threats to corals. Other threats come from disease and predatory activities from fish, crabs, and sea stars. Even plastic settling on reefs can have a negative impact. But the greatest threat comes from rises in the temperature of ocean waters due to human activities. A water temperature increase of 1.5°C this century could result in losses of 70% to 90% of the world’s coral reefs. A temperature rise of 2°C could result in elimination of nearly all reefs. When surface water temperatures rise above a preferred range, corals expel the algae living on them, thus turning the reef white. Known as coral bleaching, the polyps can starve and eventually die. The Great Barrier Reef bleaching event of 2016 killed 22% of the corals, according to the Australian Institute of Marine Science. The World Economic Forum says the reef has experienced five bleaching events since 1998. Ocean acidification, another byproduct of human activity, also causes problems. About a fourth of atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) winds up in oceans, leaving the water more acidic. Elevated CO2 levels dissolve seashells and make it harder for marine animals to grow. That is bad news—too much CO2 can erode existing reefs and inhibit new growth. Promising Efforts to Preserve and Restore Coral Reefs Australian waters contain about 17% of the world’s coral reefs. The Great Barrier Reef accounts for about 10% of that; that is about 344,400 square kilometers (34.44 million hectares), which is approximately equivalent to the area of Japan. It is no wonder that Australia values such a spectacular structure and is actively restoring it. "The Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority not only protects the reef but also promotes it’s sustainable use." In 1975, Australia instituted the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Act. Under this act, the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority was created. The Park Authority not only protects the area but also promotes its sustainable use. Regulatory programs such as the 2004 expansion of take and no-take zones demarcated areas where activities such as fishing, mining, and drilling can occur. According to the Park Authority’s website, no-take zones were increased from less than 5% to 33%. Since then, the reef has experienced several benefits: There are more fish in the area and their average size is increasing. There are fewer and less severe predator outbreaks. Disturbances from a single bleaching event, predators, and coral disease were down 30% in no-take zones, and they recovered 20% faster than nearby take zones. Strategies to preserve coral reefs are being explored. Researchers at the University of Miami in the US found that one species—the mountainous star coral—can adapt to high temperatures and acidity. The mountainous star corals survived prolonged periods of heat and quickly recovered when temperatures returned to normal levels. Unfortunately, researchers found a downside: the reproductive ability of the species declined. Australia’s Reef Restoration and Adaptation Program has begun a program to find new ways to help corals adapt to climate change. The plan is for successful techniques developed in the program to be shared around the world. Researchers funded by the Australian Institute of Marine Science are studying other ways for corals to survive climate change, such as developing heat-resistant algae. Thus far, ten heat-tolerant strains have been developed. All showed an increased ability to withstand heat over wild algae. A new technique led by Peter Harrison, a professor at Australia’s Southern Cross University, called the Coral IVF program, is showing signs of success. Many corals reproduce by spawning and spewing eggs and sperm into the water for fertilization. In the Coral IVF process, eggs and sperm are collected from healthy reefs and grown in pools. Once of sufficient size, they are transplanted to damaged reefs. The program resulted in transplanted corals growing successfully. The Coral IVF technique brings another improvement to their restoration. When the polyps are grown together with mutually supporting algae, the polyps show greater heat tolerance. Possibility of Successful Coral Restoration Projects Worldwide Provides Hope The success of the Coral IVF program is cause for hope. Harrison began his first experiment in Singapore in 2015 and brought it to the Great Barrier Reef in 2016. The first corals to be spawned and planted on damaged reefs became mature enough to begin spawning in 2021. Harrison told Tony Moore, a reporter from The Sydney Morning Herald, that the Singapore reef-spawned corals have grown from microscopic to plate-sized and were reproducing in just three years. With the success of the program demonstrated on two reef systems, Harrison said that carrying the process to a larger scale is possible. “All of this is doable,” he told Moore. Whether caused by predatory damage, global warming, or natural disease, corals are suffering. If everyone reduces their carbon footprint even a little, the survival of corals seems much more likely. *Cassie Journigan is a writer who lives in the north-central region of Florida in the United States. She focuses on issues related to sustainability. She is passionate about numerous topics including the Earth’s changing climate, pollution, social justice, and cross-cultural communications.