SEARCH

Gathering to Boost Progress in Meeting UN Goals of ‘Clean Water, Sanitation for All’ Dubai, United Arab Emirates. Wikimedia The United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Senegal are set to co-host the 2026 United Nations Water Conference , scheduled for December 2–4, 2026, in the UAE. This pivotal event aims to accelerate progress toward the UN’s Sustainable Development Goal 6  (SDG 6), ensuring the availability and sustainable management of water and sanitation for all.   According to the World Health Organization, approximately 2.2 billion people lack access to clean drinking water, and 3.5 billion lack safely managed sanitation services.   Preparatory Efforts and Stakeholder Engagement Preparations for the conference have been underway since 2024, with the UAE and Senegal leading a consultation process involving governments, international organizations, civil society leaders, NGOs, the private sector, and academia. A significant milestone was the organizational session held on March 3, 2025, at the UN Headquarters in New York, where conference stakeholders worked on details for the event. Then, in July 2025, a high-level preparatory meeting, convened by the president of the UN General Assembly, led to the formal adoption of the six interactive dialogue themes  by consensus. These themes  are:   Water for People Water for Prosperity Water for Planet Water for Cooperation Water in Multilateral Processes Investments for Water   Conference dialogues will use these themes to discuss global water challenges and how to achieve SDG 6 goals.   Rights and Inclusivity The UAE has emphasized that ensuring equitable access to water is not only a development priority but a fundamental human right. During a high-level discussion panel at the 59th session of the Human Rights Council, the UAE reaffirmed its commitment to advancing human rights to water and sanitation. The country highlighted its leadership in expanding access to clean water through national strategies and international development initiatives, including the “UAE Water Security Strategy 2036” and the “Mohamed bin Zayed Water Initiative.”   Looking Ahead The preparatory process  will culminate in a high-level international meeting in Dakar, Senegal, in January 2026, to assess progress on SDG 6.   His Excellency Abdulla Ahmed Balalaa, UAE Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs for Energy and Sustainability, said in a statement addressing the significance of the 2026 UN conference: “Water connects us all, and our actions must reflect that shared responsibility.” He added, “This Conference is our moment to course-correct—to set the world on a pathway of accelerated, coordinated, and sustained water action.” For more information, visit the official conference website: https://sdgs.un.org/conferences/water2026 .

Analysis Finds Increase in Frequency and Economic Costs   Natural disasters—including the recent flooding in Texas in early July —are of pressing concern, given the possibility of increased frequency and damage from climate change. Climate Central , a policy-neutral nonprofit that researches “our changing climate and how it affects people’s lives,” released data on billion-dollar natural disasters  in the US from 1980 to 2024. Climate Central found an increase in the frequency of disasters, less time between disasters, and more economically costly disasters over time. There was a total of 403 disasters, with an average of nine disasters per year. These disasters resulted in a total of $2.918 trillion in damages and 16,941 deaths. Of these disasters, just over half (203) were severe storms that accounted for about 18% ($514 billion) of the total cost. About one-sixth (67) were tropical cyclones, but these accounted for over half ($1.543 trillion) of the total cost and 7,211 (about 42%) of total deaths. The 1980s had 33 disasters (3.3 disasters per year), and this increased to 131 disasters (13.1 disasters per year) in the 2010s. However, there have already been 115 disasters in 2020 to 2024, of which 27 (close to one-quarter) occurred in 2024 alone. Although the average number of days between disasters varied by year, there has been an overall decline—meaning fewer days between disasters—from 59.5 days in 1980 to 11.9 days in 2024.   Sources: Climate Central – U.S. Billion-Dollar Disasters: 1980-2024   Texas Department of Emergency Management – July Flooding

Unmindful Pet Ownership Can Be Hazardous to Nature By Mal Cole* A family with their dog in nature.  © iStock /Valerii Apetoraiei Dogs’ enthusiasm for the world around them can be contagious, and there’s no doubt that owning a dog can foster an appreciation for nature.   But Fido and Luna are still predators, and a new study shows that dog ownership can come at a cost to the environment, with impacts on bird populations, land, and waterways, and even through the massive pet food industry.   These impacts are serious enough to have been described as “insidious” in a new study, but dog owners can mitigate them with conscientious care of their pets.     ‘Owned’ Dogs Studied Owned dogs (ones that are considered domesticated pets and not wild, feral, or semi-feral) are the most popular pets in the world. There are an estimated 900 million pet dogs worldwide, including 13.5 million in the UK, over 62 million in Brazil, and almost 6.4 million in Australia, according to an analysis  of the America Pet Products Association’s 2025 report. However, the purpose of a comprehensive review published in Pacific Conservation Biology was not to detail the benefits of dog ownership but to examine the impact of pet dogs on the environment. What the Australian researchers found was that pet dogs are “implicated in direct killing and disturbance of multiple species, particularly shore birds.” Also, dog feces and urine “can transfer zoonoses to wildlife and, when accumulated, can pollute waterways and impact plant growth.” Finally, pet dogs who have been treated for fleas or ticks can transfer those chemicals to waterways, endangering local wildlife.   “While the impact of cats, both feral and owned, on biodiversity has been relatively well-studied, by contrast, the comparative effect of owned dogs has been poorly acknowledged.”   “While the impact of cats, both feral and owned, on biodiversity has been relatively well-studied, by contrast, the comparative effect of owned dogs has been poorly acknowledged,” wrote study authors Curtin University Associate Professor Bill Bateman and colleague Lauren Gilson.   Shore Birds and Dogs According to data collected from wildlife rehab centers referenced in the review, dogs are responsible for more attacks on wildlife than cats.   In an interview for this article, Bateman described this disparity as part of the motivation for his research.   “I was particularly interested in pet dogs because I think we give them a free pass,” he said. “I thought it would be interesting to dig down into the data and see if there’s any evidence that, specifically, pet dogs can have a negative effect on biodiversity.”   But it wasn’t just scientific curiosity that inspired Bateman—he also wanted to help members of his community who were noticing the negative effects of dogs and wanted scientific evidence to back up their concerns.   “I had spoken to people who would say things like, there are dogs chasing birds on beaches, and I want to talk to my local council and be able to say: Look, here is evidence that shows that dogs chasing birds on beaches has a negative effect.”   Bateman found that, indeed, pet dogs can have a marked effect on shore bird populations. The chasing instinct of dogs poses a particular threat to wildlife, and the study cites several examples of owned dogs causing devastating effects on endangered shore birds internationally, from little blue penguins in Tasmania to snowy plovers in California.   “We argue that the impact of owned dogs on the environment is far greater, more insidious, and more concerning than is generally recognized.”   In Australia, owned dogs “have been recorded as catching a higher proportion of native animal prey” than owned cats, and also take larger prey, the study said. “We argue that the impact of owned dogs on the environment is far greater, more insidious, and more concerning than is generally recognized,” Bateman and Gilson concluded. A Labrador retriever with a snow goose in its mouth.  © iStock /miker8863 Historically, the effects of dog attacks have been devastating to some sensitive bird populations. A 2024 study  cited in Bateman’s review attributed a stunning 91% of reported penguin deaths in Tasmania from 1980 to 2020 to dog attacks. In 1987 , a particularly brutal attack by wild dogs on brown kiwis in New Zealand reduced their population from an estimated 900 to just 400. “One animal … can have an effect on a whole population of a rare breeding animal,” said Bateman. A dog chasing a flying bird on the beach.  © iStock /Valdeci Lima Being subject to disturbances (including a dog’s chase instinct) can have a significant impact on migratory shore birds who travel hundreds of miles to breeding grounds they have used for generations. After an arduous journey, the stress of being disturbed or chased by a dog may not kill the bird but could deter breeding behavior by making birds expend more energy to flying away . Although the effects of this kind of stress are difficult to measure, they can be severe.   “It’s actually having an effect on [the birds’] breeding potential, and therefore affects the survival of the species,” said Bateman.   Leash Laws The idea that a beloved pet could cause destruction is sobering, but it also suggests that individual actions can make a big difference.   Leash laws can help protect endangered birds if the laws are obeyed, but the study found several examples of how dog owners skirt these laws. A 2014 study  on free-ranging dogs and wildlife conservation cited in Bateman’s review showed that some wildlife perceived human-and-dog pairs as a greater threat than humans alone.   These direct effects of dogs on wildlife were part of what Bateman expected to find when he began his research. What surprised him was the unintended, cascading effects of dog ownership.   “It’s very easy to think, if a dog chases an animal, then that’s going to have a negative effect. But then, when we started digging into it, we started seeing things like just leaving a glandular scent mark had an effect on animals,” he said.   Diseases spread from dog waste are also a concern: Eighty percent of pathogens that infect domesticated pets could be spread to wildlife, including diseases and parasites found in dog feces, Bateman claims. Urine from dogs can affect other animals and impact soil chemistry.  Pixabay /pcdazero (Free for use) Other studies showed that the scent that dogs leave behind through glandular secretions, urine, and feces can cause wild animals to avoid the areas where dogs are commonly walked. Diseases spread from dog waste are also a concern. Per the study, eighty percent of pathogens that infect domesticated pets could be spread to wildlife, including diseases and parasites found in dog feces. Urine from dogs in urban areas was also shown to impact soil chemistry and contributed to excess nitrogen in waterways. Common topical medications that dog owners use to protect their pets from fleas and ticks can wash off when a dog enters a waterway and harm the freshwater ecosystem. These medications were shown to be toxic to freshwater invertebrates  even at low concentrations. Moreover, fur from domestic animals is also frequently used by birds as a soft liner for nests . Pesticides can persist in treated fur for weeks after application, and this residue was shown to impact breeding populations of birds, causing more dead offspring and unhatched eggs .   The “Pawprint” of Pet Food Bateman’s review included the environmental impact of dog food production.                                                                                                                                                                                   “I never thought that I would be talking about things like the carbon footprint of the pet food industry, the effects of just the feces and urine that dogs produce—all this becomes very cumulative,” he said.   His study cited greenhouse gas emissions, agricultural land use, and freshwater use as elements of concern with dog food production.   As a 2020 study  cited in the review noted, the environmental footprint (or “pawprint”) of the pet food industry was “equivalent to the footprint of almost twice the UK land area” (or about 24 Mha) and has the greenhouse gas emissions of “around the 60th-highest emitting country [in 2019].” Raising Awareness Can Make a Difference So, what’s a dog lover to do? Bateman recommends dog owners obey leash laws, use designated dog parks, always pick up dog waste, and find environmentally friendly pet food options.   Pet ownership carries many benefits from companionship to medical services, but dog populations far outnumber other predators, and some people may want to rethink owning a dog.   Per Bateman, one of the biggest issues is the sheer number of dogs.   “Ultimately, it’s about, do you really need a dog? And that’s not just about the environmental effect. That’s also about the welfare of the dog.”   “Ultimately, it’s about, do you really need a dog? And that’s not just about the environmental effect. That’s also about the welfare of the dog,” he says. He recommends that dog owners look after their dogs as best they can and consider owning only one dog.   Bateman himself has owned dogs in the past—and may again in the future, he says. He hopes that this study wouldn’t discourage a conscientious dog lover from owning a dog. Instead, he aims for this work to inform the public about a complex issue and empower advocates who want scientific evidence to back up the little-known negative effects of dog ownership.    “Please see this as a way of raising awareness, because it certainly raised our awareness,” said Bateman. Ultimately, it’s the responsibility of humans, not dogs, to make sure that biodiversity and the natural world remain a resource for everyone.  *Mal Cole is a freelance science and nature writer based in Massachusetts.

Potential Benefits from Omega-3s, St. John’s Wort, Saffron, Probiotics, and Vitamin D According to the World Health Organization’s 2022 report , an estimated 970 million people were affected by mental health conditions in 2019, of which 28.9% were depressive disorders. Treatment typically includes therapy and use of an antidepressant, according to the American Psychological Association . A 2025 review  by researchers, of 404 studies with 209 trials, looked at various over-the-counter products to combat depression. Five products showed evidence for depression treatment in more than 10 trials; more research is needed for products with less than 10 trials. Products evaluated in more than 10 trials with substantive evidence for depression treatment include omega-3s, St. John’s Wort, saffron, probiotics, and vitamin D. Products evaluated in two to nine trials that appeared promising for depression treatment included folic acid, lavender, zinc, tryptophan, rhodiola, and lemon balm. In addition, mixed results were found for melatonin, magnesium, curcumin, cinnamon, echium, vitamin C, and vitamin D with calcium. Products evaluated in one trial with positive effects compared to placebo were rosemary, green tea, lotus seeds, ulva, basil, chromium, Nigella sativa L . ( black cumin ), and flavonoid-rich orange juice. No trials were conducted with homeopathic products.   Sources: Review: Over-the-Counter Herbal Products for Depressive Symptoms in Adults (2025) World Health Organization – World Mental Health Report (2022) American Psychological Association – Depression Guideline Black Cumin – A Comprehensive Review (2021 )

A Swiss Pilot Project Puts PV Panels between the Rails By Deborah Harvey* The Sun-Ways solar panels are clamped between the rails on a section of Line 221 of the Swiss national rail network. © Sun-Ways In a quiet village in western Switzerland, an unassuming stretch of railway has become a proving ground for an ambitious idea: turning train tracks into linear solar farms.   This tactic aims to harness unused space for clean energy, all while trains continue to run. It is a feat that could reshape how people think about renewable power and transportation infrastructure. If adopted globally, it could conceivably become a pillar of the world’s renewable energy production, lowering household electricity costs and providing greater energy security.   As with all new technologies, there are challenges: Photovoltaic (PV) panels need to be clean—and snow-free—to work optimally, and routine rail maintenance would require the solar panels to be temporarily removed and reinstalled. The potential for expansion to hundreds of thousands of miles of train track is exciting, but the actual costs and durability of the systems are not yet known.   Still, there is growing global interest in generating vast amounts of electricity on infrastructure that already exists—and without train conductors or travelers noticing it.   From Inspiration to Installment The Sun-Ways concept was born in 2020 when Joseph Scuderi, the startup’s founder, was waiting for a train in Renens, near Lausanne, Switzerland. Looking at the empty gap between the rails, he wondered, “Why not use that space to produce solar power?”   That simple question sparked five years of development, culminating in a pilot installation of 48 removable solar panels on a 100-meter (328-foot) section of track in Buttes, canton Neuchâtel.   “We installed solar panels as we would on the roof of a house,” Scuderi said at the rain-soaked unveiling of the project in April 2025, adding that getting this far “has been a miracle.”   Asked by The Earth & I  what triggered his innovation, he credited a Walt Disney character. “Ever since I was a little boy, I've been fascinated by the world of inventions, and my hero was Gyro Gearloose!” The 1950s-era comic book about a “madcap inventor” was built around one of the characters in the Donald Duck universe. Scuderi’s inclination to always look for a solution to everyday problems never left him, he said, “and I have a notebook with dozens of inventions that sleeps at the bottom of a drawer.”   Beyond his youthful comic book hero inspiration, he eventually became head of communication and marketing for 11 years for a major Swiss electricity group. “I was responsible for promoting photovoltaics,” he told The Earth & I , “a field I'm passionate about.” The Sun-Ways pilot array sits on Line 221 of the Swiss national rail network and feeds electricity into the local grid . Each panel is a standard 380-watt module, and together the 48 panels are expected to produce about 16,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh) of electricity per year—roughly the annual consumption of four to six  average Swiss households.   Sun-Ways secured approval from the Federal Office of Transport (FOT) after extensive safety studies, as regulators were initially cautious about putting equipment on active tracks. In fact, the FOT rejected the plan in 2023 until independent experts verified that the specially designed panels would not interfere with trains or signaling.   Ultimately, authorities gave a green light for a three-year trial in Buttes under the condition that the system be monitored through all seasons. Starting in late April, passenger trains began rolling over this unique solar power plant as part of the long-term test.   Fitting Solar Panels into Rail Infrastructure Installing solar panels onto active railways requires precise engineering. In the Sun-Ways system, each module lies flat between the rails on the ties (also known as sleepers ), secured by a patented rail-to-rail fastening mechanism. This setup allows trains to pass safely above while enabling easy removal for maintenance, such as rail grinding or ballast tamping.   As Scuderi explains, the real challenge wasn’t producing energy but doing so safely between active rails. The panels’ quick-detach design makes that possible. This video  shows the rail-car solar panel–laying system created by a collaboration between Sun-Ways and the Scheuchzer company. To streamline installation, Sun-Ways partnered with the Scheuchzer company, which developed a mechanized vehicle capable of laying or removing 1,000 square meters (10,760 sq ft) of panels per day. Each panel is designed to fit standard-gauge tracks—1,435 mm (4 ft 8½ in), the most common rail size in Europe and North America—but they can also be adapted  for wider or narrower gauges.   Railroad gauges vary widely  around the world, which presents both a design challenge and an opportunity for broader adoption .   India  runs on broad gauge (1,676 mm or 5 ft 6 in), while parts of Japan  and several African countries  operate narrow-gauge lines as tight as 1,067 mm (3 ft 6 in). Sun-Ways designed its system to be modular and adjustable, and this flexibility means the core concept is globally viable, though each country’s network may still need tailored solutions and new rounds of certification before solar panels can hit the rails.   Engineered for resilience, the system remains stable  under speeds up to 150 km/h (93 mph) and winds of 240 km/h (149 mph), using low-profile, anti-reflective black PV panels to reduce glare . To ensure efficiency, brush-equipped trains can clean the panels as they pass.   Once installed, the panels can feed power into railway infrastructure, the public grid, or the traction system that powers electric trains. This eliminates the need for additional inverters. For now, the Buttes pilot connects to the local grid, but future versions may link directly to railway substations for maximum impact.   Benefits of Solar-on-Rail Technology      A maintenance worker checks the positioning of the solar panels. © Sun-Ways An obvious benefit of using railway tracks as a platform for solar generation is the efficient land use. The vast footprint of rail corridors, which are typically off-limits for other development, can be dual-purposed to produce clean energy without consuming new land or marring natural landscapes. “By exploiting the vast unexploited surface along railways, [we] aim to revolutionize photovoltaic energy production,” Sun-Ways says . In Europe alone, there is an estimated 260,000 km  (161,556 miles) of train tracks, representing huge untapped solar potential.   “Exploiting railroad tracks to produce solar power is a great idea,” agrees researcher Martin Heinrich . PhD, of Germany’s Fraunhofer Institute ,  noting that it’s smarter to put panels in built environments than to spread them over untouched land.   Another advantage  of the Sun-Ways system is its synergy with existing infrastructure. Since rail companies are major electricity consumers, they can directly use the solar power generated on their tracks. In Switzerland alone, where over 5,300 km (3,293 miles) of railway exists, Sun-Ways estimates that solar panels could produce about 1 billion kWh annually. This would account for roughly 2% of national electricity consumption, equivalent to powering 300,000 households. The Swiss FOT believes  public transit systems could eventually self-generate 20%–30% of their electricity needs with solar installations.   The modular nature of the technology also enables swift, scalable deployment , with panels installed during regular maintenance schedules and easily repositioned when needed. With minimal visual impact and no new land required, solar-equipped rail corridors offer a sustainable solution without disrupting scenery or farmland. Solar panels could produce about 1 billion kWh annually [in Switzerland]. This would account for roughly 2% of national electricity consumption.   Potential Drawbacks Despite its promise, the solar-on-rail concept presents several technical and logistical challenges . Maintenance remains a central concern, as solar panels must be removed during regular rail work, such as tamping or grinding. This is why Sun-Ways developed a removable system, though it does require extra operational steps.   Repeated handling could lead to damage or wear. Dirt, grease, and snow also pose issues for performance. Although brush attachments help clean the panels, snow accumulation may still halt production in winter. The panels are built to withstand harsh rail environments, including strong vibrations and high-speed traffic, but real-world durability remains under observation throughout the multiyear trial.   Costs and scalability are additional hurdles. The 100-meter Buttes pilot cost CHF 585,000  ($723,000) (which includes R&D, studies, prototypes, construction, and installation), and future scale should reduce per-unit costs.   The panels are built to withstand harsh rail environments, including strong vibrations and high-speed traffic, but real-world durability remains under observation. A train passes over the between-the-rails solar panels. © Sun-Ways Global Interest Growing While the Sun-Ways pilot in Switzerland is the first to operate solar panels on an active railway line, interest in rail-based solar power is growing internationally.   In France, railway operator SNCF launched the Solveig project  in early 2025, deploying containerized solar-plus-battery systems on unused rail lines. A proof-of-concept at the Achères Technical Center tested eight solar panels on a dormant track, with plans to expand across low-traffic segments identified through solar mapping.   Other countries expressing interest include Spain and Romania, with pilot installations expected soon, as well as China and the United States, which are exploring the concept for their larger rail systems. Even without direct collaboration, several nations have begun parallel experiments. In Italy, startup Greenrail has been testing solar-embedded sleepers , while in Germany a British firm trialed between-rail panels on a Deutsche Bahn test track . Japan has also explored  placing panels between rails on commuter lines. These projects highlight growing recognition of the potential for the world’s rail networks serving as large-scale solar platforms.   Meanwhile, Sun-Ways is pursuing partnerships abroad and has confirmed pilot projects with multiple countries. The Swiss firm says South Korea is one of those nations.   [The] broader goal is to transform global railways into a vast solar power network.   For Scuderi and his team at Sun-Ways, the Buttes pilot marks just the starting point of what he believes could be a vast solar power network.   In Switzerland alone, with 5,300 km (3,293 miles) of track, Scuderi estimates  that installing 2.5 million panels could yield approximately 1 terawatt-hour of solar electricity annually. That would represent about 20% of the country’s current PV output.   With the Swiss project underway, Sun-Ways is already seeking faster international adoption through partnerships . In countries with flexible or private railway systems, implementation could proceed more rapidly. Over the next five years, the company plans to equip 10–100 km (about 6.2 to 62 miles) of Swiss rail, while simultaneously pursuing projects in France, Canada, Mexico, Indonesia, India, and elsewhere.   Scuderi envisions an even more ambitious future: a world where much of the Earth’s rail infrastructure serves as a renewable energy backbone, quietly producing terawatt-hours of green power. But achieving that vision will require continued engineering improvements, reduced production costs, committed transportation partners, and strong policy support. *Deborah Harvey is a writer and researcher focused on science, technology, sustainability, and global innovation. Her work explores how emerging ideas shape the future of energy, infrastructure, and the environment.

Who Decides, Who Pays, and Who Bears the Risk? By Jana Perez-Angelo* In this photo of Earth’s atmosphere (with a Soyuz craft reentering from space), the orange is the troposphere (rising to an average of about 40,000 feet) and the blue the stratosphere (extending to an average of some 100,000 feet above Earth), which is where climate geoengineers envision sulfur dioxide gas being released to form sun-reflective sulfate particles. © NASA /Scott Kelly As wildfires burn with unprecedented intensity, heat waves strain power grids, and droughts disrupt food systems, one thing has become painfully clear: Humanity may be running out of time . Despite decades of warnings, summits, and pledges, according to organizations like the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, humankind is failing  to curb global emissions at the pace required to stave off increasing climate crisis. The window to avoid catastrophic climate disruption is narrowing, they say, and with it, public conversations are beginning to entertain once-unthinkable ideas.   Enter geoengineering, the bold and controversial concept of deliberately manipulating Earth’s climate systems to counteract global warming. Once relegated to the realm of dystopian fiction, geoengineering is now being debated  in scientific journals, government meetings, and even corporate boardrooms. From creating vast clouds of sun-reflective particles in the atmosphere to building Brazil-sized space mirrors or installing underwater curtains beneath the polar ice, these climate intervention strategies are moving  from speculative concepts to real research programs.   Some see them as humanity’s last-ditch safety net. Others warn they’re a dangerous gamble, one that could trigger unintended and irreversible consequences—or act like “climate methadone” that, if stopped, would send the Earth into a catastrophic “termination shock,” as explained in The Guardian .   At the heart of this growing debate lie deeper questions : not just what can be done, but what should  be done and who gets to decide.   Engineering the Sky Among the most discussed proposals is stratospheric aerosol injection  (SAI). This method involves injecting sulfur dioxide gas into the stratosphere, which reacts with water vapor to form tiny reflective particles of hydrogen sulfate to reflect sunlight and cool the planet. It’s inspired by natural phenomena. For example, when Mount Pinatubo  erupted in the Philippines in 1991, it spewed millions of tons of ash and sulfur dioxide into the atmosphere, causing global temperatures to drop by 0.5°C (about 1°F) for more than a year. Marine cloud brightening proposals envision unleashing plumes of salt spray into low-lying marine clouds, transforming them into radiant shields that bounce sunlight back into space—blunting the ocean’s heat intake and rewriting the energy balance of the planet’s surface. © iStock /CelsoDiniz SAI is not the only idea on the table. Scientists are also researching:   Marine cloud brightening , which involves  spraying seawater into the air to whiten clouds and increase their reflectivity. Space-based reflectors , in which   giant mirrors  orbiting Earth deflect solar radiation before it even enters the atmosphere. Underwater ice curtains , which aim  to slow the melting of polar ice by blocking warm ocean currents.   Several field tests have already begun. Marine cloud brightening has seen small-scale experimentation, while SAI remains under theoretical and lab-scale study due to its immense risk and global ramifications, says Prof. Clive Hamilton, an ethicist at Charles Sturt University in Canberra, Australia, and author of the book Earthmasters .   Can Human Beings Actually Do This? This video  shows and describes the 1991 Mount Pinatubo eruption, which spread a sulfate aerosol throughout Earth’s atmosphere, cooling the planet. Technically, some methods are feasible, at least on paper. SAI could be deployed  using aircraft, balloons, or even high-altitude drones. But the real challenge lies in controlling the outcome. How much to inject? Where? How often? And how will it affect different parts of the world?   The “brute reality” is that solar geoengineering “does seem to provide a significant way to reduce climate risk at very low cost [and] is going to be very powerful,” said David Keith , PhD, professor of geophysical science at the University of Chicago and one of the leading researchers in solar geoengineering.   “I think it’s going to be hard to stop people from rushing to do it,”  he adds. However,  d espite the appeal of Earth-engineering methods, critics say the techniques won’t solve carbon emissions , biodiversity loss, or economic inequality.   “SAI could potentially reduce the amount of global heating and some of the changes in extreme events that it brings,”  Prof. Hamilton said in an interview with The Earth & I .   But “it has all kinds of risks, and it will not reduce acidification of the oceans” or slow CO 2  accumulation, which he says is the real root of the problem. In other words, geoengineering might cool the planet, but it won’t reverse the centuries of damage already done.   Meanwhile, private companies are jumping ahead. Startups like Make Sunsets  have already launched test flights releasing sulfur dioxide gas into the atmosphere without public input, international oversight, or scientific review. This kind of unregulated experimentation has drawn sharp criticism  from environmental groups, ethicists, and international organizations. Promises vs. Reality At first glance, geoengineering seems like a tempting fix. In theory, it could lower  temperatures quickly, potentially preventing the collapse of key ecosystems and reducing the severity of extreme weather events, said the Columbia Climate School.   But those benefits won’t be evenly shared. Geoengineering could create  winners and losers. A cooling effect that benefits crops in one region might bring devastating droughts to another. The same intervention that reduces hurricanes might disrupt vital rainfall patterns elsewhere.   “Indigenous peoples, peasants, fisherfolks, and rural communities are among those on the front lines of impacts from geoengineering experimentation and deployment, and their perspectives are under-represented in research, discourse, and decision-making,” said the Center for International Environmental Law in a 2024 report . Bleached branching coral (foreground) and normal branching coral (background), Keppel Islands, Great Barrier Reef, Australia. The bleaching is thought to be caused by ocean warming and acidification, which current climate geoengineering techniques do not address. © Wikimedia  ( CC BY 3.0 ) In addition, no current geoengineering method addresses ocean acidification , a silent crisis caused by excess CO₂ being absorbed by seawater. This threatens marine ecosystems, coral reefs, and the entire ocean food chain. So, while the planet might cool, the oceans could still die.   And once geoengineering starts, it may need to continue for decades or even centuries. Sudden termination whether due to war, economic collapse, or political upheaval could cause global temperatures to spike rapidly, triggering what some scientists call “termination shock.”   Earth scientists often use computer models to predict how the planet will react to particular variables, such as atmospheric CO 2 buildup or sulfate particles in the air from geoengineering. But “it is impossible to capture all the likely effects in a model, no matter how sophisticated,” Prof. Hamilton told The Earth & I . “And tests can only provide some evidence. We would only discover the unintended effects of SAI with full-scale implementation—and even then, it might take a decade before we have a good idea.” Who Controls the Thermostat? World leaders’ photo op at the 2024 Climate Action Summit at COP29, held in Baku, Azerbaijan. Many smaller, less-developed nations are skeptical of the rich and powerful making climate geoengineering decisions without their input. © Wikipedia /President of Azerbaijan ( CC BY 4.0 )   Perhaps the most complex question isn’t “Can we?” but “Who gets to decide?”   Imagine this: One country—such as a wealthy, climate-vulnerable nation—decides to go ahead with solar geoengineering. It has the money, the technology, and the political will. But in doing so, it inadvertently disrupts rainfall patterns in another country, triggering crop failure and famine.   What happens next? Without a global governance system, one country’s decision could spark conflict   or even war. Not only that, warns th e Carnegie Climate Geoengineering Governance Initiative , but geoengineering could be weaponized to attack enemy nations or extort concessions from them.   Solar engineering “makes me nervous because mega-solutions typically have not tended to work as planned,” Pforzheimer Professor of Science and Technology Studies at the Harvard Kennedy School Sheila Jasanoff said  in 2015.   “There are many things one can get wrong in modeling large-scale projects, and also those mega-solutions are often very difficult to govern and quite anti-democratic,” she said.   In a world already grappling with distrust, inequality, and geopolitical instability, the idea of a single nation or billionaire tech mogul controlling the global climate is deeply troubling  to many.   Ethics on a Global Scale At its core, geoengineering is not just a scientific issue, it’s a moral one , according to many observers . Who has the right,  or even the ability, to decide the fate of Earth’s climate? Should a handful of researchers, governments, or corporations be allowed to experiment with atmospheric systems that affect everyone? What about the rights of Indigenous communities, future generations, and nonhuman life?   The United Nations Environment Programme released a 2023 report title d “ One   Atmosphere: An Independent Expert Review on Solar Radiation Modification Research and Deployment .” It called for global consent, inclusive dialogue, and transparent governance before any form of solar radiation modification is attempted. And even then, the models are limited. Climate systems are incredibly complex and interconnected. Unintended consequences   may become apparent only decades later when it’s too late to reverse them.   Still, some argue that the world can’t wait and that the greatest risk may be doing nothing at all. But the National Academies of Sciences and other leading institutions advocate a middle path: Invest in research and governance now but hold off on deployment until the world has proper systems in place to manage the consequences collectively.   “While geoengineering holds promise for mitigating some of the worst impacts of climate change, it also raises profound risks and ethical concerns.”   Geoengineering is slowly but surely entering the mainstream , fueled by fear, urgency, and technological ambition. But it comes at a cost, not just in dollars, but in trust, sovereignty, and the fragile balance of the planet’s ecosystems. As summarized by the Live to Plant website, “ While geoengineering holds promise for mitigating some of the worst impacts of climate change, it also raises profound risks and ethical concerns. These range from environmental uncertainties and geopolitical tensions to moral questions about human intervention in nature.”   Ultimately, as the climate clock ticks louder, the real question may not be whether humankind can fix the sky but whether societies should engineer their way out of a crisis they engineered themselves into. *Jana Perez-Angelo is a Denver-based writer and multidisciplinary creative and digital strategist passionate about brand storytelling and purpose-driven content. Her work has been featured in Relevant Magazine, Medium, and Faithful Life.

Reports Says Over Three-Quarters of Sub-Saharan Africa Lacked Access The World Health Organization estimated  around 74% of the world population cooks with modern methods, such as electric or gas burner stoves in 2022. However, according to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA’s) universal access to clean cooking in Africa  report, over 2 billion people—with close to half of them in Africa—rely on traditional stoves and open fires . This cooking style has contributed to around 3 million premature deaths per year from indoor air pollution, said the report, which included additional highlights listed below. In 2023, 963 million people in Africa lacked access to clean cooking , which uses methods such as biogas, electricity, ethanol, liquified petroleum gas (LPG), or natural gas. More than 99% of people without access were in sub-Saharan Africa, where the access rate was 23% compared with North Africa’s access rate of 95%. Two sub-Saharan countries (South Africa with 90% and Gabon with 91%) had relatively high access to clean cooking. Three nations where access was less than 5% were Burundi, Madagascar, and Mali. In Africa, the lack of clean cooking contributes to an estimated 815,000 premature deaths annually due to health impacts of household air pollution and loss of 1.3 million hectares of forest annually to gather wood for cooking. In sub -Saharan Africa as a whole, about 16% of people had access to LPG and 6% had access to electricity for cooking. Southern Africa is an exception, with about 50% of homes with access to electricity and 25% with access to LPG for cooking.   Sources: International Energy Agency – Universal Access to Clean Cooking in Africa Report   International Energy Agency – Summit on Clean Cooking in Africa World Health Organization – Clean Fuels and Technologies World Health Organization – Chapter 2 Access to Clean Fuels and Technologies for Cooking

The Dynamics and Dangers of Rapid Flooding By Gordon Cairns* Flooding of the Guadalupe River near Kerrville, Texas, in July 2025.  Wikimedia /USCG Flash floods are one of the world’s most treacherous weather events, as they occur with little warning and can cause severe damage and loss of life. For many Americans, the 2025 July 4th holiday weekend turned into tragedy when a flash flood hit Camp Mystic next to the Guadalupe River in Kerr County, Texas. Some 137 people died,  including 27 young girls and staff who were swept away in the dead of night. This was the 10th-most-devastating flash flood  in US history, according to Yale Climate Connections. In the aftermath, questions arose about unseen flash-flood warnings, a delay in evacuation  by the camp leaders, new cabins built in the floodplain , plus the deadly combination of extreme weather and the region's vulnerability to rapid flooding. Geography Matters Tornado Alley (in red) in the US. Wikimedia /Dan Craggs ( CC BY-SA 3.0 ) In the US, different regions  are vulnerable to flash floods for unique reasons. For example, the flat landscape of the states that make up Tornado Alley—Texas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Kansas, South Dakota, Iowa, and Nebraska—allows storm systems to build up quickly and then remain over the same area, causing excessive rainfall and flash flooding. The rivers and streams have less capacity to handle sudden surges of water, and this leads to overflows and flooding. Oklahoma is one of the most at-risk states, receiving over 60 flash flood warnings every year. Surprisingly, the dry Southwest is also at risk of flash flooding. Desert soil doesn’t absorb water easily, which is a problem during the monsoon season from mid-June through September. When moisture-laden air from the Gulf of America collides with the hot desert environment, it can cause sudden, concentrated downpours of rainwater. The geographic features of Arizona and New Mexico add to the risk, as steep canyons and arroyos (dry riverbeds) can quickly turn into raging torrents. Urban development … creates large sections of impervious surfaces (such as concrete) that stop water from soaking into the ground. In other parts of the US, human intervention has increased the risk of floods. Urban development in cities like New York and Philadelphia creates large sections of impervious surfaces  (such as concrete) that stop water from soaking into the ground. During a storm, water overwhelms drainage systems, leading to localized flooding. In fact, New York’s mayor  declared a local state of emergency due to heavy rain and flash flooding at the end of July 2025. Slow-moving storms were only one factor in the Kerr County, Texas, disaster. Rainfall that was described as “extraordinary,” falling at up to 4 inches an hour, was supplemented by other sources of moisture. Tropical moisture from the Gulf, monsoonal moisture from the eastern Pacific, and remnant moisture from Tropical Storm Barry—which had made landfall on the east coast of Mexico just a few days earlier—all added up to create the “perfect” storm. "Those are sort of the worst-case ingredients, from a meteorological standpoint,” Marshall Shepherd, director of the Atmospheric Sciences Program at the University of Georgia and former president of the American Meteorological Society, told ABC News . A view of Enchanted Rock (or Cherokee Rock) in Texas Hill Country.  © Flickr /Ed Schipul ( CC BY-SA 2.0 ) The landscape and soil composition of Texas Hill Country , where the Guadalupe River flows, made the situation worse. Texas has the unenviable record of leading the nation in flood deaths, and this part of the state is known as Flash Flood Alley. In the 60 years between 1959 and 2019, 1,069 people died due to flooding; this is over 1.5 times the 693 deaths in flood-prone Louisiana during the same period. This is because the steep hills in Texas make the water flow downhill quickly. As the area is semi-arid, with soils that don’t soak up much water, it causes the shallow creeks to fill with water quickly. When those creeks join a river, they create a surge of water that can destroy everything in its way: homes, cars, and, most devastatingly, humans. As the area is semi-arid with soils that don’t soak up much water, it causes the shallow creeks to fill with water quickly. When those creeks join a river, they create a surge of water that can destroy everything in its way: homes, cars, and, most devastatingly, humans. In the aftermath of the July 4th weekend disaster, many people have questioned what role a local flood warning system would have played to save lives. Forecasters were aware a massive flood was likely a few hours earlier,  but the information wasn’t fully passed on to those at risk, giving them little to no chance to escape. In an area known for flash flooding, it may seem incredible Kerr County rejected—on the basis of cost—the chance to install outdoor warning sirens  at a time when neighboring counties decided to do so. It is believed such a system would have saved lives. On July 9, Texas Governor Greg Abbott announced  a special legislative session that included topics like flood warning systems, flood emergency communications, and natural disaster preparation and recovery. A day later, Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick  and House Speaker Dustin Burrows created the Select Committees on Disaster Preparedness and Flooding, with the first hearing on July 23 and another on July 31 . “Now the work begins,” said Texas State Senator Charles Perry  at the end of the session. “Let’s get our bills drafted and try to get them over the finish line in the next two weeks.” Flooding and Climate Change Urban expansion of cities from 2000 (in blue) to 2020 (in red). High risk cities for flooding include Guangzhou, Tokyo, Jakarta, Mexico City, and Cairo. Seoul has low to medium risk.  ©Dorcas Idowu and Wendy Zhou/ MDPI  ( CC BY 4.0 ) Sadly, extreme weather events are likely to get worse due to climate  change. As the world heats up, the amount of water in the atmosphere increases, leading to a larger number of extreme rain showers and therefore more flooding.   According to the Clausius–Clapeyron relationship , for every 1°C (1.8°F) rise in air temperature, water evaporation can increase up to 7% given how warmer air holds more moisture. But it is not only climate change increasing the danger; people are also putting themselves at greater risk based on where they choose to live. It is not only climate change increasing the danger; people are also putting themselves at greater risk based on where they choose to live. A study led by Jun Rentschler and published in Nature  in 2023 reveals that over the last 40 years, human settlements around the world keep expanding into places that once would have been avoided due to flooding. These new settlements aren’t only villages; many megacities have been built on flood zones, potentially putting millions of people at risk of tragedy. A separate 2023 study  in the journal Sustainability maps megacity expansion with correlation to urban flood risk.  In some parts of the world, cities are more likely to be built in dangerous flood zones than in safer parts of the country. Research on Flood Response Yet the risk might be worth it if there is a better understanding about flash floods. A growing body of research is focusing on the dynamics of these events with the aim of developing better prediction models and mitigation strategies. A scientific paper  published in 2022, for instance, looked at almost 30,000 other studies and found that while flooding will always be an unavoidable risk, it is also manageable. Floods can be minimized or made to change course through engineering and non-engineering measures. As the risk and frequency of flooding increases, how people respond to them has changed. In the past, governments would try and control flooding through building projects, but as these systems didn’t stop the deluges destroying lives and livelihoods, they switched to trying to manage them, either through structural work such as weirs, dams, and seawalls, or keeping people away from flooding areas. Traditional flood management measures  tend to protect, reduce, or eliminate impacts and actions before an event. Now modeling techniques using probability and statistics  have been found to be successful in predicting when flash flooding could occur. A 2024 study  on an urban area in the sub-Himalayas had a very high accuracy level, and the authors expressed confidence that their results could help hydrologists, engineers, and water management administrators to control areas susceptible to flash floods. In the meantime, ever-expanding cities near water bodies, such as in China, Japan, Indonesia, Mexico, and Argentina, face high risk of flooding, according to the 2023 study  in Sustainability . In the US, the Federal Emergency Management Agency  notes that about 40% of flood insurance claims in the US come from low-to-moderate flood risk areas. The agency recommends various measures to mitigate flood risks. These include elevating one’s property to above the ground, filling areas lower than the ground (such as basements), using sandbags to protect property, and installing water pumps to remove excess water. *Gordon Cairns  is a freelance journalist and teacher of English at the Forest Schools, based in Scotland.

Can These Beach-Fouling Algae Be Turned into Useful Products? By Kate Pugnoli* Buildup of (brown) sargassum in the Cayman Islands.  © iStock /Blue Sky The Caribbean islands, Florida, and the Mexican Riviera are well known as popular vacation hotspots, but since 2011, these beautiful locations can sometimes become blanketed with Sargassum seaweed “rafts” that stretch for miles along coastlines.   As this seaweed rots, it releases a sulfurous stench—which sickens local residents and drives away tourists—and poses risks for adverse health effects and environmental impacts.   To clear the water and the air, various companies are working to harvest Sargassum and turn this unwanted vacation-wrecker into something useful.   Sargassum’s Environmental Concerns Sargassum is a type of floating brown algae that can collect in large masses. Out in the ocean, these huge, floating rafts act as habitat, food, protection, and breeding grounds for various marine species.   Unfortunately for humans, since 2011 , these huge rafts have also floated onto Atlantic coastlines and become trapped. When Sargassum decomposes, it releases hydrogen sulfide , a noxious gas.    At concentrations of 2 to 5 parts per million (ppm), hydrogen sulfide  can cause nausea, tearing of the eyes, headaches, or loss of sleep. A 2020 study  found that patients living near Sargassum-invaded waters may have been exposed to hydrogen sulfide concentrations of greater than 5 ppm for 50 days per year. This could explain why the patients’ most frequent reasons for seeking medical care were for neurological, digestive, and respiratory disorders.   At even higher concentrations —50 to 400 ppm—the fumes can lead to “difficulty in breathing, agitation, confusion, nausea and vomiting, elevated blood pressure, and loss of consciousness,” a 2023 study found. In addition, a 2024 study  found that Sargassum hydrogen sulfide exposure is linked to increased central sleep apnea events.   When it decomposes, Sargassum releases hydrogen sulfide … [which] can cause nausea, tearing of the eyes, headaches, or loss of sleep.   Sargassum also can contain heavy metals and a pathogen (Vibrio bacteria) that can lead to skin infections or gastrointestinal illness. For example, arsenic concentrations in Sargassum that washed up in Mexico along the Gulf of America in 2018 ranged from 29.0 to 65.7 mg/kg, according to the Environmental Protection Agency . This is well above the 3 mg/kg recommendation set by the Algae Technology & Innovation Centre  in France in their 2024 update .   Ever since the first Sargassum bloom  in the Atlantic occurred in 2011—following prevailing wind, ocean currents, and nutrient conditions in 2009 to 2010—huge patches of it have been found from the coast of Africa to the Americas.   When overaccumulations occur—known as Sargassum inundation events —this can adversely impact coastal ecosystems, local tourism, and public health.   Challenges in Handling Sargassum Sargassum can be left on beaches, the Cayman Islands’ Department of Environment  (DOE) notes. The algae, which can occur in small amounts too, “will eventually get washed away or buried in the next storm, with rain easing the smell,” the agency says. “Leaving Sargassum on the beach has proven to be the simplest and lowest cost approach, also helping to nourish the beach and stabilize the shoreline.”   But if the Sargassum has got to go, it should be collected and removed when it is fresh, free-floating, and before it piles up and starts to rapidly deteriorate, environmental experts say.   Removal is not an easy task, though.   The US Environmental Protection Agency , for example, recommends manual or mechanical removal that minimizes sand displacement and doesn’t use chemicals. The Cayman Islands’ DOE  adds that extreme care should be taken to prevent destruction of beach vegetation, turtle nests, and bird nesting habitat. Beaches should be “naturally clean” but not “over-sanitized,” it says.   The Cayman Islands’ Department of Environment adds that [when removing sargassum,] extreme care should be taken to prevent destruction of beach vegetation, turtle nests, and bird nesting habitat. Mechanical and manual removal of sargassum on a beach in Caye Caulker, Belize.  © iStock /Nick Young Unfortunately, using heavy machinery to remove Sargassum mats can negatively impact beach habitats by compacting sand and killing organisms that live there, such as ghost crabs  that keep a beach healthy by aerating the sand. Heavy machinery can also crush potential sea turtle nests.   Converting Sargassum into Useful Products A 2020 report  by the University of the West Indies, funded by the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, reviews potential uses and associated challenges of converting Sargassum into commercial products. These include agriculture (such as for animal feed and compost), bioenergy (for bioethanol and biogas), bioplastics, clothing and footwear, construction (bricks), cosmetics, and paper products.   [Sargassum has potential] uses in agriculture …, bioenergy …, bioplastics, clothing and footwear, construction (bricks), cosmetics, and paper products.   For instance, Omar Vázquez Sánchez , who started off with a sargassum cleanup business in 2015 upon his return to Mexico, eventually had a vision that inspired him to construct the “Sargablock”—brick made from 40% sargassum and 60% other organic materials. Equipped with a machine that could make 1,000 Sargablocks per day, Sánchez’s work was part of the UNDP’s Support for Strategic Initiatives to build homes with Sargablocks for those in need.   “The first thing I did was to put myself in other people’s shoes since I was in a similar situation,” Sánchez said . “The irony of life is growing up without a house of your own and now having the opportunity to donate them to people.” Omar Vázquez Sánchez giving his story on making the Sargablock to build homes for those in need.  YouTube Video  by UNDP Accelerator Labs Florida-based company Algas Organics has developed what they call a non-wood kraft pulp  from banana stems, pineapple leaves, and seaweed for application as pulp, textile fiber, and packaging material.   <>   According to company founder Johanan Dujon in an interview last year , “We developed a patented fermentation process to remove heavy metals from the [Sargassum] seaweed, which is a significant barrier for many potential uses.”  If the pilot trial proves successful, this process could be adopted by Miami-Dade County. “The most exciting application is in the paper and pulp industry. If our material can help reduce deforestation, that would have a significant impact,” he said.   In Mexico, researchers at Tec de Monterrey  are developing methods to transform the overabundant mats of Sargassum into an oil that can be used as an additive in synthetic lubricants commonly used in car engines and industrial machinery. The researchers tested a formula that had 10% Sargassum oil and 90% conventional lubricant, which resulted in a 26% higher viscosity index and “improved metal part protection in engines by up to 10%” compared to pure PAO6 , a common lubricant.   However, not all projects are bearing fruit. In 2019, a company called Renovare developed an eco-friendly shoe using five PET bottles for the shoe’s upper part and 100 grams of Sargassum for the shoe’s sole, according to Mexico News Daily . They had sales of about 20,000 pairs  per month. While a patent was filed in 2020  and assigned to Renovare USA LLC in 2024, the company’s website and social media are no longer active as of late 2024.   Prospects of Sargassum While new research and innovations with Sargassum are ongoing, there is hope that it can be used to make alternatives to fossil fuel–based products.   Whether it be through Carbonwave’s  efforts to make Sargassum-based fertilizers and cosmetic emulsifiers; Seafields’  efforts to grow and produce Sargassum to make bioplastics, fertilizers, and emulsifiers; or Seaweed Green’s  Sargassum-based soil enhancer, there appears to be great potential for converting a beach-fouling nuisance into sustainable products. *Kate Pugnoli  is an Arizona-based freelance journalist and former educator who works with nonprofit organizations. Her area of interest is in addressing environmental issues impacting marine biodiversity and conservation.

How Reprocessing Spent Fuel Can Unlock More Clean Energy, Cut Radioactive Waste, and Protect Natural Lands By Rick Laezman* A view of the La Hague reprocessing facility in France. The plant reprocesses nearly half of the world’s nuclear waste produced by conventional reactors. © Wikimedia , Truizguiladh Reprocessing  spent nuclear fuel can wring carbon-free electricity from uranium and its fissile byproducts —and drastically shrink the volume and toxicity of radioactive waste, and sharply reduce the need for uranium mining that scars natural landscapes. This isn’t futuristic theory—it’s a proven technology now used in France, India, Japan, Russia, and other nations , but not yet in the United States. Nuclear energy already generates  19% of US electricity without emitting carbon dioxide or soot particles. While uranium fuel is finite, like oil and coal, it produces no greenhouse gases during operation, putting it in the same emissions-free category as wind and solar. The challenge is that America’s nuclear plants run  on what’s called a once-through  or open fuel cycle: They burn a small fraction of their fuel, and then the plant operators store the rest indefinitely. More than 90% of the fissile material in “spent” fuel rods could still be used  to generate power. “Recycling waste nuclear fuel could produce “hundreds of years of energy from the uranium that we have already mined” from the earth. According to the US Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) Argonne National Laboratory , recycling waste nuclear fuel could produce  “hundreds of years of energy from the uranium that we have already mined” from the earth. The DOE’s Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) compares  the current US practice to filling a car with 10 gallons of gas, driving far enough to burn half a gallon, then throwing away the rest—over and over again. Reprocessing changes that equation: It recovers usable uranium and plutonium from spent fuel, turns it into new reactor fuel, and repeats the process multiple times in a closed  fuel cycle. The reason  US power plants have been throwing away “spent” nuclear fuel rods is because as uranium-235 fuel atoms split, they produce a variety of radioactive fission byproducts that absorb neutrons and poison the chain reaction, making the fuel less efficient over time. Eventually, the reactor can’t sustain power output without replacing the fuel. Considering the world’s dueling challenges of eliminating carbon emissions and expanding electricity generation, says Amanda Lines , a PNNL chemist, “perhaps these challenges have the same solution—recycling spent nuclear fuel to make new fuel.” The Rössing open-pit uranium mine in Namibia. Wikimedia Recycling Nuclear Waste Besides multiplying the energy yield from each ton of uranium, reprocessing reduces  the total radioactive waste volume by 80% and its long-term radioactivity by 90%. That slashes the time and cost of managing  spent fuel, which now must be cooled in pools, encased in heavy concrete casks, and guarded for thousands of years. It also lessens demand for fresh uranium, avoiding the environmental degradation  associated with mining and milling  operations in countries where significant uranium ore deposits are found, such as Australia, Kazakhstan, Canada, Russia, Namibia, and the United States. The main commercial method in use today is the plutonium-uranium extraction process (PUREX), which produces a blended “mixed-oxide” fuel (MOX). This so-called aqueous method   utilizes liquid solutions in several steps to separate reusable uranium and plutonium from spent fuel. Other emerging methods, such as pyroprocessing , use very-high-temperature molten salts and electricity to separate reusable metals without the large liquid waste streams of aqueous techniques. The benefits are clear, but only two countries  currently reprocess at a large scale. France is the leader: Its La Hague facility in Normandy, operated by the Orano Group conglomerate, has reprocessed  over 40,000 tons of spent fuel since 1976, supplying roughly 17% of the country’s electricity from recycled material. France’s nuclear fleet provides  about 61% of national power, so recycling plays an outsized role. The plant also handles fuel for other nations, returning reprocessed batches to Germany, Japan, Switzerland, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Italy. Russia, by contrast, reprocesses  about 100 metric tons a year at its Mayak facility in the Ural Mountains—just a fraction of its total spent fuel—but has plans to expand. Japan, China, India, and the United Kingdom have also pursued reprocessing programs, with varying degrees of success and continuity. US Lags in Reprocessing Waste The United States took a different path . In the early nuclear era, reprocessing was developed under the Manhattan Project to produce plutonium for thermonuclear weapons, and later eyed for extending commercial fuel supplies when uranium seemed scarce. But private-sector reprocessing efforts collapsed under high costs, technical difficulties, and tight regulation. In 1976, President Gerald Ford halted  the commercial push, citing nuclear weapons proliferation risks, and subsequent presidents maintained that stance. Proliferation in the context of nuclear energy means the spread to non-nuclear-weapons nations of plutonium, a metal that is recovered and concentrated by the PUREX process. The policy began to thaw in 2006 with the DOE’s Global Nuclear Energy Partnership , which called for international collaboration on waste recycling. More recently, under the Biden administration, DOE’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) launched programs such as ONWARDS  and CURIE  (named for radium discoverer Marie Curie) to fund development of proliferation-resistant reprocessing technologies. An example of a molten-salt reactor scheme. Note the human figure toward the top left for size comparison. © US Department of Energy Nuclear Energy Research Advisory Committee New-Generation Reactors to the Rescue Still, the US has no commercial-scale reprocessing plants, and its current fleet of light-water reactors is not optimized for MOX or other recycled fuels. Retrofitting them would be prohibitively expensive. The more promising fit is the new generation  of “fast” and advanced reactors—such as sodium-cooled fast reactors, very-high-temperature reactors, and molten-salt reactors—which can efficiently run on “spent” fuel and even consume some long-lived waste byproducts in the process.   Fast reactors  use “fast neutrons” (not slowed by a moderator like water), which allows them to fission a broader range of isotopes, including plutonium and minor radioactive elements found in spent fuel; recycle fuel in a closed fuel cycle, dramatically reducing the volume and toxicity of nuclear waste; and breed new fuel from uranium-238, extending fuel supplies for centuries. Fast reactors use “fast neutrons” (not slowed by a moderator like water), which allows them to fission a broader range of isotopes. Fast reactors, for example, use  liquid sodium—instead of water—to cool the reactor core. This enables higher efficiency and the ability to “burn” waste actinides, which are the byproduct elements that poison the fission chain reaction. Since fast reactors burn  the plutonium produced by conventional power plants, they make proliferation issues moot. Very-high-temperature reactors  use graphite to moderate reactions and helium gas for cooling, also tolerating the use of recycled fuels. Molten-salt reactors  mix nuclear fuel into a hot salt coolant, achieving high burn-up rates and inherent safety advantages. None are yet operating commercially in the United States, though multiple projects are in the pipeline, with the first expected around 2030. The reactor core of Russia’s BN-800 fast-neutron reactor. Wikimedia , Rosatom. Empresa Estatal de Energía Atómica Rusa Other countries have been quicker to deploy such designs. According to the World Nuclear Association , advanced Generation III  reactors were first introduced in Japan in 1996. Russia’s BN-600  sodium-cooled fast breeder reactor has run since 1980; its successor BN-800 came online in 2016, with a BN-1200 planned for 2027. Generation III facilities, which are far safer and more economical than previous types, rely on automatic physical processes to shut down in emergencies rather than the sometimes-unreliable operator response. China launched the world’s first Generation IV very-high-temperature reactor at Shidao Bay in 2021. Generation IV  reactors are almost entirely in the design and planning stages right now, though China launched  the world’s first Generation IV very-high-temperature reactor at Shidao Bay in 2021. Both Russia and China are also exploring floating nuclear plants, which have many advantages . They are prefabricated in modules in a factory, rather than on-site, and shipped to the location, which can save time and money compared with traditional reactors. They also can deliver clean power to remote areas where it is impractical and costly to import other fuels. Floating reactors can service populations and industrial operations—like mining—in coastal and isolated locations. The US reprocessing gap has left it dependent on once-through fuel cycles, long-term waste storage, and fresh uranium mining. Advocates like Ed McGinnis, CEO of the start-up Curio  (recipient of a $5 million CURIE grant), argue  that it is imperative to close the fuel cycle. “To unlock the full potential of nuclear energy,” McGinnis says, “it is essential that we address the challenges of the back end of the nuclear fuel cycle by recycling the spent nuclear fuel.” Playing Catch-up Despite their potential, no advanced nuclear reactors have been deployed commercially in the US. Many projects are under development, and the federal government has taken steps to support the growth of this technology. In May 2025, President Trump signed an executive order  intended to ensure the “rapid deployment” of this technology. However, according to the Nuclear Energy Institute , an advocacy group for the commercial nuclear industry, the first advanced nuclear plants in North America are not expected to begin operations before 2030. For the United States, adopting reprocessing at scale could mean: more energy from uranium already mined—potentially hundreds of years’ worth less waste to guard and store for millennia less land destroyed by new uranium mining a stronger, cleaner, more secure domestic energy supply. In summary, nuclear power is regaining momentum as countries around the world confront the urgency of climate change and the limitations of wind and solar alone in meeting stable electricity demand. Recycling nuclear waste is not a silver bullet, but it can make the technology far more resource-efficient, climate-friendly, and environmentally responsible. With supportive policies, targeted investment, and public acceptance, nuclear fuel reprocessing could transform a costly waste liability into a strategic clean-energy asset—helping to power the transition away from fossil fuels without sacrificing reliability or the landscape. *Rick Laezman is a freelance writer in Los Angeles, California, US. He has a passion for energy efficiency and innovation. He has been covering renewable power and other related subjects for more than 10 years.

By Kate Pugnoli* Two cruise ships at a port.  Photo: Pixabay  (Free for use) Whether on a honeymoon or family get-together, a cruise can be an idyllic way to spend a few days, a week, or longer enjoying a variety of cuisines, entertainment, informative lectures, and activities for young and old. While in port, one can enjoy excursions featuring picturesque sites, local culture, nature tours and unique shops.   Globally, there are now 350 cruise ships  in operation, 70% of which are small or mid-sized, according to the Cruise Lines International Association (CLIA).   The trade group has announced that its member cruise lines will pursue net-zero emissions by 2050 , but there still are environmental concerns involving both air and water that need to be addressed.   Cruise Ships—Lucrative and Popular According to the 2024 State of the Cruising Report published by the CLIA, there were 31.7 million passengers globally in 2023, up 6.8% from 29.7 million in 2019. Just over half (16.9 million) were from the United States. COVID-19 impacted cruising resulting in fewer sailings, but the post-pandemic number of passengers is projected to increase to 39.7 million in 2027.   According to the report, 12% of cruise travelers cruise twice a year, 10% of cruise travelers take three to five cruises a year, 82% of those who have cruised will cruise again, and 71% of international travelers are considering taking their first cruise.   Amid their popularity, cruise ships create a spectrum of impacts to the environment including emissions, water pollution, and potential damage to environmentally sensitive marine areas. These negative impacts are not limited to the ocean, air, and marine life, but affect residents and local businesses in ports.   Carbon and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Climate TRACE , a nonprofit coalition of organizations that monitors worldwide greenhouse gas emissions, stated that  carbon dioxide emissions from cruise ships plummeted in March 2020—due to COVID-19 travel restrictions—but then rebounded to about 30% below pre-pandemic levels. By December 2022, however, these emissions reached new heights at “almost 6% higher than pre-pandemic levels.”   Carbon dioxide emissions from cruise ships plummeted in March 2020—due to COVID-19 travel restrictions—but then rebounded to about 30% below pre-pandemic levels. By December 2022, however, these emissions reached new heights at “almost 6% higher than pre-pandemic levels.”   European regulations require cruise ships that stop in Europe to report carbon dioxide emissions through the European Maritime Safety Agency’s (EMSA’s) THETIS MRV (The Hybrid European Targeting and Inspection System Monitoring, Reporting and Verification). According to data from EMSA’s THETIS MRV , for example, MSC Cruises’ ships had emissions ranging from 189 grams of CO2 per passenger per nautical mile (g CO2 / pax-n miles) for its Euribia line to 500.8 g CO2 / pax-n miles for its Orchestra line. Emissions in this regard were generally higher for Norwegian Cruise Line Holding’s ships’ emissions, ranging from 364.9 g CO2 / pax-n miles (Norwegian Breakaway) to 644.5 g CO2 / pax-n miles (Norwegian Sun).      Data from four cruise lines are provided below from their respective most recent environmental reports for 2023.    Royal Caribbean Group ( 2023 report ) MSC Cruises ( 2023 report ) Carnival Corporation ( 2023 report ) Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd ( 2023 report ) Passengers 7,646,203 4,089,573 (guests) 12.5 million 2,716,546 Total GHG Emissions 11.38 MT CO2e 2.64 MT CO2 17.21 MT CO2e 5.81 MT CO2e Scope 1 5.37 MT CO2e 2.64 MT CO2 9.61 MT CO2e 3.16 MT CO2e Scope 2 10,219 metric tons CO2e 370 metric tons CO2e 38,000 metric tons CO2e 5,675 metric tons CO2e Scope 3 5.99 MT CO2e - 7.56 MT CO2e 2.65 MT CO2e Sulfur oxides (SOx) 275,717 metric tons 2,373 metric tons 7,000 metric tons - Nitrogen oxides (NOx) 73,271 metric tons 38,597 metric tons 165,000 metric tons - Particulate Matter 8,014 metric tons - 6,000 metric tons - Discharged Water 13.33 MT 6.23 MT 23.69 MT - Treated discharged water 10.47 MT (79%) 3.71 MT (60%) - - Untreated discharged water 2.86 MT (21%) 72,869 metric tons (1%) - - Table 1 . Emissions and pollutants based on cruise lines’ environmental reports. MT = million tons; CO2e = carbon dioxide-equivalent. Note that MSC Cruises’ greenhouse gas emissions do not include Scope 3 emissions.   Sulfur and Ship Scrubbers Emissions from a cruise ship at a port in Malaysia. © Flickr /Jason Thien ( CC BY 2.0 ) Sulfur emissions are also a concern, so the International Maritime Organization set the sulfur limit to 0.5% mass to mass ratio  for ship fuel in 2020 and reduced it to 0.1% in the Mediterranean as of May 2025. To work around using low-sulfur fuel, ships use “ scrubbers ” on their smokestacks that “scrub” some of the sulfur out of the exhaust air with seawater instead. Unfortunately, the product of this process (washwater) is often discharged into the ocean (in an open loop system) without prior treatment. In contrast, in a closed-loop system, washwater is collected on board, treated, and disposed of in the next port. There are also hybrid systems with open- and closed-loop system modes. However, according to the International Council on Clean Transportation (ICCT), about 80% of all ships in 2020 had open-loop systems, while 17% had hybrid systems, and less than 2% had closed-loop systems.   In a 2024 report  by Pacific Environment , a nonprofit that provides funding and technical skills to environmental grassroots movements, scrubbers and their environmental impacts were explained through a review of various studies. Scrubber washwater is acidic (from sulfuric acid) and contains heavy metals, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), suspended particulate matter, and nitrates. For example, scrubber discharge has led to higher mortality rates for copepods and microplanktonic species, and accumulation of carcinogenic PAHs in residential killer whales .                    Sewage and Wastewater Cruise ships  have other waste streams, including bilge water (containing oil, grease, and other contaminants), sewage, greywater (from showers, sinks, laundries, and kitchens), ballast water (used to stabilize ships), and solid waste. Ballast water can carry invasive species , such as the Asian kelp, cholera, and European green crab, that can disrupt ecosystems, but it has to be treated based on the Ballast Water Management Convention enforced since 2017 . Ballast water can carry invasive species, such as the Asian kelp, cholera, and European green crab, that can disrupt ecosystems, but it has to be treated based on the Ballast Water Management Convention enforced from 2017. A ship discharging ballast water from its anchor’s hub.  © iStock /MagioreStock Although ships are required to treat sewage on board, the International Maritime Organization  (IMO) states treated sewage can be discharged at a distance more than 3 nautical miles from shore. This extends to 12 nautical miles for raw sewage. In the US, however, treated sewage can be discharged within 3 miles , excluding no-discharge zones and freshwater sources. Threats to Marine Life and Coral Reefs A humpback whale struck by a ship. Photo : NOAA  (Public Domain) Ships also generate noise that can disrupt marine life , such as in the Arctic. According to the Port of Vancouver , most underwater noise comes from ships’ propellers, and this noise can negatively affect marine animals’ ability to find prey, mate and reproduce, and navigate. The IMO also has guidelines to reduce underwater noise  for ships. There is also the threat of physical injury to whales, dolphins, and sea turtles due to collisions with large vessels. Cruise ships can also cause significant damage to coral reefs because of the size of the vessels and weight of the chain and anchors needed to hold them. In 2020, for example, cruise ships stopping in Barbados  caused “thousands of square meters of structural damage to the island’s valuable coral reefs.” In Cozumel , cruise ships have contributed to coral damage through their propellers stirring up sediment, which settles on the coral and effectively blocks their photosynthesis and starves them to death. Ballast water also introduced stony coral tissue loss disease  to Cozumel’s coral in 2018, resulting in the death of over 60% of its coral. In Cozumel, cruise ships have contributed to coral damage through their propellers stirring up sediment, which settles on the coral and effectively blocks their photosynthesis and starves them to death. Corals in Cozumel, Mexico.  © Flickr /Amanda ( CC BY 2.0 ) Alternatives and Flying With a heightened environmental awareness among potential cruisers, cruise lines are being challenged to improve their practices. Greener alternatives for travel may include smaller cruise ships with sustainable practices. For example, Hurtigruten is in the research and development stage of its “Sea Zero”  project, a proposed “zero-emission propulsion” ship with a potential 60 megawatt-hour battery bank and retractable wind and solar sails. As a smaller ship with a capacity for 500 passengers , the company hopes it can begin sailing in 2030. However, battery and charging capacities at destinations is a concern, as “for ships that sail to the Galápagos, or the Arctic, batteries would be too heavy,” said Sönke Diesener, of Germany-based NGO the Nature And Biodiversity Conservation Union, to The Guardian . Friends of the Earth , an international federation of autonomous environmental advocacy organizations, also has a Cruise Report Card  that graded 243 cruise ships from 21 major cruise lines based on their sewage treatment, air pollution reduction, water quality or scrubber use, and transparency. Hurtigruten ranked highest overall for 2024.  Alternatively, travelers can directly fly to desirable destinations and take part in local hotels, restaurants, museums, shops, and activities. The ICCT stated in a blog  that CO2 emissions from flying are generally lower than that of cruise ships, at about 10 g CO2/pax-km to 130 g CO2/pax-km versus 250 g CO2/pax-km for cruise ships, although calculations would change if other pollutants were taken into account. *Kate Pugnoli is an Arizona-based freelance journalist and former educator who works with nonprofit organizations. Her area of interest is in addressing environmental issues impacting marine biodiversity and conservation.

How Airborne and Space-Based Imaging Technologies Inform Conservation, Climate Mitigation By Natasha Spencer-Jolliffe* NASA’s ECOSTRESS imaging technology as seen from the ISS. © Wikimedia /NASA Space-based and other remote imaging technologies are a powerful, out-of-this-world tool in the fight to protect Earth’s ecosystems. Thanks to the latest developments in remote imaging, distance from an object on the planet’s surface is no longer a hindrance to monitoring its status.   Airborne thermal imaging is a type of remote sensing used to monitor various types of environments—from forests to cities to oceans—to record and understand the thermal properties of both objects and surfaces. The data collected gives scientists and policymakers more pieces to the puzzle of climate change and better insights into ecosystem health.   The rise of this application is no accident. Pressing ecological challenges such as the acceleration of climate change, the destruction of natural landscapes, and the growth of densely populated urban environments, have been the drivers of thermal imaging advancements.   A New Way of ‘Seeing’  Remote sensing enables users to “see” in a way that human eyes cannot and to extract and understand information that would otherwise be hidden. “This allows us to work in completely new ways and to better understand the systems around us,” Tereza Pohankova, PhD candidate, Department of Geoinformatics at Palacky University in Olomouc, Czech Republic, told The Earth & I .   Infrared and thermal images, acquired from both airborne and hand-held devices, are the most prominent remote sensing tools used today for environmental monitoring. Infrared light (heat) is detected by sensors mounted on a satellite or an unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV), allowing scientists to monitor surface temperatures of city streets, for instance, or a body of water. Thermal infrared image of a forest, meadow, and pond. ©rdonar/ i Stock   How Thermal Imagery Works Thermal imagery is based on the premise that all objects with a temperature above absolute zero (-273.15 °C) emit radiation. The specific wavelength and amount of radiation depend on the object’s temperature. Researchers can detect a broad spectrum of radiation, including visible and infrared.   Thermal imagery is based on the premise that all objects with a temperature above absolute zero (-273.15 °C) emit radiation.   Thermal imaging typically requires calibration and atmospheric correction to remove atmospheric influence. Using this method enables researchers to compare images. After the calibration and correction, lighter (brighter) and darker spots are visible. Light spots indicate areas with a higher amount of emitted radiation, indicating warmer regions, while darker areas show cooler ones.   How Thermal Imagery Is Being Applied One way scientists are using thermal imagery is to identify the presence of wildfires, particularly early-stage fires that humans have yet to detect. In   June 2024 , using thermal imagery, researchers examined the lifecycle of wildfires, from evaluating pre-fire fuel conditions to understanding active fire locations and emissions, and assessing after-fire effects on air quality, vegetation, and the broader climate. Infrared images of 2025 Alabama wildfires taken by NASA’s AVIRIS-3. The images were taken of three different wavelengths visible to the human eye. © NASA /JPL-Caltech, NASA Earth Observatory Researchers are also applying drone-based thermal imaging to identify wildlife carcasses, which can spread diseases to human and domestic animal populations. For instance, in Africa, people routinely search for wild boar carcasses because if they are infected with African swine fever, even their dead bodies can spread the disease. In a 2023 research study , scientists showed how and why a drone-based thermal camera could successfully locate 42 of these carcasses, plus analyze their state of decomposition and assist with ground searches to collect them.   Depending on thermal images’ pixel size, they can reveal to researchers the precise locations where temperatures are higher. Due to long-running space satellite missions, such as Sentinel by the European Space Agency or Landsat by NASA and the United States Geological Survey (USGS), scientists can create temporal maps and comparisons. Local decision-makers can then utilize these insights to adapt their strategies and adjust for thermal comfort.    The AVUELO Project NASA’s AVUELO (Airborne Validation Unified Experiment: Land to Ocean) project , a collaboration with the Smithsonian Tropical Research Institute ( STRI ) and the Costa Rican Fisheries Federation, along with universities and institutes in the US and Panama, is undertaking groundbreaking work in airborne thermal imaging. AVUELO’s goal is to “calibrate a new class of space-borne imagers for tropical vegetation and oceans research.” According to STRI , this is achieved by combining data collected via fieldwork with “airborne imaging spectroscopy” collected aboard a small airplane for sites in Panama and Costa Rica.   AVUELO’s goal is to “calibrate a new class of space-borne imagers for tropical vegetation and oceans research.”   With a specific focus on rainforests in Panama and Costa Rica, the project aims to use data to help researchers understand how “ thousands of tree species and marine organisms create unique ecosystems .” Other goals are to understand the effects of habitat fragmentation, species interactions, and biodiversity threats, particularly in the context of nocturnal species and their conservation.   On February 6, 2025,   the AVUELO team initiated its first tropical survey,  which involved scientists collecting and measuring leaves from a 50-mile core study site within the rainforest. Additional ground crews analyzed samples in the laboratory while an aircraft carrying NASA’s AVIRIS imager collected data from above. (Left to right:) Leaf sampling, lab analysis, NASA’s AVIRIS airborne imager. ©NASA The AVUELO project showcases the use of state-of-the-art technology to help overcome human limitations in studying and conserving large ecosystems. The difficulties involved in land-based research were evident as AVUELO researchers on the ground navigated dense rainforests, coastal mangroves, rivers, and lakes. Fortunately, despite cloudy skies, most of the collection sites were clear, allowing researchers to obtain relevant data.    The application of remote sensing technology can differ per ecosystem. For instance, maintaining data continuity is a challenge for infrared and thermal imagery during a rainy season in a rainforest, as no images will be available. That’s because infrared and thermal imagery are types of what is known as optical remote sensing. Unlike radar satellite remote sensing, optical remote sensing cannot see through clouds or fog, as infrared radiation is affected by clouds. “The main difference for the usage of thermal imagery is the presence of clouds,” Pohankova explained.      Climate Protection Linked to IT Progress Vast amounts of data are generated daily worldwide from imaging. In 2020, reports indicate that commercial satellite imaging companies were gathering 100-plus terabytes of data every day . “The potential for the amount of information we receive is basically infinite,” said Pohankova.   The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has helped accelerate the thermal imaging evaluation process. “Remote sensing is tightly connected to IT progress.”   The advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) has helped accelerate the thermal imaging evaluation process. “Remote sensing is tightly connected to IT progress,” Pohankova added.   With the development of AI, scientists can classify large amounts of images more efficiently, identifying surface types and progressing to the next research stage more quickly. The problem is that most of the data is not publicly available, as it is produced by commercial companies that require payment for sharing their data. “And it is, of course, not cheap to buy,” said Pohankova.   Researchers can, however, access satellite images, a universally accessible data source. From a single image, they can make multiple calculations, deducing information about the surface or atmosphere, thereby maximizing the applications associated with these images. Airborne thermal image of Zagreb, Croatia. ©ivansmusk/iStock Urban Applications of Thermal Imaging Remote sensing technology and the data it produces also support urban climate research. Urban applications of thermal imaging typically target   Urban Heat Islands (UHI) . The term refers to the warmer temperatures that urban environments often experience compared to surrounding rural areas.   UHIs are typically found in cities and areas with prolonged exposure to high temperatures, often due to the use of impervious (not allowing liquid to pass through) materials that absorb large amounts of heat, such as asphalt and concrete. Major metro areas like New York, London, and Delhi, with large populations and extensive transportation, are hotspots for UHIs.   Researchers use thermal imagery to measure the cooling effects of specific surfaces within UHIs, such as vegetation cover in parks, or urban forests and water bodies.    Use in Weapons Detection Airborne thermal imaging also has the potential to enhance the detection and destruction of contaminated, man-made weapons.   In a   2020 study  in the Journal of Conventional Weapons Destruction , researchers highlighted the challenges associated with sensing and detecting these weapons. New technologies targeting weapons detection will need to overcome challenging terrains, dense vegetation, and metal and plastic materials routinely encountered in what is called humanitarian mine action (HMA). Urban Case Study: Remote Sensing in the Czech Republic The European Space Agency has used images of European cities—including   the Czech Republic’s capital, Prague — captured aboard the International Space Station by NASA’s thermal infrared ECOSTRESS  technology, to better understand temperature extremes. Thermal imaging of building in the Czech Republic. ©rdnor/iStock   Researchers in 2019 reviewed a high-resolution thermal mosaic of Olomouc, Czech Republic, using low-altitude airborne remote sensing, and analyzed urban climate research data. In their paper, published in the European Journal of Remote Sensing , a 5°C (9 °F) temperature increase was found during the day at the city’s building canopy layer compared to its ground level. Researchers also concluded that natural materials heat at a lower rate than artificial ones. In her studies, Pohankova has focused on the evapotranspiration of vegetation connected to urban climates. Since 2019, when she began studying the topic for her master’s thesis, she noted a limited understanding of this technology within the Czech Republic. “Even today, detailed studies for the Czech Republic are scarce,” said Pohankova. “I wanted to show that this topic matters and should be addressed,” she added.   Pohankova has been involved in several academic projects that were delivered to various organizations in the Czech Republic, including the Ministry of the Environment and the town of Černovice.“ The outputs were used to enable better decision-making policy regarding water management,” Pohankova said. *Natasha Spencer-Jolliffe   is a freelance journalist and editor. Over the past 10 years, Natasha has reported for a host of publications, exploring the wider world and industries from environmental, scientific, business, legal, and sociological perspectives. Natasha has also been interviewed as an insight provider for research institutes and conferences. Source:   Interview with Tereza Pohankova, PhD candidate, Department of Geoinformatics, Palacky University in Olomouc, Czech Republic .