By Berkeley Law
5
77 ratings
The podcast currently has 179 episodes available.
What is carbon mineralization?
As defined by the U.S. Geological Survey, “carbon mineralization is the process by which carbon dioxide becomes a solid mineral, such as a carbonate…The biggest advantage of carbon mineralization is that the carbon cannot escape back to the atmosphere.” This generally occurs by injecting carbon dioxide underground into certain rock formations so the carbon dioxide takes on a solid form: trapped and unable to reach the atmosphere.
How does carbon mineralization work?
Two of the main methods in which carbon mineralization occurs are ex-situ carbon mineralization and in-situ carbon mineralization. With ex-situ carbon mineralization, carbon dioxide solids are transported to a site to react with fluids—like water—and gas. In-situ carbon mineralization is the opposite—fluids containing carbon dioxide are funneled through rock formations in which it solidifies. Both of these methods result in carbon dioxide trapped in a solidified form.
In a third method of carbon mineralization, surificial mineralization, carbon dioxide reacts with alkaline substances—such as mine tailings, smelter slags, or sedimentary formations—which result in the carbon dioxide taking on a solidified form. In the case of in-situ carbon mineralization or surificial mineralization, carbon dioxide can react with surface water rather than an artificial fluid, replicating natural processes of carbon mineralization.
Currently, the biggest drawbacks and barriers preventing carbon mineralization from taking hold as a major climate solution lie in cost and research uncertainties regarding environmental risks. In terms of cost, the price for carbon mineralization is high: 5 million dollars per well to inject carbon dioxide into rock formations. Further, the risks for groundwater and its susceptibility to contamination through this method is unknown, and the potential side effects of contaminating water formations could be devastating for ecological communities which thrive off of these water systems.
Who is our guest?
Dr. Rob Jackson is a professor and senior research fellow at Stanford University, and author of Into the Clear Blue Sky, a novel on climate solutions. His lab focuses on using scientific knowledge to shape climate policies and reduce the environmental footprint of human activities. Currently, he chairs the Global Carbon Project, an effort to measure and control greenhouse gas emissions.
Resources
For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/carbon-capture-mineralization-with-dr-rob-jackson/
Methane in the Atmosphere: A Serious Risk
Many of the solutions we often hear about when it comes to reducing greenhouse gas emissions revolve around reducing carbon emissions, as carbon dioxide (CO2) is the primary greenhouse gas emitted by human activities. Methane, however, is the second most common greenhouse gas, emitted through agricultural practices, landfill waste, coal mining, and oil and gas operations. While methane generally receives less attention than carbon dioxide when it comes to climate solutions, recent studies have shown that it is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide. According to the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, methane has a global warming potential 28-34 times higher than CO2 upon emission, which increases to 84-86 times over a 20-year period.
How does methane enter our skies?
The concentration of methane in the atmosphere has more than doubled over the past century. Both everyday infrastructure in older cities and major leaks at oil and gas fields add to the quantity of methane into the atmosphere. As for the source of these leaks, they are largely caused by equipment failures or faulty pipes and vessels. 2,595 gas incidents have been reported in the US from 2010 to 2021, adding up to 26.6 billion cubic feet of methane gas emitted. Methane impacts both the climate system and public health; breathing methane can cause damaged airways, lung diseases, asthma attacks, increased rates of preterm birth, cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, and heightened stroke risk.
What can we do?
Mining operations can be improved to reduce methane leaks and oil and gas operations can greatly reduce emissions throughout the system. As our tools of measurement and technology improve, the world has realized the greater need to attack methane emissions, which led to the Global Methane Pledge in 2021. In this pledge, 158 countries and the EU pledged to make a distinct effort to reduce global methane emissions by at least 30 percent from 2020 levels by 2030.
Part of reducing methane emissions involves switching from fossil fuels to electricity generated from renewable sources. According to Environmental specialist and Stanford professor Dr. Rob Jackson, our skies will become cleaner once we switch to cleaner, electrical energy sources, including electric heat pumps to cool and heat our homes, electric water heaters, and especially electric stoves. According to the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, methane emissions from gas stoves in America—when scaled to the 20-year global warming potential of the gas—were “comparable to the carbon dioxide emissions of approximately 500,000 gas-powered cars.” Health-wise, a study conducted by Stanford’s Doerr School of Sustainability and PSE Healthy Energy found that “children who live in homes with gas stoves had a 24% higher risk of lifetime asthma and a 42% increased risk of having asthma currently.” Dr. Jackson says that making the switch to induction stoves is not only energetically cleaner and prevents the likelihood of gas leaks, but it also prevents us from being exposed to toxic pollutants such as nitrogen oxides and benzene gasses that come from gas stoves.
Some potential drawbacks: the cost of electricity
While induction stoves and a cleaner, electrical society sounds optimal, there are some challenges and barriers to making this a reality. First of all, not every person can afford to implement an induction stove and replace their functioning gas stove, as home renovations, rewirings, and big purchases such as a new stove cost a great deal of money. In this way, income inequality plays a major role in the way climate change impacts different people in society. Dr. Jackson uses the example of a person living in a lower-income community; surrounded by older, poorly-maintained appliances, people in these types of homes often breathe dirtier air indoors than outdoors. This is why Dr. Jackson proposes that the shift to clean energy be gradual; fueled by regulations and government support. Without social support, equal access to cleaner energy cannot be achieved.
In terms of major gas leaks, change is hard to make as an individual. According to the Environmental Defense Fund, the best thing we can do is to fight for national policy to repair and prevent leaks wherever they occur: whether at mining facilities or under our sidewalks. This is a difficult task, as all individuals can do is push for political action, however agreements such as the Global Methane Pledge seem to be steps in the right direction.
Who is our guest?
Dr. Rob Jackson is a professor and senior research fellow at Stanford University, and author of Into the Clear Blue Sky, a novel on climate solutions. His lab focuses on using scientific knowledge to shape climate policies and reduce the environmental footprint of human activities. Currently, he chairs the Global Carbon Project, an effort to measure and control greenhouse gas emissions.
ResourcesFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/identifying-and-fixing-natural-gas-leaks-in-cities-with-dr-rob-jackson/
Across the United States, climate change is increasing the frequency and intensity of heat waves. A heat wave is defined as a persistent period of high temperature days. Although unusually hot days are a natural part of day-to-day variations in weather, heat waves are becoming more common alongside the rapidly accelerating climate crisis. In major cities across the country, the number of heat waves has increased steadily, from two heat waves per year in the 1960s to six per year into the 2010s and 2020s. In the 1960s, the average heat wave was 2.0 degrees above the local 85th percentile threshold, while the average heat wave during the 2020s has been 2.5 degrees above the local threshold. Approximately 210 million Americans, or two thirds of the population, live in counties vulnerable to health threats from high temperatures. As temperatures increase, the number of heat-related illnesses, emergency room visits, and deaths simultaneously increase. As we head further into the 21st century, adaptive measures to protect human health from the effects of extreme heat waves will be necessary in the face of rising climate risk.
Protecting yourself during extreme heatOver the past three decades, heat waves have been the leading cause of weather-related fatalities across the nation. In addition to rising heat-related illnesses and deaths, extreme heat can also worsen health outcomes from chronic conditions such as cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, and acute kidney injury. Extreme temperatures compromise the body’s ability to regulate its internal temperature, resulting in illness, heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heatstroke, and hyperthermia. Individuals living in densely populated cities are extremely vulnerable to the urban heat island effect, which exacerbates high heat temperatures as man made surfaces absorb sunlight during the day and radiate the stored energy at night as heat. Children, the elderly, people experiencing homelessness, low-income communities and individuals with pre-existing health conditions are at the greatest risk to the adverse effects of extreme heat. As temperatures continue to rise, it is necessary that individuals take on adaptive measures to protect themselves from the health risks posed by extreme heat.
Action can be taken on both a policy and an individual level. Local governments can take steps to help residents reduce their vulnerability to heat through heat management plans and vulnerability assessments. For example, officials can create early warning systems and urban cooling centers for individuals to find refuge. On an individual scale, when you need to go outside, taking preventive measures such as sun protection, hats, and umbrellas is vital to stay cool. Trying to stay inside as much as possible and finding refuge from the heat will help one avoid the risks of heatstroke. More educational initiatives will be vital in informing individuals on risk factors, symptoms, and treatment steps to keep people safe and informed.
Benefits of protecting oneself during extreme heatDuring periods of extreme heat, it is important to take proper care of yourself in order to mitigate the health effects that result from high temperatures such as dehydration, heat stroke, exhaustion, and slowed cognitive function. Taking extreme heat seriously is vital, as the effects of extreme temperatures can be as serious as sudden events like heart attack or stroke. Prolonged periods of heat and humidity make your body work extra hard to maintain a normal temperature, so taking such precautions is necessary to protect yourself and your loved ones. As extreme heat-related weather events become more common, becoming accustomed to the ways you can keep yourself safe is imperative in a warming world.
More progress can be madeIf we fail to take adaptation measures on both an individual and policy level, we will be unprepared to respond to the impacts of extreme heat. As extreme heat rises in prevalence, more awareness on the ways to respond to increasingly high temperatures can help individuals adapt to such events. Currently, heat is already the weather phenomenon that kills the most people in the United States, so taking care of yourself, family, and neighbors during heat waves is essential to saving lives. For residents who do not have the resources or cooling systems in place to seek protection during a heat wave, the use of cooling centers in cities can provide short-term relief. Important to note, however, is that the increased use of cooling systems will heighten electricity costs due to increasing demand, thereby generating more greenhouse gas emissions from rising power generation. If leaks are to occur, concerns can also arise around the potential release of potent refrigerant gasses, which worsen climate change and damage the ozone layer. This creates a self-perpetuating cycle in that air conditioning is used to treat extreme temperatures, but effectively worsens the climate crisis in doing so. More innovative solutions will be necessary to curtail emissions while keeping individuals safe. Beyond individual actions during times of crisis, cities also need to help their residents respond to rising temperatures in the long-term by redesigning public spaces, planting trees to provide cooling, painting rooftops white to repel sunlight, and incorporating new cooling technologies in buildings and homes.
About our guestDr. David Sklar is an Assistant Dean at the Arizona State University School of Medicine and Advanced Medical Engineering, is a Professor at the ASU College of Health Solutions and works as an emergency physician. Former Editor in Chief of Academic Medicine, Dr. Sklar now works as a senior advisor in health policy and health professions education at ASU Health. Dr. Sklar works to increase awareness on mitigative steps individuals can take to decrease their health risks from extreme heat events.
ResourcesFor a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/staying-safe-in-extreme-heat-with-dr-david-sklar/
The United States consumes vast amounts of energy and spends enormous amounts of money every year to fuel our economy, business, and lifestyle. The US accounts for 4% of the world’s population, yet uses 16% of the world’s total energy. The production and consumption of energy are major drivers of global climate change, hazardous air pollution, habitat destruction, and acid rain. In 2022, US consumers spent $1.7 trillion on energy, amounting to around 6.7% of GDP. Annual energy costs were $5,159 per person in 2022, a 30% increase from 2021. In order to mitigate the large-scale impacts of excessive energy consumption, policymakers are calling for an urgent restructuring of the energy system through increasing efficiency. Energy efficiency is the use of less energy to perform the same task or result, often being achieved through more efficient heating and cooling systems, manufacturing facilities, and appliances and electronics. Simply, energy efficiency reduces the amount of energy required to provide products and services. Many lower-income households are burdened by rising electricity costs and increasing risks from extreme weather events but do not have the resources to fund energy-efficient systems in their homes. To address this disparity, new energy efficiency standards for affordable housing are being developed in order to lower costs and improve climate resilience for households unable to afford high energy prices.
Current Initiatives in the USThe Biden Administration has taken a lead in issuing new minimum energy standards for homes built with federal dollars in an attempt to save costs for renters and homeowners. The US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the USDA announced the adoption of the Minimum Energy Standards for new single and multi-family homes. The standards are expected to decrease cost expenditures for residents, reduce energy use and pollution, improve resident health, and increase resilience in extreme weather events. The adoption of such energy standards will incorporate cost-saving insulation, air sealing, and efficient windows, lighting, heating and cooling systems in HUD and USDA supported properties to decrease energy bills for families. It is projected that energy efficiency improvements of 37% will decrease energy costs by more than $950 a year for homeowners. Overall, minimum energy standards are projected to expand housing affordability, minimize health risks, and improve resilience of homes during extreme weather.
Advantages of energy efficiency standardsEnergy efficiency can increase affordability and reliability for homeowners by reducing total energy demand and peak electricity demand. Peak electricity demand is the highest demand for electricity at any one point in time, which utilities are required to have the capacity to meet. Peak demand is driven by patterns of energy use in the market, with most production occurring in the afternoons. Energy efficiency programs utilize a demand-side management (DSM) strategy to reduce energy demand specifically during these high-volume, peak hours. For homeowners, energy efficiency improvements are cost-effective as they can lower utility bills by reducing the amount of power needed. Further, energy efficiency can decrease our reliance on fossil fuels and enable the growth of renewable energy, thereby decreasing GHG emissions. Updated minimum energy standards are expected to reduce 6.35 million metric tons in carbon emissions over the next three decades, generating an annual cost savings of $13.9 million. Energy efficiency also spurs the creation of new jobs in research, production, installation, and sales. In 2022, more than 2.1 million Americans worked in energy efficiency, with this only growing as we transition to a greener economy. There are many social, economic, and environmental advantages that come alongside transitioning towards an energy-efficient economy,
Drawbacks in achieving energy efficiencyAlthough there are many advantages to achieving energy efficiency, there exists roadblocks in achieving the current goals being set. First, innovative technologies rely upon very specialized knowledge, requiring expert research in the field. As well, a large concern in the development of these technologies are the significant upfront costs, through initially high levels of investment in research and development. For projects that are just starting up, it can be difficult to secure funding, potentially leading businesses to solely focus on short-term goals. On the consumer side, there may be a lack of acceptance or awareness of these new technologies prohibiting their take up in the market. To achieve universal acceptance, technologies must attain the energy savings and functionality that consumers expect. Scaling up these technologies can be time-consuming and labor-intensive, requiring complex supply chain logistics, techniques, and manufacturing. Government policies, such as the new energy efficiency standards for lower-income households, will be vital in encouraging innovation and investment to accelerate this transition.
Who is our guest?Mark Kresowik, Senior Policy Director at the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy, is a strong advocate for centering marginalized communities in policies that work to improve energy efficiency. Mark works to shape local, state, utility, and federal-level policies across the country.
ResourcesFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/standardizing-energy-efficiency-with-mark-kresowik/.
As climate change intensifies, the heightened frequency of natural disaster weather-related events is quickly becoming the new reality. Whether it be prolonged wildfire seasons in Northern California or destructive hurricanes off the Florida coast, citizens across the country are beginning to bear the burden of a changing climate. For those of us yet to experience the full force of such events, our primary means of gathering information on natural disasters is through the media. Without the media’s coverage of extreme climatic events, it is difficult for people not directly impacted to be fully aware of the dangers of a changing climate. While climate change impacts more people every year, severe impacts still feel like an abstract, distant concern that may never affect them personally. In order to reframe this perception, climate storytelling, which includes steps for action and recovery, is becoming foundational towards building empathy in the wake of the climate crisis.
What is Climate Journalism?Climate journalism, the process of collecting and distributing accurate information on extreme weather events and climate change-related impacts, has been an essential element for informing the public about the effects of a changing climate. Following Al Gore’s 2006 documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, climate journalism increased by 1,000 percent in the media from the year 2000. This increase in viewership is most likely attributed to the rise of ethical concerns relating to the climate crisis as more people began to suffer the effects of natural disasters. The majority of Americans, approximately 54%, now identify climate change as a major threat to the country’s well-being. Media Matters found that news and morning shows such as ABC, CBS, NBC, and Fox spent a total of around 23 hours discussing climate change in their annual 2022 reporting. Unfortunately, climate coverage still only accounts for around 1% of corporate broadcasting, even though the climate crisis is rapidly worsening.
Keeping the Public Aware and PreparedClimate journalism not only raises awareness for the public, but can provide steps for change in combating one of the most pressing issues of our time. People need accurate information in order to make informed decisions. Strong, reliable reporting can provide citizens and policymakers the information needed to prepare for and adapt to the potential impacts climate change brings. Climate journalism can offer hope to the public, providing people with the voice and power to make a difference. By including climate change in the media, people can begin to see the incoming reality of this crisis, inspiring citizens to take action.
The Struggles of Climate CoverageUnfortunately, there remain many obstacles that hold back media organizations from prioritizing climate coverage. Climate-related disasters can be hard to access, difficult to watch, and politically polarizing. Media outlets may struggle to gain large viewership, deterring them from covering climate events. Further, the various approaches to climate journalism can create discrepancies in the type of media coverage disseminated. For example, should climate topics be covered locally or nationally? What solutions should climate journalism focus on? Such a broad scope may distract from the realities currently being faced. Unfortunately, media coverage of environmental issues still only occupies a very small proportion of total media. There remains a need for increased resources, strategies, and investment in climate and environmental journalism. Further, many major news outlets publish misleading promotional content for fossil fuel corporations, greatly impacting the opinions of viewers on such controversial issues. There are, of course, many examples of excellent climate change coverage. Our modest effort at Climate Break, as a small example, focusing on climate solutions and the wide variety of actions and initiatives being developed around the world, is designed to provide quick insights into climate solutions.
Who is Jonathan Vigliotti?Jonathan Vigliotti, CBS News correspondent, is just one example of the many climate journalists directly involved in the movement to inform the public on the effects of climate change. Vigliotti’s work as an environmental journalist has taken him to over forty countries and territories across six continents. Author of Before It’s Gone: Stories from the Front Lines of Climate Change in Small-Town America, provides personal insights into the everyday lives of Americans affected by climate change, presenting a compelling argument for the urgency of taking action now. Vigliotti believes that climate journalism has the power to spark change through the use of accurate, inspiring, and thought-provoking reporting.
Further Reading
For a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/using-climate-journalism-to-connect-weather-events-and-climate-with-jonathan-vigliotti/
Technology and high-tech solutions are not the only responses to climate change. Nature can also be a powerful form of climate resilience. Resilience hotspots are small pockets of nature that, when restored and maintained, act as barriers to climate impacts. For instance, wetlands can insulate shores from storm surges and trees can provide shade in urban heat islands. In this way, climate adaptation can go hand-in-hand with integrating nature into our cities.
The Science of Nature-Based SolutionsWhile many natural areas can have climate benefits, wetlands and urban green spaces are particularly significant ecosystems in terms of climate adaptation. How do these natural protections from climate change work in the first place?
Wetlands are areas where the soil is saturated with water either seasonally or year-round. They often provide crucial protection from the heavy rainfall and storms, which are becoming more frequent and severe due to climate change. Acting as a sort of sponge, wetlands have the ability to absorb and temporarily store the excess water from these events. When a storm hits, wetlands are a “speed bump” to floodwaters, slowing and holding back storm surge and flooding that otherwise causes damage to nearby cities and towns. According to NOAA, such protection by wetlands saves US coastal communities a whopping $23 billion a year. In many areas of the US, wetlands have been degraded by nearby urbanization or drained for development, leaving these areas more vulnerable to storm surge and flooding. As a result, restoring wetlands has become a priority as a strategy to increase climate resilience in these areas.
Urban green spaces protect against a different climate impact: extreme heat. Because urban surfaces tend to be densely covered in heat-absorbing materials like asphalt or concrete, cities absorb a greater proportion of heat from the sun’s rays. This, combined with greater concentrations of greenhouse gasses in cities, leads to a situation where cities can be up to 20 degrees Fahrenheit hotter than nearby green spaces, a phenomenon known as the urban heat island effect. With the temperature increases associated with climate change, the heat island effect poses great risks for heat-related illness and death. Urban green spaces break up the dense cover of manmade material with parks, green roofs, and shade-providing trees, creating natural areas that reflect sunlight, take up greenhouse gas emissions and provide aesthetic and mental health benefits.
How to Build Resilience HotspotsSo how can we implement these nature-based climate solutions into our cities? The resilience hotspots approach uses a patchwork of crucial sites integrated into towns and communities. By focusing on places with great potential to mitigate climate damage, this approach promotes the benefits of nature-based solutions while working with the existing urban infrastructure.
In the San Francisco Bay Area of California, for example, existing wetlands have the potential to store water and reduce storm surge during storm events if they are enhanced, thereby protecting a great number of low-lying urban places. Greenbelt Alliance has identified eighteen key areas across the Bay Area that have great natural potential to mitigate climate damages and are located in or near communities that will bear greater impacts from climate change. Working with community partners, they plan and implement restoration projects that enhance the ecosystem and increase resilience.
Equity also plays an important role in designing resilience hotspots. A process that involves community organizations in the restoration of their environment integrates local expertise and insights and can promote equitable outcomes. By combining science and equity, restoration, equity and resilience can operate collectively. Resilience hotspots can be a natural tool for mitigating climate damages and for advancing climate justice.
About our GuestSadie Wilson is the Director of Planning and Research at Greenbelt Alliance, where she manages resilience hotspots work and advocates for climate smart planning and policy. During her Masters in City and Regional Planning at UC Berkeley, she contributed to research at many Bay-Area focused institutions including the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission, The Center for Cities and Schools, and The Terner Center.
Further Reading
For a full transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/resilience-hotspots-natures-role-in-urban-climate-adaptation/
Induction-Range Stoves:
Gas stoves have recently been in the news as a source of harmful pollutants in the home and generators of greenhouse gas. The adoption of energy-efficient induction-range stovetops could offer a solution. Induction cooktops use electromagnetism to generate heat from directly within cookware, preventing the levels of energy loss seen in conventional gas or electric cooktops. The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission is not coming for anybody’s gas stove, despite a recent frenzy over concerns of bans on gas stovetops, so cooks around the country can pick the stove tops of their choosing. But as a handful of journalists have pointed out, the notion that gas stove tops are better for cooking than electric, really a matter of opinion, could have something to do with advertising investments by the American Gas Association. In fact, many chefs actually prefer induction cooktops to gas, and their environmental benefits are substantial.
Induction stoves contain an electromagnetic coil that generates a magnetic field when turned on. That magnetic field creates metallic resistance from compatible cookware, generating heat from within itself. Conversely, conventional gas and electric stoves transfer heat to pots and pans through a flame or electric coil. In that heat transfer, energy is lost. Induction has an energy efficiency of 85%. Electric stoves and gas stoves are 75-80% and 32% energy efficient, respectively, making gas the least energy efficient stove type. Across the United States, only about 32% of households use gas ranges, but in some states, like California, the number is closer to 70%. Energy Star estimates that a widespread shift to induction ranges would collectively save the United States over $125 million in energy costs and over 1000 GWh of energy.
Plug-in Induction-Range Stoves:
While Induction stoves are highly energy efficient, and can save consumers money on their energy bills, the upfront cost can be significant. According to Consumer Reports, a typical induction stove can range from roughly $1000 to $4000. Their installation can sometimes require upgrades to the home’s electrical wiring, which can add additional cost and complicates the process. Battery-powered induction-ranges like those in production by Channing Street Copper Company can be plugged in directly to standard electrical outlets. Plug-ins remove the complication of updating electrical panels or installing special high-voltage outlets, but they can be more expensive, costing consumers roughly $6000. However, a purchase of a standard induction or plug-in induction range may qualify consumers for rebates at federal and local levels.
Sam Calisch is an engineer and scientist working on decarbonization and electrification. He is the co-founder of Channing Street Copper, where he leads technology development.
For a transcript, please visit https://climatebreak.org/an-induction-range-no-rewiring-required/
Climate or “eco” anxiety refers to people feeling distressed about climate change and its impacts on our ecosystems, the environment, and human health and well-being. It is rooted in a deep existential dread concerning the future of the planet. Symptoms include feelings of grief, loss, anger, sadness, and guilt, which in turn can cause jitteriness, nervousness, increased heart rate, shallow breathing, difficulty concentrating, changes in appetite, or insomnia due to worry or concern about the effects of climate change.
According to Grist, Google searches for “climate anxiety” soared by 565 percent in 2021. And according to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, an all-time high of 70 percent of Americans express worry about climate change. In September 2021, the largest study of its kind found that the climate crisis was causing widespread psychological distress for young people between the ages of 16 and 25 across 42 countries from both the global North and South. Over 45 percent of teens and young adults said that climate anxiety was affecting their daily lives and ability to function; 56 percent said they thought that "humanity is doomed" and nearly 4 in 10 said that they were hesitant to have children because of climate change.
From Solastalgia to Soliphilia: how Native American Ecology can lead the wayThe steps people must take to address their climate anxiety depends on each individual, as people are affected by climate change in different ways. For example, some people have lost homes or even loved ones, while many others have witnessed these catastrophic events unfold on their phone screens.
Dr. Melinda Adams describes this trauma as “solastalgia,” originally coined by Australian philosopher Glen Albrecht to describe the distress caused by the destruction or loss of one’s home environment. This concept helps people to understand and express the “psychoterratic,” or the relationship between human mental health and the earth’s own well-being. Many have taken legal and political action to deal with their solastalgia. For example, last year Montana youths sued the state for its failure to recognize that approving fossil fuel projects was unconstitutional without further review of the impacts to the climate. Others have drastically altered their lifestyles, opting instead to practice underconsumption to limit their personal contributions to the changing climate.
Dr. Adams has another solution, reminding those who suffer that the definition of solastalgia also includes hope. Hope can lead us either into action or ecoparalysis. It is within this framework that Dr. Adams introduces Native American cultural burnings as a way to achieve soliphilia, “the political affiliation or solidarity needed between us all to be responsible for a place, bioregion, planet, and the unity of interrelated interests within it.’’
Cultural fires or “good fires,” which involve lighting low-intensity fires to heal the surrounding ecosystem, can exemplify this step. Not only do these fires restore degraded soils, decrease vegetation or fuel overgrowth, encourage re-vegetation and biodiversity, but they also deepen the spiritual ties people have to the land they inhabit. Fire therefore has a regenerative power, both spiritually and ecologically, as participants share stories and strengthen communal and spiritual bonds with one another during these ceremonial burnings. As a member of the N’dee San Carlos Apache Tribe, Dr. Adams takes Glen Albrecht’s theory of the “psychoterratic” and frames it as a relationship between siblings. Subsequently, as siblings, humans and the land must help each other survive. By treating the earth as a more-than-human sibling, and by practicing cultural burns, participants can begin to heal from their solastalgia.
Directly engaging with a regenerative process such as “good fires,” “grounds people’s intentions and allows for deeper connections—to place and among one another.” “[C]eremonial fires create opportunities for social, environmental, and cultural healing among young persons (Native and allied)” (Tom, Adams, & Goode at 3). Essentially, the strengthening of community through spiritually uplifting activities alleviates climate anxiety by showing young people that there are people out there who share their concern for the climate and are motivated to do something about it.
Who is our guest?Dr. Melinda Adams is a member of the N’dee San Carlos Apache Tribe and an Assistant Professor in the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science at the University of Kansas. A cultural fire practitioner and scholar, her research focuses on the revitalization of cultural fire with Tribes in California and more recently with Tribes in the Midwest. Her work with Indigenous communities combines environmental science, environmental policy, and Indigenous studies methodologies. Read more about Dr. Melinda Adams here.
ResourcesFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/how-native-american-ecology-can-tackle-climate-anxiety-with-dr-melinda-adams/.
North America is no stranger to wildfires. As of August 15, 2024, 29,917 fires this year have burned more than 5.2 million acres, according to the Center for Disaster Philanthropy. While this year’s number of wildfires is below the annual average of 35,691, the yearly acres burned is above the average of 3.8 million acres of the past 10 years.
While wildfires are a naturally occurring phenomenon, their frequency is heavily influenced by climate change, especially on the west coast of the United States. Wildfire risk increases depending on a number of factors, including temperature, soil moisture, and the presence of trees, shrubs, and other fuel. Additionally, climate change dries out organic matter or “fuel” in forests, resulting in a doubling of the number of large fires between 1984 and 2015 in the western United States. As climate change creates warmer and drier weather conditions, wildfires will likely become more frequent; studies show that an average annual warming of one degree celsius would increase the median burned area per year by as much as 600 percent in some types of forests.
Ultimately, as temperatures warm globally and drier conditions ravage the country, these fires will spread farther and become harder and harder to extinguish.
“Good” fire: an ancestral solution to our wildfire problemAs the planet warms, many have turned to ancient methods to mitigate the effects of climate change. Notably, Dr. Adams borrows the concept of “good” fires from Native American cultural fires practices, where low intensity fires are lit to heal the surrounding ecosystem. In order to positively change the public’s relationship with fire, fire agencies in California and Native American tribes have started using this term. Generally, “good” or cultural fires not only restore degraded soils and decrease vegetation or fuel overgrowth, but also deepen the spiritual ties people have to the land they inhabit. Specifically, good fire increases organic matter, keeps soil surfaces vegetated through the regrowth of plants, and encourages biodiversity.
In California, many ecosystems rely on fire for its regenerative powers. Dr. Adams notes that fire connects to water, soil health, and the health of animals and surrounding areas. It can also mitigate invasive species growth and eliminate harmful pests that are killing a lot of trees, making them more susceptible to catching fire and starting larger forest fires. As a result, fire promotes many benefits for ecosystem health.
Dr. Adams writes that as a member of the N’dee San Carlos Apache Tribe, she maintains a sacred attachment to the land, and believes that humans and the Earth are relatives. Subsequently, as siblings, humans and the land must help each other survive. Following these teachings around our relationship to more-than-human sibling and reciprocity, “good” fire participants can achieve “futurity” (intergenerational exchanges) that will safeguard future protection of the environment and human communities. Listening to these Native American Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) could lead the way to developing a more sustainable relationship to the planet and, in doing so, mitigate the effects of climate change.
Mother Earth: how climate matriarchy can save the planetThe concept of “good” fire stems from Indigenous Matriarchal Ecology. Many Native American tribes are matriarchal, such as the Cherokee and the Navajo. Applying traditionally “matriarchal” values such as care, tenderness, and love to environmental conservation could be an effective climate change solution. Inclusivity and the centering of Indigenous women’s knowledge can also allow opportunities to enhance plant and soil health, remediation, and rematriation of the quality of our plant and soilscapes to provide a prosperous support structure that enables ecosystems to thrive.
By practicing Indigenous Matriarchal Ecology, cultural fire participants can collectively start seeing the Earth as a Mother: one who gives life and receives it in return. This is why Dr. Adams and her colleagues focus on the role the soil can play in the fight against climate change through the practice of Matriarchal Ecology. Dr. Adams writes that applying a soil health approach to ecology in tandem with cultural fires can play an important role in climate mitigation by storing carbon and decreasing greenhouse gas emissions. By restoring degraded soils and adopting soil conservation practices, such as cultural fire and Indigenous Matriarchal Ecologies, “good” fire practitioners can enhance the Earth’s carbon sequestration capacity and build resilience to climate change. Furthermore, these soil improvements on formerly mined and degraded lands could make soilscapes more resilient to erosion and desertification, while maintaining vital ecosystem services. And hopefully, these practitioners can inspire others, non-Native and Native alike, to develop a better understanding of and relationships with the planet.
Indigenous Matriarchal Ecologies can highlight the positive effects of cultural fire on environmentally degraded soils, while simultaneously building native plant and soil resilience toward climate and cultural futurity that all communities can enjoy.
Who is our guest?Dr. Melinda Adams is a member of the N’dee San Carlos Apache Tribe and an Assistant Professor in the Department of Geography and Atmospheric Science at the University of Kansas. A cultural fire practitioner and scholar, her research focuses on the revitalization of cultural fire with Tribes in California and more recently with Tribes in the Midwest. Her work with Indigenous communities combines environmental science, environmental policy, and Indigenous studies methodologies.
ResourcesFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/regenerating-our-ecosystems-with-good-fire-with-dr-melinda-adams/.
The increase in climate-related disasters, such as floods, wildfires, and heat waves, has created serious financial burdens on households across the country. Since 1980, the world has seen a fivefold increase in the number of billion-dollar natural disasters. 2018 to 2022 alone saw an estimated $617 billion in damages from climate and weather related events. Beyond the public health and safety concerns, these disasters have hit Americans in the pocketbook. An estimated 13% have reported facing severe economic hardship following such disasters, with this number projected to rise as climate extremes become more frequent. For particularly vulnerable households, high financial costs from disasters can further exacerbate existing inequities. In order to adapt to a changing world of more frequent climate catastrophes, policy makers will need to develop solutions to assist populations in disaster recovery.
Solutions to climate-related financial disasterThe impacts of climate-related disasters are numerous. In addition to harming businesses and infrastructure, extreme weather events can lead to worker displacement, job loss, and migration. Catastrophic climate events, known as climate hazards, create financial strain on households from damage done to one’s property. Many households may not have the immediate resources or savings needed to repair the damage, leading to long-term displacement and financial instability. Healthcare costs, transportation expenditures, and inability to access proper insurance coverage are other burdens many individuals face following a natural disaster.
Low-income communities will face the brunt of climate change impacts. By understanding the historical inequities that have pushed marginalized communities into regions particularly vulnerable to climate change, policy makers can create more equitable outcomes. Many officials are now encouraging increased access to education, “democratized” climate decision making, and new ways to engage and empower people to take a stance in decisions about the climate.
The US Department of the Treasury further suggests that households consider utilizing government incentives to adopt climate-resilient property modifications, such as tax credits and rebates for energy-efficient home improvements. Policymakers further plan to support financial well-being by assisting households in financial resiliency efforts with programs through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).
Advantages of improving financial stability following a climate disasterInitiatives designed to address vulnerable communities affected by climate disasters can assist in adaptation towards climate extremes. Having access to resources, whether political or social, is key to providing impacted communities with the support they need to adapt to a changing environment. With increased educational awareness and government assistance, households facing financial distress and instability following a climate-related event will have the support they need to recover.
Setbacks to achieving financial stabilityIn order for these goals to be realized, policy makers will need to overcome significant challenges. For example, many households across the country face underinsurance, as climate extremes become more common and push insurers to raise rates or pull out of the insurance market altogether. As a result, vulnerable regions may be left without the proper resources to recover. A recent report found that policies for 39 million properties (about a quarter of all homes in the US) are under-priced for the climate risk needed to insure those properties. Without insurance coverage, homeowners are unable to fix damaged property.
Furthermore, the most severe effects of climate change disproportionately affect socially vulnerable populations. Less than 60% of single-family homeowners living in areas where mandatory flood insurance is required actually have the necessary insurance. As such, policy makers need to pay more attention to those communities most vulnerable to climate change in order to ensure they have access to the insurance needed to recover from a disaster and achieve financial stability following a climate-related event.
Dr. Andrew Rumbach, Senior Fellow in the Metropolitan Housing and Communities Policy Center at the Urban Institute, studies household and community risk to natural hazards and climate change. Dr. Rumbach is involved in the policy implementation and research of numerous federal and state-declared disaster events and is on the forefront of addressing disaster vulnerability and environmental risk.
ResourcesFor a transcript of this episode, please visit https://climatebreak.org/including-marginalized-communities-in-policy-decisions/.
The podcast currently has 179 episodes available.