Sustain What?

Here’s the podcast version of my “Watchwords” conversation with Mekala Krishnan, the lead author of a recent McKinsey Global Institute report, “The hard stuff: Navigating the physical realities of the energy transition.” I use the term watchwords to highlight terms or phrases that too often confuse more than clarify.

We were joined halfway through by Jessica Lovering, the co-founder and exective director of Good Energy Collective, which has a its mission “building the progressive case for nuclear energy as an essential part of the broader climate change agenda and working to align the clean energy space with environmental justice and sustainability goals.”

My curtain-raiser post has other ways to watch and share it:

Julio Friedmann, a friend and past colleague (at Columbia), has also written a fine post on this study and his own analysis. As he writes, there’s “a reluctance by many to confront the realities of The Hard Stuff: the parts of The Work that are costly, challenging, poorly framed, and utterly necessary.”

Here’s the Scale Monster image I deploy on social media off and on. Free free to share it!

As you likely know, this dispatch and webcast are mostly a labor of love now - but it is labor. To support my work, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

First, here’s my freshly updated post offering a heap of ways anyone anywhere can help the organizations and volunteers working nonstop around Hurricane Helene devastation zones:

Second, here’s a shoutout to the professional and volunteer first responders doing highly dangerous work seeking and rescuing survivors. Several are among the more than 215 victims so far. The North Carolina National Guard has been working nonstop.

Finally, please watch or listen to my Sustain What conversation seeking lessons from the catastrophic inland flooding triggered when Hurricane Helene's remnants collided with the Appalachian Mountains. My guest is David McConville, a data visualizer and risk communicator (his company is Spherical Studio) who grew up in the regions hammered by Helene and lived and worked in Asheville for many years trying to use technology, including a visualization dome, to convey the flood threat in the steep hills and deep hollows there. I got to know McConville after meeting him in Asheville when I spoke at wonderful Warren Wilson College there. We bumped into each other off and on in our separte, but related, journeys trying to figure out how to use media to foster sustainable human journeys.

As the catastrophic scope of the historic flooding in the region emerged last weekend, McConville said this on Facebook:

My heart is breaking today for many close friends in Asheville and western North Carolina, where I lived for over 20 years.

I’m also feeling an eerie sense of déjà vu. The catastrophic flooding of Hurricane Frances in 2004 got me interested in visualizing the dynamics of watersheds, impervious surfaces, and property development within bioregions.

I created the visualization below 15 years ago with The Elumenati and collaborators to help policymakers better grasp these dynamics and their consequences. Eerily, it features simulations of flooding in Biltmore Village, the real-world versions of which are currently all over the news.

He continued:

“Spherical is continuing this work in Los Angeles with Andy Lipkis, whose work on urban resilience was similarly catalyzed by his experience with flash floods in LA. As Daniel Swain notes, the looming threat of California's next ARKStorm bears striking parallels to what southern Appalachia is currently facing:

If you’ve been following me for awhile you already know about the history and future of extreme atmospheric rivers, with a repeat of the 1861-2 event that created an inland sea inevitable, if its timing remains uncertain. But here’s an excerpt from, and link to, climate and weather scientist Swain’s great thread and here’s a post of his from 2022 on this threat, amplified by human-caused global warming.

Sustain What is a passion project but it’s more likely to persist if you become a paying supporter.

The wider picture of disaster amnesia

In the webcast McConville and I talk about the challenges in trying to get communities like Asheville to act on data showing profound, but rare, hazards. It’s not easy.

In our chat he notes such warnings can end up just as ignored as Japan’s ancient, moss-encrusted “tsunami stones” were as generations forgot the warnings of ancestors who carved phrases like this into large tablets set on hillsides above the reach of great rare waves:

High dwellings are the peace and harmony of our descendants…. Remember the calamity of the great tsunamis. Do not build any homes below this point.

This is something I wrote about back in 2011:

I did a highly relevant Sustain What conversation some months back with Daniel Starosta, who studies the art, music, and history produced in the wake of disasters to better understand the social dynamics that can either impede or boost preparedness facing future threats.

Starosta’s research has spanned the landscape of disaster from hurricanes in Florida to tsunamis in Japan. He also works in climate adaptation and disaster resilience planning, with experience from Puerto Rico to Hawai'i to Bhutan. Here’s that conversation:

Exploring Disasters, Culture, Forgetfulness and Preparedness

Updated February 2025 - Given what’s unfolding under Trump 2.0, I thought it worth highlighting a Sustain What conversation I had in December 2020 with University of Rhode Island communications professor Renee Hobbs, who teaches propaganda literacy and is the author of a fantastic guide book, Mind Over Media: Propaganda Education in a Digital Age. She has built a priceless suite of online learning tools to explore and share.

I’ll be holding an onstage conversation with Hobbs at the Bioneers Conference in Berkeley, Calif., on March 28. Come meet us in person!

She provides a fantastic overview of the range of propaganda strategies, tactics and tools, noting the word should be seen as neutral. There is “good” propaganda. But, boy, there is dangerous propaganda, as well.

Emergency mode

A key section of our conversation dealt with the kind of dangerous political propaganda that is in overdrive right now.

I told Hobbs about a conversation I had earlier in 2020 with New York University journalism professort Jay Rosen, when he was warning newsrooms that democracy was in danger in the face of Trump’s nonstop lies and this required new approaches to reporting and presenting the news. Here’s that snippet from Jay, in which he said, “I think we’re facing the biggest propaganda moment in modern U.S. history.”

Keeping in mind what transpired amid the pandemic, and even more so the following January, he was surely right. And here we are again.

In December 2020, Hobbs wholeheartedly concurred with his perspective:

I have a sure sense of urgency. The fire hose of falsehood…actually goes way, way back. That's not a new technique either…. Actually throughout the 20th century, we have faced crises where propagandists had ascendency, where their ideas gained traction, and where only with a relentless pursuit of truth, only with the public activation of moral indignation, only over time can can truly dangerous propaganda be be countered. So we're in that place right now. And we're very vulnerable.

And, yes, here we are yet again. So please listen up and share this converastion.

There’s a (very) rough searchable transcript here. Transcripts can be smoothed out if more of my subscribers chip in financially.

I hope you’ll consider becoming a paid subscriber to help sustain my work and keep this content open for those who can’t afford to pay.

And please explore Hobbs’s fantastic array of open learning resources! There’s a whole section on “meme politics.” There’s a crowd-sourced “rate this propaganda” gallery.

Here’s my full April 2020 conversation with Jay Rosen:

The Press, the Pandemic and Presidential Propaganda

Update, 6:30 pm Brazil time, Aug. 31 - X flickered to life just a few minutes after I posted this, at least from my Rio hotel - just long enough for me to tweet afresh. But now it’s spinning and frozen again. So back to Threads and Bluesky for the moment.

On the final morning of a hectic three-city visit to Brazil to brainstorm with journalists, students and scientists on next steps for climate communication, Twitter ground to a halt as an order by a Supreme Court judge here took effect.

The imposed hiatus was refreshing in some ways. You may have heard my recent song about the merits of tossing your phone in a drawer once in awhile.

And it is kind of fun to see someone get under the skin of a megalomaniac. It’s no secret that I really hate much of Elon Musk’s impact on the communication practice I still call Twitter, which takes place on the platform he now calls X.

As you almost surely know, I still find Twitter uniquely valuable in navigating a host of wicked issues related to human sustainability - from climate change to disaster risk reduction to war and peace and taming information superstorms. Thanks to Musk, though, one has to don a protective suit and diver’s rebreathing system to plunge beneath the polluted surface of X and collaborate with other solution seekers.

A dangerous move in a democracy

At the same time, the move to shut down access to X in Brazil, made by Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes, feels like dangerous overreach.

In 2022 Moraes was given sole and extreme power to remove online content after a wave of fakery around recent elections helped trigger extremist actions by supporters of Jair Bolsonaro. That tsunami of disinformation has subsided. But in recent months Moraes has been in a running battle with Musk and X, and Musk’s decision to ignore court orders led to the shutdown.

I totally get the frustration, and if the company has violated the law, a significant response is needed. As Moraes wrote in a decision on Friday, “Elon Musk showed his total disrespect for Brazilian sovereignty and, in particular, for the judiciary, setting himself up as a true supranational entity and immune to the laws of each country.”

My concerns echo those of David Nemer, as described in a New York Times story on the showdown by Jack Nicas and Kate Conger:

“I was someone who was very on [Moraese’s] side,” said David Nemer, a Brazilian-born media professor who has studied his nation’s approach to disinformation at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

“But when we saw the X decision, we were like: ‘What the hell? This is too much,’” he said, using an expletive…. Justice Moraes has “set up a state of exception,” Mr. Nemer said. “But it’s a permanent state of exception, and that’s not good for any sort of democracy.”

If you read me regularly you’ll know that “state of exception” is the language used in declaring a national emergency. This came up in my reporting on efforts by some climate campaigners to get President Joe Biden to declare a “climate emergency.” A permanent state of exception can be a pathway to authoritarianism, whether initiated because of extreme storms in the information climate or the geophysical one.

As Nicas and Conger write, this is tough terrain for any democracy:

Brazil’s yearslong fight against the internet’s destructive effect on politics, culminating in the current blackout of X, shows the pitfalls of a nation deciding what can be said online. Do too little and allow online chatter to undermine democracy; do too much and restrict citizens’ legitimate speech.

Other governments worldwide are likely to be watching as they debate whether to wade into the messy work of policing speech or leave it to increasingly powerful tech companies that rarely share a country’s political interests.

As the Associated Press reported, this is not the first such move by Brazilian judge and hardly restricted to Brazil, with a host of other countries and companies doing battle over information flows:

Lone Brazilian judges shut down Meta’s WhatsApp, the nation’s most widely used messaging app, several times in 2015 and 2016 due to the company’s refusal to comply with police requests for user data. In 2022, de Moraes threatened the messaging app Telegram with a nationwide shutdown, arguing it had repeatedly ignored Brazilian authorities’ requests to block profiles and provide information. He ordered Telegram to appoint a local representative; the company ultimately complied and stayed online.

X and its former incarnation, Twitter, have been banned in several countries — mostly authoritarian regimes such as Russia, China, Iran, Myanmar, North Korea, Venezuela and Turkmenistan. Other countries, such as Pakistan, Turkey and Egypt, have also temporarily suspended X before, usually to quell dissent and unrest. Twitter was banned in Egypt after the Arab Spring uprisings, which some dubbed the “Twitter revolution,” but it has since been restored.

Beware “digital authoritarianism”

Waking up to frozen X took me back to a Sustain What conversation I had in January 2022 with a leading analyst of internet disruptions, Doug Madory, the director of internet analysis for Kentik, where he works on internet infrastructure analysis with a focus on disruptions, whether the cause is undersea cable damage in disasters like the 2022 Tonga volcanic eruption or political decisions. I’ve posted our chat at the top of this dispatch and hope you’ll give a listen. No one knows the issues better. A decade ago, Madory was described by the Washington Post as “The Man Who Can See the Internet.”

Also read Suppressing Dissent: The Rise of the Internet Curfew, a 2022 post by Madory and Peter Micek, which walks through the history of intentional throttling of social media by nations worried about dissent. Here’s what one such shutdown looked like in Cuba in 2022:

Also read this Conversation post: Internet shutdowns: here’s how governments do it, by Lisa Garbe, a postdoctoral research fellow at the WZB Berlin Social Science Center.

Of course in all of this, it’s worth noting that Musk, while yelling about free speech, has been using his total control of X to distort the landscape of converations there. No easy balance indeed.

Brazil discovers Bluesky

In the meantime, communication must continue and Diario Carioca and other news outlets reported that 500,000 Brazilians launched Bluesky accounts in 48 hours.

Thanks for reading Sustain What! This post is public so feel free to share it.

Here’s a parting shot from Rio de Janeiro:

My Sustain What webcast project started early in the pandemic and quickly evolved into having several tracks - one being regular Monday sessions I centered on pathways to Thriving Online. Here’s one of my favorites - a chat with two very different artists using drawing to communicate consequential environmental science and policy choices (also on YouTube):

Karen Romano Young (@doodlebugKRY), a seasoned science illustrator, has spent months at sea (follow her #AntarcticLog) with a focus on Antarctic science. She's also a childrens' book illustrator and author. Explore her work here.

Pat Bagley, a prize-winning political cartoonist for the Salt Lake City Tribune (@patbagley), is the longest continually employed newspaper cartoonist in the United States, with a career stretching back to 1979. In 2020, the year he was on my webcast, the National Cartoonists Society named him editorial cartoonist of the year.

Thriving online? Really?

I ended up running dozens of Thriving Online webcasts. Episodes are compiled in a YouTube playlist here: http://j.mp/thrivingonlineplaylist.

I was inspired to share this conversation after Nicole Kelner’s latest post showed up in my inbox. Kelner is a climate-focused illustrator whose Substack dispatch, Arts and Climate Change with Nicole Kelner, is a valuable mix of inspiring examples and tips for using art to propel change.

Her latest post is the first in what she says will be a weekly series highlighting examples of art that educates, inspires and offers creative outlets to deal with climate anxiety (or any other flavor):

Here’s a bit of Kelner’s own portfolio from her About page:

As you know if you’ve been tracking my output for awhile, there’s still very little data pointing to behavioral impacts of climate visualizations - even for compelling efforts like Ed Hawkins’ “warming stripes”. But there are hints, as the behavioral scientist Sabine Pahl discussed in this show:

So let the wild artistic rumpus play out.

Consider becoming a paid subscriber to build my argument with my family to keep going.

There are paths to cooperation and respect amid deep difference, and - in person or online - there are strategies that can move conversations either in a constructive or destructive direction. Elected and community leaders have a rhetorical choice to make every day facing that reality. That’s true even for bullet-grazed Trump.

As I tweeted yesterday, the momentous shooting in Pennsylvania can lead to “either a tipping point toward true unraveling or a pinch point that can be navigated if Trump's team chooses moderacy over feeding its already-committed base.”

Is this a tipping point or navigable pinch point?

Trump’s base is going nowhere. Given that the party conventions mark the start of the general election campaign, it’s standard practice for candidates to pivot to moderatioin to harvest votes of doubtful or distracted voters who are less passionate.

In an interview with Salina Zeto of the conservative Washington Examiner, Trump said this:

“The speech I was going to give on Thursday was going to be a humdinger… Had this not happened, this would’ve been one of the most incredible speeches” aimed mostly at the policies of President Joe Biden. “Honestly, it’s going to be a whole different speech now.”

At the same time, of course, a legion of Republicans jumped on the shooting to intensify “us/them” attacks on Democrats, so we’ll see how that goes…

But there’s a role here for everyone, at every level, to choose how to frame conversations and messages. With that in mind I’m reposting several Sustain What conversations that took place in the turbulent months when the pandemic, George Floyd protests and January 6th insurrection created a chaotic crescendo.

The show above, Pathways to Impact in Perilously Polarized Times, featured a marvelous array of minds and voices:

* Peter T. Coleman, a professor of psychology and education at Columbia University, will discuss lessons from his new book, “The Way Out - How to Overcome Toxic Polarization.”

Coleman holds a joint appointment at Teachers College and the Earth Institute and directs two research centers. He is also the author of “Making Conflict Work: Harnessing the Power of Disagreement” (2014) and “The Five Percent: Finding Solutions to Seemingly Impossible Conflicts” (2011), among other books.

He says “The Way Out - How to Overcome Toxic Polarization,” is “about why we are stuck in our current cultural riptide and what we can do to find our way out. It will explain how patterns of intractable polarization can and do change, and offer a set of principles and practices for navigating and healing the more difficult divides in your home, workplace and community.”

* Reggie Harris, a longtime folk singer and songwriter, storyteller and educator who has worked and sung for racial understanding, human rights and justice for decades. He’ll speak about his experiences at the interface of love and hate, Black and White and maybe sing a song or two.

He describes his album from that time, “On Solid Ground,” as a “call for personal and national grounding in the explosion of racial and civil unrest and the growing worldwide death spiral that was 2020.” Please also check out Harris’s new memoir, “Searching for Solid Ground.”

Here’s a particularly apt excerpt - Harris talking about a heated confrontation he had when Black Lives Matter and MAGA protests coincided on a town green in conservative Cobleskill in upstate New York:

Other guests were:

* Andy Norman, who teaches philosophy and directs the Humanism Initiative at Carnegie Mellon University. He says his focus is studying how ideologies short-circuit minds and corrupt moral understanding and developing tools that help people reason together in more fruitful ways. 

Norman will describe insights offered in his new book, “Mental Immunity: Infectious Ideas, Mind-Parasites, and the Search for a Better Way to Think."

* Amanda Ripley, a solutions-focused journalist and bestselling author who has become a champion of a new style of journalism sifting less for sound bites and more for pathways to insight amid complexity. 

Her latest book is “High Conflict: Why We Get Trapped and How We Get Out.” Here’s Ripley’s summary of this concept: “When we are baffled by the insanity of the ‘other side’—in our politics, at work, or at home—it’s because we aren’t seeing how the conflict itself has taken over. That’s what ‘high conflict’ does. People do escape high conflict. Individuals—even entire communities—can short-circuit the feedback loops of outrage and blame, if they want to. This is a mind-opening new way to think about conflict that will transform how we move through the world.”

* Isaac Grosof, who at the time was a Carnegie Mellon grad student running the Humanist League and is now a postdoctoral research associate at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.

More Sustain What conversations on finding common ground and traction

Just before the 2020 election I ran a related conversation with Peter Coleman, Amanda Ripley and folk singer Reggie Harris, but that show also remarkably included Wallis Wickham Raemer, an educator who is a distant, and white relative of Harris’s. His lineage goes back to a slave holder, Williams Carter Wickham, who was among those whose statues were being removed across the South. (There’s a fantastic New York Times story about the Wickhams.)

Finally, here’s a magical Sustain What 2022 conversation on “peace speech,” centering on the experience and skills built through Pádraig Ó Tuama’s many years as a mediator, gay rights voice, theologian and poet on the front lines during Ireland’s “troubles.”

Pádraig Ó Tuama & Friends on Language as a Conflict Trap or Peace Pathway

My other guests were Reggie Harris (yes, Reggie again; he is a dear friend and musical compadre from my Hudson River Valley days) and Irene O’Garden – a poet, educator and author, most recently, of the book of essays “Glad to Be Human” (and a friend).

At the time, Ó Tuama was in residence at Columbia University working with Coleman’s "Peace Speech" project with support from the Morton Deutsch International Center for Cooperation and Conflict Resolution (MD-ICCCR), Teachers College, and the Climate School at Columbia University, Coleman and Ó Tuama teamed up to explore the power of language when it comes to promoting peace, security, and sustainability across the globe.

To help sustain Sustain What and keep most content open to those overwhelmed by paywalls, please consider becoming a paid supporter.

Here’s a key point I made in today’s pop-up webcast:

Think of Tornado Alley as a syndrome, not a place. And it isn’t what, and where, it used to be.

In 2018, longtime tornado researchers Victor Gensini of Northern Illinois University and Harold Brooks of NOAA’s National Severe Storms Laboratory in Norman, Okla., completed widely-covered research showing a substantial shift in the particular meteorological conditions that are most apt to generate tornadoes (and a shift in tornado reports).

Media coverage, then and since, has tended to zoom in on the hot question: what role is played by human-driven climate change? The science around tornadoes in a human-heated climate, however, remains infused with uncertainty.

But that murk can obscure what a new paper makes soberingly clear: that expanding populations and sources of storm vulnerability - particularly flimsy housing - are greatly increasing the risk of big losses even in areas, like Texas, with a downward trend in tornado-generating weather conditions.

The new paper, published in the Nature journal Natural Hazards, is “Changes in tornado risk and societal vulnerability leading to greater tornado impact potential.” The authors are Stephen M. Strader of Villanova University, Victor Gensini, Walker S. Ashley and graduate student Amanda N. Wagner of Villanova.

Here’s the core point from the abstract (the highlights are mine):

Results indicate that escalating vulnerability and exposure have outweighed the effects of spatially changing risk. However, the combination of increasing risk and exposure has led to a threefold increase in Mid-South housing exposure since 1980. Though Southern Plains tornado risk has decreased since 1980, amplifying exposure has led to more than a 50-percent increase in mean annual tornado-housing impact potential across the region.

I reached out to Strader for a pop-up Sustain What chat. He’s been an all-too-frequent presence in my webcasts on the “expanding bull’s eye” that far too many communities are creating in meteorological danger zones. He and Walker Ashley have done invaluable work building this method for mapping hazards, exposure and - incresaingly factoring in the vulnerability of the people or property in harm’s way, as in this paper.

I hope you’ll share our conversation here with anyone living in the map areas (lower reight) shown in red, yellow or green, or do the same with the webcast video on X/Twitter, Facebook, YouTube or LinkedIn.

Here are the key takeaways Strader offered in a thread on X today (which we explore in more depth and detail in the webcast):

Despite tornado environments becoming less frequent across the Southern Plains, growing exposure [more people and more stuff] has more than made up for this dearth. There has still been a 50-percent increase in Southern Plains expected tornado-society impacts due to rapidly growing exposure.

Societal vulnerability has also played a substantial role in the severity of these impacts. Most notably growing manufactured home prevalence [and] those aged 65+, non-white populations, and single-female head of households have all increased in the Southern Plains and Mid-South.

To reiterate, exposure changes are by far driving impacts, not spatial changes in environments. Unfortunately, changes in both mean bad news for the most tornado-fatality-prone region, the Mid-South.

In our discussion, we focused on a prime fixation for Strader (and me) - the boom in manufactured homes across the South.

Here’s an earlier Sustain What discussion on this point:

Sustain What is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work financially, consider becoming a paid subscriber.

I hope you’ll watch and weigh in on this Sustain What episode testing the arguments against climate alarm of Steven Koonin, a former chief scientist at BP and former Obama-era Energy Department science undersecretary who is the author of the best-selling book Unsettled – What Climate Science Tells Us, What it Doesn’t, and Why it Matters. An updated edition was eleased on June 11th.

You can also watch and share the conversation on YouTube, X/Twitter, Facebook or LinkedIn.

Koonin, who’s joining the Hoover Institution this fall as a senior fellow, has a new op-ed out in the Wall Street Journal titled “The ‘Climate Crisis’ Fades Out.” He warns that overreach based on overheated interpretations of climate science is already causing societal pushback.

We agreed on many points but I proposed that his emphasis on “unsettled/settled” as the threshold for shaping decisions can leave societies racing to pursue solutions too late because climate change is more like a one-way ratchet than a knob that can be turned back.

We were joined by Roger Pielke Jr., a longtime climate policy analyst you’ve seen here before. Read Pielke’s critique of Koonin’s book (which largely tracks my views):

Pielke also debated Koonin last year on the question, “Is Net Zero by 2050 Possible?” We revisited this criticism of the book taken from that debate:

Koonin’s book, which was first published in 2021 and has, according to the publisher, sold some 200,000 copies, grew out of arguments he made in an opinion piece he wrote for The Wall Street Journal in 2014. I reached out to him at that time with a couple of questions and posted them and his answers on my Dot Earth blog. Click to my announcement of this webcast for that piece, which laid the foundation for todays discussion:

Sustain What is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

War is hell. No headline there.

But imagine war expierenced through the eyes and ears of lions, chimpanzees, camels and other creatures in a wildlife park in northeastern Ukraine, and experienced by their keepers and a ragtag crew of volunteers who rushed to evacuate them as Vladimir Putin’s full-scale invasion played out in 2022.

That is what you’ll experience when the documentary “Checkpoint Zoo” gets into theaters or streaming sites after its premiere at the Tribeca Festival. I hope the film gets wide distribution.

“Checkpoint Zoo” tells the story of Feldman Ecopark, a sprawling zoo and wildlife sanctuary on the outskirts of Ukraine’s second biggest city, Karkhiv, just 30 miles from the Russian border. The facility was created in 2011 by Oleksandr Feldman, one of Ukraine’s richest businessmen. A philanthropist focused on social issues, Feldman made the zoo a hub for therapy for children with disabilities and rehabilitation for drug addicts. If you scan pre-war social media, it’s all heartwarming scenes.

Then came the full-scale invasion on February 22, 2022. Five weeks in, Feldman posted an online plea for help as his staff and a passionate batch of volunteers raced to relocate the animals even as Russian attacks blasted buildings and rockets fell. Here’s Facebook video from the park in early April that year showing a shell next to animal enclosures.

Ultimately six people were killed in the animal evacuation efforts, including a 15-year-old boy, according to the film and other news reports. The park has since reopened but of course faces new threats as Russia has renewed its offensive around Karkhiv.

The film, directed by Joshua Zeman, skilfully weaves video from a trove recorded on the run by zoo staff and powerful interviews and imagery filmed by Zeman and his crew in three trips to the region in late 2022 and 2023 - during which explosions can occasionally be heard and, in one case, filmmakers and other journalists scramble for cover along with their subjects.

The result is an extraordinary portrait of the jarring mix of humanity and inhumanity created in wartime. There is heroism, wrenching loss, boundless love and a key component of any film - transformation. In this case, one of the young volunteers, a veterinarian, goes into military service as a medic.

The presence of non-human animals, as both victims and witnesses to the best and worst our species has to offer, further intensifies the experience and the leaves the viewer full of tough and essential questions.

I hope you’ll take time to watch or listen to my Sustain What conversation with Zeman. (Here’s the super rough Trint transcript.) I got to know know and respect his work through his previous documentary, “The Loneliest Whale.” That 2021 film was inspired by a short news story I wrote for The New York Times back in 2004 about the mystery of an elusive great whale in the vastness of the Pacific Ocean calling out at a frequency distinct from that of any known species.

When there’s a trailer or clip from “Checkpoint Zoo” online I’ll add it here, but in the meantime have a look at this video posted by the folks at Feldman Ecopark:

Sustain What is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.

June 1 is the official start of hurricane season in the Atlantic, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico. To stay safe along coasts or in floodable inland areas as the season heats up, you should of course bookmark NOAA’s National Hurricane Center tracking and warning site. Don’t get too used to the storm-free image on the site at the moment:

To stay sane as the media environment around hurricanes and climate change heats up, you should bookmark NOAA’s Global Warming and Hurricanes page, curated for many years by senior scientist Tom Knutson.

Knutson is one of the most level-headed and objective scientists I know in a research arena full of competitive groups, data gaps and intense debates. It’s also an arena being flooded with money as the insurance industry and businesses needing to demonstrate or measure environmental responsibility (e.g. S&P Global) hire climate scientists and invest in modeling.

I’ve been interviewing and citing Knutson for more than 20 years and thought this week was a good time to catch up with him to go over what’s well established about the influence of warming from rising carbon dioxide concentrations on tropical storm behavior and what remains obscured by natural variability and the rarity of the biggest storms. Watch or listen above or on the audio podcast or watch and share our chat on YouTube, Facebook or LinkedIn.

We talk about the “Category 6” question, the continued disagreement among researchers over the relative influences on Atlantic tropical storms of hazy air pollution and slowly shifting ocean currents and more.

There’s a super-rough Trint transcript here (they tend to be better than the one that Substack generates, at least for now). If more subscribers find it possible to chip in financially, I can get these cleaned up (and make lots of other improvements).

You may also want to click back to an evergreen interview I did around the 30th anniversary of Hurricane Andrew’s devastating hit on South Florida with the University of Miami hurricane scientist Brian McNoldy - whose Tropical Atlantic Update blog and @BMcNoldy X/Twitter feed are invaluable.