AFL fans will be happy to see the massive percentage of AFL footballers pushing for greater climate action. See what they have done at their local clubs.
CLICK HERE to VIEW
Yes! New declarations might not be receiving a lot of media coverage these days but there are now 2,248 jurisdictions that have passed a Climate Emergency Declaration (CED). In just the last fortnight there have been two more CEDs in the UK (North Yorkshire County Council and Swindon Borough Council) and one more in Japan (Hiroshima City).
Certainly the rate of new declarations has slowed since the start of the pandemic, but even the CEDs that are happening now seem to get less media coverage than during the 2019 peak. The ground-breaking declaration by the first Australian state, South Australia on 31 May 2022, received little media coverage, and the April declaration by Nillumbik Shire Council in Victoria received none.
In April 2020 there was just one new CED in the US and one in Italy. That suggests that the pandemic that was escalating at the time was a factor slowing the rate of new declarations. But it wasn’t the only factor. The dark purple bars in the chart above show the UK CEDs, a massive 506 before April 2020. Of those, 265 were mid-tier councils in England, of which there are only 333 in total. By 2020 there weren’t enough non-CED mid-tier councils left for such a high rate of new CEDs to be possible. Even so, their numbers did continue to rise. Currently 278 (83.5%) mid-tier councils of varying political persuasions have passed declarations.
Extreme heat is predicted for large parts of the US including Kansas, which is one of the country’s top three beef producers
This week, the National Weather Services (NWS) predicted extreme heat on parts of the Gulf coast and spreading to the Great Lakes in the midwest, with more than 100 million Americans advised to stay inside to fight the heat.
Read the article
European-based researcher Ember was commissioned by the environmental group, Lock the Gate Alliance, to analyse available data on methane emissions from the Australian Greenhouse Emissions Information System (AGEIS), the Clean Energy Regulator (CER), the Australian Chief Economist, Department of Natural Resources and Mines, the International Energy Agency (IEA) and the Global Energy Monitor.
Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas and its global warming potential is more than 25 times that of carbon dioxide.
The report found that in 2019, Australian coal mine methane emissions made up 68 per cent of overall energy industry emissions, making it a bigger contributor than oil and gas.
"That's a really massive climate impact before we even start to think about the carbon dioxide emissions released from burning coal."
By ABC national regional reporter Nathan Morris
 |
| Coffs Harbour 7m rise. Click to enlarge. |
 |
"Efforts to reduce carbon pollution using ethanol appear to have backfired.
For over a decade, the US has blended ethanol with gasoline in an attempt to reduce the overall carbon pollution produced by fossil fuel-powered cars and trucks. But a new study says that the practice may not be achieving its goals. In fact, burning ethanol made from corn—the major source in the US—may be worse for the climate than just burning gasoline alone.
Corn drove demand for land and fertilizer far higher than previous assessments had estimated. Together, the additional land and fertilizer drove up ethanol’s carbon footprint to the point where the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions—from seed to tank—were higher than that of gasoline. Some researchers predicted this might happen, but the new paper provides a comprehensive and retrospective look at the real-world results of the policy.
Proponents have long argued that corn-based ethanol bolsters farm incomes while providing a domestic source of renewable liquid fuel, while critics have said that its status as a carbon-reducing gasoline additive relies on questionable accounting. Based on the new study, both sides may be right."
Go to the original ARS - Technica article.
![[l1]Source: https://pixabay.com/images/id-1846093/](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/a/AVvXsEj1B10DSj_SbyIbhKURTf8JmcW3qJTOFiqwYSDlxH1EoqOFTPJUksF55Miso2QoEQGf6zRXR-Em5893F-5p930QBKQ6oYy3YxU9tyIQsRY87F2gUCmLt0X_boW0agpLAGWM_waYKUPFZQSQf4w_8_BU5CrLRHEu4FFE2hriJu3tJGBF8dzWfmcguMTc=w320-h180 "[l1]Source: https://pixabay.com/images/id-1846093/")
This article discusses how to walk the sustainability talk (literally!) by examining the environmental impacts of your sneakers and other shoes.
Sneaker production is similar to the construction of a building. First the foundation is built; in the case of sneakers, the “foundation,” the sole of the shoe, is created from natural rubber. Next, the upper part of the sneaker is attached to the sole through a vulcanizing (rubber hardening) process. Finally, the remaining parts of the shoe, including the tongue, eyestays, and logo are added.
Producing a sneaker requires materials such as rubber, leather, textiles, foam, and other synthetics. The environmental impact of sneakers comes both from procuring these materials as well as the sneaker assembly and manufacturing process itself.
The fashion industry is responsible for 8.1% of global carbon emissions, and sneakers account for a significant portion of that. In fact, sneakers are responsible for 1.4% of global carbon emissions, which comprises about one-fifth of the apparel industry’s emissions as a whole.
Drilling down further, one can see that each pair of sneakers results in 30 pounds of carbon dioxide emissions. When looking at the source of these emissions, the breakdown corresponds to two-thirds coming from the manufacturing process, with the remaining third resulting from raw material extraction.
Many sneakers are made from plastic materials, which are derived from petroleum, a fossil fuel. While these materials help increase the durability of your athletic shoes, extracting, manufacturing and recycling these materials is difficult and contributes to climate change and other forms of pollution.
When examining the detrimental effects of sneaker production on the climate, other environmental and public health concerns come to light. In addition to contributing to the release of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, sneaker production involves toxic chemicals. While benzene, xylene, and toluene don't drive the global temperature up, they are dangerous carcinogens that adversely affect people's nervous and respiratory systems.
Because of the large amounts of plastics, glue, and other materials used to produce sneakers, they are difficult to recycle. Instead, sneakers are either incinerated or thrown into landfills. There is much debate over which option is the lesser of two evils.
Incineration produces air pollution and fossil fuels. However, some argue that if incineration occurs for energy production, fewer fossil fuels are emitted and less pollution occurs. Waste-to-energy plants have advanced filters that don't allow harmful chemicals to escape, and they emit much less methane, a harmful greenhouse gas, than landfills do.
On the other hand, when sneakers end up in landfills, the millions of pairs thrown out each year add to the endless amount of waste. With methane and carbon dioxide comprising over 90% of landfill gas, it's clear that sneakers continue to contribute to climate change long after their production.
Manufacturers and retailers should only put sneakers on the market that meet the highest standards of compliance. Conducting footwear testing is one way of ensuring that products meet the strictest of environmental guidelines. Taking the initiative to test sneakers helps manufacturers and retailers provide a product that's climate-friendly while projecting a positive brand image.
Shoe manufacturers must also increase the use of natural, recyclable materials. For example, some companies are using natural cork materials to create a midsole, rather than using fossil-fuel derived foams. Others are creating foams that use natural, abundant materials like algae to reduce the use of petrochemicals in shoe production.
Sneakers are an essential part of most people's lives. Whether you’re a fitness enthusiast or just seeking a pair of comfortable shoes for your everyday life, resisting the urge to become a sneaker collector is the first step towards a sustainable shoe closet. By reducing the amount of shoes you buy, you’re reducing the amount of material that must be used to produce shoes, and helping keep shoes out of landfill.
Consumers can also hold manufacturers accountable by only purchasing from brands that follow best practices concerning carbon emissions and other climate-related issues.
Lastly, there are some places you can recycle your sneakers. The Australian Sporting Goods Association’s initiative Tread Lightly offers recycling services for shoes made of a variety of materials. Simply use their search tool to find a collection location near you.
Lena Milton
Environmental Science Writer, Researcher
"Powered by fossil fuel funding, PR agents have used astroturfing,
“manufactured consent,” and other techniques to furtively shape public
perceptions in favor of their polluting clients."
"Since 2008, the American Petroleum Institute (API), which is the U.S.’s largest oil and gas trade group, has paid the world’s largest PR firm, Edelman, $439.7 million. API isn’t the only group in the oil and gas sector to have paid a PR firm for its services. And Edelman isn’t the only PR firm to have received money from the oil and gas sector.
For decades, fossil fuel companies have been using PR firms to polish, reinvent, and fabricate their image; protect their reputation; and greenwash their activities, in ways that we are still trying to fully understand."
