Questioning the conventional wisdom about why people reject climate change opens up the possibility of more effective climate communication, a new paper suggests.
Eating protein-rich algae, insects and lab-cultured meats is more than a dietary fad: it could bring benefits for our health and the environment.
Phasing out fossil fuel-fired power plants, vehicles, ships and factories at the end of their lifetime and replacing it with zero-carbon alternatives gives us a 65 percent chance of keeping global warming below 1.5°C.
Hundreds of thousands of whales and dolphins are killed each year as bycatch in commercial fishing. Yet unless their deaths pose a species-level threat, the welfare of bycaught cetaceans is rarely a factor in evaluating a fishery’s sustainability.
Removing drilling rigs makes things look more pristine from a human perspective. But the view may be different from under the water’s surface. Leaving structures in place can actually have benefits, and removing them can cause harm.
A genetic tweak that makes photosynthesis more efficient in plants could increase crop yields by 40%, and help feed millions more people around the globe.
China has drastically cut harmful fine particle levels in the air, but this has led to an increase in ground-level ozone pollution, especially in big cities.
Insects are not only vanishing from ecosystems; they’re also becoming scarce in college biology textbooks.
There’s lots of research on how to convince people that climate change is real, and lots more about how to motivate people to take action once they are convinced. But much less is known about how to translate climate concern and activism into real political power.
Certain salt-loving microorganisms could eat seaweed and produce biodegradable plastics in a sustainable fashion.