Carbon credits, a method of reducing carbon dioxide emissions through corporation donations and trades, are beginning to create markets in oceans, in addition to traditional land-based projects. This expansion, referred to as “blue carbon credits” has profound implications for both the environment and global business. Blue carbon credits can lead to reduced global warming and healthier coastal ecosystems while increasing economic profit for corporations around the world. 

—-

Carbon credits are voluntary vouchers that allow companies to offset carbon emissions by funding projects that sequester carbon or prevent its release in the atmosphere. One carbon credit is equivalent to the release of one ton of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. 

Companies fund restoration projects and in turn receive equivalent credits to the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere, thus making their company initiatives “carbon neutral.” Companies may either use their carbon credits to release emissions while remaining carbon neutral or they may sell carbon credits to other companies looking to reduce greenhouse emissions. There is thus incentive to reduce greenhouse emissions and sell unused carbon credits to other companies for profit. 

If you want to learn more about carbon credits, check out this article next: What are Carbon Credits and How Do They Work?

Verra, a non profit headquartered in Washington, DC, was founded in 2005 to regulate the carbon credit market. Formerly known as the Voluntary Carbon Standard, Verra accredits any projects that wish to join the carbon credit market. Projects must meet a core set of Verra standards, agree to independent auditing throughout the project and publicly register so that the general public can see progress and results. Verra is essentially the rule book and referee of the carbon credit world. 

There are four main types of carbon credit land projects: forestry and conservation, renewable energy, community projects and waste to energy projects. A current forestry and conservation project credited by Verra is the reforestation and conservation of a mangrove swamp in Sinaloa, Mexico. It’s estimated that the project reduces 3,123,863 tons of atmospheric carbon each year through plantation of new trees and maintenance of existing plants. An example of a renewable energy project is currently underway in Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh. The project focuses on using renewable solar photovoltaic technology to decrease carbon emissions by 32 791 tons per year. 

What are Blue Carbon Credits?

Until April this year, Verra had only had applications for land based projects. However, the Virginia Nature Conservancy, a nonprofit organisation focused on climate change, partnered with the University of Virginia and the Virginia Institute of Marine Sciences to plant over 70 million seeds in bays off Virginia’s coasts. The project is now applying for accreditation through Verra to sell carbon credits to large scale corporations, making it the first seagrass project in the world to do so, and thus introducing the concept of “Blue carbon credits.”

Blue carbon credits mostly focus on restoration and maintenance of mangroves, seagrasses and salt marshes to sequester atmospheric carbon dioxide emissions. Blue carbon credits show great potential for mitigating climate change through their exceptional ability to store carbon dioxide. Mangroves are able to sequester up to ten times the amount of carbon than land counterparts, and are able to store the carbon for 3-5x longer. 

85% of global carbon dioxide emissions pass through oceans at some point, making oceans and coastal regions prime locations for carbon sequestering. Furthermore, while coastal regions only account for 2% of total ocean area, they make up over 50% of all ocean carbon stores, leading scientists to focus on coastal restoration projects. Investing in plantation of mangroves, small trees that grow on coastal borders, can greatly decrease atmospheric greenhouse gas emissions. Taking it a step further, having companies fund the projects that plant mangroves allows for corporations to market themselves as carbon neutral, creates a market for trade amongst the environmentally conscious and increases capital to continue globally sustainable projects. 

In addition to voluntary carbon credit markets, there is a second type of carbon credit market that businesses may be a part of called “cap-and-trade” markets. In cap-and-trade markets, governments place limits on the amount of greenhouse gases that businesses are legally allowed to release into the atmosphere. If a business reduces emissions and does not emit up to its limit, the company is able to sell “left over” unused emissions to other businesses who may be struggling to stay below their cap. Several states in the United States currently operate under cap-and-trade markets, which are mandatory, unlike the voluntary methods through Verra. With the expansion of blue carbon credits, businesses may be able to fund voluntary products to further increase yearly profits through sold credits. 

You might also like: Blue Carbon Projects Can Be Instrumental in Combating Climate Change

Criticisms of Carbon Credits

There are several critiques of carbon credits. The first is that carbon credits are intended to represent carbon sequestration that would have otherwise not happened if a project were not funded by a company. For a corporation to be truly carbon neutral, their donation would have to directly financially fuel a project. If the project could be fuelled without company donation, critics claim carbon credits give corporations a false sense of sustainability and a free pass to emit greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. 

The second major critique of carbon credits is that several companies have labeled themselves as carbon neutral and have emitted extra greenhouse gases using carbon credits that were obtained up to a decade prior. Some claim this leads to an inaccurate representation of true carbon emission and sequestration. “The market contains hundreds of millions of tons of poor quality credits” states Mark Maslin of the department of geography at the University of London, calling these situations as use of “outdated credits.” 

The blue carbon credit market has great potential for both economic growth and increased sustainability, but it must be regulated closely and avoid the critiques and pitfalls of some of the land-based carbon credits. Almost all researchers agree that simply buying and selling carbon credits is not enough, and that corporations must also be actively trying to reduce production emissions. However, Jennifer Howard, marine climate change director at Conservation International, points out “the carbon credit market is good, because the private sector has all the money. We need long-term sustainable finance to keep our projects going.” 

Featured image: Flickr

You might also like: Carbon Offset Schemes Only Make Sense With Mixed-Species Forests

The post Blue Carbon Credits Emerge as Potential New Market for Global Sustainability appeared first on Earth.Org.

As COVID-19 continues its relentless impact on the world, scientists have begun to discuss the best ways to handle subsequent pandemics, or prevent them entirely. This past July, the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) held a virtual workshop which brought together the world’s top epidemiologists, public health experts, zoologists, disease ecologists, comparative pathologists, veterinarians, pharmacologists, wildlife health experts, mathematical modelists, economists, lawyers and public policy makers to discuss the prevention of future pandemics.

—

COVID-19 is a zoonotic disease, an illness in which infectious microbes are transferred from animals to humans. The World Health Organization (WHO) reports that “more than three-quarters of the human diseases that are new, emerging or reemerging at the beginning of the 21st century are caused by pathogens originating from animals or from products of animal origin.” Zoonotic diseases first emerged over 10 000 years ago when humans began domesticating animals, such as goats and sheep, for meat, milk and skin. 

With the domestication of wild species came the rapid emergence of infectious diseases spreading from animals to humans. Rinderpest virus, a disease of ruminants, morphed into measles, which killed 140 000 people in 2018 alone. Camelpox, a disease only impacting camels, turned into smallpox, killing over 300 million people throughout the 20th century. With the domestication of pigs came whooping cough, which still infects 10 000- 40 000 US children annually. Even the common cold emerged with the domestication of cattle, while leprosy originated in water buffalo. The Spanish flu of 1918, which killed 50 million people, was of avian origin; the Ebola outbreak began when humans had contact with blood and bodily fluid of chimpanzees and gorillas. Most recently, COVID-19, which has already killed 2.5 million people worldwide, is presumed to have originated from humans improperly handling animal products in wet markets.

You might also like: Kenya Opens Bids to Expand Crop Insurance for Climate Change

While animals have been domesticated since 9 000 BC, incidences of zoonotic diseases increased drastically during the latter half of the 20th century. Beginning in 1975, 30 new infectious diseases have emerged in 30 years. Additionally, 2020 statistics suggest that every year, five new infectious diseases emerge in humans, each new strand posing a risk of a potential new pandemic. Of these new infections, scientists claim 75% of emerging diseases originate in animals, while almost all known pandemics are zoonotic. While zoonotic diseases begin in animals, scientists claim “their emergence is entirely driven by human activities.” Land deforestation, animal agriculture, wildlife trade, decreases in biodiversity and climate change are just some of the human-driven factors leading to increases in zoonotic disease.

For example, IPBES’s workshop found that 30% of zoonotic diseases are attributed to recent changes in land-use, animal agriculture expansion and growing human urbanisation. Increases in deforestation and its link to zoonotic diseases is two-fold. The first risk for transmission of animal microbes to humans happens when companies enter biodiverse environments to clear land, exposing themselves to diseases within the natural habitats. The second risk arises when surviving animals are forced to relocate after natural habitats are destroyed by deforestation, which sometimes brings them closer to human living spaces. A 2017 study found that since 1976, 25 new Ebola outbreaks have occurred as a result of human-animal interaction before and after deforestation. One case highlights a 18-month old child who contracted and died from Ebola after unknowingly playing near a bat’s nest in his backyard which had relocated after a nearby deforestation event.

 Greater human consumption of animal products is another driving force behind increased incidences of zoonotic disease. The World Health Organization, Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and the World Organization for Animal Health listed “increasing demand for animal protein” as number one on their list of “the top 4 risk factors for emergence and spread of new zoonotic diseases.”

Farmers and slaughterhouse workers regularly come in contact with animal blood, secretions and bodily fluids, greatly increasing the chance for animal microbes to jump species. Furthermore, in order to maximise profits, farmed animals have been bred to be nearly genetically identical to one another and are overpacked into small spaces in factory farms. The genetic similarity allows viruses to spread among large populations of animals without having to mutate, while the densely packed populations allow for many animals to become infected quickly. Animals in factory farms are reservoirs for diseases while factory workers, slaughterhouse workers and meat consumers are susceptible hosts for the virus to infect across species.

COVID-19 has been referred to as a “1 in 100-year pandemic, ” suggesting a global scale contagion will not likely happen again in our lifetime. However, scientists predict that “without prevention strategies, pandemics will emerge more often, spread more rapidly, kill more people and affect the global economy with more devastating impact.” As of July 2020, COVID-19 has cost the global economy upwards of USD$15 trillion. It’s estimated that the global response to the pandemic has been 100 times more expensive than the prevention would have cost.

 During the virtual workshop, IPBES recognised that pandemics are handled retroactively and rarely rely on prevention. The workshop highlighted the world’s efforts to quickly develop and distribute a vaccine after COVID-19 had emerged. “COVID-19 demonstrates that this is a slow and uncertain path, and as the global population waits for vaccines to become available, the human costs are mounting, in lives lost, sickness endured, economic collapse and lost livelihoods.”

IPBES emphasised a transition to preventative measures. Some of the workshop’s suggestions included creating an intergovernmental council on pandemic prevention and assessing the risk of emerging disease in land use projects while considering human health. Other suggestions include reducing high-risk species from wildlife trade, educating all sectors of society on emerging infectious disease hotspots and investing in habitat restoration measures. The workshop even considered implementing new taxes on high pandemic risk behaviours, such as meat consumption and production.

In 2005, Dr. Michael Osterholm, director of the US Center for Infectious Disease Research and Policy, predicted “an influenza pandemic of even moderate impact will result in the biggest single human disaster ever.” Although devastating, COVID-19 was predictable. Unfortunately, the IPBES reports that mammals are currently reservoirs to another estimated 1.7 million undiscovered viruses. Scientists believe that anywhere from 631 000 to 827 000 of these viruses are able to gravely impact human health in the future. Global efforts must be made for the prevention of subsequent pandemics altogether, rather than relying on cures once they occur.   

The post Scientists Must Shift Focus to Preventing, Rather Than Curing, Next Major Pandemic appeared first on Earth.Org.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR), the development in which “bacteria, viruses, fungi and parasites change over time and no longer respond to medicines” has been declared one of the World Health Organization’s Top 10 Global Health Threats Facing Humanity.  Antimicrobial resistance causes an increased risk of disease spread, severe illness and death. Currently, 700 000 people die each year as a result of AMR and predictions indicate that number could rise to 10 million deaths per year by 2050. Encouraging healthier environments will be pivotal in curbing antibiotic resistance spread and promoting a future that protects human health.  

—

Antibiotics, a subset of antimicrobials that fight against bacteria, are essential to our health. Prior to the discovery of penicillin in 1928 and its widespread availability in the 1940’s, people were much more likely to succumb to minor injuries, illnesses and infections that nowadays can be easily treated with a doctor’s prescription. Meningitis, pneumonia and tuberculosis were death sentences; the average global life expectancy was 47 years old. As of 2016, it was 72 years old.

With the discovery of antibiotics came not only a treatment for otherwise deadly ailments, but also the opportunity for advancements in life-saving and life-enhancing medical interventions. Surgeries, such as heart transplants, lung operations, appendectomies and cesarean section births, rely on antibiotics to prevent infection before, during and after operations. Without antibiotics, it’s estimated that 1 out of every 6 persons would die of infection after surgery.

Individuals with AIDS, cancer, autoimmune disorders and transplants rely on antibiotics to fight off infections resulting from weakened immune systems. Antibiotics have gifted us the peace of mind to engage in activities such as participating in sports and enjoying the outdoors knowing that there are drugs to treat any possible subsequent infections. Most incredibly, antibiotics have increased life expectancy to nearly 78 years old in developed nations.

Unfortunately, antibiotic resistance is on the rise, threatening our comfortable reliance on the drugs. Antibiotic resistance occurs when bacteria adapt and no longer respond to the very medications designed to kill or stunt them. While antibiotic resistance is a natural process of selective adaptation, it has been accelerated by human misuse of antibiotics.

There has been a 36% increase in human antibiotic use since the 2000’s. In response, hospitals and doctors’ offices have been more selective in prescriptions and patients have been educated to always finish their prescribed antibiotic dose. However, only 30% of manufactured antibiotics are used on humans. As a result, having discretion in medical prescriptions may only contribute to a fraction of the needed impact to control resistance. 

70% of antibiotics are used on animals. Factory farms use daily doses of antibiotics on livestock to prevent animal sickness due to poor farming conditions and to promote growth. It’s estimated that aquatic farmed fish in the US use 433 000 pounds of antibiotics a year. Not only does this rampant use of antibiotics encourage resistance within animals and sea life, but it allows for resistant bacteria to enter surrounding environments.

You might also like: 5 Ways That 2020 Was Good For Climate Change

Our environments have become breeding grounds for resistant bacteria. According to the United Nations, “every time a person or animal is treated with an antibiotic, some of that drug, often over two-thirds of what is taken, gets excreted into the environment.” Generally, this excretion occurs through urine and faeces. “Once in the environment, in soil or in water, these drug residues allow drug-resistant organisms to gain a foothold, increase in numbers and subsequently spread to infect humans, animals and plants.”

While the majority of antibiotics are used on animals, they also produce the largest quantities of waste. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that farmed animals produce three times more waste than all humans in the US. A 800 000-occupant pig farm produces 1.6 million tons of waste per year; the entire city of Philadelphia, with a human population of 1.5 million, produces only 1 million tons per year. There are roughly 75.5 million pigs on farms in the US. The dyad of excessive animal antibiotic consumption and immense waste production has created dangerous environmental cesspools which harbour antibiotic resistance. 

Not only do antibiotics and resistant bacteria spread through waste, they are also spread through consuming infected animal products, agricultural runoff into water sources, soil absorption which contaminates crops and through air particles. It’s estimated that 75% of antibiotics used in aquaculture may be lost into the surrounding environment.”

Additionally, recent studies show that increases in global temperatures may be accelerating antibiotic resistance. One says that “European countries with warmer ambient minimum temperature have had more acute increases in antibiotic resistance over the last 17 years.” While researchers qualify that the increases in temperature and resistance are only correlation at this point, there are several hypotheses that explain how the factors may have a causal relationship.

Bacteria can spread antibiotic resistant genes to one another through a process known as conjugation. Researchers claim that “higher temperatures enhance transfer of antibiotic resistant genes between bacteria.” Bacteria have also been proven to grow more quickly in warmer temperatures. As a result, warmer climates may be leading to faster growth and faster spread of resistant genes amongst bacteria; “Southern European countries with minimum temperatures that were 10°C warmer due to climate change- like Spain, Portugal, Romania and Italy- recorded a more rapid rise in antibiotic resistance over time than cooler northern European countries like Sweden, Finland and Norway.”

The United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP), United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) and the World Health Organization (WHO) collectively released a statement in which they called for all sectors of society to rally behind a “bold, unified agenda;” “to stay ahead of antimicrobial resistance, countries must put in place policies that encourage agricultural best practices that prioritise preventing infections.” It added that “human, environmental and animal health are inextricably linked.”

The animal agriculture sector has the power to make a significant impact on the trajectory of antibiotic resistance by restricting the use of antibiotics for growth and improving factory farm conditions, thus eliminating the need to use antibiotics prophylactically. Individuals can make an impact by reducing meat consumption and advocating for change to policymakers. While animal agriculture is one sector of many that may lead to resistance, current farming practices are drastically contributing to an imminent public health disaster and must be addressed immediately. 

The post Cultivating Healthier Environments May Be Crucial in Addressing Antibiotic Resistance appeared first on Earth.Org.

Microsoft President, Brad Smith, recently announced the company’s newest advancement as part of its AI for Earth initiative. Microsoft will use computer learning and computing power to agglomerate global environmental data into a planetary computer. The planetary computer, described as a “global portfolio of applications connecting trillions of data points,” is designed to use artificial intelligence to synthesise environmental data into practical information regarding the Earth’s current ecosystems.

—

At the beginning of this year, Microsoft announced its goal of becoming carbon negative by 2030. Now, the company is going a step further and focusing attention on the world’s lack of comprehensive, global environmental data. A daunting task, Microsoft’s Chief Environmental Officer, Dr. Lucas Joppa, imagines an international database that would provide the world with “information about every tree, every species, all of our natural resources.”

The planetary computer will aggregate environmental data contributed by individuals around the world coupled with machinery placed in water, space, land and air environments. For the first time, there will be a concise and comprehensive compendium of international ecosystem data. Not only will this allow for essential environmental information to be readily available to individuals across the world, but the planetary computer will predict future environmental trends through machine learning design.    

Microsoft customers and partners can use the planetary computer’s synthesised data and predictions to make eco-friendly business and personal decisions. Furthermore, Microsoft has pledged to use the system to take responsibility for the company’s own land footprint and advocate for public policy changes.

You might also like: Researchers Create New Modified Wheat Which May Help Avert Global Food Crisis

Smith acknowledges man’s reliance on nature is incontestable, while pointing out that the status of much of the world’s resources are largely unknown. “For the first time, we would be able to fully understand what resources are where, how fast they’re being depleted and more importantly, what we could and should be doing with all our natural resources.” 

70% of cancer drugs are natural or synthetic products originally found in the environment, 75% of global food crops rely on animal pollination and marine and terrestrial ecosystems sequester 60% of global anthropogenic emissions. However, humanity has had a hand in pushing the planet to the brink of environmental collapse. As of 2019, 25% of those same animal and plant species that provide us with food and medicine are threatened and 85% of wetlands that sequester emissions have been lost or altered due to human activity. It was not until the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services was published did these statistics become known to the general public. In order to protect the very resources we depend on, we must understand the quantity and way in which resources are being used. The planetary computer will monitor, model and manage Earth’s natural, limited resources while tracking ecosystems and species.

Similar models have been employed in the past. In 1995, the UN launched the Global Environmental Outlook (GEO) Project which assessed Earth’s environmental status in order to offer global guidance on sustainability. It took five years for the report to be researched and published, and much of the Earth’s resources changed in those years. 

In 2019,  the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) released the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. The report took years to publish and relied mainly on manpower. Microsoft values the knowledge contained in these reports but believes the information should be readily available to the world more easily and more regularly. Smith argues that “it should be as easy for anyone in the world to search the state of the planet as it is to search the internet for driving directions or dining options,” and Microsoft believes technology and artificial intelligence is the key to get there.

Microsoft is providing the world with a ground-breaking chance to correct our negative environmental impacts and move forward through personal, business and international governmental actions to preserve and protect biodiversity. In addition to providing the technological platform for innovation, Microsoft is leading by example through public policy activism. Microsoft is outspoken in its support of governmental national ecosystem assessments, public land and water conservation, governmental infrastructure to measure and monitor ecosystems and enhanced public-private partnerships. Microsoft has also made a pledge to preserve more land than it uses by 2025.

While Microsoft acknowledges it is undertaking the world’s greatest data, computing and algorithmic challenge, the company is steadfast in its commitment to “put the full power of Earth-scale data right at people’s fingertips” in hopes that this information will allow people to “come together and solve some of the greatest environmental and sustainability challenges we face today.”

The post Microsoft Launches a ‘Planetary Computer’ To Support Global Sustainability appeared first on Earth.Org.