Talk with nearly any climate expert who wants to wean humanity off of fossil fuels and prepare yourself for a list of technological solutions.
From wind and solar to fusion and geothermal, you're far more likely to hear about the need to incentivize scientific innovation than you are about Jimmy Carter-esque pleas for us to turn down the heat and leave our cars at home.
Sadly, as wise as Carter's suggestions may have been, such appeals often just don't work with most people.
Those experts are right: we're going to have to change our energy sources—and soon. But increasingly, environmental groups are making it clear that yes, fighting climate change means reducing our use of smokestacks, but it also means doing the same with our half-smokes. There's now a fairly broad expert consensus that we can't avert the most serious climate consequences without a dramatic reduction in livestock-raising.
Greenpeace just issued a report declaring that we need to cut meat consumption in half for climate purposes. The Center for Biological Diversity says that if we want to prevent wildlife extinction, the best thing we can do is eat less meat. And the Union of Concerned Scientists concludes that two of the leading causes of global deforestation are the creation of pasture land for cattle grazing and growing crops to feed animals confined on factory farms.
These groups are hitting the nail on the head in their diagnoses of animal agribusiness as a major threat to the planet. However, unlike with fossil fuels, many of the recommendations to solve the problem of factory farms rest with the individual consumer: simply make the conscious choice to eat less meat. And as good of an idea as that is for both planetary and personal health reasons, we can't ignore that this problem is unlikely to be solved by individual action alone. Like clean energy, it will also take a technological revolution.
Just as we need superior alternatives to fossil fuels that still give us the same functionality of heat, light, and transportation to which we're accustomed, we need the same for meat. Fortunately, there are some promising options that may just allow us to have our meat and eat it too.
Credit: Compassion Over Killing/flickr
One such alternative to factory farming of animals is "clean meat," or real meat grown from animal cells rather than animal slaughter. It's a simple idea: Just take a miniscule biopsy of muscle tissue from an animal, put those cells in a cultivator where they think they're still in the animal's body, and watch them grow into the same exact muscle (i.e., meat) they would've become inside the body.
It may sound like science fiction, but with a cadre of start-ups racing to commercialize the world's first real animal products grown without animals, it's now science fact. As someone who's eaten this clean meat many times, I can attest that it tastes good. In fact, it tastes like meat since that's, well, exactly what it is.
Even meat giants like Cargill and Tyson see the promise in cleat meat, both having now invested in Memphis Meats, one such start-up based in California. In a Fox Business interview, Cargill CEO David MacLennan discussed his new investment: "Call it 'clean meat' if you will. It's a way to produce meat in a different alternative that isn't as resource-intensive."
Just how much less resource-intensive? The environmental benefits could be astounding. One study by Oxford University's Hanna Tuomisto concluded that growing clean beef could use 99 percent less land, 96 percent less water, yet emitting 96 percent fewer greenhouse gases than raising cattle for beef.
Clean meat isn't an alternative to meat any more than ice from your freezer is an alternative to ice formed in a wintry lake. Both are ice, but one is formed without human intervention and the other through technology. Similarly, clean meat is real meat, but just grown with far fewer resources and fewer food safety concerns.
Such meat is still years—though not decades—away from being a regular presence on grocery shelves. In the meantime, there's another food science revolution that's poised to play a major role in addressing the problem.
Just as plant-based milks like almond and soy milk have exploded in popularity in recent years, plant-based meats are poised to do the same. These products may not be actual meat, but companies like Beyond Meat and Gardein are now making alternatives that regularly appeal to the most inveterate carnivores. Just like with plant-based milk, consumers of plant-based meats aren't being asked to give up the tastes that they love; they're simply being offered what looks and tastes like the same thing, but without the same type of planetary problems (nor the cholesterol for that matter).
Yes, we'd all be better off eating less meat and enjoying more whole foods plant-based meals like brown rice and beans on whole wheat tortillas. But meat production is on the rise, both in America and throughout the world. In the U.S., we still eat more meat per person than just about any nation in global history.
Weaning ourselves won't be easy—from fossil fuels or factory farms. But without technological innovations that make doing the right thing the easy and economical thing, the task may be near-impossible. To invest in a cleaner food future, it's time to invest in both the budding clean meat and plant-based meat industries.
A recent analysis argues that while Plastic Free July aims to reduce plastic use, significant impact requires action from governments and companies, not just consumers.
Individual efforts during Plastic Free July are insufficient to address plastic pollution without systemic changes.
Governments and corporations must implement regulations and redesign production and distribution systems to reduce plastic waste.
Effective solutions need to consider the essential roles plastics play in everyday life and avoid disadvantaging vulnerable communities.
Key quote:
"Consumers shouldn’t have to bear full responsibility for plastic pollution. Individual sacrifices – particularly temporary ones – won’t make a significant difference."
— Bhavna Middha, senior research fellow at the Centre for Urban Research, RMIT University and Ralph Horne, associate deputy vice chancellor of research & innovation at the College of Design & Social Context, RMIT University.
Why this matters:
Focusing solely on consumer action overlooks the need for comprehensive policies and industry accountability to create lasting environmental change. Addressing plastic pollution effectively requires broad, systemic reforms that protect both the environment and vulnerable populations. Read more: A plastic recipe for societal suicide.
CAMERON PARISH, La. — Late into the night, John Allaire watches the facility next to his home shoot 300-foot flares from stacks.
He lives within eyesight of southwest Louisiana’s salty shores, where, for decades, he’s witnessed nearly 200 feet of land between it and his property line disappear into the sea. Two-thirds of the land was rebuilt to aid the oil and gas industry’s LNG expansion. LNG — shorthand for liquified natural gas – is natural gas that's cooled to liquid form for easier storage or transport; it equates to 1/600th the volume of natural gas in a gaseous state. It’s used to generate electricity, or fuel stove tops and home heaters, and in industrial processes like manufacturing fertilizer.
In the U.S., at least 30 new LNG terminal facilities have been constructed or proposed since 2016, according to the
Oil and Gas Watch project. Louisiana and Texas’ Gulf Coast, where five facilities are already operating, will host roughly two-thirds of the new LNG terminals – meaning at least 22 Gulf Coast LNG facilities are currently under construction, were recently approved to break ground or are under further regulatory review.
Although the U.S. didn’t ship LNG until 2016, when a freight tanker left, a few miles from where Cameron Parish’s LNG plants are today, last year the country became the global leader in LNG production and export volume, leapfrogging exporters like Qatar and Australia. The
EIA’s most recent annual outlook estimated that between the current year and 2050, U.S. LNG exports will increase by 152%.
Allaire, 68, watches how saltwater collects where rainwater once fed the area’s diminishing coastal wetlands. “We still come down here with the kids and set out the fishing rods. It's not as nice as it used to be,” he told
Environmental Health News (EHN).
That intimacy with nature drew Allaire to the area when he purchased 311 acres in 1998. An environmental engineer and 30-year oil and gas industry veteran, he helped lead environmental assessments and manage clean-ups, and although retired, he still works part-time as an environmental consultant with major petroleum companies. With a lifetime of oil and gas industry expertise, he’s watched the industry's footprint spread across Louisiana and the Gulf of Mexico’s fragile shores and beyond. Now that the footprints are at the edge of his backyard, Allaire is among a cohort of organizers, residents and fisher-folk in the region mobilizing to stop LNG facility construction. For him, the industry’s expansion usurps the right-or-wrong ethics he carried across his consulting career. For anglers, oil and gas infrastructure has destroyed fishing grounds and prevented smaller vessels from accessing the seafood-rich waters of the Calcasieu River.
From the view of Allaire’s white pickup truck as he drives across his property to the ocean’s shore, he points to where a new LNG facility will replace marshlands. Commonwealth LNG intends to clear the land of trees and then backfill the remaining low-lying field.
“You see what’s happening with the environment,” Allaire said. “When the facts change, I got to change my mind about what we’re doing.”
Community bands together
John Allaire, left, purchased 311 acres in Cameron Parish in 1998, and has watched the oil and gas industry's footprint spread to his property.
Credit: John Allaire
During an Earth Day rally in April, community members gathered in the urban center of Lake Charles to demand local oil and gas industries help deliver a safer, healthier future for all. In between live acts by artists performing south Louisiana’s quintessential zydeco musical style, speakers like James Hiatt, a Calcasieu Parish native with ties to Cameron Parish and a Healthy Gulf organizer, and RISE St. James organizer Sharon Lavigne, who’s fighting against LNG development in rural Plaquemines Parish near the city of New Orleans, asked the nearly 100 in attendance to imagine a day in which the skyline isn’t dotted by oil and gas infrastructure.
Not long ago, it was hard to imagine an Earth Day rally in southwest Louisiana at all. For decades, the area has been decorated with fossil fuel infrastructure. Sunsets on some days are highlighted by the chemicals in the air; at night, thousands of facilities’ lights dot the dark sky.
“It takes a lot of balls for people to start speaking up,” Shreyas Vasudevan, a campaign researcher with the Louisiana Bucket Brigade, told EHN in the days after the rally. In a region with its history and economy intertwined with oil and gas production, “you can get a lot of social criticism – or ostracization, as well – even threats to your life.”
Many are involved in local, regional and national advocacy groups, including the Louisiana Bucket Brigade, Healthy Gulf, the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the Turtle Island Restoration Network, the Center for Biological Diversity and the National Audubon Society.
“You see what’s happening with the environment,” Allaire said. “When the facts change, I got to change my mind about what we’re doing.” - John Allaire, environmental engineer and 30-year oil and gas industry veteran
But environmental organizers are fighting a multi-billion-dollar industry with federal and state winds at its back. And LNG’s federal support is coupled with existing state initiatives.
Under outgoing Louisiana Gov. John Bel Edwards — a term-limited Democrat — the state pledged a goal of reaching net-zero greenhouse emissions by 2050. Natural gas, which the LNG industry markets as a cleaner-burning alternative, is cited as one of the state’s solutions. Louisiana is the only state that produces a majority of its carbon emissions through fossil fuels refining industries, like LNG, rather than energy production or transportation. Governor Edwards’ office did not return EHN’s request for comment.
This accommodating attitude towards oil and gas industries has resulted in a workforce that’s trained to work in LNG refining facilities across much of the rural Gulf region, said Steven Miles, a lawyer at Baker Botts LLP and a fellow at the Baker Institute’s Center on Energy Studies. Simultaneously, anti-industrialization pushback is lacking. It’s good news for industries like LNG.
“The bad news,” Miles added. “[LNG facilities] are all being jammed in the same areas.”
One rallying cry for opponents is local health. The Environmental Integrity Project found that LNG export terminals emit chemicals like carbon monoxide –potentially deadly– and sulfur dioxide, of which the American Lung Association says long-term exposure can lead to heart disease, cancer, and damage to internal or female reproductive organs.
An analysis of emissions monitoring reports by the advocacy group the Louisiana Bucket Brigade found that Venture Global’s existing Calcasieu Pass facility had more than 2,000 permit violations.That includes exceeding the permit’s authorized air emissions limit to release nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, particulate matter and volatile organic compounds 286 out of its first 343 days of operation.
The Marvel Crane, the first liquid natural gas carrier to transport natural gas from the Southwest Louisiana LNG facility, transits a channel in Hackberry, Louisiana, May 28, 2019.
“This is just one facility,” at a time when three more facilities have been proposed in the region and state, Vasudevan said. Venture Global’s operational LNG facility — also known as Calcasieu Pass — “is much smaller than the other facility they’ve proposed.”
In an area that experienced 18 feet of storm surge during Hurricane Laura in 2020 — and just weeks later, struck by Hurricane Delta — Venture Global is planning to build a second export terminal Known as “CP2,” it’s the largest of the roughly two dozen proposed Gulf LNG export terminals, and a key focal point for the region’s local organizing effort.
Residents “don’t really want LNG as much as they want Cameron [Parish] from 1990 back,” Hiatt told EHN of locals’ nostalgia for a community before storms like Rita in 2005 brought up to 15 feet of storm surge, only for Laura to repeat the damage in 2020. Throughout that time, the parish’s population dipped from roughly 10,000 to 5,000. “But the wolf knocking at the door is LNG. Folks in Cameron think that's going to bring back community, bring back the schools, bring back this time before we had all these storms — when Cameron was pretty prosperous.”
“Clearly,” for the oil and gas industry, “the idea is to transform what was once the center of commercial fishing in Louisiana to gas exports,” Cindy Robertson, an environmental activist in southwest Louisiana, told EHN.
Helping fishers’ impacted by LNG is about “actual survival of this unique culture,” Cooke said.
In a measure of organizers’ success, she pointed to a recent permit hearing for Venture Global’s CP2 proposal. Regionally, it’s the only project that’s received an environmental permit, but not its export permit, which remains under federal review. At the meeting, some spoke on the company’s behalf. As an organizer, it was a moment of clarity, Cooke explained. Venture Global officials “had obviously done a lot of coaching and organizing and getting people together in Cameron to speak out on their behalf,” Cooke said. “So, in a way, that was bad. But in another way, it shows that we really had an impact.”
“It also shows that we have a lot to do,” Cooke added.
Environmental organizers like Alyssa Portaro describe a sense of fortitude among activists — she and her husband to the region’s nearby town of Vinton near the Texas-Louisiana border. Since the families’ relocation to their farm, Portaro has worked with Cameron Parish fisher-folk.
“I’ve not witnessed ‘community’ anywhere like there is in Louisiana,” Portaro told EHN. But a New Jersey native, she understands the toll environmental pollution has on low-income communities. “This environment, it’s so at risk — and it’s currently getting sacrificed to big industries.”
“People don’t know what we’d do without oil and gas. It comes at a big price,” she added.
Southwest Louisiana’s Cameron Parish is one of the state’s most rural localities. Marine economies were the area’s economic drivers until natural disasters and LNG facilities began pushing locals out, commercial fishers claim.
Credit: Xander Peters for Environmental Health News
Residents “don’t really want LNG as much as they want Cameron [Parish] from 1990 back,” James Hiatt , a Healthy Gulf organizer, told EHN. "But the wolf knocking at the door is LNG."
Credit: Xander Peters for Environmental Health News
For the most part, Cameron Parish’s life and economy has historically taken place at sea. As new LNG facilities are operational or in planning locally, locals claim the community they once knew is nearly unrecognizable.
Credit: Xander Peters for Environmental Health News
A disappearing parish
The stakes are seemingly higher for a region like southwest Louisiana, which is the epicenter of climate change impacts.
In nearly a century, the state has lost roughly 2,000 square miles of land to coastal erosion. In part driving the state’s erosion crisis is the compounding impacts of Mississippi River infrastructure and oil and gas industry activity, such as dredging canals for shipping purposes, according to a March study published in the journal Nature Sustainability. Louisiana’s Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority said Cameron Parish could lose more land than other coastal parishes over the next 50 years. A recent Climate Central report says the parish will be underwater within that time frame.
On top of erosion and sea level rise impacts, in August, 2023, marshland across southwest Louisiana’s Cameron Parish burned. The fires were among at least 600 across the Bayou State this year. Statewide, roughly 60,000 acres burned — a more than six-fold increase of the state’s average acres burned per year in the past decade alone.
But while the blaze avoided coastal Louisiana communities like Cameron Parish, the fires represented a warning coming from a growing chorus of locals across the region — one that’s echoes by the local commercial fishing population, who claimed to have experienced unusually low yields during the same time, according to a statement from a local environmental group. At the site of the Cameron Parish fires are locations for two proposed LNG expansion projects.
"The idea is to transform what was once the center of commercial fishing in Louisiana to gas exports.” - Cindy Robertson, an environmental activist in southwest Louisiana
It was an unusual occurrence for an area that’s more often itself underwater this time of year due to a storm surge from powerful storms. For LNG expansion’s local opposition, it was a red flag.
As the Louisiana Bucket Brigade has noted prior, the confluence of climate change’s raising of sea levels and the construction of LNG export terminals — some are proposed at the size of nearly 700 football fields — are wiping away the marshland folks like Allaire watched wither. Among their fears is that the future facilities won’t be able to withstand the power of another storm like Laura and its storm surge, which wiped away entire communities in 2020.
Amidst these regional climate impacts, LNG infrastructure has shown potential to exacerbate the accumulation of greenhouse gasses that cause global warming. For the most part, LNG is made up of methane — a greenhouse gas that’s more than 80 times more potent than carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Among the 22 current LNG facility proposals, the advocacy group Sierra Club described a combined climate pollution output that would roughly equal to that of about 440 coal plants.
The climate impacts prompt some of the LNG industry’s uncertainty going forward. It isn’t clear if Asian countries, key importers of U.S. LNG, will “embrace these energy transition issues,” said David Dismuke, an energy consultant and the former executive director of Louisiana State University’s Center for Energy Studies. Likewise, European nations remain skeptical of embracing LNG as a future staple fuel source.
“They really don't want to have to pull the trigger,” Dismukes added, referring to Europe’s hesitation to commit more resources to exporting LNG from the American market. “They don't want to go down that road.”
While there will be a tapering down of natural gas supply, Miles explained, “we’re going to need natural gas for a long time,” as larger battery storage for renewables is still unavailable.
“I'm not one of these futurists that can tell you where we're going to be, but I just don't see everything being extreme,” Dismukes said. “I don't see what we've already built getting stranded and going away, either.”
For now, LNG seems here to stay. From 2012 to 2022,U.S. natural gas demand — the sum of both domestic consumption and gross exports — rose by a whopping 43%, reported the U.S. Energy Information Administration, or EIA. Meanwhile, in oil and gas hotbeds like Louisiana and Texas, natural gas demand grew by 116%.
Throughout 25 years, Allaire has witnessed southwest Louisiana’s land slowly fade, in part driven by the same industrial spread regionally. Near where the front door of his travel trailer sits underneath the aluminum awning, he points to a chenier ridge located near the end of the property. It’s disappearing, he said.
“See the sand washing over, in here?” Allaire says, as he points towards the stretches of his property. “This pond used to go down for a half mile. This is all that's left of it on this side.”
In the course of a century, Houston, once known for its magnolia flowers, turned into the “energy capital of the world.” To many, at 52 miles long and deepening under its 11th expansion, the Houston Ship Channel represents its epicenter.
The channel hosts hundreds of chemical facilities, some of which have years of documented Clean Air Act violations. Amnesty International called the channel a “sacrifice zone” where fenceline communities, made up predominantly with people of color, are disproportionately exposed to pollution. This is seen as the “cost of doing business,” according to the report.
But to people like Juan Flores and his family, the area is also home.
Flores, who you’ll meet in the video report above, has lived in Galena Park his entire life, and has been surrounded by the Houston Ship Channel’s dredge material deposit sites for as long as he can remember. He even recalls playing in them as a child.
The current 11th expansion of the port will create new dredge deposit sites and will stack new dredge material on old sites. In response to communities’ concerns of potential risks, Port Houston, the local entity that manages the public ports of the channel and is in charge of the expansion alongside the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, has said there is no cause for concern. According to the Corps, the material is tested before being placed on the mounds — yet the Corps has stated in the past that they do not test the deposit sites.
Watch the video above to learn more about the stories of these communities and their industrial neighbors. Editor’s note: This story is part of a two- part series that will highlight the expansion of industry along the Houston Ship Channel – and the channel itself – amidst the landscape of an ever growing industrial footprint and the pollution that comes with it.
Trump’s Project 2025 plan aims to reverse Biden's climate initiatives, increasing oil and gas production while reducing renewable energy support.
The plan could significantly increase U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, hindering global climate goals and exacerbating extreme weather events.
Critics warn this shift could jeopardize U.S. leadership in global climate efforts and lead to severe environmental and public health impacts.
Key quote:
“What [Project 2025] would do is slow down and delay that transition, undercut the ability to bring down emissions, which is very harmful for the climate and causes a lot of pollution in communities near these facilities.”
— Rachel Cleetus, policy director at the Union of Concerned Scientists
Several recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court pose significant challenges to the government's ability to combat climate change and pollution for years to come.
Recent Supreme Court rulings restrict the Environmental Protection Agency's power to enforce air and water pollution regulations.
The court overturned the Chevron doctrine, limiting federal agencies' authority to regulate critical areas, including the environment.
The court also put a hold on an EPA plan to reduce industrial air pollution that drifts across state lines to downwind states.
These decisions reflect a concerted campaign by industry and conservative groups to weaken the administrative state and the EPA.
Key quote:
“They had a knife before; they have a chain saw now.”
— Sam Sankar, senior vice president for programs at the environmental lawfirm Earthjustice
Why this matters:
These rulings hinder efforts to address climate change, potentially worsening health outcomes by allowing increased pollution and environmental degradation. The decisions could influence U.S. climate policy for decades, especially if conservative judges continue to dominate the judiciary. Read more: Supreme Court undoing 50 years’ worth of environmental progress.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approved the construction of the largest liquefied natural gas terminal in the U.S., sparking local opposition and potential lawsuits.
U.S. Rep. John Curtis, known for his climate advocacy, won his primary, positioning himself for a U.S. Senate seat.
Curtis founded the Conservative Climate Caucus to promote Republican engagement in climate science and bipartisan solutions.
His legislative future may include the "PROVE IT Act," focused on studying carbon intensity of U.S. products.
Key quote:
“Does it verify or affirm that you can have a more thoughtful or nuanced position on climate issues and energy issues and still get elected statewide in a conservative state? Yes.”
— U.S. Rep. Garret Graves (R-La), ranking member of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis
Why this matters:
Curtis' win could lead to greater bipartisan cooperation on climate issues in a traditionally conservative state. His efforts to shift Republican perspectives on climate policy may impact national discussions and legislative actions.
