biodiversity
Newsletter
Credit: Arvind Vallabh/Unsplash
Fifteen years after the Gulf oil spill, health claims stall as offshore drilling expands
A decade and a half after the Deepwater Horizon disaster, many Gulf Coast residents and cleanup workers still struggle to receive compensation for alleged oil-related health problems, even as environmental restoration slows and offshore drilling ramps up.
In short:
- The Deepwater Horizon spill released 134 million gallons of crude oil into the Gulf of Mexico in 2010, and while BP paid billions in damages, few of the thousands who claim health problems have won compensation.
- Conservationists praise the billions invested in Gulf restoration, but Louisiana’s flagship sediment diversion project has been paused, facing local backlash over its impact on fisheries and dolphin populations.
- The Trump administration is pushing new offshore drilling leases, with BP planning over 40 new wells, despite continued warnings from environmental groups about the risks of another disaster.
Key quote:
“They didn’t know the dangers. They didn’t do what they should have to protect these young people.”
— Tammy Gremillion, mother of a Deepwater Horizon cleanup worker
Why this matters:
Oil spills have long-term, often invisible consequences that ripple through ecosystems and communities for generations. In the case of Deepwater Horizon, toxic exposure from oil and chemical dispersants like Corexit may have contributed to serious health conditions, but proving those links in court remains elusive. Thousands of claims have been dismissed, leaving sick workers and coastal residents without recourse. At the same time, efforts to restore degraded wetlands and habitats have made progress but now face political and economic headwinds — especially as new drilling projects threaten to undo those gains. Offshore drilling in the Gulf continues under looser regulatory scrutiny, raising the risk of future spills even as communities and wildlife continue to grapple with the fallout from the last one.
Read more: Settlement for BP oil spill workers falls short of expectations
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Wanasanan Phonnaun/Unsplash
Agroforestry cuts deforestation in Southeast Asia, but success depends on local policies
Agroforestry systems have reduced deforestation across Southeast Asia over the past eight years, but new research finds that without the right policies, they can also drive forest loss.
In short:
- A study in Nature Sustainability found agroforestry reduced deforestation in Southeast Asia by more than 250,000 hectares annually between 2015 and 2023, avoiding up to 74 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions each year.
- The impact of agroforestry varied across the region: while it curbed forest loss in areas like Laos and Sumatra, it accelerated it in others such as eastern Cambodia, depending on economic, ecological and governance conditions.
- Researchers urge policymakers to support agroforestry through land tenure rights, community-led land-use planning, and incentives to boost productivity on existing farmland.
Key quote:
“These diverse [agroforestry] systems can provide alternative sources of income [for farmers] — fuelwood, timber, fruits, and other products — reducing the economic pressure to clear more forests.”
— Steve Hoong Chen Teo, study lead author and researcher at the National University of Singapore
Why this matters:
Agroforestry, the practice of integrating trees and shrubs into farmland, has gained traction as a way to tackle climate change while supporting rural economies. In Southeast Asia, where tropical forests are vital carbon sinks and biodiversity hotspots, deforestation from industrial agriculture remains rampant, particularly for crops like oil palm and rubber. This new study suggests agroforestry can slow deforestation and reduce carbon emissions, but only under certain conditions. If land rights are weak or markets demand rapid crop expansion, agroforestry can backfire, fueling more forest loss. Millions of people in Southeast Asia rely directly on forests for food, medicine and livelihood, and unsustainable clearing puts them at risk.
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Photo by Ashwin Vaswani/Unsplash
Pope Francis, who used faith and science to call out the climate crisis, dies at 88
Pope Francis died this morning at the age of 88. He spent his papacy urging world leaders and everyday Catholics to treat climate change as both a scientific fact and a moral emergency.
In short:
- Pope Francis made climate justice a pillar of his legacy, calling for urgent action on global warming and spotlighting its disproportionate impact on the poor.
- His 2015 encyclical Laudato si’ was a watershed moment, aligning Catholic doctrine with climate science and influencing key international talks like the Paris Agreement.
- Even as his health declined, he continued to challenge wealthy nations’ responsibility, framing fossil fuel dependence and environmental destruction as “structural sin.”
Key quote:
“The wealthier nations, around one billion people, produce more than half of the heat-trapping pollutants. On the contrary, the three billion poorer people contribute less than 10 percent, yet they suffer 75 percent of the resulting damage.”
— Pope Francis
Why this matters:
Pope Francis helped elevate climate change to an urgent moral imperative, linking it to poverty, inequality, and global health. His framing was radical in its simplicity: Protecting the Earth is not just about survival; it’s about love, justice, and human dignity. Even as the pope's health faltered, he made it clear that environmental collapse isn’t just a policy failure, but a spiritual failure. And while not everyone accepted his message, Pope Francis helped galvanize climate movements around the world and gave environmental justice a pulpit few could ignore.
Read more: At the Vatican, a call to avoid 'biological extinction'
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: redcharlie/Unsplash
Extreme heat and drought weakened forests’ ability to absorb carbon dioxide in 2024
The amount of carbon dioxide in Earth’s atmosphere rose at record speed in 2024, likely because rainforests and other ecosystems, stressed by extreme heat and drought, absorbed far less carbon than usual.
In short:
- Data from the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) shows atmospheric CO₂ concentrations jumped 3.75 parts per million in 2024, the largest annual increase ever recorded, exceeding the previous 2015 record by 27%.
- Though fossil fuel emissions hit a new high, scientists say this modest rise doesn’t account for the CO₂ spike; instead, they point to stressed forests, wildfires, and prolonged droughts disrupting the planet’s natural carbon sinks.
- A recent El Niño event, followed by persistent dryness in the Amazon and central Africa, significantly diminished the land’s ability to absorb CO₂, potentially turning vital ecosystems into net carbon sources.
Key quote:
“This tropical dryness is basically shutting down CO₂ uptake.”
— Philippe Ciais, associate director of the Climate and Environmental Sciences Laboratory
Why this matters:
For decades, Earth’s forests, grasslands, and oceans have acted like a giant sponge, soaking up nearly half the carbon dioxide emitted by human activities. But when ecosystems like the Amazon rainforest and Congo Basin become stressed — by heat, drought, or fire — their ability to store carbon falters. That means more carbon stays in the atmosphere, accelerating climate change. In 2024, the world saw signs of that shift, as extreme weather events coincided with a breakdown in CO₂ absorption. If such patterns continue, the world could enter a dangerous feedback loop: warming damages ecosystems, which then release more carbon, which in turn speeds up warming. This would make it harder to predict or control climate outcomes, putting human health, food systems, and biodiversity at greater risk.
Read more: Forests struggle to absorb carbon due to extreme heat and wildfires
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: 1photo/Big Stock Photo
Trump’s China tariffs drive up Brazil soy farming and Amazon deforestation
China is expected to buy more soybeans from Brazil — accelerating forest loss in the Amazon and the Cerrado — as U.S. tariffs disrupt global agricultural trade.
In short:
- A new round of U.S. tariffs on Chinese imports, including a 145 percent duty, has led China to redirect its soybean purchases from the U.S. to Brazil, potentially increasing deforestation in the Amazon and Cerrado biomes.
- Brazilian right-wing governors are weakening environmental protections and attempting to void the Soy Moratorium, which has historically curbed Amazon deforestation linked to soy production.
- Indigenous communities, such as the Munduruku, are facing environmental degradation and threats to land rights as soy plantations expand around their territories.
Key quote:
“The fact that the Amazon soy moratorium is actively being weakened right now, I think it puts Brazil at a really precarious place.”
— Lisa Rausch, University of Wisconsin at Madison
Why this matters:
Soy farming is a leading driver of deforestation in Brazil, especially in the Amazon and Cerrado regions — both critical carbon sinks for the planet. When forests are cleared, vast stores of carbon are released, worsening climate change. The recent spike in global demand for Brazilian soy, fueled by trade tensions between the U.S. and China, threatens to accelerate this deforestation. And it’s not just climate at risk: Indigenous communities, long-standing stewards of the forest, are losing access to clean water and land, while government leaders push to gut environmental regulations. These changes come at a time when enforcement in the Amazon remains weak, and land-clearing practices — often illegal — continue largely unchecked. If deforestation increases, the consequences extend far beyond Brazil: disrupted rainfall patterns could affect agriculture across South America, and the loss of biodiversity may prove irreversible.
Related: Brazil Supreme Court justice sparks backlash with proposal to weaken Indigenous land rights
Keep reading...Show less
Trump reopens protected Pacific waters to commercial fishing, sparking backlash
President Trump has opened a vast marine reserve in the Pacific Ocean to commercial fishing, rolling back more than a decade of protections in a move he says will boost the U.S. seafood industry.
Rebecca Dzombak and Lisa Friedman report for The New York Times.
In short:
- Trump signed an executive order allowing commercial fishing in the Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument, a 500,000-square-mile protected area established by President George W. Bush and expanded by President Obama.
- A second order directed federal agencies to ease restrictions on fishing and aquaculture, with supporters arguing the move will help the economies of Pacific territories like American Samoa.
- Environmental groups and marine scientists say the move threatens biodiversity and undermines legal protections, and they plan to challenge the order in court.
Key quote:
“This is a gift to industrial fishing fleets and a slap in the face to science and the generations of Pacific Islanders who have long called for greater protection of these sacred waters.”
— Maxx Phillips, director for Hawaii and Pacific Islands at the Center for Biological Diversity
Why this matters:
Marine protected areas function as biodiversity banks: When left alone, they teem with life, serve as fish nurseries, and often boost surrounding fisheries by allowing populations to regenerate. They also have a role in mitigating and building resilience against the effects of climate change. The Pacific Islands Heritage Marine National Monument is one of the largest such zones on Earth, home to endangered whales, turtles, deep-sea corals, and countless species not found elsewhere. Opening it to industrial fishing risks damaging fragile ecosystems that may take decades — or longer — to recover. Critics argue the decision is part of a broader push to prioritize short-term economic gain over long-term ecological and food security. The U.S. holds jurisdiction over more ocean territory than any other nation. What it chooses to do with that responsibility will shape the health of the planet’s largest ecosystem and the livelihoods of coastal communities for generations to come.
Related: Trump's renewed push for fish farms in the Gulf could reshape marine life
Keep reading...Show less
Newsletter
Credit: Justin Wilkens/Unsplash
Trump’s deregulation and FEMA cuts put Mississippi River and others at extreme risk, report warns
The Mississippi River tops this year’s list of America’s most endangered waterways, as environmental groups warn that President Trump’s sweeping deregulation and Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) budget cuts are accelerating threats to rivers across the country.
In short:
- The Mississippi River, which provides the primary source of drinking water to dozens of municipalities and supports nearly 900 species, is now the most endangered U.S. river due to worsening pollution, drought, and government deregulation.
- Trump’s proposed dismantling of FEMA, which manages disaster response and flood mitigation, endangers rivers from Louisiana to Appalachia, including areas still recovering from Hurricane Helene’s catastrophic flooding.
- Data centers and fossil fuel expansion, heavily incentivized under the Trump administration, are further straining rivers in Virginia and West Virginia, where water shortages and pollution violations are already threatening ecosystems and public health.
Key quote:
“Our water wealth is one of our greatest assets as a nation. But pollution and extreme weather are putting our rivers, clean water, and public safety at risk. When our rivers are sick, our own health and prosperity suffers.”
— Tom Kiernan, president and CEO of American Rivers
Why this matters:
Rivers are lifelines for drinking water, agriculture, biodiversity, and cultural heritage, yet many are in crisis. The Mississippi River, often called the nation’s backbone, faces compounding threats from climate change and deregulation. FEMA, now facing severe cuts, has long played a key role in flood mitigation and rebuilding infrastructure after climate disasters. Without this support, communities face growing risks from flooding, contamination, and habitat loss. Simultaneously, the unchecked growth of water-intensive industries like data centers and fossil fuel operations is drying up aquifers and further polluting waterways. Ignoring the health of these rivers risks a cascading impact on ecosystems and the millions of people who rely on them.
Related: Trump considers scaling back federal disaster aid to states
Keep reading...Show less
ORIGINAL REPORTING
MOST POPULAR
CLIMATE
