Weekly Climate News

October 29, 2020

  • Indigenous Mayan communities are suing the Mexican government over plans to install more than 1 million solar panels near their homes, a project that would require clearance of 600 hectares of trees from their communities. 

  • Vietnam prepares for Typhoon Molave, the fourth storm to hit the central region of the country in the past few weeks in a series of the most intense tropical storms they have experienced in decades. Currently, 130 people have been reported dead and 18 missing, and about 300,000 homes have been damaged or completely collapsed by the floods. 

  • The Trump administration has rolled back nearly 100 climate policies and rules in regards to clean air, water, wildlife and toxic chemicals. Here is the full list. 

  • Ranchers and activists have taken sides in a proposed plan to cull the Tule Elk Herd in Point Reyes National Seashore, located north of San Francisco, California. 

  • Check out this list of key Senate races which could largely determine the future of U.S. climate policy. 

  • Japan announced ambitious plans to become carbon neutral by 2050. 

  • Fossil fuel companies are losing favor with investors, as many are turning toward the renewable energy sector. 

  • Poor air quality in Asia has been linked to billions of premature deaths, and a new report claims that breathing air in New Delhi can shorten life expectancy by more than nine years. 

  • A new study by NASA will look at how particulate matter in air pollution affects human health. 






Environmental Art: From the Creative to the Political Sphere

Image courtesy of Mronline.org

Image courtesy of Mronline.org

By Siona Ahuja ’24

Staff Writer

The environmental art movement serves as an umbrella movement to various facets of nature. It is a call to worship it, be inspired by it, conserve it and resist those who cause irreparable damage to it. These creations call for humans to recognize their inseparable bond from nature and regard it as the very force that sustains them. 

Environmental art has been present since the earliest art forms, evoking sentiments of environmental interconnectedness among people with its longtime existence. Reflection of nature around humans has dated back to the paleolithic cave paintings that depict wildlife as well as hunting and gathering. Claude Monet revolutionized art and created the impressionist movement by using nature as his muse. 

“For me, a landscape does not exist in its own right, since its appearance changes at every moment; but the surrounding atmosphere brings it to life — the light and the air which vary continually,” Monet said. “For me, it is only the surrounding atmosphere which gives subjects their true value.”

The environmental art movement includes several submovements such as romanticism, eco-realism, arte povera and sustainable art.

Romanticism was a reactionary artistic movement that resisted the scientific rationalization of nature during the Enlightenment Era in the 18th century. The rise of capitalism regarded elements of nature such as water and wind as commodities rather than a source of appreciation. Poets, artists and intellectuals responded by utilizing art forms that celebrated nature in its purest form. For example, John Constable, an 18th century British painter, revolutionized the environmental art movement through his naturalistic, richly colored landscape paintings. 

In the late 1960s, environmental art manifested in the political sphere. The detrimental human impacts on the Earth were becoming visible in this period, and art became crucial to transforming human consciousness worldwide. Some concerns included oil spills and carbon emissions causing smog. The population explosion of the 1970s in particular led to a panic of overpopulation and its accompanying environmental pressures like pollution, starvation and resource depletion, which were depicted by artists at the time.  

Land art, art made directly into the landscape using natural materials like twigs and leaves, transformed into protest art. Creating outside traditional spaces questioned the commodification of art and its placement in studios and galleries. A major land art figure is Anya Gallaccio, a British artist who creates site-specific minimalist installations and often works with organic, decaying material. Her practice of using unconventional materials like ice, sugar cubes, flowers and fruit depicts her anti-consumerist stance and prompts the viewers to think about unnecessary human intervention in nature. Her works flow well with the general transitory theme of land art that suggests impermanence in the natural world. This movement is also notable for reintroducing nature to urban landscapes, as seen with Alan Sonfist’s prominent “Time Landscape” (1965-1978), a land installation in New York City. 

Arte povera, or “impoverished art,” was an avant-garde Italian movement of the 1960s that incorporated reused, commonplace and literally “poor” materials like rope, soil, rocks, paper, clothing and the like. This was a reaction to the minimalist and modernist abstract painting realm that had dominated Europe in the mid-1960s. Arte povera pieces were mainly sculptural and challenged the notion of art as a valuable, exclusive commodity. Marisa Merz was the sole female member of the initial movement and worked with unconventional items like boots, blankets and bowls of salt. 

Sustainable art is an art form that is in harmony with the principles of sustainability such as social justice, ecology, grassroots democracy and nonviolence. The pieces are considered sustainable if they are made of recycled materials or by objects that do not exert any pressure on the Earth. Artists seek to highlight environmental degradation and the harsh reality of climate change through a creative medium. Camille Thibert is a French artist who creates what she calls “earthworks.” Her pieces incorporate reclaimed wood that is uniquely crafted through a drilling technique that creates shadows and textures in the portraits painted on them. By using nature as a medium, Thibert seeks to start a discussion on the vulnerability of nature and highlight how we should engage in a more conscious lifestyle. 

The work of Mount Holyoke Guest Artist in Art Amanda Maciuba is concerned with the current environment and human agency within the landscape. “Artists respond to this [environmental] threat in a variety of ways, from making work that mourns ecosystems lost, or creating overtly political work that shares or exposes issues in the environmental policy world,” Maciuba said. “The work can stem from more traditional drawings and paintings that respond to or illustrate these issues, to artists that directly intervene in the environment and their communities with site-specific installations and performances.”

As an artist whose primary discipline is print media and book arts, a majority of Maciuba’s work is paper-based. Her research practice, which is to explore the environments and communities where she lives to help her draw inspiration for her work, is extensive. “I consider going out and physically exploring the environment a vitally important part of my practice,” Maciuba said. 

“I also spend time investigating the people that live in a space and how they have impacted their environment,” Maciuba added. “My hope is that my work encourages viewers to reconsider their impact on their immediate communities.”

Maciuba doubts that this art movement is going away any time soon. She said that as climate disasters continue to grow more extreme, people are beginning to see how these threats impact their immediate livelihood. In line with this thought process, she announced that “the art studio department [at the College] is actually creating a new class that will specifically think about the art and ecology movement.” 

“I think one of our jobs as artists is to document and critically engage with what is going on in our lives, as well as the world right now,” she added.


The Best Movies for Environmental education

Pictured above: Seed: the untold story. Image courtesy of Cstpdx.com

Pictured above: Seed: the untold story. Image courtesy of Cstpdx.com

By Catelyn Fitzgerald  ’23

Staff Writer

With online learning and quarantine, a break after a long day of classes likely consists of a movie or a few episodes of a show on Netflix. While students may want to spend those short moments of peace from an endless flow of assignments and tests watching a fun movie, it is still imperative to educate ourselves on the crisis that is climate change. Environmental education comes in many forms, and as we strive to be informed about the changes happening in the world around us, education can be incorporated into our daily lives by replacing one TV binge a week with an environmental documentary. Whether you are starting to learn about the environment and do not know where to begin or are an avid environmentalist looking to dive deeper into subjects of interest, there is a movie out there to teach and inspire you. Below are seven films that approach environmental issues in a (relatively) unbiased and compelling way.

“David Attenborough: A Life on Our Planet”

Where to watch: Netflix

Whether or not you are an environmental enthusiast, there is a chance you have watched a film by Sir David Attenborough at least once in your lifetime. With a voice that has become instantly recognizable across decades and around the world, Attenborough has written and narrated dozens of films showcasing the Earth’s natural wonders. 

In “A Life on Our Planet,” Attenborough returns to the screen to urge action against climate change. He reflects on his own travels as a film writer, which began when little was known about climate change, to show the major environmental changes that he has witnessed. With amazing footage of wildlife and an urgency that makes it impossible to look away from the screen, this film offers a broad view of the threat of climate change that is a must-watch for anyone, regardless of their level of background knowledge.

“Seed: The Untold Story”

Where to watch: Kanopy

“Seed: The Untold Story” teaches the importance of preserving seed biodiversity, along with the history and future of how the world’s food is grown. The film explores the influence of industrial agriculture on the biodiversity of the world’s seeds — which is currently at only 6 percent of past levels — and shows the work of seed banks around the world to preserve what little diversity remains. 

The film travels across the world to various seed banks, which cultivate the remaining diversity of seeds in order to preserve their cultural and ecological importance, and then provide them free of charge to local farmers who would otherwise have to rely on large seed corporations. The film looks at the flaws of industrial farming from an unexpected angle, making it a must-watch for anyone interested in food and agriculture.

“Years of Living Dangerously”

Where to watch: Youtube

“Years of Living Dangerously” is a Youtube series that takes celebrities on a journey to learn more about an aspect of climate change. For example, in the first episode, actor Harrison Ford explores palm oil production in Indonesia’s national parks and discovers that this illegal activity thrives with the help of government corruption in the forestry sector. At the same time, New York Times writer Thomas Friedman travels to Syria to explore connections between the country’s devastating drought and the civil war that it faces ravages today. Meanwhile, actor Don Cheadle attempts to answer the question of whether religion and belief in climate change can coexist in a small Texas town. 

The series feels much like a TV drama, with vastly different narratives intermingling in each episode and leaving the audience on a cliffhanger every few minutes. While the 60-minute runtime of each episode is not enough to dive deeply into the issues it explores, the series provides an introduction to facets of climate change that are new to most viewers. If you want to see your childhood “Star Wars” crush get into a heated argument with Indonesia’s minister of environment and forestry over deforestation, this is the series for you.

“Chasing Coral”

Where to watch: Netflix

Chasing Coral” follows a group of scientists as they attempt to capture an environmental phenomenon known as coral bleaching through the use of underwater time-lapse photography. By following the trials faced by the researchers as they try to comprehensively document coral bleaching, the film tells as much of a story about the lives of field researchers as it educates the audience about the threats to coral posed by climate change. One member of the research team, Zackery Rago, becomes a central part of the film as his passion for coral shows the emotional level of witnessing environmental degradation. Rago’s presence in the film adds a layer of storytelling that is compelling to any viewer, regardless of their specific interest in coral, and is a source of inspiration for other young scientists. 

“The Harvest”/”La Cosecha”

Where to watch: Youtube

Child labor has been the subject of global attention for years, but “The Harvest,” also known as “La Cosecha,” captures the lives of child farmworkers in a way so personal that it casts a new light on farming and food production. The film follows three young farmworkers who travel across the U.S. to find work each season while also trying to go to school and carve out a different future for themselves. Seeing children and teenagers who had such relatable dreams, feelings and angst at that age while leading such different lives is heartbreaking. I found myself scouring the internet for evidence on how the stars of the film are doing today and felt a temporary wave of relief to see them able to continue their education thanks to the film’s success. However, many children in the same situation will continue to grow the food that we eat without structural changes to U.S. labor policy. If you are interested in the people behind your breakfast, lunch and dinner, you should watch this movie.

“Switch: Discover the Future of Energy”

Where to watch: Youtube

Switch: Discover the Future of Energy” follows energy scientist Scott Tinker as he travels the world to learn where our energy comes from and what it may look like in the future. The film explores the benefits and drawbacks of major sources of the world’s energy, such as coal and oil, and evaluates the viability of potential alternatives to these energy sources. The film takes an unbiased, explore-all-of-the-options approach and is a great starting point for anyone new to the world of renewable energy. The film reveals how entrenched we are in unsustainable energy sources, but provides a source of hope in the ever-growing number of innovations that may power the world in the future.

“Cowspiracy”

Where to watch: Netflix

I remember watching “Cowspiracy” in my AP Environmental Science class during my junior year of high school. Shockingly, by the time finals came around in the spring, I was a full-fledged vegetarian, cursing the livestock industry for its use of huge amounts of water and its contribution to global greenhouse gas emissions. To anyone with no previous knowledge of the environmental impacts of meat production, this film is shocking.  It has faced controversy for both its interpretations of data on livestock methane emissions and its attack on environmental nonprofits who the movie claims are just one part of a conspiracy to cover up the impact of the meat industry. Despite this, the film is still successful in shaking up audience views on food and climate change, driving home that reducing meat consumption is one of the single best ways an individual can reduce their environmental impact. I would encourage meat-eaters to watch this movie but to take it with a grain of salt.

Experimental Coral Reef Preservation Strategies Are Underway

Pictured above: Coral reefs.

Pictured above: Coral reefs.

By Dnyaneshwari Haware ’23

Staff Writer

Despite being out of the eye of the general population, the destruction of reefs is impacting the livelihoods of approximately 1 billion people globally.  These effects are seen through reduced biodiversity, lower fish stocks and a higher rate of coastal erosion. In the past 20 years, 50 percent of coral reefs have been lost, and by 2050, more than 90 percent are expected to die. The causes of this erosion include overfishing, the bleaching of coastlands, an increase in ocean temperature and other exploitative factors that further intensify the damage. In areas of destruction, scientists are attempting new methods of preserving the reefs, such as the relocation of more resilient corals and the new implementation of 3D-printed corals. 

The impacts of global warming have caused increasing challenges for reefs and coral. A large number of reefs are temperature sensitive and struggle to survive 1 degree Celsius above the summer maximum of the region. Additionally, the increase in atmospheric carbon dioxide also increases the acidity of oceans, further producing challenging living environments. 

In efforts to revive coral communities, one solution is moving heat resilient corals, which can cope with temperatures between 6 and 7 degrees Celsius hotter and can survive in acidic waters, to struggling reefs elsewhere. However, there are significant obstacles, such as the need to save the thermally resilient species from extinction due to factors other than global warming like physical damage from construction, development and overfishing. Another concern is the introduction of a new species of corals into an ecosystem, which may significantly change its equilibrium. 

Efforts also include more experimental methods, such as integrating 3D printing technology. In 2018, the largest 3D printed coral reef was deployed at a site in Maldives using a technology called the Modular Artificial Reef Structures. These not only substitute real corals for coral farming, which is the cultivation of corals for commercial purposes, but can also create new reef habitats in degraded areas or new locations. However, using artificial structures as restoration tools is expensive and cannot act as a replacement for conservation strategies. 

In environmental conservation, finding local organic solutions that could result in long-lasting positive effects on the community is essential for sustainability. One example is a coral reef restoration project off of a 4.3-mile-long island in Kenya led by the women of the community. According to the Kenya Marine and Fisheries Institute, between  60 and 90 percent of coral reefs were destroyed in some surveyed areas. 

Local communities that largely depend on fishing and ecotourism have suffered from the loss of these reefs, as the reefs provide breeding grounds for hundreds of species of marine life. In response, the women of Wasini Island have been restoring fish populations by cultivating seagrass, which plays a key role in the overall coral reef ecosystem. The seagrass provides shelter to juvenile fish who then mature and move into the reefs. The project also involves building artificial coral reefs using locally found materials such as rock boulders held together with hydraulic cement. Corals grown in nurseries are then planted on these artificial reefs and have a survival rate of 75 percent after transplant.

All these methods involve constant experimentation, and results vary depending on the ecosystems. Law enforcement, the involvement of government and independent agencies, financial support and the cooperation of local communities have been necessary for the largest movements toward the conservation of coral reefs.


Flood and Fire Risks Are Frequently Undisclosed

Photo courtesy of Freephotos.com.

Photo courtesy of Freephotos.com.

By  Helen Gloege ’23
Staff Writer

Since 2016, over 1 million natural disaster displacements have occurred each year in the U.S. It is predicted that the number of people who will be displaced by natural disasters like hurricanes and wildfires will increase. By 2100, 6 feet of sea-level rise could force 13.1 million Americans to relocate. Climate change will soon factor into homebuyers’ and renters’ choices of where to live, but most are not warned about flood or wildfire risk in their new homes. They often pay for the resulting damages financially and beyond, in lives lost and the toll on physical and mental health that can last for years to come. The annual number of floods and wildfires that exceed $1 billion in damage has increased in recent years. Between 2015 and September 2020, there have been 28 of these disasters in the United States.

Fire prevention is on the minds of those who live in Western states, and there is political division on how best to prevent fires. The governors of California, Oregon and Washington have all indicated that climate change is the reason for the fires. President Donald Trump, however, has argued that the fires resulted from how the states manage their forests. 

Scientists have pointed toward forest thinning and controlled burns as solutions. However, complicating this is the influx of people moving into rural areas or building vacation cabins in the woods, leading to populated small acreages. This means that, if controlled burns were to escape, they would most likely move onto someone’s property.

Millions of people living in the West have moved into fire-prone landscapes with little warning of risk from government, real estate agents or sellers. Between 1992 and 2015, about 60 million homes were within less than a mile of a wildfire, and that number has since increased. 

Only Oregon and California require wildfire risk to be disclosed to residents. Frequently, this disclosure amounts to a few lines buried in hundreds of pages of text. In Oregon, homebuyers didn’t see the word “wildfire” mentioned in a disclosure statement recorded during a sale, only a line that said the property was in the “forestland-urban interface.” In California, there is a special form for disclosing natural hazards that states risk level, but these rules are only enforced in some parts of the state. If this applies, homeowners are responsible for clearing flammable brush and dry vegetation that would create a defensible space between the house and the fire. 

California lawmakers passed a bill in 2019 that increases wildfire disclosure. This law includes that, starting in 2021, sellers must inform the buyer if they are following flammable brush rules and provide a list of potential ways their house may be susceptible to fires. Starting in 2025, sellers must say if they have completed retrofits to make the house more fire-resistant. 

Even if states did want to disclose wildfire risk, the information isn’t always available. Wildfire risk mapping involves detailed modeling because fire behavior fluctuates greatly. In 2020, the U.S. Forest Service released new maps showing community risk nationwide, but the maps aren’t scaled to use for individual properties. According to NPR, “Insurance companies have done the most detailed risk analysis but most homeowners won’t find out unless the insurance rates go up or their policy is canceled.” Additionally, most existing wildfire maps don’t reflect the added risk from climate change.

The decision made to build in these fire-prone areas is usually made by developers and local officials. They are frequently guided by large-scale zoning plans that don’t take wildfire risks into account. These local governments are financially incentivized to allow new development in risky areas. Homeowners need to know wildfire risks to allow them to make informed decisions. Homebuyers will also be more likely to have evacuation plans and take fireproofing steps. They will understand that preparing for wildfires isn’t a one-time job. 

Wildfire risk is not the only natural disaster with a lack of transparency. Growing research has suggested that flood risk also falls under this category, despite the growing risk due to climate change. There are an estimated 15 million properties that have a significant risk of flooding. Between 1980 and 2017, about 80 percent of presidential disaster declarations were for events that involved flooding; however, only 29 states require flood disclosure laws. The 21 states that don’t require information include some of the most vulnerable, like Florida, Virginia and Massachusetts. 

Residents of states that do require flood risk disclosure frequently don’t know they live in harm’s way until it is too late. In 27 of the 29 states that require disclosure, potential buyers receive information about flood risk after they make an offer on the house. The information often isn’t clear as most states’ requirements involve a single check box if the property is on an official flood plain. This may not be an accurate indicator of flood potential, as official flood maps have hard lines between areas with high flood risk and little to no flood risk. 

In addition, nearly one-third of all flood damage occurs outside of official flood plains. After Hurricane Harvey hit Texas in 2017, a law was passed requiring sellers to tell buyers if the house is in a flood zone and if they had flood insurance. Similar attempts in other states have stalled due to a fear of driving down property values. Indeed, research has suggested that disclosing flood risk may cause a decrease in property values by about 4 percent.

Future and current homebuyers may not listen to maps or data. However, the clear dissemination of information regarding fire and flood risk would allow the increasing number of homeowners moving into high-risk areas to understand the possible dangers and take precautions by purchasing flood insurance or making a house more fire-resistant.


Weekly Climate News

October 8, 2020

  • The European Parliament voted in favor of cutting greenhouse gas emissions 60 percent by 2030, an update from the previous 40 percent. 

  • South Asia is in the midst of the worst monsoon season it has experienced in the past decade with an estimated 17.5 million people in India, Bangladesh and Nepal affected by the severe flooding. The floods, combined with the pandemic, have heightened the need for significant economic recovery and damage finance. 

  • COVID-19 has exposed Mexico City’s increasing water crisis, with vulnerable households experiencing shortages while gated communities have sufficient access to supplies. 

  • The August complex fire which started in California has expanded beyond one million acres, requiring it to take on the new classification of “gigafire,” the first in modern history. 

  • New data shows that 2020 had the warmest September on record. 

  • Woodlands in the Northeast experience changes as a result of climate change. Read about it here. 

  • The racial achievement gap in United States schools has been widening as a result of increasing temperatures, a new study shows, which is yet another example of how the impacts of climate change are being felt disproportionately by people of color.

  • A new partnership between the U.S. and Qatar is working on finding buried water in earth’s deserts. 

  • The ice loss in Greenland is likely to be more this century than at any other time in the history of civilization. 


Tightening Restrictions on the Spread of Climate Misinformation: Facebook, Covering Climate Now and More

Pexels.jpg

By Helen Gloege ’23

Staff Writer

Climate change has been evident this summer, between enough hurricanes to run out the 21 annual alphabetical names and forest fires across the West Coast and southwestern U.S. Along with the sharp and unwavering presence of environmental emergencies, there is a necessity to learn the truth about the climate crisis and its effects on daily life. In a modern and increasingly online era, people wishing to learn about the climate crisis often turn to online news platforms and social networks such as Facebook. 

Various news organizations have already been seen making changes in the information they report on climate change. Covering Climate Now was created to allow climate coverage to improve and give information to the public. The site was co-founded by the Columbia Journalism Review and The Nation in association with The Guardian and aims to help news organizations increase and improve coverage of the climate crisis as well as possible solutions. Various news services that have joined include The New York Times, The Washington Post, NBC News, CNN, the Los Angeles Times and many others. 

NBC News, which joined Covering Climate Now in April, launched Planet 2020, a new series, during the week of September 21. This broadcast involves Al Roker, the network’s chief climate correspondent and longtime weather forecaster who has been talking about climate change on the “Today” show for years now, and co-host Savannah Sellers. Together Roker and Sellers connect dots between extreme weather, climate change and the upcoming 2020 election. They hope to target millennials and Generation Z, groups that make up 37 percent of eligible voters. 

Another Covering Climate Now partner, Bloomberg, has launched a new digital outlet and print addition, Bloomberg Green, that aims to deal with economic aspects of the climate story. 

Of course, this hasn’t solved all of the problems in relation to coverage of climate change. It was found that only one of 93 segments that aired on ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, Fox and MSNBC during the week Hurricane Laura hit the Louisiana coast connected the storm to climate change. In addition, out of the 46 segments ABC, NBC and CBS aired about the California wildfires, only seven of them mentioned climate change, demonstrating a huge need for improvement in journalistic coverage of significant climate events.

Along with news outlets, social media is a big source of information for the public. Recently, Facebook pledged to create a Climate Science Information Center aimed at connecting people with science-based information and putting the company at net zero emissions by the end of the year. The information center includes factual resources from the world’s leading climate organizations and actionable steps one can take in everyday life. This includes facts, figures and data from places such as the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and climate science partners, including the U.N. Environment Programme, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, the World Meteorological Organization, the Met Office and others. They will also be partnering with 70 independent fact-checking organizations globally that will cover over 60 languages. Outside of the information center, they plan to reduce false climate-related posts in News Feed and apply warning labels to tops of posts on Facebook and Instagram so viewers understand the content is false. This has already launched in France, Germany, the U.K. and the U.S. and will expand to other countries later on.

This is a new step for Facebook, which has in the past allowed false, misleading or disputed information on the platform. However, since the announcement, climate scientists and environmental groups claim the effort doesn’t do enough to rein in false climate change information and conspiracies. As many people use social media for their news, there is pressure on social media companies to do more to address climate change misinformation on their platforms. Distrust from climate activists and environmental groups with Facebook grew back in September 2019 when the CO2 Coalition claimed carbon dioxide from humans is beneficial for the planet, labeled as an opinion by Facebook. This has created a general concern from the public that climate misinformation will continue to run rampant despite these new measures. 

Additional concerns say that this initiative enables Facebook to set clear lines on fact and fiction. Outside of the Climate Science Information Center, Facebook plans to continue with warning labels that show false information but won’t take down posts unless they are an immediate safety risk. It is also unclear how many users will visit the information centers or how many people will see false information before it is labeled as false. Facebook is trying to find a balance between allowing free speech and tackling misinformation.

Part of the concern about Facebook misinformation comes from a larger concern about social media in general. In a recent study done through online network analysis firm Graphika, climate deniers were found to be posting on average four times as much as climate scientists, experts and campaigners. Since virality is how social media companies make money, it is likely that groups of people who post frequently can cause posts to go viral and receive attention without going through fact-checking processes. Social media also allows for echo chambers to form where groups of like-minded users will gather together and frequently share news and opinions that are similar. For example, there could be a Facebook group that claims that climate change is false and would ignore the false statement on Facebook posts because it disagrees with their idea. 

After the announcement in regard to the climate hub was made, hundreds of accounts linked to Indigenous, environmental and social justice organizations were suspended. For three days, over 200 people with posting privileges on pages involving those organizations were locked. Around the time they were suspended, there were events planned through Facebook that would have occurred during the lockout period. Facebook notices claimed account holders had posted the content that infringed on or violated others’ rights or the law; however, when reinstated, Facebook told them it wasn’t for these reasons. It is unclear why the accounts were taken down and Facebook has yet to provide a clear explanation. Bans are frequently performed by a social media algorithm without human involvement, meaning there is a possibility for loopholes that claim true information is false or don’t flag false information.

With the increased visibility of the effects of climate change in our daily lives, news agencies and Facebook have begun to act on the responsibility they hold to the public by providing information and updates on climate change. It is important for the information on climate change to be accurate in order for appropriate actions to be taken. There is still a long way to go in preventing the spread of misinformation in relation to climate change.

Climate Change in the Presidential Debates: A Hopeful Outlook

By Abby Wester ’22

Staff Writer

Climate change is a growing crisis affecting the environment in a multitude of ways. In the past few months alone, the United States has seen historically devastating fires on the West Coast and a record-breaking hurricane season on the East Coast. Despite how this global crisis is expected to disturb economies, infrastructure and human health, it is still a heavily contested subject in American politics. United States presidential debates have a history of glossing over, or completely ignoring, the issue of climate change. The heated and insult-ridden presidential debate between President Donald Trump and former Vice President Joe Biden on Sept. 29 directly addressed the subject for the first time in 12 years.

The last question about climate change in a presidential debate was posed in 2008. This year, moderator Chris Wallace dedicated 10 minutes of discussion to the topic. According to a Tweet made by meteorologist and journalist Eric Holthaus, those 10 minutes “[double] the total amount of time [spent talking about climate change] in all 2000 minutes of presidential debates since 1988.”

In an interview with NBC News, Nathan Hultman, director of the Center for Global Sustainability at the University of Maryland, stated that the presence of questions about climate change in the debate “[reflect] the heightened political and grassroots interest in the subject.” Groups such as the Sunrise Movement have been advocating for discussion about climate change since June 2019, when they staged a sit-in outside of the Democratic National Headquarters demanding a Democratic primary debate dedicated to the discussion of climate. 

Wallace’s question delivered differing answers from the two candidates. Trump spoke about his aspiration of “crystal-clean water and air” while dodging questions about his rollbacks of Obama-era environmental legislation and withdrawal from the Paris Climate Accords. Biden laid out his plan for renewable energy, but separated himself from the Green New Deal proposed by left-wing Democratic congresspeople. 

Although the candidates’ answers were filled with insults and interruptions, they still left an impression of their beliefs about climate change. Environmentalists and Americans worried about climate change were left with a sense of reassurance that this topic will be discussed further in the future of U.S. politics.