Connect with us

Sustainability

Canada Joins America and China in the Fight Against Plastic Pollution

Published

on

plastic pollution

Canada has recently announced a plan to ban “harmful” single-use plastics, joining a global movement to significantly reduce waste. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the plan will go into effect as early as 2021.

Items such as plastic bags, straws, and water bottles will likely be barred under the new ban. When compiling a definitive list of banned items, Trudeau says the government will take “a science-based approach.”

Canada’s Plastic Problem

Currently, Canadians recycle only 10% of plastics. At this rate, Canadians will throw out around $11 billion worth of plastic goods annually by 2030.

“This is a big step,” Trudeau said. “But we know we can do this for 2021.”

According to the Canadian government, 1 million birds and more than 100,000 sea mammals worldwide are injured or die every year due to plastic pollution. “You’ve all heard the stories and seen the photos,” Trudeau said. “To be honest, as a dad, it is tough trying to explain this to my kids. How do you explain dead whales washing up on beaches across the world, their stomachs jam-packed with plastic bags?”

The prime minister says that the European Parliament’s sweeping vote to ban single-use plastics in March inspired the plan. The proposal included a ban of the top 10 most common single-use plastic items present on European beaches by 2021. Additionally, it includes an ambitious goal to recycle 90% of plastic bottles by 2029.

In May, the UN agreed on a landmark deal preventing plastic waste from entering the world’s oceans. Around 180 countries decided to crack down on waste management with a legally binding agreement to regulate plastic waste exports. The United States, the third highest plastic exporter in the world, was not among these nations.

China Tackles Plastic Pollution

This comes around a year after China announced a ban on waste plastic imports. Formerly, China accepted a majority of the world’s shipments of recyclables from other nations including the United States. Consequently, unrest ensued among foreign markets now questioning where to divert their plastic waste.

American Involvement Against Plastic Pollution

Although environmental policy has been largely partisan within the American government, ocean pollution is an issue met with bipartisan agreement. Earlier in October, President Donald Trump signed legislation aimed to control plastic pollution in oceans.

While many agree this measure was a step in the direction, critics insist more change is necessary. Trump has historically excluded the U.S. from being among countries to “blame” for excessive waste damaging oceans. Instead, he has mainly cited countries like China and Japan for contributing to the issue.

However, some individual states have imposed plans of their own to curtail ocean degradation. Recently, Oregon lawmakers voted 17-12 to prohibit single-use plastic bags.

The state’s Senate decided restaurants and grocery stores will no longer be able to provide plastic bags, but will instead give customers the option of purchasing recyclable plastic and paper bags for 5 cents. Governor Kate Brown is poised to pass the bill, after voicing her support for it previously.

In 2015, the EPA reported that the United States produced more than 126 billion plastic bags that year. However, Americans only recycled 12.8% of those bags. If the Senate approves the bill, Oregon will join New York, Hawaii, and California in the fight against plastic pollution.

“Something we use once shouldn’t be able to pollute our environment for hundreds of years,” Oregon State Senator Michael Dembrow said.

Conclusions

Across the world, government officials have attempted to foresee the future of the world’s oceans—and it’s not promising. Plastic pollution has been empirically harmful toward ocean habitats, and a staggering amount of marine organisms have died or been injured as a result. That’s why Canada’s plan is such a major victory in the battle for environmental action and justice. To truly provoke meaningful change and save the planet’s oceans from complete degradation, it cannot be done without the support of nations.

Continue Reading
2 Comments

Sustainability

Miley Cyrus doesn’t want to have kids until the climate crisis is resolved. She’s not alone.

Published

on

As climate despair continues to grow, some have said they feel helpless; others have even said climate change has made them feel suicidal. Though Miley Cyrus isn’t on that level, she did recently said she doesn’t want to have kids until the climate crisis is resolved.

And she’s not alone. There’s actually an entire movement, BirthStrike, that shares the sentiment of not having kids due to the crisis. The movement is growing, and though Miley made no specific mention to it, she seems to embody at least some of its values.

Miley Cyrus Shares Her Thoughts with Elle Magazine

In a recent interview with Elle, Miley shared her thoughts on sustainability and climate change fairly extensively, saying:

“We’re getting handed a piece-of-shit planet, and I refuse to hand that down to my child. Until I feel like my kid would live on an Earth with fish in the water, I’m not bringing in another person to deal with that.”

We saw Miley’s angry rhetoric before: at one of her concerts, where she expressed her disdain for how human activity has damaged the environment. That speaks to her passion for the climate topic.

Later in the same Elle interview, Miley added:

“We just take and take and expect it to keep producing … it’s exhausted. It can’t produce.”

Though it’s unclear what she’s referring to specifically, her statement could be alluding to a number of things. For instance, she could be referring to the deforestation problem or how ocean pollution has affected marine habitats.

Miley Cyrus Isn’t Alone

Though most people’s decisions to have children aren’t affected by the climate crisis, Miley is far from being alone. BirthStrike is quickly gaining popularity, currently counting over 330 people as members of its organization.

To learn more about the organization, CNN spoke with 33-year-old British musician Blythe Pepino, who told the network:

33-year-old British musician Blythe Pepino is the founder of the BirthStrike movement.
33-year-old British musician Blythe Pepino is the founder of the BirthStrike movement. Image Credit: Linda Nylind/The Guardian

“I love my partner and I want a family with him but I don’t feel like this is a time that you can do that.”

The BirthStrike movement is grounded on two fundamental principles:

  1. Having kids would subject them to a deteriorating planet.
  2. Having kids would add to the emissions problem.

On an emotional level, the first point. And on a statistical level, since the typical person emits over 5 tons of carbon dioxide annually, one can understand the second point.

Miley echoes this sentiment, saying:

“I feel like that’s what all millennials are dealing with right now … We don’t want to reproduce because we know that the earth can’t handle it.”

But what really influenced her position on the climate crisis were the Californian wildfires, of which her family was a victim.

Wildfires Influence Miley’s Decision

The 2018 Woolsey fire caused over $6 billion in damages. Included in those damages was Miley’s $2.5 million Malibu home and some of her earliest songs. Miley took immediate action, and has accomplished a ton:

“After the Woolsey fire, I thought about how we helped more than 120 families who lost their homes. We’ve served nearly 1,300 homeless kids in Hollywood every year since 2014. And last year, we helped 270 kids find housing and provided 32,000 meals. That won’t burn down. That helped me become much more disconnected from things.”

The Woolsey fire burned Miley's $2.5 million Malibu home and some of her earliest songs.
The Woolsey fire burned Miley’s $2.5 million Malibu home and some of her earliest songs.

But despite a tremendous contribution from Miley, she can’t solve the wildfire problem alone (or at all, really). In part, that’s because the wildfire problem is everywhere. That’s where the helplessness comes from, as she shares:

“With natural disasters, you don’t get a choice. You surrender.”

To think from Miley’s perspective: “How can you expect your kids to do well if they can lose just about everything they have to a natural disaster?”

Conclusions

Regardless of whether you plan on having kids, a necessary consideration is whether the Earth can actually support them. Miley suggests that many millennials like her understand that it might be in everyone’s best interests to not bring up children in an age faced with the implications of climate change. That’s your decision to make.

Continue Reading

Sustainability

NYC makes history with new styrofoam ban

Published

on

Monday marked the first day New York City’s ban on styrofoam went into effect. From now on, the city will issue fines to businesses for selling single-use styrofoam products. 

The long-awaited ban formally started January 1, but the city granted businesses a six-month grace period prior to its enforcement. The new law prohibits products including takeout containers, cups, plates, and packing peanuts. Such a ban will most greatly impact the food industry, manufacturing companies, and retailers in the city.  

In lieu of styrofoam products, officials encouraged businesses to transition to compostable or recyclable alternatives, such as paper. However, there will be some exceptions, such as containers to store raw meat. 

Exceptions to the Styrofoam Ban

According to the New York Department of Sanitation (DSNY), small businesses with an income less than $500,000 can apply for an exemption. That is, if they can provide evidence that switching to foam substitutes will create too substantial a financial hardship, they will be exempt from the ban.

Ramifications for Businesses

Businesses caught selling or distributing styrofoam products will be fined $250 by the DSNY for their first violation, $500 for their second, and $1,000 for every one that follows. The department sent mailers to almost 130,000 businesses to warn them about the ban and provide help during the transition.

This law will make NYC the largest city in the U.S. to prohibit styrofoam. Other cities that have enacted laws banning the material include San Diego, Miami Beach, Seattle, and Washington DC. Maine and Maryland also have plans to implement legislation banning styrofoam in the coming years. 

“New York City’s ban on styrofoam is long overdue, and New Yorkers are ready to start using recyclable alternatives,” New York Mayor Bill de Blasio said upon announcing the ban last year. “There’s no reason to continue allowing this environmentally unfriendly substance to flood our streets, landfills, and waterways.” 

Reactions to the Styrofoam Ban

Many council members have praised de Blasio, a 2020 presidential candidate, for his commitment to making New York City more sustainable and environmentally-friendly. Earlier this year, the mayor announced a Green New Deal for the city with goals to make NYC carbon neutral by 2050, and also released a $10 billion infrastructure project aimed at protecting the city from rising sea levels spurred by climate change. 

Council members have praised Mayor de Blasio for his decision to ban styrofoam in NYC.
Council members have praised Mayor de Blasio for his decision to ban styrofoam in NYC.

de Blasio said in a statement that New Yorkers toss out 60 million pounds of styrofoam every year. He mentioned that this disposal leads to overflowing landfills and bolster the environmentally harmful petroleum economy. Further, the DSNY said styrofoam is harmful to the environment due to the difficulty associated with recycling it properly.

“We’re ending this dirty practice so we can ensure a cleaner, fairer future for our children,” de Blasio said. 

Conclusions

This ban acts as a major victory in the city’s fight against climate change. With a city as big as NYC taking such steps against reducing pollution, there’s hope others will as well.

Continue Reading

Sustainability

Guadalajara wakes up to 6 feet of hail…then it’s 83 degrees Fahrenheit again

Published

on

Just yesterday, Mexican officials said that a storm yielded some four feet of hail in the Guadalajara region. The hail storm reportedly damaged over 200 homes and swept away over a dozen cars. However, the temperature reached a high of 83 degrees Fahrenheit just later that day.

The State Government Helps Guadalajara

Guadalajara receives help from the state government.
Guadalajara receives help from the state government.

The state government acted quickly. Workers dragged businesses out of the hail. They also cleared streets and drainage systems.

Ramifications and Conclusions

Jalisco governor Enrique Alfaro was quick to correlate the hail storm with climate change. Translated from Spanish, Alfaro’s tweet can be understood as: “I was in the place to assess the situation and witnessed scenes I had never seen: hail more than a meter high, and then we wonder if climate change exists.”

Thus far, there are no reported fatalities or injuries as a result of the hailstorm. However, CBS reported that three adults may have developed hypothermia.

Strange Weather in Guadalajara

Granted that three adults may have developed hypothermia, it would be reasonable to believe that Guadalajara’s temperature was cold for at least the rest of the day. Weather reports showed that this was far from the case.

Within the same day of the hailstorm, Guadalajara reached a peak temperature of 83 degrees Fahrenheit.

In fact, at its highs, Guadalajara reached 83 degrees Fahrenheit.

But even preceding the hailstorm, Guadalajara saw temperatures around 88 degrees Fahrenheit. Further, current weather forecasts show that the city will see highs between 80 and 86 degrees Fahrenheit in the next 10 days.

Strange.

Continue Reading

Trending

Share via