Scientists discover promising solution for looming global crisis: 'The potential is pretty large'
With all the havoc carbon can wreak on our environment, have we ever considered just sort of hiding it away from the atmosphere? If that sounds impossible, well, it actually might not be. At least not according to a new study published in the Science journal.
Researchers have found that storing carbon in building materials may provide some answers in our search to protect the environment. Over 30 billion tons of materials like asphalt, concrete, brick, plastics, and wood are created every year. If we can use them to store carbon, we may be able to keep that carbon out of the atmosphere.
"The potential is pretty large," UC Davis grad student and lead researcher Elisabeth Van Roijen says.
This concept is called "carbon sequestration," and it's not a new one. In fact, it's been around for decades, albeit in different forms from the one suggested in this study. But, how exactly does it work?
To store carbon in building materials, it would require the use of biochar. Biochar is a carbon-rich material made from biomass or organic waste that can be used in the production of concrete, asphalt, plastics, and brick.
According to researcher Sabbie Miller, "If 10% of the world's concrete aggregate production were carbonatable, it could absorb a gigaton of carbon dioxide."
On top of the carbon storage these new building materials could provide, they also have the potential to promote and boost a circular economy. That could be a game-changer for humanity and the planet at large.
Some of these materials are already available, while others are still works in progress. They're not the only environmentally friendly building materials out there, either.
Canadian company Light House recently started a Construction Plastics Initiative seeking to recycle plastic waste used in construction into new building materials. Scientists have also recently developed a new technology that can help keep buildings cool without upping their energy consumption.
While it's easy to get hung up on bad news about the environment, stories like these — and brilliant people who make them possible — offer plenty of hope.
Join our free newsletter for weekly updates on the latest innovations improving our lives and shaping our future, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
11 hours ago
- Miami Herald
Invasive bullfrogs ‘eat everything' — including turtles — at Yosemite, study says
A study has found that removing invasive bullfrogs from Yosemite National Park ponds has generated a resurgence in the population of native pond turtles, experts said. When University of California, Davis, researchers first began studying four ponds at the park, they were overwhelmed by non-native American bullfrogs, a news release said. 'At night, you could look out over the pond and see a constellation of eyes blinking back at you,' said Sidney Woodruff, a UC Davis Ph.D. candidate and lead author of the study. 'Their honking noise is iconic, and it drowns out native species' calls.' The invasive frogs had decimated the native population of northwestern pond turtles, according to the study, published in the May issue of the journal Biological Conservation. Together with the southwestern pond turtle, northwestern pond turtles are the only native freshwater turtles in California, the university said. Northwestern pond turtles have vanished from over half their range, which stretches from Baja California to Washington state. At Yosemite, the only surviving turtles in the ponds surveyed were the ones that were too big for bullfrogs to eat, the study found. American bullfrogs are native to the eastern United States but don't belong in the West. 'One reason American bullfrogs are among the top worst globally introduced pests is because they eat everything — anything that fits into their mouth,' said senior author Brian Todd, a UC Davis professor in the Department of Wildlife, Fish and Conservation Biology. 'They've been causing declines to native species everywhere they're introduced, which is around the world.' The bullfrogs were introduced to Yosemite National Park in the 1950s and quickly spread throughout the park, researchers said. While their arrival was believed to be linked to the decline in pond turtles, it wasn't confirmed until the study took place, according to researchers. Between 2016 and 2022, researchers monitored four ponds at Yosemite, two with bullfrogs and two without, the study said. Turtles were 2 to 100 times more prevalent at the ponds where bullfrogs were absent, researchers said. When bullfrogs were removed from the other two ponds in 2019, researchers found juvenile pond turtles in them for the first time, the study said. 'As bullfrog presence declined, we started to hear other native frogs call and see native salamanders walking around,' Woodruff said. 'It's nice to be able to go back to these sites and hear a chorus of native frogs calling again that previously would not have been heard.' The Western Pond Turtle Range-wide Conservation Coalition, Yosemite Conservancy, U.S. Geological Survey and USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture funded the study.
11 hours ago
Transport of mercury through rivers has risen threefold since Industrial Revolution, new study finds
Human activity has caused the amount of mercury being transported through rivers all over the world to increase up to threefold since the Industrial Revolution, making regulations to prevent toxic metals from entering waterways even more necessary, according to environmental policy experts. Industrial practices such as coal combustion, mining and manufacturing have increased mercury pollution and changed the way it moves through rivers, causing a sharp rise in mercury concentrations around the world since the 1850s, according to a paper published Wednesday in the journal Science. Scientists pay especially close attention to neurotoxins like mercury due to its ability to accumulate in fish and rivers, Yanxu Zhang, an associate professor at Tulane University's School of Science and Engineering and co-author of the study, told ABC News. Researchers used process-based models to reconstruct the amount of mercury emissions that would have existed in waterways naturally from events such as volcanic activity or wildfires, Zhang said. They found that between 1845 and 1859, the average baseline river cycle was roughly 390 megagrams of mercury per year. Today, rivers carry about 1,000 megagrams per year -- equating in about a 585 megagram per year increase in the last two centuries. The researchers also corroborated this finding with global historic sediment cores, according to the study. The findings of the report are "not at all surprising," John Holdren, a professor of environmental science and policy and former science adviser to President Barack Obama, told ABC News. "It just adds one more data point to the clear evidence that many human environmental impacts far exceed the scale of natural influences," Holdren said. The presence of mercury then poses a health risk to people living nearby -- especially in developing regions in South America, Southeast Asia and Africa, Zhang said. But proposed rollbacks on U.S. Environmental Protection Agency regulations that tightened emissions standards for toxic metals like mercury could soon put Americans at risk of increased mercury levels in U.S. waterways, according to environmental policy experts. Earlier this year, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin announced a massive deregulation campaign, rolling out more than two dozen policy announcements to propose changes on several emissions regulations. The actions included revisions to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), which set limits on mercury and arsenic pollution from coal and oil power plants -- rules the EPA described in a press release in March as "overreaching." During a press conference on Wednesday, Zeldin said that if the proposed changes to MATS are finalized, "no power plant will be allowed to emit more than they do today -- or as much as they did one or two years ago." "These decisions allow more mercury into the air and water, even though mercury is known to harm children's brain development, and arsenic is linked to cancer and birth defects," James Pew, director of federal clean air practice at Earthjustice, told ABC News. In March, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down a requirement from the Clean Water Act that forced polluters to comply with water quality standards as a condition of their permits. Last month, the House of Representatives voted to allow about 1,800 facilities -- including chemical plants, refineries and pesticide manufacturers -- to "reclassify" themselves as minor polluters and stop controlling, monitoring or reporting toxic emissions under the Congressional Review Act. The vote passed 216 to 212, with all Democrats and one Republican opposing it. The Senate had approved the resolution weeks earlier. "All of Donald Trump's actions since taking office are taking us backwards on mercury pollution and threatening our health," Sierra Club Climate Policy Director Patrick Drupp told ABC News. Mercury -- along with other heavy metals, such as lead -- is one of the "clearest" cases of public health knowledge that has been translated into environmental standards in the U.S. over the last 50 years, Dan Esty, a professor of environmental law and policy at Yale University and former commissioner of Connecticut's Department of Energy and Environmental Protection, told ABC News. The report is "another reminder of the massive irresponsibility of the EPA's headlong retreat, under President Trump and EPA Administrator Zeldin, from science-based approaches to protecting public health from environmental harms of all kinds," Holdren -- the environmental science professor -- said. Mercury is toxic to both animals and people in a number of ways, necessitating effective controls to keep people from being harmed, Paul Anastas, director of the Center for Green Chemistry and Green Engineering at Yale University and former assistant administrator for the EPA, told ABC News. "It's always foolish to ignore mercury," Anastas said. "...If you're not afraid of mercury, you're not paying attention." Exposure to mercury typically occurs from eating fish and can cause a host of symptoms, such as loss of peripheral vision, the feeling of "pins and needles" in hands and feet and impairment of speech, hearing and walking, according to the EPA. Mercury exposure to infants in the womb can have a severe impact on brain and nervous system development, the EPA noted. The rollbacks will likely trigger more child deaths and increase the number of cases of cancer, lung disease and heart attacks, Ryan Maher, an environmental health attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity, told ABC News. The eastern U.S., which contains many industrial sites that could potential have mercury in waste discharges, could especially be impacted, study co-author Zhang said. Mercury contamination is already happening in Minnesota, where residents have been advised by the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency to restrict eating fish from rivers, lakes and other bodies of water that have excess mercury to once per week. If mercury levels increase, humans may have to balance fish consumption to avoid exposure, Zhang said.
Gizmodo
15 hours ago
- Gizmodo
RIP to These NASA X Accounts, as U.S. Science Falls Off a Cliff
NASA is axing at least 23 X accounts run by the agency's Science Mission Directorate (SMD), citing a need to 'strategically reduce' its digital footprint. The move comes in the wake of President Donald Trump's proposed funding cuts that could kill numerous research programs. NASA operates more than 400 social media accounts, 300 of which belong to SMD. It's fair to say that's a bit excessive. The agency believes its effort to consolidate these accounts—which began in 2018—will improve its social media impact through more cohesive messaging. Some followers, such as spaceflight photographer John Kraus, are welcoming the change. Kraus described the consolidation as 'long overdue.' But others disagree, arguing that shuttering these accounts will further limit public access and attention to research in Trump's America. 'In my view the core strength of social media is letting individual voices and their quirks find their individual audiences,' Harvard University astronomer Jonathan McDowell tweeted Tuesday, June 10. 'Making a bland uniform corporate account to replace individual [NASA] voices is a mistake.' The agency says the public won't lose access to social media updates about all the affected SMD programs, but their accounts will either be archived, merged into larger, thematic accounts or NASA's flagship channels, or rebranded to 'better align with strategic framework.' The NASA X accounts (formerly Twitter) that have been or are soon to be archived serve as critical outreach platforms for specific research programs, spacecraft, rovers, satellites, and other scientific initiatives. These are just some of the ones being nixed: Perseverance Mars rover: @NASAPersevere Curiosity Mars rover: @MarsCuriosity Voyager 1 and 2 spacecraft: @NASAVoyager Commercial crew program: @Commercial_Crew Exploration ground systems: @NASAGroundSys International Space Station research: @ISS_Research Space Launch System (SLS): @NASA_SLS Orion spacecraft: @NASA_Orion Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS): @NASA_TESS Goddard Institute for Space Studies: @NASAGISS A few of these accounts, such as the Curiosity Mars rover's X page, have millions of followers. 'Don't worry, my mission isn't going anywhere,' Curiosity's account assured fans on Monday, but the same can't be said for all of these programs. Trump's 2026 fiscal budget request proposes to cut NASA's funding by nearly 25% in one year—one of the largest percentage cuts proposed in the agency's history. This includes a 47% cut to the agency's science program, a move that would 'decimate' NASA, according to the Planetary Society. If approved by Congress, the budget would kill at least 41 active and planned space missions. Voyager's funding, for example, would shrink from $7.8 million to $5 million in 2026, then drop to zero in 2029, the Washington Post reported. The Mars Sample Return (MRS) mission, which intends to return samples of the Red Planet's surface dutifully collected by NASA's Perseverance rover over the last few years, is also on the chopping block. The funding cuts would ultimately retire the Orion capsule and Space Launch System (SLS) megarocket, too, according to Ars Technica. The International Space Station (ISS) is already feeling the funding squeeze. The Center for Advancement of Science in Space (CASIS)—which operates the ISS National Lab—recently canceled an upcoming space station research conference due to 'the current regulatory and budgetary environment.' The proposal also includes sweeping staff cuts that would reduce NASA's workforce by roughly one-third. 'That would represent the smallest NASA workforce since mid-1960, before the first American had launched into space,' Casey Dreier, chief of space policy at The Planetary Society, recently told 'This is the extinction-level event we were warning people about,' Dreier added. With NASA's scientific future thrown into question, it's easy to see why the outreach rollback has struck a nerve with some, but this isn't the only federal science agency facing big changes to its online presence. the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) website for its Climate Program Office, is expected to shut down after most of its staff were laid off on May 31, The Guardian reports. Affected staff told the publication that they believe the cuts were aimed at restructuring public-facing climate information. While NOAA and NASA face distinct challenges, both agencies are undergoing major changes that signal a shifting landscape for publicly available science—just when we need it most.
