
Lack of endangered whale babies raises alarm among scientists
The whale is the North Atlantic right whale, which numbers only about 370 and has declined in population in recent years. The whales give birth to calves off the southeastern United States from mid-November to mid-April, and federal authorities have said they need to have at least 50 calves per season to start recovering.
The whales didn't come anywhere near that number this year. The calving season produced only 11 mother-calf pairs, scientists with the New England Aquarium in Boston said.
The lack of baby whales underscores the need for their protection, conservationists said Monday.
North Atlantic right whales are vulnerable to entanglement in marine fishing gear and collisions with large ships.
'They're also reproducing more slowly than they used to,' said the International Fund for Animal Welfare in its calving season report card.
"This is likely due to stress from entanglements, navigation among busy maritime traffic, increasing ocean noise, and the changing distribution of their food sources."
The calving season did have some bright spots. Several females gave birth for the first time, and that gives hope for the future, the aquarium said in a statement. The whale population only has about 70 reproductive females left.
'With past calf counts ranging from 39 to zero, we never know how any calving season will unfold. While the calf count is relatively low this year, I am encouraged by four new mothers being added to the reproductive pool,' said Philip Hamilton, senior scientist in the Aquarium's Anderson Cabot Center for Ocean Life.
The whales can weigh up to 45,360 kilograms and were heavily exploited during the era of commercial whaling. They've been protected for decades, but have been slow to recover.
In recent years, scientists have said the whales have strayed from established protected zones in search of food, and that has put them at elevated risk of entanglements and collisions.
The whales migrate from the south to New England and Canada to feed on tiny ocean organisms.
India's plans to double steel production by the end of the decade could jeopardise its national climate goals and a key global target to reduce planet-heating gas emissions from the steel industry, according to a report released Tuesday.
The report by Global Energy Monitor, an organisation that tracks energy projects around the globe, said efforts to decarbonise steelmaking are gaining traction around the world.
However, in India, the world's second-largest steel-producing nation, overwhelming reliance on coal-based technologies presents a big challenge.
'India is now the bellwether of global steel decarbonisation,' said Astrid Grigsby-Schulte, project manager of the Global Iron and Steel Tracker at GEM and report co-author.
'If the country does not increase its plans for green steel production, the entire sector will miss an important milestone. So goes India, so goes the world.'
Currently, up to 12 per cent of India's greenhouse gas emissions, which go into the atmosphere and heat the planet, come from steelmaking. That number could double in five years if steel is produced in line with the government's plans, according to the report.
At the same time, India wants to produce 500 gigawatts of clean power - enough to power nearly 300 million Indian homes - by the end of this decade. The South Asian nation recently crossed the milestone of installing 100 gigawatts of solar power, most of which was installed in the last 10 years.
By 2070, India also aims to go net zero, that is, it will either eliminate all carbon dioxide pollution it emits or cancel it out by using other methods, such as planting trees that absorb carbon.
Steel production is one of the most carbon-intensive industries, responsible for nearly 9 per cent of global greenhouse gas emissions. The International Energy Agency has set a target for 37 per cent of global steelmaking capacity to rely on lower-emission electric arc furnaces by 2030.
Current projections by GEM show the world reaching just 36 per cent — a shortfall largely due to India's coal-heavy pipeline.
India plans to expand its steel production capacity from 200 million to over 330 million tonnes per year by 2030. According to the new data, over 40 per cent of global capacity in development - about 352 million tonnes per annum - is in India, with more than half of that using coal-based capacity.
'India is the only major steel-producing nation that has so much coal-based capacity in the pipeline,' said Henna Khadeeja, a research analyst with GEM who also worked on the report.
India's steel sector releases approximately 2.6 tonnes of carbon dioxide per tonne of steel, roughly 25 per cent more than the global average. China, the world's largest steelmaker, has managed to keep its emissions lower per tonne by producing more scrap-based steel and retiring older coal-based plants.
India's heavy dependence on coal for steelmaking is driven by a combination of factors: low-cost domestic coal, a relatively young fleet of blast furnaces that still have 20–25 years of operational life left, and a lack of natural gas and steel scrap.
The country's scrap recycling ecosystem remains informal, and high-quality iron ore is scarce.
'There is potential for India to change course,' said Khadeeja of GEM. 'Much of the planned capacity is still on paper. Only 8 per cent of it has actually broken ground. This means there is still a window to shift toward lower-emission technologies.'
The consequences of producing carbon-polluting steel may go beyond climate goals. While India's steel exports are only a small share of its overall production, they could suffer as major markets like the European Union begin enforcing carbon border taxes next year.
'India may be better off tolerating some short-term pain of technological upgrading to make its steel cleaner for long-term competitiveness gain,' said Easwaran Narassimhan of the New Delhi-based think tank Sustainable Futures Collaborative.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
How major US stock indexes fared Tuesday, 8/19/2025
Wall Street fell further from its records. The S&P 500 lost 0.6% Tuesday, its third straight loss after setting its all-time high last week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average inched up less than 0.1%, and the Nasdaq composite sank 1.5%. Drops for Palantir Technologies, Nvidia and other stars bid up because of the mania around artificial-intelligence technology led the declines. Home Depot helped keep the Dow steadier after standing by its forecast for profit and revenue this year. On Tuesday: The S&P 500 fell 37.78 points, or 0.6%, to 6,411.37. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 10.45 points, or less than 0.1%, to 44,922.27. The Nasdaq composite fell 314.82 points, or 1.5%, to 21,314.95. The Russell 2000 index of smaller companies fell 17.86 points, or 0.8%, to 2,276.61. For the week: The S&P 500 is down 38.43 points, or 0.6%. The Dow is down 23.85 points, or 0.1%. The Nasdaq is down 308.02 points, or 1.4%. The Russell 2000 is down 9.92 points, or 0.4%. For the year: The S&P 500 is up 529.74 points, or 9%. The Dow is up 2,378.05 points, or 5.6%. The Nasdaq is up 2,004.16 points, or 10.4%. The Russell 2000 is up 46.45 points, or 2.1%. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Why Auburn is completely justified in claiming 4 more national titles
The Auburn Tigers just closed the gap on the University of Alabama in the national title debate, and they didn't have to take a single snap to do it. Claiming four new national titles in one swoop, in the year 2025, has to rank as Auburn's greatest victory since the Kick Six. Thing is, based on the precedent already set down by that school across the state, Auburn is completely justified in claiming most, if not necessarily all four of the new titles. What's good for the Tide is good for the Tigers, after all. 'For too long, Auburn has chosen a humble approach to our program's storied history — choosing to recognize only Associated Press national championships,' Auburn athletic director John Cohen told On3 in announcing the new title windfall. Two banners, for the 1957 and 2010 seasons, hang in Jordan-Hare Stadium, and prior to this week the Tigers also acknowledged the 1913, 1983 and 1993 seasons as meeting national championship qualifications. [Join or create a Yahoo Fantasy Football league for the 2025 NFL season] Effective immediately, Auburn will now claim the 1910, 1914, 1958 and 2004 seasons as national championship ones, because, as Cohen notes, the Tigers' recognitions 'now align with the well-established standard used by the NCAA's official record book and our peers across the nation.' Auburn can justify the new rings on two fronts: first, because pre-21st-century college football was a chaotic nest of competing rankings and ad hoc justifications, and second, because Alabama already went there. Reason #1: Nobody knows anything The Tigers are taking advantage of 20th century college football's inherent absurdity. Then as now, the soul of college football lies in argument, the furious and fiery debate over unanswerable questions of strength and worth. But for all the good that the College Football Playoff and its predecessor postseason series have brought the game, they've robbed us of the debate of which team really would've come out on top in a winner-take-all matchup. When you determine your postseason rankings via polls rather than games, there's ample room for debate … and ample territory to claim championships on your own a century after the fact. Multiple contemporaneous and after-the-fact polls have attempted to make sense of college football's anything-goes era, some with far more statistical rigor and validity than others. Still, finding a poll that breaks your way is like finding a $100 bill on the ground; you might not be entitled to it, but you're going to keep it anyway. Auburn does have history in its corner. The Auburn of the 1910s was a fearsome unit, led by a diminutive Irishman named Mike Donahue and featuring players with spectacular names like Fatty Warren, Baby Taylor and Moon Ducote. In the three national championship seasons Auburn now claims, the Tigers won 22 games, lost one and tied one. Auburn and Alabama weren't playing at that time due to hard feelings on both sides, which was good news for the Tide, a mediocre 15-11 over the same stretch. The 1958 team played under a total blackout — no television, no bowl appearances — but still managed to go 9-0-1. That was only good enough for fourth in the final rankings, behind LSU (10-0), Iowa (7-1-1), and Army (8-0-1). The 2004 team went 13-0 but was not included in the two-team BCS, losing out on a berth by mere percentage points to USC and Oklahoma. Auburn and Oklahoma were tied going into the regular season's final week, but because Auburn didn't beat Alabama badly enough in the Iron Bowl, winning by 'only' eight points, Oklahoma moved ahead only to get shellacked by USC in the Orange Bowl. (Incidentally, I cover all this in my new — and apparently already dated — book Iron In The Blood: How the Alabama vs. Auburn Rivalry Shaped the Soul of the South, on sale next Tuesday. Feel free to correct the appropriate passages by hand.) Reason #2: Alabama did it first If you're mad at Auburn for claiming four new titles, you might want to reserve a good measure of your scorn for their rival. Back in the 1980s, an Alabama sports information director went diving in the record books and in one swoop, awarded Alabama five pre-Bear Bryant-era titles. These range from defensible and acceptable to absurd, like the 1941 season where Alabama went 9-2 and finished 20th (!) in the AP poll … but ranked No. 1, tied with Minnesota, in a single, much smaller poll. Nothing Auburn did Tuesday is anywhere near as egregious as that, and yet the 1941 team remains canonized on Alabama's Walk of Champions in front of Bryant-Denny Stadium. Now, granted, there's the question of an incredibly slippery slope here. If Auburn is going to claim a national title for 2004, why can't Utah — which also went undefeated at 12-0 — also claim one? Why couldn't 2017 Central Florida or 2023 Florida State, which, like 2004 Auburn, were both left out of the postseason dance despite going undefeated? For that matter, why can't Alabama claim the 1966 title and jump up to 19? That season, Alabama went 11-0 with six shutouts, but finished behind two teams — Notre Dame and Michigan State — that went 9-0-1 and played to a tie in late November. The suspicion, then and now, was that pollsters of the day were punishing the Crimson Tide for the state of Alabama's woeful record on civil rights in the turbulent 1960s. (Politics and sports have always intertwined.) Yes, Auburn's ring-grab could well set off a new wave of schools retroactively seeking to claim national titles won by their great-grandfathers. We could see new banners hanging in stadiums all across the country as enterprising researchers whip up dissertation-length justifications for why their school deserves titles from the days before cars or TV. But so what? We now have in place a means of determining, once and for all, a season's indisputable national champion. And as college football sins go, a bit of reapportioned valor ranks pretty low on the list. We've got to hold onto something to argue about, after all.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ibrahima Konate closer to STAYING at Liverpool
Liverpool have got a contract problem to solve with . The Frenchman is out of contract in 2026 - and the club have so far had little success in tying him down to a new deal. Having seen the 26-year-old establish himself as Virgil van Dijk's preferred partner in their 2024/25 Premier League-winning season, the Reds will be gutted to lose him on a free next year. 🚨2025/26 LFC x adidas range🚨 LFC x adidas Shop the away range TODAY LFC x adidas Shop the home range today! LFC x adidas Shop the goalkeeper range today LFC x adidas Shop the new adidas range today! That has led to speculation that we could see the France international on the move this summer instead - provided Liverpool's asking fee is met. Media reports have suggested that the club would settle for a deal for anything between £35m and £50m - although there are no guarantees that Richard Hughes would cash in. Madrid tell Alonso: No more signings One more season of Konate - regardless of his future intentions - may well be the most sensible option unless Marc Guehi can be brought on board during the current window. - with Los Blancos previously reported to be willing to buy Konate this summer. However it looks like Los Blancos' tune has changed. According to a new report in Defensa Central, president Florentino Perez and technical director Jose Angel Sanchez have informed coach Xabi Alonso that there will be NO more transfers this summer. Madrid bid for Konate ruled out It means a bid for Konate can be ruled out - taking one of the main suitors for Konate off the table. Liverpool went through practically all of last season with contract doubts over Van Dijk, Mohamed Salah and Trent Alexander-Arnold. While Trent turned his back on his hometown club and joined Madrid, Liverpool convinced Salah and Van Dijk to remain at the club for two more years. Indeed at one stage it appeared Salah was more out than in but Arne Slot's title-winning team is evidence enough for the Egyptian King that Liverpool are going places. © IMAGO Can Liverpool convince Konate to stay? And so while it might right now seem that Konate is on his way to Real Madrid as a replacement for either Antonio Rudiger or David Alaba in 2026, a lot can happen between now and January. By that stage he will be available to talk to overseas clubs about a free transfer - and no doubt Madrid will be in the mix. But if Liverpool get off to a great start - reaffirming their status as the best club in the Premier League - then Konate could ultimately be persuaded to stay. The move this summer now appears off the table - and Liverpool have a second chance to convince their stopper that his future lies on Merseyside.