Latest news with #UnitedNationsEnvironmentProgram
The Star
18 hours ago
- Science
- The Star
30 per cent global ocean protection target not enough for marine giants, says study
CANBERRA/MANILA (Xinhua): The global goal to protect 30 per cent of the world's oceans by 2030 will not be sufficient to ensure the survival of marine megafauna such as whales, sharks, turtles, and seals, international scientists have warned. An international study has mapped the world's most critical ocean habitats for marine megafauna, revealing that even ambitious global protection targets will fall short of safeguarding these threatened species, according to a release from the Australian National University (ANU) on Friday. In December 2022, the Convention on Biological Diversity parties agreed to conserve 30 per cent of Earth's land and seas by 2030, but the United Nations Environment Program notes that biodiversity is unevenly protected: while a quarter of ecological regions meet the 30 pe rcent target, some have no coverage, leaving many species and ecosystems insufficiently conserved. The UN-endorsed MegaMove project, involving nearly 400 scientists from over 50 countries, tracked more than 100 marine megafauna species to identify where conservation efforts should focus, the release said. The study, published in Science, found that only 8 percent of oceans are currently protected and warns that the UN High Seas Treaty's 30 per cent target, though supported by 115 countries, will not fully safeguard key habitats for threatened marine giants. ANU Associate Professor Ana Sequeira, the study's lead author and MegaMove founder, explained that the research mapped areas where marine megafauna engage in essential behaviors such as foraging, resting, and migration. These species serve as top predators with crucial roles in marine ecosystems but face mounting threats from human activities, she said. "We found that the areas used by these animals overlap significantly with threats like fishing, shipping, warming temperatures, and plastic pollution," Sequeira said, adding the 30-percent protection goal is helpful but not enough, so further measures are needed to reduce threats beyond protected areas. The study identifies specific mitigation measures beyond protected areas, including modifications to fishing gear, different lighting systems in nets, and ship traffic management schemes. - Xinhua
The Star
05-05-2025
- Automotive
- The Star
Kenya hosts conference to boost transition to electric mobility
NAIROBI, May 5 (Xinhua) -- Kenya on Monday hosted a two-day high-level conference aimed at accelerating the adoption of electric mobility (e-mobility) solutions as part of efforts to catalyze the reduction of carbon emissions. The third edition of the annual E-Mobility Stakeholders Conference and Expo took place in Nairobi, the capital of Kenya, with over 200 stakeholders drawn from government, development agencies, and private sector innovators to explore opportunities for scaling up electric vehicles (EVs), charging infrastructure, and policy frameworks. Alex Wachira, principal secretary in Kenya's Ministry of Energy and Petroleum, said the government is keen to build an enabling environment within the e-mobility ecosystem through the provision of requisite infrastructure, including charging stations that will enable motorists to travel with simplicity. Annika Berlin, program management officer at the United Nations Environment Program's Sustainable Mobility Unit, noted that Kenya has achieved progress in adopting e-mobility solutions such as EVs and motorcycles. Berlin revealed that the transport sector remains a major contributor to carbon emissions, hence the need to create a supportive policy environment and attract investment in green transport. Hezbon Mose, president of the Electric Mobility Association of Kenya, said there are about 9,047 electric vehicles registered in the country, the bulk of which are motorcycles. Mose said growing awareness of the effects of climate change and air pollution is making EVs more socially desirable.
Japan Times
28-04-2025
- Science
- Japan Times
The world is waking up to the dangers of superpollutants
Carbon dioxide is the big daddy of greenhouse gases. Making up the bulk of our emissions and staying up in the atmosphere for many centuries, whether we're successful or not at limiting global temperature rise boils down to what we do about CO2. But it's only part of the equation in global warming. A group of lesser-discussed climate pollutants are many times more powerful than carbon dioxide and could serve as an emergency brake on near-term warming. Even better: There's reason to be cautiously optimistic. So-called super pollutants — a group of greenhouse gases and aerosols including methane, black carbon, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and tropospheric ozone — are responsible for about 45% of warming to date, with carbon dioxide responsible for the other 55%. While these emissions exist in the atmosphere for a fraction of CO2's centuries-long lifetime, they have a more potent warming effect. Methane is the short-lived climate pollutant with the greatest impact, coming mainly from agricultural, waste and oil and gas industry sources. While methane isn't toxic in itself, it's the primary contributor to tropospheric — or ground-level — ozone. O3 is actually helpful when it's up high, 20-odd kilometers above sea level, where it filters the sun's ultraviolet radiation; but down in the lowest level of our planet's atmosphere, it wreaks havoc with our lungs and vegetation. Black carbon — the soot that results from incomplete combustion of fossil fuels, waste and biomass — isn't a greenhouse gas, but does contribute to warming by absorbing sunlight and releasing it as heat, in the same way that urban infrastructure and asphalt roads do. As a major component of particulate matter, black carbon is bad news for our respiratory and cardiovascular systems and impedes photosynthesis in plants. As these pollutants disappear from the atmosphere much faster than CO2, the benefits of reducing them will be realized sooner. Chris Malley, senior researcher at Stockholm Environment Institute, explained that hasty mitigation has the potential to slow down the warming expected by 2050 by as much as 0.5 degrees Celsius. But the real beauty of reducing super pollutants is the benefit to human health and food security: The Clean Air and Climate Coalition, a body launched by the United Nations Environment Program, states that it could also prevent more than 2 million premature deaths each year and avoid annual crop losses of over 50 million metric tons. Despite their multihazardous natures, the Paris Agreement doesn't require countries to single out super pollutants in climate action plans known as nationally-determined contributions, or NDCs. As a result, many of the first NDCs didn't do so at all, simply referring to one number — CO2-equivalent, a standardized metric which converts the different warming potentials of each pollutant into a comparable figure. This doesn't give a clear picture of the impacts of any given action plan as these gases have distinct impacts over different timescales. It also obscures the chance to communicate the very tangible and near-term public benefits. But here's why we ought to feel some optimism. NDCs are submitted every five years and in the second round of submissions post-2020, Malley observed a sizeable uptick in countries referring to super pollutants explicitly or implicitly, via sector-specific targets or co-benefits. Pre-2020, only Mexico and Uruguay included quantitative reduction targets for a relevant super pollutant. Post-2020, 20 NDCs included quantitative information on short-lived climate pollutants or air pollutant reductions. It's also notable that several countries also included assessments of the benefits. Nigeria, for example, concluded that if its climate plan was successfully implemented, 30,000 Nigerians wouldn't die prematurely every year by 2030. It turns NDCs into plans to protect citizens' health. Now, new NDCs are being submitted ahead of the 30th United Nations climate change conference in Brazil at the end of the year. There's only a small basket to analyze, with just 19 nations submitting updated plans so far, but there are signs that awareness of super pollutants is growing. One notable example is Canada's NDC, which reported the outcomes of a public engagement push. About 11,000 participants were asked which co-benefits of climate change action should be prioritized and 79% said air quality and public health. This demonstrates how the near-term benefits of tackling superpollutants can strengthen and broaden public support for climate action. At a time where the concept of net zero emissions is heavily politicized, that's incredibly helpful. But, while there's reason to hope, NDCs are just pieces of paper. The U.S. submitted an ambitious climate plan at the end of the Biden administration which won't be implemented under U.S. President Donald Trump, who is withdrawing the country from the Paris Agreement again. Success in many developing countries' plans also depends on conditional support. Without more money and expansions in technical and human capacity, all the benefits for planet and people won't be realized. Methane emissions have also continued to rise, meaning that while the plans and awareness are there, we're still way off track. We don't have to be. Often solutions are easy wins with no technical breakthroughs required, such as reducing methane leaks from oil and gas infrastructure or draining rice paddy fields once or twice a year. Economic benefits are another upside, giving the waste sector an opportunity to generate profits out of rubbish by selling compost or biogas. Make no mistake, carbon dioxide is the number one greenhouse gas to conquer. But ridding ourselves of super pollutants will yield immediate benefits — cooling our cities, giving us cleaner air to breathe and better food to eat. Lara Williams is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering climate change.
Forbes
18-04-2025
- Lifestyle
- Forbes
The Hidden Crisis Of Fashion: Climate, Water & Microplastic Impact
Pile of old clothes and shoes dumped on the grass as junk and garbage, littering and polluting the ... More environment In Beyond the Price Tag: The Dark Side of Luxury and Circular Fashion, the darker undercurrents of the fashion industry were examined. Now, we go deeper into one of its most pressing impacts: pollution. From carbon emissions to synthetic fiber runoff, the environmental cost of our closets is growing—fast. According to the United Nations Environment Program, the fashion industry is responsible for about 10% of global carbon emissions, more than international flights and maritime shipping combined. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change estimates that by 2030, fashion's emissions could increase by 50% if no action is taken. This makes the sector one of the highest-emitting global industries—and among the least regulated in climate conversations. Yet despite this outsized footprint, fashion remains one of the least scrutinized sectors in climate policy discussions. The United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change estimates that if current production and consumption patterns continue unchecked, the industry's emissions could rise by 50% by 2030. According to data from the EU, 20% of global industrial water pollution comes from textile dyeing and treatment. In countries like Bangladesh and India, factories release untreated wastewater laden with toxic chemicals like chromium, lead, and mercury directly into rivers. According to the Waste Management, many factories operating without adequate regulation in regions where there are limited restrictions—discharge millions of liters of untreated, chemically saturated wastewater daily into rivers that serve as lifelines for local communities. According to the World Bank, toxic effluents from dyes and finishing agents contain carcinogens and heavy metals such as chromium, cadmium, lead, arsenic and mercury, contaminating drinking water sources, destroying aquatic ecosystems, and poisoning farmland. In Bangladesh's Buriganga River, for instance, once a source of freshwater and food, dissolved oxygen levels have dropped to near-zero in some areas, turning the river into a biological dead zone due to lack of life, according to Al Jazeera. What makes the impact even more alarming is that the fashion industry consumes 93 billion cubic meters of water annually, according to the United Nations—enough to meet the needs of five million people per year. This means that while some parts of the world experience water scarcity, vast amounts of clean water are being polluted or depleted to keep the fashion engine running. Indonesia environment water pollution fashionROMEO GACAD/AFP via Getty Images) According to the International Union for Conservation of Nature, 35% of microplastics in the ocean come from synthetic textiles like polyester, nylon, and acrylic. These fibers shed during washing and find their way into marine food chains. According to the Journal of Hazardous Materials, plastic pollution has rapidly escalated into one of the planet's most pressing environmental challenges. As the global population continues to grow, so does the demand for plastic—driving annual production to a staggering 430 million tons. Alarmingly, around 11 million tons of this plastic find their way into the ocean each year. Without strategic global action, this figure could triple in the coming decades, threatening marine ecosystems, endangering wildlife, and impacting the millions of people who rely on the ocean for food, income, and survival. A 2018 study published in Environmental Pollution Microplastics and microfibers have been detected across every major ocean basin, underscoring the pervasive nature of this form of pollution. Among these, microfibers—tiny threads often shed from synthetic textiles—rank among the most frequently found micropollutants along coastal shorelines worldwide. Fashion may be a symbol of expression, but in it lies a pattern of destruction—one that is polluting our waters, and threatening life below the surface. According to leading experts and global data, the fashion industry is not only a top emitter of carbon, but also a silent force behind poisoned rivers and the invisible spread of microplastics. From the synthetic fibers that shed into our oceans, to the billions of liters of chemically treated water dumped into once-thriving ecosystems, the price of fashion extends far beyond stores. Yet the industry continues to operate in a vacuum—underregulated, underreported, and under pressure only from the voices of those brave enough to speak up. Experts like Dr. Hakan Karaosman are helping lead that charge, pushing for full-spectrum sustainability that incorporates environmental ethics into every tier of the supply chain—from design studio to dye house. If we are to create meaningful change, this moment must spark more than awareness. It must spark accountability. Fashion must transition from a model of unchecked consumption to one of conscious creation. In the next article in this series, we will unravel the environmental and ethical toll of fashion waste. From mountains of discarded garments in Chile's Atacama Desert to the global dumping of secondhand clothing in Accra. We will also assess how the industry is exporting its trash—and its effects on the most vulnerable communities.
Forbes
01-04-2025
- Business
- Forbes
Beyond The Price Tag: The Dark Side Of Fast Fashion Business Models
Fast fashion Fast fashion has revolutionized the apparel industry, making trendy clothing more affordable and accessible than ever. However, this business model comes at an enormous cost. According to the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, the fashion industry produces over 92 million tons of textile waste annually, with fast fashion contributing significantly to this staggering figure. As brands like Zara, H&M, Temu and Shein continue to push rapid production cycles, the environmental and human costs are mounting at an unsustainable rate. This is the first article in the Fashion and Sustainability series. To gain expert insight into the current state of the industry by examining the different types of fashion business models and how they are designed for overconsumption. Dr. Hakan Karaosman, Associate Professor at Cardiff University, Chief Scientist at FReSCH, and Chair at the Union of Concerned Researchers in Fashion, was interviewed to gain insight on the sector. He is a leading authority on sustainable fashion supply chains and stresses that true sustainability requires systemic change rather than surface-level commitments and certifications. As the son of a garment worker, his research is deeply personal, fueling his mission to bring justice to those working across complex fashion supply chains through scientific inquiry and industry reform. The Fast Fashion Model: A System Built on Waste and Exploitation Fast fashion thrives on a high-speed production cycle that prioritizes low costs and rapid turnover. According to the New York Times garment workers in countries such as Bangladesh and Cambodia earn as little as $3 per day, often working in unsafe conditions. Meanwhile, synthetic fabrics like polyester—found in over 60% of garments—release microplastics into the ocean with each wash, further exacerbating pollution according to the United Nations Environment Program. Ultra-Fast Fashion: The Darker Side of Trend-Driven Apparel If fast fashion is unsustainable, ultra-fast fashion is outright catastrophic. Brands like Shein, Boohoo, and Fashion Nova have taken the most undesirable aspects of fast fashion and accelerated them through data-driven trend forecasting. Shein alone uploads between 2,000 and 10,000 new styles daily, leveraging algorithmic predictions and influencer marketing to fuel relentless consumer demand according to Times Magazine. A 2022 Business Insider report indicate that some Shein suppliers' workers are 18-hour shifts for as little as 4 cents per garment. The Direct-to-Consumer Shift: A Sustainable Solution or Greenwashing? Direct-to-consumer brands like Everlane and Reformation present themselves as sustainable alternatives by cutting out middlemen and emphasizing ethical sourcing. While this model reduces inventory waste, many brands still rely on overproduction and aggressive marketing tactics. According to Changing Markets Foundation, 59% of sustainability claims by major fashion brands are misleading, indicating that greenwashing remains a significant issue. The Future of Fashion & the Need for Systemic Change The dominance of fast and ultra-fast fashion reveals a system built on exploitation and environmental destruction. Unless consumers and policymakers demand greater accountability, the cycle of disposability will continue. The rise of sustainable alternatives and green certification is promising, but without systemic reform, the industry's impact will remain devastating. Stay tuned for the next article in the series which examines the business models of luxury, resale, and rental fashion industries.
