Common Home Issue 04

Risk and Innovation

Urgent adaptations in a changing world

Letter from the Editors

We are thrilled to present to you the fourth issue of Common Home, Georgetown’s magazine on environment and sustainability from the Earth Commons Institute (ECo).

In this issue, we shine a light on efforts big and small to reduce environmental threats across the globe. You’ll find stories of innovation, bravery, and doggedness; of actions big and small that inspire us, from corporations to museums, laboratories to villages.

We look to community organizations across the world - in Mongolia to Palau and beyond - to discover creative ways to strengthen ecosystems while providing humans food and clean water. Their solutions are local, but their lessons are universal.

In this vein, we hear first hand from people on the front lines of a changing climate. We step into the shoes of a veteran Australian firefighter in a time of ever more threatening bush fires, and discover how a physician on campus trains fellow health care workers to treat the toll of extreme weather.

We look to Georgetown alumni, too. Through their first-hand accounts, we see how a multinational packaging firm reduces waste, we learn about NASA’s sustainability efforts, and immerse ourselves in an eco-friendly fashion show by a Fulbright scholar in Cambodia.

We hear good news on how American policies and actions shape the future on our soil. One piece discusses how the Inflation Reduction Act may impact the climate, and another explores how a climate change museum hopes to inspire civic engagement through their exhibits. And we explore how consumers and corporations are moving - at various speeds - towards Electric Vehicles, and a more circular economy.

With the importance of humanities in understanding climate change, the impact of carbon emissions, and more, this issue of Common Home is our most multifaceted yet.

A special thank you to our esteemed guest writers within and beyond Georgetown. We are delighted to share your voices with our readers.

Sincerely,

The Common Home Editorial Board

Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23, Alannah Nathan, SFS ‘24, and Maya Snyder, SFS ‘24

Table of Contents

Letter from the Editors

Should the Inflation Reduction Act Make Us Less Pessimistic about the Climate?

Rising Risk of Extreme Heat on Health in the District

By Ursula Gately, COL ‘23, Georgetown Undergraduate Environmental Health Collaborative

Ph.D., Associate Professor at Georgetown University Master’s in Communication, Culture & Technology Program

By Evan Barba,

Seven Reasons to Learn About Energy

Curating Climate Change: How a new museum in NYC is creating community through teaching people about climate change

By Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23

Sustainable Packaging: A step-by-step path to greener packaging

By Caroline James, Director of Sustainability at Atlantic Packaging; COL ‘16

Treecart

By Charlotte Taylor, SFS ‘24

Hungry Worms and High-Tech Jaguars: Creative local solutions to resource challenges across the world

By Maya Snyder, SFS ‘24

Alumni Spotlights: NASA Scientist Argyro Kavvada, Ph.D.

Re-Made in Cambodia, an Eco-Friendly Fashion Show

By

Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23 with Fulbright Scholar Alyssa Kardos Loera, NHS ‘21

An Australian Firefighter on the Frontlines: Mental health, climate change, and the 2020-21 Bushfire season

Anthony Green, New South Wales Rural Fire Service Volunteer Firefighter Interview with Alannah Nathan

Preparing for Climate Disasters: Perspectives from a physician teaching future health professionals

By

Caroline Wellbery, Ph.D., Adjunct Professor in Georgetown University Medical Center’s Department of Family Medicine

By Maria Petrova, Ph.D.,

Program Co-Director of Georgetown University’s Masters of Science in Environment and Sustainability Management

The Social Cost of Carbon: Where Our Measurements Fall Short

By Professor Raphael Calel, Ph.D., Associate Professor in the McCourt School of Public Policy

The Role of Oil and Gas Companies in the Energy Transition

By Alannah Nathan, SFS ‘24

How the Humanities Can Help with the Climate Crisis: How ethics, culture, and spirituality can galvanize climate action

By

Erin Cline,

Ph.D.,

Paul J. and Chandler M. Tagliabue Distinguished Professor of Interreligious Studies & Dialogue, Senior Research Fellow at the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs

Connections Between Humanity and Nature: Reflections on three films that probe relationships between humans nature

By Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23

The Breakdown: Circular Economy

By Christian Rishel, Founder of Circudyne; M.S., SFS ‘94

Cover art by Susha Roy. This magazine is printed on 100% recycled paper using 100% recyclable inks. Please share or recycle this copy.

Editorial Board

Alannah is a Junior in Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service studying Global Business with a minor in French. Her interests in the environment space include the energy transition, climate economics, and sustainable economic development. She now calls Brooklyn, NY, home.

Marion is a Senior in the college studying History and Art History with a minor in Theater and Performance Studies. She is from Brooklyn, NY and is passionate about the intersection of sustainability and the arts.

Maya is a Junior in Georgetown University’s School of Foreign Service, majoring in Science, Technology, & International Affairs and minoring in English. Originally from San Diego, California.

Alannah Nathan

Marion Cassidy

Maya Snyder

Yamo na Kami by Katryn Bowe

Should the Inflation Reduction Act Make Us

Less Pessimistic about the Climate?

Professor Evan Barba’s perspective on the climate impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022

By Evan Barba, Ph.D. Associate Professor at Georgetown’s Communication, Culture, & Technology Program

I have never been shy about my climate pessimism. But it doesn’t take much reading between the lines of the latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report to reach the conclusion that two degrees of warming– and all the turmoil that implies– is unavoidable at this point.

The question we are grappling with now is whether or not we can collectively do enough to prevent something far worse.

However, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 gives us all

cause to be slightly, cautiously, less pessimistic. That is not to say the bill is cause for optimism, as some have reported. If this were 1982, I would be awash in optimism at this timely, forward-looking, and morally responsible piece of legislation, but seeing as it’s 40 years behind schedule, I’m going to have to settle for being just a bit less pessimistic.

The bill supports numerous critical climate initiatives, with electric vehicles (EVs) a significant focus. In many respects, electric vehicles are a big win. They are far less polluting at the point of use which, in addition to global climate benefits, will make a big difference for the health and well-being of those living in large, traffic-congested cities. Moreover, most analysis indicates that they also produce fewer greenhouse gasses over the course of their life-cycles.

On the flip side, as a recent analysis points out, EVs are getting bigger, and that’s not necessarily an efficient use of electricity. If commuting 30 miles into the city each day uses as much electricity as powering a house for a day (about 30kwh), then one day of commuting basically operates two homes. In the long run, that’s not necessarily a win for the environment.

It’s the things that change the paradigm of how we get to work that will make the biggest differences in the long term, but there seem to be few incentives for bike lanes, car-free zones, or other ways that might actually get people to use resources more efficiently, and to me, that’s a missed opportunity. Not to mention, there is still quite a bit of support for fossil fuels in this bill that will potentially make the climate crisis worse or, at the very least, mitigate some of the potential benefits we might realize.

Still, I understand the pragmatics of legislation enough to know that perfect can’t be the enemy of the good, and this bill still does a lot right.

For instance, this bill includes incentives aimed at creating a national supply chain for EV batteries. It’s often true that legislation like this will assume that carbon emissions outside U.S. borders (like those currently associated with mining and manufacturing battery materials) don’t exist, and therefore are not accounted for in the total emissions. This bill– to the great credit of those who put it together–does not try to use that trick, and instead, provides a fair accounting of pollution associated with mining activities. Moreover, in the long-term transition off of fossil fuels, an in-place national supply chain will also offer important opportunities for recycling batteries into new EVs and home battery systems. As recycling becomes more common, the national supply chain may even look more like a “supply circle.”

All in all, there are many parts of this bill that really do make me less pessimistic– cheaper and better batteries are a necessity for a more resilient and distributed power grid, it takes environmental justice more seriously (although probably not seriously enough) with provisions to support underserved communities, and it includes enough incentives to both private citizens and commercial industry to potentially reduce U.S. carbon emissions by 40% from 2005 levels before 2030. These are reasons to be happy, but we must keep in mind that they are only the beginning of what we ultimately need to accomplish, and many of the bill’s effects will not be felt for years.

Passing the Inflation Reduction Act is not an excuse to rest easy now. If we are to actually diminish the effects of climate change for the next generation, we still need more drastic, societal change. This bill starts us down that path, but we still have quite a way to go.

Professor Evan Barba teaches at Georgetown’s Communication, Culture, and Technology Program. If you’re interested in learning more about him and his work, you can access his website at EvanBarba.com

Curating Climate Change

How a new museum in NYC is creating community through teaching people about climate change

By Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23 & Common Home Editor

In Washington D.C. alone there are dozens of museums, from one dedicated to spies, to geography, and even to postage. Yet, in the entire United States there is only one museum dedicated to climate change: The Climate Museum, based in New York City.

The Climate Museum – in development since the mid-2010s – runs pop-up exhibitions and events throughout the city, frequently exhibiting on Governors Island and across the five boroughs. Now it is looking for a permanent location that they can call home year-round.

Climate Signals installation by Justin Brice Guariglia - Photo: Justin Brice Guariglia, courtesy of the Climate Museum

Miranda Massie founded the Climate Museum in the wake of Hurricane Sandy. After seeing the devastation the hurricane caused New York City, Massie sought to learn more about the climate crisis. When her Google search came up empty on museums dedicated to climate change, she created one herself.

A decade later, Massie is directing the museum she envisioned, with the support of a dozen staff members. Current Design and Curatorial Associate at The Climate Museum, Saskia Randle, sat down with Common Home to discuss the importance and aspirations of the Climate Museum.

The Climate Museum mobilizes two unique strengths museums hold: museums are considered very trustworthy sources of information, and they’re very popular. “The combination of these two elements,” Randle noted, “gives the museum a transformational capacity and that’s what we need for climate action. To be able to engage with a lot of people and provide information to allow them to take the necessary steps and take action accordingly.”

“Our overall goal is to inspire action, and civic action specifically, with the climate crisis,” Design and Curatorial Associate Randle explained, “Most Americans in the U.S. are worried about the climate crisis, but only few people talk about it regularly.” In fact, a recent Yale opinion survey found that while 65% of Americans say they are worried about global warming, only 35% report discussing the matter “at least occasionally.”

“We want to reach people of all ages who are worried and want to do something, but have not quite found a way to get involved in a meaningful way,” Randle noted. “All of our different programming is really to provide a pathway for those people into climate action and civic engagement. We want to make people feel like they’re taking action alongside others, and show people that they have agency beyond consumer actions.”

One example of how the museum promotes this ethos lies under the “Take Action!” section of their website. Anyone can print a Climate Ambassador Card which is a walletsized card of climate conversation starters. It provides a reminder and easy tool for people to casually talk about climate change.

The museum’s strengths lie in its flexibility. “Since we’re still quite small we have the ability to react and change our plans based on current events. This allows us to stay relevant with what’s going on.” For instance, in 2018 the museum had an exhibition called Climate Signals where ten highway traffic signs were placed around the city. The displays flashed text to draw passers-by into the climate conversation. Each sign was also translated into the languages commonly spoken in its neighborhood, allowing the displays to be accessible and adjustable.

As the crossover between culture and climate expands, social justice has become a key part of the Climate Museum’s mission. The museum considers how different themes — food, health, labor, and law — all intersect with the crises of climate and inequality. The Climate Museum strives to ensure that its programming is as accessible as possible: its livestream discussions usually have an ASL interpreter and the museum is prioritizing finding a permanent location that is transit accessible – making it socially accessible, too.

Starting a new museum is no small feat particularly when it comes to funding. The museum only accepts funds that are “mission compatible.” It rejects any funding with ties to the

fossil fuel industry in order to maintain public trust.

Yet, the funding constraint has not stopped the museum from making an impact. “People are always excited to hear about the Climate Museum and surprised that it is so new,” Randle exclaimed. “The Climate Museum wants to engage with people of all ages and wants people to know they do not need to be expert scientists in order to engage and talk about the climate crisis.”

“The Museum has created such a wonderful community — including colleagues, visitors, partner orgs, etc. — that all work, learn, and fight to create progress together.”

Taking Action exhibition - Photo: Saskia Randle, courtesy of the Climate Museum

Four steps to sustainable packaging

A step-by-step path towards more sustainable packaging

By Caroline James, COL ‘16, Director of Sustainability at Atlantic Packaging

At Atlantic Packaging, a leading provider of sustainable packaging innovation in the U.S., Caroline James (COL 2016) works with customers across an array of industries to determine the most sustainable options for their products by assessing their functionality needs as well as the most likely end-of-life scenarios.

When launching my career, I didn’t expect that my childhood fascination with trash would play any role. It shouldn’t have surprised me, though, that my personal frustration with the vast amount of waste we generate should turn into a career in making packaging more sustainable. Packaging is the largest contributor to plastic waste (about 46%), so making even a small dent can significantly decrease the waste stream.

It’s an exciting time to work in sustainable packaging; we finally have brands’ attention about why it’s critical to move to more sustainable options. The path towards more sustainable packaging is far from one-size-fits-all, but I find that

the journey looks a bit like this:

1. Companies commit to sustainable packaging

Most consumer packaged goods (CPG) companies have made pledges in the last few years to use more recycled content, make packaging more recyclable, and use better materials.

Advocacy by non-profit organizations such as the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, which advocates for a more circular economy, has helped spur these changes. CPG companies have had more technical assistance by expert groups like the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, which creates resources

and collaborations to help companies navigate this rapidly evolving space.

Many companies are willing to make changes in response to feedback from consumers who want packaging that’s more recyclable or compostable. Consumers are receiving more packaging at their doorsteps than ever and want to know what to do with it when they’re done. Brands’ marketing teams (correctly) see packaging as part of the “unboxing experience,” and for many consumers, having packaging that they perceive as sustainable is an important part of that experience.

Additionally, CPG companies feel pressure from changing legislation. Many countries, including the U.S., are seeing rapid adoption of packaging extended producer responsibility (EPR) laws, which require companies to take financial and sometimes operational responsibility for their packaging when it’s disposed of. This basically manifests as taxes that companies pay based on how much of each type of packaging material they sell into a given geography. Companies typically have to pay more for difficult-to-recycle materials, like flexible plastics, and less for easier-to-recycle materials like paper. Four states, including California, have passed packaging EPR laws, and sixteen states introduced packaging EPR legislation in 2022 alone.

It’s hard to know how expensive EPR will be for companies as states develop their fee structures, but we know that companies can minimize their financial burden by reducing

the absolute amount of packaging they use and by switching to more recyclable or compostable materials.

Between consumer expectations and changing regulatory frameworks, brands are feeling the pressure to rapidly make their packaging more sustainable.

2. Find opportunities to reduce the amount of packaging needed

The first thing we help businesses do is reduce the amount of packaging they’re using in the first place; the most sustainable material is none at all. This is a balancing act, though: the last thing that companies want is damaged products because of insufficient packaging. Sustainability advocates don’t want that either. The only thing worse than packaging waste is product waste, especially food.

We use creative solutions to help companies determine what packaging they’re using that isn’t necessary for the protection and look-and-feel of their product.

3. For packaging that can’t be eliminated, determine most sustainable materials

After reducing packaging, we’re back at the question: what material should they use as packaging? The short answer is: it depends on the packaging application.

We recommend, when possible, that companies make packaging out of materials that are curbside-recyclable, such as paper or rigid plastics like PET (#1 plastics) or HDPE (#2 plastics). These materials have a good chance of actually being recycled if they are clean, and most Americans have access to curbside recycling at home where they can recycle these materials.

In particular, we try to create as much packaging as possible from tree-based fiber. Fiber is a renewable resource, whereas traditional plastics are made of non-renewable fossil fuels. Fiber is strong and can be recycled five to seven times. That is, you can repulp paper 5-7 times before the shredded fibers of recycled paper are too short for the fibers to hold together.

We help companies ensure that their fiber comes from responsibly managed forests to protect forests’ role as critical carbon sinks. Fiber is also one of the easily recycled materials, and we see this reflected in the high rates of recycling for paper -- for instance, about 96% of corrugated cardboard boxes are recycled in the U.S.

However, if the package can’t be made of those materials, the conversation gets more complicated. Flexible plastics, like bags, films, and wraps, are not recyclable in curbside recycling systems. If they do arrive at recycling sortation centers (called Material Recovery Facilities, or MRFs), they cause problems with sortation machinery. (Replacing flexible plastics is, I’d say, the biggest challenge we’re facing right now in sustainable packaging.) But flexible plastics sometimes have their place – they can be extremely efficient for their weight, and often do the best job at keeping products like food fresh for as long as possible.

We’re seeing myriad innovations using paper material to replace both flexible and rigid plastics, such as mailers (the envelopes you often receive e-commerce shipments in). The flexible plastic versions are not curbside recyclable, but many companies are switching to paper-based mailers that consumers can recycle curbside.

Often when packaging touches liquids or food, it makes more sense to use compostable packaging. Composting is essentially the recycling of organic materials, and using compostable packaging can help divert more food waste to composting facilities. I’m looking forward to innovations like compostable versions of sauce sachets, like ketchup packets.

switch, we test our assumptions and make sure we have a full understanding of the change’s impact.

One tool we use is called life cycle assessment (LCA) which helps us assess the environmental impact that an item has over its lifetime, such as the water or greenhouse gas footprint. LCA is a powerful tool to compare packaging options, but they’re not perfect. For instance, while they usually account for things like emissions, water use, and fossil fuel depletion, they rarely account for waste impact— how much of the packaging will wind up in a landfill or in the environment.

Secondly, we think about realistic recyclability or compostability of different items. Will a MRF be able to easily sort the material away from other materials? Will paper repulping machinery be able to handle the waxy coating on some papers? It’s not enough to tell customers to throw an item in a recycling or compost bin. Packaging professionals need to look down the entire supply chain, past the consumer’s trash can, and understand what happens to a piece of packaging. Only with this full picture can we design packages that are less likely to find themselves in landfills, incinerators, or the environment.

Lastly, we iterate on consumer messaging. If we’re going to this effort and expense to use recyclable or compostable packaging, we need to ensure the end user understands what bin to put the item in when they’re done.

This is such a fascinating and important time to be involved in changing the way we think about waste, especially in packaging. I work with large companies every day to help them transition to more sustainable packaging, and it’s satisfying when a company makes a change, especially when I see the scale at which the change will happen. Removing an ounce of plastic here or switching to paper-based material there can make enormous changes at scale. Consumers can help us make the changes even more quickly by communicating their desire for better packaging to the companies they buy from the most frequently. We all come into contact with packaging every day, and we can vote with our wallets to reward companies that choose to use the best materials.

4. Assess potential impacts and hone consumer messaging

We can talk theoretically about which packaging options will be the most sustainable, but before engaging in a costly

Caroline James graduated from Georgetown College with a degree in government and completed her MBA at Yale University with an emphasis in sustainable business and industrial ecology. While at Georgetown, Caroline was a founding member of GU Fossil Free (GUFF), the campaign that successfully persuaded the University to divest its endowment from fossil fuels. She also served in GUSA as Secretary of Sustainability. She lives in Charlotte, North Carolina with her fiancé Charles.

Treecart (2022)

Sculpture by Charlotte Taylor, SFS ‘24 made of cardboard, broken shopping cart, hot glue

Treecart is a sculpture the addresses the implications of consumerism on the environment. The cart was an abandoned, broken object which I found and repurposed for this sculpture. I chose to sculpt a tree entirely out of discarded cardboard to act as the central figure growing within the cart. The tree symbolizes the Earth and all things natural while the cart alludes to the everyday routine of consuming material goods. Treecart encourages the viewer to confront the detrimental effects of mindless consumerism on the environment. The materials of the tree itself point to the obscene amount of waste generated just in product and food packaging. In fact, according to the EPA, paper and paperboard make up the largest percentage of municipal solid waste management in the United States. I hope that viewers will reflect on the larger consequences resulting from everyday waste.

Hungry Worms and High-Tech Jaguars

Creative local solutions to resource challenges across the world

By Maya Snyder, SFS ‘24 & Common Home Editor

Stingless bee colonies, worm compost, and mangrove forests – these are just a few examples of nature-based solutions that reconcile competing needs between humans and the environment.

In conservation as in life, rarely does a one-size solution fit all. We looked at small organizations across the world - from Panama, Mexico, Kenya, Palau, Mongolia, and the United States - to showcase the creative ways they are protecting their water and land resources. Whereas human resource consumption and environmental protection are often in direct competition, these organizations have created “win-wins” that are well suited to their local realities.

In so doing, they push towards the UN’s 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), of which today we dive into those regarding land ( #15), marine resources (#14) and clean water and sanitation (#6).

ON LAND

On land, grassroots organizations are leading efforts to restore forests, protect biodiversity, and combat land degradation.

The Yaguará Foundation, for instance, seeks to build a more harmonious relationship between two of Panama’s residents: humans and jaguars. Established in 2017, Yaguará is based near a buffer zone of the Darién National Park, a critical jaguar corridor.

As human activity like cattle ranching continues to encroach into the dense rainforests of the Amazon Basin, the jaguar population is increasingly threatened by habitat fragmentation, poaching, and human-wildlife conflict. The conservation status of jaguars is “Near Threatened.”

One of the primary reasons for jaguar deaths in Panama is rancher retaliation for the killing of livestock. Yaguará hopes to mitigate human-wildlife conflict by using camera traps and GPS collars to track jaguars’ hunting habits and roaming areas. The group uses the collected data to inform their conservation approaches. Anti-predation measures, such as the construction of electric fences, help keep jaguars out of ranches. Sustainable production and management models, like more efficient use of cattle farms, helps keep ranchers from encroaching onto jaguar territory. Beyond a focus on alleviating active conflict, Yaguará seeks

to demonstrate that the coexistence between humans and wildlife can be prosperous. In addition to disseminating free educational resources the foundation is focused on developing alternative livelihoods for locals which benefit from the presence of jaguars, like ecotourism and agroforestry industries.

Bayan Dukhum Cooperative, Mongolia

In the Gobi drylands of Mongolia, the Bayan Dukhum Cooperative is combating soil erosion and desertification with sustainable agroforestry techniques. In a region where the majority of the population is dependent on the land and their livestock, pasture restoration is critical.

The cooperative’s approach targets maximizing land efficiency and land productivity. The production of crops like lucerne and silage, for instance, is doubly beneficial. As grasses, they contribute to vegetation that helps combat soil degradation; as drought-resistant forms of livestock fodder, they reduce food vulnerability.

It’s a cyclical process: any waste produced by the livestock can be made into biohumus, which promotes more vegetation growth to curb desertification. Vermicompost, a type of biohumus, can be made using livestock manure and worms. The nutrient-rich organic fertilizer contains one hundred times more beneficial bacteria and fungi than ordinary soil.

When the resources of the land are used efficiently, both the land and its people benefit. After implementing these sustainable strategies, the cooperative recorded a twenty percent increase in member households’ incomes. Annual production grew to 120 tons of hay, 80 tons of fodder, 35 tons of vegetables and potatoes, and one ton of barley flour–accounting for three-quarters of the soum’s agricultural production.

Kuxtalil Cooperative, Mexico

In Mexico, the Kuxtalil co-operative network uses meliponiculture to support their communities and local environment. Meliponiculture, a practice dating back thousands of years in Mayan culture, is the breeding and management of native stingless bees. Over ninety women represent the network, spread out across twelve honey production units in Yucatán.

Environmental conservation is central to the network’s

mission. Xunáan Kaab, the species of bees native of the Yucatán region, is under threat as a result from environmental degradation and deforestation. They are essential pollinators of the region’s crops and native vegetation. By preserving this vital player in their local ecosystem, the work of the Kuxtalil network is strengthening biodiversity in Mexico.

But the benefits of bees aren’t just environmental. The honey produced by the Melipona bee contains medicinal properties, and compared to other types of honey, is less likely to crystallize, making it more appealing for consumers. Through their brand, Yaal-Kaab, the Kuxtalil network sells this honey, along with other honey-based products. As a result of this new source of income, the women of the network are more independent, becoming the primary supporters of their families and assuming roles of larger influence in their communities.

NEAR WATER

In communities near water, environmental advocates are expanding access to clean water while also ensuring the sustainable use of marine resources.

Mikoko Pamoja, Kenya

To increase the resilience of its coastal communities, Mikoko Pamoja is restoring Kenya’s mangrove forests through the sale of carbon credits (permits to produce a certain amount of carbon emissions). The project is accredited through Plan Vivo Foundation, an international NGO that sells one Plan Vivo Certificate (PCV) for every one metric ton of CO2 equivalent sequestered. Capitalizing off of mangrove forests’ huge capacity for carbon sequestration, Mikoko Pamoja secured validation to sell at least 3,000 metric tons of CO2-equivalent per year through 2033. Individuals participating in the Voluntary Carbon Market (VCM) then buy the project’s PVCs, generating an annual revenue of approximately $12,000.

Using the income from carbon credits, Mikoko Pamoja funds its mangrove rehabilitation efforts to provide both immediate and long-term benefits for the local community. Mangroves are crucial to supporting the region’s fisheries–the trees’ detritus and knotted roots provide essential nutrients and protection for juvenile fish. Mangrove forests also serve as a coastal buffer, defending the land from storms and mitigating saltwater contamination of crops and drinking water.

Kelp Farming, Alaska

In Alaska, organizations like Sea Grant Alaska and Native Conservancy, are supporting the development of kelp farms. A historically traditional food source for many indigenous peoples in Alaska, kelp is now being increasingly turned to for its potential as a regenerative industry. Growing kelp is low impact, meaning it requires no fertilizers, pesticides, freshwater, or arable land. Seaweed contributes critical support to marine life, providing habitats and nutrients to a variety of fishes. A fast-growing plant, kelp is also capable of sequestering large amounts of carbon.

Once harvested, the edible and nutrient-rich seaweed can help strengthen local food sovereignty and security. It can also be sold, providing a sustainable supplementary source of income for the local region and diversifying the economies of Alaska’s coastal communities.

Ngaraklidm Women’s Organization, Palau

Ngaraklidm Women’s Organization in Palau is reviving taro fields to protect the seascape from sedimentation. Like mangroves, taro is an effective sediment filter. When built near waterways, they keep water and soil within farms, mitigating agricultural runoff into the ocean and protecting local reefs and fisheries.

In addition to their environmental benefits, the taro fields are also culturally significant. Taro cultivation is an 800 year old practice that was once in danger of being forgotten. In fact, the women of the Ngaraklidm organization originally established the taro field project in 1950 with the goal of preserving this important part of their culture– and they succeeded.

By the project’s completion in 2015, the group had established an additional 144 taro fields and inspired the development of taro cultivation projects in four other sites.

Locally-targeted, environmental innovations like these are fascinating in their use of unique, nature-based solutions. More importantly, however, they demonstrate that creating sustainable communities doesn’t require the sacrifice of humans’ access to food, water, or shelter. Rather, with the right tools, sustainable solutions (as the SDGs promote) can help preserve– or even enhance– the economies, traditions, and health of communities for years to come.

These projects were carried out with the funding and support of organizations like The Equator Initiative, The Science for Nature and People Partnership, and the Global Environment Facility’s Small Grants Programme. If you’re interested in learning more, you can discover other locally-targeted solutions and read about their other environmental efforts on their websites.

Photo by Timothy K

Alumni Spotlight: NASA Scientist Argyro Kavvada, Ph.D.

In this Alumni Spotlight edition, we profile Dr. Argyro Kavvada, who leads sustainability initiatives at NASA’s Earth Science Division Applied Sciences Program and leads Booz Allen Hamilton’s project on studies, assessments, and strategic management for NASA’s Earth Science Applied Sciences Program. She is also the executive director of the global Earth Observations for Sustainable Development Goals (EO4SDG) initiative. Dr. Kavvada graduated from Georgetown in 2009 with a Masters degree in Applied Mathematics and Statistics.

Interview by Maya Snyder, SFS ‘24 & Common Home Editor

What inspired you to work in the environmental field?

Growing up on a Greek island in the northeastern Aegean Sea, I had plenty of opportunities to be outside in nature, and this helped develop my curiosity about our changing planet. Through the natural environment, I was able to understand changing patterns in rainfall, wildfires, ocean temperature changes and unpredictable seasonal weather. These early experiences sparked a love of Earth science and the environment that my academic and professional experiences further cultivated.

What career path led you to where you are now? Were there any pivots, or was it a straight path?

During my early academic years, I was inspired by Dr. Stamatios Krimigis, a renowned space physicist from Chios and a close mentor, whose space exploration career had a great impact on me. In my graduate years, I was able to explore various internship opportunities and foster not only my applied mathematics and climate science skills but also gain experience in connecting science to society through programs such as the NOAA Science On a Sphere and its displays at museums and science centers across the country. I also taught numerous classes about Earth science and climate, where I trained people formally and informally, and developed courses, tutorials, workshops, and materials for them.

These experiences, coupled with a continuously growing network of leaders and mentors, helped propel the beginning of my professional career and have continued to support my career advancement to date.

How has your experience working with NASA shaped your perspective on the environment and sustainability?

My experience has strengthened my understanding of the importance of co-production of knowledge and collaboration between scientists, science practitioners, analysts, and decision-makers to create usable science applications and research. This requires honing data products, information systems, modeling capabilities, and analysis methods with applications in mind and ensuring that end-users are

involved in the process from day one to enable the co-design of practical solutions to tackle environmental challenges.

What’s an issue or topic in the environmental field that you are especially passionate about?

I am passionate about broadening the communities engaged with, and benefiting from, the use of Earth Science information and derived knowledge to address climate-changerelated impacts and build their resilience to climate-related threats. I am also particularly interested in furthering efforts to promote a diverse STEM workforce. I participate in professional networks that promote diversity and inclusiveness and facilitate mentorship opportunities within the science community, like Women in Geospatial+ and American Association for University Women.

When you reflect back on your time as a Georgetown student, what would you tell current students regarding their career search? Do you have any advice for current students hoping to pursue a career in the environmental field?

My advice to current students is to expect a meandering

career path rather than a straight line and to prepare for it by building their skills, network and allowing space and time for new experiences. Pursue that internship opportunity, consider taking part in a study-abroad program, learn a new language!

What’s your favorite activity to do in nature?

Growing up on a Greek island, I developed a love for ocean related activities from a young age. I would say that some of my favorite activities are swimming, kayaking, snorkeling, and sailing! I try to go back to Greece every year to enjoy the crystal clear blue sea and sun-filled days.

Do you have any books, films, or podcasts related to the environment that you recommend?

There are so many!! Let’s see: “Rain: A Natural and History” by Cynthia Barnett is a favorite one as it brings forward rain’s integral role in history, culture and science and its inextricable link to climate change.

Another book I’d like to recommend is the “Earth Observation Applications and Global Policy Frameworks” (in press), an AGU publication in collaboration with Wiley (see here) that I edited in coordination with colleagues from the Group on Earth Observations and NASA. The book shares Earth science applications and discusses international collaborations and initiatives to advance global policy priorities in diverse sectors such as wetland preservation, food security, water quality, marine conservation, disasters, urbanization, drought and land degradation, and

greenhouse gas monitoring.

As far as podcasts are concerned, I enjoy the UN Environment Programme’s Resilience: The Global Adaptation podcast as it shares local stories from people across the world on how they leverage science, technology and innovation including nature-based solutions— from the magic of wetlands to the creation of sponge cities— to deal with climate change impacts.

Our Alumni Spotlight series elevates alumni voices in the environmental field and shares their inspiring stories. Hundreds of Hoyas within the vast network of Georgetown alumni are working towards a greener future; leading critical projects in wildlife conservation, sustainable business, ecological research,

Re-Made in Cambodia, an Eco-Friendly Fashion Show

Georgetown alumna Alyssa Kardos Loera creates an Cambodian-centric fashion show as a Fulbright Scholar in Phnom Penh.

By Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23 & Common Home Editor

Alyssa Kardos Loera graduated from Georgetown’s School of Nursing & Health Studies in 2021 and is a Fulbright English Teaching Assistant (ETA) in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. She recently organized a sustainable fashion show in which clothes were “90% recycled or upcycled and 10% made out of hand woven fabric from villages in Cambodia.”

The event, Re-Made in Cambodia (RMIC), took place on June 11, 2022, and included a runway fashion show and poem recital as well as dance and music performances.

Kardos Loera’s interest in sustainable fashion began when she thrifted her own clothing while at Georgetown, and only

grew when she worked at a thrift store in Spain before her Fulbright program began. This experience inspired her to research sustainable fashion in Cambodia and pursue a project upon her arrival.

From the get-go, Kardos Loera knew she wanted to create a fashion show. Her first step in exploring Cambodian fashion was to connect with the local arts community during her introductory month in Phnom Penh, the nation’s capital.

Kardos Loera first spoke with Cambodian Living Arts, a non-profit working to support arts in Cambodia, who referred her to local artisans. “The process was very much like a

Pictured: Alyssa Kardos and Saron Chhem, founder and designer of Domeli and both of the outfits pictured. Material sourced from Clothesline Resale Boutique. Hair by Kate Korpi Salon, Makeup by Sao Sokthen, and Photos by Norea Media

Pictured: Pich Solida (front), Pisey Chhay (back). Designed by Muoy Chorm Cambodia - Hair by Kate Korpi Salon, Makeup by Sao Sokthen, and Photos by Norea Media

tumbleweed in a good way. The more people I talked to, the more people joined the project or referred me to someone else who referred me to someone else.”

Prior to RMIC, Kardos Loera had no professional fashion show experience, but she did not let that hold her back. She was upfront with all the participants and admitted while some people were originally hesitant, they were drawn in once they heard about the show’s eco-friendly and Cambodian-centric theme, which set it apart from other Cambodian fashion shows.

Additionally, the show featured Cambodian designers’ work. “All fabrics were designed by at least one Cambodian designer, and there was only one non-Cambodian designer out of the 24. But he worked with someone who was Cambodian, which was important because a lot of the fashion shows here primarily feature foreign designers,” Kardos Loera noted.

Kardos Loera wanted the show to be accessible and free, “A lot of the fashion shows are very exclusive, invitation only.

The goal of this was very much the opposite.”

Kardos Loera was first exposed to broader cultural differences between the U.S. and Cambodia in the early stages of creating the show, particularly through the culture of second hand clothes in Cambodia. While in the United States, second hand clothes are primarily clothes people have bought, worn, and then donated, in Cambodia this system is more unusual.

“Markets will have secondhand clothes, but in different forms than we might see in the United States. Market sellers in Cambodia will buy loads of secondhand clothes often imported from Japan or Korea. So if a factory messes up on one tiny part of a garment, a mistake you probably wouldn’t notice, the factory has to get rid of it and so a lot of those clothes end up at markets in places like Phnom Penh. It’s very much normalized to not get perfect clothing because many people buy clothes through these markets.”

However, fast fashion clothing factories are found in

Pictured: Silverbelle, Choreographer: Chumvan Sodhachivy, Dancers: Soy Chanborey, Sour Kimseng, Leav Chanlyka, Horn Kanha, Orn Sophim. Recycled outfits provided by Nikki Baillie and Nathan Haas. Hair by Kate Korpi Salon, Makeup by Sao Sokthen, and Photos by Norea Media

Cambodia as well. In fact, Cambodia has over 550 garment factories in their own country. Out of Cambodia’s clothing exports, 40% are sent to the EU and 30% of these exports are sent to the United States. Adidas, H&M, Gap, and Uniqlo all have subsidiaries in Cambodia. In conjunction with increasing industrialization, deforestation has also become more prevalent. In the past twenty years about one third of Cambodia’s tree cover has been lost.

Kardos Loera wishes Americans would think more about where their clothes come from. “I want people to humanize the process of clothing production and think about what needs to happen in order for clothing to be so cheap. Americans are still benefiting from these very cheap exports. It’s not because that money goes a long way in this country because it doesn’t, clothing and factory workers are very underpaid. People need to think about the standards they have for ethical consumption.”

The garment industry is the largest employer in Cambodia accounting for 16% of the country’s GDP and 80% of total exports. Therefore, Kardos Loera’s focus on sustainable clothes that are made by and for Cambodians was especially important.

Worldwide, the clothing industry is the second largest contributor to pollution, following oil. “A lot of the artists really focused on this theme of taking what some people call waste, taking what is discarded, and making something beautiful again in a very poetic way that was also a celebration of Cambodian design.”

It’s important to differentiate between upcycling and recycling, Kardos Loera explained. “When you stain a shirt it’s not gone. You can do more with it than just throw it out. And that’s a lot of what these designers worked on, and

obviously a lot of what they did was very fashion forward and very technical and cool. But there are small things that you could do to change your clothing, like you can dye it and make it wearable again. It’s not just where you buy your clothes from, but it’s also how you treat your clothes,” Kardos Loera explained.

Creating a community of like-minded people and artists was a constant theme throughout the event production. Up until two days before the show, there was zero funding. “I wasn’t focusing on sponsorships at the beginning because I thought of the show as a community event.” The event space, Friends Futures Factory, partnered with Kardos Loera and offered the space and marketing services for free. Makeup, hair, choreographers, backstage crew, and catering were also donated. “I couldn’t believe everyone gave all their time and did everything for free, it was incredible.”

The event did raise money from visitor donations which went towards paying the artists, but was not enough to compensate everyone to the extent Kardos Loera wanted. The goal for additional shows is to have a sponsor to ensure everyone can access and contribute to the project without financial burden.

“I learned so much about humility throughout this process,” said Kardos Loera, “I learned a lot from the way that people worked and the way people gave their time, their creativity, and everything. I was very personally affected by it.”

Kardos Loera explained there are plans for the fashion show to become an annual event, “when the fashion show no longer becomes a unique event, because of its sustainability, focus on Cambodian designers, and accessibility to the public, that’s when I think it will no longer be necessary.”

Pictured: Kimseng Sour. Designed by Sok Bopha Leak with Raffles International College Phnom Penh. Hair by Kate Korpi Salon, Makeup by Sao Sokthen, and Photos by Norea Media

Illustration by Susha Roy

An Australian Firefighter on the Frontlines of Climate Change

By Anthony Green interviewed by Alannah Nathan, SFS ‘24 & Common Home Editor

Anthony Green is a volunteer firefighter from the New South Wales Rural Fire Service, the largest fire service in the world with over 70,000 volunteers. We recently spoke with Anthony about his unique perspective as a firefighter who witnessed the devastating effects of wildfires on human life and wildlife. Eastern Australia is one of the most fire-prone regions of the world. Extraordinarily intense, the 2019-20 Australian bushfire season burned over 100,000 square miles and destroyed over 2,500 homes.

CH: Describe your role as a member of the fire service.

AG: I’m a volunteer firefighter, so I don’t get paid to do what I do. The NSW Rural Fire Service is a volunteer service and it covers most of the state, physically. It’s massive. It’s one of the biggest fire services in the world with about 70,000 volunteers. It’s spread across a large area in south eastern Australia, about double the size of California.

CH: When did you join the fire service?

AG: I joined the fire service in 1994. I was 15, maybe 16. My grandparents lived on a farm in a very small community. Maybe a few hundred people. The local fire service was something we did with a community perspective and it was infectious.

CH: Do you think the volunteer culture within the fire service is something unique to Australia?

AG: Yes and it’s not just firefighting, it’s other emergency response services too. There’s a very strong history of volunteering in Australia. It comes from being a very sparsely populated, remote country where it’s somewhat impractical to have full-time paid emergency service workers in every corner of the state. You don’t have the people or the infrastructure. Some people even think it’s a bit of an insult to suggest paying volunteers.

CH: What does your day-to-day look like with the fire service?

AG: I spend most of my time in a helicopter or an airplane doing tactical supervision from the air. We manage aviation assets. Being in the air and being able to see fire from the sky is incredible because it looks so different to being on the ground. When you’re on the ground and there’s a 50 foot

high fire, it’s very hard to get some appreciation and scale of what someone who’s six-foot tall on the ground sees looking up into the sky as 200 foot trees are on fire.

CH: Even here in the United States, we were aware of the intensity of Australia’s 2019-20 fire season. What was that season like for you?

AG: When I joined the fire service, there was a massive wildfire in 1994, which went through most of Australia. And we thought that was the biggest forest fire in the history of mankind but it was eclipsed by 2019-20. And eclipsed not just in terms of area burned, but structures lost, homes lost, personal property lost, lives lost. It was the worst fire season in a very long time. It’s also the intensity with which the 2019-20 fire burned. Prior to the 2019-20 bushfire season, we had an extreme drought. Some parts of New South Wales hadn’t seen rain for 5, 6, even 7 years. So the underlying drought factor in New South Wales was horrendous.

Prior to that year, I hadn’t remembered a fire starting and just being unable to deal with it within a couple of weeks. Our forests are very remote. There are no roads, there’s no way to get to them other than helicopter. You can’t walk to them, you can’t drive to them. Most fires get dealt with in a couple of weeks. We had fires in 2019-20 that burnt for three months, which is unheard of, and they burned millions of hectares. The size and the longevity of the fires highlighted what’s happened over the last ten, twenty, thirty years in the fire service.

CH: You know the ingredients that can create a perfect storm for a bushfire. Did it feel like a ticking time box before that fire season?

AG: Yeah, we normally can predict with reasonable certainty the frequency of large fires, and they normally come about every decade. But what was coming this time was much, much bigger.

I think people underestimated a couple of things. One was how dry it actually was. And then we had an unseasonably warm winter and spring. I’ve never seen before 45 degree temperatures on the ground, not just for a few hours, but for days. And that just kills everything. Second, it’s unquestionable that the seasons have gotten longer and become more intense too. I’ve also noticed that the Northern

Hemisphere’s fire season and the Southern Hemispheres fire season overlap a lot now. We used to have a big break between seasons. Often in the northern hemispheres’ fire season, we send crews to the US and to North America and vice versa. Now, you could still be in your fire season and you could be sending crews down to Australia. We’re often competing with the northern hemisphere over when to bring back aviation assets and when to leave them here because we both need them.

The other thing that I’ve seen over the years is the impact it’s had on life. Not so much on personal property, not talking about houses, or farms, or stock, but the mental health impact on people. Twenty, twenty-five, thirty years ago, no one really talked about it. I know it existed, and it was around, but no one ever talked about what these catastrophes do to people. We’ve had towns in my state that have been completely wiped out by fire, every house has been razed to the ground. Whole communities have been removed. There’s a lot of investment right now in healing people’s mental health as much as possible. I’ve never seen that sort of investment into rehabilitation of people.

CH: Are there any anecdotes from the 2019-20 fire season that stand out to you?

AG: I think what I’ve never seen before is the loss of stock: people’s animals, livestock, sheep, cows, pigs. That’s a pretty graphic sight and stench. I’m talking about thousands and thousands of dead stock lying around. I was in a number of situations where we would land and you might see hundreds of stock just standing in the corner of a paddock and the fire will be coming toward them. We were able to cut fence lines with some pliers and just let stock go. I don’t know if they survived or not.

A couple of times, I’d see fire enveloping houses. In some situations, people were just trapped in their houses. They couldn’t escape, it was too late to leave. In many instances helicopter rescue crews were able to pick up families and fly them out to safety. Houses were completely destroyed by fire. We had a couple of lucky saves but the vast majority of times we were unable to do anything and lots of houses and people’s livelihoods were destroyed.

Our aim is to protect life and protect property. Property could be lots of things: someone’s house, shed, or caravan. Or it could be their livelihood: their stock, their fruit trees, or their apple trees. Being able to do that sort of thing is strongly entrenched in my mind.

CH: Thank you for sharing that. It’s difficult to ask someone who’s been in that position to revisit and share some of those memories. Many people are very much at a distance from everything, even for people who care and do their best to

educate themselves. Unless you’re there, I think that chasm is massive.

AG: Yeah, you’re right. And I think we [firefighters] do a bad job of talking about it. Especially if we’re just tasked for a day, you might leave home at early hours of the day, work all day firefighting, and then come home and go back to normality. I think I’m pretty lucky in that I’ve got plenty of people to talk to because a lot of people can’t, especially older guys, I think there’s a stigma.

CH: Generational?

AG: Yes, absolutely.

CH: Do you see the fires through the lens of climate change? Do you view them as a one off event?

AG: Its both. Seeing the effects of climate change and how that’s changed the severity and longevity of the fire season has made me acutely aware. If I didn’t see first hand that impact, I wouldn’t be as aware. That awareness leads me to be more careful.

I’m certainly not a denier. I can see the effects. But if you don’t see fire, you don’t see floods, you don’t see sea level rise, it’s very easy to just shrug your shoulders and think in 50 years time maybe only then we’ll see the effects, and then I’ll be gone. Now I see the actual effects not just the perceived effects, and see the misery it brings to people’s lives, makes me acutely aware of how strong a force it is.

It’s hard to unsee what we’ve seen. It’s not an accident. We don’t have more intense fire season and flooding because it’s a fluke. It’s happening because there’s a reason.

I’m scared to think what it will be like in 20-30 years time. The rate of change has become more obvious more recently. Maybe because I’m more aware of it, or more because it’s actually increasing: it has appeared to be more intense than before. It’s changed and probably irreversible.

The opinions expressed within this article are solely the author’s and do not reflect the opinion and beliefs of the NSW RFS or the NSW Government.

This is the first in a global series of interviews with first responders. Emergency service personnel care not only for our communities but witness the immediate effects of climate change whether they be floods, fires, or droughts.

Perylene Peak by Katryn Bowe

Preparing for Climate Disasters

Perspectives from a physician teaching future health professionals to advance climate change solutions

By Caroline Wellbery, Deputy Editor of American Family Physician and Professor in the Department of Family Medicine in the Georgetown University School of Medicine

A cataclysmic heatwave hit India’s Uttar Pradesh province that resulted in 20 million deaths. After the electricity went out, hundreds of desperate residents took refuge in the town’s lake. The water itself was so warm it brought no relief, and by morning the lake’s surface was floating with corpses, leaving only a single survivor.

So begins Kim Stanley Robinson’s cli-fi novel, The Ministry for the Future, set in 2025. The visceral impact of this scenario is all the more haunting in the context of real heat waves that have continued to multiply since the novel’s publication in late 2020. Most of us have heard about last summer’s heat dome in the Northwestern U.S.; about temperatures rising 15 to 35 degrees higher than normal in Italy; those reaching as high as 123.3°F in Western Australia; and yes, about India’s recent exposure to the hottest month in its recorded history.

Global and regional scope of climate disasters

Heatwaves along with other climate disasters are on the rise. For those looking for details, NASA’s website offers predictions for a variety of global climate phenomena including heat waves, precipitation, hurricanes, drought and sea level rise. These informational maps speak to the causes and effects of climate change.

Many climate effects are regional. For example, Southwestern states in the US will continue to suffer severe drought and wildfires, while Northeastern states will experience heat waves, downpours and sea level rise. Regional variation and the sense that climate disasters are mostly limited, albeit repeating, events make it difficult to provide a one-size-fits-all response. Yet because these disasters have large-scale economic and health impacts, we should familiarize ourselves with the nuts and bolts of institutional and local preparedness.

Health Impacts

Surprisingly few people (including most health professionals) recognize the health impacts of climate change. Yet, from a disaster perspective, climate events cause considerable morbidity and mortality.

Heat waves have the most widespread health impacts, given their prevalence and the body’s limited ability to adjust to higher temperatures, particularly when compounded by humidity. Children, pregnant women, and older adults are especially vulnerable to heat injury. Socio-economic factors also disproportionately expose certain groups to develop underlying health conditions, due to such factors as outdoor work and no air conditioning.

In addition, wildfires have broad respiratory impacts from the release of particulates and toxins from burning material. Flooding exposes people to infectious diseases and water contaminants. Any climate disaster causes psychological trauma, both directly due to the immediate event and indirectly because of loss of home and other assets, often aggravating poverty and forcing displacement. In many individuals, mental health impacts can linger as a lasting post-traumatic stress disorder.

The health harms previously mentioned don’t just add up—they multiply. A paper published in The American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine recently released the results of their California study showing the synergistic effects of heat and air pollution. All-cause mortality increased 6.1% and 5% respectively on extreme heat and high air pollution days, but increased 21% when both were present.

Thus, health professionals have an important role in the event of climate disasters. Most of these will be emergency room physicians responding to bodily injury, heat stroke, and respiratory distress, but also mental health crises, though health professionals in certain specialties: pediatricians, pulmonologists and allergists, for example, see lower-grade climate-related problems in their offices every day.

Disaster Preparedness

Numerous online sources evaluate geographic areas prone to specific climate disasters with the underlying premise that prescient users may want to move their households to avoid their exposure to future climate disruption.

Most people, however, lack the wherewithal to move to a cooler, less disaster-prone area. As such, we require further investment in community disaster preparedness.

Community preparedness efforts recognize the importance of connectedness and collective engagement. Broadly speaking, emergency management requires structural oversight, beginning with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which offers resources and information to help communities become more resilient. The FEMA Strategic Plan discusses prospects for community-based climate resilience and related issues of societal inequities that make some communities vastly more susceptible to climate injury.

For example, hospitals as institutions need to prepare for an influx of patients during storms, heatwaves or wildfires by ensuring adequate personnel and attending to facility infrastructure. Ambulances need to be able to forge through flooded areas to transport patients. Generators need to be moved from ground-level to high-up areas. Evacuation plans and protocols need to be in place when patients require urgent transfer. We know from our experience with COVID how quickly hospitals are overwhelmed and run out of supplies, so preparedness also requires solid communication channels and collaboration with public health institutions.

At the same time, we need to know how ordinary citizens can prepare, starting with our local communities. Most current personalized disaster preparedness advice focuses on individual families, recommending advance assembly of emergency supplies (flashlight, bottled water, generators, food reserves etc.).

Georgetown University’s personal preparedness page provides a wealth of links on individual preparedness and related government resources, as well as advice on such topics as how to provide first aid in an emergency until help arrives.

In March of this year, Georgetown’ Office of Emergency Management conducted a full-scale emergency preparedness

exercise (Hoya Storm). According to Marc Barbiere, OEM’s director, this experience allowed members of the Georgetown community to respond to a simulated severe weather event of the kind most likely to impact the campus (storms and tornadoes). Nonetheless, says Barbiere, it can be challenging to get people to pay attention to the need to prepare for and mitigate against the threats associated with climate change.

Some thinkers argue that because of our high-level global inaction on climate change, our best bet is for citizen responders to organize in preparation for climate extremes. They have concluded that survival requires deep adaptation, the creation of resilient, self-sufficient, and prepared communities. According to this model, nests or networks of participating individuals offer a share of practical skills focused on immediate and longterm community preparedness needs, including medical care, food and water, and protection.

Ultimately, we need to keep our focus on the bigger picture because true resilience rests on prevention. Disasters affect entire ecosystems: crops, access to water, biodiversity, and livable air quality; that is to say, the well-being and survival of all things. Dealing with disasters proactively by putting response systems into place is at best temporary. Our failure to prevent the continued rise of CO2 emissions is a planetary calamity of a different order altogether.

Many thanks to Marc Barbiere, Director of Georgetown’s Office of Emergency Management for information on campus preparedness, and to Dr. Stefan Wheat UC Health Emergency Care University of Colorado School of Medicine for his thoughts on this topic and his direction to the ASPR TRACIE Climate Change Resilience and Healthcare System Considerations report..

Dr. Wellbery is interested in climate change and health in medical education. She prepares the next generation of health professionals to advance climate change solutions through patient education and advocacy.

Rising Risk of Extreme Heat on Health in the District

By Ursula Gately, COL ‘23, Co-Founder of the Georgetown Undergraduate Environmental Health Collaborative

If you have been in DC this summer, you know that the District has been boiling. With mid-to-high 90ºF+ weather, it has become increasingly important to seek out cooler indoor spaces to protect from the effects of extreme heat. For the first time in six years, DC has risked this summer hitting 100ºF temperatures, a rare occurrence, even as the “feels like” temperature hits much higher. What has led to an increase in these hotter days throughout the DMV?

Extreme heat is defined by the EPA as weather which is much hotter than average for a particular time and place. This is measured through the heat index, which takes into account how high the temperature is in a place, as well as how hot it feels when humidity is factored in. We are seeing an average temperature increase both around the world and in the United States. As extreme heating events become more common, we run the risk of increased occurrences of heat-related illnesses.

The spectrum of heat related illnesses range from mild heat exhaustion to potentially fatal heat stroke. While all DMV residents can be affected by heat exposure, some populations are at particularly elevated risk, including the elderly, infants, pregnant women, athletes, outdoor workers, and unhoused individuals. Extreme heat can exacerbate pre-existing conditions and health disparities.

Exposure to heat is also influenced by historically racist housing policies that can cause temperatures within a single city to vary by as much as 13ºF. According to DC Policy Center, summer temperatures in the District can vary from 76ºF in Rock Creek Park to 102ºF in Ivy City, Trinidad, and the Navy Yard. One reason this trend occurs is that these neighborhoods have fewer trees and more impervious surfaces, which do not allow water to pass through (asphalt, concrete, brick, stone). These artificial surfaces make the streets more susceptible to extreme heat.

Heat exposure has also been associated with decreased academic achievement in students and increased aggressive behavior. The relationship between heat and interpersonal experience are complex and some people spend their entire careers researching them. The nuance of these connections lies in the indirect influence of heat on social systems, and at times are hard to explain or navigate given the many ways in which they impact our lives. One example might be that hot temperatures can make a person feel irritated, as they find themselves sweating through their clothes on the walk or bike ride to work, which could lead to heightened emotional responses or combativeness throughout the day.

As temperatures rise due to climate change, the adverse effects of heat on health are expected to rise. Given the direct and

indirect implications of extreme heat on public health, more work needs to be done to assess the relationship between rising temperatures and peoples’ wellbeing.

DC Mayor Bowser has declared a Heat Emergency when temperatures hit 95ºF, which occurred at least twenty-four times during the summer of 2022. One way the local government is working to mitigate the effects of extreme heat on residents is by releasing a Heat Emergency Plan. The plan outlines ways in which individuals can keep cool, referencing five low barrier cooling shelters and forty-four recreational, community, and municipal cooling centers.

around educating the Georgetown community about environmental health in Washington D.C. and providing students with opportunities to protect the planet and their health. Activities to date include:

A gathering in Georgetown’s Red Square to make blankets for unhoused people around D.C. This event is meant to embody Georgetown’s core value of cura personalis, care for the whole person, as students get the opportunity to aid the larger D.C. community.

A panel on extreme heat and health with Jeanne Braha, the executive director of Rock Creek Conservancy, and Samantha Adhoot, MD, pediatrician and founder of Virginia Clinicians for Climate Action, a nonprofit focused on advocacy work on environmental health at the state and government level. The conversation was geared at engaging each expert’s background in environment and health to foster dialogue on environmental health in the DMV.

A service project to remove invasive species at Whitehaven Parkway. The John Main Center for Meditation and Interreligious Dialogue offered a meditation, which I lead, to connect environmental health and wellbeing to contemplative practice and reflect on the weekend as a whole.

However, during one heat emergency in July of 2022, Street Sense Media discovered that only twenty-five of the forty-four cooling centers were open during heat emergencies. Sixteen were unsure of their status and two indicated that they were not intended to be used as cooling centers.

Moreover, cooling centers may not always be within close proximity to individuals experiencing extreme heat. This is exacerbated by the fact that they are not often well understood or advertised. The city must play a larger role in advertising and increasing awareness around cooling centers and resources to combat extreme heat.

Georgetown Undergraduate Environmental Health Collaborative

To recognize the effects of environmental issues like extreme heat on human health, a group of Georgetown students, including myself, founded the Georgetown Undergraduate Environmental Health Collaborative in the summer of 2022. Led by Mark Kuo (COL ‘24), the group launched in the fall of 2022, with additional founding members including: Urooj Ahmed (COL ‘24), Alex Bamford (COL ‘23), Amber Mickelson (COL ‘25), Minoli Ediriweera (COL ‘24), and Shreya Kalra (Health ‘25).

Our group was awarded a grant from the American Public Health Association (APHA) to host a series of events in September focusing on the intersection of extreme heat and public health issues in honor of the APHA’s 150th anniversary.

Our Climate Health in the District Weekend is centered

“Given the direct and indirect implications of extreme heat on public health, more work needs to be done to assess the relationship between rising temperatures and peoples’ wellbeing.”

Seven Reasons to Learn About Energy

By Maria Petrova, Ph.D., Program

Co-Director of the Masters of Science in Environment and Sustainability Management, Georgetown University

If you are a college student born at the turn of the 21st century, you have helped create a paradigm shift in how people live, how companies operate, and how policymakers lead in response to the century’s most pressing crisis: the climate disaster. Your generation – Gen Z – value sustainability more than any other generation, affecting how you eat, shop, and vote. A recent UK survey found that three quarters of Gen Zers value the sustainability of a product over a brand name. As your generation joins the workforce, your buying decisions will gain increasing purchasing power which will add pressure on companies to ramp up their sustainability efforts. Importantly, you’ll gain power to implement changes within the organizations you work for.

At its core, sustainability is about questions of energy. If you are pursuing a degree or have already entered the workforce, think critically about the way we produce and consume energy. Learning about our energy system and acting to change it will have a monumental impact on the 21st century’s paradigm shift towards a sustainable future.

Here are seven reasons to learn about energy:

1. Energy is at the heart of everything.

Energy is ubiquitous: It turns on your computer, charges your phone, heats your shower on a cold day and cools your house in the summer heat. Energy powers the economy. If you haven’t considered the importance of energy before, try naming one thing you’ve done today that doesn’t require a form of energy.

Action item: Find out where your household’s energy comes from. Take a look into your city’s energy infrastructure. Which sectors consume the most energy in your state? How does this compare nationally? Globally? You might find, for example, that the average American uses almost twice the energy than the average person in France and more than 11 times the average in India.

2. Global energy access reduces inequality.

In 2015, the United Nations adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development that includes 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Goal #7 calls for ensuring

global access to affordable, reliable and modern energy services by 2030. In 2020, 733 million people lacked access to electricity and 2.4 billion people – one-third of the world’s population – lacked access to clean cooking. Many in developing countries continue to get their energy from obsolete technologies such as biomass.

Action item: Work towards achieving the SDGs. Learn how to enhance international cooperation to facilitate access to clean energy, expand infrastructure, and upgrade technology to supply modern and sustainable energy services for all. Get involved in global energy access efforts. Contact your representatives. Support or join an organization dedicated to universal access to sustainable energy.

3. The more energy consumed, the more carbon emitted.

The per capita energy consumption has grown sharply, leading to a spike in greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the energy sector is responsible for three quarters of current carbon emissions. The volume of heat-trapping carbon dioxide in the atmosphere shot past a critical milestone in May 2022: 421 parts per million, more than 50% higher than pre-industrial times. For comparison, prior to the late 19th century industrial revolution, carbon dioxide levels were at 280 parts per million. Scientists warn that to reduce the human impact on the environment and keep temperatures steady, carbon dioxide should stay at a level of 350 parts per million or below.

Action item: Work to reduce energy consumption in your own life, and urge others to do the same. In 2020, the CO2 emissions per capita in America reached 13.68 tons. According to BCC, taking one less long-haul flight per year can save 1.68 tons of CO2 equivalent, taking public transport can save 0.98 tons, and using renewable-based heating can save 0.64 tons. Even small actions make a difference: Buy local or in-season produce, take the stairs, turn off the lights when you leave a room (an LED light saves up to 90% of energy compared to a traditional bulb of the same output). Propose to the organizations, institutions, and workplaces that you are part of steps on how they can change their energy consumption and efficiency.

4. A switch to renewables is urgently needed.

Scientists, business executives, and policy makers agree that to prevent climate change, we need to rapidly reduce our dependence on fossil fuels and switch to renewable sources of energy. Yet, to date, renewable energy constitutes only 17.7% of total global energy consumption. The speed and scale of this transition must accelerate to reduce the effects of climate change. Although wind and solar plants became 70% and 89% cheaper in the last ten years, respectively, their capacity must exceed that of coal and gas in less than five years. Fortunately, when countries like the U.S. deploy renewables, they lower the costs for everyone and make the technologies accessible to the entire world. It helps that the world’s largest economies–those part of the G7–have agreed to stop funding any overseas fossil fuel developments from the end of this year, which will help shift about $33 billion a year from fossil fuels to clean energy sources.

Action item: Understand how renewable energy innovation works and encourage organizations to adopt renewables faster. Research green energy procurement and ensure it is a good fit for your home and the organizations, institutions, and workplaces that you are part of. Help policy makers streamline policies and targets to increase the adoption of renewables. Get in touch with renewable energy installers to inquire about putting solar panels on your roof or installing a heat pump.

5. Electrification across all sectors is a good starting point.

Worldwide, the share of renewables in electricity generation has increased to almost 30% in 2021– up from 27% in 2019. However, electricity production is only 18% of total energy use; heat production and transportation complete the other 82%. Cars, trucks and other parts of the transportation sector are some of the biggest contributors of greenhouse gas emissions. The transportation sector is the top source of emissions in California and the second largest in New Zealand. It is commendable that California is moving to ban sales of new gas-powered cars in the state by 2035 and New Zealand wants 30% of all car sales to be electric by 2035 as well.

Action item: As competition in the electric vehicle market grows and electric vehicles become more affordable, think about programs that offer incentives for people and organizations to get rid of older, gas-guzzling cars. Many EVs are very expensive and beyond the reach of the average U.S. household income; however, economies of scale and proper incentives can make EVs more affordable. Understand the complexities of electrification with its requirements for robust energy grid infrastructure.

6. Energy is a job-creator.

The energy transition is expected to generate jobs. The International Labor Organization estimates that the green economy could create 24 million jobs by 2030. For example, the number of jobs in energy efficiency is expected to soar to almost 36 million in 2050 from about 17 million today. The increase in renewables and environment jobs will go up much faster than jobs in the oil and gas sector as well. According to a 2022 LinkedIn report, “In the last five years,

the number of Renewables & Environment jobs in the U.S. has increased by 237% in stark contrast to the 19% increase for Oil & Gas jobs.” With this rate of increase, LinkedIn predicts that jobs in the Renewables & Environment sector will exceed jobs in the Oil & Gas sector by 2023.

Action item: New jobs will be created by adopting sustainable practices in the energy sector, including changes in the energy mix, promoting the use of electric vehicles and improving the energy efficiency of buildings. Take energy-related courses, get a certificate, and try to learn as much as you can about energy. Pick an energy field that interests you and become a leader in it.

7. Energy can help create stronger communities and serve as a bridge for reducing inequalities.

Falling energy prices mean that people’s real incomes rise. Investments to scale up energy production with cheap electric power from renewable sources are an opportunity not only to reduce emissions, but also to achieve economic growth – particularly for the poorest places in the world. In addition, the transition to renewables provides an opportunity for communities to decide where and how they want their power to come from. Installing community energy projects via a collaborative spatial planning process will lead to stronger, more collaborative communities with expanded self-governance.

Action item: Learn how spatial planning and stakeholder engagement can aid the energy transition and help lead the way. Work with communities to help them envision what type of energy future they want to invest in. Understand how the adoption of renewable energy spreads, analyze the barriers for

Pictured Dr. Maria Petrova

The Social Cost of Carbon Where Our Measurements Fall

Short

By Raphael Calel, Ph. D. Associate Professor McCourt School of Public Policy

The Inflation Reduction Act is the biggest legislative step the U.S. has ever taken to tackle climate change. The U.S. is on track to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by as much as 30% by 2030 compared to the 2005 peak, but projections indicate this new legislation could push that number to 40%.

Even at that rate, though, there is still a great deal more to do to address the climate crisis. Moving forward requires a better appreciation of the far-reaching benefits of climate action.

The U.S. government uses a number known as the “social cost of carbon” to represent the benefit of climate action. It is an estimate of the additional damage that will be caused by emitting just one more ton of carbon dioxide. If we stopped that ton of carbon dioxide from being emitted, that’s how

much damage would be averted.

The social cost of carbon informs everything from new vehicle mileage standards to the U.S. position in international climate negotiations, and understandably, it has been hotly contested in the courts. However, the number has some serious limitations: it fails to take into account the actualized global climate fluctuations in our epoch.

The first step in calculating the social cost of carbon is to forecast the long-term upward trend in global temperatures. Importantly, the long term trend calculations have not historically taken into account the unpredictable fluctuations in global temperatures around the long-term trend. This may seem like a small oversight, but in a new study my colleagues and I found that these fluctuations will create anywhere from

$10 trillion to $50 trillion dollars of additional economic damage over the next 200 years, when measured in today’s money. And significant as these economic costs are, the human toll will invariably be far harder to stomach.

One reason for these costs is that, while some years will be cooler than the trend and others will be hotter than the trend, extreme years will have disproportionately harmful consequences. And when this additional source of risk is included in the modeling, you also tend to get several extreme years in a row, sometimes even decades. The more typical years aren’t enough to compensate for this risk.

Because we’ve been blind to the costs of global variability, we’ve underestimated the benefits of all these investments by trillions of dollars. Whilst there is still a pressing need to reduce emissions at a faster rate to avoid predictable climate change, we also need to dramatically scale up our investments in adaptation to lessen the costs of the unpredictable, but inevitable, climate extremes.

The second reason is that a climate that is more responsive to greenhouse gas emissions will also be more variable. It is difficult to predict exactly whether a doubling of atmospheric carbon dioxide would lead to a 5˚F or 10˚F degree increase in long-run global temperatures, but the higher that number is, the worse the year-to-year fluctuations are, too. Being dealt a bad hand in the climate casino, then, doesn’t just mean higher global temperatures, but also more unpredictable temperatures–a double whammy.

Yet, despite creating trillions of dollars in damage, these temperature fluctuations have almost no effect on the current measured social cost of carbon. The reason is that, in an already warmer world, emitting one extra tonne of carbon dioxide hardly changes the year-to-year fluctuations. Ultimately, we will face this risk whether or not we emit that one extra tonne of carbon dioxide, and with climate change, the harm will be much greater.

The fact that we cannot avoid this risk makes it practically invisible to anyone who is narrowly focused on the social cost of carbon, but it also makes it more important that we prepare for it. If we cannot avoid this risk, then we need to make investments to prevent the future climate extremes from wreaking havoc. There are many things we can and probably should invest in – the need for power grids and infrastructure that will better withstand future weather extremes is maybe too obvious to mention, but consider the need to shift our food supply toward a more resilient model, to build up greater disaster readiness capabilities, to invest in social programs to help communities in need of resettlement, and more.

The Inflation Reduction Act has succeeded politically, in part, because of its focus on creating tax breaks and rebates to bring down the costs of clean technologies. Investments to build resilience to climate extremes also have significant promise as a legislative agenda. Many of these investments would bring substantial benefits even in the absence of climate change, and poorer disaster-prone communities would likely have the most to gain, including across the South, the West, and along the Gulf Coast. Their elected representatives could support these kinds of investments without ever being forced to utter an unpopular word about “climate change.” These investments can be a cornerstone of a more populist climate agenda.

Raphael Calel, an Associate Professor in Georgetown’s McCourt School of Public Policy, is an applied environmental economist engaged in the evaluation of climate change policy. His research investigates the implementation and economic impacts of the EU Emissions Trading System and the Clean Development Mechanism, as well as the challenges of forecasting the economic damages from climate change.

“Because we’ve been blind to the costs of global variability, we’ve underestimated the benefits of all these investments by trillions of dollars.”

“These fluctuations will create anywhere from $10 trillion to $50 trillion dollars of additional economic damage over the next 200 years.”

The Role of Oil and Gas Companies in the Energy Transition

By Alannah Nathan, SFS ‘24 & Common Home Editor

Alannah, a rising Junior in Georgetown’s School of Foreign Service and Common Home editor, shares insights from her recent research through the The Laidlaw Foundation’s Undergraduate Research and Leadership Program on the role of oil and gas companies in the global energy transition from non-renewable to renewable sources of energy.

Just twenty fossil fuel companies are responsible for 35% of all energy-related carbon dioxide and methane emissions since 1965. Given their outsized impact on climate change, oil and gas companies now face immense pressure from key stakeholders including investors, governments, and the public to define their role in the current green energy transition – the shift in the primary energy supply

from non-renewable to renewables sources of energy – and achieve net-zero emissions by 2050.

A recent Atlantic Council report highlights the two choices oil and gas companies face in how to respond to the growing calls for decarbonization. In areas where energy demand is rapidly growing (such as China, Africa, and India), oil and gas companies might support coal-to-gas switching and invest in electrification infrastructure. Natural gas, though still a greenhouse gas, emits between 50 and 60 percent less carbon dioxide when combusted than coal.

Alternatively, in regions where energy demand is already high, oil and gas companies can choose to deploy renewables

and new technologies. In such cases, new deployments would serve not merely as a hedge against demand risk— or a means to decarbonize their own production (the production and extraction process of oil and gas itself is a highly carbon intensive process, accounting for roughly 20% of oil and gas companies’ emissions)— but to support the low carbon energy transition as a whole.

The oil and gas sectors hold a competitive advantage over emerging energy companies in certain key areas. Unlike young companies (a new solar company, for instance) , veteran oil and gas companies have historically strong balance sheets, supply chain infrastructure expertise, and complex project management skills. If leveraged properly, the oil and gas industry has the unique skillset to aid the hydrogen economy, develop offshore wind infrastructure, support electrification (including EV charging stations), and build out carbon capture and storage (CCS).

Danish multinational Ørsted A/S, suggests that such a shift in business models is indeed possible (and potentially highly profitable).

In 1991, Ørsted (then named DONG) developed the world’s first offshore wind farm in the Baltic Sea. At the time, the wind farm of eleven turbines supplied a mere 1% of Denmark’s electricity. In 2012, DONG faced financial disaster, a result of the fracking boom in the U.S. which sent gas prices to the floor.

Then, newly appointed CEO Henrik Poulsen developed a strategy to transform DONG into a major offshore wind developer. The company set an installation cost target of approximately USD 100 per Mwh by 2020. By 2016, they had already brought the cost down to USD 60. Danish government policy, technological innovation, and supply chain expertise helped drive down costs. As a first mover in offshore wind, Ørsted held and still holds a significant advantage.

In 2016, the company went public with a value of USD 15 billion. In 2021, Ørsted’s market capitalization reached as high as USD 93 billion. Ørsted has since acquired wind farms across the globe, including the Block Island Wind Farm off the coast of Rhode Island. By 2020, Ørsted generated 90% renewable energy. It is now the largest offshore wind developer, supplying power for more than 15 million people. Ørsted is on track to be carbon neutral across its operations and energy production (scope 1 and scope 2)1 by 2025. Additionally, by 2040, Ørsted has set a target to reach net zero ambitions across the entire value chain, including scope 3.2

Ørsted proves that the transition to renewables can be

profitable for traditional oil and gas companies when done right. Unfortunately, few other oil and gas companies are on par with Ørsted’s transition. Even as discourse and marketing on the energy transition, climate, emissions, and renewables significantly increases among major oil and gas companies, the transition stagnates. TotalEnergies, for instance, used “climate” 6 times in their 2009 annual report, compared to 426 times in their 2021 report.

In addition, many companies have also announced net-zero targets by 2050 for at least scope 1 and scope 2 emissions. However, no major companies3 have identified a clear and strategic plan to transition to net-zero emissions in line with the Paris Agreement.

Each of the seven majors has acknowledged the science of climate change and pledged to reduce methane emissions and achieve at least net-zero Scope 1 and Scope 2 emissions by 2050, but their continued commitment to fossil fuel extraction and production raises doubts of their claim’s sincerity. To date, clean energy investment accounts for only 5% of total oil and gas company capital expenditures globally (an increase from 1% in 2019).

Moreover, if oil and gas majors’ continue to extract resources and produce oil and gas at their historic rate, existing infrastructure alone will emit roughly 658 GGt of CO2, overshooting the carbon budget allowed to reach the Paris Agreement (400 GGt of CO2) by about 258 GGt of CO2. Furthermore, if built, proposed power plants (planned, permitted, or under construction) are expected to emit an extra 188 gigatonnes CO2. Taken together, the 846 gigatonnes CO2 from predicted emissions from existing and proposed energy infrastructure shoot past the entire carbon budget to limit warming to 1.5℃ .

Evidence indicates that investors, policymakers, and the public should be cautious of the oil and gas industry’s green claims. To achieve the Paris Agreement, the oil and gas sectors’ climate engagement thus far signals the vital importance of policy in holding the industry accountable.

How the Humanities Can Help with the Climate Crisis

How ethics, culture, and spirituality can galvanize climate action

By Erin Cline, Ph.D., Paul J. and Chandler M. Tagliabue Distinguished Professor of Interreligious Studies & Dialogue, Senior Research Fellow at the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs, and Affiliated Faculty at the Earth Commons Institute

Growing up in Alaska in the 1970s and 80s, my fondest childhood memories are of long summer days roaming the shores of Kachemak Bay, exploring the woods, watching moose calves take their first steps and baby sea otters ride on their mothers’ bellies, and harvesting vegetables and berries from our garden.

But I also remember the Exxon Valdez oil spill of March 1989.

Though geographically the largest state, Alaska is astonishingly small by population and the connectedness of its people. So when nearly 11 million gallons of crude oil poured into Prince William Sound, it was personal. Not just because we could smell the oil and see a sheen from the beaches in front of our house—more than 250 miles away from the spill – but because the livelihoods of so many of our families, friends, and neighbors revolved around the oil industry and the water.

All of this shaped my understanding of the tension between our reliance on natural resources and the importance of environmental conservation. So many people I knew were

passionate environmentalists. And so many people I knew depended on the oil, gas and fishing industries. These industries were not just sources of income; they were also ways of life. Many of the kids I grew up with would take over their parents’ fishing boats or setnet (anchored fish nets) sites after they graduated from high school. It was a tradition. It defined, in large part, who they were.

The same is true in the hills of West Virginia, Eastern Kentucky, and Pennsylvania, where coal mining is not just a way to earn a living; it is a tradition passed down in families. And so, as we face the climate crisis, we must examine how our use of natural resources impacts the earth and also think about how those natural resources are deeply tied to the cultures and traditions that define many Americans’ lives and identities.

Much of my work as philosopher and theologian has sought to demonstrate the importance of the humanities in addressing society’s contemporary issues. My current research extends this approach to the climate crisis specifically. I am interested in what the humanities—including works of literature, poetry, drama, music, philosophy, theology and

religion—can do to augment the work of climate scientists. How can our disciplines work together to garner the support of citizens and policymakers to address the climate crisis?

One way the humanities can contribute is by helping us understand why some Americans are resistant to change. Social change is incredibly difficult to bring about as it involves not just policy change but also changing citizens’ ways of thinking and acting. For instance, in parts of America where people’s livelihoods depend on natural resources like coal, it is not a purely economic matter; people don’t want to lose a part of their culture either. One of the best ways to understand the complex mixture of feelings and experiences that are a part of coal country is to turn to the humanities: to drama, music, and literature.

Watch Dopesick and pay close attention to the feelings of a girl who is following in her father’s footsteps working in a coal mine—not just for the money or because she has no other choice, but because she loves it.

Listen to the songs on Kathy Mattea’s album, Coal, written by people from mining families and communities (including Mattea herself), describing their love of the work, the dangers of the profession, its impact on the land, the injustices perpetrated by big companies, and the way that mining is woven into the fabric of people’s lives.

Read the poetry and essays of Wendell Berry. Rooted in the mountains of Kentucky, Berry quotes the words of storyteller, historian, and conservator Wallace Stegner in distinguishing between the two types of Americans: “boomers,” who “pillage and run,” and “stickers,” who “settle, and love the life they have made and the place they have made it in.” As Berry puts it, they are “placed people” and “forever attached to the look of the sky, the smell of native plants, and the vernacular of home.” Later in his life, he joined fellow “stickers” to defend Kentucky’s rural creeks from the “boomers” whose mining exploits turned them fluorescent orange.

Like any tradition that connects us to those who came before us, coal mining— as well as much of the work in the oil, gas, and fishing industries—is not easily abandoned. When traditions must change, that change should involve an acknowledgment of their value, and something to connect the old and the new, if people are to navigate it successfully. This might mean new sources of energy that are based in and tied to the land in places where coal, oil, or other natural resources have been central, and that will not only employ the people, but connect and reconnect them to the land that sustained their families for generations—and that can sustain them in new ways in the future.

The humanities can also help by offering different kinds of reasons for citizens and policymakers to support a green future, including ethical and religious reasons. Ancient Confucian and Daoist philosophers, for instance, were surprisingly aware of how natural resources can be decimated, and they were interested in why and how we should respond to that. Through a unique, poignant and powerful set of stories, anecdotes, approaches, and practices, they encourage an ethical understanding of Nature and its role in a good life. And, importantly, they hold out hope that it is possible to balance the needs and demands of human communities and the needs of Nature.

Indeed, as Ignatius of Loyola argued, there is a spiritual dimension of the human person that needs to be fed, sustained, and exercised, just like the body. Research from the social sciences shows that our psychological health and overall happiness is not simply a product of our economic status or physical health. There is substantial evidence that spending time in Nature contributes to our well-being in key ways. We don’t just need a green future, physically; we need it spiritually, as well.

The humanities can make key contributions here. Historically and today, Nature is often the location of religious, mystical or spiritual experiences for people of different faiths or spiritual outlooks. These writings elicit reverence for the natural world by engaging the heart, the imagination, and the senses; they are first and foremost therapeutic. But they also do some of the harder philosophical and theological work of noticing and reflecting on how Nature affects us, ethically and spiritually, and is indispensable for our flourishing.

My current work explores how ancient Chinese philosophical and religious insights dovetail in a variety of interesting ways with the contemporary writings of authors who hailed from or spent much of their lives in the heartland of America—writers like Wendell Berry, Mary Oliver, and Thomas Merton—who offer vivid descriptions of the natural world and its effect on us. All of them, as well as ancient Chinese thinkers, share the conviction that the natural world feeds us not just physically, but spiritually and ethically, when we attend to it and regard it with the reverence it deserves. We become kinder, more grateful, more fulfilled and better able to find meaning and joy in our lives. Indeed, there are more than just physical reasons to support a green future, and the humanities are ripe for helping us to explore them.

An affiliated faculty member of the Earth Commons, Professor Cline specializes in Chinese philosophy, Chinese religions, and comparative philosophy and theology.

What We’re Watching: Connections Between Humanity and Nature

Reflections on three films that probe relationships between humans nature

By Marion Cassidy, COL ‘23 & Common Home Editor

Warning: minor spoilers ahead

To me, a great film is one that makes me empathize with –or even want to emulate– a character, whether or not I can personally relate to their experience. I grew up in New York City, and while I consider myself an environmentalist, the thought of camping or even interacting with animals (bugs!) terrifies me. Safe to say, I’d take being surrounded by tall buildings over tall trees any day.

Yet, what struck me most about the films Nomadland, My Octopus Teacher, and Fire of Love, is that each communicated a near spiritual connection between humanity and nature in an incredibly poetic, yet surprisingly relatable manner. Each of these three films features an intimate connection between a character and nature: the American landscape, an octopus, and volcanoes.

While I could not directly connect to these experiences with any of the three films’ characters, I found it fascinating to

watch the relationships between man and earth develop. By the conclusion of each film, I felt I had a deeper understanding of the majesty of nature. I finished each with a greater sense of empathy towards this special connection–and even a desire to experience it myself.

Nomadland (2020) directed by Chloé Zhao (currently available to stream on Hulu)

Nomadland follows a middle-aged widow named Fern, played by Frances McDormand, who quits her job and lives a nomadic lifestyle around America in her van. The film won the Academy Award for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Actress in 2021, amongst other prestigious awards.

I saw the film as a love letter to the American landscape. Wide shots of canyons and forests portray the vastness and beauty of our landscape. Yet it was simultaneously critical of our material and capitalist society.

Still from Nomadland

I couldn’t help but be curious of what older adults think of this film. It touches upon aging, life reflection, and grief. In moments, I felt perhaps too young to appreciate these sentiments to their fullest. While I don’t know if I’m ready to be a nomad and live out of a van, this film helped me understand the appeal of that lifestyle to others. There is a beautiful serenity and simplicity in existing as a nomad and I admire people who are able to live in the world and not be bound by American ideals of success.

My Octopus Teacher (2020) directed by Pippa Ehrlich and James Reed (currently available to stream on Netflix)

My Octopus Teacher is a documentary about a diver named Craig Foster who discovers an octopus whom he forms a friendship with over the course of a year. The film portrays a relationship you might see between two human beings: an initial meeting, a burgeoning closeness, a comfortability around one another and, finally, a heartbreak.

The film shows Foster and the octopus becoming one, and at least from Foster’s end, he begins to think of the octopus’ needs and safety, sometimes even before his own. The level of care shown between the pair is incredibly moving. Not to mention, the shots of the South African sea and aquatic habitat are stunning.

It could have been easy to take this relationship between man and octopus and portray it without seriousness or without significance behind it– even, perhaps, poke fun at it. Instead, the filmmakers capture the gravity and beauty of the relationship. It shows that communication can emerge from more than just words and that love and care can be shared amongst all beings.

Fire of Love (2022) directed by Sara Dosa (currently available to see in theaters and will eventually be available to stream on Disney+)

Fire of Love is a documentary composed of archival footage, with narration from Miranda July, about the late married couple and volcanologists Katia and Maurice Krafft whose love of volcanoes bring them together. They spend their lives visiting volcano sites, sharing their experiences with the public through film, and doing press tours.

While I was left with questions about their research funding, academic paths, and what their site research actually focused on, the duo’s personal story and character are compelling enough in and of itself.

I would not say I learned a lot about volcanoes, in fact, I may even have more questions now than I did before, but the film made me appreciate what’s so mesmerizing about them. The incredible footage from the Kraffts reveals glowing lava down a mountain side in the dark of night and how volcano particle eruptions’ ejections look like fireworks in the sky.

Previously, I had only thought of volcanic eruptions as natural disasters, but through this film I understood how enthralling they are. This film is not trying to be scientifically informative, it’s a slow burn that exemplifies the poeticness of the earth’s natural phenomena and two people who shared that wonder. It feels like a special honor to have even a small glimpse into the natural wonders of volcanoes.

Still from My Octopus Teacher

Still from Fire of Love

The Breakdown: Circular Economy

By Christian Rishel, Founder of Circudyne; M.S., SFS

What does the term “circular economy” refer to? What are its core components?

The circular economy is a framework that organizes how value is created. The defining feature is the decoupling of economic activity from the consumption of finite resources. Circularity is reached when value is created and fully retained. The “how” of circularity is very much an open book, and presents an enormous opportunity for innovators. There are three core pillars: designing out waste and pollution, keeping products and materials in use at their highest value for as long as possible, and supporting nature’s regenerative systems.

The linear economy, circularity’s antecedent and the reality in which we currently find ourselves, is characterized by the take-make-use-waste paradigm. Circularity closes the loop by eliminating the waste part. I think about circularity as the opposite of planned obsolescence.

Why is a circular economy model essential for achieving long-term sustainability and climate goals?

Circularity is primarily an economic idea. Mainstream sustainability initiatives are generally tactical attempts to make the things we do less bad by mitigating the harmful byproducts of linear production at the margin. Circularity, on the other hand, systemically addresses the underlying causes not just of climate change, but also biodiversity loss and pollution.

have a lot of work to do and not very much time.

Do you expect more companies to adopt a circular economy model? What’s preventing more from adopting it so far? What is the timeline on which companies are adopting the circular economy?

I believe it is inevitable that the entire economy will transform to circular. Every long-term constraint one can imagine requires it. Resource cost and availability, supply chain pressures, political and regulatory trends, even consumer preferences, are all moving towards a world where the waste we generate must be tracked, managed, and re-valorized. Transformations always seem obvious in hindsight, and impossible at first. Think of the transformations we’ve seen lately: lean management, digitization, and now electrification in the mobility sector. Circularity is like these, but bigger.

There is much we must unlearn in order to accomplish it. In my opinion, the greatest shift we need to undertake is our collective understanding of the role of the firm and what that means for innovation strategy. The internet era suggested that small, incremental change is the prudent way to go. That won’t work for the circular transformation. As Lloyd George said, “you can’t cross a chasm in two small jumps.” To remain relevant, every company will need to be in the circularity moonshot business.

What value do circular strategies bring to our economy?

By mapping the entire economic value chain and rooting out waste at the source, circularity resolves negative externalities that otherwise would go unaccounted for. In so doing, it generates outcomes that are both environmentally and economically sustainable. The consulting firm Circle Economy estimates that if the world economy were 17% circular by 2032 (up from 8.6% today), global warming would be kept below 2℃ by cutting greenhouse emissions 39%. We

Credible analysts have taken a shot at quantifying the opportunity. In 2015, Accenture said the circular economy would “unlock” $4.5 trillion in growth by 2030. Honestly, that seems low to me. Is there any credible scenario in which firms can bring their current linear model–with its dependence on increasingly rare minerals, single-use plastics, long supply chains, short product cycles, and destructive pollution–into the next decade and hope to hold onto their current valuations? And for the pioneer brands that profitably master circularity first, is there any doubt that they will become category leaders? Again, think of recent transformations. How did digitization change retail? What has electrification done for valuations in automotive? As transformations go, circularity will be of even greater magnitude, because it will touch every part of the economy.

‘94

“ The ‘how’ of circularity is very much an open book, and presents an enormous opportunity for innovators.”

What are examples of circularity in action?

It’s still in early days, and admittedly, progress has been slow. You see small brands trying big things, and big brands trying small things: sub-scale experiments often with frustrating outcomes. Generally, you see successful circular models applied first to capital goods that are expensive, complex, and suited for planned maintenance. Rolls-Royce is credited as the leader with the “power by the hour” subscription service for their jet engines: airlines pay a flat hourly rate for each motor as they use it, and Rolls Royce handles all installations, check-ups, maintenance, and decommissioning. You see other industrial companies utilizing the same subscription-based business model. Ricoh

(office equipment) and Philips (commercial lighting systems and medical equipment) follow suit.

On the consumer side, brands are still figuring it out. Apparel and CPG are areas of particular focus. My favorite example is very recent: last week I took possession of a pair of running shoes that I don’t own. The Swiss shoe company On just introduced the Cyclon, a shoe which you rent out for a monthly fee and when they’re used up, On sends a new pair, and collects the old to be recycled. The innovation is in the model: they’re controlling a greater share of the value chain. So you see signs of progress. It’s taken over 20 years to get from “power by the hour” for jet engines to “sneakers as a service.” But the pace of change is accelerating rapidly.