Evergreen Trinity Vol. 3 Issue 1

Evergreen Trinity TRINITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL MAGAZINE SEPTEMBER 2023

Green Hydrogen: Energy-Saving Naps: Renewable Energy What has the green party achieved since getting into Lifeline or Fossil Fuel Pipedream? power?

VOL. 3. ISSUE 1

Solarpunk: An alternative future or an aesthetic fantasy Photography by Alannah Hassett

Evergreen Trinity TABLE OF CONTENTS

Editor's Note

02

CURRENT AFFAIRS Carbon Credit Offsetting

03

Replanting vs Rewilding

05

Climate Change Crisis and Political Deception: Unveiling Governments’ Hypocritical Stance

07

Energy-Saving Naps: What has the green party achieved since getting into power?

09

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

FEATURE Nuclear Energy: A Powerful Catalyst for a Sustainable Future Eco Urbanism: Finding our way back to nature

SUSTAINABLE LIVING AND CULTURE The cost of travel?

12

Green Hydrogen: Renewable Energy Lifeline or Fossil Fuel Pipedream?

On the frontline of climate change: perspectives from different groups most affected right now Challenges and Opportunities for sustainable agriculture in Ireland

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

TRINITY

Trinity's divestment from fossil fuels

Profiting off the Climate Crisis: disaster capitalism Explained

21

23

25

27

29

31

14

COMMENT

Solarpunk: alternative future or aesthetic fantasy?

16

I’m fighting for air – and you should too

19 Photograph by Emma Gallagher

Welcome

02

Photograph by Siubhán Stockman

Editors' Note Lily Hassett

Dear Readers, I'm thrilled to welcome you to the third volume of Evergreen! It's been an incredible journey, taking the reins from Faye, who did outstanding work over the past two years.

This edition of Evergreen delves into the rapid changes and debates unfolding in the world of sustainability. Articles like "Eco-urbanism," "Green Hydrogen," and "Rewilding" explore new ideas and discussions about what a sustainable future might entail. Recognizing the intrinsic connection between humans and the environment and how we can foster a more harmonious relationship with the natural world.

I'd like to express my heartfelt gratitude to our new team members, Gabriela and Brí, for their supportin making this edition happen. Special thanks to our talented photographers, Alannah, Siubhán, and Freddie, for their stunning visuals, which undoubtedly is the hightlight of this edition. Last but not least, a big shoutout to our staff writers for infusing creativity into every article in this edition.

I hope you thoroughly enjoy this volume and discover something new, whether it's about carbon credit offsetting or the fascinating world of solarpunk! We encourage you to get involved and share your thoughts with us. If you have any questions or queries, don't hesitate to reach out via email at editorevergreentrinity@gmail.com

Happy Reading!

Current Affairs

Carbon Credit Offsetting

By Isabelle Doyle

Humans have been harming the planet with increased carbon emissions for centuries now.

We have gotten so good at this that it will take a long time to recover from the damage.

As mentioned by Hank Green in one of his recent videos, we are not the first species to disrupt the climate, however, we are the first species to be aware that we are doing it. With this awareness comes the responsibility to find solutions to lower our impact. The idea of carbon credit offsetting has been popularised in recent years to help neutralise our carbon emissions. This is done by companies or individuals paying a small fee to invest in projects that reduce carbon emissions such as forest preservation or wind farms. While carbon offsetting can be a good temporary solution as we phase out the use of fossil fuels, it is currently being used as a replacement for systemic reforms.

Furthermore, there is little evidence that the current offsetting projects have any real benefits for the environment.

Since the industrial revolution, we have not only increased the carbon in the atmosphere, but we have also reduced the tools used by the planet to regulate excess carbon through deforestation. As is continually pointed out by environmental scientists, the only way to allow the planet to heal from this is through a drastic reduction in emissions. This problem highlights the virtue signalling being done by large oil companies such as Shell, who are using carbon credits to work towards becoming a carbon neutral company. To reach this goal, they announced earlier this year that they would invest $450 million into carbon offsetting projects. However, an investigation into this scheme found that over 90% of their planned investment projects are likely “phantom credits”, having no real impact on the environment. Companies like Shell are what brought us into the climate crisis, and we cannot trust them to be the ones to fix it.

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Current Affairs

Shell is a company that relies on the exploitation of natural resources and is one of the top five oil companies in the world. They benefit financially from the exploitation of oil which leaves them with very little incentive to truly reduce their emissions. Even if the carbon credits they were using were beneficial, it would not stop the fact that they are polluting the environment.

“We are not the first species to disrupt the climate, however, we are the first species to be aware that we are doing it” The criticisms of carbon credit offsetting goes further than the investment projects being unreliable. Many investment projects are being called out for engaging in ‘Green Colonialism’. This is when investors from the Global North use land in the Global South for environmental projects to reduce carbon such as reforestation. However, investors are buying land that belongs to indigenous communities, which causes these communities to become displaced by losing their traditional livelihoods and their cultural traditions. They devalue and undermine the knowledge indigenous groups have of their land. An example of this can be seen with the Norwegian carbon offsetting organisation, Green Resources. Their projects are aimed at preserving two forests in Uganda in hopes to rebuild the land to help neutralise carbon purchases made in the West. This has turned the forests into a commodity to ease the guilt

04

of carbon purchases made by companies in the West, disconnecting the buyers from the effects of carbon in the broader ecosystem.

An interview was carried out with the locals in Uganda who were personally affected by this investment project. They mentioned there were some things to be happy about, as it brought new jobs to the area and caused more money to go into public services.

However, for the most part, people were not happy with these changes and believed the investors did not have locals’ interests at heart. Local laws were not followed or respected; The residents no longer owned large portions of the land which led to more precarious food security. A local leader called out the investors who he believed were getting a lot more out of the deal than the locals. This shows the importance of making environmental changes equitable and beneficial to all communities. We cannot continue to let indigenous and less privileged communities deal with the hardest burdens of the climate crises.

The concept of carbon offsetting is not inherently bad and could be beneficial if used correctly. However, the way it is currently being carried out has a lot of issues. David Antonili, who was the CEO of one of the biggest carbon offsetting schemes resigned after recognising they were not useful. If they were used correctly and invested in meaningful projects, carbon credit offsetting could be a very beneficial tool to start the process of carbon reduction as we come up with new systems and ways of living based on more sustainable and renewable energy sources. However, the current way offsets are being used ignore the damage being done by the overconsumption of fossil fuels. We must commit to take meaningful action to reduce our emissions to make a meaningful change.

Photograph by Ross McAulay

05

Current Affairs

Replanting vs Rewilding

By David Flanagan

As humanity grapples with the urgent need to address climate change and preserve biodiversity, restoring and expanding natural ecosystems has become a paramount priority. Two prominent approaches that have gained attention are replanting and rewilding. While both methods aim to regenerate their respective ecosystems, they differ in their strategies and outcomes. This piece seeks to delve into the nuances of rewilding and replanting in the Irish forestry sector.

The most popular approach to forest regeneration is direct planting of tree specimens or reafforestation in an area. This method involves actively planting tree seedlings or propagating forests through extensive human intervention. This approach can quickly establish forests therefore restoring degraded areas, countering deforestation, and creating new forested landscapes within a short time span.

This method gained popularity after the first world war where, in response to increased demand for timber, many forests were planted for this purpose. Many tree species were initially planted for commercial endeavours, but it became clear that not all species were economically efficient.

Optimising factors such as speed of forest maturity and timber quality slimmed down the number of species used with scant regard for the effects to local biodiversity.

Fast forward to recent decades, the wideawareness of human-induced climate change has given forest regeneration a whole new urgency. That urgency is to rapidly expand forest coverage to act as a form of carbon sequestration, applying the brakes to our runaway greenhouse gas emissions.

National and international afforestation policy has focused on delivering greater forest area. Ireland’s national goal is to have 18% forest cover by 2050 (currently 11.6%). Direct forest planting offers a rapid method to achieve these targets.

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

One may conclude that more forestry is good whatever the case may be, however, through an ecological lens, not all forests are necessarily beneficial. Commercially productive species such as Sitka Spruce have become the dominant species of Irish forests. While this species is not native to Ireland, it performs exceptionally well to our climate and ground conditions. Adding into the mix, a commercially focused grant system which favours non-native conifers means that nowadays conifer species make up almost 70% of Irish forest coverage.

These are often concentrated monoculture plantations, causing significant negative consequences for local and national biodiversity.

“However, through an ecological lens, not all forests are necessarily beneficial” Forest floors of these monoculture spruce plantations have been repeatedly shown to be ecological and biodiversity dead zones.

No clearer can this be seen than in my own locality where extensive financially-driven spruce plantations have become established in the area: minute details such as the absence of birdsong (a staple of our rich native woodlands) and a toxic bed of pine needles on the forest floor create an eerie atmosphere devoid of life.

Current Affairs

In terms of carbon sequestration, a report issued to the Department of Agriculture as mandated by EU legislation (commented on in a 2020 Irish Times article) illustrated that Irish forestry became a net emitter of greenhouse gases. While trees are one of the most effective means of absorbing carbon, a significant portion of carbon is stored in the soil. Therefore, through disturbing the soil during a mass planting of tree specimens, felling processes, and eventual timber harvesting, greenhouse gases are emitted.

This leads one to question whether direct afforestation is the silver bullet it is often portrayed to be.

Given the drawbacks to direct afforestation, it is worth considering another approach to forestry – rewilding. In essence, rewilding is an approach that seeks to restore natural processes and enhance biodiversity by allowing nature to take its course. It involves minimal human intervention, focusing on creating the time and space for nature to restore itself.

06

The recent publication of “An Irish Atlantic Rainforest” by Eoghan Daltun charts his journey to rewild over 70 acres of land on the Beara Peninsula in Cork. Daltun highlights the need for human involvement whether it be removing invasive rhododendrons or erecting fencing to exclude ravenous deer from destroying the fledgling forest. In all other cases nature takes the lead in the project.

Daltun is candid about the labour and financial input required, but is proof that it can work. He also sprinkles in some cultural restoration as part of his journey which is yet another dimension of biodiversity restoration.

.

In essence, rewilding is an approach that seeks to restore natural processes and enhance biodiversity by allowing nature to take its course. It involves minimal human intervention, focusing on creating selfsustaining ecosystems. Instead of planting specific tree species, rewilding emphasises the reintroduction of native flora and fauna, encouraging the revival of natural ecological interactions.

A limited number of specimens may be introduced (i.e. planting a limited number of native tree species) however, precedence is given to species already in situ and creating the environment for them to reproduce. After all, these specimens are adapted to the highly localised conditions of a specific area.

Likewise, by having a variety of species, there is great genetic diversity in the area. This genetic diversity offers an insurance policy whereby the survival of the forest is protected from diseases that may affect a single species. Another advantage is that through the encouragement of native flora, non-flora species are attracted to the area. As seen in many rewilding projects, restoring natural habitats i.e. native woodlands, encourages animal and insect species to inhabit the area.

If we are serious about addressing the biodiversity crisis, we need both the restoration of flora and fauna populations.

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

When it comes to forestry policy, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. While the need for timber will continue to exist, legislation and government funding must reflect the twin crises of climate change and biodiversity loss.

We must make room for nature to restore itself to the magnificence it once held on this island. We must learn from past mistakes which have caused such damage to our local environment. But most of all, we must let nature lead us towards a sustainable and prosperous future. After all, trees have been on this planet for much longer than humans have!

Current Affairs

Climate Change Crisis and Political Deception: Unveiling Governments’ Hypocritical Stance

By Katie Bowden

In the complex landscape of climate change governance, governments' positions have come under scrutiny for their hypocrisy.

Several factors contribute to this stance, including their financial investments in fossil fuel industries, lack of transparency in decision-making processes, insufficient action to combat climate change, and the presence of systemic racism influencing environmental policies. These key aspects shed a light on the intricate web of contradictions in government approaches to climate change and the urgent need for greater accountability, equitable action and the distribution of accurate climate change information.

Governments are often perceived as hypocritical due to this lack of transparency in their decision-making processes or failure to provide relevant information to the public. This lack of transparency can create the impression that actions and policies are influenced by hidden agendas or undisclosed interests, eroding public trust.

07

change, governments persist in funnelling substantial investments into fossil fuel extraction. ake the oil drilling operation in Alaska called the Willow project for instance, which anticipates releasing an additional 9.2 million metric tons of carbon pollution into the atmosphere (Turrentine, 2023). In light of these contradictions, one must question the authenticity of governments' environmental commitments. How can they claim to align with sustainable environmental solutions and combat climate change while actively participating in the profitable extraction of fossil fuels? The time has come for governments to reprioritize, shifting their focus away from fossil fuel exploitation and instead fund financial resources into sustainable and renewable energy alternatives.

The formidable challenge governments encounter arises when influential industries, such as fossil fuel companies, wield their power to downplay or undermine climate change science, primarily driven by their economic interests. This exertion of influence often takes the form of financially supporting political campaigns, aiming to obstruct the dissemination of accurate information on climate change.

“Governments to reprioritize, shifting their focus away from fossil fuel exploitation and instead fund sustainable and renewable energy alternatives” Fossil fuels, responsible for over 75 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions and nearly 90ercent of carbon dioxide emissions (Nations, 2023), present a stark paradox.

Despite this undeniable impact on climate

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Current Affairs

Consequently, this can lead to governmental hypocrisy and hinder the acknowledgment of the grim reality concerning the future of life on Earth.

Inside Climate News revealed a staggering fact: Exxon and various other oil companies have actively spent over $5 billion to undermine climate science and oppose clean energy policies. This reveals a blatant hypocrisy, as these companies are the primary contributors to climate change, yet they invest vast sums in preventing effective climate action. However, the hypocrisy extends beyond the oil companies themselves. Democratic politicians, including former US President Barack Obama and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, have also accepted significant financial backing from the fossil fuel industry. Obama received campaign donations totalling over $2 million. Similarly, Clinton received $1.5 million in campaign donations from the oil and gas industry (Kirk, 2020). This raises questions about the conflicting interests at play, where politicians who claim to advocate for climate action and clean energy solutions have also benefited from the financial support of the very industries responsible for exacerbating climate change. The acceptance of such substantial donations from fossil fuel companies could be seen as compromising their ability to take decisive action against the main source of the climate crisis, calling into question the authenticity of their commitment to tackling climate change.

The Paris Global Climate Agreement is the main argument that governments’ use to display their interest for more sustainable world. The Paris Global Climate Agreement was established during the UN Climate Conference in 2015 with the objective of mitigating the impacts of climate change by preventing global temperatures from rising above 2 degrees Celsius. While the agreement is legally binding, it does not impose fines or penalties on countries that fail to meet their emission reduction targets (Denchak, 2021). However, as we approach the seven-year mark since the conference, only the European Union, the UK, and South Africa are currently on track to achieve their carbon emission goals. This starkly reveals the hypocrisy within government systems, as The majority of the 194 countries that signed

08

efforts to come close to their emission targets. This is a clear illustration that government words are not aligned with thei Developed countries lack accountability for historical colonization damage, now impacting third-world nations with climate change effects despite lower carbon emissions. The hypocrisy of governments addressing racial justice in the context of climate change is striking.

Despite acknowledging the disproportionate impact on marginalized communities, their actions perpetuate environmental racism. Industries contributing to climate change operate unchecked in marginalized neighbourhoods, increasing pollution and health risks for these communities.

“The hypocrisy of governments addressing racial justice in the context of climate change is striking” International climate agreements may not consider historical and current contributions to climate change, intensifying global racial and economic inequalities. This lack of meaningful action reveals a troubling hypocrisy in government approaches to climate change and racial justice. This clearly illustrates the contradictions between government rhetoric regarding climate change and racial justice and the actual policies and decisions that perpetuate environmental racism and fail to address the systemic inequalities in climate change impacts. This lack of meaningful action exposes a troubling hypocrisy in the way governments approach the intersection of climate change and racial justice (Williams and Mos-Shogbamimu, 2021).

In the context of climate change, governments are often criticised for their overall inaction in implementing sustainable solutions and for a lack of accountability and honesty regarding the deteriorating state of our planet. This gap between their rhetoric and actual efforts further contributes to the perception of government hypocrisy on climate-related matters.

Current Affairs

09

Energy-Saving Naps: What has the green party achieved since getting into power? By Daire Murray

The Green Party are unique in Irish Parliamentary Politics. Their core value, environmental justice, allows the party to remain stoic in the face of fluctuating party politics and remain the green voice of the Oireachtas as their motivating factor is environmental justice rather than garnering power.

Originating from grassroots environmental groups in the early 80’s, the party has developed far beyond protest politics and established itself firmly as a serious political party, capable of entering coalition governments in both 2007 and 2020. The party has had a steady growth from taking its first Dáil seat in 1989 to the 2020 election where the Greens took home 7% of first preference votes. The question remains whether the Green Party have done enough in government to maintain steady growth. If not, the situation may be more similar to the disastrous aftermath of the 2007 election, where the Greens lost seats in both local and general elections (Frankland, Lucardie and Rihoux, 2016).

Photograph by Freddie Fallon

reorganise and shift their focus to garnering more political support for the environmental cause, beginning by reorganising the party structure and putting more effort into negotiating with other parties during local elections and regarding the office of Lord Mayor of Dublin. Essentially, the party began to play the political game.

This change of attitude paid off as the party entered a coalition with Fianna Fail in 2007.

Although a controversial move (leading to the resignation of the Party’s leader, Trevor Sargent), the party members spoke and made the decision to leave “amateur activism” behind (Frankland, Lucardie and Rihoux, 2016).

“Their core value, environmental justice, allows the party to remain stoic in the face of fluctuating party politics” Photograph by Ross McAulay

We must consider the vast development the Greens have experienced in the last 30 years. The shift from grassroots protest politics to more focused parliamentary politics began in the 1990’s with the endorsement of Mary Robinson for President.

Gradually at this time, the Greens began to

However, the coalition government did not last long. Although the Greens managed to get green policies on to the programme for government, (such as a 3% reduction in carbon emissions and investment into insulating homes to reduce fuel usage) the 2008 crash and the attitude of the Bertie

Current Affairs

10

Ahern government meant that none of these polices came to fruition (Clark and Weeks, 2011). This led to a massive loss in public trust in the Green Party and their competence on the national political stage. Following the 2009 election, the party went into a hibernation period… only truly recovering in the 2020 election.

within the party. Bitter tensions arose around the issue of entering into government with Fianna Fail and Fine Gael and the terms of the deal (McGee, 2021). Negotiations ended with lots of the items from the Green Party manifesto on the programme for government and the right people in the right places to ensure that this time, they followed through on their promises.

In 2020, the electorate made a surprising lean left, placing Sinn Fein as the most popular party for the first time since the foundation of the Irish Free State. The Greens also claimed a record 12 seats. This dramatic rise in support can be in part attributed to the huge rise in awareness of the climate crisis over the last few years. It is also consistent with the general shift to the left of the political spectrum.

“This dramatic rise in support can be in part attributed to the huge rise in awareness of the Photograph by Alannah Hassett climate crisis over the last few years” Photograph by Siubhán Stockman

A coalition government was formed, between Fianna Fail, Fine Gael and the Greens. The Greens came out of pre-coalition negotiations in a very strong place. Seven of their TD’s were elected Ministers, in powerful areas such as The Environment, Culture, Equality and Community Development.

However, this decision created a deep divide

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

And follow through they have. They have passed the Climate Action Bill, making 5year carbon budgets a legal requirement of the Government, and setting up the Climate Advisory Council. The Climate Action (Amendment) Bill was introduced into parliament within 100 days as promised, and passed through parliament, for the most part intact, in July 2021. The Greens followed through with the ban on smoky coal which, along with turf, can no longer be sold in retail premises.

A Just Transition Plan was also approved by the Government in November 2023. Focusing on the areas that will be affected most by the decarbonisation of the economy, the plan provides framework for transitioning these communities into a carbon-neutral society fairly. Promises to increase dialogue with citizens on Environmental issues and to support the European Green Deal have also been upheld.

Current Affairs

However, the strength of the Greens has been tested. Although the Climate Act is truly a push in the right direction, and a massive victory for Minister Ryan, the 2023 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) report stressed that Ireland is not on track to follow through on the commitments made in this Act. In the past year, emissions only dropped by 2%, when they need to be much closer to 5% in order to meet our commitments. Sectoral analysis shows that the main issue is transport, whose emissions rose by 6%.

This comes as a result of a return to work after the 2020-2022 pandemic and a resulting boom in road traffic and overall car usage (McGee, 2021) . The transport sector needs emergency action.

We need investment in viable alternatives such as widespread public transport. The antithesis of this was the residential sector who reduced their emissions by 12%. This was made possible by large government investments in retrofitting homes and grants to upgrade heating systems etc. No longer were government policies and personal interests at cross-purposes.

According to the 2023 EPA report, at the rate we are going at, we are not going to meet our targets or even come close. In 2023, we reduced our net carbon emissions

11

by a mere 2% from 2019 levels. In order to meet our target of a 51% reduction by 2030, we Photograph as a country need to take this crisis even

by Freddie Fallon more seriously. The government need to make protecting the environment a number 1 priority. By voting in Green politicians, we can ensure this will happen. As Minister for the Environment and Green Party Leader Eamon Ryan said, “We are the only party able to play senior hurling when it comes to climate change” (McGee, 2020).

The target of a 51% reduction in carbon emissions by 2030 is a lesson in self-control for this country. We, as a people, voted people into government who would do something about the Climate emergency.

We, led by our government, acted in putting together a Climate Action Act, whereby we would reduce our emissions significantly enough to do our part to alleviate some of the pain and suffering we would otherwise inflict on our beautiful planet. We, as a nation, not a collection of “sectors”, must now come together to actually meet our selfset targets and do what we set out to do; make the world a liveable place for future generations. massive loss in public trust in the Green Party and their competence on the national political stage. Following the 2009 election, the party went into a hibernation period… only truly recovering in the 2020 election.

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

13

Sustainable Living

The cost of travel?

By Ellen Duggan

This summer, I did what one of my friends refers to as ‘the Irish student moving to Berlin for clubbing thing,’ except that I have not moved to Berlin (too expensive) and my closest experience to clubbing has been a small, sweaty room that seemed more like my local teen disco than Berghain (albeit one with shots for €1). I’m living in a small city and working in an Irish pub and I can state without a doubt that it’s one of the best and most enriching decisions I’ve ever made. Though, honestly, I say that about every decision I’ve made about travel. Since starting university, I’ve spent as much as I can afford on leaving the country: visiting my best friend in London, reading week in Paris, a weekend trip to Tallinn. Cheap Ryanair flights and surviving on bread and cheese upon arrival have meant I haven’t even suffered too much financially.

“I am convinced travelling has made me a better, more aware and more tolerant person” My older relatives have watched me do this with a combination of pride and nostalgia, occasionally slipping me some cash and telling me they also spent all their money on travel when they were young, and that it educates you like nothing else does.

And I wholeheartedly agree - from art museums in ornate palaces constructed for Catherine the Great, to witnessing a fraternity ‘midnight scream’ ritual here in Germany, I am convinced travelling has made me a better, more aware and more tolerant person, and

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Sustainable Living

that through trips abroad I have attained something I couldn’t on my family’s annual holiday to Cork - which I hugely resented when I was young while watching my friends return from Lanzarote with colourful fridge magnets yacht. A recent report from Greenpeace shows that train routes (by far the least carbon intensive option for travel) in Europe are on average twice as expensive as flights, with some being up to 30 times the price for the exact same route. There’s also the question of drawing your journey out to allow for a slower, more sustainable means of transport. The cost of travel isn’t just the price of a flight or a bed in a hostel- it’s the weeks of work you are taking off, and the money you are not earning in the meantime. There is no way I could stay here for three months unless I was working the entire time. Flying is horribly convenient - both the quickest and cheapest way to get around the globe. It is the fastest growing source of transport-related greenhouse gas emissions in the EU and flights under 1500 KG (which often have corresponding rail routes) make up 25% of EU aviation emissions.

In the meantime, the aviation industry is doing its best to convince us that flying can become and will become sustainable. Ryanair, on their website, describe themselves as ‘the greenest and cleanest airline in Europe’ and pledge net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, despite being Europe’s most polluting airline in 2022.

And while the idea of carbon offsetting is nice, in reality it’s just another market based approach to sustainability, lending to the idea that we can shift responsibility around and buy our ay out of the climate crisis,rather than actually reducing emissions.

13

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

I can offer some practical tips for travelling sustainably. I can recommend you travel less and for longer, that not only is it better for the planet but a more rewarding experience. I can advise avoiding tourist destinations, visiting during the off-season, checking the carbon footprint of wherever you’re staying. I can tell you that it matters what you consume when you arrive, and that you should support small businesses and eat locally produced food. To pack only what you need so your bags aren’t too heavy, bring a reusable water bottle and cutlery, a tote bag and a lunch box (which I’ve found here, street food vendors will often accept if you ask them to place food in it).

You should think of getting to and from the airport or port or station, and if you can try to cycle where you’re staying. But that’s another article.

I’m not committing to never flying again, which I don’t think is realistic or feasible. What I can tell you is that I won’t be making anymore weekend trips, and that next time I travel it will be by ferry. I’ll be sticking to the principle that just because flying is cheap, it doesn’t mean there isn’t a greater cost.

Photograph by Emma Gallagher

And perhaps I’ll be rejoining my family on our annual trip to Cork.

Trinity

Trinity's divestment from fossil fuels

By Ruaidhrí Saulnier

Nearly three years on since officially divesting from fossil fuels, what has Trinity done since?

Did the move influence other colleges across Ireland, its sustainability practices, and divestments’ impact on Ireland’s emission goals, and the impact on the Irish 2030 sustainable development goals.

Getting Trinity to commit to divestment was a huge win, but what has come of it?

The divestment was first announced in December of 2016, following a fifteen month campaign, led by the student campaign “Fossil Free TCD”. Trinity joined 677 other institutions and 58,399 individuals at the time who pledged to divest from fossil fuels. These groups included governments and investors from 77 countries including banks, pension funds, insurance companies, and institutes in the health, education, philanthropy, and faith sectors. Together they represent $5 trillion in assets. At the time, Trinity had €6 million invested in oil companies.

After the success of the Fossil Free TCD campaign, other student groups on the island followed suit, notably the University of Galway (formerly NUIG) in March 2017 and Queen's University Belfast in May 2017, as well as a national campaign “Fossil Free Ireland'' in July of that same year. More recently, Trinity College Cambridge has also pledged to divest from fossil fuels, following similar calls to divest from alumni.

Despite these promises to divest, last year the University Times reported that Trinity still has shares worth at least €8 million in companies directly involved in fossil fuel activities, despite saying it would divest from such companies several years ago. Final divesting occurred in the first quarter of 2022, as

Photograph by Emma Gallagher

Trinity

confirmed in an email by university spokesperson Catherine O’Mahony.

Information on the actual stocks in the fund is hard to find. However, the guidelines prepared y Solactive provide comprehensive guidelines on which companies can be invested in through that fund. Trinity has also divested from the arms and tobacco industries, also reflected in the same fund.

“Trinity still has shares worth at least €8 million in companies directly involved in fossil fuel activities” Divestment by one party requires investment by another. Some critics of divestment say that this removes conscious investors from the discussion as to how the fossil fuel industry is run. This new investor, who may have already been an investor previously, is now more interested in growing the polluting company, more than the divestor who sold their stake.

To be more climate conscious, some critics say the divestment needs to be kept and run off. In other words, kept operational until the end of its lifespan, with few upgrades and maintenance and upgrades in productivity, instead of being sold to someone who will keep operating and expanding it. Divestment makes for a better press release. Run-off

15

makes for a better world. This is what Harvard’s current remaining fossil fuel investments are doing.

In 2018, the Fossil Fuel Divestment Bill passed with all-party support in the Dáil. This bill with all-party support in the Dáil. This bill compels the Ireland Strategic Investment Fund to sell off its investments in global fossil fuel industries. At the time, the value of this investment in fossil fuels was €318 million across 150 companies. If the divestments decrease Ireland’s carbon emissions, it is still very far behind where it should be, missing emissions targets year on year, with the third highest per capita emissions in the EU. The goals are to cut CO2 emissions by at least 80%, compared to 1990 levels, by 2050 from the electricity, building and transport sectors, and take an “approach to carbon neutrality in the agriculture and land-use sector”.

While Ireland’s performance with regard to some Sustainable Development Goals is above Photograph by Alannah Hassett the EU average, it lags behind in the environmental goals, most notably SDG 12 Responsible Consumption and Production, SDG 13 Climate Action SDG 17 Partnership for the Goals and SDG 9 Industry, innovation and infrastructure.

In spite of all this, Ireland is currently on track to miss its 2030 goals.

As of July 2023, 1593 Institutions are pledging to divest in fossil fuels. Their combined spending power amounts to a total value of €36.59 trillion in assets, as reported by the Global Fossil Fuel Divestment Commitments Database in 2023.

Photograph by Emma Gallagher

Comment

Solarpunk Subtitle: An alternative future or an aesthetic fantasy?

By Rachel Smyth

Picture a city where beams of sunlight illuminate stained-glass buildings with power glittering solar panels on every roof. Up high, colourful stacked apartments host tumbling plants and rooftop forests while electric cable cars carry passengers to-and-fro, above twisting streets filled with cyclists and pedestrians. Imagine a multicultural society where people who are unrestricted by gender norms, ethnicity, or skin colour, come together in flourishing community gardens and other open spaces to share ideas, wearing earthtoned and upcycled clothes. Welcome to the strange and beautiful world of solarpunk. In a media landscape increasingly occupied by negative news stories and pessimistic predictions, some groups are clinging tightly to an optimistic outlook. Informed by subgenres like steampunk, cyberpunk and dieselpunk, yet refusing to engage in their often-gloomy outlooks (nor their reliance on fossil fuels), solarpunk is a climate-focused aesthetic, subgenre, and political movement that you never knew you needed.

First coined in 2008, the term solarpunk began to appear more widely after 2014 when it sparked discussion online and became the subject of literature, anthologies, and art. As a relatively new genre, solarpunk is constantly being redefined and is yet to reach mainstream attention, despite being picked up by some media and researchers in recent years. Aesthetically, solarpunk has emerged as a blend of art nouveau, upcycled materials, leafy architecture and a touch of Hayao Miyazaki (Princess Mononoke, for example). It could be easy to dismiss as yet another aesthetic, following a long line of ephemeral styles such as “cottagecore” or “dark academia”, which have sprung up over social media in recent years.

Comment

At first glance, solarpunk-inspired art, architecture, and fashion design seem like fan-art of a futuristic novel, a niche theme based purely on visual appeal. However, as proponents of solarpunk have pointed out (see the Solarpunk Manifesto on re-des.org), the genre is much more than this. It is a political and social movement in its own right, united by its defence of optimism as a valid response to the climate crisis and a belief in community collaboration and renewable energies as the path towards a brighter future. The “solar” element references a hope for renewable energy as a society-changing solution while “punk” indicates a bottom-up and nonconforming element that distances the movement from green-washed messaging and the personal responsibility for “sustainability” that is promoted by capitalist systems.

“It is a political and social movement in its own right, united by its defence of optimism as a valid response to the climate crisis” Picture a city where beams of sunlight illuminate stained-glass buildings with power glittering solar panels on every roof. Up high, colourful stacked apartments host tumbling plants and rooftop forests while electric cable cars carry passengers to-and-fro, above twisting streets filled with cyclists and pedestrians. Imagine a multicultural society where people who are unrestricted by gender norms, ethnicity, or skin colour, come together in flourishing community gardens and other open spaces to share ideas, wearing earthtoned and upcycled clothes. Welcome to the strange and beautiful world of solarpunk. In a media landscape increasingly occupied by negative news stories and pessimistic predictions, some groups are clinging tightly to an optimistic outlook. Informed by subgenres like steampunk, cyberpunk and dieselpunk, yet refusing to engage in their

17

often-gloomy outlooks (nor their reliance on fossil fuels), solarpunk is a climate-focused aesthetic, subgenre, and political movement that you never knew you needed.

First coined in 2008, the term solarpunk began to appear more widely after 2014 when it sparked discussion online and became the subject of literature, anthologies, and art. As a relatively new genre, solarpunk is constantly being redefined and is yet to reach mainstream attention, despite being picked up by some media and researchers in recent years. Aesthetically, solarpunk has emerged as a blend of art nouveau, upcycled materials, leafy architecture and a touch of Hayao Miyazaki (Princess Mononoke, for example). It could be easy to dismiss as yet another aesthetic, following a long line of ephemeral styles such as “cottagecore” or “dark academia”, which have sprung up over social media in recent years. At first glance, solarpunk-inspired art, architecture, and fashion design seem like fan-art of a futuristic novel, a niche theme based purely on visual appeal. However, as proponents of solarpunk have pointed out (see the Solarpunk Manifesto on re-des.org), the genre is much more than this. It is a political and social movement in its own right, united by its defence of optimism as a valid response to the climate crisis and a belief in community collaboration and renewable energies as the path towards a brighter future. The “solar” element references a hope for renewable energy as a societychanging solution while “punk” indicates a bottom-up and non-conforming element that distances the movement from green-washed messaging and the personal responsibility for “sustainability” that is promoted by capitalist systems.

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Comment

Solarpunk is seen as a utopian subgenre and movement, in contrast to the darker dystopian themes that are often found in futuristic literature today. In this way, it enters the frequently fought battle within the climate movement between hopeful and “realistic” (and arguably pessimistic) attitudes to the climate crisis. Not only do apocalyptic, worstcase scenarios dominate the burgeoning “clifi” genre, but highly unfavourable ecological futures are also popular settings in nonfiction, like The Uninhabitable Earth by David Wallace-Wells. While it is certainly important to inform people of the consequences of climate inaction, many scholars have spoken out against the dominating narrative of doom and gloom. The prominent climate scientist Michael E. Mann criticised Wallace-Wells’ message as doomist, inadvertently aiding the narrative of climate denial and inaction by inciting hopelessness rather than productive action. Solarpunk takes a radically different approach.

“many scholars have spoken out against the dominating narrative of doom and gloom” By advocating that the climate crisis is severe and requires immediate societal change, solarpunk envisions communities that not only survive, but re-emerge with better infrastructures, a better quality of life, and reduced social inequalities. But is it responsible to promote such a utopic future?

Could it incite complacent dreaming rather than urgent action? Williams describes solarpunk as a “richly elaborated speculative solar energy imaginary” and explains how speculation is an essential first step towards a future independent of fossil fuels and polluting industries - and if we can’t imagine it, how can we build it? Similarly, Reina-Roz points to solarpunk as a counter-cultural hope that helps us to actualise a world where energy is decolonised and power relations are broken down, allowing space for alternate understandings of humans and their place in ecosystems.

18

Photograph by Ross McAulay

Despite the bottom-up nature of the solarpunk movement and its essentially socialist values,there is always the risk that it may fall prey to capitalist systems, and see its core values eroded away to a superficial aesthetic.

This has been witnessed in many climate movements, where concepts like “zero waste” or “minimalistic living” have been criticized for remaining confined to individual, materialistic, and financial contexts that do not consider collective action and often exclude those not privileged enough to participate in these circles. To stay true to its roots, the solarpunk movement must avoid being co-opted by corporations who wish to use it as the new “sustainable” marketing tool while failing to support any real societal changes. Just as the recent trend of thrifted and handmade clothes have informed fast fashion designs, there is a chance that the solarpunk values of circularity, harmony with nature, and cultural diversity could become another short-lived aesthetic rather than a genuine shift to eco-friendly and inclusive lifestyles. In this way, solarpunk enthusiasts must go beyond literary and artistic speculation to incorporate the “punk” spirit into their lived realities and push for concrete changes to our society. Importantly, solarpunk is not purely a distant-future thought experiment. Solarpunk-type actions and organisations can be found in contemporary society, from individuals and companies installing solar panels for more autonomous, clean energy, to circular economy campaigns like the Right to Repair (R2R) and the humble community garden.

Keeping a utopian dream of the future in mind can help guide our current actions and feed our drive for positive, inclusive change - as long as we accept the inevitable messy realities of such a society and never give in to a false idea of perfection. Let’s aim for a solarpunk attitude, not an inflexible, utopian ideal.

Comment

19

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

I’m Fighting for Air – and you should too.

By Kevin Mullaney

I’m concerned about the climate crisis but find it hard to be more than ‘simply concerned’. I am not alarmed when I hear of the ice caps melting, or that the tide will rise gradually over the coming decades. I recognise it is important to “Reach Net Zero by 2050”, but I have no idea what this means for me, as a person, and so I have no strong feelings about this intention. The consequences of the climate crisis sound brutal, but then again, doing something about it is never at the top of my list, on a given day.

There are a lot of consequences of the climate crisis that I want to care more about because I know they are important, but I’ve found myself caring more about what its ‘causes’ mean for me—namely, air pollution. ‘Carbon emissions’ have been described as the ‘currency’ we are overspending, or the ‘calories’ we are overconsuming, but in reality, they are neither of these things. They are a part of the atmosphere, the air we breathe, likewise oxygen and nitrogen.

Since the Industrial Revolution, we have been burning fossil fuels, and have overdosed our atmosphere with not only carbon emissions but also PM2.5 and other gases like nitrogen dioxide and sulphur dioxide. These are less familiar to us but from what I have learned about them, the last thing we should be doing is breathing them.

PM2.5 – Vague and dangerous.

PM2.5 might be familiar as one of the types of masks available for use during COVID-19 but is likely to be unfamiliar outside that sphere. It is described as fine ‘particulate matter’, less than 2.5 microns, or 1/33 of a human hair, in diameter. This means that it can pass through our lungs and into our bloodstreams, and stay in our bodies. This won’t be too bad, except PM2.5 is the matter produced by the burning of fuel for heat or energy.

Its increased concentration in local air quality is strongly associated with increased lung and heart diseases, such as cancers and chronic pulmonary diseases. Exposure among children can stunt their lung and brain development. It affects the immune system, causing an increased prevalence of allergies and weakened immunity. Any one of these conditions can destroy a life, or at least, the quality of life.

This means that the particles we breathe in, without a moment’s notice, could be slowly ravaging our bodies. It could be the thing that kills us, a death sentence picked up between two breaths. Maybe it just happened.

"Surely, this won’t happen to me” Environmental damnation is quite grim, so at this point, I would ask myself ‘How likely is this going to happen to me?’ Some factors make it more likely, such as being in smoggy or hazy environments, being near burning fuels, or running contaminated liquid like polluted

Comment

water or slurry, as these are actively churning out air pollutants. There are Air Quality map resources online if you would like to see the air quality in your area. It is worth highlighting that Ireland did not meet the WHO Air Quality Standards for Health in 2021.

“This means that the particles we breathe in, without a moment’s notice, could be slowly ravaging our bodies” With all this in mind, I would find myself saying ‘Well, it could happen to people in my circumstances, but surely it won’t happen to me’. I thought that too, up until 6 years ago when my dad was diagnosed with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis, or IPF – Latin for ‘Aggressive, untreatable lung disease of unknown cause’. For around 5 years, my Dad would find it harder to breathe, until he couldn’t. He had a history of a bad heart, and so had always looked after himself. He never smoked, and the doctor could only say it was likely to do with ‘something he breathed in at some point in his life’. He fought very hard, and passed away in June two years ago, at the age of 64. I thought we were invincible until the day we weren’t.

20

transparent about their practices and are trying to produce fewer pollutants, because they know we care.

Be heard – contact our elected officials and tell them that the addressal of this problem will secure our support for them. Push for details, to see if there is substance behind their statements.

Thoughtful and comprehensive changes to farming practices, energy production, and traffic management are necessary to affect air quality. This requires the election of people who seek to engage with these challenges. If we elect public servants who ‘blow smoke’, it will not make the air cleaner.

Some of these actions are daunting or uncomfortable, so when we feel hesitant, think. Think of every child whose first breath is now exponentially more dangerous than ours was. Think of every parent and grandparent, who could lose decades of their life to an avoidable illness.

When it comes down to it, air does not care if we think air quality is an important issue. Air does not care if we think someone else should do something about it, or if we are not responsible. Air does not care if we find it inconvenient to address air quality. When we Fight for Air, we either fight hard enough to survive, or we don’t.

What can we do?

This is why it is important to Fight for Air; it is too frustrating and deflating to do less.

Do what we can ourselves – be responsible for burning less fuel— for heat, car journeys, and home energy. Be energy-efficient by reducing energy usage or choosing less fuel-intensive ways of travelling like buses, active transport, or carpooling.

Be proactive – question our energy suppliers and bin collection services about their wastepractices and be willing to change service providers. Support those that are

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Feature

Nuclear Energy: A Powerful Catalyst for a Sustainable Future

By Adam Ó Ceallaigh

In pursuit of a sustainable future, the energy sector is undergoing a profound transformation, with a focus on transitioning to green sources. Renewable energies like solar and wind power offer promising solutions, but their sole current capacity falls short of meeting the growing global energy demands. As we prioritise the shift to renewables it becomes essential to explore supplementary sources that can bridge the energy gap. Nuclear energy serves as a powerful catalyst for change, and offers a reliable and low-carbon alternative to fossil fuels. I want to explore the merits of nuclear energy and debunk anti-nuclear narratives, to shed light on nuclear energy’s potential to accelerate the transition to a cleaner and more sustainable energy landscape.

One common narrative that you hear is that nuclear energy is unsafe. Nuclear energy has come a long way in terms of safety since the incidents at Three Mile Island, Chernobyl, and Fukushima.

Modern reactor designs incorporate advanced safety features, such as passive cooling systems and robust containment structures. The industry has learned from past mistakes and implemented stringent safety protocols to prevent accidents and ensure the well-being of both humans and the environment.

In the 60-year history of civil nuclear power generation, with over 18,500 cumulative reactor years across 36 countries, there have been only three significant accidents at nuclear power plants. When comparing fatalities, fossil fuels have led to 78.59 deaths per thousand terawatt-hours, while nuclear power has led to 0.03 deaths per thousand terawatt-hours.

The global electricity consumption in 2022 was 24,398 terawatthours. These facts underscore the level of safety surrounding nuclear energy.

Feature

While waste management was once a legitimate concern, the nuclear industry has developed effective strategies for handling and storing radioactive waste. The industry has made remarkable progress in waste management, addressing radioactive waste responsibly. Reprocessing technology recycles 96% of nuclear power waste, namely plutonium and uranium. The waste can subsequently be used as reactor fuel in nuclear power plants.

The creation of deep geological repositories, as exemplified by Finland's newly opened OnkaloRepository, offers a promising solution for long-term waste storage. Onkalo is the first permanent nuclear waste depository, located 455 metres underground. It ensures the safe containment of nuclear waste for 100,000 years, minimising environmental hazards. The repository can hold 5,500 tons of waste, addressing waste concerns for over a century and giving time for more repositories to be built.

The Limitations of Renewables Renewable energies have made significant strides in recent years, with a particular focus on 2030 targets. But they face inherent limitations that hinder their widespread adoption as standalone sources.

The intermittent nature of solar and wind power, with solar making energy only 20% of the time and wind 35%, poses challenges in matching energy supply with demand. Importantly, there is also a need to reduce energy consumption.

Additionally, renewables' geographic and climate dependencies restrict their effectiveness in certain regions, necessitating a careful consideration of their suitability for different locations.

On top of this, storage technologies are still developing and have not yet reached the level required for large-scale deployment, making it challenging to store excess energy generated during peak times for use during periods of low production.

The need for space, particularly with regard to solar and wind turbines, further adds to the challenges of scaling up renewable energy installations. California's largest nuclear plant Diablo Canyon, occupies approximately 1000 acres and produces 16,477 GwH per year. In

22

comparison, you would need, on average, 527,264 acres of solar PV to produce the same amount.

A greener future with nuclear energy Nuclear power sets itself apart from intermittent renewables, and poses as a direct competitor to fossil fuels, by providing a reliable baseload electricity that operates 24/7. This characteristic ensures a stable power supply, effectively addressing the issue of intermittency that is commonly associated with solar and wind energy. For instance, France relies on nuclear power for at least 65% of its baseload electricity, unlike Ireland, which uses 71.5% fossil fuels.

Nuclear energy presents a significant advantage in reducing greenhouse gas emissions compared to fossil fuels. During electricity generation,It is practically carbonfree, making it a vital tool in combating climate change. In France, the average carbon dioxide emissions are as low as 40 grams per kilowatt-hour. In contrast, countries like Germany, which depend on coal for approximately 20-25% of their power, produce about 440 grams of carbon dioxide per kilowatt-hour.

Nuclear power also exhibits remarkable energy density. This exceptional efficiency not only reduces the reliance on resource extraction, but also minimises waste generation. Nuclear power plants are highly efficient, with an average efficiency rate of 91%, in comparison to the efficiency rates of 20% of solar energy and 30% of wind energy.

Mitigating climate change demands a swift transition to renewable energy sources. While renewables play a pivotal role, their power alone cannot meet global energy demands.

Nuclear energy presents itself as a crucial bridge toward a sustainable future. By providing low-carbon baseload power, nuclear energy complements renewables and helps meet energy requirements while we work on expanding renewable infrastructure. As we navigate the complexities of our energy transition, embracing nuclear energy alongside renewables positions us to accelerate change, protect the planet, and secure a sustainable energy future for generations to come.

Feature

23

Eco Urbanism: Finding our way back to nature

By Gabriela Gazaniga

The strive for advancement is a core part of human nature. Innovation is often found at the centre of community building and architecture.

For generations, modern architecture and urbanism have been understood as skyscraper concrete jungles, sleek metal and glass structures, and a displacement of the natural environment.

“multi-dimensional sustainable human communities within harmonious and balanced built environments” With climate change awareness at an all-time high, and sustainability measures everincreasing, efforts to restore the natural environment and ecosystems to urban areas are actively being made.

The term “ecourbanism” is thought to have been coined by the renowned architect Manuel Ruano in 1999. As per Ruano’s definition, ecourbanism refers to the “development of multi-

Photograph by Lily Hassett

Photograph by Siubhán Stockman

dimensional sustainable human communities within harmonious and balanced built environments”. In essence, the concept is understood as the integration of ecology alongside the building process rather than treating ecology and architecture as separate entities. In this way, ecology and urban design become one.

What Does Practice?

Ecourbanism

Look

Like

in

Although the term was coined in 1999, ecourbanism remains a broad topic.

Perhapsits vagueness allows for a more widereaching concept that invites various perspectives and ideas in its application.

For example, ecourbanist practices are not singular to architectural creativity but further include transport, water management, food production, recycling and more.

No feat(s) of ecourbanism has gained more global attention than Singapore’s ecoprojects. The first of Singapore’s projects, ‘Gardens by the Bay’, included a canopy of solar powered “supertrees”. These supertrees are 50 metre high mechanical marvels that utilise sunlight to generate solar energy, clean the air, and collect rainwater. The trees further absorb heat and regulate high temperatures, acting as a forest canopy for the streets below.

Feature

The second notable project from Singapore is its construction of an “eco-smart city”. In 2021, the country announced plans to construct a purpose-built eco-smart city directed at placing ecology at the forefront of urban development. This city will place the environment at the centre of its operation.

Trees and greenery will be in abundance, safe passages for the native wildlife will be included, automobile transportation will be underground, and the city will be reserved for pedestrians and cyclists. The city will further promote the use of electronic vehicles through installing a myriad of charging stations.

The eco-smart city will be built with the future in mind. Instead of catering to the normalcy associated with the current times, Chong Fook Long, the director of Singapore’s Housing and Development Board (HDB), has stated the city will both prepare for and propel the realities associated with a sustainable future.

Is this really the future?

Climate change is one of the foremost pressing issues of the 21st century and the future. The manner in which society operates with large carbon emissions, deforestation, and unsuitable waste management poses an extreme threat to the health and safety of both the Earth and its inhabitants.

Ecourbanism allows for the cultivation of the Earth’s natural environment, promoting a more

24

balanced and harmonious planet. It is unrealistic to expect humanity to revert advancements in order to evade climate change. What ecourbanism allows for is a divergent avenue to prosperity.

Rather than living in combat with the Earth, ecourbanism proposes utilising the natural world to promote advancement and propel humanity into the future in a more sustainable fashion.

Singapore’s ecourbanist projects offer an insight into the future of community and society. Both the ‘Gardens by the Bay’ and the eco-smart city act as a case study of ecourbanism in practice. Through the success of individual ecourbanism ventures, such a way of life will soon become normalised and sought after.

Humans require a healthy and thriving natural world in order to survive. The harm done to the environment through urbanisation and general neglect has only negatively impacted the quality of life across the world. Sickness, natural disasters, unpredictable weather patterns and more have all become a part of day to day life.

By working with the environment rather than against it, harmony with the Earth can be recovered.. Ecourbanism is not only the future, but the path to a more prosperous future.

Photograph by Ross McAulay

Feature

25

Green Hydrogen – Renewable Energy Lifeline or Fossil Fuel Pipedream?

By Kay Kasier

As governments around the world search for cheap, renewable energy, green hydrogen is becoming popular. Although hydrogen fuel is not new, creating it in an entirely clean process is a recent development. As huge fossil fuel companies begin to invest into green energy, we seek to answer the questions: Is it safe? Is it sustainable? And will hydrogen become the fuel that the world runs on?

Hydrogen as Fuel Right now, most things we use to create energy release pollutants into the atmosphere; burning coal, natural gas, oil, and petrol. In 2019, these destructive processes made up 84% percent of global energy use (Ritchie, Roser, 2022).

Although strides have been taken to make electricity grids green, there are some processes that prove difficult to electrify.

Namely, infrastructure that involves moving big, heavy things like lorreys, ships, etc. It can also be difficult to electrify more remote areas and to move them off of fossil fuel energy. That is where hydrogen fuel comes in.

Since hydrogen is a gas, all the current gasoriented infrastructure can more easily be adapted to include usable H2 without the initial cost associated with electrification.

Likewise, it can more easily be used to power large vessels without worrying about power cells or electricity storage. (Topolski et al., 2022).

Why all the Colors?

Hydrogen gas is a fuel type which can be classified into grey hydrogen, blue hydrogen, and finally green hydrogen. Because hydrogen is rarely found as pure H2, it normally exists in nature as a compound that has to be broken up. The colour of the hydrogen is based on how environmentally friendly its isolation process is.

The only natural by-product of hydrogen gas as a fuel alternative is water (H2O) as the pure hydrogen combines with oxygen in the air. The water created in the process can then be split to create more pure hydrogen and continue the cycle. That may sound like a perfect, infinite energy system, but problems occur when splitting the water into its separate components. Some extra energy needs to be added to split the compound.

“That may sound like a perfect, infinite energy system, but problems occur when splitting the water into its separate components” Grey Historically, the pure hydrogen isolation process has been done using natural gases.

Of 70 million metric tons of hydrogen produced world-wide, 99.6% comes from hydrocarbons and can be classified as grey (methane) or brown (coal) (Wood Mackenzie, 2020).

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Blue To offset emissions, sometimes the carbon is captured and stored resulting in “blue” hydrogen. This carbon capture technology is imperfect and expensive, so blue hydrogen has not become particularly sought-after.

Feature

26

Green Green hydrogen is entirely renewable, produced through solar-powered electrolysis.

Because the power used to jumpstart the electrolysis process produces no pollutants, this fuel is deemed “green.”

Why is it Important Now? As countries and companies all over the world initiate Climate Action Plans, many include clean energy deadlines and emissions reductions. As the world shifts to renewable energy, major fossil fuel companies have begun to look into clean energy that matches their current infrastructure and can be implemented cheaply: enter, green hydrogen.

Major investors in green hydrogen projects include BP, Shell, TotalEnergies, Repsol, and Italy’s Eni. In Ireland, interest groups like Hydrogen Mobility have been formed, made up of BOC Gases, Bord Gáis Energy, Toyota Ireland, CIÉ Group, Hyundai Ireland and government departments. Hydrogen Mobility has goals to have 80 hydrogen fuel stations in Ireland by 2030 (Hydrogen Mobility Ireland, 2023). Currently, there are two; one in Dublin and one in Belfast.

Will Hydrogen fuel overtake Electric?

Although some groups would like most vehicles to run on hydrogen, this is likely not the case.

Hydrogen gas may have a higher energy output than diesel, creating 33.6 kWh of usable energy per kg, as opposed to only 14 kWh per kg, but it also has to compete with electric vehicles (GenH2 Staff, 2022).

“Electricity can only take us so far– alternatives are needed” As EVs become more common and more charging stations are put in place, it seems to be winning the sustainable energy race.

Although hydrogen has its upsides, namely fuel cell range, gaseous infrastructure and short charging time, it may have gained traction too late in the face of an electrifying fleet.

Compressing, storing, and transporting hydrogen also proves to be expensive in a way that electricity is not. Both fuels have the downside of requiring rare earth minerals in

Photograph by Siubhán Stockman

their fuel footprints.

cells,

increasing

their

carbon

Will it Become the Golden Child of Renewables in Ireland?

The world energy economy is at a period of transition, investing globally over 1 trillion USD in renewables and grids in 2023 alone (IEA, 2023). Electricity can only take us so far– alternatives are needed. According to a report

by Aurora Energy Research, Ireland is uniquely suited to become a “powerhouse” of green hydrogen. This is due to its offshore wind energy farms. (Aurora Energy Research, 2023).

The Irish government has also come to recognize this advantage and possibility to provide the cheapest green hydrogen in Europe. In its 2023 Climate Action Plan, Ireland pledged to dedicate 2GW of its offshore wind energy to green hydrogen production. For Ireland, green hydrogen has the ability to achieve reduction goals while adding to the country’s energy export economy. With the financial backing and encouragement of oil and gas giants to reduce overall cost, green hydrogen could become a new favourite energy source. Will it take over every sector? Likely not. But, it will hopefully fill in the missing pieces of the renewable energy puzzle that electrification has left empty.

Feature

27

Photograph by Ross McAulay

On the Frontline of Climate Change: perspectives from different groups most affected right now

By Suki Weckert

The effects of climate change can be felt everywhere by now, be it the rising temperatures or the increase in extreme weather phenomena like drought, floods, and thunderstorms.

But while politics in industrialised nations often still concern themselves with the decline of the standard of living and the catastrophic effects that are to be expected if the climate isn’t protected, poorer countries and hotspots of the devastating effects of climate change are subjected to devastating conditions already.

If ‘environmental justice’ is the fair treatment of everyone when it comes to environmental issues, ‘environmental discrimination’ refers to discrimination against certain individuals and groups, especially when it comes to the exposure to environmental hazards (Clarkin, 2023).

Environmental discrimination can be found nationally and internationally. On a national scope, there is evidence that hazards like toxic waste dumps or factories are likely to be pushed towards underprivileged areas (Judy, 2018). In addition, many minorities are protected less well, because they have less access to resources and often can’t adapt (Judy, 2018). It makes sense that you can’t

move away from a toxic waste dump if you can’t afford the rent in a less hazardous area.

It also makes sense that you can’t mobilize legal support if you can’t pay a lawyer. Laws to ensure and intentions toward a more equal treatment of people exist, but in practice claiming one’s due is hard to manage, since to win a case, proof of a discriminatory intent (which is hard to get) is usually required (Ahlers, 2016). While new decisions for example in America also allow to make a case based on disparate impact regardless of intention, the legal system makes it difficult to sue, by limiting the rights of private people to make cases (Ahlers, 2016, Judy, 2018).

“96% of all deaths from natural disasters occurred in developing countries” On an international level, the situation looks even worse. While people in industrialised nations get to relish the positive economic impacts of an economic system that’s causing climate change in the first place, inhabitants of developing countries experience most of the drawbacks (Simms, 2001). In 2001 96% of all deaths from natural disasters occurred in developing countries (Simms, 2001), a figure that’s tough to swallow, and the situation kept and keeps on worsening with climate change advancing. Not only are these countries less well protected from and more affected by climate change, they also are the least contributors.

Feature

28

Cynically, while many developing countries are struggling to repay debts to as always, we should keep in mind that history shows that a system change is possible and emphasise that equality and a preservation of the environment we all need to survive are non-negotiable.

Measures must be taken to mitigate the immediate effects of environmental discrimination and to initiate a long-term revaluation of our economic goals and understanding of entitlement to global commons.

Environmental racism is tough to prove, but making equity a defined part of the planning process for environmental hazards could lead to more environmental justice (Ahlers, 2016, Judy, 2018). In addition, the creation of rights to sue and setting up oversight bodies that check for environmental discrimination could have a positive effect (Judy, 2018).

“Economic assessment and planning must be tailored to a country’s economic situation” Further, to appreciate the disparate impact of the effects of climate change, economic assessment and planning must be tailored to a country’s economic situation, which varies greatly between industrialised nations and developing countries. To do so, distortions, like

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Photograph by Siubhán Stockman

not valuing environmental costs (Simms, 2001) or valuing the products of subsistence farming on a level that doesn’t appreciate their importance to an economy (Chambwera and Stage, 2010), have to be removed to appreciate the actual impact of climate disasters on a country.

“A clean environment shouldn’t be a privilege, but a human right” A massive change of thinking is taking place when it comes to the question of who owes whom internationally. In a long-term process, developed countries must restructure their economies, not or not only developing countries. Like equity should be made a goal in land-planning, planning within the limits the environment presents us with must be embraced (Simms, 2001).

In addition, expectations about economic growth must be lowered to a more realist level to be able to balance our environmental budget (Simms, 2001). After all, a clean environment which makes life possible and enjoyable shouldn’t be a privilege, but a human right.

Feature

Challenges and Opportunities for sustainable agriculture in Ireland

by Méabh Breen

Ireland’s agricultural industry has long been cited as the ‘make or break’ factor when it comes to Ireland’s capacity to operate fully as a relatively sustainable country. In 2021, the agricultural sector was responsible for 37.5% of our greenhouse gas emissions. We have the second-lowest percentage of land farmed organically in the EU. With immense pressure from top-down regulations (i.e. the European Effort-Sharing regulation), as well as bottomup pressure from the increasingly climateconscious Irish people, there has been a huge trend towards the imposition of policies which aim to reduce the business-as-usual production capacity of Irish farms. These policies have, unsurprisingly, been met with push-back from many in the agricultural community and traditionally ‘pro-agri’ political parties. The push-back for some of these policies was so intense that it nearly caused a complete collapse of the government. It has appeared as though, in the mind of the farmer, ‘green’ agricultural policies must always involve a huge level of sacrifice on their part; indeed, these sacrifices are rarely accompanied by support from the government, and, more generally, these policies are rarely constructed in the holistic manner which allows for profitable, long-term sustainable farming. In a sense, it's no wonder these proposed policies are met with such pushback.

Undoubtedly, the uprooting of the modus operandi in any industry or practice will involve some initial sacrifice in the name of sustainability; however, the success of recent ‘green’ policies in the Irish government has suffered greatly from the ‘something must be done syndrome’ and a lack of support from the appropriate auxiliary policies. Policies should always attempt to account for all stakeholders, but in the case of many recent ‘green’ policies, the foundations are not rooted in any broader holistic approach to transitioning toward a sustainable economy and society, making them largely ineffective.

Last year’s proposed Green Party Policy, which aimed to reduce agricultural emissions by

29

30%, was met with much resistance from the agricultural community, Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael alike. Following an intense battle, the target was negotiated down to a 25% decrease. IFA President Tim Cullinane cited this policy as “a potentially devastating blow for Irish Farming.” The core of this anger seemed to result from both the lack of budgeting for farmers to enable this transition as well as the lack of a clear pathway by the government to implement such an ambitious policy. As of April 2023, the Agricultural Committee has still not specified how these targets should be met. While the high agricultural emissions should no doubt be addressed, it appears as though policy proposals for such a task are lacking in both realism and clarity. It is foolish, lazy, and counterproductive to impose ambitious environmental policies without also providing adequate support during their implementation Private car use is another issue that often dominates environmental discourse. It was only recently that Minister for Transport Eamonn Ryan came under fire after a set of models published by the National Transport Authority (NTA) indicated that stringent measures discouraging private car use would form the basis of his memo on reducing transport emissions, which was to be discussed at cabinet. Some of the standout measures include €10 congestion fees and increased parking fees.

While the environmental impacts of our over-reliance on cars needs to be addressed, these measures deter attention from what many see as the primary cause of this over-reliance: an underdeveloped, inaccessible public transport etwork. This raises the same concern as stringent agricultural policies— that is, people can only be expected to abide by progressive new practices when they have the necessary support to do so. In this case, people can only reduce their car usage if they are provided with a sufficient alternative- i.e. public transport- to fulfil the role their private car used to. Likewise, farmers can only be expected to implement new, environmentallyconscious farming practices if they are given proper compensation, be it in the form of temporary income supplementation, grants, education schemes or tax cuts, to name a few examples.

These two cases illustrate a broader issue with climate policy. It seems as though the vast majority of climate policy is largely isolated

Feature

from other forms of government policy, hindering its implementation and longevity.

This issue is, of course, reflected at the microlevel, as is discussed above; the 25% agricultural emission target is not accompanied by the necessary supporting policies to make these demands feasible for the average farmer. Clear, supportive subsidisation policies should be implemented alongside these ambitious targets.

Furthermore, resources should be put aside to fund education on sustainable farming practices in order to aid the agricultural community with this transition. At the macrolevel, policymakers should also endeavour to take a more ambitious and all-encompassing approach to the climate crisis; that is to say, sustainability should be incorporated into every sector of the economy and society, not just agriculture and transport. Only after policies which allow for the development of a truly sustainable economy become mainstream will environmentally friendly farming policies be incentivised. Research indicates that demand for organic, sustainable produce is expected to soar in the next few years. This increased demand presents an opportunity for farmers to diversify their product, engage in less carbon-intensive farming practices, and reap substantial monetary rewards. In the meantime, the government should endeavour to address the issue of below-cost selling in Irish supermarkets— a phenomenon which renders the horticulture business financially unattractive and therefore disincentivises this less carbon-intensive practice.

If the Irish government truly wishes for farmers to meet these ambitious targets, then they must do their part and enact policies that work in tandem with these goals. For their part, there is a whole host of measures that can be taken. For one, the government might consider incentivising the planting of clover on farmland, the practice of which has been known to reduce the need for artificial fertiliser, increase dry matter intake, and increase milk solids production. This would decrease the need for artificial fertilisers (a major contributor to our greenhouse emissions), increase the milk matter produced per cow (meaning fewer cows will be needed to produce the same output), and refute the ssumption that sustainable farming is inherently less profitable, as it has been estimated that the introduction of clover into farmland increases profit by €150/ha per year.

30

Were the government to distribute clover to farmers all over the country, it would be a small but significant step towards sustainability. This act is both a passive and relatively feasible contribution towards the reduction of emissions that has been largely overlooked as a possible widespread initiative by the government.

It would also be beneficial for the government to embark on a major marketing campaign aimed at educating members of the agricultural community about the benefits of sustainable farming and challenging the existing narrative around sustainability and financial losses. Less than half of producers feel that there is enough information about sustainable farming practices to enable them to reach the current ambitious targets; while this is a substantial figure, it is not particularly surprising. Though the introduction of clover is a relatively simple way to improve sustainability, most farmers do not have an immediate incentive to implement such measures; this is likely because many farmers are not aware of the benefits of such policies or, if they are, they are unwilling to make the initial sacrifices in the name of sustainability if future returns cannot be guaranteed.

Research has also shown that many farmers have refrained from investing in sustainable farming practices until they are certain they will be rewarded for such an action— either by the market or by the government. The introduction of an ambitious, realistic, and accessible education and marketing programme would show the agricultural community that they have the support of the government to implement more sustainable practices, and that they will be rewarded for doing so.

The policy opportunities outlined above will contribute toward a more sustainable Ireland in two ways: firstly, they will reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other environmentally damaging practices in the immediate future; secondly, and perhaps more importantly, these policies will challenge the idea that sustainability always involves a sacrifice on the part of farmers. They will show that profitability and sustainability are not mutually exclusive, especially when the quest toward sustainability is supported by robust and ambitious government policy which supports equally robust and ambitious sustainability targets.

Feature

Profiting Off the Climate Crisis: Disaster Capitalism Explained

By Ella McGill

Over 500 new millionaires emerged during the Covid-19 pandemic, according to BBC News.

500 new people became billionaires, 40 of which – Moderna CEO, Stéphane Bancel; BioNTech cofounder Uğur Şahin – did so by helping to fight the pandemic itself. We are all familiar with the ways poor people get poorer during catastrophes. In the case of Covid-19, many small businesses faced prolonged closures and restrictions to business. But how do people become millionaires in trying times?

What does it look like to profit off of chaos?

Journalist Naomi Klein calls opportunistic responses by governments and free markets to disastrous events ‘disaster capitalism’. As the climate crisis worsens, this term gains relevancy. The Atlantic writes that unliveable climate conditions will likely displace one billion people in the next year, and disaster capitalism ensures that protection is available only for those who can afford it.

“the crisis has been mobilised by corporate elites to push through corporate agendas” Free markets respond to crises by producing.

In the wake of any new disaster, products emerge to quell people’s worries – or to create more of them. Madrigal writes that climate change products range from useful items such as air purifiers and inflatable life-jackets, to personal thermostats for menopausal women, and placebo-effect paper masks for bushfires.

As climate conditions deteriorate, he writes, people can ‘reinterpret the problem as a personal, consumer one: “What do I need to survive the

31

biosphere today?” Taking a collective problem and solving it personally will not solve anything, he believes: ‘you can’t buy your way out of a warming planet’. Not only does individualising one’s approach to climate change not solve it, Madrigal believes that there are important moral dimensions to such decisions. Criticising Kim Kardashian and Kanye West for hiring private firefighters to defend their mansion against the Woolsey fire in California in 2019, Madrigal says that, particularly when governments are overwhelmed or public resources lacking, ‘richer people are going to get better service than poor people, across the board’.

Photograph by Alannah Hassett

Shifting our focus to societal elites, things take a more sinister turn. Klein believes many political elites are deeply enmeshed within the disaster-capitalism complex, such as how former Vice President of the US, Dick Cheney, was in the business of privatising the US military before coming into office, or how Rudy Giuliani and Paul Brenmer launched home security companies off the back of 9-11.

Similar dynamics played out during the Covid19 pandemic. Concerns were raised about insider trading when senators sold stocks after a White House briefing that forecast the market crash. Others feared governments were using the pandemic to enact their personal agendas, such as the announcement of relaxed environmental protocols in China during this time. Klein says, ‘We need political leaders who think disasters are bad. That, to me is a good starting premise’.

With regards to climate change, the crisis has been mobilised by corporate elites to push

Feature

through corporate agendas. Newsweek report that fossil fuel giant, Enbridge, operating the controversial Line 5 pipeline under the GreatLakes of North America, has cited the climate crisis, to which it, itself, contributes, as reason to up its prices to consumers. By ascertaining that its pipeline network has approximately 19 years of life left due to global warming, Ari Peskoe, director of the Electricity Law Initiative at Harvard Law School, says that Enbridge are ‘conceding that they can see the writing on the wall’. It’s ironic, he says: ‘They’re not going to be [needed] less than 20 years from today, and as a result they have to raise prices’.

The pipeline is backed by Ohio Republican Governor Mike DeWine, who by 2021 had received almost $400,000 from fossil fuel sector donations.

But how can we fight disaster capitalism? The answer, according to Madrigal, is to understand our individual place in the collectivity of catastrophe. Chapman says disasters can become ‘critical moments of radicalisation and collective action’. He says that, when disaster occurs, solidarity and mutual aid can step in to unite against capitalist beneficiaries.

Examples of this come from Miller and Liu’s study on the impacts of online learning on the existing social inequalities between white and POC students in North America. Miller and Liu found that, in true disaster capitalist fashion,

32

private firms responded to the Covid-19 pandemic by encouraging public investment in online learning platforms which systemically disadvantaged students of colour. The authors also discovered, however, that the concept of teacher-family-community solidarity could be used to oppose this. Teachers, families and communities could work together, to cocreate inclusive curricula and assessments. In addition, they could lobby of private sector support organisations to ensure equitable distribution of online-learning technology to all students.

Miller and Liu list successful attempts of community organisation against disaster capitalism, such as the California Dignity in Schools Campaign for racial justice in online education, and the successful co-construction of Tucson Unified School District curricula by drawing on community funds of knowledge, as opposed to sourcing supports privately. Such collective actions are needed to disrupt the present default: the disaster capitalist processes of consumer panic and elite manipulation.

Liu and Miller write that while educators and policy makers stress ‘getting back to normal’ in times of disaster, ‘going back is the wrong thing… normal is where the problems reside’.

‘Every disaster’, Chapman says, ‘brings us one step closer to saying enough is enough, we’re trying something different’. Coming together repeatedly in collective action, is the only way we can disrupt the current tyranny of the disaster capitalist market.

Photograph by Ross McAulay

Evergreen Trinity Editor

Lily Hassett

Deputy Editor Gabriela Gazaniga

Head Copyeditor Brídín Ní Fhearraigh-Joyce

Photo Editors Alannah Hassett Siubhán Stockman

Social Media Editor Aoife Prunty

Layout Editor Maisie Greener

Copyeditors

Siubhán Stockman Katherine Irwin Bonnie MacCann

Suki Weckert Daire Murray Isabelle Doyle

Staff Writers Ruaidhrí Saulnier Céleste Levingtston Katie Bowden Kay Kaiser

Rachel Smyth David Flanagan Nicole Hennessy Daire Murray

Join the Evergreen Team Evergreen is a student-led publication with the aim to increase climate literacy across campus and to provide like minded climate activists to share their thoughts and ideas.

We are always open to new contributors, photographers copyeditors!

Contact us if you want to get involved at: editorevergreentrinity@gmail.com Instagram: @evergreentrinity Twitter: @evergreenTCD Linkedin: Evergreen Trinity

Photograph by Emma Gallagher

Evergreen is Partially funded by and an Associate Publication of Trinity Publications.

Any questions or complaints must be sent to editorevergreentrinity@gmail.com Photography by Alannah Hassett