Ben Dolbear reviews the news that Germany will reform its meat industry in light of multiple coronavirus outbreaks directly linked to the sector. Photo by David Edkins In the last week of May, over ninety employees at a meat plant in Dissen, Lower Saxony, fell ill with COVID-19. That came after a similar plant in Coesfield found that over one fifth of its staff tested positive for the virus. An infectious problem that has become synonymous with the meat industry in recent months has now prompted the German federal government to take action. One of the reasons being given for such high rates of infection among meat plant employees is because of the poor conditions in which the often young men who come from abroad are forced to work. Approximately 90,000 people are employed to work in Germany's biggest meat plants, and many of them work and live in very cramped conditions, an impossible environment to practice any form of social distancing measures. Exploitative Migrant Labour One plant heavily affected by the virus is Westfleisch, located in North Rhine-Westphalia, where three quarters of tested staff members tested positive, the majority of whom were on low pay and originating from Eastern European nations such as Romania and Bulgaria. According to Szabolcs Sepsi, who works as a counsellor at DGB Fair Mobility, which 'assists in the enforcement of fair wages and working conditions for migrant workers from Central and Eastern European (CEE) countries on the German labour market', commented: "Workers in the German meat industry work very often through subcontractors, not for the slaughterhouses themselves, and the working conditions at these subcontractors are often very, very bad." Squalid Working Conditions The typical conditions for a migrant worker who is employed by a meat plant's subcontractor are likely to include sharing a bedroom with three others, Sepsi continued. As a result of the shocking revelations, Chancellor Angela Merkel's federal government has announced that as of 2021, slaughterhouses must employ their staff directly, rather than use subcontractors. It was employment minister Hubertus Heil who led the presentation of the reforms, which also include increased fines for firms in breach of working time directives. Agriculture Minister Julia Klöckner backed the draft legislation which must soon be presented to the German Parliament, saying that, 'The delegation of responsibility to subcontractors comes at the expense of many workers. There's an obvious need for adjustment here'. As recently as December last year, DW, a German public broadcasting service, conducted an investigation into slaughterhouse conditions in Germany for both animals and employees, entitled 'The high cost of cheap meat' with the accompanying hashtag #AnimalRights. It found that unpaid overtime and shifts exceeding sixteen hours were commonplace in the industry. You may also like: Factory Farming is Risking Future Pandemics We are a socio-ethical impact initiative advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear reviews the latest GWEC annual report. Photo by Aaron Staes The annual Global Wind Report from the Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) has revealed positive progress in some of the world's largest economies, with China and the United States leading the wind energy revolution. The headline of the report is undoubtedly the impressive fact that last year, wind has its second best year in the history of renewable energy, boasting a nineteen percent increase in wind installations between January and December. This amounts to a surge of over sixty gigawatts of energy globally, equivalent to double the demand for electricity in the entire United Kingdom. This means that total capacity for wind generation now stands at 651 gigawatts, which is an unprecedented 10% growth since the turn of last decade. Notable among new installations was offshore wind, with one in ten new wind farms being built away from land. This type of installation benefits from the sea breeze effect, and is thought to be more efficient that onshore wind generation because of the enhanced reliability of wind direction and speed. The report also recommends the utilisation of emerging technological solutions such as hybridisation and green hydrogen to open up uncultivated opportunities within the sector. The world's top five markets for wind energy in 2019 were China, the US, United Kingdom, India, and Spain, which put together accounted for over seventy percent of new global installations. However, the report is not all good news. The Coronavirus pandemic, which has claimed over sixty thousand lives and has put over one third of people across the globe on effective lockdown, has led to lower productivity in the energy industry. While 2019 was until the end of the year on track to be a record year for wind with expected new gigawatts of capacity exceeding 76 gigawatts, the virus meant that the resulted fell short. In light of this unexpected shock to the global economy, the GWEC will soon publish a revised five year plan for 2020-2024. Despite this, the Council has alternatively suggested that the outbreak could herald a new beginning for renewable energy, with national governments preparing economic stimulus packages that it is hoped will include measures to support the wind sector. You might also like: Sweden Goes Coal-Free Two Years Ahead of Schedule We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. |To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear takes an early look at the under-reported publication of the new UK initiative that sets to see major changes to our transport network. | Innovation and Sustainability Photo by Yoss Cinematic In a landmark report on carbon emissions, Transport Secretary Grant Shapps has said that our first port of call for travelling in the near future will be a 'cost-effective and coherent public transport network', rather than our cars. The 80-page document that has left climate advocates astounded, titled 'Decarbonising Transport: Setting the Challenge', sets out ambitious plans for achieving a net-zero economy in the UK. One such measure being proposed is that all personal vehicles will be carbon neutral, with technological advancements, 'including new modes of transport and mobility innovation', leading to changes in the way such vehicles are used. Too Little, Too Late? Despite the move in June 2019 by the UK Government to become the first major global economy to be net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, advocates have highlighted the urgency of the climate crisis which will not wait until 2050 to have a drastic impact on the way we live our lives. Some have even warned that the Conservative government could exploit the use of international carbon credits to shift the burden of emissions abroad. The biggest headline of the report comes in its Foreword, in which the minister writes that: 'Public transport and active travel will be the natural first choice for our daily activities. We will use our cars less and be able to rely on a convenient, cost-effective and coherent public transport network'. Cycling campaigner Roger Geffen reacted to the release of the report, telling the BBC that, 'Grant Shapps [is] the first government minister in the UK to talk about traffic reduction since John Prescott tried (and failed) to achieve this aim in the late 1990s. There are some holes in the document, but it suggests that the government really does seem to be taking climate change seriously'. But campaigners are worried about the lack of clear action on aviation pollution, which the industry claims can be solved through technology, something doubted by environmentalists. A New Role for Rail Much of the document, released on 27th March, 2020, focuses on passenger rail to alleviate the commuter impact on the fastening pace of climate change. It emphasises that travelling by train is, 'a relatively low-carbon form of transport, and is one of the most efficient ways of moving high volumes of people into city centres', pointing out that last year passenger figures rose to a record of 1.759 billion journeys. It is hoped that further public investment in the sector will enhance the accessibility of such a mode of travel. The Department of Transport admits that there is, 'considerable uncertainty' over the future of transport emissions, but hopes that a combination of changing consumer behaviour, technological advancements, and an injection of public funds will set the UK on the right trajectory to achieving net-zero in the coming decades. We advocate for societal-ethical journalism and change, acknowledging topics that matter. Covering sustainability, climate change, environmental, nature, health, nutrition, mental health, mindfulness, sentience, science and ethical consciousness. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To advocate for a better tomorrow, consider joining for £1 today.

Kate Byng-Hall investigates the recent developments of anti-racism demonstrations and some of the flash points involving some of the UK's controversial sites and monuments. Photo by Ehimetalor Akhere Unuabona On the 7th of June, a 125-year-old statue of wealthy slave-trader Edward Colston was pulled from its plinth by protestors on Colston Avenue, Bristol, and thrown into the harbour where his boats used to dock. The act, hailed by some and condemned by others, occurred during one of the Black Lives Matter protests which have been taking place across the UK after the death of black man George Floyd at the hands of a white police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota on the 25th of May. During the incident, Avon and Somerset Police made the decision not to intervene in order to avoid a “very violent confrontation” , and allowed protestors to roll the statue through the streets before pushing it into the water. The Home Secretary Priti Patel has responded to the statue’s removal by calling it “utterly disgraceful”, stating that “it's not for mobs to tear down statues”. Leader of the Labour Party Keir Starmer has also said that protestors pulling down the statue was “completely wrong”, but said that it should have been officially removed “a long, long time ago”. The Prime Minister Boris Johnson weighed in, tweeting that the protests had been “subverted by thuggery” through non-peaceful behaviour such as the statue being torn down, saying that it is a “betrayal of the cause they purport to serve”. This symbolic event, whether orderly or not, has kickstarted a movement campaigning for the dismantling of statues and monuments commemorating Britain’s imperial and colonial past across the UK for good. Unpleasant Reminders From the mid-17th century until the Act for the Abolition of the Slave Trade was signed in 1807, Britain used slavery as a means to build its Empire and wealth, making it one of the leading traders in the world. The trade impacted all aspects of the country, and this is reflected in the naming of streets and buildings, as well as various monuments commemorating key figures who pioneered the industry. This trend is now being criticised for applauding rather than denouncing Britain’s imperial past. Road names around Britain are a reminder of imperialism, with Penny Lane in Liverpool, made famous by the Beatles’ song, being originally named after slave ship owner James Penny. The namesake of Cochrane Street , one of the main roads in Glasgow, is Andrew Cochrane, a tobacco magnate who made his fortune thanks to the slave trade, but BLM protestors have informally renamed it Sheku Bayoh Street after a black man who died in police custody in 2015. There are also several statues across the country dedicated to men whose achievements were facilitated by slavery, such as one depicting Cecil Rhodes , a well-known imperialist, at Oriel College in Oxford which campaigners have been trying to get removed for years. The college has justified keeping the statue erect by saying that the figure “was a reminder of the complexity of history and of the legacies of colonialism” in Britain. The New Britain Despite some protestation, the remnants of imperialism and colonialism in the country are beginning to be acknowledged, and in some cases, erased. After protestors pulled down the Edward Colston statue, a nearby school named after him, Colston Girls’ School , has removed a statue of him, and is considering changing its name entirely. Colston Music Hall in the city has also announced that it will switch to a new name in the autumn in order to disassociate it from the slave trade. After the incident in Bristol, London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan has proved that the issue must be taken seriously. He has launched the Commission for Diversity in the Public Realm to review the diversity and propriety of the capital’s monuments, as he has said that statues and street names which commemorate slave traders “should be taken down” . “It is an uncomfortable truth that our nation and city owes a large part of its wealth to its role in the slave trade. While this is reflected in our public realm, the contribution of many of our communities to life in our capital has been wilfully ignored” – Sadiq Khan , Mayor of London One such monument has already been removed, as the statue of slave-trader Robert Milligan was pulled down from its plinth outside the Museum of London on the 10th of June. If this trend continues, many more will follow across the country. Khan has additionally pledged that new memorials will be erected to reflect the multiculturalism of the UK, such as ones for Stephen Lawrence, the Windrush generation and a National Sikh War Memorial. Meanwhile, replacements for the Edward Colston statue are already being proposed, with over 18,000 locals suggesting that a memorial be unveiled of Paul Stephenson , the black man who organised the Bristol Bus Boycott in 1963 to protest the ban on ethnic minorities working on the city’s buses, and Banksy proposing that the original statue be replaced with the addition of a number of protestors tearing it down. Whatever changes are made, it is imperative that the UK recognises the aggressively racist flaws in its past, and holds itself accountable rather than brushing such flaws under the carpet once again.Britain is a rich and diverse nation, and there is no longer a place for affirmation of discrimination here. We strive to inspire socio-ethical impact and acknowledgement. Advocating for topics that matter. Stay informed by following us today .  A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Kate Byng-Hall investigates the cause of the civil unrest spreading across america and takes a closer look at some key factors. Photo by Clay Banks On Monday 25th May, 46-year-old George Floyd was murdered in Minneapolis, Minnesota after a police officer knelt on his neck, suffocating him. The incident was recorded by an onlooker and has been viewed millions of times. Derek Chauvin, 44, pressed his knee against Floyd’s neck for 8 minutes and 46 seconds after he was detained for allegedly paying for cigarettes using a forged $20 bill. After 6 minutes, Floyd became unresponsive, but Chauvin did not move his knee despite fellow officers being unable to find Floyd’s pulse. He was taken to hospital, but was pronounced dead an hour later. Chauvin was charged with third-degree murder and manslaughter on Friday, four days after the incident, but many have criticised the charge’s leniency as Floyd can be clearly heard saying “I can’t breathe” and “don’t kill me” while he was being restrained. Three other officers present during the arrest are awaiting charges. Chauvin has eighteen previous complaints made against him with the Minneapolis Police Department's Internal Affairs, while Tou Thao, another officer present, has received six complaints, and was part of an ‘excessive force’ lawsuit in 2017 after he arrested a man, despite having no reason to, and proceeded to beat him. Both officers were permitted to continue serving despite their previous misdemeanours. This murder of a black man at the hands of a white police officer has led to widespread outrage as yet another addition to a long list of instances in which African-American men have been systematically exposed to more extreme police brutality and infringements on their human rights than their white counterparts. Protests Escalate The response to this police violence has escalated from peaceful protests to dangerous and destructive rioting in more than thirty states across America. “The way he died was senseless. He begged for his life. He pleaded for his life. When you try so hard to put faith in this system, a system that you know isn't designed for you, when you constantly seek justice by lawful means and you can't get it, you begin to take the law into your own hands” – Christopher Harris, a friend of Floyd’s Curfews have been implemented in several areas to avoid unrest, including a Los Angeles curfew of 8pm to 5:30am, and beginning as early as 5pm in Seattle. However, these restrictions have been widely disregarded, with protesters taking to the streets in fury. Across the country, shops have been looted, police cars have been set alight, and buildings have been vandalised and set ablaze. Twenty police vehicles were burned in one night of rioting in New York. Protesters have been launching fireworks towards riot police, with officers responding with rubber bullets and tear gas. Rioters even threw explosive Molotov cocktails at police forces in Las Vegas. One person was shot dead during gunfire in Indianapolis after he was suspected of looting. Hundreds of arrests have been made so far. The National Guard, the US’s primary reserve military force, has been enlisted to protect the White House and assist the police in eleven states so far. Trump’s Response The President Donald Trump’s response to the tragedy has provoked even more uproar. He initially offered condolences after Floyd’s death, but was quick to condemn protestors against his murder as “thugs”. He went on to threaten rioters with violence in a tweet which states that “when the looting starts, the shooting starts”. Twitter chose to censor the post as it incites violence, the latest source of friction between the President and the social media platform. Trump has also confirmed that the American Army is on standby to take to the streets to quell violence if necessary, a fact which has proved to aggravate protesters. Black Lives Matter George Floyd’s appalling murder has led to an outpouring of support for the Black Lives Matter movement, which was founded in 2013 after a policeman was acquitted for the shooting of black teenager Trayvon Martin in Florida. Donations have also flooded in from around the world to various organisations supporting African Americans and civil rights organisations, as well as the Memorial Fund for Floyd’s family. An online petition calling for a just sentencing of the police officers involved in Floyd’s death has collected almost nine million signatures. This has been a wake-up call for many of us, exposing just how blatant and alarming police brutality against black people in America still is. It’s now up to us, people of all races and nationalities, to educate ourselves on what we can do to support ethnic minorities and oppose systematic racism wherever we can. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Nick Webb investigates the latest research suggesting theirs a second front when it comes to battling global pandemics. Photo by David Lee At a time when a large portion of the population of the world is on lockdown due to the coronavirus, new research has been published showing how levels of air pollution can now be seen as another “pandemic”. Research published by the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) in their publication Cardiovascular Research shows how on average, lives are shortened by almost three years worldwide due to different sources of air pollution. The findings show that air pollution is responsible for shortening life on a greater scale than wars and violence, diseases such as Malaria and HIV/AIDS, and smoking. Using new methods, the researchers measured the effects of different sources of air pollution on death rates, and its effects on different categories of disease. The study showed how globally, air pollution was the cause of 8.8 million premature deaths in 2015 alone, and that cardiovascular diseases caused by air pollution are responsible for 43% of cases. The Impact of Pollution Professor Jos Lelieveld, lead author on the research paper, and of the Cyprus Institute said: “It is remarkable that both the number of deaths and the loss in life expectancy from air pollution rival the effect of tobacco smoking and are much higher than other causes of death.” A co-author on the paper, Professor Münzel, has said that the impact of air pollution on overall public health was much higher than expected, and that it is a global phenomenon. The research calls on policy-makers to pay more attention to this, as the study also separated avoidable causes of air pollution such as smoking and other human-generated sources from natural pollution (wildfires, desert dust emissions). They believe that air pollution, which has been neglected by cardiologists looking at ill health, should be included as a significant risk factor along with smoking, diabetes, high blood pressure, and cholesterol in guidelines on preventing heart syndromes and heart failure. “About two-thirds of premature deaths are attributable to human-made air pollution, mainly from fossil fuel use; this goes up to 80% in high-income countries. Five and a half million deaths worldwide a year are potentially avoidable” – Prof Münzel The paper shows how levels of pollution are not evenly spread across the world’s population centres, and how different regions experience different levels of emissions. East Asia has the highest expectancy of loss of life, due to high levels of avoidable emissions and a large population; there is up to three or four years of lost life in these countries. Europe and America’s 1-2 years of lost life expectancy could be largely prevented by phasing out burning fossil fuels. This paper is the first to break down the connection between levels of emissions and life expectancy data in this way, considering population density, ages and other risk factors. What Can be Done? While the research paper shows a much higher than expected impact on loss of life on the population, to the extent that the authors have used the term “pandemic”, they do also postulate that much of the pollution causing the increasing loss of life is avoidable. Lowering levels of smoking and reducing the burning of fossil fuels across the world would decrease the number of harmful particles in the atmosphere and the average life expectancy worldwide would increase by a year. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Shaun Britton observes what we need to know before commencing the 'New Normal'. Photo by Daria Shevtsova As many public places lay quiet, as buildings that held host to hundreds stand with closed doors, Nature continues - and if anything, has benefited greatly from a brief respite from our relentless pursuits. Through all that has unfolded in recent months, the cycles of nature still wax and wane as they always have. That should, one would hope, be a notable observation - that through our actions and abstinence Nature continues to walk forward. Now more than ever, it seems pertinent to remember that we are visitors not owners. We are a part of the world, of course, but we are most certainly guests - not governors. Whatever this ‘new normal’ is, will be and does or should involve, one thing is clear if we wish to make a better future - we should be very clear on what the ‘new normal’ should not be. As we consider how to re-engage the economy, our priorities in overcoming the trials of recent months are in danger of becoming staggeringly misaligned. Economic security is obviously of great importance, yet there can be no economy without ecology, no profit without planet. Our endeavours are, as they aways have been, reliant on the environment. The extent to which we are able to have a functioning economy, is in direct correlation with the capacity of the environment to sustain it. One must dictate the other, and we have for much time now got them round the wrong way. The Forgotten Partner It could be argued that the current crisis, when one understands its origins, arose from our fractured relationship to the natural world. As with so many similar crises, one would be hard pushed to ignore perhaps the most common thread, which is our treatment and use of animals. Animals remain one of our most tangible and tactile windows to the rest of nature. How we treat them speaks volumes. Put simply, our use and treatment of animals can be observed to be in most if not all cases, unnecessary, and our treatment of them is both questionable and unconscionable. It is from the industries built up around this exploitation of animals and our ability to overpower them, that such a large portion of our major crises have arisen. Unprecedented recent events will sadly become commonplace if we continue to perceive our station as above that of those we share the Earth with, and indeed, the Earth itself. In our reasoning and recovery, we might consider to foster our humility and self management as a foundational approach, rather than as a post-impact regretfulness. As we have seen from recent acts of kindness and ingenuity from all walks of life, we have the capacity to act unprompted to support the many in need of help, and indeed, those who help us, while those in positions of power may leave us waiting and wanting. Whilst we have been away from loved ones, isolating or quarantining ourselves, most have recognised what is most important to us when our activities are restricted. Many have rediscovered or restrengthened a keenness to help others, to be with those they love, even in the simplest of activities. Additionally, as amply demonstrated, protecting the parts of our infrastructures that sustain our societies, regardless of whether the end user is rich, poor, young or old, has experienced a renewal and restrengthening. The Real New Normal The term 'new normal' despite entering the common lexicon with some fanfare, carries under its whimsical connotations an alarming lack of concreteness and a curious ambiguity. That is, in part, due to our still trying to understand how daily life will operate in light of recent events. However, that ambiguity is also an awareness of opportunity. These are unprecedented times for many, but unprecedented times naturally usher in new definitions and changes of direction. As we step back from the speeding train of our financial pursuits and personal hurrying, many are beginning to contemplate that a new normal should not just be what goes on day by day, but about what we ultimately accept. Normality becomes a benchmark, a systemic green light that opens the door for similar activity. We can approach the fabled new normal with a bane, or a brush. We can co-opt, or co-create. Whichever we do, if we are too become the people we truly wish to be, and create a future we are capable of, we must allow ourselves to remember what we are so close to losing: that we are the brush strokes in a picture much wider than our place on the canvas. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear on the demise of Virgin Atlantic instigated by a slump in demand thanks to the COVID-19 pandemic. Photo by Julia Khalimova Virgin Group has opened a month-long round of emergency conversations with staff as over 3,000 jobs are set to be permanently cut as demand for international flights drops by 94%, with numbers not expected to fully recover until at least 2023. With a dark future looking likely for Virgin Atlantic, majority owner Richard Branson, who is estimated by Forbes to be worth over £4.5 billion, has made a plea to the British government to prop up the firm while it gets back on its feet. Virgin, a brand initially associated with music records, launched its first flight across the Atlantic Ocean on 22nd June, 1984, after Branson saw opportunity to take on state-controlled British Airways after free marketeer Margaret Thatcher took over the premiership of the UK government. In more recent years, Virgin Atlantic has struggled, and in 2014 the firm registered pre-tax losses of £174.7m whilst net debt stood at over half a billion pounds. But earlier this month, 69-year-old Branson approached the British state, asking for a bailout of £500 million, offering his private Caribbean island as collateral. Branson's optimistic request is likely initiated by the generous comparable loans being made to airlines in the United States, with the New York Times reporting that companies will receive over $25 billion in the coming months. The Impact of Fossil Fuels But climate advocates have argued that billionaires like Branson should focus on cutting their carbon emissions rather than increasing unsustainable capacity. Legal representatives for environmental charity Possible have taken the rare step of writing to Conservative Chancellor Rishi Sunak asking him to promise that any funding going into the aviation industry has conditions attached to ensure that there are 'meaningful emissions cuts' from planes. In addition to environmental concerns, economic observers have pointed out that Branson has paid no form of personal income tax in the United Kingdom since his move to the British Virgin Islands over fourteen years ago, with some arguing that some of the business moguls personal wealth should go towards saving Virgin. Some have also pointed out the irony in Branson's requests to the government after one decade old comments emerged showing that he once opposed state bailouts in the aviation sector. Branson said: 'I think other companies [not banks] need to stand on their own two feet, and the weak ones need to go to the wall'. In 2006, advocates for the environment criticised Virgin Atlantic for its initiative to fight climate change by planting trees to offset emissions released by limousines driving customers to the airport. At the time, campaigners said the move would be 'barely a drop in the ocean' when looked at in the context of Virgin's fleet of 33 aircraft. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Emma Reynolds reveals more about the new initiative that sees Luxembourg become the first country to introduce free public transport. Photo by Josh Hild On the 29th February 2020, the government of Luxembourg abolished fares for trains, trams and buses. This change was introduced with the aim of reducing congestion and pollution in the country, and to support members of the public who are on a lower living wage. The only exception will be for first-class train tickets, which will cost €3. The government is hoping that this new legislation will encourage 20% more people to travel using public transport. They are aiming to reduce the number of cars on the road by 15% by 2025. Due to Luxembourg’s tiny size, measuring only 2586 km², it has been difficult to keep up with the amount of daily commuters, and controlling the congestion they cause. There are almost 625,000 inhabitants in the country, and around 214,000 of them travel to work every single day, causing large traffic jams. Luxembourg has the highest greenhouse gas emissions per capita in the EU, with over half of the emissions originating from transport. The transport minister of Luxembourg, François Bausch, made a statement explaining the government’s decision, saying that “for people with low incomes or the minimum wage, for them it’s really substantial, the main reason is to have better control of mobility, and then the side reason is clearly also environmental issues.” The ground-breaking steps Luxembourg is taking to innovate travel in their country are continuing in the coming years, with plans due to be finished by 2030. The government has had plans to invest €3.9 billion into railways, upgrade the bus and tram network to introduce more electric vehicles, and add more park-and-ride sites to the border, all in an effort to reduce congestion as well as emissions. The idea of bringing free transport into every single country in Europe and the UK would be incredible, both for economic and environmental reasons. It would encourage more people to commute using buses and trains, pulling cars off of the road, reducing congestion, and decreasing emissions. It would also inspire people to engage in more exercise, since people will walk to their local station or bus stop in order to use public transport. It could also be beneficial for wellbeing, as people would be in contact with more people every day, which could allow people to talk more and feel less alone. Such a transition would not be straightforward, but drastic change is needed in order to change how people travel if we really want to combat climate change and reduce urban pollution. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear reviews the progressive decision by various European capitals to lobby the European Union in placing the Green New Deal at the heart of the bloc's coronavirus recovery plan. Photo by Markus Spiske Environment ministers from France and Germany have joined growing calls in Europe for a fast-track prioritisation of the EU's popular and ambitious Green New Deal. The ministers co-signed an opinion piece, published in Climate Home News, in which they write that a much-needed economic recovery after the continent sees off the worst of the coronavirus pandemic must not come at the cost of a long term plan for the climate, which is undergoing unprecedented strain due to rising levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, coupled with deforestation and mass agricultural farming of meat. Seventeen national officials signed the article, including Dan Jørgensen, Minister for Climate, Energy and Utilities of Denmark, and Eric Wiebes, Minister of Economic Affairs and Climate Policy of the Netherlands. The political leaders, well-known across the continent for lobbying in favour of greater climate protections across the bloc of 27 nations, argue that building momentum to fight the 'persisting climate and ecological crisis' must stay high on the political agenda, in an apparent nod to climate advocates such as Greta Thunberg and Extinction Rebellion, who have succeeded in introducing the pressing nature of the climate crisis to the public consciousness over the past few years. Citing the rapid response by governments across the globe to COVID-19, which saw entire economies closing down for weeks on end and citizens mandated to remain indoors in a bid to slow the spread of the virus, the ministers say that early action is always essential, including on the climate. This means that the EU must work in solidarity to fight biodiversity loss and climate change. Late last month, the heads of state and government of EU members invited the European Commission, headed by President Ursula von der Leyen, to start working on a recovery plan from coronavirus, which integrated ideas on the 'green transition and digital transformation', a move welcomed by the signatories of the letter. 'We should withstand the temptations of short-term solutions in response to the present crisis that risk locking the EU in a fossil fuel economy for decades to come.' The EU's Green Deal is a growth strategy which includes the pledge to achieve carbon neutrality across the continental bloc by 2050, as well as substantial funding for businesses to engage in environmental investment. According to EU climate boss Frans Timmermans, clean energy sources also have a major role to play in the revolutionary project. Earlier in April, the European Commission launched a public consultation on its radical Renewed Sustainable Finance Strategy as part of a package to pump one trillion euros into European projects making economies more sustainable for the climate's future. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Katie Byng-Hall discusses the latest call to action by leading scientists to revive our planet's oceans before it is too late. Photo by Valdemaras D. A group of leading global scientists has suggested, in a new review published in Nature magazine, that there is a chance that the world’s oceans could be restored by 2050, but only if we take drastic action immediately. One of the report’s authors, Professor Carlos Duarte of the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology in Saudi Arabia, says that, 'we know what we ought to do to rebuild marine life, and we have evidence that this goal can be achieved within three decades [...] Indeed, this requires that we accelerate our efforts, and spread them to areas where efforts are currently modest'. The report has concluded that the oceans are more resilient than we might expect, but they cannot withstand the abuse humanity is subjecting them to for much longer. Currently, at least one-third of fish stocks are over-fished, one third to half of vulnerable marine habitats have been lost, and a substantial proportion of all coastal oceans suffer from pollution, eutrophication, oxygen depletion, and ocean warming. In 2015, it was predicted that the amount of rubbish in the oceans could double by 2025. All of these factors must be rectified if the oceans are to return to their former glory. A Ray of Hope The prospects for marine life have not all been disheartening in recent years. The proportion of marine species considered to be close to extinction by the IUCN dropped from 18% in 2000 to 11.4% in 2019, with sea otters in western Canada rising in numbers from just dozens forty years ago to thousands now, and both grey seal and cormorant populations are rocketing in the Baltic Sea. The United Nations has launched its Sustainable Development Goals initiative, setting out a set of aims to be completed globally to save the planet. Goal 14 is to 'conserve and sustainably use the oceans, seas and marine resources for sustainable development', and it is hoped that the UN taking action will encourage member states around the world to follow suit. 'Science gives us reason to be optimistic about the future of our oceans, but we are not currently doing enough in the UK or globally' – Prof Callum Roberts, marine conservation biologist at the University of York. Plan of Action Nature’s report suggests that we should focus on restoring nine key aspects of ocean health in the restoration mission, namely: salt marshes, mangroves, seagrasses, coral reefs, kelp, oyster reefs, fisheries, megafauna and the deep ocean. It proposes that we approach the clean-up by taking fundamental action in protecting species, harvesting wisely and restoring habitats such as coral reefs. According to Dr Duarte, we are all currently 'failing to embrace this challenge, and in so doing condemning our grandchildren to a broken ocean unable to support good livelihoods is not an option'. Making Waves Scientists have predicted that the restoration of the oceans would cost roughly $10-20 billion per year until 2050 to rebuild marine life fully, but the eventual return rate on this investment would be around 10 times this. Revenue generated by ocean industry already constitutes 2.5% of the world’s GDP, and with the ‘ocean economy’ expected to double to £2 trillion by 2030, investment in its future seems sensible. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear discusses the latest development in the green energy revolution sweeping across Western Europe. Photo by Unknown | Pixabay Sweden, which had previously pledged to become coal-free by 2022, earlier this month closed its final coal-fired plant, making it the third coal-free country in Europe, after only Belgium and Austria. The coal-fired plant, located in Hjorthagen, eastern Stockholm, and owned by power utility Stockholm Exergi, closed its doors for the last time in mid-April. This meant that the co-generation plant KVV6, which houses two boiler rooms, became the very last coal-fired plant in the Nordic state to shut, enabling the Swedish energy firm to meet its ambitious target of a coal-free economy by 2022 over two years early. Stockholm Exergi, jointly owned by the City of Stockholm and Finnish private energy firm Fortum Oyj, now say that the plan is to carry on towards the path of climate neutrality, specifically by expanding renewable energy generation. Challenges Ahead However, the company has expressed concern at a lack of progress in this regard, and as a major supplier of heat and electricity within the Swedish capital, there is now growing pressure on bosses to explain how supply will continue to meet demand without fossil fuels. In a promising attempt to alleviate concerns from both consumers and climate advocates, Exergi has partnered up with electricity firm Ellevio, an electricity distribution company which dominates the energy markets in 35 of Sweden's 290 municipalities, to secure the success of renewable energy across Scandinavia. Building on this groundbreaking energy partnership, Stockholm Exergi has also made a rare and welcome pledge to not only become carbon neutral in the near future, but to 'create negative emissions', too. According to Chief Executive of the firm Anders Egelrud: 'Since Stockholm was almost totally fossil-dependent 30-40 years ago, we have made enormous changes and now we are taking the step away from carbon dependence and continuing the journey towards an energy system entirely based on renewable and recycled energy'. A Continent of Progress Just four years ago, Belgium became the first European nation to rid itself of coal, the dirtiest fossil fuel on Earth, accounting for over 0.3C of the 1C increase in global average temperatures; this means that coal is the single largest source of global temperature rises in the past century. Campaign director of lobbying group Europe Beyond Coal Kathrin Gutmann has predicted that the continent will soon see the demise of coal entirely, a move which she says 'will repay us in kind with improved health, climate protection and more resilient economies'. According to national governments, France is on track to become Europe's fourth coal-free nation in 2022, which Portugal following soon after in 2023. The UK has said that its final coal-fired plant will close at some point in the following year. Local politicians of all stripes across Stockholm have praised this landmark achievement, with financial mayor for the City of Stockholm, Anna König Jerlmyr, stating, 'the fact that Stockholm Exergi is choosing to phase out the coal is already welcomed, as it is in line with the city’s conversion to a sustainable and fossil-free Stockholm'. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear delves into the history of single-use plastics within construction, and how one Merseyside builder plans to overcome the sector's reliance on the synthetic compound. Photo by Chormatograp This year, builders across the United Kingdom will contribute 50,000 tonnes of plastic waste to the environment, much of which will end up in our oceans. But Neal Maxwell has an ambitious plan to get this figure down to zero by 2040. There have been impressive improvements on the recycling front in construction over the past few decades thanks to considerable efforts by industry leaders to improve sustainability but despite this, more than 40% of plastic waste from UK construction continues to be sent to landfill and creating thousands of tonnes of plastic waste that will not decompose for over 1000 years, causing hazardous threats to natural wildlife and the atmosphere. According to UK Construction Online, the four biggest contributors to plastic waste in the industry by far are: plastic packaging, unused materials from over-ordering and off-cuts, improper storage and handling, and workforce food packaging and utensils. As a result, the construction industry is second only to the packaging sector in terms of plastic waste, contributing a notable proportion of the UK's 3.7 million tonnes of plastic waste annually. A Wasteful Industry Disappointingly, despite recent progress on recycling, the future continues to look bleak for waste in construction. Allan Sandilands, a principal consultant at a waste reduction non-profit consultancy Resource Futures, has admitted: “There is not a huge drive to tackle single-use plastics in the construction industry. It can be a difficult sell.” Whilst stressing that much of the plastic in construction is embedded permanently in buildings and does not therefore contribute to short-term landfill waste, Sandilands has said that much single-use plastic continues to go to waste, largely in part to the absence of any financial incentives to act in a more sustainable fashion. But Neal Maxwell, along with fellow researchers from the University of Liverpool, see hope for the construction industry, and have drawn up plans to push the curve of plastic waste down to an ambitious zero in just two decades. An Action Plan Working alongside industry-leading architect Dr Gareth Abrahams from Liverpool's School of Environmental Science, Maxwell's team have drawn up a four-point charter that they hope, if given backing by the UK government, will become enshrined in legislation; Comprehensive phasing out of paint containing plastic. The establishment of a 'traffic light' style guide to warn purchasers which paints contain plastic to allow them to be ethical consumers. The group hope government backing will enable the creation of a template house made without any plastic. The group want to end the use of plastic wrapping for all building materials from bricks to cladding. Maxwell, a former builder, hopes the 'carrot and stick' approach to removing plastic from a market so heavily reliant on such a material will win over builders who are nervous about the costs of replacing plastics for more sustainable alternatives. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear reviews the timing behind President Trump's decision to scrap environmental protections whilst the media were distracted by the pervasive threat of the deadly Coronavirus pandemic. Photo by Benjamin Suter | New York Eight years ago, the Obama administration finalised plans to introduce revolutionary greenhouse gas reduction and fuel efficiency standards, which would have seen fuel economy performance double in the United States by 2025. Last week, President Donald Trump reversed those same plans, a catastrophic move projected to result in an extra 1.5 billion metric tonnes of climate pollution dumped in the atmosphere. It has been estimated that more than 200,000 Americans die from air pollution each year, and it was hoped that Barack Obama's 2012 Clean Car Standards would reverse some of the damaging effects of oil extraction, transport, and refining. A Surge in Heat-Trapping Fuels The United States is a nation of 273.6 million personal vehicles, each of which is expected to emit 4.6 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually, more than any country in the world. The Environmental Defence Fund has praised the Obama Clean Car limits, saying that, '[c]ars and light trucks account for about 45 percent of all U.S. oil consumption and more than 20 percent of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions', and that the Standards would cut harmful pollution significantly. As the Guardian has pointed out, last year the globe saw its hottest twelve-month stint in living memory, rising hunger, displacement, and loss of life due to extreme temperature and weather disasters induced by man-made climate change. But it seems as though, in the run up his highly contested battle for reelection, President Trump has prioritised the fossil fuel lobby, seeking to bolster the industry which employs 1.1 million Americans across many states that Trump will be hoping to hold on to, or take from the Democrats, in November. However, employment in the green fuel economy is now thought to be ten times the figure in the fossil fuel industry. Trump's argument is that scrapping the Standards will boost the US economy, meaning that cars will be cheaper in the short-term, in direct contradiction to what the vast majority of automakers, labour unions, and consumers have said, all stakeholders who are increasingly seeing the value of long-term sustainability and green innovation. Some Mitigating Measures A spokesperson for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an independent executive agency which has long criticised the current Republican administration for its deep cuts to the organisation, has managed to water down Trump's proposals to entirely scrap the regulatory legislation by adding a commitment to progress on fuel efficiency of a minimum of 1.5% per year. Most experts say that this protective measures will not be enough to overcome the challenges posed to climate change by personal cars and trucks. Even when taking into account the EPA measures against the full-scale rollback, there are expected to be an additional 18,500 premature deaths and 250,000 more asthma attacks as a direct result of the air pollution caused by President Trump's legislative repeals. Air pollution from cars and other vehicles is known to cause cardiovascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, Type 2 diabetes, lung cancer, and pneumonia, as well as chronic kidney disease, hypertension and dementia, which were not previously recognised. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Shaun Britton explores nature, mental health and how interwoven they are when it comes to well-being. Photo by Spencer Selover It is estimated that in 2020, depression will be the second leading cause of world disability, and furthermore, is set to become the biggest global contributor to disease burden by 2030. In 2013 in the UK, 8.2 million people suffered with anxiety. Also in the UK, it has been reported that 1.2% of the population, or 12 out of every 1000 people, suffer with OCD, although the actual figure may be higher. In 1995, only 0.8% of 4-24-year-olds in England reported having a long-standing mental health condition. By 2014 this number had increased to 4.8%. It seems that in the modern age, the more we have developed technologically, the more our inner worlds have suffered. An article in the Greater Good Science Centre publication highlights this problem with a study that tracked the frequency of 186 nature-related words across a vast number of books, films, documentaries and songs from the 1950s onwards. It found a major decline in the use of such words across these works over that time. The authors conclude that this trend does not marry with urbanisation, as often assumed, but with the growth of technology, notably indoor entertainment such as the advent of TV and video games. The great escape, or the great mistake? Technology is not an enemy. The connectivity that today's technology affords cannot be underestimated. The reasons for mental health problems are varied and complex, but it may be that our compulsion to hide in virtual worlds could be covering up what we truly long for. Keeping our heads stuck in our laptops or phones may be contributing to society taking insufficient responsibility for its contribution to the climate crisis. Professor Peter Khan has stated that we may be slow to react to the damage we cause to our environment, and his observation could explain why we may have lost sight of our connection to nature: “All of us construct a conception of what is environmentally normal based on the natural world we encounter in our childhood. With each ensuing generation, the amount of environmental degradation increases. But each generation tends to take that condition as the normal experience. This is what I have been calling ‘Environmental Generational Amnesia’. It helps explain how cities continue to lose nature and why people don’t really see it happening - and to the extent they do, they don't see it as much of a problem” The Road Back Home Many studies have shown the immense benefits of more time connected with nature, such as noted decreases in feelings of depression and anxiety. One programme even introduced natural imagery to a selection of prison inmates, who subsequently showed a considerable reduction in violent acts and complex behaviour. We are not only always able to be in nature, but all too often forget that, in a way, we are nature ourselves. To recognise that we’re a part of nature, inexorably and irrefutably, is to recognise the nature within ourselves. There is a saying, ‘as above, so below, as within, so without’. If the disharmony, disconnection and discontent within us may stem from, or be affected by our increasing isolation from nature, it is not a great leap to consider that our treatment of the natural world may, unsurprisingly, come from the same place. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Nick Webb investigates the science and research behind the encouraging news that part of our ozone layer is starting to heal, slowly. Photo by Allan Scott McMillan | Location: Calgary, Canada Research published last month from scientists at the University of Colorado Boulder is showing that the affects on the Ozone layer above Antarctica are starting to reverse and even heal. At about an altitude of about 10 km (6.2 miles) it contains a high concentration of ozone, of which absorbs most of the ultraviolet radiation reaching the earth from the sun. This is great news for Planet Earth, since the purpose of the ozone is to protect living organisms from the excessive UV radiation, increased exposure can interfere with the DNA and cell division processes in animals and humans leading to mutations, skin cancer, cataract in eyes, weakness in human immune response. A depleted ozone layer could have a serious impact on plants, ecosystems, materials and biochemicals cycles. It's importance is critical to the balance of our world. According to National Geographic: “The ozone layer is a thin part of the Earth's atmosphere that absorbs almost all of the sun's harmful ultraviolet light. "Ozone holes" are popular names for areas of amage to the ozone layer. " The Research and Report The report suggests that this is due to restrictions first put in place at the Montreal Protocol in 1987. It looks at how weather patterns seen from satellite imaging and simulations show a change in winds above Antarctica and how the changes are down to human actions rather than random climate fluctuations. The hole was created as a result of the industrial usage of Ozone Depleting Substances, namely man-made gases, from the 1960s onwards. The opening of the hole caused air currents around the southern hemisphere to move further south, leading to the for the Hadley Cell jet stream - which is responsible for trade winds and tropical rains - to get wider. Antara Banarjee, lead author of the paper said: “This study adds to the growing evidence showing the profound effectiveness of the Montreal Protocol. Not only has the treaty spurred healing of the ozone layer, it’s also driving recent changes in Southern Hemisphere air circulation patterns.” In the study, Banarjee and her colleagues have shown that the trend of ozone depletion reversed from around the year 2000, as concentrations of ozone-depleting substances began to lessen, leading to a gradual recovery. Using computer simulations to show the changes in circulation trends, the researchers determined that the pause in depletion could not only be caused by naturally shifting wind patterns. The statistics the research team gathered showed how even with rising CO2 emissions, the changes in near-surface circulation could only happen within the Ozone layer. Towards the end of the 20th Century, the combination of rising emissions of CO2 and greenhouse gasses and diminishing amounts of ozone depleting substances in the atmosphere pushed near-surface circulation more towards the poles. Since the turn of the new millennium, the rising CO2 has balanced the effect of ozone recovery, continuing to push circulation poleward. Long-Lasting Success on the Horizon Martyn Chipperfield, from the University of Leeds has said that “we have turned the corner” in terms of ozone recovery, and that the study represents the next step in seeing what effects the recovery of the ozone layer could have on the global climate. While we are starting to see the beginnings of recovery in the ozone layer, ozone depleting chemicals have a very long atmospheric life span, and different parts of the world will recover at different rates. Banerjee suggests that in the Northern Hemisphere, ozone levels will return to the levels seen in the 1980s by the 2030s, but the Southern-mid latitudes will not recover until the 2050s, with the Antarctic hole not fully recovering until the 2060s. Chipperfield, however does predict climate change will thin the ozone layer around the tropics at the same time, which will have to be tackled. John Fyfe, a co-author of the paper said “Identifying the ozone-driven pause in circulation trends in real-world observations confirms, for the first time, what the scientific ozone community has long predicted from theory.” Banerjee says “We term this as a ‘pause’ because the poleward circulation trends might resume, stay flat, or reverse. It’s a tug of war between the opposing effects of ozone recovery and rising greenhouse gases that will determine future trends.” Essentially, we’re not out of the woods yet. These results are showing how human efforts to combat negative effects of some forms of pollution are starting to have some success. While full recovery is some time away, it shows unified efforts across the globe do work, towards a better trend, that can benefit all. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Shaun Britton takes a deeper look at the ways in which our relationship with nature has changed during recent times, and how it highlights the power we have to protect our planet. Photo by Simon Shim | Location: New York With recent events of Covid-19 , and the vast majority of people remaining at home, an interesting glimpse into Nature’s ability to self heal can be observed, and could give us an insight into what is possible when we take some steps back. Recent reports of wildlife being seen to return to areas around the country, and changing environmental effects show the manner in which Nature can come back to balance. Small particulate matter and nitrogen dioxide have seen a prominent decrease in locations in the UK, and this information comes at the same time as news that Ozone layer depletion h as reduced, thanks to the 1987 Montreal Project treaty. A Fish to Water The return to populate areas built over natural habitats of some animals that previously stayed away, shows us how our animal brothers and sisters could be a closer part of our world if our interaction shifted. In a welsh seaside town, goats have been seeing roaming the area , and in Canada, Orca Whales were spotted in a Fjord for the first time in decades. A New Reflection Whilst there is a great deal yet to do to combat climate change, and our other environmental issues . with transport, animal agriculture and greenhouse gases being the biggest contributors, we might perhaps consider our impact. At a time when we have to step back, it could be very important to consider how we have interacted with the natural world, and realise that we have perhaps been putting our preferences, and our pockets in the wrong places. If we are to gleam positives from our challenges, then possibly the first and most important is an opportunity to re-examine our pace and priorities. It may be a time both in our own inner worlds and our shared world, to start with our foundations and basic principles as we approach our challenges. As the natural world has shown us, it can heal and come back to us if we let it, and are willing to consider different approaches. It might be that the opportunity of re-evaluating our de facto engagements with the outside world, is one that holds promises in all areas of our inner and collective future. A Narrative for Nature In 2015, it was announced that a third runway was being planned at Heathrow Airport. This decision prompted notable criticism and campaigning and eventually in February , the Court of Appeal ruled that the decision to allow it was unlawful. Similarly the proposed HS2 rail network, a high speed railway to the North, provoking similar reactions, was recently highly criticised for clearing of woodland. Environmentalist and campaigner Chris Packham recently lost a legal bid to halt the activity . Examples like this are not uncommon, and with the environmental challenges of climate change, rising populations, biodiversity, waning water supplies and more, the striding forward for infrastructure projects at the expense of the environment is a disconcerting notion at best. To see Nature beginning to balance herself out as a side-affect of the measures we put in place to protect ourselves as a species, we now have the opportunity and an initiative going forward to prioritise the well-being of our planet and its inhabitants too . We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Georgie Chantrell-Plant learns more about the latest sustainable innovation for generating electricity. Photo by Aleksandr Slobodianyk Good news for sustainable innovation with research published in Nature suggesting that it could soon be possible to generate electricity from rainwater. The concerns of climate change and it's impact on our planet is a motivator for many in creating new sustainable alternatives to our current fossil fuel dependency. A research study has been published on the recent developments in this latest scientific venture, co-authored by Xiao Cheng Zeng and Zuankai Wang, heralding from City University of Hong Kong and The University of Nebraska-Lincoln suggests there may be new way. Innovating The Impossible Something which seemed near to impossible to achieve like creating electricity from the rain, is getting closer and closer to a breakthrough. The newly discovered method of harnessing electricity from rainwater could in fact generate enough power to light 100 small LED bulbs with a single raindrop, a prospect that is leaps and bounds ahead of any other previous attempts. "Our research shows that a drop of 100 microlitres of water released from a height of 15 centimetres [5.9 inches] can generate a voltage of over 140V, and the power generated can light up 100 small LED lights," claims Wang, a biomedical engineer. The Technical Side How was this achieved? By making improvements to the already-established Droplet-Based Electricity Generator (DEG) with the addition of polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE- a formula which can be found in Teflon) Film which in turn creates a surface charge as it is continuously hit by water droplets. As the droplets hit the surface, they then act as a bridge that connects two electrodes: Aluminium electrodes and Indium Tin Oxide. This then creates a closed-loop surface in which all the collected energy can be released. What this means is that the water droplets now become resistors, and the PTFE film coating acts as a capacitor. By having a coating that has a near-permanent electric charge, the generator is then able to slowly collect charge from continuously falling droplets and store it until it reaches its capacity, effectively converting those droplets into a form of energy. Significant Stride for the Future This study only looked at the effects of droplets falling a small distance, but due to its generic design, it is hoped that this process can eventually be applied anywhere where water hits a solid surface, for example the hull of a boat or the top of an umbrella, meaning it could be adapted to harvest energy from waves or even water that is enclosed within a tube. The researchers suggest that it doesn’t necessarily have to be a falling droplet for it to provide harvestable energy. Chemist Xiao Cheng Zeng spoke out in an interview for Vice, stating: "The significance of this technology is the much-enhanced electric power per falling rain droplet, which makes the device much more efficient to convert energy from a falling droplet to electricity”. This process still has a great way to come, so transforming it into a single and accessible renewable energy source is still quite far off in the distance. It still has numerous obstacles to overcome, one of those being a way to prevent electrode corrosion, so it may be a while until this venture is brought outside of a lab. It is hoped that within five years, a proof of concept and prototype will be completed. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Nick Webb takes a closer look at the climate concerns surrounding Greenland and Antarctica. Photo of Derek Oyen On 6th February 2020, scientists recorded temperatures in Antarctica equalling those of Los Angeles on the same day: Esperanza Base, Eagle Island recorded the temperature of 18.4°C (64.9°F). This coincided with the island’s day of peak ice-melting: one inch in a single day, and four inches in the ensuing week. Glaciologist at Nichols College, Mauri Pelto, who observed the event, said “I haven’t seen melt ponds develop this quickly in Antarctica”. The extreme melt led to a loss of 20% of Eagle Island’s seasonal snow in a single event, the third such major melting of the 2020 Antarctic Winter. Persistent warm weather such as this has not been widely seen in Antarctica in the 21st Century, to which NASA scientists assess that a number of weather conditions have combined to create abnormally high temperatures. “If you think about this one event in February, it isn’t that significant,” said Pelto. “It’s more significant that these events are coming more frequently”. Antarctica and Beyond At the opposite end of the globe, Arctic temperatures in the summer of 2019 were high enough to trigger 600 billion tons of ice to melt in Greenland, leading to a 2.2mm increase in global sea levels. This significant melt from both poles has led to a total sea level rise of 17.8mm globally from 1992-2017. While that may not sound like a lot, it is a hugely worrying sign of the catastrophic effects of global warming. The Ice Sheet Mass Balance Intercomparison Exercise (Imbie) has taken data from across both ice sheets which paints a picture of increased melting leading to greater sea-level rise. Measurements taken from 1901 showed annual sea-level rise to be at 1.7mm a year, whereas between 1992 and 2010 the increase stood at 3.2mm a year, with the organisation predicting that this figure is set to keep rising during further heatwaves in the coming years. A Chilling Trend Data by Imbie shows that polar ice loss has increased six-fold since the 1990s, with Andrew Shepherd, a professor of Earth Observation at the University of Leeds, stating that “this would mean 400 million people are at risk of annual coastal flooding by 2100. These are not unlikely events with small impacts; they are already underway and will be devastating for coastal communities.” The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) predicts that, due to the increase in melt from both ice caps, global sea level rise could be up to 53cm by 2100. Lead author on the IPCC’s assessment report on the issue, Guðfinna Aðalgeirsdóttir, Professor of Glaciology at the University of Iceland, stated that Imbie’s satellite observations of the poles show that both melting and ice discharge from Greenland have increased since observations started. While some scientists are sceptical about the long-lasting significance of these temperature increases, such as Alexandra Isern, head of Antarctic studies at the National Science Foundation, who has called them “weather events” as opposed to “climate events”. However, data collected from NASA satellites shows these are most likely not one-off events, but part of a more worrying trend of higher polar temperatures. Scientists must now determine if these higher polar temperatures are anomalies, or hints at a concerning new weather pattern, in which case new policies to protect the world’s vulnerable ice sheets must be brought into place before they’re lost forever. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear reviews Spain's decision to trial universal basic income in the wake of the Coronavirus pandemic, and its wider implications for society. Photo of Homesless Man The month of March saw Spanish unemployment hit a record high after the jobless claim rate rose by 302,265, due to a national lockdown that was introduced halfway through the month thanks to the Coronavirus pandemic. Now, the European nation of 47 million people is implementing unprecedented steps to introduce a permanent universal basic income. Finland Was First In December 2016, the centre-right Finnish government led by Juha Petri Sipilä trialled the policy with 2,000 unemployed people across the Scandinavian nation, providing them with €560, or £500, of free money. Though in Finland this cash sum amounts to less than one fifth of average private sector earnings, the safety net that this basic income provided allows the recipients to avoid the fear of falling into poverty and frees them up to do meaningful work rather than engaging in unstable and poorly-paying employment practices. The trial went on until the end of 2018, and participants responded by saying that they felt 'happier and less stressed' as a result of the pilot scheme. The universal basic income worked in Finland as it provided unemployed people with the time they needed to apply for jobs and learn essential new skills to improve their employ-ability. Though short-term employment did not see a surge as a result of the scheme, a comprehensive analysis is due to be revealed later this year. It's Not Exclusive Universal basic income pilot schemes are actively being trialled in every continent except Australasia and Antarctica, with programmes in Canada astonishingly finding that those participating in the negative income tax scheme experienced an 8.5 percent decrease in hospitalizations. Results from an extensive study by the Roosevelt Institute entitled 'No Strings Attached: The Behavioral Effects of U.S. Unconditional Cash Transfer Programs' concluded: There is either no impact on or a moderate decrease in labor participation and a significant increase in other quality-of-life benefits (mental and physical health, education outcomes, parenting, reduced criminal activity, etc.). Between 2007 and 2009, the government of Namibia, a southwestern African nation traditionally susceptible to high levels of poverty, trialled a universal Basic Income Grant which saw positive results in 'reducing poverty and crime and in raising levels of school attendance'. A Societal Safety Net Now, Spain is introducing the policy to help those struggling from money problems during the Coronavirus pandemic, and are considering making the cash handouts a permanent measure in Spanish society, if successful. Speaking on national television last Sunday, economy minister Nadia Calviño said, 'We're going to do it as soon as possible [...] so it can be useful, not just for this extraordinary situation, and that it remains forever'. Coronavirus has so far claimed more than 15,000 lives in the Mediterranean nation, and as the recovery operation begins in coming months, the left-wing government hopes to provide 'a permanent safety net for the most vulnerable' in the form of unconditional payouts to those vulnerable to, or already experiencing, economic hardship. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ellie Chivers investigates the welcoming report that wild animals in China are now out of bounds for human consumption | Science and Sentience Photo by Theodor Lundqvist As mentioned in one of our previous articles, it’s hard to imagine anything good coming from this dreadful Coronavirus outbreak. But little beautiful changes have been happening; you may have seen the amazing photos of the Llanduno goats beginning to occupy the streets as humans quarantine indoors, or the fish swimming about the waterways of tourist-scarce Venice. Perhaps no change, or no movement, has been as shocking and as celebrated as China’s latest decision enforced by Covid-19: a ban on the consumption of wild animals. Why Now? This week the number of people confirmed to be infected by deadly the pandemic across the globe has now surpassed 1 million. The virus that has now killed over 6,000 people in the UK alone, is actually supposed to have originated at a wildlife market in Wuhan, China. It has been suggested that either a bat, snake or pangolin transmitted the virus to a human and initiated the pandemic, but this still remains unconfirmed. China now acknowledges that trade and consumption of wild animals in the country needs to end in order to prevent further pandemics like this one from happening. Easier Said Than Done In such a strange time, having some good news like this to focus on is very much needed – but the ban will be difficult to roll out. The consumption of wild animals has deep roots in Chinese culture, with it being believed that eating animals such as peacocks and boars will transfer the strength and power of these animals to the consumer. The country’s wildlife trade is worth over $73 billion. Even though 20,000 wildlife farms across China closed as the virus began to spread, such strong actions from the Chinese authorities – that were ultimately scrapped – are not unheard of: the selling of snakes was banned for a short time in Guangzhou after a SARS outbreak, but it was not enforced for long. This ban is also not the only necessary action that needs to be taken, as the use of wild animals in traditional Chinese medicine is still very much allowed. A weakening industry Even though it is the belief of some that the trade is too-far ingrained into the Chinese way of life, there is evidence to suggest that the popularity of wild animal consumption is China was reducing even before the outbreak. In 2012, a study found that 52% of residents in China’s biggest cities were against the consumption of wild animals. Hopefully the Coronavirus pandemic will be what finally halts this trade once and for all. We advocate for societal-ethical journalism and change, acknowledging topics that matter. Covering sustainability, climate change, environmental, nature, health, nutrition, mental health, mindfulness, sentience, science and ethical consciousness. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To advocate for a better tomorrow, consider joining for £1 today.

Kate Byng-Hall reveals the long awaited breakthrough in finding a curable solution for HIV. | Health and Nutrition Photo by Laura Cros The second person ever has been cured of HIV in London. Adam Castillejo, 40, is still free of the virus more than 30 months after stopping anti-retroviral therapy (ART) for it. Castillejo, otherwise known as the ‘London Patient’, was found to have been cured of the disease after receiving a stem-cell transplant to cure the unrelated cancer which he was also suffering from. It is yet to be determined whether his recovery could have a meaningful contribution to the formulation of a universal cure for the virus. Scientists say that HIV originated in Kinshasa, Democratic Republic of Congo and is said to have transmitted over from monkeys, to chimpanzees before finally crossing over to humans in the 1920s, causing a worldwide pandemic. What is HIV? HIV (human immunodeficiency virus) is a virus that damages cells in the immune system, thus decreasing the body’s ability to fight everyday infections and disease. The virus is seen as such a threat because, if left untreated, it can lead to contraction of AIDS (acquired immune deficiency syndrome), a number of potentially life-threatening infections and illnesses that can occur when the immune system has been severely damaged by HIV. HIV can be passed from person to person through sexual fluids, blood, or breastmilk, meaning it is primarily spread through sexual intercourse, sharing needles, or breastfeeding. A particularly vulnerable group to the disease is men who have sex with men, which led to massive stigma surrounding the virus in the 1980s when it was less understood. The most dangerous aspect of HIV is that it is possible to have it in your system for many years without you being aware. Many people have a fever when they initially contract the virus, but then have no symptoms after that despite it living in their bodies, gradually weakening their immune systems. This fact makes the need for the development of a cure all the more urgent, but it has proved a very difficult task. “Cost of treatment, drug toxicities, interaction with other drugs and persistence of inflammation and acceleration of the aging process, all put together, warrant an urgent need for a total cure” – Murugan Sankaranantham, Indian Journal of Sexually Transmitted Diseases and AIDS Two People Cured The ‘London Patient’ follows the ‘Berlin Patient’, the first person to be cured of the virus in the world. In 2007, Timothy Ray Brown, the ‘Berlin Patient’, received a stem-cell transplant in his bone marrow to cure his leukaemia, and subsequently also his HIV. Castillejo and Brown’s transplants had a significant factor in common which made their recovery from HIV possible: both of their donors possessed a rare genetic mutation which protects against HIV, meaning that when the patients received these transplants, their genes also became capable of warding off the virus. After this breakthrough, research was conducted to see whether stem-cell transplants from donors who did have this rare gene would have the same effect on HIV and cancer sufferers. The transplants caused the virus to hold off for a number of months, but the remaining HIV cells managed to mutate again and begin attacking the immune system again. This shows that the genetic mutation either has to be implanted into HIV patients or somehow replicated in order to cure the virus. Researchers have admitted that they are a long way away from creating a universal cure for HIV, but Castillejo’s recovery is a ray of hope, as he has proven that it is possible to be cured of this cruel disease. We advocate for societal-ethical journalism and change, acknowledging topics that matter. Covering sustainability, climate change, environmental, nature, health, nutrition, mental health, mindfulness, sentience, science and ethical consciousness. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To advocate for a better tomorrow, consider joining for £1 today.

Ben Dolbear examines the calls by scientists to extend the Geneva Convention to protect wildlife and nature. | Nature and Environmental Photo by Bruno Martins - Natural History Museum An open letter by 24 leading scientists has called for an extension to the Geneva Convention to make damage to environmental nature reserves in areas of conflict a war crime. Professor Sarah Durant of the Zoological Society of London has contributed to the letter, writing in the Nature journal that despite calls for a fifth convention more than two decades ago by environmental activists, consequences of human military conflict continue to see the destruction of megafauna, or large animals, the extinction of entire species, and the poisoning of water resources. The Need for Change The extended Geneva Convention, adopted in 1949, includes four conventions to protect those vulnerable during times of war, which includes protections for wounded and sick soldiers on land, wounded, sick and shipwrecked military personnel at sea, prisoners of war, and civilians, including those in occupied territory. At present, the United Nations international law commission has adopted twenty-eight measures to preserve nature in regions of conflict, but the signatories of this new letter argue that they do not go far enough. The environment is undoubtedly one of the most frequent and most heavily affected victims of war, and calls for greater protection of nature stem back to the Vietnam War of the second half of the twentieth century during which the United States military used over twenty million gallons of Agent Orange, a deadly herbicide and defoliant chemical, to destroy ancient rainforests, wetlands, croplands, and vegetation. Today, pollution from the remnants of the toxic chemical continues to have deadly consequences for the Vietnamese environment. The Scientific Demands José Brito, an academic from the University of Porto, Portugal, added to the letter: 'The impacts of armed conflict are causing additional pressure to imperilled wildlife from the Middle East and north Africa. Global commitment is needed to avoid the likely extinction of emblematic desert fauna over the next decade'. It is the aim of the letter for global bodies to enact internationally recognised protections of natural environments particularly susceptible to damage during war so that vulnerable and rural communities, as well as animal species, are better shielded from the human brutality that threatens their existence. It is hoped that a fifth treaty of the Geneva Convention would provide legal instruments for 'site-based protection of crucial natural resources', writes Professor Durant, but would only work if governments across the globe work with multinational firms to regulate the trading of arms, so that the impact of the industry's activities is reduced effectively. We advocate for societal-ethical journalism and change, acknowledging topics that matter. Covering sustainability, climate change, environmental, nature, health, nutrition, mental health, mindfulness, sentience, science and ethical consciousness. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To advocate for a better tomorrow, consider joining for £1 today.

Ellis Jackson reveals encouraging news from US that human trials for a Covid-19 vaccine have started | Science and Sentience Photo by Vital Sinkevich The first human trials of a possible Covid-19 vaccine have begun in Seattle, Washington as of Monday 16th March. These trials are the first opportunity for scientists to evaluate the effectiveness of one potential vaccine against the virus developed by American company Moderna, in collaboration with the U.S. National Institutes of Health. Four volunteers at the Kaiser Permanente research centre in Northern California received a jab containing a harmless genetic code copied from that of the coronavirus. This vaccine was developed 63 days after the genetic sequence of the virus was shared by Chinese authorities. This is the first step of many in the clinical trials to understand the potential benefits of the vaccine prototype named mRNA-1273, and, if it works, what level of dosage is required to induce an immune response against the virus in its recipients. "The open-label trial will enroll 45 healthy adult volunteers ages 18 to 55 years over approximately 6 weeks," the NIH said. "The first participant received the investigational vaccine today." On the day of 16th March. Almost 200,000 People Affected The Covid-19 strain of coronavirus has infected more than 200,000 people across the world since it was first identified in Wuhan, China in late December. This includes 2626 people infected in Britain, although it is estimated that the actual total may number 35,000 – 50,000 cases due to the fact that many people are either self-isolating without access to a test, or are carrying the virus without displaying any symptoms. There are currently no fully-developed vaccines against Covid-19 being distributed to the public, so scientists around the world are fast-tracking research for potential solutions to this deadly pandemic. Many countries are budgeting large sums of money to be invested in research of the virus and its treatments, and planning how to combat its effects; the United States has pledged £8.3B, and the UK, £12B. Tips to Help Against Coronavirus Stay aware of the latest information on the COVID-19 outbreak, available on the World Health Organisation website and through your national and local public health authority. Here are some tips for maintaining a healthy stance during this health emergency: Regularly and thoroughly clean your hands with an alcohol-based hand rub or wash them with soap and water. Maintain at least 1 metre (3 feet) distance between yourself and anyone who is coughing or sneezing. Stay at home if you feel unwell. If you have a fever, cough or difficulty breathing, seek medical attention and call in advance. Follow the directions of your local health authority and government restriction-enforcements. Stay informed on the latest developments about COVID-19. Follow advice given by your healthcare provider, your national and local public health authority or your employer on how to protect yourself and others from COVID-19 We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Kate Byng-Hall explores the biodiversity landscape, its challenges and some simple solutions to help it flourish. | Nature and Environmental Photo by Hannah Bruckner The UK’s ecosystem is facing a crisis. Scientists approximate that populations of the UK’s most important wildlife have plummeted by an average of 60% since 1970, with three quarters of all butterfly species dropping significantly in numbers in recent years. We must try to rectify these declines and prevent the same happening to other species. A recent RHS Study has outlined multiple reasons why Britain’s people developing personal domestic gardens could have huge benefits for our ecosystem and our wildlife: Gardens help control urban temperatures, mitigating the effects of extreme heat and cold caused by climate change. They prevent flooding by absorbing rainwater that would otherwise overload drainage systems. They have effectively become some of Britain’s best nature reserves, housing a range of species including birds, mammals and invertebrates. They support human health by easing stress and providing physical exercise. Our Green Spaces Some experts have said that Britain could be facing a period of deforestation due to the inadequate rate at which trees are replanted after being felled. This can be seen as only 1500 hectares of woodland was planted in 2017, well below the 5000 annual target designed to boost Britain’s woodland. Experts have said that by 2060, woodland needs to cover 12% of the UK’s land, a significant increase from the 10% which it covers today. This is a necessity in order to maintain the country’s essential natural oxygen releases and provide habitats for our beloved wildlife. In the meantime, personal gardens could be the answer for some of these demands. Insects and Bees Must be Revived The decline in trees and green spaces in Britain has led to pollinating species disappearing from around a quarter of all UK habitats, meaning that 11 pollinators have been lost from each 1km grid square tested since the 1980s. Bees have been especially badly affected, with 17 species currently regionally extinct, such as the Great Yellow Bumblebee and the Potter Flower Bee, a further 25 species regarded as threatened, and 31 of conservation concern. Insects are so important for Britain’s ecosystem because they make up two thirds of all life on Earth, and are the bottom of the natural food-chain, meaning the rest of the country’s wildlife depends on them flourishing in great numbers. Not to mention that pollinators’ services are worth £690m a year to the UK economy – even the most cynical of people cannot deny that these creatures are invaluable to us. “If all humankind were to disappear, the world would regenerate back to the rich state of equilibrium that existed 10,000 years ago. If insects were to vanish, the environment would collapse into chaos.” – Harvard Biologist, Edward O. Wilson How to Kickstart Your Own Action Gardens now account for almost half of urban green space, meaning that they can surely now be used to have a positive impact on the environment. Here are some tips for utilising your garden for maximum environmental benefits: Plant ‘pollinators’ which provide the best food for bees + and butterflies, such as gaura and milkweed plants. Leave seeds out for the birds to eat in the autumn and winter. Switch from electrical to manual lawnmowers. Ditch chemical fertilisers and weed-killers. Collect rainwater and use it to water plants during dry periods. Collect food/garden waste to fertilise your garden naturally. Keep houseplants, as they contribute to oxygen supplies even if you don’t have an outside-garden. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. |To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ben Dolbear explores the natural reclamation of Venice and other sites benefiting from a reduction in humanity's impact. | Nature and Environmental Photo by Ibrahim Rifath Recently, the city council of Venice approved an unprecedented move to tax any foreign tourists who enter the city. This was due to the vast daily clean-up operation needed and the environmental impact caused by those visiting the ancient city. The Coronavirus pandemic has left Venice and cities across Italy deserted amid harsh quarantine rules. The global community has been watching Italy closely whilst the extent of the impact is being understood. Today, it seems as though the wildlife of Venice are relocating back. Nature Returns Once a powerful presence, the length of the La Serenissima waterways, usually dominated by 30 million annual visitors, the Venetian streets are now being reclaimed by nature. Videos are emerging on social media from Venice locals in awe of what they are seeing for the first time in decades: the return of nature. At present, only essential boats are allowed to travel through Venice, a decree which has virtually rid the waters of human activity, and allowed the rebirth of animal activity. According to Classic FM, Venice is the clearest it has been for sixty years, with a spokesperson for the Venetian mayoral office commenting, ‘the water now looks clearer because there is less traffic on the canals, allowing the sediment to stay at the bottom’. In one clip seen in the Guardian, the streets surrounding those locked down is underlined by calm, blue waters, and numerous shoals of fish swimming downstream. In other areas of Italy there are reports of dolphins who have reclaimed the port of Sardinia. Climate Concern Continues This news comes just days after European Space Agency had found that pollution had been extensively reduced in China amid the COVID-19 lockdown as well as seeing a strong harsh reduction in air pollution in Italy. Chris Packham, a well-known naturalist welcomed a reduction in pollution through planes being grounded and there being fewer cars on the road, but said he was worried the global issue of climate change has been forgotten and momentum lost. In a move that will see Italian tourist sites essentially vacant until at least 3rd April, the European self-isolation measures will hopefully see more environmental positives as the human impact on nature subsides, for now. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. |To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Kate Byng-Hall looks into some great natural and nutritious ways to help boost your immune system in the fight against coronavirus. | Health and Nutrition Photo by Zamani Sahudi The immune system is the biological barrier which operates within our bodies to protect us from threatening foreign substances, cells, and tissues by triggering an immune response. As the pandemic virus Covid-19 gets increasingly closer to home, and with over 10,000 people dead globally from the disease this year, a healthy immune system is essential to prevent the virus becoming serious if you contract it. Immune-Boosting Diet What we consume can have a significant impact on the strength of our immune systems. Certain foods contain high levels of substances such as Vitamins C and E, zinc, and antioxidants which contribute to the development of our immune responses. If you can manage to find any of these items in the shops, then their chemical and mineral properties could help to keep your immune system strong: Citrus fruits e.g. oranges and grapefruit Red bell peppers Broccoli Garlic Ginger – this can also help with sore throats Spinach Almonds Turmeric Green tea Papaya – one papaya provides 224% of the daily recommended vitamin C intake Kiwis Sunflower seeds All of these foods should be consumed as part of a healthy, balanced diet – equilibrium in what we consume is what promotes health. Even though self-isolation might tempt you to drown your sorrows, consuming alcohol in excess can impair the immune system, so drink in moderation. Lifestyle Improvements Getting plenty of sleep is a must in order to allow your body time to develop the proteins it needs to fight infections. Adults should aim to be getting 7-9 hours’ sleep every night. Research has shown that just one night of poor sleep can reduce your immune cells by as much as 70%, so make sure to get enough shut-eye. Smokers have an increased risk of catching infections and suffering severe complications from them because smoke inhalation compromises the immune system. Smoking is doubly inadvisable in relation to Covid-19 because the virus is especially risky for people with respiratory complications which smoking inevitably give you. A positive change you can make is to incorporate regular exercise into your self-isolation lifestyle through walks or indoor workouts. You can find loads of guided programmes via online videos or exercise apps. Physical exercise can reduce inflammation and supports infection-fighting cells. The endorphins released during exercise also help in stress-reduction, a key way to protect your immune system. Staying relaxed in this stressful time may seem difficult, but experiment with different activities to find the stress-busting methods which best suit you. Some ideas include walking, gardening, reading, yoga, and painting, as well as staying in contact with loved-ones. Can We Really Boost Our Immune Systems? It can be easy to presume that taking vitamin supplements can be a quick-fix to boost our immune systems. However, researchers at Harvard University argue that taking supplements only boost immunity in people who were initially malnourished. "Unfortunately, the reality is that those kinds of products aren't really offering you any benefit," says Michael Starnbach, a professor of microbiology at Harvard Medical School. "There's no evidence that they help in fighting disease." The researchers concluded that taking too many vitamins could trigger autoimmunity, a process in which the immune system is over-stimulated so begins to attack the body’s healthy cells and tissues. In fact, consuming a large number of vitamin supplements can be so dangerous that it can lead to headaches and dizziness, or, in extreme cases, organ damage. The immune system is incredibly complex, made up of hundreds of different types of cells performing specific tasks. We should not try to interfere with this. The safest way for us to protect ourselves against coronavirus is to stick to a healthy, balanced diet, and not to follow any health crazes in excess. In the coming weeks and months, the best way to protect ourselves is to wash our hands regularly and stick to social-distancing measures. See the World Health Organisation’s advice here, and government guidelines here. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. |To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Emma Reynolds tells us about the bold moves taken by these industry leaders by taking sustainable steps in the fight against plastic | Nature and Environmental Photo by Alex Loup Two of the world’s largest plastic bottle manufacturers, Coca-Cola and Pepsi, have decided to commit to a better, more sustainable future. Both of the companies have chosen to increase their commitment to recycling materials they use, and to encourage their customers to do the same. They are trying to incorporate more recycled plastics into their bottles, and therefore create a more sustainable manufacturing process. The companies were formerly members of the Plastics Industry Association. A company that practises plastics lobbying, which encourages the use of plastic, and offers careers in plastic manufacturing. They seek to make plastic bans illegal in America, a goal which hindered Coca-Cola and Pepsi’s plans for supporting more sustainable practices. For this reason, both companies have withdrawn from the organisation. Greenpeace were a large part of the reason why the companies chose to leave the Plastics Industry Association as they denounced the scientific logic behind the organisation’s supposedly sustainable practices. The fact that such globally influential companies have chosen to cut ties with the Association is a positive step forward. John Hocevar the Campaign Director of Greenpeace USA Oceans commented: “companies understand that we cannot publicly say they want to end plastic pollution, while financially supporting an association that lobbies for our continued reliance on throwaway plastics” New Plastic Priorities The two globally recognised brands are choosing to make a larger difference in their plastic usage and are experimenting with more sustainable alternatives such as aluminium packaging. In 2019, PepsiCo announced that its Aquafina branded water is soon going to be sold in aluminium cans at fast food US restaurants, with the plan being to implement this in retail stores in the near future. Pepsi has committed to using only recyclable, compostable or biodegradable packaging by 2025, also pledging to make new plastic bottles using 25% recycled material. "Tackling plastic waste is one of my top priorities and I take this challenge personally," PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta said. "We are doing our part to address the issue head on by reducing, recycling and reinventing our packaging." These plans are a huge victory for sustainability and eco-friendly activists as it is a chance for two globally renowned companies to make significant change in the war that we are fighting against excessive plastic use. Even if the act of becoming more sustainable is just a marketing ploy to improve the companies’ image in a time when ethical and environmental practice is heavily scrutinised by consumers, the change is being made nonetheless. If such huge companies are making a commitment to helping the environment, then hopefully others will follow suit. Let’s keep fighting for plastic change, together. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. |To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Kate Byng-Hall puts together a mindful guide to help you through this testing time. | Mental Health and Mindfulness Photo by Christopher Burns On Monday the 23rd of March, Boris Johnson finally announced that the United Kingdom would be entering an increased level of enforced social distancing in response to the rapidly spreading Covid-19 virus. Essentially the country went into lockdown for the foreseeable future, with people only allowed to leave the house to get food or medication, to exercise once a day, to go to work if they are a key worker, or help the vulnerable. During this unprecedented period of national quarantine, everyone’s health could be compromised if we don’t look after each other and ourselves. Here is a guide to many activities you can try out to protect your physical, mental, and emotional health while social distancing. What to do at Home Get innovative with what you have around the house and get things done which you’ve been meaning to: Dig out the board games Try painting, drawing or colouring in Do some baking (if you can find the ingredients) Have a movie day – revisit classics or try things you’ve been meaning to watch Spring clean and declutter Sort out your book/movie/CD collection – you could find hidden gems Learn the basics of a new skill such as a new recipe, language or even some code Join some online pub quizzes for charity Start a blog or podcast Write a diary during lockdown to look back on Make a scrapbook/photo album Try some creative writing or poetry Listen to full albums rather than just singles Try upcycling or restyling old clothing items Pick up a musical instrument or sing Try a free online course with FutureLearn or OpenLearn Get Outdoors Being outside in nature is a very freeing experience, and should be valued at this time because it can alleviate symptoms of anxiety, and induces the release of serotonin and melatonin. While our right to leave the house is limited for the time being, get out into the garden as much as you can, and use your daily exercise allowance wisely: Try some outdoor yoga Plant and grow some veg Plant some wildflower seeds Plant some sunflowers (you can buy seeds online) Mow the lawn Order some bird-food and set up some feeders Have a picnic in the garden Vary the routes you take for your daily exercise Grow plants/flowers/cacti on windowsills or balconies if you don’t have a garden Stay Connected Retaining regular contact with friends and family is crucial during the tricky period of isolation, as it’s easy to feel alienated when you cannot meet people face to face. Get creative with how you can stay in touch: Call elderly relatives who are in isolation just for a chat Communicate with friends online via Skype or Zoom Learn to knit and make a scarf for a loved one Exchange music recommendations with friends Try a book club – decide to read a book with someone and discuss it afterwards Have a remote dinner party over a video call Write letters and send cards to loved-ones Protect the Mind This shocking change to our way of life is bound to have adverse effects on our mental health. There are many possible ways to help your mind to stabilise during this uncertain time: Stick to a healthy sleep schedule Meditate daily; use online guides like Headspace if you need a helping hand Maintain a healthy diet as opposed to comfort eating Drink water regularly Try and access online counselling if you need it Keep your house tidy so it doesn’t become a chaotic or overwhelming space Clean the house regularly to prevent spread of germs Try breathing and mindfulness exercises if you are feeling panicked Do not drink excessive alcohol as this can be damaging to your mental health Join Elefriends if you need an online community to feel supported Open the windows to get enough fresh air and reduce feelings of claustrophobia Keep the mind stimulated through crosswords, quizzes, and reading Find a ‘safe space’ in your house or garden where you can go if you feel at risk of having a panic attack Receive ongoing support from therapists or healthcare professionals online Get up at the same time every day in order to create a routine Reduce the time you spend checking the news or social media for updates on the virus as this can aggravate anxiety or compulsions, and only rely on reliable sources If you feel you need more support, consult the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy’s advice for dealing with anxiety related to the pandemic. For more advice on how to stay safe during social distancing, consult the NHS, WHO, and government guidelines. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. |To support our work and journalism, consider becoming an advocate from just £1.

Ellie Chivers discovers how soap bars are better for the environment and in the fight against coronavirus | Nature and Environmental Photo by Anne Nygard It’s been drilled into us for weeks now – ‘stay two metres apart from other people’ ‘stay inside as much as possible’, and of course, ‘wash your hands!’ Bottled soap is becoming increasingly hard to come by, so you might be wondering how it is possible for us to keep our hands sufficiently clean during the coronavirus pandemic. But hiding in plain sight on those sad, scarce shelves may be a saviour in disguise: a bar of soap. It can do the job just as well, while also being much more beneficial for Planet Earth. Doesn’t bar soap transmit germs? When you and your family are using one bar of soap between you, you may come to the conclusion that one user’s germs will quickly be transferred to the next. In fact, this is not the case. One of the more in-depth studies into this was conducted in 1965, with the results showing that no matter the amount of bacteria on a bar of soap, there would be no health risk to subsequent users. Whereas bacteria could exist on the pump of a liquid soap bottle, the surface of a bar of soap is simply not a habitable place for bacteria, so bars of soap maybe in fact be a superior alternative. Better for the environment The average American household wades through 20 bottles of soap and shampoo a year; this means there are 2.5 billion plastic bottles used up and chucked out every 365 days from bathroom products only, eventually clogging up landfill. It has been proposed that sales of bar soap is beginning to see a resurgence due to a growing societal concern about plastic pollution. Bar soap packaging includes significantly less plastic, while companies are also doing more to react to the increasing concerns. For example, Unilever brand Dove announced they will no longer be wrapping their soap bars in plastic. In 2018, bar soap sales rose by 3%, a promising statistic which suggests that people are gradually trying to adopt a more sustainable lifestyle. It’s worth noting that many mainstream brands of bar soap include ingredients derived from animals, but there are numerous cruelty-free brands which are readily available, if not in supermarkets then from online stores, such as Lush, The Body Shop, and Holland & Barrett. So, if the bottled soap at your sink is running dangerously low, next time you’re shopping for essentials, why not pick up some bar soap instead? Remember: When it come comes to cleanliness vs Coronavirus continue to follow NHS and government advice in order to stay safe. We are a socio-ethical impact charity advocating for topics that matter, whilst supporting wider planetary change and acknowledgement. A charitable initiative funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please consider becoming an advocate.

Ben Dolbear reveals more about the welcomed announcement from the UK Government | Innovation and Sustainability Photo by Ian Simmons The UK government has put a pause on all fracking, citing fears that earth tremors risk causing too much disruption among local communities. The news from the UK government comes at the same time that leading Democratic candidates in the US presidential election are promising to put a fracking ban in place, leading to a furious backlash from American oil corporations Exxon and Chevron. The Green Party has described the move as ‘very, very welcome’, but have expressed concern that the move may be overturned after the general election result in mid-December. Writing on Twitter, co-leader of the Greens Sian Berry wrote, ‘[b]anning fracking is for life, not just for Christmas’. In addition to this criticism, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn condemned the ban as ‘an election stunt to try and win a few votes’, perhaps in a reference to conversations at the Conservative Party conference earlier this year which aired ‘the potential for fracking to affect up to 200 electoral districts, 40 of them marginal’. Extinction Rebellion blocked the entrance to the UK’s only active fracking site in September 2019 calling it the “burgeoning catastrophe” of global warming. What is Fracking? Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, is a technique by which gas and oil are recovered from shale rock, a sedimentary rock found globally. A liquid mixture of water, sand, and chemicals is pumped at high pressure into underground rock formations in order to open cracks which allow trapped gas or crude oil to flow to the surface. Proponents of fracking include Cuadrilla, who notoriously ended drilling operations in the northwest of England in 2011 after minor quakes were identified nearby and have since been hampered by similar incidents. Why Fracking is Unsustainable and Bad for the Environment They argue that fracking reduces energy costs and carbon emissions by displacing coal in electricity generation, but anti-fracking campaigners such as Frack Off say that the process involves releasing dangerous chemicals into the earth, wastefully utilising unsustainable levels of natural resources, and leads to earth tremors in surrounding areas. It is also of great concern that one of the main gases released during the fracking process in methane, roughly 4% of which escapes into the atmosphere. Methane is estimated to be 25 times stronger than carbon dioxide in trapping heat, contributing immeasurably to global warming. A Community Concern and More British communities have also expressed fears that local water supplies are negatively impacted by fracking, which uses millions of gallons during the process. Up to 40% of the water used for fracking that is returned to the earth is riddled with toxic contaminants. Anti-fracking campaigners have expressed concern that the government has only ‘paused’ fracking ‘unless and until further evidence is provided that it can be carried out safely here’. The language used by the UK government leaves open the possibility for the return of fracking in England. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please consider becoming an advocate.

Societal and Consciousness Writer: Ben Dolbear Assesses Italy’s Waste-Cutting Initiative. Photo by Christopher Czermak A global effort to reduce both hunger and food waste has led the Italian Senate giving its overwhelming backing of a bill which will make donating unsold food to charities easier. Until now, Italian businesses have found it difficult to pass on unsold food because of laws restricting the distribution of food marginally past its sell-by-date, but the lifting of such laws will lift this regulative burden, a move which is expected to relieve the waste strain on the nation by one million tonnes, or one sixth of its waste output. Currently, strict rules on food sales means that foodstuff which is not only just out-of-date, but mislabeled, is marked as waste, and must be disposed of. These rules have contributed to shocking levels of waste in the developed world, and made the hunger crisis worse. It is thought that loosening these rules will relieve the pressures on businesses to contribute towards global waste.  Homelessness has been a plight on European nations since the recession caused by the Global Financial Crisis of 2008, and austerity policies imposed by governments to reduce fiscal deficits have pushed more people into poverty. It was estimated that in Italy in 2015, for example, there were over 50,000 people living in extreme poverty, 85% of which were men, according to the Istat Survey on Homelessness. The trend towards greater levels of homelessness has led many countries to introduce strict policies on businesses to prevent hunger in developed nations. France, for example, earlier this year became the first country in the world to mandate grocery shops to donate all unsold food to charity. The United Nations Food and Agricultural Organisation have said that one third of food globally is wasted, a figure which extends to 40% in Europe. This food could, it says, feed 200 million people. From a financial perspective, politicians have estimated that food waste management costs Italy more than £10 billion annually, and could equate to as much as 1% of total GDP. The European Union is currently exploring proposals to end food waste in all member its states, following the lead from France and Italy. #foodwaste #food #charity | Tru. 🌱 Sources: https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/italy-passes-law-to-send-unsold-food-to-charities/ https://www.globalcitizen.org/en/content/big-win-french-supermarkets-can-no-longer-throw-aw/ https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-36965671 https://www.fiopsd.org/en/il-follow-up-2013_14/

Ben Dolbear Reveals Stanley Johnson's Soft Spot For The Growing Movement Photo by Joël de Vriend Stanley Johnson, the father of Prime Minister Boris Johnson, has backed Extinction Rebellion (XR), the strikers who have shut down London to draw attention to the climate emergency. This comes the day after the Prime Minister branded the activists ‘uncooperative crusties […] littering the road’ who are occupying ‘hemp-smelling bivouacs’. Stanley Johnson, who served as a Conservative member of the European Parliament for Hampshire East between 1979 and 1984, has authored several books about the environment and climate change, including Environmental Policy of the European Communities and The Warming. The Prime Minister, on the other hand, has been criticised for consistently failing to address the climate crisis, and for presenting ‘tokenistic’ environmental policies in this week’s Queen’s Speech. What Stanley Johnson Says: Speaking to London activists on Wednesday, Stanley Johnson said, ‘[f]rom tiny acorns, big movements spring. We have been moving far too slowly on the climate change issue.’ And in an apparent dig at his son’s comments at a book launch, he went on to say, ‘I regard it as a tremendous compliment to be called an uncooperative crusty.’ The current wave of protests, which have been backed by all major opposition parties in Parliament, began on Monday 7th October when XR promised to shut down major routes into London in an attempt to raise awareness of the immediacy of the emergency which the UN have warned requires urgent action now. Time To Act According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, there are twelve years in which we can limit the ‘catastrophe’ of climate change, and even one half of a degree increase in global temperatures will ‘risks of drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people’. Early this morning, activists were ordered to disband their lawful congregation in Trafalgar Square, and Scotland Yard have said that the Autumn Uprising must ‘cease’. This comes as the Guardian praise Extinction Rebellion for their important role in enabling the public to wake up to ‘the gravity of their cause’ We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate. | Tru.

Writer Ellie Chivers Takes a Look at the Global Shift in Animal Welfare Policies. Photo by Christopher Burns In 2015, New Zealand set the standard for animal rights globally. The passing of their Animal Welfare Amendment Bill was cause for celebration amongst activists everywhere, as the momentous move finally recognised the sentience of all animals, as opposed to only chimpanzees, orangutans and dolphins. The bill also banned animal testing and research in the country, as well as giving clearer guidelines on how to prosecute animal cruelty. It truly was a breakthrough. But, 5 years on from that ground-breaking bill, we take a look at sentient recognition globally. North America Animal sentience is still not wholly recognised in North America as they are still considered “objects” by law. While there have been backtracks this decade for animal rights in North America since NZ’s Welfare Amendment Bill passed, there have been changes for the better elsewhere in the fight for animal rights. For example, SeaWorld announced the ending of it’s orca shows and breeding programmes, following backlash from the ‘Blackfish’ documentary, which showcased the mistreatment of the killer whales kept there. This year, California became the first state to ban the sale and manufacturing of new fur items, while cat declawing has also been banned in New York state. Europe According to an article in the House of Commons library, published in July this year, “the sentience of animals will continue to be recognised and protections strengthened when we leave the EU.” The Animal Welfare (Sentencing) Bill, published in June, also increases the maximum sentence for those prosecuted for animal cruelty. Additionally, in 2018, Brussel’s parliament voted to recognise animals as “living being[s] endowed with sensitivity, interests of its own and dignity, that benefits from special protection.” Also in this year, Slovakia redefined animals as living beings. Elsewhere in Europe, Pope Francis stated that animal testing should only be an option when “it remains within reasonable limits [and] contributes to caring for or saving human lives.” Meanwhile, this year Switzerland’s proposal to ban factory farming was met with 100,000 signatures, which enforced a nationwide ballot. Coming Soon Asia In China, there is no outright legislation the recognises animal sentience, but various articles and bills outline humane treatment of animals and promote practices that minimise their suffering. That being said, cosmetics that are sold in China are still required to be tested on animals before being sold to the public. Similarly, Japan does not recognise sentience, but acknowledges suffering. Further developments have been made elsewhere in the continent; in 2017, one of Thailand’s biggest meat producers promising to phase out gestation and farrowing crates by 2027, improving the welfare of 250,000 pigs. Even before NZ’s bill, India became the first Asian country to ban animal testing, announcing the scrap plans in 2014. South America In the case of South America, the suffering of animals is largely recognised, while the sentience of animals is noted in Chile. In Chile, animal cruelty can be punished by a maximum of a 3-year jail sentence. No significant animal rights movements have taken place between NZ’s bill to now here, however. Africa Sadly, in Africa, countries either only recognise animal suffering, or do not recognise suffering or sentience at all. Only in Tanzania is there a difference, with the mental health of animals being acknowledged. Here, suffering is recognised and there are laws against animal cruelty, though they have not been enforced since the NZ bill. Some landmark changes have been made since New Zealand’s historic bill set the precedent for animal welfare, with Europe leading the way in making changes for the better in regard to animal sentience since. It is clear that momentum is building for global reform and lets hope more countries will follow in the years to come. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Writer Ben Dolbear looks closer at Greta Thunberg's reasons for turning down the Nordic Council environmental award. Photo by BBC and @gretathunberg Greta Thunberg, Swedish climate activist, has turned down the Nordic Council's prestigious climate award which would have seen her bag nearly £50,000, saying instead, 'the climate doesn't need awards'. The young activist, who recently celebrated her seventeenth birthday by returning to the Swedish Parliament where she started her 'Fridays for Future' protest which later turned into a global phenomenon, used the platform given to her by the awards ceremony to say that 'politicians and the people in power' need to listen to the younger generation and the current, best-available science, which is pointing towards an irreversible climate disaster unless direct and urgent action is taken by governments across the globe to overturn consumer and market reliance on unsustainable sources of energy. Last year, Thunberg narrowly missed out on becoming the youngest ever Nobel Laureate for the Nobel Peace Prize, which instead went to Ethiopia's prime minister Abiy Ahmed. Despite this, her impassioned speeches and unwavering activism have led her to become a symbol of hope for many people deeply concerned about the state of our planet. The President of the Nordic Council, which elected to award Thunberg the prize, gave respect for her decision, praising her movement as one which is 'good for everyone'. Today, the concentration of carbon dioxide in our air is the highest that it has been for three million years and global temperatures are rising at an unprecedented pace. Last year also saw a turning point in the physical consequences of the pressure humanity is putting on the planet, with the US state of California and the country of Australia suffering from devastating, drought-induced wildfires. However, senior political figures from US President Donald Trump to Brazilian leader Jair Bolsonaro and Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison continue to publicly question the responsibility of humanity in the climate emergency, an inaction on which Greta Thunberg has centred her criticism. Posting on Instagram to explain her decision to turn down the award, Thunberg attacked her hosts for the poor Scandinavian record on climate. 'The Nordic countries have a great reputation around the world when it comes to climate and environmental issues', she said, but Nordic energy consumption tells 'a whole other story'. Her comments were in reference to a WWF and the Global Footprint Network report which claims that Sweden and its closest neighbours is living as if the world has the resources of four other planets. Thunberg said that the gap between the gloomy scientific reality and what politicians are promising to do in response is 'gigantic'. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Ellie Chivers discovers how some doctors are offering nutritional solutions to support long term health benefits and help minimise chronic diseases. Photo by Eiliv Sonas Aceron It’s drummed into us from an early age that we need to live healthy, balanced lifestyles. But ensuring you adopt a nutritional diet means more than just looking good; it keeps your body, your health and your mind in check. Nutritious diets are more and more frequently being prescribed medically. Known as ‘lifestyle medicine’, nutritious diets are being prescribed to prevent contracting even some of the world’s most horrible diseases. The lack of focus on nutrition at medical schools might explain this phenomenon. The First Practitioners in Lifestyle Medicine In Greenville, South Carolina, Dr Beth Morris is the first ever physician board-certified in lifestyle medicine. Dr Morris prescribes patients lifestyle interventions to help to prevent, or even cure, diseases, and aims to raise awareness of how simple things in patients’ day-to-day lives and diets can affect their health. While she has highlighted exercise, sleep and stress management as significant in helping tackle disease, the importance of nutrition cannot be understated. There are numerous diseases that can be prevented by healthy eating; even the chances of contracting cancer, strokes and heart diseases are diminished by opting for a more nutritious diet. The Importance of going Plant-Based Dr Morris has also highlighted the benefits of a plant-based diet: “if people want to lose weight in the context of minimising chronic disease down the road, a plant-based diet is the way to go…what sets a plant-based diet apart is that it’s the only diet pretty much where it’s not based on restrictions. It’s easy to adhere to because people are not left hungry”. There are more vegan Brits than ever these days, which in turn means it’s easier to switch to a plant-based lifestyle – brands are reacting to the rise in awareness of this diet, and are providing vegan alternatives, such as KFC releasing their vegan "chicken" burger in 2019. Where’s the Nutrition at Medical Schools? While many of us are aware of the connection between nutritious diets and healthy living, some in the know claim even they don’t know enough about nutrition. In 2018, the BBC revealed that medical students in the UK are only taught between 10 and 24 hours of content based on nutrition across a five or six year course. The General Medical Council, who publish guidance and standards for medical schools across the UK, have since set up a review of their training to determine whether nutrition should be given more focus during medical courses. A boost in the emphasis placed on nutrition within medical schools’ curriculum would be backed by a number of medical professionals. Professor of Clinical Medicine at Columbia University, Sara Sidelmann, claims “health’s future is about a focus on nutrition to prevent disease.” Are Nutritionists the Future? While we learned a long time ago that too much chocolate is bad and eating your 5-a-day is ideal, it could be suggested that it’s time we went back to basics when it comes to nutrition. The importance of some of the fundamental foundations of basic healthy-living can sometimes be lost in a world of fad diets and celebrity fitness regimes. Should access to nutritionists be similar to access to a doctor? When there is so much evidence to suggest that good nutrition is essential for health, perhaps solutions to pesky colds or even chronic diseases are much simpler than we think. Seeing a nutritionist could be another way to try and combat ailments, and the only you need medicine could be sat in your fruit bowl. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Ellie Chivers examines the double-edged sword nature of Covid-19 and its potential effects on the environment and humanity. Photo by CDC Coronavirus: The deadly and inescapable ‘C’ word attracting the undivided attention of reporters and the public alike. This week, the World Health Organisation declared Covid-19 a pandemic , triggering governments to take further action worldwide. The proven deadly disease, particularly for our elderly and those with underlying health problems has shut down schools, universities, and has a tight grip on several countries with many of their core industries affected. The UK is currently in the midst of the steady increase in cases of the disease, with 798 now recorded , and 10 deaths so far. It is hard to view the virus in any kind of ‘glass half full’ light, but an interesting, and perhaps unprecedented, result of the Coronavirus is that it has caused China’s carbon dioxide emissions to drop a significant 25 per cent with not too dissimilar ripples in Italy. China and Italy China is one of the world’s largest industrial powerhouses, but the closing of factories and refineries, as well as a drop of around 13,000 flights in to and out of the country daily, has caused their emissions to plummet . After Chinese New Year celebrations, it is normal to see a drop in coal consumption across the country as employees enjoy the week-long celebration, but the virus has halted the usual bounce-back. While it is unlikely these low emissions will continue after the virus is contained, these findings, first exposed by Lauri Myllyvitra , are something quite colossal. China’s CO2 output decline to 150 million metric tonnes is equivalent to the amount New York emits in one year. An article published to Forbes in 2018 revealed that China produced more CO2 emissions than the United States and the EU combined. This fact makes it undeniable that China needs to drastically reduce its emissions in order to truly help remedy the climate crisis, and the impacts of this pandemic might be the wake-up call the country’s government needs. Additionally, the European Space Agency’s satellite monitoring system has reported that Italy, which is the country within Europe to be so far the most severely affected by the coronavirus with the whole country currently on lockdown, has also had a significant reduction in its air pollution emissions. Will this really have an impact? The drop in emissions is huge for China, but has come at an unfortunate cost. As cases of Coronavirus hopefully ease up in the future, it is likely China will ramp up factory production to make up for lost time, so whether the effects of this emission dip will be felt for much longer is difficult to comprehend. Additionally, it’s predicted that even though reduced air travel and factory production reduces industrial emissions, this could be offset by domestic emissions as more and more people are told to stay home from work or decide to self-isolate. Environmentally, Covid-19 is helping in the fight against climate change however, from a health perspective, it is and will remain to be real danger for those most vulnerable within society. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please  consider donat ing.

Senior Editor Shaun Britton gives us a summary of arguably one of the most unprecedented years of the decade. | Journal Exclusive Photo by A Friend Looking to Tomorrow In the chill winter air, as the clocks struck midnight on New Year's Eve 2019, we did not just leave behind another year, but another decade. It was a decade that saw Donald Trump made US President, a decade in which we lost legends such as David Bowie, and a decade which witnessed tragic large-scale conflicts that shocked nations around the world. It was also a defining decade for awareness of climate change and environmental devastation. Yet it was a decade full of hope, as people young and old across the world stood up for the planet and challenged single-use plastic. The decade also brought forward the #MeToo movement, saw more countries legalise gay marriage, and saw an estimated 327% rise in people ditching animal products. Looking Forward, Not Backwards Having the political leadership that we do in the face of the trials we must overcome, it would be forgiven to entertain some healthy pessimism. After all, there is concern that leaders like Trump either don't understand climate change at all, or actively dismiss it, with him and his administration steadfastly promoting coal and fossil fuel development. "Yes, the danger must be growing. For the rowers keep on rowing. And they’re certainly not showing. Any signs that they are slowing." - ‘Wondrous Boat Ride’, from Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (1971) Boris Johnson neglected to take part in the televised party leadership debates on climate change in 2019, prompting the programme's producers to place a melting ice sculpture in his position on the panel. His plans to increase the number of flights to and from the UK were also unveiled in 2019, making reaching climate goals seem impossible. The decade may have brought us difficult times, but there was a great deal to be thankful for, and if we pick up the trail of breadcrumbs that the 2010s have left for us, we may find that the 2020s may be not just be bright, but the decade that saves the planet......... | Read More... We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please consider becoming an advocate.

Shaun Britton explores past solutions to dwindling resources and how similar steps could offer a much needed societal wide impact to safeguard our future. Photo by Duncan Kidd In 1940, the drastic shortages caused by the pressures of the Second World War led to the introduction of rationing in Britain. Various goods and produce such as petrol, sugar, lemons, meat and dairy, were either in scarcity due to limited importing, needed for the war effort, or both. Rationing sought to meet the issues of waning resources in 1940, but could it be an effective, and potentially course changing way to remedy the climate crisis of today, to support the sustainable needs of the future? Not a Drop to Drink According to a PWC report, in the year 2000, 508 million people across 38 countries experienced 'water stress' – a term used to describe a lack of availability and supply to water, or the possibility of that lack in the near future. By 2025, the report predicts that over 3 billion people in 48 countries could be in the same situation. The report also shows that much of our water is stored in inaccessible places, with 75% of freshwater in glaciers, and just under 25% underground. Imminent rising temperatures bring with them many threats to water supplies, including melting glaciers, so practical solutions are more vital than ever before. Particularly when approximately 70% of the world’s freshwater is used in food production. Decreasing Resources Today, we find ourselves in a world where demand for resources is outstripping the availability of the resources themselves. An infographic from science writer Tim De Chant measures how many resources would be needed if we continued to maintain the typical consumption of different countries. The infographic shows that if the whole world consumed resources like the US does, we would need a planet 4.1 times the size of the Earth to manage. For the UK, it would need to be twice the size. The production of beef uses 15,415 litre/kg of water. Soya, although using much less water than its meat counterpart (296 litres per litre/kg), is still in high demand, with the USDA stating that in 2017/18, world soybean production would be at 346.92 million metric tons, though it is worth noting that three quarters of soya production is for animal feed. The answer is of course, to adopt the suggestions offered from leading organisations – follow a plant-based diet, reduce emissions, stop using single-use plastics, buy local, and of course, reduce our consumption. But if people refrain from or even refuse to reduce consumption by their own will, might rationing be our only option? Change or Change It seems unlikely, given the consumption habits of the western world, and the levels of food in wartime rationing, that people would be all up for its return, and many further may see no issue in our consumption at all. Glib comments on the ‘Nanny State’ however, may have no jurisdiction here. If a government has any job to do, then it should be the protection and well-being of its populace, not just of those in the privileged position of frequent access to food, but of those who haven't. If we as a collective are unwilling to change our consumption at a personal level, then there may be only one conclusion: that a responsible government may have to, out of necessity, control our consumption levels for us, whether we like it or not. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please consider donating.

Ellie Chivers tells us more about why the dairy industry is failing and the factors contributing to it's demise. Photo by Josh Redd Dairy companies are feeling the shift in consumer trends and paying the price for their unsustainable, and arguably unethical business models, with some of the biggest names in the industry filing for bankruptcy. When you make your morning bowl of cereal, is it corn flakes or milk first? When you’re making a cuppa at teatime, is it milk before teabag or the other way around? And is it cow’s milk, or a milk alternative? If it’s the latter, whether that’s soya, oat, almond or coconut milk, you’re not the only one. In fact, a lack of demand for real milk has caused the demise of a number of America’s dairy companies. The Death of Dairy Founded in 1925, Dean Foods was the largest dairy company in the USA, with 66 manufacturing facilities operating in 32 states, distributing produce around every state in America. In November 2019, it filed for bankruptcy.It's blaming a drop in milk consumption across America. In 2014, data from the USDA revealed the amount of whole milk drunk per capita in the country had fallen 78% since 1970, which equates to Americans drinking less than 0.24 cups a day compared to 1.1 nearly 50 years ago. As of January 2020, Borden Dairy Co, another one of America’s oldest and largest dairy companies has also become the second major producer to file for bankruptcy. Some might say it’s a sad story for Dean Foods and Borden Diary, but others would say that its encouraging news to see a change in the trend of the exploitation of animals for products, with many sentient cows now be spared a life of slavery and trauma for human consumption. Drop in British Milk Consumption It’s not just America seeing a shift towards milk alternatives. Stats unveiled in 2019 show that of 2000 Brits surveyed online, 27% of 16-34 year olds say they no longer drink cow’s milk, 37% cited health benefits as the reason behind their switch, while 36% prioritised environmental concerns. That being said, it’s clear that the majority of older consumers are sticking to tradition, as milk alternatives still only account for 4% of volume sales across the whole UK, and 8% of value sales. There is a long way to go before Britons abandon dairy completely. Ethical and Environmental Concerns Environmental concerns seem to permeate through more issues than just the product inside the packaging. A growing awareness for health, ethical and environmental factors is arguably part of this shift. 33% of consumers stating that they want containers to be made wholly or at least partially from recycled plastics, and 27% want a guarantee the milk they buy is at least sustainably farmed. The new consumer trend is about more than just the product, it's a sign that collectively human consciousness is shifting towards being more aware and taking action towards a more responsible and sustainable society. Hopefully, with what seems to be the beginning of the end for the dairy industry, this should push companies within this sector to take more ethical and sustainable choices when choosing a business path in the future. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please consider donating.

Ben Dolbear reveals how the eighth largest coal producing country is taking coal-free steps to becoming a more sustainable nation. Photo by Alain Wong Germany is currently the eighth largest producer of coal on the globe, contributing approximately 185.8 million tonnes of the fossil fuel to the climate crisis annually. But according to a government commission released earlier this year, the nation will commit to ambitious targets which will see them entirely cease all coal production. This comes despite the fact that 40% of the country's electricity is currently sourced from coal. Climate Before Convenience Lignite coal is cheap, domestically mined, and responsible for approximately one fifth of the country's greenhouse gas emissions. It is for this reason that Germany has been criticised in some quarters for prioritising its economy over tackling climate change - until now. Speaking after a 21-hour negotiation, Ronald Pofalla, chairman of the 28-member government commission, boldly stated during a news conference, "There won’t be any more coal-burning plants in Germany by 2038'. Around 20,000 people currently work in the German coal industry, and a fund of around €41 billion of funding has been set aside to help mitigate any negative consequences to regions which economically benefit from coal production. 340,000 Germans currently work in its renewable energy industry. The statement follows the 2012 decision by the German government to shut down over half of the country's nuclear plants in pursuit of more sustainable alternatives. Concern Across Continents Despite the promising political shift in Europe towards addressing the climate crisis, coal looks set to remain the world's leading source of electricity indefinitely, particularly due to the fact that China alone produces almost as much coal as the rest of the globe combined. In the United States, President Trump has rewritten Obama-era emission rules for power plants, meaning that the coal industry is set to see a revival due to the slashing of goals for carbon reduction. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please consider donating.

Ellie Chivers has put together this helpful guide to get you started on this wonderful plant based diet. The jump to veganism is big, no matter your current diet, but here are some tips to make the transition a little smoother: Vegan Mindset The best way to launch yourself into veganism is to stock up, so you’re ready and raring come January 1st. Having noodles, beans, rice, pasta and spices to hand will encourage you to whip up hearty vegan dishes. Keep reminding yourself why you’re committing to this – it will be demanding, but remember your reasoning. Slow And Steady Some people can make the transition immediately, but for others, the change will come gradually. Both are completely okay. If the latter applies to you, try cutting out meat in the first week, fish in the second, and dairy in the third. It’s all about going at your own pace, and what will encourage the lifestyle to stick. Friends And Community If you have a friend who’s happy to help out, that’s great! Having a cooking buddy will inject some fun, as well as having someone to share ideas with. Failing that, there are many vegan communities that would be delighted to assist. Whether that’s online, or in a local village hall; just one person, or a big group, having that supportive network will cushion your transition into veganism. Get Creative A brand-new diet is a fantastic excuse to experiment with dishes. A great way of doing this is through vegan cook books, or online – there are all sorts of recipes targeted at both the competent cooks, or those who can just scrape beans on toast. Veganise Your Favourites While it is a thrill to make some impressive new-fangled meals, you may miss some comforts. Why not veganise your favourite foods? Swap the beef patty for beans in your burgers, the chicken pieces for tofu in curries and stir fries, and the cheese for a dairy-free version for pizza. Making these little but impactful changes is a brilliant start. Vegan Meat Substitutes Look at the back of meat substitute packets – like vegetarian sausages, burgers and pies - some of the brands that make these products are vegan too. Furthermore, you can emulate that perfect BLT with tempeh, and there’s lots of meat dishes that can be veganised with a touch of tofu. Protein Priority Stripping away the meat and animal by-products takes away some vital protein (which are found in both animals and plants based food), essential to build muscle mass and energy. It’s important to replace what might be lost with essential plant-based (much healthier) protein sources such as: chickpeas, beans, lentils, peas, quinoa – to name a few – all have that much-needed protein content. Stack Away You may find that many vegan meals aren’t as calorific. That means it’s totally okay to snack, especially while your body is detoxing and getting used to the change. Pick up some extra fruit or treat yourself to a scrumptious vegan chocolate bar. Vegan Markets & Festivals As veganism grows, so do the vegan markets - try out not just vegan food, but also gifts, beauty, skincare and clothes. Visiting a vegan market is a wonderful way of getting inspiration before or during your Veganuary journey. If you can’t find a local vegan market, try local Sunday markets or Christmas markets – many have vegan stalls too. Motivation Reminder Remember why you decided to take these steps, and what it means to you and the benefits. Whether your motivation was for your health, helping the environment for natures animals. We hope that by following these tips, they will help your transition go more smoothly. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a pro-consciousness publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. We are charity and funded by readers like you. To stay up to date, please subscribe to our newsletter. To support our work and journalism, please donate. | Tru.

Sarah Clifford-Smith investigates how billions of micro-plastic could be polluting your morning brew. Photo by Clay Banks A recent Canadian study published in the Journal of Environmental Science and Technology has found that tea bags release billions of micro-plastics when submerged in boiling water. The scientists conducting the study found 11.6 billion micro-plastic and 3.1 billion nano-plastic particles were released from just one tea bag. The release of such particles is accelerated by high temperatures, so the boiling water used to make our morning cups of tea is allowing high volumes of the micro-plastics to enter our cuppas. The History of Tea The drinking of tea originated in China, with tea bags first making their way to the West for commercial consumption in the early 1900s. They were favoured for their convenience, however the tea put into the bags was often comprised of leftovers from tea processing factories producing lower quality tea. The first tea bags were made using gauze sacks. Today, the bags are commonly made with filter paper, however polypropylene, a type of plastic, is used to seal the bags; this makes many tea bag not fully biodegradable, with some premium brands making their bags entirely from plastic. Plastic’s Implications The World Health Organisation has been investigating the possible health implications of human consumption of plastic; although they have not found health risks with the current level of plastics in products, their findings thus far are based on little evidence as micro-plastic research is still a new area of science. Plastic that is twenty microns (each micron being a thousandth of a millimetre) or less can enter our bodies through the intestines instead of passing through and out of the body. A recent study has found that when immune cells come into contact with micro-plastics, they die three times faster than other immune cells. This calls into question what effect micro-plastics this could have on the human immune system as more and more are finding their way into our bodies. An average person could be ingesting approximately 5 grams of plastic per week. The equivalent of one credit card - WWF Plastics in tea bags have more far-reaching consequences than just our bodies. Most tea bags get thrown in the bin and end up in landfill. The small plastic particles can seep away into water supplies, ending up in the oceans and soul. Once these kind of micro-plastics end up in the oceans, fish mistake them for food, allowing them to move their way up the ocean food chain and can eventually end up back on our plates. Plastic particles can then pass through our bodies and end up in the sewage system. Though tea bags only contain small plastics, they are sold and used in extremely large quantities across the globe, meaning they can build up and have a significant impact. Making a Change Some brands have been conducting trials and research into creating plastic-free, fully biodegradable tea bags. The spotlight fell on tea bags when campaigners demanded that tea companies rid their products of plastic. Teapigs has been quietly leading the way in environmentally-friendly packaging. They were the first tea bag company to be certified plastic-free, as well as sustainably source their tea, priding themselves on selling whole tea leaves in their bags instead of powders. Other large tea brands, such as PG tips, Clipper and Pukka are not yet plastic-free, but are trialling new more sustainable materials. Another option is using a pot and loose tea leaves or using a strainer for one mug of tea, but most tea leaves sold in supermarkets come in plastic bags. When the alternative is introducing micro-plastics into our bodies and oceans, is it really worth it just for the convenience of making a cuppa quickly? Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Writer Katie Byng-Hall looks at the real moral and environmental impact of fashion and what some retailers are doing about it. Photo by Hannah Morgan Fashion is an integral part of modern life for many people, which means that buying clothes continually to keep up with trends is key. This can be summed up in the term ‘fast fashion’, namely cheap, fashionable clothing available on the high street, inspired by catwalks and celebrity fashion, and updated non-stop. This trend leads to approximately 350,000 tonnes of clothing being thrown into landfill annually as garments are constantly replaced. The top high-street brands now typically have 52 ‘micro-seasons’ annually based on current trends. For example, Topshop releases 400 new styles on their website every week. This fast turn-around means that the products are often poorly made from low-quality materials which are harmful to the environment. Today’s consumerist fashion culture is concerning not only for our pockets, but also for the planet. Environmental Impact The clothing industry has a monumental effect on the environment. The annual greenhouse gas emissions related to textiles production stand at 1.2 billion tons, making the fashion industry’s climate impact greater than that of all international airline flights and maritime shipping trips combined. It has also been found that the production of all the clothing bought in the UK every minute releases more carbon emissions than a car driving around the world six times. Buying a single cotton white shirt produces as much carbon dioxide as driving a car for 35 miles. The industry harms the environment through more than just greenhouse gases. Textile dyeing is the second largest water-polluter globally, trumped only by agriculture. Additionally, polyester, currently the most popular clothing material, releases microfibers when it’s washed which add to plastic levels in the oceans, poisoning sea creatures when plankton eat the fibres. Underestimated Damage The fashion predicament, and thus also its environmental impact, are more severe than one might think. Clothing and footwear production supplies 8% of global greenhouse emissions, a figure which is expected to see a 50% increase by 2030. This is caused by our rapidly expanding appetite for new clothing. Clothing production doubled between 2000 and 2014, with the average person buying 60% more clothing annually compared to the overall spending habits of 15 years ago. This growth in demand has a destructive effect on more than just the environment. Fast fashion is fuelled by low-paid workers, often overseas, who have to produce garments in poor conditions to meet their employers’ excessive demands. For example, some cheap materials contain high levels of lead, meaning that workers exposed to them for prolonged periods of time are more at risk of infertility and heart attacks. Our consumerist habits come at the detriment of other humans’ lives. ‘Slow Fashion’ Fast fashion needs to be challenged through so-called ‘slow fashion’. One example of this is ‘circular fashion’ – recycling materials from well-made garments used to create new clothing. Multiple organisations are promoting a more sustainable approach to clothing, such as the UN’s Alliance for Sustainable Fashion campaign, launched in 2019 to kickstart action by ten coordinated UN organisations trying and change the fashion industry through sustainable projects and policies. Big high-street companies are also jumping on the bandwagon, with H&M launching a garment collection scheme to reduce waste, and Patagonia producing jackets made from recycled plastic bottles. Companies like Rent the Runway, from which you can rent outfits for occasions instead of buying them, are also becoming more popular. Whether it’s through buying from sustainable brands, purchasing better-quality garments so you have to replace them less frequently, donating used clothing to charity and buying second-hand, or just buying fewer new pieces altogether, making changes to your clothing spending habits can have a real positive impact on the environment. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Health and Nutrition Writer: Ellie Chivers Explores The English City Dominating The Vegan Scene. Photo by Matthew Gerrard When I think where the most ‘vegan’ place in the world could be, some major metropolis packed with "millennials" or ‘hippies’ come to mind – perhaps Brighton, L.A or Sydney. Research has revealed that the most ‘vegan’ city in the world is the one and only Bristol.  This might sound a bit of an unlikely reality to many who haven't visited, but after delving deeper into Bristol’s sub-culture, it really is no surprise. Viva! – the animal rights group – is based in Bristol, alongside a surplus of independent vegan lounges, restaurants and shops. Only 27 miles away from Glastonbury, Bristol has earned it'self a reputation for many things, having a great nightlife and a diverse culture. The researchers Chef’s Pencil: An online congregation of chefs who share their favourite recipes believe; " It is thought that the Veganuary campaign, where people eat vegan for the month of January, has contributed substantially to the rise of veganism in the UK, ". The research was carried out using Google Trends, and found Bristol had the most concentrated number of searches for vegan-related things.  Global Change Veganism has been felt globally, and can in part can be credited to some high-profile documentaries such as ‘ What The Health ,’  ‘Cowspiracy’  and  ‘F ood inc"  which many have said have had an impact on turning them vegan. O ne in five under 30s in Sweden now class themselves as vegan, and vegan companies in New Zealand are apparently struggling to cope with demand. As for the UK itself, we hold the title of ‘second-most vegan country in the world’ , biting at Australia’s heels. Our country also houses 5 of the world’s 20 most vegan cities. All in all, if you want your vegan fix, Bristol is the place to go. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please  donate .

Writer Ben Dolbear Reveals what Could be the Beginning of the end of Animal Circus Culture Photo by Sergi Ferrete In a pioneering move towards totally outlawing the circus animal culture, the ruling Social Democrats, headed by Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen, paid around £1.3 million (11 million Danish krone) for the four African mammals, called Ramboline, Lara, Djunga and Jenny. As yet, there is no confirmed home for the animals, but the government has appealed for anybody with suitable facilities to provide a ‘timely takeover and proper welfare’ for the elephants. Until this time, Animal Protection Denmark will offer them a temporary home. The purchase comes six months after the UK government tabled a bill to criminalise travelling circuses from featuring animals, with Michael Gove saying, ‘[t]ravelling circuses are no place for wild animals in the 21st Century’. The manager of the circus to which three of the elephants belonged, Benny Berdino, said he was happy that the animals would be given a ‘happy retirement’. There is currently no European Union-wide law on circus animals and circus animal welfare is the individual responsibility of member states. At present, twenty-two member states have already implemented 'restrictions, a partial or a full ban’ on the use of circus animals, but are obligated to allow circus animals to be transported through their territory. In February this year, a Parliamentary question was submitted to the European Commission on an ‘EU-wide ban on the use of wild animals in circuses for reasons of public safety and security, human and animal health’. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Katie Byng-Hall Investigates The Corporate Response To Notre-Dames Recent Fire. Photo by Bennett Tobias On the evening of 15th April 2019, a fire began in Paris’s Notre-Dame Cathedral. Over the ensuing hours, the cathedral’s roof sustained significant damage, and its spire collapsed. Although the devastation was not as extensive as feared, France mourned the damage to one of the country’s iconic national treasures. In the days after the fire, French companies and wealthy tycoons flocked to donate to the restoration of the cathedral’s roof. The French oil company Total gave €100 million, while multi- billionaire owner of Gucci and Louis Vuitton Bernard Arnault contributed €200 million, arguably in an attempt to outdo his business rival François Pinault who initially only donated €100 million (although it seems silly to use the word ‘only’ regarding such huge sums). While some have applauded this generosity, others argue that the money could have been used more honourably for more urgent causes, such as the battles against environmental destruction, climate change and poverty. The construction of Notre-Dame as we know it began in 1163, with additional features added in the following centuries making it a fascinating encapsulation of both medieval and gothic architecture. As French President Emmanuel Macron said in his statement after the fire, “Notre-Dame is our history, [...] the epicentre of our lives”. This passionate speech reflects the sentiment of the French people, and would seem to justify the massive donations which flooded in to help save the landmark. Despite this, some see it as just another building, making it inherently replaceable in spite of its cultural significance. Donors’ displays of solidarity have been condemned as PR stunts designed to show off their wealth and benevolence to a cause which they knew would receive worldwide publicity, rather than one which could be beneficial to the planet as a whole. To some, the donations are a demonstration of the continual cycle of the rich helping the rich conserve their own money-centric culture, while disregarding the pressing issues which face the environment and the quality of life of other human beings. Culture or Climate? Roughly 8 million tonnes of plastic are thrown into the ocean every year. Arguably the most alarming collection of such plastic is the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, a clump of 1.8 trillion pieces of rubbish spread across the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and California. Experts have devised a scheme whereby 42% of the Garbage Patch could be removed from the water within a decade, but it would cost $390 million to fund. With the $1 billion raised in a matter of days for Notre-Dame, this scheme could be completed twofold; it may even be enough to clear the rubbish from the area entirely, or formulate a solution to prevent plastic entering the ocean in the first place. Many people believe that the volume of human rubbish in our oceans is a crisis which deserves more attention than a fire in an old building, and a crisis which is currently being neglected. Having said this, some wealthy and well-known figures have actively participated in environmental conservation. For example, Leonardo DiCaprio founded the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation in 1998, and has since used his celebrity to raise $80 million in grants to fund grassroots environmental projects in 50 countries worldwide. But the question is, are individuals’ isolated contributions or actions enough to make significant change before it’s too late? Why can we not create a movement similar to the reaction to the Notre-Dame disaster to help save the planet? Elitist Culture During Macron’s presidency, there has been a continual theme of societal discontent, embodied since late 2018 in the Yellow Vest movement. Photo by cv The yellow vests, named because of the motorists’ vests they wear, are lower-paid workers who struggle to make ends meet with their current income, but who earn too much to qualify for social benefits. They began protesting against the 20% rise in diesel tax instated by Macron, as well as his tax cuts to the wealthy; the protesters see Macron as a president for the rich and elite rather than the common Frenchman, and his endorsement of the cathedral fundraising can be seen as a confirmation of that. While it is true that some lower-paid French people are delighted by the fact that Notre-Dame is to be restored because it is a cultural monument close to the heart of many across France, the $1 billion donations prompted almost 10,000 yellow vest protesters to take to the streets in opposition in the days following the fire. It is undeniable that such a sum of money could be used to improve the lives of French workers and those under the poverty line, so it’s understandable that some see the Notre-Dame donations as wasted on saving a building rather than helping French people. A Necessary Balance. The scenes of Parisians crying on the streets as they watched their cathedral burn should not be disregarded. Culture is an integral part of how humans interpret and identify with the world they live in, and Notre-Dame is one of the most prominent cultural landmarks in the world. However, Greta Thunberg, the 16-year-old Swedish climate change activist, identifies a key problem with the amount of attention given to the cause of saving the planet. While she has said that she is happy that the fundraising for Notre-Dame’s restoration is strong, she has expressed the valid concern that the enthusiasm behind the restoration of the Earth’s climate is not so substantial. The same could be said for the support for those people struggling to contend with poverty in France and around the world. The environment is the single piece of culture which can unite the world and be appreciated by everyone, never mind being essential for human survival. What man has made should be protected and preserved as it is our legacy, but the Earth’s natural landmarks and the lives of our fellow humans should be given the same respect and concern. #donations #money #notredam | Tru. 🌱 Source: 1.https://truththeory.com/2019/04/17/billion-dollars-has-been-raised-for-notre-dame-cathedral-but-we-cant-fix-the-planet/ 2.https://www.rte.ie/news/business/2019/0416/1042851-notre-dame-fire/ 3.https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/apr/15/notre-dame-fire-paris-france-cathedral 4.https://www.britannica.com/topic/Notre-Dame-de-Paris 5.https://www.shoutoutuk.org/2019/04/22/sickened-by-huge-notre-dame-donations-dont-worry-jesus-is-too/ 6.https://www.thelocal.fr/20190418/should-the-notre-dame-donations-be-spent-on-frances-poor 7.https://gardencollage.com/change/climate-change/celebrities-care-environment-want-know/ 8.https://www.earthday.org/2018/04/05/fact-sheet-plastics-in-the-ocean/ 9. https://www.overtureglobal.io/story/the-cost-to-clean-up-the-great-pacific-garbage-patch 10. https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/yellow-vests-notre-dame-fire-protest-paris-macron-a8879521.html 11. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2018/12/happening-france-yellow-vest-movement-explained-181204153014250.html

Writer Ben Dolbear examines the European Union's poor record on climate change, and why poor centralised decision-making has hampered efforts to fight it. Photo by Artur Roman The European Union's new leadership has made bold promises on climate change since the handover of power last month. But the bloc's poor record on environmental action during its twenty-five formal years of existence may prove a more accurate, unflattering calculation for the future direction of the European Project. Before assuming the position of President of the European Commission early last December, German native Ursula von der Leyen promised the European Parliament that it would be her priority to alleviate the concerns of a European population who were 'feeling quite clearly the effects of climate change'. The President has committed her new Commission to pushing through the 2050 climate neutrality target, an initiative that she calls 'ambitious'. 'I want the European Green Deal to become Europe's hallmark. At the heart of it is our commitment to becoming the world's first climate-neutral continent. It is also a long-term economic imperative: those who act first and fastest will be the ones who grasp the opportunities from the ecological transition. I want Europe to be the front-runner. I want Europe to be the exporter of knowledge, technologies and best practice' - Ursula von der Leyen. These are welcome words from a president who clearly acknowledges more than most national governments the immediacy of the crisis already threatening lives and living standards across the globe. However, the reality of the Green Deal struck on 13th December amounts to significantly less than what was hoped for by climate activists conscious of the continent's soaring carbon contribution to the warming atmosphere. One such disappointing caveat to the deal is the exemption of Poland, whose economy relies heavily on coal. Poland is by far Europe's largest polluter, with its Belchatow power station contributing 38.3 megatonnes of carbon dioxide to global emissions in 2018. Lack of action by Poland will lead to efforts by the rest of Europe being undermined by its booming coal industry. Furthermore, the Czech Republic and Hungary only agreed to the deal once it had been watered down so much as to allow for no punitive measures against their use of nuclear energy, a power source condemned by Greenpeace as having 'no place in a safe, clean, sustainable future'. Far from being 'Europe's man on the moon moment', as suggested by President von der Leyen, the final details of the pitiful compromise deal will not be known until a key meeting in Glasgow at the end of 2020. The European Union's lack of action on climate change is as old as the institution itself, with big money hampering honest politics and real change for years; just last week the six-month rotating presidency of the European Council, currently held by Croatia, signed a deal with its own country's national oil company INA to supply its fuel. This kind of corruption has defined the failure to action by the European Union, reminiscent of the Cresson scandal of the 1990s. The greatest irony came in late November of last year when the European Parliament symbolically voted to declare a climate emergency despite continuing to split their parliamentary sessions between two homes: Strasbourg, France, and Brussels, Belgium. This monthly move comes at a regular cost of £150 million as gas-guzzling lorries, carbon-emitting planes, and diesel cars transport tonnes of paperwork and office equipment across the 270 mile stretch. Whilst it is commendable that EU-wide carbon emissions have been dropping throughout the last decade, current plans to allow overly high greenhouse gas emissions until 2030 have forced members of the indigenous Sami community in Sweden and French lavender farmer Maurice Feschet, who lost 44% of his harvest in six years because of climate change, to file a lawsuit against the EU institutions. Families who sued the European Union claimed that their lives had been blighted by poor policy decisions regarding climate change made by the lawmakers at the top of the EU, and instead of claiming compensation asked that politicians define a higher, more ambitious reduction target. The United Kingdom leaves the European Union at the end of January, at it is hoped that breaking away from its institutions will enable future governments of the UK to engage with more ambitious proposals on climate change, including a national Carbon Emissions Tax and enforceable limits on carbon emissions. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Writer Ben Dolbear examines advice from a leading US think tank recommending the introduction of a global levy on red meat in an attempt to reduce consumption and fight climate change. Photo by Alex Azabache Fitch Solutions Macro Research, a leading macroeconomic analysis group, has suggested that red meat may soon follow sugar in becoming the next target of the 'sin tax' as concerns over climate change grow to record levels. People are more aware and concerned today about the interrelated issues of climate change, deforestation, and animal cruelty than ever before, meaning that pressure is being put on government's to help reduce global intake of red meat. Currently, humanity consumes an unsustainable 315 million tonnes of meat, a number that is widely expected to surge to 453 million by 2030, as the Earth's population level increases to well above eight billion. Over-consumption of red meat has several damaging, unintended consequences for the environment, including deforestation on an unprecedented level. Currently, it takes an area of vegetation more than seven times the size of the European Union to produce food for the cattle and livestock consumed in Europe. The last decade has seen a marked increase of government intervention through taxation of products deemed undesirable for public health, such as cigarettes, alcohol, and sugar, but this newest move against red meat would show a commitment that administrations across the world are serious about the Earth and its future. Back in May of last year, Fitch Solutions commented that, 'governments could leverage on this demand for more sustainability and tax the consumer instead of implementing stricter environmental production regulations', in a reference to popular action movements against climate change such as Extinction Rebellion (XR), who have also spoken out about the detrimental environmental impacts of the excessive consumption of factory-farmed meat. Reducing our consumption of red meat has also been linked to lower risk of cancer and heart disease, with a study by University of Oxford researchers finding that a red meat tax could save up to 6,000 British lives annually. According to a report released by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) last summer, which includes data compiled by more than 100 scientists from 52 countries, our food system accounts for 37% of all greenhouse gas emissions, with the way we use land, including for farming, mining, logging, and raising livestock, accounting for a shocking 23%. In light of the recommendations by Fitch Solutions, the German parliament has, in the first few days of the new year, dedicated much of its debating time to mulling over the introduction of a meat tax, with one minister saying that such a move could bring in revenue to be spent on improving animal welfare. At present, Germany taxes meat at 7%, less than half the 19% standard rate on goods. However, increasing the VAT on red meat to the standard rate, according to the Federal Environment Agency, bring in €5.2 billion a year, which could be spent on environmental measures. Other European nations, particularly Sweden and Denmark, have for the last few years debated the idea of a meat tax, but no country has yet implemented it. Like what you read? Like Tru. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate.

Innovation and Sustainability: Writer Ellie Chivers Celebrates The Rise Of Renewable Energy. Photo by Vitaly Vlasov For the first time since the Industrial Revolution, clean energy sources have managed to scrape their way to the top – and are now being used more often than their unsustainable counterparts. This cause for celebration was announced by the National Grid in late June, with zero-carbon sources being accountable for 48% of the electricity we generate here Britain, compared to fossil fuels creating 47% and biomass burning, 5%. This news is perhaps unsurprising when looking at electricity generation trends over the past decade. For example, coal generation has depleted from 30% to a mere 3%, while wind power generation has escalated from 1% to 19%. We have also witnessed the first coal-free fortnight this year, and recorded new highs in solar power generation for two straight days. Yet, as the increase in demand for solar and wind energy increases, so will the need for storage of the energy, such as in the batteries of electric cars. The cars’ charging systems will be flipped so that when demand strikes, the National Grid can receive energy back from the cars. There are also ways of trading electricity with our European neighbours, with the zero-carbon share set to increase to 90% by the 2030s through the UK’s exchange of electricity with Norway’s impressive hydropower network. That being said, there is set to be a rise in demand from motorists for nuclear energy, and those at the National Grid have warned the government that the technology behind the electric cars is still a work in progress and cannot be relied upon. The government have been notoriously shy in confronting the issues surrounding climate change, yet the new findings show a tipping point in the right direction for the use of clean energy sources. We can only hope this increases all the more in an effort to save our planet. We are a conscious publication and platform providing social-ethical insight and acknowledgement about topics that matter. Ethical insight, one place. We are non-profit and funded by readers like you. | To support our work and journalism, please donate. | Tru.