Ecosystem degradation

Human-induced ecosystem degradation has been going on for a long time. It does not only harm nature and wildlife, but also us humans, as our wellbeing is closely linked to ecosystem health. It is estimated that 40% of the world’s population is affected by ecosystem degradation in one form or another, with the greatest impact falling on poor and vulnerable people [2]. Ecosystem degradation takes on many forms, including land use change, pollution, and the introduction of invasive species [2]. The exploitation of natural resources and degradation of ecosystems is happening under ever-accelerating rates – and we are now at risk of reaching tipping points in some ecosystems [2]. Past these points, our ecosystems cannot recover to their natural state anymore. Degraded ecosystems cannot provide us with the same essential ecosystem services any longer and lose their biodiversity and integrity [2].

The degradation of ecosystems has gone so far that simply protecting what is left is not enough. As the UN puts it, “we need more nature” [2]. This can be achieved by restoring the ecosystems that we have destroyed. Ecosystem restoration is defined by the UN as “the process of halting and reversing degradation, resulting in improved ecosystem services and recovered biodiversity” [2]. Engaging with this process looks different around the world, as the action needed depends on local conditions [2].

What the UN does about it

To raise awareness of this issue and combat ecosystem degradation as well as biodiversity loss, the UN initiated the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. This was decided on in a resolution by the UN General Assembly in March 2019 [2]. Its aim is to “prevent, halt and reverse the degradation of ecosystems worldwide” [3], while contributing to combat poverty, climate change, and the current mass extinction. The UN emphasizes that large-scale ecosystem restoration worldwide is needed to meet the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030 [3]. Ecosystem restoration can also have direct economic benefits. By the numbers: it is estimated that for every dollar spent on ecosystem restoration, between three and 75$ are returned in form of ecosystem goods and services [3]. Furthermore, ecosystem restoration can contribute immensely to climate change mitigation and future resilience against climate change, reduce the risk of future pandemics, increase food security, and halt biodiversity loss [2].

One of the main goals of this UN Decade is to enhance the understanding of these benefits of successful ecosystem restoration and to include this knowledge in education as well as public and private sector decision-making [3]. Besides this, a goal is to strengthen the commitments and actions on ecosystem restorations at various levels world-wide [3]. The vision of the UN Decade is “a world where – for the health and wellbeing of all life on Earth and that of future generations – the relationship between humans and nature has been restored, where the area of healthy ecosystems is increasing, and where ecosystem loss, fragmentation and degradation has been ended” [3].

Yet, there is currently too little political support and technical capacity to achieve the necessary large-scale changes worldwide. Therefore, the UN Decade works to support governments, NGOs and stakeholders to achieve the vision [3]. They do this, for example, by raising awareness, furthering research and monitoring of global restoration progress, building technical capacity, and creating a platform for actions to take place [3]. UN members are encouraged to integrate ecosystem restoration into national policies and plans, enhance implementation of ecosystem protection and restoration by mobilising resources, and enable scientific research on the impacts of restoration [3]. The UN Decade can also be seen as a catalyser for a decentralized global movement to protect and restore nature [3]. For this, we need people that participate and do the actual work of restoring ecosystems locally – not only during the UN Decade, but also well after 2030.

Taking action

Ecosystem restoration can take on many forms and depends on the ecosystem and its status. Approaches can include repairing the damage that was done to the ecosystem or removing the drivers of ecosystem degradation, thereby inducing the ecosystem to repair itself [2]. All these approaches require time and resources, enabling policies, and knowledge [2]. Ten principals are meant to guide the restoration actions of the UN Decade:

The UN has also published an “Ecosystem Restoration Playbook”, in which it outlines how you can get involved. Examples are creating, joining, or donating to a restoration project, cleaning up your local ecosystem, greening your home, or buying sustainable products. You can also spread the word and raise awareness about ecosystem degradation and restoration. If you take action and become part of the #GenerationRestoration movement, you can make a pledge online. On the UN Decade’s website you can also take an interactive journey through various ecosystems and find upcoming events. Some of them take place online and are free to join!

References:

[1] https://www.un.org/en/observances/international-decades , last accessed 10.10.2021

[2] UNEP (2021). Becoming #GenerationRestoration: Ecosystem restoration for people, nature and climate. Nairobi. Available online: https://www.decadeonrestoration.org/publications/becoming-generationrestoration-ecosystem-restoration-people-nature-and-climate  

[3] UNEP and FAO (2020). Strategy for the UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration. Available online: https://www.decadeonrestoration.org/strategy  

The post “We need more nature” – The UN Decade on Ecosystem Restoration appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

When the excursion started at 8am on Friday morning, we drove off into the fog. By the time we reached our first stop – a volcano named “Rauher Kulm” in Neustadt am Kulm – the fog still hadn’t cleared. Nevertheless, we walked up the volcano and climbed the look-out tower. Apparently, the view from up there is usually great, but we had to use our imagination to see the surrounding Fichtelgebirge behind the wall of white fog. In spite of that, it was an interesting stop, as we learned about the geology of the basalt mountain, which has never erupted, and the surrounding vegetation.

The next stop was an information center at a former extra-deep drilling borehole. Here the continental deep drilling program of Germany (KTB) was conducted. The aim of this research program was to analyze the continental earth crust at this location. The researchers wanted to drill down to a depth of 10 km, but in the end they were only able to reach a depth of 9.1 km. The main drilling was conducted from 1990 to 1994. Nowadays the location serves as an information center about the drilling, general geology, and earth system processes. We watched a short movie and visited the exhibition on the earth system at the information center.

Following in the footsteps of Goethe and Alexander von Humboldt, we visited the “Felsenlabyrinth Luisenburg” in the Fichtelgebirge. The boulder field of granite stones has developed over long time spans through weathering and erosion processes. In German the particular form of weathering, through which the well-rounded giant boulders developed, is called Wollsackverwitterung (English: spherical weathering/onion skin weathering).

We climbed up steep steps and hiked through narrow gaps in the rocks. By now the fog had cleared and the sun was shining, so we had a great view from the top. On our hike through the rock labyrinth, we found a fascinating species: the luminescent moss (Schistostega pennata), which grows in cracks and between rocks.

Before heading back to Bayreuth, we had the opportunity to visit an old farmhouse (currently a museum), where we could see how people used to life in this region. Although it was unfortunate that the museum was already closed by the time we arrived, we could still have a look at the traditional herbs and the vegetable garden present there.

The excursion gave a nice teaser of what Bayreuth’s surroundings have to offer and provided a good chance to catch up with friends and meet new students. All in all, it was a great start to the new semester!

The post GCE students explore the Fichtelgebirge appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

Community-supported agriculture (CSA) originated in Japan (as “Teikei”, which means partnership), and in Switzerland independently from each other in the 1970s [1]. Since then, it has been propagated worldwide, and it can be found in many different forms and under various names. There is no fixed way of doing CSA. Still, the international CSA network URGENCI defines it as: “a framework to inspire communities to work together with their local farmers, provide mutual benefits and reconnect people to the land where their food is grown” [2].

CSA is an association between farmers or gardeners and private households, in which the needs of everyone – including the environment – are respected.  The members of this closed economic circle do not pay for individual food items, but rather for the upkeep and running of the agricultural business. In return, they receive a share of the harvest, which is usually provided to them on a weekly basis. This way of operating results, not only in the sharing of costs, but also the responsibilities and risks between the farmers and members, having benefits for both sides.

Small-scale, regional and sustainable agriculture are supported and furthered through these practices. CSA gives the farmers financial and planning security, besides assuring a fair wage for them [3, 4]. The financial security gives the farmers more flexibility and room for maneuver to try out new or traditional as well as more sustainable and organic ways of farming [3]. The time and money for trying out these practices often lack in conventional farming. In conventional agriculture, farmers also tend to concentrate on a small number of crops, vegetables or fruits they specialize in, to maximize efficiency. By implementing CSA, the farmers can grow a large range of products to satisfy the members of the association with a variety of products each week [3]. This increases diversity, which also has positive implications for the soil and local fauna. Furthermore, food wastage is reduced, as products that do not meet market standards are still distributed to and consumed by the members [3, 5]. The members receive fresh, regional, nutritious produce and the benefit of knowing where their food come from.  

There are different ways in which CSAs operate. Most commonly the farmers calculate the expenses for the year, based on the produce the members would like them to grow [3]. Then, either the costs are split evenly between all members in terms of a monthly membership fee, or, at a bidding round, each member can suggest what they could pay for the year. If after the bidding round not the whole costs are covered, the bidding round is done again, until they are [3]. The second option is based on the solidarity principal, as those, who can afford to, pay more, and those, who cannot, pay less. This way no one is excluded based on their financial situation.

Another aspect of CSA is the involvement of the members in the running of the farm. This is done to a varying extent at different CSA farms. For instance, members can either help out with the harvest, during planting events, or in the organization of food pick-ups. This way the consumer turns into a prosumer – a combination of consumer and producer. The idea behind this is that people do not only support the local farmer, but also experience where their food comes from. This puts the value back in the food, and it makes people think more about what they buy and eat. Therefore, there is a great educational value in CSA too.

There are many success stories of CSAs worldwide. But a relevant example, that shines a light on the problems some CSA farmers experience, is the study case by Ostrom in 2007 [4] on over 20 CSA farms in the Minneapolis and Madison area (USA). The study showed that especially the community idea behind CSA – farmers and members united as a community, sharing not only the benefits but also risks of farming – is often difficult to develop, and expectations of farmers and members tend to diverge. Since the initiative comes from the farmers in most cases, there is often a struggle to find members or to keep them involved [4]. The consequence of this is that farmers might orient the fees on what the members are willing to pay, rather than on what they really need to run the farm with fair wages and the other benefits that are meant to come with running a CSA [4]. Still, farmers, who can overcome the divergent expectations between themselves and members, and that can induce member engagement, are successful [4].

Notwithstanding, it has to be noted that this study conducted by Ostrom (2007) cannot be generalized, as it was conducted in one region [4]. A study on several CSAs in Germany, for example, found that most CSA members were motivated and engaged in farm activities [5]. Furthermore, the assessment conducted by Ostrom in 2007 revealed that members, who really engage with the CSA practices, experience a lifestyle shift, as they change their shopping behavior, cook healthier and with more variety [4]. This led the author to conclude that “part of the power of CSA as social movement lies with its ability to gradually forge a new understanding of what it means to eat” [4]. A concept that, therefore, bears ecological and social transformative potential.

If you would also like to change the way you eat and support local farmers, you can find information on CSAs around Bayreuth and how to get involved here. In Germany CSA is organized in the Netzwerk Solidarische Landwirtschaft , currently there are 368 CSA farms registered on their website [6].

References:

Where not otherwise indicated: https://www.solidarische-landwirtschaft.org/das-konzept

[1] https://urgenci.net/csa-history/ (last accessed 23.09.2021)

[2] https://urgenci.net/about-urgenci/ (last accessed 23.09.2021)

[3] Simpfendörfer C. (2017) Solidarische Landwirtschaft: Verbraucher gestalten Land(wirt)schaft. In: Kost S., Kölking C. (eds) Transitorische Stadtlandschaften. Hybride Metropolen. Springer VS, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-13726-7_6

[4] Ostrom M. (2007). “Community Supported Agriculture as an Agent of Change: Is it Working?”. Remaking the North American Food System, Clare Hinrichs and Tom Lyson (eds). University of Nebraska Press, pp 99-120.

[5] Bechtel D, van Elsen T. (2015). Potenziale Solidarischer Landwirtschaft für Naturschutz in der Kulturlandschaft. 13. Wissenschaftstagung Ökologischer Landbau. Available online: https://orgprints.org/id/eprint/26965/  

[6] https://www.solidarische-landwirtschaft.org/solawis-finden/auflistung/solawis#accordionHead131864 (last accessed 23.09.2021)

The post Community-supported agriculture – a transformative approach appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The Wadden Sea is the largest tidal flat system in the world, ranging from the Netherlands via Germany to Denmark. Due to its Outstanding Universal Value, as well as the progress that has been made in protecting and managing the Wadden Sea, it was declared a UNESCO World Heritage Site in 2009. The World Heritage Site area comprises most of the Wadden Sea and spans almost 11.500 km² across a coastline of about 500 km.

There are many factors that make the Wadden Sea an outstanding and valuable ecosystem. The geology and geological processes are very unique, as the coastline is extremely dynamic and constantly shaped by tides and wind. Through these processes, a diverse range of habitats have been created over time, such as large mud flats, saltmarshes, and sand dunes. However, not only long-term dynamics play a role. On a daily basis, the large tides move about 15 km³ of water in and out of the tidal area twice a day. These dynamics make the Wadden Sea a challenging place to live in, forcing its inhabitants – animals and plants alike – to adapt to the changing environment. Nevertheless, it is a major hotspot for biodiversity and the biomass productivity is one of the highest worldwide. Over 10.000 species can be found here and in the course of a year up to 12 million migratory birds stop over. The Wadden Sea is not only of great importance to migratory birds but also to coastal birds in general. It is an ideal habitat for them due to the immense availability of food, lack of mammalian predators, and undisturbed nature of some of the islands. The tidal flats harbor the largest population of lungworms worldwide with about 1 billion individuals. They play an important role for the ecosystem, as they recycle the upper sediment layer several times a year and thus keep the flats sandy.

The Wadden Sea and the immense biodiversity it harbors are nowadays threatened by anthropogenic influences like tourism. Being one of the most popular tourist destinations in Northern Europe, the Wadden Sea area saw over 53 million overnight stays in 2013 [1]. This is not even counting the number of day trippers, which are also in the millions each year [1]. Besides this, climate change and the associated sea level rise is expected to have a great effect on the Wadden Sea ecosystem. An increase in temperature and precipitation is already visible, which has led to an influx of southern warm-water species, northern migration of some cold-water species, as well as changes in the timing of life cycle events [2]. These changes, in turn, affect the food web in the Wadden Sea and might cause an imbalance in the trophic network [2]. Tidal flats and salt marshes might be able to keep up with the sea level rise to some extent, but other habitats might disappear [2]. Besides changes in temperature and sea level, changes in wind patterns and associated storm surges will also affect the Wadden Sea area. An increased flooding risk of salt marshes could, for example, limit the breeding success of birds [2]. Changes in precipitation patterns can also affect the Wadden Sea ecosystems via changes in riverine runoff and estuarian circulation [2].

In recognition of its uniqueness and important value, the Netherlands, Germany, and Denmark have joined forces to protect and manage the Wadden Sea through the Trilateral Wadden Sea Cooperation (TWSC) since 1978, which in turn is coordinated by the Common Wadden Sea Secretariat. The guiding principle of this cooperation is to “achieve, as far as possible, a natural and sustainable ecosystem in which natural processes proceed in an undisturbed way” [3]. Nowadays, most of the Wadden Sea is protected in form of national parks and nature reserves.

The three main areas of work of the TWSC are conservation, sustainable development, and environmental education. They continuously monitor the Wadden Sea in different aspects like wildlife, human activities, and ecological processes and regularly publish their findings in the Wadden Sea Quality Status Report. Additionally, they have conservation projects on various topics. Regarding climate change, they aim to enhance the ecosystems resilience through nature-based solutions. Coastal protection against sea level rise plays an especially important role here. For the protection of migratory birds and their habitat, the Wadden Sea Flyway Initiative has been established. To limit human interference with the ecosystem, a framework for sustainable fisheries has been developed and major parts of the Wadden Sea are designated Particularly Sensitive Sea Areas where marine activities are controlled. The TWSC also aims at creating sustainable tourism while enhancing people’s awareness on the value and importance of the Wadden Sea. The latter is also being done through environmental education programs.

If you would like to get involved in the conservation of the Wadden Sea yourself or are interested in marine/wetland ecology or ornithology, there are internship and job opportunities in this area. Some helpful links are listed below:  

https://www.waddensea-worldheritage.org/job-vacancies

https://multimar-wattforum.de/nationalpark-zentrum/jobs.html

https://www.nationalpark-wattenmeer.de/mitmachen/mitarbeiten/stellenangebote/

https://www.nationalpark-wattenmeer.de/wissensbeitrag/cb-praktikum-auf-scharhoern/

Where not indicated otherwise, the source for this blog entry is the official Wadden Sea World Heritage website: https://www.waddensea-worldheritage.org/

If this post has sparked your interest in the Wadden Sea, you can find much more information on the official website. Don’t forget to follow the Wadden Sea World Heritage on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram for the most-up-to-date news about this special place!

Other References:

[1] Bjarnason J.-B., Günther W. & Revier H. (2017) Tourism. In: Wadden Sea Quality Status Report 2017. Eds.: Kloepper S. et al., Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven, Germany. Last updated 21.12.2017. Downloaded 30.08.2021. https://qsr.waddensea-worldheritage.org/reports/tourism

[2] Philippart C.H.M, Mekkes L., Buschbaum C., Wegner K.M. & Laursen K. (2017) Climate ecosystems. In: Wadden Sea Quality Status Report 2017. Eds.: Kloepper S. et al., Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven, Germany. Last updated 21.12.2017. Downloaded 30.08.2021. https://qsr.waddensea-worldheritage.org/reports/climate-ecosystems

[3] CWSS (2017) Introduction. In: Wadden Sea Quality Status Report 2017. Eds.: Kloepper S. et al., Common Wadden Sea Secretariat, Wilhelmshaven, Germany. Last updated 01.03.2018. Downloaded 30.08.2021. https://qsr.waddensea-worldheritage.org/reports/introduction

The post The Wadden Sea – A UNESCO World Heritage Site appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

From stable states to the Anthropocene

Before the journey through the current and future state of our planet begins, the narrators take us back to the past. Emphasis is put on the stable state of the earth’s climate in the Holocene, and how this stability has allowed the modern world as we know it to develop. Continuously maintaining this stability is crucial for the systems that underpin our modern world. But we now have left this state of stability and entered a new geological epoch, termed the Anthropocene. Rockström highlights that, in only 50 years, we have pushed the climate past the state it has been in for the last 10.000 years. He draws a stirring comparison to us humans driving towards a cliff in the dark at full speed, with no headlights on. But in his view, science provides headlights, so that we can see the risks ahead of us. 

The risk of destabilizing the whole planet inspired Rockström and his colleagues to identify the systems and processes which regulate the state of earth. Next to defining these earth system processes, they also quantified the point beyond which we trigger non-linear changes (tipping points) and called these the planetary boundaries. They defined 3 zones for each system: the safe zone, the danger zone, and the high danger zone. The difference between the latter two is that the danger zone represents the range of uncertainty. The high danger zone, on the other hand, is beyond the range of uncertainty, and we face great risks of reaching tipping points here. Once we understand these systems and boundaries, we can not only identify which ones we have already crossed, but also how to return to the safe space again.

The planetary boundaries

The narrators kick the journey off with the first and most commonly known process, climate change. As we are all aware, we have already destabilized the climate system. In fact, we have already crossed the planetary boundary of 350 ppm of atmospheric CO2 concentration to the danger zone – and we are rapidly approaching the boundary to the high danger zone, which is represented by 1.5 °C warming or 450 ppm atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Next, the journey goes to the biosphere boundaries: the systems of land, biodiversity, freshwater, and nutrients fall into this category. For all of these, except the freshwater system, we have already crossed into the danger zone. Biodiversity loss and biogeochemical fluxes fall deep into the high danger zone and the land use change closely approaches it. Rockström highlights that the 1.5 °C target equivalent for biodiversity loss is zero loss of nature from now on. Also, the issue of nutrient flows, causing for example large scale eutrophication, needs to be taken more seriously. For freshwater use, we are still in the safe zone.

Ocean acidification is another process for which we are still in the safe zone, but we are just a step away from crossing the boundary into the danger zone. Arriving in this danger zone would have devastating consequences for all marine life.

There are two systems for which no boundaries could be defined yet: novel entities (e.g. nuclear waste, microplastic, heavy metals) and atmospheric aerosol concentration. Even though we do not know where we stand for these, we still need to limit the disposal and emission of these substances, as the environmental and air pollution has alarming consequences for nature and human health.

The last process gives us hope for the future: Ozone depletion, the only example for which we have passed way into the high danger zone but managed to reverse course through immediate and globally coordinated action. This shows that it is possible to return to a safe space if enough effort is put into it.

From a grim reality to sparking hope

Besides introducing us to the framework of planetary boundaries and where we stand on them, the narrators also paint a picture of the far-reaching destruction that we humans have already caused nature. In this very emotional section of the documentary, we hear from an Australian scientist on how he has seen the devastating effects of coral bleaching and the loss of whole reef systems in the course of his career. Another Australian scientist takes us to her research site, where she studies a vulnerable Australian bird species, after the destructive fires of the 2019/2020 fire season. Her arrival at the site during nesting season with all the nests destroyed and no wildlife remaining is heartbreaking to watch. But who is not moved by these pictures will be given food for thought by the linkages the narrators draw between the current pandemic and nature loss.

After opening our eyes for some of these far-reaching impacts we have on nature, we are provided with hope. According to Rockström, the window for us to turn around and move out of the danger zone is still open, but just barely. In the last part of the documentary, the narrators explain simple ways in which we can return to the safe space. These solutions reach from an immediate reduction of emissions, to planting more trees, having a healthy and climate friendly flexitarian diet, and reducing waste. The core message of the conclusion is that we do need to act now – and efforts must be globally coordinated, as what we do in this decade will determine the future course of humanity and our planet.

Opinion on the documentary

What makes this documentary extraordinary in my opinion is that it acts as a wake-up call, not only on the issue of climate change but on the multitude of complex and intertwined issues humanity has caused and is facing the consequences of now. The documentary provides a great introduction to the framework of planetary boundaries, and I encourage anyone interested in this topic to watch it, or dive in deeper by reading some of the papers Rockström and colleagues have published on this.

While the main part of the documentary was very interesting and emotionally moving, I have to admit that I was slightly disappointed with the section on solutions. After spending the majority of the time on showing us how bad the state of our planet is and how we humans have caused this, the solutions were portrayed in an overly simplistic way. By making the solutions sound so simple, I feel like in the end the issues are slightly downplayed after framing the current state of our planet and our future so grim at first. But this is only my personal opinion and since I still find it a very interesting and eye-opening documentary, I leave it to you to watch it and make up your mind about it.

References:

Main source: “Breaking boundaries: The science of our planet”, 2021, Netflix film directed by Jonathan Clay.

[1] https://www.pik-potsdam.de/en/news/latest-news/netflix-documentary-201cbreaking-boundaries201d-with-pik-director-johan-rockstrom-and-sir-david-attenborough-special-preview-at-biden-climate-summit , last accessed 01.07.2021

[2] Planetary boundaries illustration: J. Lokrantz/Azote based on Steffen et al. 2015. Available online: https://stockholmresilience.org/research/planetary-boundaries.html , last accessed 01.07.2021

Further reading:

Rockström, J., W. Steffen, Noone, K. et al. 2009. Planetary boundaries: exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society 14, 32. URL: http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol14/iss2/art32/

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. 2009.  A safe operating space for humanity. Nature 461, 472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a

Steffen, W., Richardson, K., Rockström, J et al. 2015. Planetary boundaries: Guiding human development on a changing planet. Science 347, 1259855. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1259855

The post Movie Review: Breaking Boundaries – The Science of our Planet appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

We traveled through time as we made our way from Bayreuth through the Black Jurassic, Brown Jurassic and White Jurassic to Bamberg. Our first stop was a quarry in Mistelgau, where we searched for fossils. We mainly found Belemnites, which are abundant in this quarry as it is also called “Belemnitenschlachtfeld”. From the quarry, which represented the Black Jurassic, we drove through the Brown Jurassic and made our next stop in the White Jurassic. Here we visited a cave – the Ludwigshöhle – where Prof. Beierkuhnlein told us more about the geology of the area.

The drive through the Fränkische Schweiz was accompanied by remarks of Prof. Beierkuhnlein explaining to us village names and showing us the best place for a pre-New year’s celebration. The last stop before Bamberg was the stone garden of Sanspareil. After a stroll through the rock formations, we got asked to perform something on the stage of the ruin-theater, which turned into a short Samba dance lesson for this year’s Summer Fête. It was a great time together, where everyone could enjoy themselves. The entire excursion and especially those funny group activities showed that, despite the pandemic and all the restrictions, our cohort managed to become a tide-knitted group already.

In Bamberg we had a little free time, which most of us used to get an ice cream and enjoy the sun while strolling through the beautiful city. The sightseeing went on with a walk through the rose garden and a visit of the dome. Last, but not least, we went to the Natural History Museum of Bamberg. Just like for most the other places of our tour we only had limited time, making it more of a teaser to motivate us to come back by ourselves and explore more of the museum another time. Personally, I was most impressed by the fossils. After having searched for some of them ourselves in the morning, it was astonishing to see what great (both in size and detail) fossils have been found by scientists in the surroundings.

There is nothing like a good German beer to end a great day.  So we stopped by a famous pub to try the typical Bamberger Rauchbier. While opinions on this beer varied, everyone enjoyed the excursion, spending a day with friends, and away from our computers!

The post GCE Excursion to Bamberg appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) is an independent intergovernmental organization that was established in 2012. Its purpose is to “strengthen the science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being and sustainable development” [1]. The work of IPBES comprises giving policy support, building capacity and knowledge, developing and writing assessments and outreach. Governments as well as expert scientists are involved in this work.

The IPBES-8 Plenary, which was held online from the 14^th to the 24^th of June 2021, began with opening remarks from the IPBES chair, secretary, and regional groups, followed by an inspiring video on the achievements of IPBES since the last plenary in 2019. The opening video, which is embedded below, emphasized the great impact of the Global Assessment report, which launched at IPBES-7 in 2019. Organizers also highlighted the IPBES Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Pandemics, as well as the newly released IPBES – IPCC Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Climate Change. These two workshop reports show the importance of the work of IPBES in the most relevant context: Now, while we face the ongoing pandemic, but also as we grapple with continuing anthropogenic climate change.  

The main aim of IPBES-8 was to finalize and adopt two scoping reports. One on a “thematic assessment of the interlinkages among biodiversity, water, food and health” [2] and the other on a “thematic assessment of the underlaying causes of biodiversity loss and the determinants of transformative change and options for achieving the 2050 Vision for Biodiversity” [2].  Over the course of the conference, the collaboration of IPBES with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) for work on the interlinkages between biodiversity and climate change was also discussed. GCE students had the opportunity to observe not only the plenary, but also working group sessions, where the scoping report drafts were discussed in detail. It was particularly interesting for students to see such a process happening, after learning about how these negotiations work theoretically in previous seminars offered by the GCE study program.

An important point on the agenda included the determination of venues for future plenary sessions. As worthwhile as it was to listen in to these negotiations online, hopefully GCE students can travel to the next IPBES plenary in person again! 

References:

[1] About IPBES, available under https://ipbes.net/about  

[2] IPBES/8/1* Provisional agenda, available under https://www.ipbes.net/event/ipbes-8-plenary

The post GCE students at IPBES-8 appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

“This is about the field work for the Ecological Climatology exercise course. When we met up at the university’s Botanical Garden (EBG) a few weeks ago, I had the chance to meet most of my fellow students for the first time in person. Naturally, I had seen all of them before, at least their faces on camera during online classes. But this was the first time that we were able to be close by each other – with the required 1.5m distance of course. As we made a circle and tried to make small talk, the tension was broken when we had to perform a corona quick test. We all sat on the ground and started with that, we joked and helped each other with the instructions. Results: all negative! Now… let’s head to the measurement stations!

Sitting in the grass in a circle around the professor – some of us taking notes, others just paying attention – even the fact that we all were wearing masks was not a problem. We answered questions and discussed the topics. While we learned about how to set up the climate station equipment and how it works, we could remember the concepts we had already learned in the online seminar of the same course.

Groups were made, and we assembled our own weather station. Talking to the classmates about family, friends and what we will eat later for dinner in such a relaxed environment, felt like we didn’t have the restrictions, and I am sure we all enjoyed being in the field and having an in-person class for the first time after 6 months. When the measurement stations were all set up and the equipment connected, we finished up the class to go home and enjoy the rest of the sunny day in a happy mood. After finally meeting my classmates in person, I left with the promise to bring cookies with me next time.

Two weeks later, we met outside the Botanical Garden, did the corona quick tests again, formed groups and went off to the field. It was raining a little bit, but we all were prepared with umbrellas and rain jackets at hand. We took some notes, which was tricky with the umbrella in one hand and the notebook and pencil in the other. We discussed the topics we got introduced to in the online class and we understood even more what the aim of our work will be. Within our groups, we dissembled the meteorological stations we had set up last time, and we took the information recorded to be analysed as part of our homework: errors and statistical differences. We shared some cookies, of course, and as the weather was getting less rainy, it was already time to go home.

Time flies when you’re having fun! We will meet again with our groups to decide a new spot in the Botanical Garden to put the weather stations and compare the measurements – hopefully, when it’s sunnier. As the next class will be online, we will meet again within one month to assemble the stations in a different terrain. Let’s see where the groups will choose the locations in the big premises of the EBG!”

Besides the Ecological Climatology field work, students were also able to attend a few other practical courses in person this semester. Over the last couple of weeks, for instance, the harvest of some global experiments in Disturbance Ecology have been taking place. There, biomass has been harvested and sorted from various experiments, mostly concerning the effects of climate change and other disturbances on grasslands. Another fun in-person course is the botanical excursions that take place on a weekly basis and in which plant determination is learned first-hand. All in all, it is great to finally be outside in the field and get the chance to interact with fellow students and lecturers in person again!

The post Finally on the field again! appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

CDR methods comprise any technique that intentionally removes CO2 from the atmosphere [4, 5]. With this decrease in atmospheric CO2 concentration, we should see a reduction in the greenhouse effect. This then leads to a stabilization of global mean temperature or even a cooling effect [4], depending on the extent of removal and level of residual emissions. There are two subcategories of CDR methods: biological based solutions, which enhance the natural carbon sequestration of biological systems, and engineering based solutions, which use engineered systems to sequester carbon [4].

What can these methods look like?

An example of biological based CDR methods is ocean fertilization. In this method the biological pump of the ocean is enhanced by adding otherwise limiting nutrients (e.g. iron) to the water [4]. The idea behind this method is that the addition of nutrients leads to increased algae growth, which in turn leads to increased CO2 sequestration by photosynthesis [4]. Since algae are taken up by other organisms, which then release the CO2 by respiration in deeper layers of the ocean, carbon is removed from the surface and stored in deeper layers [4]. However, the effectiveness of ocean fertilization is debated, as not all of the sequestered carbon will be moved to deeper ocean layers and there might be a decrease in productivity and therefor carbon sequestration in neighboring areas of the ocean [4]. Thus, ocean fertilization might just lead to a shift in the location of carbon sequestration, but not an enhancement [4]. Also, this method impacts the whole marine ecosystem with unpredictable and possibly negative side effects [4]. Some authors argue that it is not a viable CDR method due to its sustainability issues and low efficiency [6].

Another biological based CDR method is enhanced weathering. The natural process of rock decomposition sequesters carbon [4]. The aim of enhanced weathering is to speed up this typically slow natural process and thus enhance carbon sequestration [6]. There are several ways this could be done, from enlarging the reactive surface by grinding rocks or spreading minerals in agricultural soil to catalyzing the reaction of rocks and CO2 in chemical engineering plants [4, 6]. Besides capturing carbon, the weathered rocks could also have a fertilizing effect in soils [6]. A downside to these methods lies in the fact that large quantities of minerals would be required in order to sequester a significant amount of CO2, the mining for which would be energy intensive and destructive to ecosystems [4]. Other side effects are hard to predict and would vary depending on the used rock and application site [6]. The sequestration potential of enhanced weathering is estimated to be between 2 and 4 Gt CO2/year by 2050 at a cost of 50 to 200 US$/t CO2 [6]. Up to now, discussions about enhanced weathering have been theoretical and are mainly based on models [6], but the previously mentioned trials in the UK will include a project involving the application of crushed silicate rocks on farmlands [2]. 

An example for an engineered CDR method is the direct air carbon capture and storage (DACCS). Here, CO2 is directly captured from ambient air and the resulting CO2 stream can either be further processed or stored (e.g., in geological formations) [4, 6]. There are no biophysical constraints to this method and minimal side effects are expected; the limitations come from costs and storage [6]. If these constraints were overcome, this technique would have a high potential [6]. A method very similar to DACCS is bioenergy with carbon capture and storage (BECCS). It basically works the same, but BECCS filters out the CO2 that gets emitted at bioenergy production sites [4]. At these locations, the CO2 concentration is higher than in ambient air, making the filtering process easier. However, this method comes with the limitations and side effects of bioenergy production by biomass, which requires large areas of land and induces land use change and associated emissions [6]. For both DACCS and BECCS, a potential of 0.5 to 5 Gt CO2/year by 2050 is estimated [6]. In terms of cost, BECCS is estimated to be slightly cheaper (100 – 200 US$/t CO2) than DACCS (100 – 300 US$/t CO2) [6]. Small-scale pilot projects already exist for both methods, but upscaling is still needed for wide-spread applications.

The role of CDR in tackling climate change

The methods discussed above are just a few examples for CDR methods, but they already show that more research and upscaling is necessary in order to remove significant amounts of CO2 from the atmosphere. Yet, given that our carbon budget is very limited, CDR methods are an important tool to achieve the Paris agreement goals – in fact, they are a substantial part of most 1.5 °C consistent pathways in the IPCC report [5, 6, 7]. CDR methods function to attain net negative emissions to come back to 1.5 °C after an overshoot and/or to offset residual emissions in these pathways [7]. The IPCC models mostly consider BECCS or afforestation/reforestation as CDR methods only, as the other methods are not understood well enough yet [7]. According to the IPCC, between 100 and 1.000 Gt CO2 need to be captured by CDR methods by the end of the century for 1.5 °C consistent pathways with no or low overshoot [7]. If only BECCS is considered, the implementation would have to reach a potential of up to 8 Gt CO2/year by 2050 and double that by 2100 [7], which might not be possible. Using several CDR methods on a smaller scale might be better than using one method on a large scale, because this way the limitations and side effects could be minimized [5]. It also should be mentioned that estimations of potentials of different CDR methods are debated and represent a current area of research. There has been a study that found that BECCS, DACCS, enhanced weathering and ocean liming could theoretically remove sufficient CO2 from the atmosphere separately from another to keep within the 1.5 °C target [8]. But the authors also argue that it is likely not possible to implement the methods in time to achieve this goal, as more research and a global infrastructure as well as coordinated governance is needed for their large-scale application [8].  

Due to their slow-acting nature, CDR methods cannot be seen as emergency solutions to climate change, but rather as complementary to conventional mitigation strategies [4, 5, 7]. We should also not solely rely on these methods, as they do have unpredictable and adverse side effects [6] and assume that we fully understand the carbon cycle and can influence it [5]. However, the less we reduce our emissions now, the more we will rely on CDR methods in the future [5].

References:

[1] Neate R. 2021. Elon Musk pledges $100m to carbon capture contest. The Guardian. Access here.

[2] UK Research and Innovation. 2021. UK invests over £30m in large-scale greenhouse gas removal. Access here.

[3] Carrington D. 2021. Trials to suck carbon dioxide from the air to start across the UK. The Guardian. Access here.

[4] The Royal Society. 2009. Geoengineering the climate: Science, governance and uncertainty. RS Policy document 10/09. The Royal Society, London, UK. 82pp. Access here.

[5] Minx JC, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Fuss S, Hilaire J, Creutzig F, Amann T, Beringer T, de Oliveira Garcia W, Hartemann J, Khanna T, Lenzi D, Luderer G, Nemet GF, Rogelj J, Smith P, Vincente JLV, Wilcox J, Dominguez MMZ. 2018. Negative emissions – Part 1: Research landscape and synthesis. Environmental Research Letters 13: 063001. Access here.

[6] Fuss S, Lamb WF, Callaghan MW, Hilaire J, Creutzig F, Amann T, Beringer T, de Oliveira Garcia W, Hartmann J, Khanna T, Luderer G, Nemet GF, Rogelj J, Smith P, Vicente JLV, Wilcox J, Dominguez MMZ, Minx JC. 2018. Negative emissions – Part 2: Costs, potentials and side effects. Environmental Research Letters 13: 063002. Access here.

[7] IPCC. 2018. Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte V, Zhai P, Pörtner HO, Roberts D, Skea J, Shukla PR, Pirani A, Moufouma-Okia W, Péan C, Pidcock R, Connors S, Matthews JBR, Chen Y, Zhou X, Gomis MI, Lonnoy E, Maycock T, Tignor M, Waterfield T (eds.)]. In Press. Access here.

[8] Lawrence MG, Schäfer S, Muri H, Scott V, Oschlies A, Vaughan NE, Boucher O, Schmidt H, Haywood J, Scheffran J. 2018. Evaluating climate geoengineering proposals in the context of the Paris Agreement temperature goals. Nature Communications 9: 3734. Access here.

Cover image: By Ralf Vetterle on Pixabay. Access here.

The post Carbon dioxide removal – Part of the solution to climate change? appeared first on Global Change Ecology.

The plastic problem

Plastic pollution is one of the most pressing environmental issues that many countries struggle with worldwide. During the last decade, the detrimental effects of plastics on the environment and human health have been extensively researched. Experts all agree that plastic is harmful to humans and it takes over 1000 years to decay, degrading into microplastics and accumulating in ecosystems.

Microplastics are particularly persistent in the environment and hard to capture and recycle. It is important to note that they are not just a result of the breakdown of bigger plastic pieces, but are also produced, for instance, by cosmetic firms to be included in a range of cosmetic products. Hence, after usage of these products the microplastics get washed down the drain, move through the wastewater treatment system, and end up in rivers and oceans. Once released into aquatic ecosystems, the tiny plastic particles are taken up via the food chain and accumulate in the higher trophic levels, in a process known as bioaccumulation. Moreover, microplastics can accrue in the soil, affecting plant growth and soil biota.

The problem with bioaccumulation of plastics are specific properties that have been proven to affect the endocrine system of mammals. By binding to hormone receptors, ingested plastic will result in a downstream cellular effect, leading to developmental changes. Fish have been known to feminize, resulting in detrimental effects on the ecosystem and harming multiple relationship chains established throughout the systems.

Humans ingest plastics through food, handling receipts and drinking from plastic water bottles. This problem has been analysed by researchers at the University of Bayreuth, who in a recent study have detected various types of microplastics in mussels obtained from supermarkets. With microplastics present in food obtained from the supermarket, it seems impossible for us to avoid it in our daily lives. This illustrates how careless actions stemming from short-term convenience not only devastate long-established ecosystem dynamics, but also end up affecting us humans for decades to come.     

Besides the effects of microplastic, the plastic litter in form of bigger pieces, called macroplastic, has a wide range of implications on the environment and ecosystems as well. These include entanglement, ingestion, and suffocation for organisms in marine and terrestrial environments.

Plastic usage in times of the Covid-19 pandemic

As the plastic pollution problem has been reported more and more in the media, the resulting rise in awareness of the effects of plastic usage on the environment greatly impacted governmental decision-making. New laws and specific legislation concerning plastic production and consumption were established. Several countries, including the EU and some U.S. States, started banning or were planning to ban single-use plastics, such as straws, cups and shopping bags, as well as the production of microbeads, which are commonly used in cosmetic products such as face scrubs and soaps. However, the Covid-19 pandemic has drastically affected the global efforts of tackling the plastic problem.

The pandemic has led to an arms race for personal protective equipment (PPE) all over the world. With an increase in both medical equipment such as facemasks, gloves and other protective clothing, as well as single-use plastics from food packaging, home-delivery services and e-commerce, the production and consumption of plastic immensely rose. Commitment to wear a mask has drastically increased the production of one-off masks and the resulting littering. It is estimated that there is a monthly need for 129 billion face masks and 65 billion gloves to contain the spread of the virus on a global scale. A large part of these can now be found as rubbish on the pavement or at the side of the road. In combination with other medical equipment, the resulting waste in the medical sector alone has increased to up to 370%.  

Social trends amplifying this problem include a growth in the throw away culture and online shopping, as well as the increased demand for food delivery and take-away packaging. This is a direct result of the fear-driven perceptions of hygienic and recycled products, as well as the Covid-19 associated sanitary concerns. Estimations predict a 14% increase in plastic and corrugated grocery packaging in the U.S., while reports from a Spanish plastic packaging company show a sales increase of 40%. Additionally, the low oil prices caused by the crisis have reduced the competitiveness of recycled plastics, leading to an increased usage of virgin plastics.

Due to the growing demand for plastic, there has been a temporary relaxation on the policies banning or reducing single-use plastics in many places around the world, including several U.S. States. This reversal or delay of policies relevant for the reduction in global plastic use will result in plastic industry lobbyists taking advantage of the situation, making future implementation of similar guidelines and laws very difficult. It is therefore important to address the fear-driven perceptions against the hygiene of reused and recycled products now, during as well as after the pandemic. It is important to increase people’s trust in packaging-free products and sustainable alternatives to prevent a lasting return of the throwaway culture and thus a resurgence in the use of single-use plastic. An overarching message here is the importance of continuing to move forward with a total system overhaul to make using reusables a safe and convenient option despite the pandemic.  

Waste management in times of the Covid-19 pandemic

Coming back to the example of our campus: The university was quick to respond to the littering problem by putting up more bins, specifically for plastic recycling. However, the increasing plastic waste remains an issue and the pandemic has negatively impacted the recycling sector as well.

In some countries, like Portugal, the government recommended not to recycle any possibly contaminated household waste and in Italy infected people were asked not to sort their waste at all. In the U.S. the recycling capacity was significantly lowered by recycling companies closing due to decreased demand from the industry, low oil prices favouring the use of virgin plastic over recycled plastic and fear of spreading the virus via recycled materials. In other countries, like the Netherlands, there was a backlog of recycling waste due to disruption in logistics.

Therefore, the motioned changes in the usage of plastics have implications for global waste management. The fact that already before the pandemic over two billion people lacked access to waste collection and over three billion people lacked access to waste disposal amplifies the current situation during the crisis.

As the failure to properly manage the waste generated from health facilities and households may escalate the spread of Covid-19 via secondary transmission, the virus creates additional challenges in waste management, including waste management practices and both environmental and global issues. These effects, including future solutions, are illustrated in the infographic shown here:

Conclusion

The Covid-19 pandemic has led to a severe increase in the usage and disposal of single use plastic products. Some countries waste management facilities can not cope with the resulting amounts of waste, which consequently means an improper treatment of the surplus plastic waste. In combination with littering of PPE and other single use plastic products this will result in an increased plastic pollution in the environment, where it will persist for decades and negatively impact ecosystems. Since the pandemic has been going on for over a year and an end is not in sight yet, it is important to take notice of this issue and find ways to reduce our plastic consumption whilst keeping to current hygiene regulations.

References:

Aragaw, T. A. (2020). Surgical face masks as a potential source for microplastic pollution in the COVID-19 scenario. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 159, 111517. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2020.111517  

Gorrasi, G., Sorrentino, A., & Lichtfouse, E. (2020). Back to plastic pollution in COVID times. Environmental Chemistry Letters. doi:10.1007/s10311-020-01129-z

Greenpeace (2020). “Where did 5,500 tonnes of discarded face masks end up?”. Retrieved from: https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/44629/where-did-5500-tonnes-of-discarded-face-masks-end-up/  

Kargar, S., Pourmehdi, M., & Paydar, M. M. (2020). Reverse logistics network design for medical waste management in the epidemic outbreak of the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). Science of The Total Environment, 746, 141183.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141183 

Kulkarni B. N., Anantharama V. (2020). Repercussions [BC1] of COVID-19 pandemic on municipal solid waste management: Challenges and opportunities. Science of the Total Environment, 743, 140693[BC2] . https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c02178

Kumar BNV, Löschel LA, Imhof HK, Löder MGJ, Laforsch C. (2021). Analysis of microplastics of a broad size range in commercially important mussels by combining FTIR and Raman spectroscopy approaches. Environmental Pollution , 269, 116147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2020.116147

Nowakowski, P., Kuśnierz, S., Sosna, P., Mauer, J., & Maj, D. (2020). Disposal of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic Is a challenge for waste collection companies and society: A case study in Poland. Resources, 9(10), 116. https://doi.org/10.3390/resources9100116

Prata, J. C., Silva, A. L., Walker, T. R., Duarte, A. C., & Rocha-Santos, T. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic repercussions on the use and management of plastics. Environmental Science & Technology, 54(13), 7760-7765. https://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.0c02178

Sarkodie S. A., Owusu P. A. (2020). Impact of COVID-19 pandemic on waste management. Environment, Development and Sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-020-00956-y

Sharma, H. B., Vanapalli, K. R., Cheela, V. S., Ranjan, V. P., Jaglan, A. K., Dubey, B., Goel S., Bhattacharya, J. (2020). Challenges, opportunities, and innovations for effective solid waste management during and post COVID-19 pandemic. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 162, 105052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105052

Silva A.L.P., Prata J.C., Walker T.R., Duarte A.C., Ouyang W., Barcelò D., Rocha-Santos T. (2020). Increased plastic pollution due to COVID-19 pandemic: Challenges and recommendations. Chemical Engineering Journal, 405, 126683. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cej.2020.126683

Vanapalli, K. R., Sharma, H. B., Ranjan, V. P., Samal, B., Bhattacharya, J., Dubey, B. K., & Goel, S. (2020). Challenges and strategies for effective plastic waste management during and post COVID-19 pandemic. Science of The Total Environment, 750, 141514. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.141514

Wilson, D.C., Rodic, L., Modak, P., Soos, R., Carpintero, A., Velis, K., & Simonett, O. (2015). Global waste management outlook. UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme). Retrieved from: https://www.unenvironment.org/resources/report/global-waste-management-outlook.

The post How a virus stopped us from flattening the plastic curve appeared first on Global Change Ecology.