Category: The __ Crisis

With the climate crisis more pressing than ever, Bill Gates discussed his new book How to Avoid a Climate Disaster at a virtual webinar on February 17. CBS Correspondent Michelle Miller moderated the webinar, and attendees came from 4 D.C. based schools: The George Washington University, Georgetown University, American University and Howard University. One of the richest people in the world, Gates discussed his unique journey on how he became involved in the fight against climate change. Here are our main takeaways:

1. Innovations are key to reducing carbon emissions

At the event, GW Presidential Fellow Renea Williams got the once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to ask Gates what he believes are the most promising solutions that already exist to help combat climate change. While facing the challenge of avoiding a climate crisis can be daunting, Gates is optimistic because of his belief in innovation. From an early age, he’s always been obsessed with computers. Gates recalled when having a computer on every desk was a wild idea and now years later that idea is tame.  

“My basic optimism about climate change comes from my belief in innovation. It’s our power to invent that makes me hopeful,” Gates said. 

He emphasized that there needs to be investment in innovation that will have a lasting impact. Planting a tree is a positive investment, but it doesn’t compare to other gold standard offsets such as carbon capture models that pull carbon dioxide out of the atmosphere and sequester it for hundreds of thousands of years. The investment in innovations that have long term impacts are vital for a zero carbon emissions world.

2. Climate solutions must be rooted in environmental equity

In the discussion, Gates emphasized how climate solutions must take an equitable approach, grounded in the knowledge that climate change impacts poorer communities around the world in more devastating ways. 

Climate mitigation strategies must “be intentional about the equity element of these efforts,” said Gates. “We've got to design that in from, from the very start.” 

There should also be greater responsibility to reduce emissions for wealthier countries, who have historically contributed far more emissions than developing countries have. Gates highlighted the unfairness of the climate crisis, as poorer countries do not have as much technology and resources to build strong climate adaptation strategies. Ironically, these emissions were not even their fault to begin with, yet they are still paying the greatest price.

3. There needs to be a plan for climate change

Gates acknowledges that the young generation has taken a lead in accelerating the green movement. Across the globe, children have stepped out onto the global stage and demanding leaders commit to eliminating carbon emissions. While Gates praises the commitment of the younger generation, he also points out that there needs to be a plan. 

“A plan that really admits that it's going to be very difficult. That looks at all the sources of emissions and taps into human ingenuity, taps into the private sector and government policy,” said Gates. 

To effectively create a net zero emissions world by 2050, there needs to be a plan that details how to achieve that. The movement can garner all the momentum and support in the world, but without a plan it’s aimless. GW appears to be on the right track by committing to divest from fossil fuels by 2025, but the commitment can only be fulfilled with a clear and well-followed plan to do so. 

4. When communicating climate change, focus less on the doom-and-gloom, and more on what’s worth saving

Regarding how to effectively communicate climate change, Gates recommended for young people to really tailor their message to who they’re speaking to. Many people have heard about the daunting consequences of climate change, but hearing these warnings often does not energize them to take action and only induces their anxieties more. Gates suggested that a more innovative approach could be to focus on the natural beauty of the planet and what’s worth saving. Fostering an appreciation for the planet helps drive others towards a call to action and fosters a deeper connection between the individual and the greater climate movement. In Gates’ opinion, one of the most effective examples of this storytelling approach is David Attenborough’s environmental documentary, A Life On Our Planet.

“You know we owe it in a moral way to not get rid of those beautiful natural ecosystems,” said Gates in reflection to the film.

If Bill Gates supports solutions-driven climate communication, then GW’s very own Planet Forward seems to be on the right track. Planet Forward is an environmental news site housed at GW’s School of Media and Public Affairs for students around the country to publish inspiring environmental stories. Over the years, SustainableGW and Planet Forward have fostered a tight relationship to train students on how to powerfully and effectively communicate the urgency of the climate crisis.

By Francesca Edralin

While the COVID-19 pandemic and climate change are two scientific crises raising political controversy, the two issues possess another interesting intersection: Could the global response to COVID-19 offer a long-term solution to combat the climate crisis?

Over recent months, stay-at-home orders have led to a temporary plunge in greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector, as much of the population stayed home more and traveled less. However, as governments gradually lift social distancing orders, more and more people are leaving their homes and transitioning back to old routines.

Yet, some aspects of the quarantine routine have the potential to translate into long-term lifestyle changes. In particular, teleworking offers a multitude of environmental benefits if continued after the quarantine period. Recent research shows that increased teleworking in communities reduces air pollution and traffic congestion.

In 2018, civil engineer and transportation systems analyst at the University of Illinois-Chicago Ramin Shabanpour published a study on the impacts of teleworking on local air pollution. In his study, Shabanpour identified the current populations in Chicago capable of telework. Then, he calculated what percentage of those populations participated in telework at the time. He found that only 12% of individuals who are capable of telework worked from home to some extent. Using 12% as the base, Shabanpour and his team developed a simulation that modeled a hypothetical “twin city” of Chicago.

“We spent a few years here in Chicago developing a transportation simulation platform which, in a nutshell, is a simulation-based twin city. Using a software known as the POLARIS model, we were able to simulate what we have in the real world,” he said.

Shabanpour and his team kept all data points constant in the simulation, except for the percentage of the population who worked from home which they increased from 12% to 50%. The simulation did not manipulate the frequency that Chicago residents worked from home, only increasing the percentage of teleworkers at the current frequency.

The results proved to Shabanpour and his team how beneficial teleworking can be for the environment.

“We found that we can reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 0.7% because of an increase in telecommuting. When you talk about impact, this is actually a huge number because if you multiply 0.7% with current greenhouse gas emissions in Chicago, we find that an implementation like this can reduce 500 tons of greenhouse gas emissions per day,” Shabanpour said.

Capable teleworkers do not need to solely work from home to produce these emission reductions. Shabanpour acknowledges that most teleworkers only work from home a few days per week, and they likely still drive when they telework in order to run errands. The simulation’s results account for the driving needs of teleworkers, because Shabanpour kept the frequency that teleworkers drive to work and run errands in real life constant.

Shabanpour’s study was one of the first to analyze teleworking’s impacts on air pollution and the environment. While he only examines telework patterns in the Chicago metropolitan area, his findings can apply to any area that suffers from air pollution and has a section of the population that is capable of telework.

As a result, Shabanpour has emerged as an advocate for telework. He believes that current efforts to reduce traffic congestion and vehicle emissions invest in the wrong solutions, instead of cost-efficient solutions like telework programs.

“We just invest billions and billions of funding into building new bridges and infrastructure – let’s start looking at this soft side of transportation. Focusing on these numbers, we can definitely reduce the transportation emissions and congestion that we have at a very low cost, compared to the big infrastructure projects that we have,” Shabanpour said.

As the quarantine period forced many companies to temporarily transition their workforce online, the potential for companies to commit to a long-term telework system makes Shabanpour’s research more relevant now than ever.

In the past, companies have hesitated to allow teleworking. Timothy Golden, a professor and telework researcher at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, finds that companies assume teleworking would decrease employer satisfaction and productivity.

“Because you’re working away from the office, particularly if the rest of the office is still there, that has the potential to make you feel cut off or separated from people,” Golden said.

Golden asserts that hybrid teleworking programs, which allow employees to split their hours between working from home and in the office, alleviate employees’ concerns of feeling isolated from the workplace. He also recommends that managers assess which employees are capable of telework, meaning they can productively complete their tasks at home.

“It’s not an all-or-nothing scenario. It’s not a one-size-fits-all,” Golden said.

Companies who supported teleworking before the pandemic prove that implementing a telework system increases productivity and company savings, in addition to reducing carbon footprints.

Dell, headquartered in Austin, Texas, is one company leading the global movement toward hybrid teleworking programs. Since implementing its “Connected Workplace” program, Dell allows employees to design a work-from-home schedule tailored to their preferences. Dell cuts 136 million travel miles and more than 35,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide annually through this program, as calculated in their most recent sustainability report.

John Pflueger, the principal environmental strategist at Dell who designed the Connected Workplace program, told Environment+Energy Leader, “We’re pleased with the flexibility it offers our employees and the positive consequences it has on carbon emissions.”

If the environmental impacts do not incentivize companies, perhaps the benefits in finances and productivity will. Dell’s recent sustainability report highlights that it saved $39.5 million from the Connected Workplace program, which allows the company to reduce the amount of office space they pay for and maintain. Dell also hires from a greater applicant pool, with the ability to hire top talent beyond the region of Austin.

“When a company is considering a work-from-home program or telecommuting or remote work, sustainability is probably not the primary reason why. The primary reasons are issues related more to work-life balance and being the sort of employer that the 21st-century employee has come to expect, but we found sustainability-related benefits are an important side effect,” Pflueger said.

Golden is hopeful that this quarantine period will help companies and employees realize the various benefits to teleworking.

“I think this is a defining moment for telework in that it is likely to be much more commonplace after this pandemic. Now that it’s forced on so many people, it’s changing mindsets because teleworking is no longer something that ‘other people do’, it is something that everyone does,” Golden said.

Shabanpour demonstrated the environmental benefits of teleworking scientifically, while companies such as Dell show how teleworking programs foster a more sustainable and cost-efficient workplace. Now, the COVID-19 pandemic showed many companies already have the means for telework, although they may not have taken advantage of it previously.

Perhaps what helps to flatten the curve of COVID-19 cases now just may help flatten the curve of greenhouse gas emissions as well.

Message from Sustainable GW

5G is on its way. The fifth generation cellular network technology is primed to be ridiculously fast - fast enough to change the way you go about your daily life. 

Today, the top corner of your phone screen probably says 3G, or 4G LTE, and these are symbols that stand for the different generations of broadcasting technology. 1G, or first generation, gave us the ability to make calls, 2G allowed us to send and receive messages, 3G let us access the internet, and 4G made accessing the internet markedly faster. LTE is a classification used to symbolize signal connection speeds in between 3G and 4G. 

The speeds of these connections are partly measured in something called latency, which  marks the time it takes for information to travel from one area to another. As the fastest widespread broadband, 4G boasts a latency rate of 300 milliseconds. This is remarkable, as the average human reaction times between 200 and 300 milliseconds. At best, human reaction time is only slightly faster than the time it takes for a device to retrieve information from a host on 4G.

5G, on the other hand, as some engineers have stated, will have a reaction time around one millisecond. Almost instantaneous. This is why when 5g reaches peak connectivity and is introduced to the world, it will allow for a new age of technology. Things like self driving cars and augmented reality become not only plausible, but markedly better alternatives to what exists today. A one millisecond delay time means an almost instantaneous reaction to a possible collision in a 5G self-driving vehicle, which would hypothetically reduce the amount of death and injury every year from car accidents substantially. It also means technology like virtual reality will be experienced in near real-time. While all of this promises to alter the way in which we experience the world around us, it also guarantees that many of the devices that we use today will quickly go obsolete. 

In this fast-paced age of technology, the newest and most advanced products seem like a necessity for our everyday lives. As the Bureau of Economic Analysis reports, Americans spent almost 71 billion dollars on telephone and communication technology in 2017, which is five times more than they spent in 2010 even when adjusted for inflation. Technological corporations have been feeding into this ‘newer is better’ model, reducing the lifespan of a device and regularly unveiling newer, more advanced devices and enticing consumers with discounts for upgrades. This sort of mentality is great for profit, but produces a large amount of electronic waste, which is much harder to recycle than plastic or paper. 

Electronic waste can not be simply placed in a recycling bin because the precious metals hidden inside these products can be flammable or radioactive. They must be sent to specialized recycling centers that focus on taking apart technological devices and salvaging parts that can be used in making future electronics. Because of this difficulty, most obsolete technological parts end up incinerated or in landfills.

With the introduction of 5G, this is only going to get worse. As Alana Semeuls of TIME magazine reports, electronics waste is the fastest growing solid waste stream in the world, and it will “turn into a torrent as the world upgrades to 5G”. E-cycling facilities forecast an explosion of the number of devices in the waste stream and are preparing to expand their capacity in order to meet these demands. However, these devices will never reach their facilities if they are not disposed of properly. At this time, more than ever, the GW community should turn its attention to the blue e-waste collection towers located throughout the campus. The university has contracted eAsset Solutions, a recycling center located in Falls Church to pick-up and recycle any technological parts placed in these collection towers, which are pictured below:

There are eight collection towers located across the three main GW campuses:

• Marvin Center (Ground Floor next to elevator)
• Science and Engineering Hall (1st Floor West)
• Gelman Library (Basement Level 2).
• Shenkman Hall (1st Floor Elevators)
• Thurston Hall (Mail Boxes)
• West Hall  @ Mount Vernon Campus (Lower Level 1)
• District House (Level B-1 on H Street side near restrooms)
• Enterprise Hall @ VSTC (Loading Dock)

Electronic recycling is only a short-term solution, as technological companies rapidly increasing the rate of obsolescence has accelerated the rate of resource depletion to something completely unsustainable and detrimental to our environment. Until companies like Apple and Amazon feel pressure from their consumers to create more long-lasting products, e-waste will continue to pollute nature at an alarming rate. Today, all we can do is dispose of electronics in a smart and safe way in the wake of 5G technology.

...continue reading "The Dark Side of 5G Technology"

The Chesapeake Bay Crisis: Why Should I Care?

Lucy Hummer

“Save the Bay” is a phrase that has become incredibly sensationalized over the last decade or so. But why? What does it really mean? DC is located within the Chesapeake Bay watershed, and most of you probably already knew that. However, the definition, scale and ultimate repercussions of this fact are likely unclear. This is a sad truth, but it does not need to be this way forever. We should all care about the bay, and we should all do our part to ~save~ it.

According to our trusty friend dictionary dot com, a watershed is essentially a drainage basin, one which collects precipitation to ultimately flow into a surface water outlet such as a river or bay. Decoded, this just means all of the land where gravity pulls water towards one body as opposed to another. The Chesapeake watershed, then, includes six states and the District, all water ultimately flowing into our great Bay. The ecosystems found within this geographical region are diverse, rich, and beautiful. They are also unfortunately at great risk. Humans have continued to exhaust the resources of the watershed and abuse the Bay to the point of nearly killing it.

The use of the word ‘killing’ is extreme and often used as an alarmist tactic, but in this case it is entirely true. Toxins in water lead to a process called eutrophication, which means the amount of dissolved oxygen decreases over time. Fish, aquatic plants and other creatures then have less air to breathe, and in some cases sections of waterbodies can be literally classified as “dead”.

This matters to you and me for a variety of reasons. Beyond the general, ‘we should all care about our Earth, nature is beautiful, blah blah blah, etc etc etc’, the Bay holds many utilitarian purposes. As the diverse regions of land use around the watershed continue to degrade due to human influence, this leads to many unplanned consequences on the local economy and beyond. Those who live directly on the Chesapeake itself are affected by actions of those hundreds of miles away. I am from central Pennsylvania, nowhere even close to the Bay’s coastline. However, if I decided that I wanted to apply pesticides to my mom’s front lawn back home, within no time those chemicals would end up in the Bay, along with all of my neighbors’, too.

Every decision we make every single day has an ecological consequence, whether it be positive or negative. As we all know, the Earth operates under a series of cycles. I understand that it is not easy to visualize our ultimate impacts on the Earth. How could me choosing not to lay commercial pesticides at my mom’s house and then slapping a Save The Bay bumper sticker on my Kia Soul do anything at all? I see it the same way as I see voting. Everybody gets the whole concept of ‘make sure you go out and vote in elections, even though it seems like your voice doesn’t really have an impact’. I don’t see how this concept is ANY different. The Chesapeake Bay Watershed is a massive resource, one which is taken advantage of and degraded every single day. Especially as college students who live within the watershed, it is important to care. It should matter to you, and it does impact you. Not to be super dramatic, but the Bay is dying and she is beautiful and we must help her.

The Groundwater Crisis: Why Should I Care?

Lucy Hummer

Groundwater is something that we often forget about. We can’t see it, we don’t really understand a use for it, and we generally “other” it from the water we drink or enjoy at the beach. However, as we all learned in 3^rd grade with the water cycle, all water is the same. This means that the trillions of gallons that are stored deep under the surface of the earth in between sand and rock can and will become the water which we drink much quicker than we may think.

So what is groundwater? While it may not be the most glamorous topic, we can go ahead and categorize fresh water into three sections for ease of this illustration. This will give us: drinking water, surface water and ground water. We can say that drinking water is all of the industrially stored water, whether that be in a pipe that has been clarified and prepared to enter your tap, or in a $5 plastic bottle in the CVS refrigerator. Surface water is what immediately comes to mind when you think of fresh water, meaning our lakes, streams and rivers. Ground water, then, is everything else. Massive deposits of water are found directly under our feet, called aquifers, traveling from the clouds deep down below the water table.

Why does this matter to you? Our groundwater sources are at risk. Tens of BILLIONS of gallons of groundwater are extracted from the earth each day in the United States alone, and this water is being used much more rapidly than it is being recharged. While we continue to treat this water as an inexhaustible resource, it takes years for an aquifer to refill just a few inches. That 3^rd grade water cycle lesson drilled into our minds that water is a renewable resource, but this is not entirely true. Our view of the seemingly unending supply of safe and clean water must shift to seeing it instead as a privilege, as this may not always be the case.

Industries, particularly the cattle industry and agro-business in the southwest United States, are using this groundwater alarmingly rapidly. If the aquifers run dry, it will take centuries for them to recharge. I can say with a fair amount of certainty that this groundwater crisis, partnered of course will the umbrella issue of climate change, is the largest and most pressing environmental issue facing the world today. Some towns, in the United States and internationally, are already running completely dry. So why is nobody talking about it? Is it because at large ‘groundwater’ sounds so boring?

While it is of course the best way to make environmentalism engaging and accessible to the largest amount of people, we must de-glamorize the concept of eco-advocacy. Issues like the groundwater crisis are happening NOW and we must do what we can to make ourselves care, regardless of how mundane they seem in concept.