Empa’s Post

🌍 **A Sustainable Future for Over 10 Billion People?** 🌍 So far, no study has been able to show whether all people can meet their basic needs without exceeding planetary boundaries. Empa just did it! Recent research published in the Journal of Cleaner Production reveals that it's technically feasible for more than ten billion people to live sustainably on Earth while maintaining a decent standard of living. Using the "doughnut" model, the study shows that an ecological and equitable life is possible with significant changes in energy systems and agriculture. This groundbreaking study gives hope for a balanced coexistence with our planet. 🔗 [Read more here](https://lnkd.in/d-KwCZ7N)

We all understand the power of innovation in building a more resilient food system. But the recent article in The National, "Why Science Alone Won't Save the Planet," raises a crucial point: tech can't win this fight alone. 🔗 https://lnkd.in/eJu_cS-G Absolutely, breakthroughs like carbon-capturing materials are game-changers, just like the one mentioned in the article. But the focus can’t solely be on futuristic solutions. The article rightly warns against complacency – waiting for a silver bullet tech solution can delay real action. The good news is, there are already incredible advancements happening alongside futuristic tech. Regenerative agriculture practices, for example, are demonstrably improving soil health and reducing emissions. So the questions I hope will spark some knowledge sharing is What existing solutions are you most excited about/confident it? What new tech has completely blown your mind lately? #agritech #regenerativeagriculture #innovation

#environment, #technology,#civilrights Working as consultant for 15+ years, sharpened my interest in 3 main areas - environment, technology and civil rights. Those three areas might seem quite distinct of each other, but in fact they are increasingly merging. Human impact on Earth is so vast, that there is hardly any “virgin” Nature left. The gases human activity emits to the atmosphere, the microplastics we release in the waters, chemicals and technology implied in farming impact the biosphere as a whole. To put it in other words, there is no nature to “go back to”, it is a modified biosphere we refer to. The technologies we use by all means change our live and Nature. Technology can also be used to reduce human impact, to protect nature and even to restore it. All the ethics and philosophy related to what is ethical looking at the new tech developments, the basic human rights of clean environment, the rights of the next generations to liveable world – that all bring us to the civil rights field of my interests. If the mix of environment-technology-ethics is a call for you, I recommend the projects of the following international network: https://lnkd.in/dZcBQP-7

Sustainable Development Goals using Artificial Photosynthesis Dive deep into this Blog Insights @ https://bit.ly/42zVDAJ   #sustainabledevelopmentglobal #artificialphotosynthesis #researchnester

13 minutes ago How can we help pull back from the edge? 1. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐁𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬? 𝐃𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: A scientific framework that defines limits within which human activities can operate without destabilizing Earth’s systems. 𝐆𝐨𝐚𝐥: To prevent irreversible environmental damage by maintaining the balance of biological and chemical cycles. 𝐏𝐮𝐫𝐩𝐨𝐬𝐞: Provides a science-based approach to understanding the Earth's capacity to support human development while avoiding crossing these critical limits.   2. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐍𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐁𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬: 𝐂𝐥𝐢𝐦𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞: The most well-known, but just one of the nine. 𝐎𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐁𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬: 𝐁𝐢𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐈𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐠𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲: Protecting ecosystems and biodiversity.  𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐝-𝐒𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞: Managing land use and deforestation.  𝐍𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐥 𝐄𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬: Addressing toxic substances and pollutants.  𝐅𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐡𝐰𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐔𝐬𝐞: Conserving freshwater resources. 𝐒𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜 𝐎𝐳𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐃𝐞𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 : Mitigating ozone layer damage (the only boundary under control). 𝐀𝐭𝐦𝐨𝐬𝐩𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐜 𝐀𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐨𝐥 𝐋𝐨𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠: Controlling air pollution. 𝐎𝐜𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐀𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧: Reducing CO₂ emissions affecting ocean chemistry.  𝐁𝐢𝐨𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐦𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐅𝐥𝐨𝐰𝐬: Managing nitrogen and phosphorus cycles.   - 𝘐𝘯𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘤𝘰𝘯𝘯𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴: Imbalances in one boundary often affect others due to complex feedback loops.   3. 𝐎𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐢𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐞𝐩𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐁𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬? - In 2009, Johan Rockström, then the director of the Stockholm Resilience Centre along with 28 leading scientists, developed the concept. - Planetary boundaries have since become a foundation for global environmental policy and decision-making.   4. 𝐂𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐂𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐁𝐨𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐬: - Abrupt environmental changes. - Cascading effects, where destabilization in one boundary worsens others. - Irreversible damage to Earth’s ecosystems.   The planetary boundaries framework is a clear reminder that our planet has a 𝐭𝐢𝐩𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐩𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭 and crossing them could trigger global-scale environmental crises.  

Measuring forest carbon has never been easier! 🌲🔍 Discover how cutting-edge technology allows scientists to assess carbon levels with just the push of a button. This innovation is a game-changer in our fight against #climatechange.

Imagine a world where nature itself holds the key to healing our planet. This is the promise of phytoremediation, a groundbreaking technique that uses the power of plants to cleanse our soil and water. By harnessing their natural abilities, plants can extract, stabilize, degrade, volatilize, and filter pollutants, providing an eco-friendly solution to some of our most pressing environmental challenges. Through phytoremediation, we can transform contaminated sites into thriving, green spaces. Phytoremediation is not just a scientific process; it's a movement towards a more sustainable and harmonious relationship with nature. By supporting this innovative approach, you are contributing to a cleaner, greener world. We invite you to join us on this journey. Visit www.mywastesolution.com to learn more about our efforts and how you can get involved. Together, we can cultivate a sustainable future. Let's make a difference. #JoinTheSustainabilityMovement

Lately, I watched a fascinating documentary that introduced a novel concept: seeds engineered from wood and carbon fiber designed to store and gradually release water. This innovation aims to boost vegetation growth by ensuring plants receive a consistent water supply, a potentially game-changing technology for arid regions. While the concept is impressive, it led me to a personal reflection: Are these synthetic solutions the best approach to addressing the environmental issues we face—issues that we ourselves have generated? Introducing inorganic elements into ecosystems brings us to a critical juncture. Is fostering a 'cyber-nature' truly the right path forward? Nature has flourished through millennia of natural evolution, a process through which life has adapted to various challenges without human intervention. This reflection makes me question the size of our ego in thinking that we can improve upon nature's own mechanisms. Could our efforts to alter these natural processes ultimately prove to be counterproductive? I invite everyone to reflect on this and discuss more sustainable solutions that honor the principles of natural evolution, considering the long-term implications of our technological interventions. #Sustainability #Innovation #EnvironmentalTechnology #NatureVsTechnology

Carbon market 1.0 / 2.0 are categories that have been invented in reaction to criticism funded and perpetuated by those fundamentally opposed to market-based conservation. The criticism will not stop at 2.0, because it is ideological in nature. Unless we want to be figuring out how to fix carbon market 2.0 with carbon market 3.0 in 5 years, and so on and so forth, we've got to start looking forward and stop trying to fix what has been defined as "legacy". This does nothing good for the market and is in fact a good way to stop it in its tracks. Innovation happens on a continuum, and methodologies and programs should be adapted and redefined on that same continuum. The concept of looking back and punishing pioneering, good-faith, efforts that were state of the art in their era, is sheer folly. If we collectively believe in market-based conservation, let's stop speaking the enemy's language!

"Humanity is continuing a path towards ecological instability. While resource consumption is unprecedented, significant parts of the human population are still deprived of decent living. The safe and just operating space postulates that it is possible to simultaneously stay within ecological limits and fulfil basic needs. However, evidence that such a state can be achieved given existing population and available technologies is lacking. Here, we attempt to show whether a safe and just space exists by modelling material and energy requirements for satisfying basic needs with various technological scenarios. Environmental impacts of a basket of products representing basic needs satisfaction are measured through life cycle analysis and compared to planetary boundaries for the first time. We find that all planetary boundaries considered can be respected for 8.0 and 10.4 billion people with a probability of 81% and 73% respectively. However, this requires a fossil-free energy system, and an essentially vegan diet as well as no additional cropland conversion. To actually create and enlarge a safe and just operating space, carbon dioxide emissions, biodiversity, Phosphorus and Nitrogen emissions would need to be further reduced, mainly by improved agricultural practices and material circularity." https://lnkd.in/dZvKAemi