Quantcast
Channel: Environment
Viewing all 2972 articles
Browse latest View live

Sea levels are rising way faster than they have in the past 2,800 years

0
0

FILE - In this Oct. 31, 2012 file photo, a view from the air shows the destroyed homes left in the wake of Superstorm Sandy in Ortley Beach, N.J.  Sea levels on Earth are rising several times faster than they have in the past 2,800 years and are accelerating because of man-made global warming, according to new studies. An international team of scientists dug into two dozen locations across the globe to see what the sea level was for the past 2,800 years. They charted gently rising and falling seas over centuries and millennia. Until the 1880s and industrialization of society, on average the fastest seas rose was about 1 to 1.5 inches a century, plus or minus a bit. During that time global sea level really didn’t get much higher or lower than three inches above or below the 2,000-year average.  (AP Photo/Mike Groll, File)

WASHINGTON — Sea levels on Earth are rising several times faster than they have in the past 2,800 years and are accelerating because of man-made global warming, according to new studies.

An international team of scientists dug into two dozen locations across the globe to chart gently rising and falling seas over centuries and millennia.

Until the 1880s and the world's industrialization, the fastest seas rose was about 1 to 1.5 inches (3 to 4 centimeters) a century, plus or minus a bit.

During that time global sea level really didn't get much higher or lower than 3 inches above or below the 2,000-year average.

But in the 20th century the world's seas rose 5.5 inches (14 centimeters). Since 1993 the rate has soared to a foot per century (30 centimeters).

And two different studies published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, said by 2100 that the world's oceans will rise between 11 to 52 inches (28 to 131 centimeters), depending on how much heat-trapping gas Earth's industries and vehicles expel.

"There's no question that the 20th century is the fastest," said Rutgers earth and planetary sciences professor Bob Kopp, lead author of the study that looked back at sea levels over the past three millennia. "It's because of the temperature increase in the 20th century which has been driven by fossil fuel use."

To figure out past sea levels and rates of rise and fall, scientists engaged in a "geological detective story," said study co-author Ben Horton, a Rutgers marine scientist. They went around the world looking at salt marshes and other coastal locations and used different clues to figure out what the sea level was at different times. They used single cell organisms that are sensitive to salinity, mangroves, coral, sediments and other clues in cores, Horton said. On top of that they checked their figures by easy markers such as the rise of lead with the start of the industrial age and isotopes only seen in the atomic age.

When Kopp and colleagues charted the sea level rise over the centuries — they went back 3,000 years, but aren't confident in the most distant 200 years — they saw Earth's sea level was on a downward trend until the industrial age.

Sea level rise in the 20th century is mostly man-made, the study authors said. A separate, not-yet-published study by Kopp and others found since 1950, about two-thirds of the U.S. nuisance coastal floods in 27 locales have the fingerprints of man-made warming.

And if seas continue to rise, as projected, another 18 inches of sea level rise is going to cause lots of problems and expense, especially with surge during storms, said study co-author Stefan Rahmstorf of the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in Germany.

"There is such a tight relationship between sea level and temperature," Horton said. "I wish there wasn't, then we wouldn't be as worried."

The link to temperature is basic science, the study's authors said. Warm water expands. Cold water contracts. The scientists pointed to specific past eras when temperatures and sea rose and fell together.

The Kopp study and a separate one published by another team projected future sea level rise based on various techniques. They came to the same general estimates, despite using different methods, said Anders Levermann, a co-author of the second paper and a researcher at the Potsdam Institute.

If greenhouse gas pollution continues at the current pace, both studies project increases of about 22 to 52 inches (57 to 131 centimeters). If countries fulfill the treaty agreed upon last year in Paris and limit further warming to another 2 degrees Fahrenheit, sea level rise would be in the 11 to 22 inch range (28 to 56 centimeters).

Jonathan Overpeck at the University of Arizona, who wasn't part of the studies, praised them, saying they show a clear cause and effect between warming and sea level rise.

Journal: http://www.pnas.org

SEE ALSO: 14 images that reveal what the hottest year in history looked like

CHECK OUT: NASA scientists take to Reddit to issue a dire warning

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This brilliant idea uses the ocean's own currents to clean up garbage


Business Insider is hiring paid interns who love to write about science

0
0

business insider newsroom

Business Insider Science is looking for a paid editorial intern!

Interns at Business Insider aren't sent on coffee runs or forced to spend their days filing or making copies.

Instead, they are an integral part of our team. Many of our current writers and editors started as interns. 

As a BI intern, you'll spend your time doing meaningful, important work: researching, pitching, writing, and even breaking science news. We want people who can find their own stories, pitch them, and write quickly, cleanly, and intelligently.

Our style is smart, conversational, exciting, and geared toward non-scientists. Careful attention to detail and an ability to be efficient in a quick-turnaround environment are both skills that are absolutely required for this job. We also prize agility in and enthusiasm for tackling wildly different topics — from the latest fitness trends to the growing problem of climate change to new research in space and psychology.

Our aim is to help readers engage with the world around them in as many smart, creative ways as possible. Science is everywhere.

This position is at our Flatiron headquarters in New York City. Internships run for six months and interns are encouraged to work up to 40 hours a week.

Consider applying if:

  • You have awesome writing and copy editing skills.
  • You can translate complicated studies, decrypt complex developments, and make science and health exciting for a general audience.
  • You're constantly coming up with new story ideas.
  • You're ready to take one subject or piece of news, research, and tackle it from multiple angles.
  • You always have something to add to the conversation when it comes to trending news.
  • You thrive in a fast-paced, collaborative setting.

Apply here with a resume, clips, and a cover letter telling us what makes you passionate about science reporting.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: People doing backflips on a two-inch wide strap is a real sport called slacklining

Here's what America would look like under 25 feet of water

0
0

Jefferson 25 feetSea levels are rising several times faster today than at any other point in roughly the last 3,000 years, according to new research.

Scientists project that if humans don't get control over greenhouse gas emission levels, then sea levels could rise by as much as 3-4 feet by the year 2100.

Sea levels rise because of melting glaciers and ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica as a result of warming temperatures. The ocean also expands as it warms.

Rising sea levels make coastal areas, particularly those with dense populations, much more vulnerable to heavy flooding.

Artist and researcher Nickolay Lamm, from StorageFront.com, previously created sea-level rise maps to show what major US monuments would look like over the next century if we continue on a business-as-usual track. Lamm used data provide by Climate Central to build his sea level maps.

The hypothetical scenes show icons, like the Statue of Liberty and the Washington Monument, and depict four levels of flooding at each landmark: 0 feet; 5 feet (possible in 100 to 300 years); 12 feet (possible by about 2300); and 25 feet (possible in the coming centuries):

READ MORE: Sea levels are rising faster than they have in 28 centuries — here's what could happen to New York City

SEE ALSO: Sea levels are rising way faster than they have in the past 2,800 years

Here's a map of New York City today. The white triangle is where the "camera" is positioned in the illustrations — toward Lower Manhattan. In the next slide, you'll see what this camera is looking at in real life.

Source: Nickolay Lamm/StorageFront.com; Data provided by Climate Central



Here's New York City today, from the perspective of the camera in the first map.

Source: Nickolay Lamm/StorageFront.com; Data provided by Climate Central



Here's that same map of New York City in about 100 years if sea level rises by 5 feet, represented by the blue shading.

Source: Nickolay Lamm/StorageFront.com; Data provided by Climate Central



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Reducing the amount of polluting gases we emit could save nearly 300,000 people by 2030

0
0

coal plant

America’s international climate obligations carry a significant public health benefit, with new research finding that about 295,000 premature deaths could be prevented in the country by 2030 if deep cuts to greenhouse gas emissions are achieved.

At a summit in Paris in December, 196 nations, including the US, agreed to limit global warming to 1.5C above pre-industrial levels in order to prevent the worst effects of climate change.

The agreement, the first to demand all countries slash emissions, will require major emissions reductions given that the world has already warmed by 1C during the past century.

A paper by Duke University calculates that in order to help achieve the Paris goal, the US will need to reduce its emissions by 40% by 2030, compared with 2005 levels. This is a jump from the 26-28% reduction the US has promised to undertake by 2025.

The US would prevent many premature deaths and save the economy billions of dollars should it make the necessary emissions cuts, the Duke study shows. A total of 295,000 Americans who would otherwise die from lung cancer, heart attacks or respiratory diseases by 2030 would be saved due to the reduction in air pollution.

Currently, the US experiences about 200,000 early deaths each year due to emissions from heavy industry, cars, trains and ships, as well as commercial and residential heating. Ozone and particulate matter released from the burning of fossil fuels are linked to 100,000 of these annual deaths.

“If we continue on the current high trajectory of emissions we’ll continue to have a large number of pollution-caused deaths,” said Professor Drew Shindell, lead author of the research. “Climate change doesn’t feel immediate unless you have the kind of smog you have in China right now but the health benefits would happen right away if we acted. And they’d happen right here in the US.

“People should realize that emissions are having a big impact already. You are talking about more than 100,000 deaths a year at a time when people spend a huge amount of time and money on a relatively small number of deaths from terrorist attacks or plane crashes. Air pollution is a very big health challenge, it’s having a major public health impact in the US.”

Although coal is in decline in the US, the main national mechanism to reduce emissions has been put on hold by the supreme court, which is considering challenges from nearly 30 states to a plan by Barack Obama’s administration to limit emissions from power plants.

To get to a 40% reduction in emissions by 2030, not only would this plan need to proceed unhindered, it would also have to be expanded to areas beyond electricity generation. Almost all of America’s car fleet would need to be electrified.

“It’s a tall order, there’s no getting around that,” said Shindell. “We’d need the support of Congress and the supreme court. But it’s achievable if we really want it. The US does require a big jolt because we are nowhere near the path we need to be on. We are creating a very difficult climate for future generations.”

The study, which has been published in Nature Climate Change, is based on a model of future emissions scenarios and the known health impact of air pollution. The economic cost was calculated from the value the Environmental Protection Agency places upon each avoided premature death.

A 75% reduction in transport emissions would save 120,000 lives by 2030, the Duke study calculated, while a 63% cut in energy emissions would prevent a further 175,000 deaths. Most of these saved lives would be in cities and states that contain high concentrations of polluting industry, such as Ohio and Kentucky.

The US would also gain economically from emissions cuts, with $800bn saved by 2030 due to the reduced health burden, increased consumer spending and transition to new clean energy opportunities.

According to the World Health Organisation, about seven million people died in 2012 as a result of air pollution. WHO said this total – which represents one in eight of all total global deaths – shows that air pollution is the “world’s largest single environmental health risk”. Heart disease and stroke are the primary deadly consequences of air pollution.

This article originally appeared on guardian.co.uk

SEE ALSO: There's a worrisome problem at the heart of the Zika-virus crisis that no one is talking about

CHECK OUT: 14 images that reveal what the hottest year in history looked like

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Bill Nye has a 'bone to pick' with NASCAR

Rising seas are threatening to swallow up some of these beautiful places

0
0

Solomon Islands

Climate change will have many devastating effects related to changes in weather patterns, but perhaps the greatest damage will be caused by rising sea levels — and nowhere is poised to suffer from this more than inhabited islands that will soon be underwater.

The oceans are rising faster than they have for the last 2,800 years, according to a new report published Monday in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

At this rate, sea level rise during the 21st century will be in line with previous estimates from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which suggested they could rise by another 3-4 feet by 2100.

These surging seas are threatening to submerge some of the most beautiful islands around the globe, and they're having an impact here in the US, too: 

This is an updated version of a story written by reporter Chelsea Harvey in January 2015.

CHECK OUT: Sea levels are rising faster than they have in 28 centuries — here's what could happen to New York City

NOW READ: Here's what America would look like under 25 feet of water

Sea levels rose by nearly 14 centimeters during the 20th century (shown by the red lines). That's double the maximum rise predicted by models without global warming (blue lines).

Source: PNAS, 2016



And the rising waters are threatening to drown some of the world's 52 island nations — home to an estimated 62 million people.

Source: United Nations Environment Programme



Depending on regional influences, like nearby melting glaciers, ocean currents, and even tectonic activity, waters can rise at different rates in different areas. The UN reports that sea level rise on these islands is up to four times the global average, and it's already driving inhabitants away from their homes.

Source: United Nations Environment Programme 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Climate change is ruining some of the best aspects of Los Angeles

0
0

Los Angeles

The city of Los Angeles is known for its sandy beaches, mild temperatures, and lack of humidity.

The combination of cool winters and warm summers sets it apart from almost every other city in the nation.

But rising temperatures are already putting the city at risk.

A new study, published this week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences journal say they expect sea levels to rise anywhere from 11 to 52 inches by 2100, depending on how much heat-trapping gas we emit. That could be detrimental to Los Angeles' coastline. 

We've outlined some of the most significant effects of climate change today and how this will affect the LA region in the future.

An earlier version of this post was written by Leslie Baehr.

NEXT: These 10 cities have the worst air pollution in the world, and it is up to 15 times dirtier than what is considered healthy

CHECK OUT: Sea levels are rising faster than they have in 28 centuries — and it spells a worrisome reality for New York City

Los Angeles County, which includes the city of Los Angeles, covers a land area of 4,000 square miles (shown in red). It stretches north along the coast past Malibu, south to include Long Beach, and includes two islands, 88 cities, and Angeles National Forest.

Source: US Census



The county is home to more than 10 million people, making it among the most populated counties in the U.S.

Source: US Census



Los Angeles is known for its mild weather and year-round pleasant temperatures. It has warm winters, with a January average of 59 degrees Fahrenheit, and cool summers, with an average July temperature of 70 degrees F.

Source: US Climate Data

 



See the rest of the story at Business Insider

This country now has higher air pollution levels than China

0
0

New Delhi smog

India's air pollution levels official overtook China's in 2015, with the average particulate matter exposure exceeding Beijing for the first time in the 21st century.

The information was revealed by Greenpeace on 22 February, who conducted an analysis of Nasa satellite data to reach their conclusion.

Greenpeace research noted that 23 out of 32 National Air Quality Index (NAQI) stations in India had recorded more than 70% exceedance of the national standards, which puts public health at risk.

Furthermore, as many as 15 cities showed levels of air pollution that greatly exceeded the prescribed national standards.

Their report on NAQIs in India concluded that the most polluted cities in India often go months without a single day that meets the standard levels.

Delhi, Ahmedabad, Varanasi, Patna, Agra and Kanpur were among those cities to be listed as having hazardous pollution levels.

A spokesperson for Greenpeace India said: "China's strong measures to curb pollution have contributed to the biggest year-on-year air quality improvement on record while in contrast, India's pollution levels continued a decade-long increase to reach the highest level on record."

New Delhi pollution

Greenpeace researchers believe that the NAQI system will only be effective in protecting citizens from air pollution if efforts are made to communicate pollution levels through radio and TV channels, as well as through the internet. They urged government officials to provide "actionable instructions" on how people can protect themselves from the increasing pollution levels and recommended the use of air pollution masks, as well as the installation of air purifiers in schools, hospitals and other public buildings.

Noting that China's air pollution levels have begun to drop while India's has steadily been rising, Greenpeace said that city-specific actions could not solve the national air pollution problem. Sunil Dahiya, energy campaigner for Greenpeace India, said that Beijing had attempted to approach the problem through city-specific ways for a number of years and had failed in reducing pollution levels.

Vendors selling drinks stand beside vehicles near the India Gate war memorial on a smoggy day in New Delhi February 1, 2013. REUTERS/Adnan Abidi

Dahiya said: "Realizing it as a regional issue impacting larger geographies of the country, the Chinese government decided on adopting a systematic, coordinated and time-bound action plan which ultimately resulted in massive decrease in pollution levels in the country."

As a result, Dahiya recommends that the government set up air pollution monitoring systems in all major urban areas and set a deadline for meeting the national air quality standards. He also said that it would be a good idea to make it mandatory for industries and thermal power plants to display "real time air emission data" on public platforms.

SEE ALSO: Here's why the US government suddenly banned a bunch of soaps, bodywashes, and toothpastes

CHECK OUT: NASA scientists take to Reddit to issue a dire warning

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 4,000 people in China die every day from air pollution

What's happening in the Arctic is transforming how we transport goods

0
0

arctic shipping vessel

LONDON, Feb 25 — The Arctic is thawing even faster than lawmakers can formulate new rules to prevent the environmental threat of heavy fuel oil pollution from ships plying an increasingly popular trade route.

Average Arctic temperatures are rising twice as fast as elsewhere in the world and the polar ice cap's permanent cover is shrinking at a rate of around 10 percent per decade. By the end of this century, summers in the Arctic could be free of ice.

As the ice melts, traffic of ships carrying cargoes of gas, coal and diesel through the region has increased. Russia, in particular, is keen to expand shipping through the Arctic given its rich natural resources and efforts to cut costs. It aims to cut journey times between Europe and Asia by 30 to 40 percent.

"It is time for regulators to wake up and realize that the Arctic is melting away right in front of us," said Whit Sheard of the Circumpolar Conservation Union (CCU) green group.

"Common sense regulations, integrated ocean planning, and explicit protections are all needed before the resources of the region are targeted for exploitation or before it becomes a major shipping route."

While there is a non-binding agreement in place between Arctic states aimed at Arctic environmental protection, campaigners say there has been no progress on regulating the use of heavy fuel oil (HFO), which is banned in the Antarctic region owing to its toxicity and the polluting emissions it generates.

Regulations for the Antarctic came into effect in 2011 after being adopted by the United Nations' shipping agency the International Maritime Organization (IMO).

Arctic shipping routes

It was arguably an easier sell as less commercial cargo ships such as oil tankers operate in the Antarctic, where fishing boats, cruise ships and yachts predominate.

Any effort to tackle the issue is likely to take some time even after last year's climate deal in Paris, which commits nations to curb emissions. The Paris deal did not set specific targets for commercial shipping, leaving the IMO to take up the charge.

HFO was not the top focus of an Arctic Council meeting on environmental protection earlier this month, leading campaigners to seek more action. They plan to raise the issue at the IMO's next marine environmental protection committee session in April.

Julie Gourley, senior Arctic official at the U.S. State Department, said Washington, which has the rotating chair of the Council, was "presently studying" the risks associated with HFO and continued to engage with Council partners to find solutions for Arctic issues.

Significant threat

According to a 2009 study by the intergovernmental Arctic Council, the release of oil into the Arctic's marine environment "either through accidental release, or illegal discharge, is the most significant threat from shipping activity".

Last year, the U.S., Russia and other Arctic nations signed an agreement to bar their fishing fleets from seas around the North Pole.

Under the Polar Code, which was adopted by the IMO, ships trading in polar regions will have to comply with environmental provisions from January 2017.

The code imposed prohibitions on the carriage of oil or oily mixtures from any ship into the sea and prevented pollution from garbage and noxious liquid substances. But it only "encouraged" ships not to use or carry HFO in the Arctic.

A 2015 study by the CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis estimated that two thirds of the volume of world trade that goes through the Suez Canal could be re-routed via the Arctic route in future. It gave no time frames.

Other analysts are more conservative on how much trade could be re-routed given the recent economic slowdown in China and oil price uncertainty.

Madison Maersk Container Ship Shipping

The Suez Canal, which allows ships to travel between Europe and South Asia, accounts for an estimated 8 percent of world seaborne trade.

The International Association of Oil & Gas Producers (IOGP), representing the global upstream industry, said it had gained extensive experience "in the safest and most environmentally sensitive ways of operating in such conditions".

"While some parties have called for codes of best practices in the Arctic, as far as the industry is concerned, wherever we do business the same high standards apply," the IOGP said.

Looser ice means icebergs and there is the risk of vessels being holed. Insurers are also looking for more clarity.

"The level of regulation applying to these new waterways has, perhaps inevitably, not had time to catch up with the physical changes to the Arctic environment," said Joe Hughes, chairman and chief executive of ship insurer American Club.

"From an insurance perspective, marine underwriters will have concerns in regard to hull and other damage caused by physical hazards encountered in the Arctic, and navigating restrictions."

(Additional reporting by Ekaterina Golubkova in Moscow; editing by Susan Thomas)

SEE ALSO: There's a worrisome problem at the heart of the Zika-virus crisis that no one is talking about

DON'T MISS: 2015 was the hottest year in history by the widest margin on record

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: A bunch of daredevils built this human-sized spiderweb in the middle of a Utah canyon


Extreme heat waves could occur yearly by 2075

0
0

RTX1MV8A

Things are heating up.

With climates around the world still changing, deadly heat waves are becoming more common, especially in places like the Middle East which are already struggling with scorching summers.

And the forecast isn't looking all that cool for other places either.

In a paper published in Climatic Change researchers found that heat waves that currently occur only once every 20 years could occur every year in the near future.

And these aren't isolated incidents.

The study predicts that by 2075, 60% of the land surface on the Earth could experience these dramatic events.

The researchers also found that those extreme heat waves were more likely to be even hotter than those experienced in the present, with heat waves across 60% of the land surface having temperatures 5.4 degrees Fahrenheit warmer than heat waves now.

Though that might not seem like much, even a few degrees can mean the difference between life and death for vulnerable populations. Heat stress is a dangerous thing, and can prove fatal to the very young, the elderly, and people already suffering from illnesses. Heat waves are typically most deadly for the impoverished, especially those who don't have access to the respite offered by cooling facilities, electricity, or air conditioning.

RTX1HPB3

Luckily, this isn't our only possible future. The researchers point out that if we manage to cut greenhouse gases dramatically, emitting less heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, we can reduce the frequency of these events.

"The study shows that aggressive cuts in greenhouse gas emissions will translate into sizable benefits starting in the middle of the century for both the number and intensity of extreme heat events," study author Claudia Tebaldi said. "Even though heat waves are on the rise, we still have time to avoid a large portion of the impacts."

This article originally appeared on Popular Science.

SEE ALSO: NASA scientists take to Reddit to issue a dire warning

CHECK OUT: There's a worrisome problem at the heart of the Zika-virus crisis that no one is talking about

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Sea levels are rising at the fastest rate in 2,800 years — here’s what Earth will look like if all the ice melts

Here's the hard truth about recycling takeout containers

0
0

chinese food takeout

Recycling plastic sometimes seems like a minefield.

It should be easy, right? Plastic shampoo and soda bottles go in the blue bins, wispy plastic grocery bags don't — but what about take-out containers?

Many to-go containers are similar to plastic bottles, but they're often caked with food. If it's too dirty, the recycling plant might just send it to the landfill.

Adding to the confusion is that whether you can recycle any given plastic — or any plastic at all — depends entirely on your local government's recycling program.

Many cities recycle plastics only with a tiny embossed number 1, 2, and 6 on the item, or some other combination of those numbers.

But what do they actually mean?

The numbers correspond roughly to the type of resin used the plastic itself. (Though even within these categories, there's a huge amount of variation.)

Most to-go food containers — particularly the clear, clam-shell type — are made out of plastic No. 1, just like soda bottles. These are pretty easy to recycle, and most municipalities will, after you've rinsed them and completely removed any stickers.

While containers making their way from your street to the plant, any bits of food on them can spur bacterial growth. The containers can be sterilized, but that adds time and energy to the process. Many plants would rather just chuck the dirtiest plastics than waste resources on cleaning them thoroughly.

Cardboard pizza boxes and paper Chinese takeout containers don't hold up well to rinsing, so you have to rip up the containers to separate the soiled from pristine parts (then recycle the latter).

nyc styrofoam getty Styrofoam, however, is another matter.

It's is so hard to recycle that New York City tried to ban it in 2013, but failed when the industry won a lawsuit two years later.

Most places won't pick up styrofoam, also known as plastic No. 6, with your regular recycling. But depending on where you live, there might be a drop-off facility.

Of course, lots of take-out places are switching to biodegradable boxes.

Researchers from Singapore announced today they've created a new, biodegradable polymer derived from crustacean shells — so even if your city doesn't recycle plastic yet, it might soon.

The perhaps unsatisfying final verdict on takeout containers is that it's complicated. Check your local government's site for recycling information, look for embossed numbers that match the plastics it accepts, rinse those containers well, and chuck anything else.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We Put A GoPro Through The Recycling Process

Beijing is planning to build ‘ventilation corridors’ to blow air pollution away

0
0

beijing smog

Beijing is planning to develop a network of “ventilation corridors” to help disperse its notorious smog, Xinhua reported on the weekend, citing the city’s planning authorities.

But an environmental expert questioned the effectiveness of the approach, saying the better remedy was to cut emissions.

The corridors would be created by linking parks, rivers, lakes, highways and low-rise buildings to allow greater air flow, said Wang Fei, deputy head of the city’s urban planning committee.

By improving air flow through the city, “the wind can blow away heat and pollutants, easing the urban heat island effect and air pollution,” he told Xinhua.

Construction would be strictly controlled in areas within the corridors’ boundaries, and obstacles in the way would be removed if possible, Wang said.

Under the plan, five major corridors more than 500 meters wide would stretch from the northern suburbs to the south, with several secondary ventilation corridors more 80 meters wide.

Beijing’s urban planners first raised the idea as a potential way to tackle air pollution in 2014. Feasibility studies had been conducted in the past two years, Wang said. But no timetable has been given for the project.

Ma Jun, director of the Beijing-based Institute of Public and Environmental Affairs, said Beijing was trying to fight smog by improving the conditions for pollutants to disperse, but such an approach might not be effective.

“It mainly depends on weather conditions,” Ma said.

“Most often, it’s not that strong winds cannot enter the city. Rather, it is the lack of wind in calm weather that often leads to heavy pollution ... More research is needed to prove if ventilation corridors are effective before the city spends huge amounts of funds on such plans.”

The better approach was to reduce emissions, Ma said.

SEE ALSO: This country now has higher air pollution levels than China

MORE: 8 ways living in a city is terrible for your health

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: 4,000 people in China die every day from air pollution

The disastrous gas leak in California was the largest of its kind in US history

0
0

Aliso Canyon Methane Leak Porter Ranch

Remember that gas leak that sprang from a natural gas well in the Southern California town of Porter Ranch last fall?

Scientists just confirmed that it was the largest methane gas leak the US has ever endured, according to a study published February 25 in the journal Science.

Scientists have even calculated that the amount of methane that leaked each day was enough to fill a balloon the size of the Rose Bowl.

The leak, which sprang on October 23, 2015 from a natural gas well in a quiet, hilly town in northern Los Angeles, uncontrollably spewed more than 100,000 tons of methane — a potent greenhouse gas — into the sky before it was finally plugged four months later on February 18, 2016, scientists announced.

To put the environmental impact into perspective, the amount of methane released from the well is equivalent to the annual emissions of nearly 500,000 passenger vehicles.

Shortly after the leak, residents said they became sickened from the noxious fumes, experiencing nausea, nosebleeds, and headaches. Thousands were displaced, and community members and activists pointed fingers at SoCalGas, the owner of the well, for not taking proper precautions. At least dozens of lawsuits are currently pending.

In addition to this being the worst methane leak in the history of the US, activists and officials have deemed this one of the most deplorable environmental catastrophes in recent years, drawing comparisons to some of the most egregious man-made mishaps.

Environmental activist Erin Brockovich labeled this one of the worst environmental disasters since the 2010 BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, which for nearly three months leaked more than 3 million barrels of oil into the gulf. Even today, nearly five years later, oil still dots beaches along the Louisiana coast with tar, choking mangrove trees and sickening dolphins.

In a public hearing on January 9, L.A. County Supervisor Michael D. Antonovich referred to the leak as a "mini Chernobyl,"according to the Los Angeles Times

That's right, Antonovich compared the leak to the 1986 nuclear power plant disaster in Ukraine, which spewed radioactive material into the sky — killing two plant workers during the release and 28 people in the next few weeks due to acute radiation poisoning. It's considered one of the "most serious accidents in nuclear history."

Porter Ranch Methane gasAccording to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, exposure to the chemical mercaptan, which is added to the gas to give it that quintessential (and detectable) sulfurous smell, can cause staggered gait, vomiting, irritation of the respiratory system, wheezing, rapid heart beat, arm and leg rigidity, bluish discoloration of the skin, and irritated eyes and mucous membranes.

Industrial exposures could even put someone in a coma and cause death by a blocked lung artery up to 28 days later.

While the human side effects from the gas are temporary, the atmospheric damage from the leak is lasting.

Much like a blanket, greenhouse gases advance global warming by trapping heat in the atmosphere. While methane is the second most abundant greenhouse gas after carbon dioxide, it is arguably worse for the environment. It doesn't stick around in the atmosphere as long as carbon dioxide, but it locks heat into our atmosphere more efficiently.

Experts estimate that methane can warm the planet tens, hundreds, or even thousands of times better than carbon dioxide can.

Methane, mercaptan, and other gases that poured from the well are invisible to the naked eye. But an infrared camera, operated by an Earthworks ITC-certified thermographer, was able to reveal the enormous methane plume in action on December 17:

SoCalGas crews finally drilled a relief well that they pumped with fluids and cement to intercept and plug the flow of gas from the leaking well. But while the leak has stopped, the effects will severely hamper California's greenhous gas emissions targets for the year, scientists said in a press release.

“Our results show how failures of natural gas infrastructure can significantly impact greenhouse gas control efforts,” Tom Ryerson, a chemist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and co-lead scientist on the study released today, said in a press release.

The event was so huge, the team studying the plume even had to check their gas-sniffing gear to ensure it was working properly.

"It became obvious that there wasn’t anything wrong with the instruments," co-author Stephen Conley of Scientific Aviation and UC Davis said in the release. "This was just a huge event."

SEE ALSO: 14 images that reveal what the hottest year in history looked like

CHECK OUT: NASA scientists take to Reddit to issue a dire warning

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: This massive Los Angeles county gas leak is spewing 110,000 pounds of methane an hour

Wildlife officials are catching poachers with robot animal decoys

0
0

White tailed deerWildlife officials have a new breed of undercover agents: Robotic animals that are more than just taxidermy specimens.

These animals are actually so realistic they are used to snare poachers all across the U.S.

Officials pose the critters in environments where shooting them is illegal. Then they find a place to hide out of sight of the poachers who attempt to shoot the creatures, Popular Science reports.

With the use of a remote, these robots can easily move, although they can't walk or run.

They can, however, make subtle movements such as lifting a leg or turning their head. And recent reports say that's just enough to lure in poachers.

There's a huge demand for these decoys, noted Jim Reed of the Humane Society Wildlife Land Trust (HSWLT), which donates them to agencies that combat poaching, The Washington Post reports. Game wardens are usually underfunded, Reed said, and robotic wildlife is definitely expensive.

One deer costs around $2,000, while a black bear costs up to $5,000. And the Humane Society says hunters kill as many animals illegally as they do legally, meaning wardens are extremely busy.

If the decoys look alive, it's because they once were, Brian Wolslegel, owner of Custom Robotic Wildlife told the Post. Wolslegel doesn't hunt. Instead, he raises deer in his backyard. He makes the realistic dummies out of legally acquired hides from hunters, game wardens, or online.

He sells as many as 100 whitetail deer yearly, and they are his most popular critter. Wildlife officers have told him they make up to $30,000 in fines off of each robot animal, he said.

When one of these pseudo-critters isn't available, having a poacher, a wild creature, and a law enforcement officer on the scene at the same time is like winning the lottery, he said. And if the poacher is caught, "the animal already died in the process," he said.

Through the decoy program, the HSWLT donates deer, bear, pronghorn, and other wildlife decoys to agencies. The decoys are placed in a vulnerable setting (an open field, for instance), and officers waiting nearby use remote controls to make them move like a living animal would.

If a poacher shoots at a decoy, the officers have the necessary evidence to support the poacher's prosecution.

And the decoys can still look lively, even if they've been shot 100 times, The Week reports. In part, this is because they are filled with Styrofoam. So there's usually no problem if bullets pass through their cores. If the motor gets hit, it's replaceable.

These motors are the same type that are found in toy cars or planes, National Geographic reports. The decoys are also outfitted with reflective eyes that glow at night when light shines on them.

Typically, a deer in the forest doesn't necessarily appear well-groomed, Reed noted.

"It may have a little mud stuck on its back, some hairs ruffled from the wind," he said. The decoys that work best are the ones that "get well-seasoned."

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: We tried Shake Shack and In-N-Out side by side, and it's clear which one is better

Leonardo DiCaprio gave an Oscars climate-change speech that'll give you chills

0
0

the revenant leo

When Leonardo DiCaprio accepted his Oscar for Best Actor Sunday night for "The Revenant," he took the opportunity to highlight an inconvenient truth.

"Making 'The Revenant' was about man's relationship to the natural world," he said in his acceptance speech. "Climate change is real, it is happening right now. It is the most urgent threat facing our entire species, and we need to work collectively together and stop procrastinating."

As DiCaprio pointed out, 2015 was the hottest year in recorded history. The average global temperature over land and sea was 1.62 degrees Fahrenheit (0.90 Celsius) above the 20th century average — 0.29 F (0.16 C) hotter than the previous record set in 2014.

"Our production needed to move to the southern tip of this planet just to be able to find snow," DiCaprio said.

As The Washington Post reported, the actor's speech comes on the heals of a recent study which suggests climate change may be worse than we thought. The report found that humanity must keep our emissions of carbon dioxide to less than 1,000 billion tons if we're to have a good chance of keep global warming below the widely accepted limit of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

This is not the first time DiCaprio has taken a stand on climate change. In December, he addressed mayors from around the world during the Paris climate talks, calling for countries to divest from fossil fuels such as coal, oil, and gas, The New York Times reported.

"Now to get there, we must act. We must finally leave behind the inefficient technologies of another century and the business models that they have created," he said, according to the Times.

In January, DiCaprio received an award at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, for his foundation, which focuses on climate change and protecting the world's wildlife and ecosystems.

Watch DiCaprio's full Oscar speech here.

NEXT UP: 2015 was the hottest year in history by the widest margin on record

NOW SEE: 14 images that reveal what the hottest year in history looked like

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The 10 most awkward moments from the 2016 Academy Awards

Leonardo DiCaprio used the biggest moment of his career to talk about climate change


Leonardo DiCaprio won 'most important moment' at the Oscars — but not for his award

0
0

leonardo decaprio oscars speech reuters 2016

Leonardo DiCaprio has tried for years to focus the world's attention on climate change. But Sunday night, while clutching his first (and absurdly long-awaited) Oscar, he took advantage of an incredibly well-broadcast moment to get on his soapbox.

During the acceptance speech for best actor, DiCaprio threw strong words at politicians and industries who have used trumped-up controversies to ignore the increasingly dire effects of climate change around the globe.

"We need to support leaders around the world who do not speak for the big polluters or the big corporations, but who speak for all of humanity, for the indigenous people or the world, for the billions and billions of underprivileged people who will be most affected by this," he said.

And he's right: The year 2015 was the hottest year on record, and the populations that will suffer the most as sea levels rise and weather becomes more severe are almost invariably the world's poorest.

But somehow, the "debate" over the warming trend refuses to die.

Recently, climate change deniers have played up a dispute among scientists about a highly contentious "slowdown"between 2000 and 2014 in the Earth's upward-moving warming trend.

In June 2015, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) refuted the idea of such a "hiatus," saying that better measurements revealed that the rate of warming was consistent over that time frame.

warming trend noaa

The argument was resurrected on February 1, when some of the world's most prominent climate scientists — including John Fyfe and Michael Mann — published an article re-affirming the existence of the hiatus.

Conservative media from Breitbart to the Daily Caller have billed the academic debate as "proof" that the scientific community is engaged in a vast conspiracy using manipulated data to create false narratives about the threat of climate change.

In reality, that's not what the report says at all.

The authors never posit that humans aren't affecting climate — just that a slowdown might exist, and may point to subtle climate-buffering mechanisms we don't yet know much about.

Gavin Schmidt of RealClimate fired off a volley of tweets that explains this pretty well:

The reality is that climate modeling (note: not climate science proper) is still a relatively new field. There's also much we don't know about how global climate cycles work over the periods of decades or longer. The new study suggests the slowed rate of warming might be due to changes in the Pacific Ocean currents that work on ten-year cycles.

The authors point out that, while they came to a different conclusion than NOAA, they all agree that the political world has framed the issue in an "unfortunate way," specifically calling out the use of words like "'stalled,' 'stopped,' 'paused,' or entered a 'hiatus'" as inaccurate to describe the Earth's warming trend.

To be clear: There has been no stop in global warming. The world is still getting hotter, just at a slightly slower pace than previously thought.

Even a temporary slowdown in the rate of warming doesn't mean we're out of the woods. It doesn't even mean we might catch a break in the warming trend. The recent discussion is just part of how science constantly re-evaluates and improves its models to better understand complex systems.

Leo was right when he said that climate change is the most urgent issue of this generation and the ones to come — and if it takes a celebrity to change the minds of the 60% of Americans who don't believe dealing with climate change is a top priority, so be it.

In the meantime, the planet isn't getting any cooler.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: One of the world's great natural wonders could be forever altered by climate change

The impact of driverless cars may not be what you think

0
0

Google self-driving car

I started learning driving only three years ago, and – inevitably – failed my first test.

Naturally, I was disappointed: but then it occurred to me that I could avoid the whole issue, if only I could get my hands on a driverless car.

And this triggered the research question: what would the overall impact on travel demand, energy use, and carbon emissions be if driverless cars were readily available to the likes of you and me?

I joined a few like-minded academics in the US to research how the automation of road transport might affect energy use, and to quantify the potential range of these impacts.

We found that a widespread adoption of self-driving vehicles could indeed help to reduce energy consumption in a number of ways.

For example, on motorways, automated vehicles can interact with each other and drive very closely as a “platoon”. This can reduce the total energy consumption of road transport by 4% to 25%, because vehicles which follow closely behind each other face less air resistance.

What’s more, when vehicles can interact with each other and road infrastructure – such as traffic control systems – this will smooth out the traffic flow. The result will be less congestion and a reduction in energy use of up to 4%. On top of this, automated “ecodriving” – a driving style which controls speed and acceleration for more efficient fuel use – can reduce energy use by up to 20%.

When you are riding in your self-driving car, obviously you won’t be at the controls, so you will no longer be able to enjoy the rapid acceleration of your driving days – so perhaps the desire for more powerful engines could diminish. And given that vehicle safety is expected to improve dramatically in self-driving cars, some of the heavy safety features could be removed, making cars lighter. Each of these changes could reduce energy use by up to 23%.

The bigger picture

So far, so good – all of these mechanisms improve the efficiency with which a car travels. But, as a society, our interest lies in reducing total energy use, or total carbon emissions – and energy efficiency forms only one half of this picture. Our total carbon emissions also depend on the demand for travel. So, while improving the energy efficiency of cars by automating the driving process will reduce the carbon emissions of individual vehicles, the overall impact of this change will depend on how many people use them.

For instance, consider what would happen if large numbers of people switched to self-driving cars from traveling by train. We generally prefer the privacy and convenience of traveling by car, but using public transport means we can concentrate on other stuff – such as reading a book or getting some work done. A self-driving car offers all of these benefits. As a result, we found that driverless cars could prove so attractive that they increase car travel by up to 60% in the US.

As you can see below, the features of driverless cars may have a range of impacts on energy consumption – both positive, and negative.

image 20160226 27003 1fobd8l

Self-driving cars could also encourage a completely new group of people to own vehicles – for example, the elderly, the disabled and possibly those too young to drive themselves. This would increase the welfare of that demographic by giving them greater mobility. Yet travel demand, energy use and carbon emissions would all rise: our estimate for the US is an increase between 2% and 10%.

Sharing is caring

But it’s not all bad news: self-driving cars could encourage a move away from current car-owning culture to a car-sharing or on-demand culture. This opens up a few different possibilities. For one thing, by making the per-mile costs more visible to the user, car sharing or automated taxis could reduce travel demand from individuals. Yet these shared automated cars may still travel empty for some parts of their trips, so this option could lead a reduction of energy use between 0% to 20%.

But even greater energy savings are possible if the size of the self-driven shared car is matched to the trip type: for example, if a one-person commute trip is undertaken by a compact car, while for a family leisure trip a medium-sized sedan is used. This approach could reduce energy demand by 21% to 45%.

One thing we haven’t touched in great detail is the potential for self-driving cars to encourage a switch to alternate fuels such as electricity and reduce carbon emissions. Imagine the car dropping you off at your destination and finding a charging point to recharge itself.

So, automation does have the potential to reduce energy use for road transport. But this is not a direct result of automation per se; rather, it is due to how automation changes vehicle design, operations and ownership culture. It’s also interesting that some of the energy-saving benefits of self-driving cars are possible at a lower level of automation, through increased interaction between vehicles and infrastructure.

It is clear that the benefits of self-driving cars will depend on how we use them. The widespread adoption of automated vehicles could well have some unexpected effects, so it’s vital that we find and implement ways to realize the full energy-saving and carbon-reducing potential of self-driving cars. Until then, we’d better keep practicing our driving.

Zia Wadud, Associate professor, University of Leeds. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

SEE ALSO: Here's what America would look like under 25 feet of water

CHECK OUT: Here's how much of the world would need to be covered in solar panels to power Earth

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Do you really need to filter tap water?

London is set to open the world’s largest floating solar farm

0
0

4368

On a vast manmade lake on the outskirts of London, work is nearing completion on what will soon be Europe’s largest floating solar power farm – and will briefly be the world’s biggest.

But few are likely to see the 23,000 solar panels on the Queen Elizabeth II reservoir at Walton-on-Thames, which is invisible to all but Heathrow passengers and a few flats in neighboring estates.

“This will be the biggest floating solar farm in the world for a time — others are under construction,” said Angus Berry, energy manager for Thames Water, which owns the site.

“We are leading the way, but we hope that others will follow, in the UK and abroad.”

Five years in planning and due to be finished in early March, the £6m project will generate enough electricity to power the utility’s local water treatment plants for decades.

The energy will help provide clean drinking water to a populace of close to 10 million people in greater London and the south-east of England, a huge and often unrecognized drain on electricity, rather than nearby homes.

Why put solar panels on water?

The answer, according to Berry, is that the water is there, and might as well be used for this purpose. Floating panels, covering only about 6% of the reservoir, will have no impact on the ecosystem, he says.

Though waterbirds, including moorhens and gulls, live on the margins, and a thin scum of litter is visible at the shore, the reservoir is not intended as a home to wildlife, and any fish living here are accidental visitors. Eighteen meters deep, it provides water for Londoners in a constantly churning stream. Although most of the population growth in London tends to be towards the east, most of the water still comes from reservoirs to the west of the city.

But future projects to make use of water companies’ reservoirs in order to provide solar power might be in doubt, Berry said.

The current government has slashed subsidies for solar and wind power. Berry said that this would not affect the QEII project, but might have an effect on whether follow-up projects could go ahead. “We have had to look very closely at the economics of this, at all stages,” he said. “It is not clear what the future economics would be [for other potential projects].”

A similar floating solar farm with around half the capacity of the Thames Water project is being built by water company United Utilities on a reservoir near Manchester. Construction of an even bigger farm - at 13.7MW more than twice the QEII farm - is underway on a reservoir in land-scarce Japan and due to finish in 2018. 

4368 (1)

Putting solar panels on the water for the QEII scheme has not required planning permission, though big arrays of similar panels on land require official sanction. The government has decided to ban farmers who put solar arrays on agricultural land from receiving EU subsidies for the land.

More than 23,000 solar panels will be floated by developer Lightsource Renewable Energy at the reservoir near Walton-on-Thames, representing 6.3MW of capacity, or enough to generate the equivalent electricity consumption of about 1,800 homes.

The reservoir was commissioned in 1962, and remains one of the biggest serving London. Thames Water said that plans for a “super-sewer” under London would not affect the solar power project.

This article originally appeared on guardian.co.uk.

SEE ALSO: Elon Musk made an incredibly important point about solar energy

CHECK OUT: Here's how much of the world would need to be covered in solar panels to power Earth

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: Sea levels are rising at the fastest rate in 2,800 years — here’s what Earth will look like if all the ice melts

A 7.9 magnitude earthquake just struck the southwest of Indonesia

0
0

In this Monday, Nov. 16, 2015 photo, Mount Sinabung looms above the village of Sukanalu which was abandoned following its eruption, in North Sumatra, Indonesia.

A massive and shallow earthquake struck on Wednesday off the west coast of the Indonesian island of Sumatra, a region devastated by the 2004 Indian Ocean quake and tsunami, and there were early reports of deaths.

A tsunami alert was called off, TV said. Neighboring Australia had also issued a tsunami watch for parts of its western coast and then canceled it.

"There are some who have died," said Heronimus Guru, the deputy head of operations with the National Search and Rescue Agency. He did not know how many, but any rescue operation will be hampered by the dark, which falls early in the tropical archipelago.

The epicenter of the earthquake was 502 miles southwest of Padang (which is in the West Sumatra province), the US Geological Survey said. It was six miles deep.

There were no immediate reports of damage or casualties but the shallower a quake, the more likely it is to cause damage. USGS originally put the magnitude at 8.2, and then 8.1, before lowering it to 7.9.

"So far there have been no reports (of damage) yet," Andi Eka Sakya, an official of the National Meteorological Agency, told TVOne. "In Bengkulu (on southwest coast of Sumatra) they didn't feel it at all." A Medan (the capital of the North Sumatra province) resident also said he didn't feel the quake.

 

Indonesia, especially Aceh, was badly hit by the Indian Ocean tsunami in 2004 that killed 230,000 people in a dozen countries. The 2004 tsunami had a magnitude of between 9.1 and 9.3, and was 19 miles deep. 

The country straddles the so-called "Pacific Ring of Fire", a highly seismically active zone, where different plates on the earth's crust meet and create a large number of earthquakes and volcanoes.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: How Marshawn Lynch — who hasn't spent a penny of his NFL salary — makes and spends his money

The dark backstory of 'Mad Max' shows how the world ends

0
0

By the time six-time Oscar winner "Mad Max: Fury Road" opens, the world is dead. The "Mad Max" franchise, beginning with the 1979 original movie, takes place in a desolate Australian wasteland where cities have been replaced by infinite stretches of sand. What happened?

The world's oil supplies evaporated, touching off a cataclysmic global war. Although the "Mad Max" films don't have a concrete timeline, director George Miller and the screenwriter for the original film, James McCausland, have revealed that the films exist in a universe where the world implodes in the chaos following complete oil depletion.

charlize theron mad max

In 2006, McCausland wrote an op-ed on oil dependence for Australia's Courier-Mail, saying:

George and I wrote the [Mad Max] script based on the thesis that people would do almost anything to keep vehicles moving and the assumption that nations would not consider the huge costs of providing infrastructure for alternative energy until it was too late.

The original script was written in the shadow of the 1973 oil crisis, which had huge political and economic effects following an international oil embargo.

"Mad Max" follows this to its extreme conclusion: economic and societal collapse. In a dark mirror to the 1973 crisis, "Mad Max" takes place in a world where oil scarcity, instead of recovering eventually, sets off a chain reaction of war, destruction, and the nuclear apocalypse.

mad-max-1

The opening moments of the second film, "Mad Max 2"— aka "The Road Warrior"— lays out how everything fell apart. The narrator recalls a time "When the world was powered by the black fuel and the deserts spouted great cities of pipe and steel. Gone now, swept away ... without fuel they were nothing."

In time, the economic collapse destabilized entire cities. This touched off a bloody civil war over resources, leaving only disorganized bands of scavengers willing to kill to survive.

"Their leaders talked and talked and talked, but nothing could stem the avalanche, their world crumbled, cities exploded, a whirlwind of looting, a firestorm of fear, men began to feed on men," the narration of continues.

mad-max-road-warrior

In a key scene during the third film, 1985's "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome," Max is told the final part of the story. In a desperate grab to secure the last reserves of oil, the world was drawn into a nuclear war that decimated the remaining natural resources. The world was dead.

mad-max-cave-drawings

When "Fury Road" begins, all known remaining resources — clean water, functioning vehicles and weapons, and viable oil — have been hoarded by one man: Immortan Joe. He leads The Citadel, where he's worshipped as a living god. Max finds himself wrapped up in the battle to overthrow him, pursued by Immortan Joe across the desert wastes that used to be Australia.

MMFR TRL 87286

Despite minimal dialogue, the franchise features smart and insightful social commentary, best summarized by "Fury Road's" costume designer, Jenny Beavan, during her Academy Award acceptance speech for best costume design.

"It could be horribly prophetic, 'Mad Max,' if we're not kinder to each other, and if we don't stop polluting our atmosphere, so you know, it could happen," she said.

Join the conversation about this story »

NOW WATCH: The behind-the-scenes footage of 'Mad Max: Fury Road' is better than the movie itself

Viewing all 2972 articles
Browse latest View live




Latest Images