Climate Education: Does Healing the Planet Begin in the Classroom? - BRYCE COON - Director of Education - EarthDay.ORG

Climate Education: Does Healing the Planet Begin in the Classroom? - BRYCE COON - Director of Education - EarthDay.ORG

Director of Education · EarthDay.ORG

If you talk to a young person about the climate crisis, they tend to have one of two responses. They either feel like we're not doing enough, and they're advocating for more. The other response is that students would just shut down and wouldn't want to talk about it. I believe introducing climate education is key to addressing that climate anxiety and providing students with climate optimism, hope and solutions.

KATHLEEN ROGERS - President of EarthDay.ORG - Planet vs. Plastics Campaign 2024

KATHLEEN ROGERS - President of EarthDay.ORG - Planet vs. Plastics Campaign 2024

President of EarthDay.ORG

The world recognizes that plastics have imperiled our future. Many environmentalists, myself included, view plastics as on par with, if not worse than, climate change because we do see a little light at the end of the tunnel on climate change. Babies vs. Plastics is a collection of studies, and we particularly focused on children and babies because their bodies and brains are more impacted than adults by the 30, 000 chemicals that assault us every day.

The Unseen Invasion of Microplastics in Our Lives - KATHLEEN ROGERS - President of EarthDay.ORG

The Unseen Invasion of Microplastics in Our Lives - KATHLEEN ROGERS - President of EarthDay.ORG

Interview with KATHLEEN ROGERS
President of EarthDay·org

Microplastics and nanoplastic pollution are currently blanketing the planet. They are in the air we breathe, the food we eat, and the water we drink, infiltrating our bodies and even brains and human embryos. Coca-Cola alone sells 100 billion+ single-use plastic bottles each year, ending up in landfills and the ocean. Earth’s population will reach 9.8 billion people by 2050. Two-thirds of humans will become city dwellers. Our waste will drive a mounting worldwide crisis.

Highlights - Mathis Wackernagel - Founder, Pres., Global Footprint Network - World Sustainability Award Winner

Highlights - Mathis Wackernagel - Founder, Pres., Global Footprint Network - World Sustainability Award Winner

Founder & President of Global Footprint Network
Winner of the World Sustainability Award · IAIA Global Environment Award

So shooting for one planet just means you would be totally dominant, and leave no space for other species. Ecologists say to maintain 85% of preindustrial biodiversity, it would take about at least half the planet left on its own. That would mean getting to half-planet. And now we use at least 1.75. I say at least because our assessments with about 15,000 data points per country in a year are based on UN statistics, and their demand side is probably an underestimate because not all demands are included. And also on the supply side or the regeneration side, the UN is very production oriented, so it's the FAO numbers, for example, look at agricultural production, and the depletion side or the destruction side is not factored in adequately. So that's why it's an underestimate. And still, it shows we use about 1.75 Earths, and that's more than three times half an Earth. So that's kind of the difference. But we also know overshoot will end one way or another. The question is do we choose to end it? Do we choose it by design, or do we let nature take the lead and end overshoot by disaster? So it's really ending overshoot by design or disaster. That's the big choice we need to make.

Mathis Wackernagel - Founder, President, Global Footprint Network - World Sustainability Award Winner

Mathis Wackernagel - Founder, President, Global Footprint Network - World Sustainability Award Winner

Founder & President of Global Footprint Network
Winner of the World Sustainability Award · IAIA Global Environment Award

So shooting for one planet just means you would be totally dominant, and leave no space for other species. Ecologists say to maintain 85% of preindustrial biodiversity, it would take about at least half the planet left on its own. That would mean getting to half-planet. And now we use at least 1.75. I say at least because our assessments with about 15,000 data points per country in a year are based on UN statistics, and their demand side is probably an underestimate because not all demands are included. And also on the supply side or the regeneration side, the UN is very production oriented, so it's the FAO numbers, for example, look at agricultural production, and the depletion side or the destruction side is not factored in adequately. So that's why it's an underestimate. And still, it shows we use about 1.75 Earths, and that's more than three times half an Earth. So that's kind of the difference. But we also know overshoot will end one way or another. The question is do we choose to end it? Do we choose it by design, or do we let nature take the lead and end overshoot by disaster? So it's really ending overshoot by design or disaster. That's the big choice we need to make.