Connect with us

Published

on

von Lena Westphal (Nachhaltigkeitsmanagement)

Immer häufiger stellt sich heraus, dass in vielen Bereichen im Leben keine Gleichberechtigung zwischen Frau und Mann besteht. Dies hat oft auch den Grund, dass die Forschung zu bestimmten Themen, die für Frauen relevant sind, rückschrittig ist bzw. sich gerade erst aufbaut. So ist bekannt, dass die Klimakrise mehr negative Auswirkungen auf Frauen als auf Männer hat. Der vierte Gleichstellungsbericht des Bundes greift dieses Thema als Fokusthema mit der Bezeichnung „Gleichstellung in der sozial-ökologischen Transformation“ auf.

Disclaimer: In diesem Blogartikel wird von dem Familienmodell Frau, Mann, evtl. Kind(er) gesprochen und sich auf ein binäres Geschlecht bezogen. Ich bin mir bewusst, dass es natürlich und zum Glück (!) viele verschiedene Familienmodelle und Geschlechter gibt und möchte darauf hinweisen, dass beispielsweise alleinstehende, alleinerziehende, Frauen mit einer Behinderung, Trans*frauen oder Frauen in einer gleichgeschlechtlichen Beziehung noch härter von den Auswirkungen der Klimakrise betroffen sind als heterosexuelle Cis-Frauen.

So nimmt die Marginalisierung von LGBTIQ+Personen beispielsweise im Katastrophenfall zu. Sie erfahren beim Zugang zu Wasser, Lebensmitteln, Gesundheitsversorgung und Notunterkünften häufig Diskriminierung.

*** English version below ***

Frauen sind gesundheitlich stärker von den Auswirkungen des Klimawandels betroffen als Männer, da sie häufiger mit Hitzesymptomen wie Kopfschmerzen, Leistungsabfall und Schlafstörungen zu kämpfen haben. Auch in der Schwangerschaft kann es durch Hitzewellen, die von der Erderwärmung ausgelöst werden, zu Komplikationen und sogar Frühgeburten kommen. Auch die Ressourcenverknappung, etwa bei Lebensmitteln, hat mehr Auswirkungen auf die Frau, da ihre Überlebenswahrscheinlichkeit geringer ist als bei Männern. So waren 2023 im Hitzesommer 75 Prozent aller Verstorbenen weiblich.

Es gibt auch gesellschaftliche und politische Gründe, warum Frauen stärker von der Erderwärmung betroffen sind. Das klassische Rollenbild einer Frau, das immer noch Teil unserer Gesellschaft ist, sieht vor, dass sich Frauen zunächst erstmal um andere kümmern und erst zum Schluss um sich selbst. Frauen leisten weltweit mehr Care-Arbeit (= Sorgearbeit oder Pflegearbeit) als Männer.

Abbildung 1: Symbolbild für Care-Arbeit (Quelle: Spiegel.de)

Die Ungleichverteilung von Sorge- und Haushaltsaufgaben erschwert es Frauen, sich an die Auswirkungen des Klimawandels anzupassen. So haben sie meistens einen schlecht bezahlten Job in der Familie und sind somit abhängig von ihrem Partner. Ihnen bleibt insgesamt auch weniger Zeit, sich ausreichend über den Klimawandel und dessen Folgen zu informieren.

Insgesamt sei betont, dass es sich hierbei nicht nur um Probleme der Frauen im globalen Süden handelt, sondern es ein weltweites Problem ist. Nach dem Wirbelsturm Katrina in den USA 2005 haben beispielsweise mehr Frauen als Männer aufgrund von Care-Arbeit ihren Job aufgegeben, damit sie sich besser um ihre Familien kümmern konnten.

Frauen arbeiten auch häufiger in Pflegeberufen und sind hier einem direkten Infektionsrisiko ausgesetzt, was die Corona-Pandemie bereits bestens gezeigt hat. Die Klimakrise wird langfristig für weitere und häufiger auftretende Pandemien sorgen und hier werden dann auch wieder Frauen einem erhöhten Infektionsrisiko ausgesetzt sein, da sie vermehrt an vorderster Front in systemrelevanten Berufen arbeiten. Pandemien sorgen zusätzlich dafür, dass die Gleichstellung von Frau und Mann wieder gefährdet wird, da sich Frauen auch eher um das Homeschooling der Kinder kümmern als Männer.

Mehr als zwei Drittel der Studien (68 Prozent) zeigen, dass Frauen durch den Klimawandel größeren Gesundheitsrisiken ausgesetzt sind. Das Kreisdiagramm zeigt die Ergebnisse von 130 Studien über Klimawandel und Gesundheit: 89 Studien kamen zu dem Ergebnis, dass Frauen stärker betroffen sind als Männer, 30 Studien kamen zu dem Ergebnis, dass Männer stärker betroffen sind als Frauen, und 11 Studien kamen zu dem Ergebnis, dass es keinen Unterschied in der Betroffenheit von Männern und Frauen gibt. Weltweit sind Frauen häufiger als Männer von klimabedingter Ernährungsunsicherheit betroffen und leiden nach extremen Wetterereignissen auch häufiger unter psychischen Erkrankungen oder Gewalt in der Partnerschaft.

Abbildung 2: Quelle: Carbonbrief.org

Weltweit sind Frauen insgesamt stärker von Armut betroffen und verfügen über weniger Geld oder Besitz als Männer. Im globalen Süden haben Frauen tendenziell weniger Landbesitz, weniger Zugang zu landwirtschaftlichen Produktionsmitteln wie Geräten, Saatgut oder Dünger, aber auch weniger Kapital.

Aufgrund der zunehmenden Trockenheit verlängert sich die Strecke bis zu den Wasserquellen. Die Wasserversorgung ist in vielen Kulturen Frauensache und meistens essen und trinken Männer zuerst, sodass am Ende kaum noch etwas für die Frauen übrigbleibt, obwohl diese das Wasser, aufgrund ihrer Menstruation, dringend benötigen. Durch die weiteren Wege, machen sich die Frauen häufig schon im Dunkeln auf den Weg oder kehren erst nachts zurück, wodurch sie einem erhöhten Risiko von sexualisierter Gewalt ausgesetzt sind.

Frauen werden früher zu Hausarbeit, wozu auch das Heranschaffen von Wasser gehört, herangezogen. Sie haben dadurch weniger Zeit und Gelegenheit, Bildung zu erlangen, wenn die Wege zu den Wasserstellen immer weiter werden.

Die Lebensmittel werden aufgrund klimatischer Veränderungen insgesamt knapper. Frauen in ärmeren Ländern sind eher dem Risiko zu hungern ausgesetzt als Männer, da die knappe Nahrung eher an sie verteilt wird.

Auch politisch gesehen haben Frauen einen Nachteil. In selbstversorgenden Familien führt die Politik dazu, dass sich diese Familien auf immer schlechteren Böden durchschlagen müssen. Sobald Männer die Familien als “Klimaflüchtlinge” verlassen, müssen die hinterbliebenen Frauen ihre Familien alleine versorgen, was sie noch angreifbarer macht.

Kommt es zu Extremwetterereignissen verletzen sich oder sterben Frauen sogar häufiger als Männer. Vor allem in Ländern, in denen Frauen einen niedrigeren sozioökonomischen Status haben, gehen diese selten ohne männliche Begleitung aus dem Haus, tragen Kleidung, die die Bewegungsfreiheit bei möglichen Überflutungen sehr einschränkt und werden später vor Klimakatastrophen gewarnt. Während die Männer bei der Arbeit sind, kümmern sich Frauen zu Hause um die Familie und den Haushalt. Oft können Frauen auch nicht schwimmen, was die Flucht bei Überschwemmungen nahezu unmöglich macht. So waren 2004 bei dem Tsunami in Südostasien 70 Prozent der Todesopfer Frauen.

Als 1991 der Zyklon “Gorki” an der Küste von Bangladesch wütete, kamen neunmal mehr Frauen ums Leben als Männer. Bei den verheerenden Buschbränden 2009 in Australien wollten sich doppelt so viele Frauen als Männer in Sicherheit bringen. Und als 2016 in Kenia wegen einer schweren Dürre zwei Millionen Menschen hungern mussten, waren es jeweils die Frauen, die als letzte Lebensmittel erhielten.

Hinzu kommt, dass klimawandelbedingte Katastrophen häufig die Versorgung mit Mitteln der Familienplanung und den Zugang zu gynäkologischen Untersuchungen oder Geburtshilfe einschränken.

Als wäre das nicht alles schon genug, steigt auch die sexualisierte Gewalt gegenüber Frauen. Zwangsheiraten könnten im globalen Süden wieder zunehmen, weil die Klimakrise den Zugang zu Bildung und Hilfsangeboten stark negativ beeinflusst. Es kommt zu Ernteausfällen, junge Frauen werden vermehrt zu Hause gebraucht, um die Familien zu unterstützen und werden häufiger jung verheiratet oder gegen Vieh verkauft. Es kommt auch dazu, dass (junge) Frauen zu Prostitution gezwungen werden. Dies hat dazu geführt, dass im südlichen Afrika, aufgrund von Dürreperioden, die HIV-Infektionen gestiegen sind. All diese “Maßnahmen” werden von den Familien durchgeführt, um das fehlende Einkommen zu kompensieren und die restliche Familie vor Hunger zu schützen.

Selbst wenn Frauen in Notunterkünften unterkommen, sind sie dort vermehrt Gewaltdelikten ausgesetzt und haben nahezu keine Privatsphäre.

Gerade weil Frauen stärker vom Klimawandel betroffen sind, nehmen sie den Klimawandel stärker als Bedrohung wahr als Männer. Sie setzen sich mehr für den Klimaschutz ein und fordern auch mehr politische Maßnahmen und sind auch bereit, mehr Geld dafür auszugeben. So war es ab dem 20. August 2018 Greta Thunberg, die in Schweden die „Schulstreiks für’s Klima“ startete und damit weltweit die “Fridays For Future”-Bewegung loslöste.

Abbildung 3: Greta Thunberg vor dem schwedischen Reichstag in Stockholm (Quelle: Tagesschau.de)

In Deutschland ist vor allem Luisa Neubauer für ihren Aktivismus bekannt und setzt sich auf Demos oder in Talkrunden vor allem mit männlichen Politikern auseinander. Generell sind überproportional viele Frauen an der Protestbewegung beteiligt.

Abbildung 4: Luisa Neubauer und heutiger Bundeskanzler Friedrich Merz 2020 bei Markus Lanz
(Quelle: Utopia.de)

Frauen haben insgesamt einen klimafreundlicheren Lebensstil. Sie essen weniger Fleisch und fahren weniger Auto. Oft ist das aber keine bewusste Entscheidung, da sie weniger befugt sind, einen umweltbelastenden Lebensstil zu führen. Eine französische Studie fand vor kurzem heraus, dass Männer 26 Prozent mehr CO₂-Emissionen verursachen als Frauen. Während auf Männer jährlich 5,3 Tonnen CO₂ zurückgehen, sind es bei Frauen 3,9 Tonnen. Die Bereiche Verkehr und Ernährung machen zusammen rund die Hälfte eines durchschnittlichen CO₂-Fußabdruckes aus.

Viele argumentieren, dass Männer mehr Kalorien oder Fleisch benötigen oder allein durch ihren Job mehr CO₂ verbrauchen als Frauen. Dies konnte die Studie allerdings widerlegen. Rechnet man alle sozioökonomischen, biologischen und gesellschaftlichen Unterschiede heraus, bleibt immer noch ein Geschlechterunterschied von 18 Prozent. Für diese restlichen 18 Prozent konnten die Forscher:innen keine Erklärung bieten.

In Ländern, in denen Frauen politisch mehr Mitspracherecht haben, ist jedoch auch die CO₂-Belastung geringer und das Interesse an strukturellen Veränderungen größer. Außerdem zeigen Frauen in ihrem Alltag mehr Engagement, etwa beim Einkauf, bei der Arbeit, bei politischen Wahlen oder beim Engagement in ihren privaten Bereichen.

Leider ist es bisher weltweit so, dass kaum Frauen an den politischen Entscheidungen mitwirken können, da sie bei beispielsweise Klimakonferenzen immer noch unterrepräsentiert sind. Ihre Bedürfnisse werden von den männlichen Entscheidungsträgern stets vernachlässigt. Dementsprechend hätte es einen großen Einfluss, wenn Frauen mehr zu sagen hätten und häufiger bei Entscheidungen beteiligt werden.

Seit Jahrzehnten warnen Expert:innen, dass klassische Geschlechterrollen die Menschen anfälliger für extreme Wetterereignisse machen. Politische Entscheidungsträger haben diese Warnungen lange ignoriert. Heute sind sie gezwungen umzudenken und sich zu fragen, wie sich Ungleichheiten abbauen lassen, die sich anderenfalls immer weiter zu verstärken drohen.

Die Klimakrise bedroht vor allem arme Bevölkerungsschichten, die keinen politischen Einfluss haben. Die meisten Frauen haben kein Mitspracherecht, wenn es um die Diskussion um die Verwendung und Nutzung von Ressourcen oder um grundlegende Entscheidungen geht.

Abbildung 5: Quelle: Dgvn.de

Im Pariser Klimaabkommen von 2015 haben sich die Staatsoberhaupte darauf geeinigt, die globale Erderwärmung auf durchschnittlich 1,5 Grad Celsius über dem vorindustriellen Niveau zu begrenzen. Die Unterzeichner:innen einigten sich zudem auch auf einen “geschlechtergerechten” Ansatz bei der Anpassung an den Klimawandel. Dieser sollte sich an den besten verfügbaren wissenschaftlichen Erkenntnissen orientieren.

Um dieses Ziel zu erreichen, müssten die Systeme verändert werden, die noch immer an alten Ungleichheiten festhalten. Machtverhältnisse müssen neu gedacht werden. Dies würde bedeuten, dass Reichtum und Ressourcen weltweit gleichmäßiger verteilt werden müssen und es eine gerechtere Mitbestimmung und Beteiligung bei umweltpolitischen Themen gibt.

Bisher gibt es allerdings wenig Belege für diesen Wandel, weshalb die Ungleichheit immer noch Tagesordnung ist. Die Beteiligung von Frauen an Anpassungsprojekten ist sehr selten und auch in der nationalen Klimapolitik werden die Bedürfnisse von Frauen nicht genug beachtet.

Die Geschlechtergleichheit wird aber immerhin in vielerlei Hinsicht angestrebt. So ist es beispielsweise eines der 17 Ziele der Sustainable Development Goals (kurz: SDG’s). Durch die UN-Klimakonferenzen gründeten sich auch zwei transnationale Netzwerke: das zivilgesellschaftliche GenderCC – Women for Climate Justice und die Global Gender and Climate Alliance (GGCA).

Abschließend muss jedoch betont werden, dass das persönliche Konsumverhalten von Frauen und Männern einen nicht so großen Einfluss auf das Klima hat wie Unternehmen. Rund 100 Unternehmen machen weltweit bereits 70 Prozent der Treibhausemissionen aus. Somit haben Politik und Wirtschaft den größeren Einfluss.

Außerdem gibt es auch Momente, in denen Männer stärker vom Klimawandel bedroht sind, als Frauen. Dies ist allerdings die Seltenheit. Ein Beispiel ist aber, dass Männer, aufgrund ihres klassischen Rollenbildes, bei Waldbränden länger in ihrem Haus bleiben, um es zu “beschützen”, während sich die Frauen mit dem restlichen Teil der Familie in Sicherheit bringen. Dies ist u. a. auf die toxische Männlichkeit zurückzuführen, aufgrund derer dieses Verhalten von Männern erwartet wird. Dieser Faktor ist natürlich auch nicht gesund. Allerdings ist bewiesen, dass der Klimawandel zu einseitig naturwissenschaftlich und damit stark stereotyp männlich diskutiert wird. Frauen leiden somit insgesamt mehr unter den Folgen der Klimakrise und viele dieser Folgen wurden durch patriarchle Strukturen verursacht.

*** English version ***

Climate crisis: women more affected than men

by Lena Westphal (Sustainability Management)

It is becoming increasingly apparent that in many areas of life there is no equality between women and men. This is often due to the fact that research on certain topics that are relevant to women is lagging behind or is only just beginning to develop. For example, it is known that the climate crisis has more negative effects on women than on men. The federal government’s fourth Gender Equality Report takes up this topic as a focus theme with the title “Equality in the socio-ecological transformation”.

Disclaimer: This blog article refers to the family model of woman, man, possibly child(ren) and refers to a binary gender. I am aware that there are of course and fortunately (!) many different family models and genders and would like to point out that, for example, single women, single parents, women with a disability, trans* women or women in a same-sex relationship are even harder hit by the effects of the climate crisis than heterosexual cis women.

For example, the marginalization of LGBTIQ+ people increases in the event of a disaster. They often experience discrimination when it comes to access to water, food, healthcare and emergency shelters.

Women’s health is more affected by the effects of climate change than men, as they are more likely to suffer from heat-related symptoms such as headaches, reduced performance and sleep disorders. Heatwaves caused by global warming can also lead to complications and even premature births during pregnancy. The scarcity of resources, such as food, also has a greater impact on women, as they are less likely to survive than men. In 2023, for example, 75 percent of all deaths in the heatwave summer were female.

There are also social and political reasons why women are more affected by global warming. The classic role model of a woman, which is still part of our society, is that women first take care of others and only then take care of themselves. Worldwide, women perform more care work than men.

Figure 1: Symbolic image for care work (source: Spiegel.de)

The unequal distribution of care and household tasks makes it difficult for women to adapt to the effects of climate change. They usually have a low-paid job in the family and are therefore dependent on their partner. Overall, they also have less time to inform themselves sufficiently about climate change and its consequences.

Overall, it should be emphasized that this is not just a problem for women in the Global South, but a worldwide problem. After Hurricane Katrina in the USA in 2005, for example, more women than men gave up their jobs due to care work so that they could take better care of their families.

Women also work more frequently in care professions and are directly exposed to the risk of infection, as the coronavirus pandemic has already shown. The climate crisis will lead to further and more frequent pandemics in the long term, and women will again be exposed to an increased risk of infection, as they are increasingly working at the front line in systemically relevant professions. Pandemics also ensure that gender equality is once again at risk, as women are also more likely to homeschool their children than men.

More than two thirds of the studies (68 percent) show that women are exposed to greater health risks as a result of climate change. The pie chart shows the results of 130 studies on climate change and health: 89 studies came to the conclusion that women are more affected than men, 30 studies came to the conclusion that men are more affected than women, and 11 studies came to the conclusion that there is no difference in the extent to which men and women are affected. Globally, women are more likely than men to be affected by climate-related food insecurity and are also more likely to suffer from mental illness or intimate partner violence following extreme weather events.

Figure 2: Source: Carbonbrief.org

Worldwide, women are generally more affected by poverty and have less money or property than men. In the global South, women tend to own less land, have less access to agricultural production resources such as equipment, seeds or fertilizer, but also less capital.

Due to the increasing drought, the distance to water sources is increasing. In many cultures, water supply is a matter for women and men usually eat and drink first, so that in the end there is hardly anything left for the women, even though they urgently need the water due to their menstruation. Due to the longer distances, women often set off in the dark or only return at night, which exposes them to an increased risk of sexualized violence.

Women are called upon to do housework earlier, including fetching water. As a result, they have less time and opportunity to gain an education as the distances to water points become ever longer.

Food is becoming scarcer overall due to climatic changes. Women in poorer countries are more at risk of starvation than men, as the scarce food is more likely to be distributed to them.

Women are also at a political disadvantage. In self-sufficient families, the policy means that these families have to eke out a living on increasingly poor soil. As soon as men leave their families as “climate refugees”, the women left behind have to support their families alone, which makes them even more vulnerable.

When extreme weather events occur, women are injured or even die more often than men. Particularly in countries where women have a lower socio-economic status, they rarely leave the house without a male companion, wear clothing that severely restricts their freedom of movement in the event of flooding and are later warned of climate disasters. While men are at work, women are at home taking care of the family and the household. Women often cannot swim either, which makes it almost impossible for them to escape in the event of flooding. In the 2004 tsunami in South East Asia, for example, 70 percent of the fatalities were women.

When Cyclone “Gorki” hit the coast of Bangladesh in 1991, nine times more women lost their lives than men. During the devastating bushfires in Australia in 2009, twice as many women tried to flee to safety as men. And when two million people went hungry due to a severe drought in Kenya in 2016, it was women who were the last to receive food.

In addition, climate change-related disasters often limit the supply of family planning resources and access to gynecological examinations or obstetric care.

As if that wasn’t enough, sexualized violence against women is also on the rise. Forced marriages could increase again in the Global South because the climate crisis is having a major negative impact on access to education and aid. There are crop failures, young women are increasingly needed at home to support their families and are more often married off young or sold for livestock. (Young) women are also forced into prostitution. This has led to an increase in HIV infections in southern Africa due to periods of drought. All these “measures” are carried out by families to compensate for the lack of income and to protect the rest of the family from hunger. Even if women are accommodated in emergency shelters, they are increasingly exposed to violence and have almost no privacy.

Precisely because women are more affected by climate change, they perceive climate change as more of a threat than men. They are more committed to climate protection and also demand more political measures and are prepared to spend more money on them. It was Greta Thunberg, for example, who launched the “School Strikes for the Climate” in Sweden on August 20, 2018, thereby triggering the “Fridays For Future” movement worldwide.

Figure 3: Greta Thunberg in front of the Swedish Parliament in Stockholm (Source: Tagesschau.de)

In Germany, Luisa Neubauer in particular is known for her activism and mainly confronts male politicians at demonstrations or in talks. In general, a disproportionately high number of women are involved in the protest movement.

Figure 4: Luisa Neubauer and current Federal Chancellor Friedrich Merz 2020 on Markus Lanz
(source: Utopia.de)

Overall, women have a more climate-friendly lifestyle. They eat less meat and drive less. However, this is often not a conscious decision, as they are less empowered to lead an environmentally harmful lifestyle. A French study recently found that men cause 26 percent more CO₂ emissions than women. While men are responsible for 5.3 tons of CO₂ per year, the figure for women is 3.9 tons. The transport and food sectors together account for around half of an average CO₂ footprint.

Many argue that men need more calories or meat or consume more CO₂ than women simply because of their job. However, the study was able to disprove this. If all socio-economic, biological and social differences are factored out, there is still a gender difference of 18 percent. The researchers were unable to provide an explanation for this remaining 18%.

However, in countries where women have a greater political say, carbon pollution is also lower and interest in structural change is greater. Women also show more commitment in their everyday lives, for example when shopping, at work, in political elections or in their private lives.

Unfortunately, women have hardly been able to participate in political decisions worldwide to date, as they are still underrepresented at climate conferences, for example. Their needs are always neglected by male decision-makers. Accordingly, it would have a major impact if women had more say and were more frequently involved in decision-making.

For decades, experts have warned that traditional gender roles make people more vulnerable to extreme weather events. Political decision-makers have long ignored these warnings. Today, they are forced to rethink and ask themselves how inequalities can be reduced, which otherwise threaten to become ever more pronounced.

The climate crisis primarily threatens poor sections of the population who have no political influence. Most women have no say when it comes to discussions about the use and utilization of resources or fundamental decisions.

Figure 5: Source: Dgvn.de

In the Paris Climate Agreement of 2015, the heads of state agreed to limit global warming to an average of 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. The signatories also agreed on a “gender-responsive” approach to adapting to climate change. This should be based on the best available scientific knowledge.

In order to achieve this goal, the systems that still hold on to old inequalities must be changed. Power relations need to be rethought. This would mean that wealth and resources must be distributed more evenly worldwide and that there must be fairer co-determination and participation in environmental policy issues.

So far, however, there is little evidence of this change, which is why inequality is still the order of the day. The participation of women in adaptation projects is very rare and women’s needs are not sufficiently considered in national climate policy.

However, gender equality is still being pursued in many respects. For example, it is one of the 17 goals of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs for short). The UN climate conferences also led to the establishment of two transnational networks: the civil society GenderCC – Women for Climate Justice and the Global Gender and Climate Alliance (GGCA).

Finally, however, it must be emphasized that the personal consumer behavior of women and men does not have as great an impact on the climate as companies. Around 100 companies already account for 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. Politics and business therefore have the greater influence.

There are also times when men are more threatened by climate change than women. However, this is a rarity. One example, however, is that men, due to their traditional role model, stay longer in their house during forest fires to “protect” it, while women take the rest of the family to safety. This is partly due to toxic masculinity, because of which this behavior is expected of men. This factor is of course not healthy either. However, it has been proven that climate change is discussed too one-sidedly in scientific terms and thus in a strongly stereotypically male way. Women are therefore suffering more overall from the consequences of the climate crisis and many of these consequences were caused by patriarchal structures.


Inhaltliche Quellen:

Quellen Abbildungen:

Klimakrise: Frauen stärker betroffen als Männer

Continue Reading

Ocean Acidification

What are Tire Wear Particles?

Published

on

What do you think about when you hear the words “microplastic pollution?” Your mind may immediately go to imagery of colorful fragmented plastics broken off from bottles, buckets and other items we use in our everyday lives. Or, perhaps, you imagine a pile of microplastic fibers—the tiny, squiggly, spaghetti-shaped plastics that shed from our synthetic clothing. You may be surprised to hear there is another major source of microplastic pollution that’s hiding in plain sight, quite literally under our feet, that might change how you think about microplastics: tire particles.

We all know tires wear down over time—that’s why we have to replace them on our cars roughly every 60,000 miles or so. Every time a vehicle accelerates, brakes or simply drives down the road, the friction between its tires and the pavement creates tiny fragments of rubber, known as tire wear particles.

Driving a car or even riding in a bus is a bit like dragging an eraser across the planet, except the crumbs are microplastics. Toxic microplastics.

Dr. Britta Baechler
Director, Ocean Plastics Research, as quoted in Eos magazine

Tires are made from a complex mix of natural and synthetic rubber along with a range of additives, fillers and chemical compounds—some of which, like the preservative 6PPD, have been shown to be highly toxic to coho salmon when they break down into derivative product 6PPD-Q in the environment—even in tiny concentrations.

Some studies have shown that a single vehicle’s tires can emit more than two trillion particles per mile driven—and that the average person generates nearly two pounds of tire particles per year! Once these particles are shed from tires, they don’t just disappear. Some are small and light enough to become airborne, drifting away from roadways as dust. Others settle on road surfaces, where they accumulate until the next heavy rain washes them into storm drains and from there, into streams, rivers and eventually the ocean.

That’s why tire wear particles are now considered one of the top sources of microplastics to the environment. In fact, until recent developments in analytical methods, scientists weren’t reliably able to detect tire wear particles in microplastic counts—thus, these pesky microplastics may have been evading our detection for years.

Why green infrastructure may be one of our best near-term solutions

Unlike some sources of plastic pollution, we can’t simply stop driving overnight. Reformulating tire rubber to be less toxic or shed less material, while promising, will take time to develop, test and scale across the global vehicle fleet. So, what can we do about tire wear particle pollution right now?

This is where green infrastructure comes in. Green infrastructure refers to engineered natural systems (things like bioswales, rain gardens, roadside buffers and permeable pavement) that are designed to slow down, filter and treat stormwater before it reaches rivers, lakes and coastlines. Instead of routing runoff directly into storm drains and out to sea, green infrastructure gives contaminated water a chance to percolate through soil, plants and other natural filtration media, which helps trap microplastics, including tire wear particles, preventing them moving further downstream.

Early research on green infrastructure has been promising, showing that these systems are quite effective at capturing microplastics and other contaminants carried in road runoff. But there’s a critical piece we still don’t fully understand: What would it take to scale up green infrastructure across an entire city, and how much of a dent would that actually make in long-term tire wear particle pollution?

Our research on green infrastructure capture of tire wear particles

Funded by the Tire Industry Project, our plastics science and policy teams at Ocean Conservancy have partnered with the University of Toronto on a new study evaluating the costs and benefits of scaling up green infrastructure at the city level specifically to capture tire wear particles.

If you happen to be driving on the roadways of Portland, Oregon, you may spot our scientists crouched over, precariously scooping dirt with spoons from a sample area on the roadside. Don’t be alarmed—that’s just us doing science! Feel free to give us a wave.

Ocean Conservancy is currently working to:

  • Quantify the scale of pollution: Collect road dust samples from 30 cities globally to measure both total microplastic and tire wear particle concentrations and determine how different variables (population density, road size, rainfall) might influence those values.
  • Assess feasibility: Determine what it would take realistically—logistically, financially and spatially—to scale up green infrastructure across an entire city.
  • Model positive impacts: Estimate how much city-scale green infrastructure could reduce tire wear particle pollution entering aquatic ecosystems.
  • Compare across cities: Understand how well these solutions might translate across different urban contexts, focusing on Portland, Oregon; Toronto, Canada; and London, England as case-study cities.
  • Make our findings accessible: Produce a public-facing toolkit to help city planners, engineers and advocates guide real-world implementation of infrastructure that captures tire-wire particles. 

By pairing rigorous science with practical guidance, we hope to help cities move from asking “Could this work?” to confidently building solutions that we know can be effective.

Give today and make a difference!
We are on the front lines of ocean protection, investing in research, leadership and advocacy that advances evidence-based solutions that work.

How can I help?

Tire wear particle pollution can feel like an overwhelming problem. After all, it’s tied to transportation, which most of us rely on every day. But that’s exactly why research like this matters: It gives us a real, near-term path forward that doesn’t require waiting for the entire global transportation system to change first.

You can help by staying engaged with Ocean Conservancy as we continue to dig into solutions for the plastic pollution crisis—one roadway, one storm drain and one city at a time. Together, we can keep working toward a world and ocean free of plastic pollution, forever and for everyone.

The post What are Tire Wear Particles? appeared first on Ocean Conservancy.

What are Tire Wear Particles?

Continue Reading

Ocean Acidification

A tiny but remarkable visitor in Vejle Fjord-Denmark?

Published

on

A small jellyfish-like animal recently reported from Vejle Fjord has attracted attention. Clear photographs suggest that it belongs to the genus Gonionemus and may possibly be the clinging jellyfish, Gonionemus vertens (Picture courtesy to Jonas Bøgelund Poulsen)

Unlike the large jellyfish commonly encountered along Danish coasts, Gonionemus vertens is a small hydromedusa, usually only around 1.5–2.5 centimetres across. Its transparent bell reveals four coloured reproductive structures arranged like a cross. Numerous fine tentacles surround the bell, often appearing bent or angled. Small adhesive pads near the ends of the tentacles allow the animal to attach itself to eelgrass, seaweed and other submerged vegetation.

This unusual behaviour explains its English name: the clinging jellyfish. During the day, it often remains attached to vegetation rather than drifting freely with the current. At night, it becomes more active and swims into the water column to feed on zooplankton and small crustaceans. Consequently, it can easily remain unnoticed even in places where it is already established. Another reason the species can be difficult to detect is its life cycle. The visible medusa is only one stage. For much of its life, the animal may persist as a minute polyp attached to a hard surface, shell or vegetation. These inconspicuous polyps can reproduce asexually and later release new medusae when environmental conditions become favourable.

Gonionemus vertens is generally considered native to the northern Pacific but has been introduced into several parts of Europe and the Atlantic. Transport on ship hulls, in ballast water or with movements of oysters and other marine organisms has been suggested as possible pathways, although the pathway responsible for any particular occurrence is rarely known with certainty.

Despite its delicate appearance, the animal should not be touched. Some populations possess powerful stinging cells and have caused intense pain, swelling, muscle cramps and, in rare cases, serious allergic reactions. Sting severity differs considerably among regions, which is one reason researchers suspect that animals currently grouped under the name G. vertens may represent a complex of closely related forms.

The Vejle Fjord observation is therefore scientifically interesting, but it should not yet be presented as a confirmed record of G. vertens. Anyone encountering a similar animal should photograph it without handling it and record the date, exact location, approximate size, number observed and surrounding habitat. Observations can be submitted to Denmark’s national species portal, Arter, where they can be evaluated and contribute to tracking changes in Danish marine biodiversity. Please use either my App: GoJelly JellySpotter or reprot to the Arter.dk: Gonionemus taxon page and Danish species-reporting portal.

References:

Edwards, C. (1977). A study in erratic distribution: The occurrence of the medusa Gonionemus in relation to the distribution of oysters. Advances in Marine Biology, 14, 251–284. DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2881(08)60448-4.
Govindarajan, A. F., Källström, B., Selander, E., Östman, C., & Dahlgren, T. G. (2019). The highly toxic and cryptogenic clinging jellyfish Gonionemus sp. (Hydrozoa, Limnomedusae) on the Swedish west coast. PeerJ, 7, e6883. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.6883.

A tiny but remarkable visitor in Vejle Fjord-Denmark?

Continue Reading

Ocean Acidification

New Friends, New Addresses

Published

on

The JOIDES Resolution (JR) was a renowned, international, scientific research ship. It was home to over 190 expeditions, each sailing for 60 days at a time without docking. Scientists and crew members from all over the world met to discover Earth’s secrets through studying ocean cores. Every two months the JR would get a new crew, sailing to an entirely new place. This once in a lifetime experience forms special and unforgettable social connections.

Since working on the JR I’ve kept those connections strong with snail mail. I have always been an avid penpal, so meeting new friends means new addresses to send my letters and postcards to. Experiences like sailing on the JOIDES Resolution or participating in programs like OCEAN CORE Academy is one of the ways I’ve met people from all over the world.

Now that the JR is retired, there is no more scientific research drilling being done through the International Ocean Discovery Program (IODP). But, there is still plenty to learn from ocean cores, and plenty of people to meet through programs like OCEAN CORE Academy (OCA). OCA is an annual summer opportunity from the U.S. Scientific Support Program (USSSP) that hosts undergraduates interested in geoscience related careers. Students can apply to this program for a chance to research and study data recovered from cores originally brought up by the JR, now located at the Gulf Coast Repository (GCR) in College Station, Texas. Students also practice forms of science communication with the guide of mentors. As a science communicator and fan of snail mail, I ran a craft night teaching students how to make and send science-themed postcards.

Fig. 1) students using watercolor to paint onto 4 by 6 inch board paper, a photo of a thin section slide is in the background. Photo by Dr. Leah Joseph.

For this project, we based the cover image of the postcards off of rock thin section slides. These slides are a slice of a hard rock or mineral that’s been glued to a microscope slide, sanded to 0.03 millimeter thickness, and polished. Thin section slides are used to identify grain size, shape, color, and other physical properties. This helps scientists understand the textural relationships between the rocks and determine the origin or evolution of the parent rock. Thin sections can also be helpful for identifying minerals using cross polarized light (XPL). XPL reduces light reflection and glare, commonly used for sunglasses and professional photography, but in a polarizing microscope, XPL is used to create a dark field causing certain minerals to appear brighter and more visible. Different colors are associated with different minerals, and as the stage of the microscope rotates, light passes through the slide in unique ways aiding scientists with identification. Identifying minerals can help scientists in understanding more about where the rocks came from and how old they are. These thin sections are not only informative, but are incredibly beautiful, making unique and stunning postcard covers.

     

Fig. 2) Examples of thin section slides under a XPL microscope, bronzitite (left) and gabbro (right). Sourced from here.

After the OCA students finished their paintings, my home-made “post card” stamps go on the back, a stamp gets added, and they’re ready to be mailed out. Although most OCA participants this year were U.S. based, they came from all over, ranging from Staten Island to San Francisco to Arizona to Connecticut. In addition to one mentor from New Zealand!  For many of these students this was their first time traveling on their own, and their first time forming long-distance connections. With these scientific postcards, OCA students can stay connected by reminding each other of the science they learned together. My experience on the JR taught me great things about geological research, but it also gave me life long connections that I cherish. Although the JR is gone, its legacy lives on in our memories and the ways we stay connected with friends. I’m grateful to know that even without an international ship, I’m still able to add friends to my address book.

     

Fig. 3) Examples of participant made postcards

Written by Kellan Moss

New Friends, New Addresses

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2022 BreakingClimateChange.com