1 . There is widespread agreement that climate change threatens our existence. But in our rush to address this challenge, our efforts mustn’t heighten another, more immediate one: the global decline of biodiversity. We are losing species at 1,000 times the natural rate. If we stay on this track, we risk losing up to half of them by the middle of the century.

Sadly, the singular focus on solving climate change has led to people ignoring biodiversity. The alarming result is that many climate efforts unintentionally quicken nature’s destruction. Take the huge need for solar farms for an example. If not located properly, they’ll impact ecosystems and habitats. In Virginia, for example, more than half of solar facilities are being built on forested land rather than areas such as rooftops or parking lots. The state’s push for solar development could lead to the deforestation of nearly 30,000 acres annually.

There is a real risk that badly planned renewable infrastructure (基础设施) will have a greater impact on biodiversity than existing fossil fuel infrastructure. Thus, we need to chart a path that doesn’t address one environmental challenge by creating others.

Indeed, with practical choices, we can do the opposite, using nature to address climate change. Consider carbon removal. Research shows between 2001 and 2019, forests around the world seized more than twice the amount of carbon dioxide that they emitted (排放) —absorbing more than the combined annual emissions of the US and UK. Nature is also critical in setting the adaptation necessary to prepare for increasingly severe weather shocks, such as the role of mangroves (a kind of tree) in absorbing floods.

Governments must think differently, employing better infrastructure planning at all levels. A report from The Nature Conservancy shows careful siting can reduce the effects of the clean energy infrastructure by 70%compared with siting as usual practices. For instance, solar farms can be put on already degraded land.

It would be a tragic irony if, in our efforts to tackle climate change, we end upbringing a big and immediate crisis in the natural world.

2 . The environment has never been more in need of a helping hand from us. Schools, in particular, are in a great position to educate future generations and make sure that good environmental habits are learned and adopted from an early age. So, ranging from energy efficiency to recycling, here are our tips to make your school more eco-friendly and sustainable.

☆    1    

Sending waste to landfill to slowly rot away isn’t the best use of the world’s resources. Plus, the space available for landfill is rapidly running out. Instead, boost recycling by providing appropriate and appealing facilities with clear signage (标识).     2    .

☆Turn off the lights and fit energy-efficient light bulbs

Saving energy used for lighting is one of the easiest things that we can do.     3    . Turn off lights when they’re not needed. Signage asking people to turn off the lights can act as a useful reminder.

☆Go paperless

    4    , with paper now being seen as outdated in many cases. This is good news for the environment, but it sometimes needs people to change how they do things. Look into options for creating and using fewer paper-based administration systems at school and think twice before printing or photocopying all those A4 pages, for example.

☆Reject plastic water bottles

Recent television programs and campaigns have raised the issue of waste plastic towards the top of the environmental agenda. In some ways, this isn’t surprising because, again, it is relatively easy for everyone to make a difference to the environment with minimal effort.     5    . Just stop buying brand-new water bottles that are used once and then recycled, and reuse existing bottles and containers instead.

5 . Imagine a world where nothing ends up in landfill. Instead, everything can be reused and recycled, creating products that never reach their “end of life”. According to a recent report by the Circle Economy Foundation, only 7.2% of all used materials are being cycled back to be reused and recycled without creating waste.

An Italian company aims to change this by creating furniture products made from a plastic-like biomaterial, which is fully organic and biodegradable (可生物降解的), and can be used over and over again. Using fruit peel, orange seeds and coffee grounds collected from businesses in Italy, the company can redistribute products to the same businesses for use in their offices, instead of furniture made from common plastic. If, by mistake, any of the material ends up in the ocean, it doesn’t produce any microplastics.

Each product is made through a four-step process. First, the food waste is dried and crushed into a very fine powder. Then, the powder is mixed with a biodegradable plastic alternative known as polyhydroxybutyrat (PHB), with the fruit waste making the PHB more study (坚固的). The material is then turned into a filament (细丝) and, using a spool, put into a 3D printer.

Because a lot of food waste would be buried and incinerated in the landfill, which would produce lots of carbon dioxide, Reusing fruit peel and coffee grounds decrease carbon dioxide from the production of plastic, according to the director of operations in the company. He adds that the biomaterial is as sturdy as wood, and won’t begin to break down unless it’s touched by water, bacteria or acidity.

Despite its eco-friendly benefits, the biomaterial is expensive. It costs probably six times more than common plastic, and it is a very difficult and expensive process, so this is why many companies aren’t doing it.

However, the director is hopeful that in a few years, as-more consumers and businesses are forced to face the damage that unsustainable plastic is doing to the planet, the biomaterial will be much more widely used. “We really believe this is the material of the future,” says the director. “Little by little, a step at a time.”

6 . In the eyes of many environmentalists, the world appears to be getting worse. They believe, the natural resources are running out and the air and water are becoming ever more polluted. But if we check the facts, things look different. Energy has become more abundant, not less so. Fewer people are starving. What seems to cause this gap between perception and reality?

One factor is the prejudice in scientific research. Scientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems. That may be wise policy, but it will also create an impression that there are more potential problems than actually exist.

Secondly, environmental groups seek attention from the mass media. They also need to get continuous financial support. Understandably, perhaps, they sometimes exaggerate (夸大) their arguments. In 1997, for example, the World Wide Fund for Nature issued a statement titled: “Two thirds of the world’s forests lost forever”. The truth turns out to be near 20%.

The media can add to confusion too. People tend to be more curious about bad news than good. Newspapers and broadcasters are there to provide what the public wants. That, however, can lead to significant misinterpretations. For example, when a natural disaster happens, the media usually highlights the negative parts, giving more attention to the disaster’s details and what happens afterward. This flood of bad news can make people think that such events are more frequent or serious than they actually are. Consequently, people may develop a sense of insecurity, despite statistically low probabilities of similar events happening to them.

Another factor is people’s poor perception. People worry that vaccines can cause severe side effects or long-term health problems. Despite extensive scientific evidence demonstrating their safety and effectiveness, some individuals remain hesitant due to unfounded fears.

It is crucial that we look at the facts if we want to make the best possible decisions for the future. It may be costly to be overly optimistic – but more costly still to be too pessimistic.

8 . Travelling allows us to see landscapes we wouldn’t be able to explore otherwise. Sometimes, the beauty is so attractive that we’d like to extend our stay to immerse (沉浸) ourselves in it, or simply have a version of it we could carry with us back home. Inspired by questions about personal land preservation and wondering how the hurried pace of travel can be slowed, Kathleen Vance launched her Travelling Landscapes series. With it, she creates miniature (微小的) landscapes inside antique suitcases and trunks.

“In first creating the Travelling Landscapes series, I was thinking about accessibility to nature and exploring the concept of ‘untouched natural sites’,” Vance says. “The perfect landscapes I sculpt are visual connections from my personal memories of travels and focus on waterways as a primary element. I consider these a reminder of how precious our natural resources are, and how necessary it is to protect these vital elements for life.”

The initial pieces of Travelling Landscapes were created in 2005 and each contained soil, water, and grasses native to the area it described. “It was created as a ‘site displacement’ sculpture, in which I removed the soil and plants from a designated stream and transplanted them into a container,” the artist says.

The well-travelled beauty wouldn’t come alive if it weren’t for the use of antique luggage in her work. These additions further the message she’s trying to put out into the world. “I use primarily antique luggage for this series as it denotes not only this concept of containment, but travel, preciousness, and possession,” Vance points out. “I consider each case carefully, investigating its prior history, its owner, and for which type of travel it was designed to be used. All these indicators help to inform the landscape that I create.”

Throughout her expressive body of work, Vance tries to connect people to local aspects of nature that are overlooked or underappreciated, opening new channels to bring nature into our daily lives.

10 . James Rainey reads trees like most people read signposts. The senior ecologist is using a small hand camera to identify a lichen (地衣) that is surrounding the base of wild pines (松树) in a deep narrow valley on the west coast of Scotland. He is looking for ecological clues of species associated with the ancient Caledonian Forest, which once covered most of the Highlands.

Wild pines have been growing in Scotland continuously since the ice age, offering a globally unique ecosystem supporting rare wildlife. But now less than 2% of the original growth survives, with just 14 individual Caledonian pinewood sites now officially recognized. “To meet the demand for more wood, many wild pines in Highlands have been removed to make room for commercial forestry,” says Rainey. “This was often done in ancient woodlands and was really damaging to the remaining trees.”

But restoration is still possible, especially since some old trees still survive along with the ancient woodland soil and seedbank—seeds stored in the soil, which can grow once the heavy shade of commercial conifers (针叶树) is removed.

The ecological investigator uses three clues of evidence to discover where these pinewoods first stood. “First there’s the historical evidence, like old maps and texts. Then comes the landscape context: is the pine associated with planting around a big house, or is the setting more natural? And finally I use the ecological evidence: wild pine usually grow alongside old birch trees, which indicates ecological continuity,” explains Rainey.

Rainey has identified 23 pines in this area, all rooted in places least accessible. Their needles have been taken for genetic testing to confirm their family trees. “This would have been filled with trees but is now empty — these are the most critical areas in need of regeneration and we want the whole of the ancient woodlands to recover, not just the pines,” he said.