Locating Co-presence in Media Messages about Global Warming

This paper responds to recent calls for alternative approaches to the analysis of environmental communication that uncover overlooked voices in the discussion of environmental issues. Borrowing core principles from critical rhetoric, it suggests a way to categorize media messages according to how human–nature relationships are constructed in media discourse. The paper illustrates how, in presenting contrasting and often oppositional constructions of human–nature relationships, the media messages examined articulate three recurrent (but not equal) discourses on global warming. These discourses include (1) nature-as-out-of-reach discourse, (2) nature-as-antagonist discourse, and (3) nature-as-co-present discourse. By juxtaposing these discourses, the paper shows how environmental communication scholars can engage in critical realism and political advocacy to illuminate latent public discourse that holds the potential to champion marginalized voices of nature and accentuate the interconnectedness of humans and the environment.     

Getting caught up in the game: managing non-formal dynamics in the remediation of contaminated sediments in Oslo harbor

This study aims at describing, analyzing and evaluating the relation between management styles and process dynamics of a complex planning process confronted with unexpected dynamics. The development of an aquatic disposal site for dredged contaminated sediments in Oslo was managed by a project management style focused on timely and cost-effective implementation. Coupling the remediation project with another infrastructural project and the actual construction of the site led to unexpected dynamics in terms of resistance and controversy. Project management had difficulties in adjusting its style accordingly, resulting in even more delay and resistance. Managing complex planning projects requires a style suitable to the characteristics of the project and the capability of adjusting it to changing circumstances. The paper concludes with some explanations why it is difficult to change management styles in complex planning and implementation processes and complexity-embracing approaches to deal with this.     

Co-pyrolysis of swine manure with agricultural plastic waste: Laboratory-scale study

Manure-derived biochar is the solid product resulting from pyrolysis of animal manures. It has considerable potential both to improve soil quality with high levels of nutrients and to reduce contaminants in water and soil. However, the combustible gas produced from manure pyrolysis generally does not provide enough energy to sustain the pyrolysis process. Supplementing this process may be achieved with spent agricultural plastic films; these feedstocks have large amounts of available energy. Plastic films are often used in soil fumigation. They are usually disposed in landfills, which is wasteful, expensive, and environmentally unsustainable. The objective of this work was to investigate both the energetics of co-pyrolyzing swine solids with spent plastic mulch films (SPM) and the characteristics of its gas, liquid, and solid byproducts. The heating value of the product gas from co-pyrolysis was found to be much higher than that of natural gas; furthermore, the gas had no detectable toxic fumigants. Energetically, sustaining pyrolysis of the swine solids through the energy of the product gas could be achieved by co-pyrolyzing dewatered swine solids (25% m/m) with just 10% SPM. If more than 10% SPM is used, the co-pyrolysis would generate surplus energy which could be used for power generation. Biochars produced from co-pyrolyzing SPM and swine solid were similar to swine solid alone based on the surface area and the ¹H NMR spectra. The results of this study demonstrated the potential of using pyrolysis technology to manage two prominent agricultural waste streams (SPM and swine solids) while producing value-added biochar and a power source that could be used for local farm operations.     

Cautioning against overemphasis of normative constructs in conservation decision making

Questions around how to conserve nature are increasingly leading to dissonance in conservation planning and action. While science can assist in unraveling the nature of conservation challenges, conservation responses rely heavily on normative positions and constructs to order actions, aid interpretations, and provide motivation. However, problems can arise when norms are mistaken for science or when they stymy scientific rigor. To highlight these potential pitfalls, we used the ethics-based tool of argument analysis to assess a controversial conservation intervention, the Pelorus Island Goat Control Program. The program proponents' argument for restorative justice was unsound because it relied on weak logical construction overly entrenched in normative assumptions. Overreliance on normative constructs, particularly the invocation of tragedy, creates a sense of urgency that can subvert scientific and ethical integrity, obscure values and assumptions, and increase the propensity for flawed logic. This example demonstrates how the same constructs that drive biodiversity conservation can also drive poor decision making, spur public backlash, and justify poor animal welfare outcomes. To provide clarity, a decision-making flowchart we devised demonstrates how values, norms, and ethics influence one another. We recommend practitioners follow 3 key points to improve decision making: be aware of values, as well as normative constructs and ethical theories that those values inform; be mindful of overreliance on either normative constructs or ethics when deciding action is justified; and be logically sound and transparent when building justifications. We also recommend 5 key attributes that practitioners should be attentive to when making conservation decisions: clarity, transparency, scientific integrity, adaptiveness, and compassion. Greater attention to the role of norms in decision making will improve conservation outcomes and garner greater public support for actions.     

Framing of Geoengineering Affects Support for Climate Change Mitigation

The growing recognition that climate change mitigation alone will be inadequate has led scientists and policymakers to discuss climate geoengineering. An experiment with a US sample found, contrary to previous research, that reading about geoengineering did not reduce conservatives’ skepticism about the existence of anthropogenic climate change. Moreover, depending on how it is framed, geoengineering can reduce support for mitigation among both conservatives and non-conservatives. When geoengineering is framed as a major solution, people worry less about climate change, leading to reduced mitigation support. When framed as disastrous, people perceived geoengineering as riskier, also leading to a decrease in mitigation support. A more moderate framing of geoengineering as a partial solution is less susceptible to moral hazard effects. Overall, results suggest that geoengineering will not lessen political polarization over anthropogenic climate change, and could undercut support for mitigation efforts. Instead, framing geoengineering as a small piece to solving a big puzzle seems to be the best strategy to weaken this potential moral hazard.     

Statistical accuracy for estimations of large wood blockage in a reservoir environment

Environmental Fluid Mechanics - The blockage of weirs or bridges by in-stream wood can reduce the flood discharge capacity, leading to hazardous situations. To assess the related risk, blocking...     

Seeing the forest not for the carbon: why concentrating on land-use-induced carbon stock changes of soils in Brazil can be climate-unfriendly

Regional Environmental Change - Soil carbon stocks of 29 plots along a transect through tropical Brazil showed only minor soil carbon losses after land use shift, although replacement of...     

Green Screen or Smokescreen? Hollywood's Messages about Nature and the Environment

This paper examines ideologies about nature and the environment in popular, animated Hollywood films—including The Lorax, Wall-E, and Ice Age 2—through a symptomatic reading. The primary goal of the analysis is to elucidate key omissions in these texts through an assessment of the problematic—defined in this research as an a-priori answer to perceived audience concerns regarding the role of consumerism and corporate culture in environmental problems. Silences in the films revolve around: how environmental problems are defined; what the consequences are; who the responsible parties are; and what potential solutions exist to mitigate them. The significance of the research is underscored by the formation of an increasingly intimate relationship between children, consumer culture, and commercial media in the USA, as well as the increasingly dire information emerging about global environmental issues. This analysis reveals the dual, often conflicting, messages that commercial film provides for its young audiences about pivotal environmental problems and their potential resolution.