Scientists from Osaka Metropolitan University have found a way to synthesize fumaric acid, a raw material using for producing the biodegradable plastic polybutylene succinate, using artificial photosynthesis. The plastic, typically made from petroleum, was synthesized from carbon dioxide, biomass-derived compounds, and\u00a0solar energy<\/a>.<\/p> The study<\/a>, published in the journal\u00a0Sustainable Energy & Fuels<\/em>, documents the first time that fumaric acid has been successfully synthesized from carbon dioxide and sunlight. The research shows that fumaric acid can be made from carbon dioxide and biomass rather than petroleum.<\/p> \u201cToward the practical application of artificial photosynthesis, this research has succeeded in using visible light \u2014 renewable energy \u2014 as the power source,\u201d Yutaka Amao, professor from the Research Center for Artificial Photosynthesis at Osaka Metropolitan University and study author,\u00a0said in a statement<\/a>. \u201cIn the future, we aim to collect gaseous CO2 and use it to synthesize fumaric acid directly through artificial photosynthesis.\u201d<\/p> According to the authors, fumarate is typically synthesized from petroleum and emits high amounts of carbon dioxide when produced. The findings show promise in using solar energy and carbon dioxide rather than fossil fuels to produce this resource.<\/p>","excerpt":"Scientists synthesized fumaric acid, a raw material for the biodegradable plastic polybutylene succinate, using artificial photosynthesis.","byline":"","author":"Josh Wojcik","author_bio":null,"author_img_url":null,"publisher":"EcoWatch","type":"post","image":null,"gc_medium_image":"https:\/\/cdn.www.hbhuluo.com\/images\/categories\/featured-category-environment.jpg","has_featured_image":false,"img_alt":"","img_caption":"","gc_selection":false,"url":"\/\/www.hbhuluo.com\/article\/utilizing-solar-energy-to-make-biodegradable-plastic","is_gc_original":false,"is_evergreen":false,"footnotes":null,"audio":false,"pdf":null,"video":false,"date_added":"Feb 1, 2023","date_modified":"Feb 1, 2023","categories":[{"id":58,"name":"Environment","slug":"environment"},{"id":109,"name":"Technology","slug":"technology"},{"id":110,"name":"Region","slug":"region"},{"id":111,"name":"North America","slug":"north-america"},{"id":170,"name":"Clean Energy","slug":"clean-energy"},{"id":176563,"name":"Science","slug":"science"},{"id":248072,"name":"Pollution","slug":"pollution"}],"_date_added":1675209600,"_date_modified":1675209600,"_categories":["environment","technology","region","north-america","clean-energy","science","pollution"],"_tags":[]},{"id":214329,"title":"Practitioners Share Insight on Participatory Grantmaking Approaches","summary":" As a consultant focused on participatory grantmaking, I have been thrilled to see growing interest in community-led grantmaking practices. At the same time, I have been disheartened to see common misconceptions spread throughout the sector, such as that participatory grantmaking is new or unproven. I\u2019ve also seen philanthropists dismiss participatory grantmaking as a passing fad.<\/p> Perhaps we should instead call modern philanthropy new and unproven. Modern philanthropy in the US emerged in the early 20th century and was developed primarily by the robber barons of the time. It is difficult to prove\u00a0that modern philanthropy has done much good<\/a>. To the contrary, it has siphoned over $1 trillion into private control, the majority of which remains in the market and is never distributed to the benefit of communities.<\/p> What we take as \u201cnormal\u201d in modern philanthropy is based on the fundamental, and frankly patronizing, assumption that the wealthy are best suited to distribute grants\u2014a notion that turns a blind eye to the fact that this practice gives those who extract (or have even stolen) community wealth the power to choose how to distribute this wealth.<\/p> Participatory grantmaking, on the other hand, is based on movement frameworks that have been around for centuries\u2014and has roots in community distribution models that have been practiced for millennia. Even in today\u2019s formal philanthropic sector, it has a considerable track record.<\/p> In collaboration with a national foundation, I recently had the opportunity to research some of the most longstanding community-led funds in the nation and to learn from them about what it takes to embed effective participatory grantmaking in philanthropic institutions and create authentic community engagement. Inspired by a recent Groundswell \u201cOpen Letter to Philanthropy, from People of Color-led, Movement Accountable, Public Foundations<\/a>,<\/u>\u201d the foundation selected 10 community-led organizations that have been engaged in different forms of participatory grantmaking, some for over 40 years.<\/p> When it comes to the nuts and bolts of establishing a participatory grantmaking program, some best practices and trends were evident, including:<\/p> The Alliance\u2019s latest report,\u00a0Connecting Older Adults to Housing: Examining Disparities<\/a>\u00a0analyzes the different ways in which older adults exit homelessness by race, ethnicity, gender, age, and shelter status. Based on 2018 data from the Vulnerability Index Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VI-SPDAT), it finds that 1) Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) utilization among older adults has been helping them exit homelessness and 2) Black older adults were the least likely to receive housing assistance. This blog post will discuss some key insights on how homeless service systems are housing older adults, and where there are areas to improve.<\/p> The Alliance\u2019s new report shows that permanent supportive housing (PSH) and Rapid Re-Housing (RRH) were the top housing interventions for older adults exiting homelessness, and RRH utilization increased as older adults aged. Systems may be using RRH as a bridge to other permanent housing options if PSH resources are not available: nearly 23 percent of those 75 and older exited homelessness through RRH, compared to less than 16 percent of those ages 55-64 or 65-74. Older adults also may not qualify for PSH if they do not have any disabling conditions, so systems may turn to RRH instead. However, as the housing market tightens, RRH may become out of reach for a population living on a fixed income, with fewer means of increasing income to pay for housing after their rent subsidy ends.<\/p>","excerpt":"The Alliance\u2019s latest report, Connecting Older Adults to Housing: Examining Disparities analyzes the different ways in which older adults exit homelessness by race, ethnicity, gender, age, and shelter status.","byline":"","author":"Josh Wojcik","author_bio":null,"author_img_url":null,"publisher":"National Alliance to End Homelessness","type":"post","image":null,"gc_medium_image":"https:\/\/cdn.www.hbhuluo.com\/images\/categories\/featured-category-human-services.jpg","has_featured_image":false,"img_alt":"","img_caption":"","gc_selection":false,"url":"\/\/www.hbhuluo.com\/article\/how-older-adults-are-exiting-homelessness-into-housing","is_gc_original":false,"is_evergreen":false,"footnotes":null,"audio":false,"pdf":null,"video":false,"date_added":"Feb 1, 2023","date_modified":"Feb 1, 2023","categories":[{"id":54,"name":"Human Services","slug":"human-services"},{"id":76,"name":"Human Rights","slug":"human-rights"},{"id":110,"name":"Region","slug":"region"},{"id":111,"name":"North America","slug":"north-america"},{"id":163,"name":"Homelessness and Housing","slug":"homelessness-and-housing"},{"id":259848,"name":"Aging\/Eldercare","slug":"aging-eldercare"}],"_date_added":1675209600,"_date_modified":1675209600,"_categories":["human-services","human-rights","region","north-america","homelessness-and-housing","aging-eldercare"],"_tags":[]},{"id":214408,"title":"How Feedback Can Be An Empowering Opportunity for Youth","summary":" Committed to mentoring relationships, Silver Lining Mentoring (SLM) empowers youth in foster care through the development of essential life skills. They are dedicated to cultivating an environment where marginalized voices are lifted up and centered in service of dismantling systems of oppression. Listening to the youth has been at the heart of their work to improve their programs offerings as well as the branding of their organization.<\/p> In early 2023, Silver Lining Mentoring (SLM) will launch a pilot program supporting youth who are transitioning out of the foster care system. In planning for this new program, they want to listen deeply to the youth who are participating in the pilot, and iterate on the program in response to their feedback. In the past, SLM has had challenges getting youth and mentors to respond to feedback surveys. As a consequence, they are exploring new ways to listen to the youth who are a part of the pilot program, and presented in LabStorm to gather ideas and advice on how they can improve their feedback practices.<\/p> We are living in messy times. The impact of a frail democracy and fissured economy is that day-to-day living for far too many people in the United States\u00a0is desperate and dire, while a handful of plutocrats, willing to game these political and economic systems, are lining their pockets to consolidate wealth, power, and political influence. Philanthropy is implicated in the creation of these realities. I say this as the leader of a national foundation, but one that came in eager to reform the work and ways of philanthropists, in and outside of my own institution. Many of us are seeking to make sense of our role in disentangling the relationship between wealth and power, redistributing resources for the fights for justice ahead, and repairing generations of harm caused by the institutions we now lead. As I\u00a0continue to make sense of this for myself, I\u2019m reminded that the fight for justice is always unbalanced. And so, as I think about what should be next for philanthropy, at Marguerite Casey Foundation and across the sector, I would suggest we hyper-focus on doing what we do at our best: moving money to create a more even terrain for organizers, activists, and scholars to fight for a representative multiracial democracy, just economy, and a planet that is treated as sacred.<\/p> I think the messiness of our times has distracted us from and confused many of us about what we do best as philanthropists. The last two years created an opening for us to reflect on past practices, engage new leaders, and publically name the winners of our current political and economic systems. It was an opening that many ran through, others peeped through, and some turned their backs on. The incongruent ways philanthropic leaders approached the pandemic, racial uprisings, and ensuing economic precarity led to many of us using the same words with wildly different definitions, approaches, and actions. This creates tension and has the power to undermine our collective impact in a number of ways.<\/p>","excerpt":"Let\u2019s remember what we do best as philanthropists.","byline":"","author":"Josh Wojcik","author_bio":null,"author_img_url":null,"publisher":"Stanford Social Innovation Review","type":"post","image":null,"gc_medium_image":"https:\/\/cdn.www.hbhuluo.com\/images\/categories\/featured-category-philantropy.jpg","has_featured_image":false,"img_alt":"","img_caption":"","gc_selection":false,"url":"\/\/www.hbhuluo.com\/article\/how-can-philanthropy-best-support-social-movements","is_gc_original":false,"is_evergreen":false,"footnotes":null,"audio":false,"pdf":null,"video":false,"date_added":"Feb 1, 2023","date_modified":"Feb 1, 2023","categories":[{"id":46,"name":"Philanthropy","slug":"philantropy"},{"id":110,"name":"Region","slug":"region"},{"id":111,"name":"North America","slug":"north-america"},{"id":112,"name":"Impact Philanthropy","slug":"impact-philanthropy"}],"_date_added":1675209600,"_date_modified":1675209600,"_categories":["philantropy","region","north-america","impact-philanthropy"],"_tags":[]},{"id":214387,"title":"Fire Scientists Shed Light on Wildfire Trends","summary":" It can be tempting to think that the recent wildfire disasters in communities across the West were unlucky, one-off events, but evidence is accumulating that points to a trend.<\/p> In a new study<\/a>, we found a 246% increase in the number of homes and structures destroyed by wildfires in the contiguous Western U.S. between the past two decades, 1999-2009 and 2010-2020.<\/p> This trend is strongly influenced by major fires in 2017<\/a>, 2018<\/a> and 2020<\/a>, including destructive fires in Paradise and Santa Rosa, California, and in Colorado, Oregon and Washington. In fact, in nearly every Western state, more homes and buildings were destroyed by wildfire over the past decade than the decade before, revealing increasing vulnerability to wildfire disasters.<\/p> What explains the increasing home and structure loss?<\/p> Surprisingly, it\u2019s not just the trend of burning more area<\/a>, or simply more homes being built where fires historically burned<\/a>. While those trends play a role, increasing home and structure loss is outpacing both.<\/p> As fire scientists, we have spent decades studying the causes<\/a> and impacts of wildfires<\/a>, in both the recent<\/a> and more distant past<\/a>. It\u2019s clear that the current wildfire crisis<\/a> in the Western U.S. has human fingerprints all over it. In our view, now more than ever, humanity needs to understand its role.<\/p> From 1999 to 2009, an average of 1.3 structures were destroyed for every 4 square miles burned (1,000 hectares, or 10 square kilometers). This average more than doubled to 3.4 during the following decade, 2010-2020.<\/p> Nearly every Western state lost more structures for every square mile burned, with the exception of New Mexico and Arizona.<\/p> Given the damage from the wildfires you hear about on the news, you may be surprised to learn that 88% of wildfires in the West over the past two decades destroyed zero structures<\/a>. This is, in part, because the majority of area burned (65%) is still due to lightning-ignited wildfires, often in remote areas.<\/p> But among wildfires that do burn homes or other structures, humans play a disproportionate role \u2013 76% over the past two decades were started by unplanned human-related ignitions, including backyard burning, downed power lines and campfires. The area burned from human-related ignitions rose 51% between 1999-2009 and 2010-2020.<\/p> This is important because wildfires started by human activities or infrastructure have vastly different impacts<\/a> and characteristics that can make them more destructive.<\/p> Unplanned human ignitions typically occur near buildings<\/a> and tend to burn in grasses<\/a> that dry out easily and burn quickly. And people have built more homes and buildings in areas surrounded by flammable vegetation, with the number of structures up by 40% over the past two decades across the West<\/a>, with every state contributing to the trend.<\/p> Human-caused wildfires also expand the fire season<\/a> beyond the summer months when lightning is most common, and they are particularly destructive during late summer and fall when they overlap with periods of high winds<\/a>.<\/p> As a result, of all the wildfires that destroy structures in the West, human-caused events typically destroy over 10 times more<\/a> structures for every square mile burned, compared to lighting-caused events.<\/p> The December 2021 Marshall Fire that destroyed more than 1,000 homes and buildings in the suburbs near Boulder, Colorado, fit this pattern to a T<\/a>. Powerful winds sent the fire<\/a> racing through neighborhoods and vegetation that was unusually dry for late December.<\/p> As human-caused climate change<\/a> leaves vegetation more flammable later into each year, the consequences of accidental ignitions are magnified.<\/p> This might make it easy to think that if we just put out all fires, we would be safer. Yet a focus on stopping wildfires at all costs<\/a> is, in part, what got the West into its current predicament<\/a>. Fire risks just accumulate for the future.<\/p> The amount of flammable vegetation has increased in many regions because of an absence of burning due to emphasizing fire suppression, preventing Indigenous fire stewardship<\/a> and a fear of fire in any context, well exemplified by Smokey Bear<\/a>. Putting out every fire quickly removes the positive, beneficial effects of fires<\/a> in Western ecosystems, including clearing away hazardous fuels so future fires burn less intensely.<\/p> The good news is that people have the ability to affect change, now. Preventing wildfire disasters necessarily means minimizing unplanned human-related ignitions. And it requires more than Smokey Bear\u2019s<\/a> message that \u201conly you can prevent forest fires.\u201d Infrastructure, like downed power lines, has caused<\/a> some of the deadliest wildfires in recent years.<\/p> Reducing wildfire risks across communities, states and regions requires transformative changes<\/a> beyond individual actions. We need innovative approaches<\/a> and perspectives<\/a> for how we build<\/a>, provide power and manage lands<\/a>, as well as mechanisms that ensure changes work across socioeconomic levels<\/a>.<\/p> Actions to reduce risk will vary, since how people live and how wildfires burn vary widely across the West.<\/p> States with large tracts of land with little development, like Idaho and Nevada, can accommodate widespread burning, largely from lighting ignition, with little structure loss.<\/p> California and Colorado, for example, require different approaches and priorities. Growing communities can carefully plan if and how they build<\/a> in flammable landscapes, support wildfire management for risks and benefits<\/a>, and improve firefighting efforts<\/a> when wildfires do threaten communities.<\/p> Climate change<\/a> remains the elephant in the room. Left unaddressed, warmer, drier conditions will exacerbate challenges of living with wildfires. And yet we can\u2019t wait. Addressing climate change can be paired with reducing risks immediately to live more safely<\/a> in an increasingly flammable West.<\/p> Philip Higuera<\/a>, Professor of Fire Ecology, University of Montana<\/a><\/em>; Jennifer Balch<\/a>, Associate Professor of Geography and Director, Earth Lab, University of Colorado Boulder<\/a><\/em>; Maxwell Cook<\/a>, Ph.D. Student, Dept. of Geography, University of Colorado Boulder<\/a><\/em>, and Natasha Stavros<\/a>, Director of the Earth Lab Analytics Hub, University of Colorado Boulder<\/a><\/em><\/p> This article is republished from The Conversation<\/a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article<\/a>. The<\/span>\u00a0Conversation<\/span>\u00a0is a nonprofit news source dedicated to spreading ideas and expertise from academia into\u00a0the<\/span>\u00a0public discourse.\u00a0\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\r\n \t
\r\n \t
\r\n \t
\r\n \t
\r\n \t
Wildfires are becoming more destructive<\/h2>
Humans increasingly cause destructive wildfires<\/h2>
Putting out all fires isn\u2019t the answer<\/h2>
How to reduce risk of destructive wildfires<\/h2>