04222020

2

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

DAILY BEACON STAFF AND POLICY INFORMATION EDITORIAL

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Letter from the Editor: One last special issue and then it’s good-bye … and hello

EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Gabriela Szymanowska MANAGING EDITOR: Caroline Jordan COPY CHIEF: Calista Boyd OPERATIONS MANAGER: Natalie Widmer CAMPUS NEWS EDITOR: Alexandra DeMarco CITY NEWS EDITOR: Jake Yoder SPORTS EDITOR: Ryan Schumpert, Ryan Crews DIGITAL PRODUCER: Austin Orr OPINIONS EDITOR: Evan Newell PHOTO EDITOR: Sophia Liberatore DESIGN EDITOR: Michael Bloodworth DIRECTOR OF MARKETING AND PROMOTIONS:

James Perlow PRODUCTION ARTISTS: Jeremiah Pham,

Catherine Fei, Hannah Isanhert, Peter Kramar

ADVERTISING/PRODUCTION ADVERTISING MANAGER: Hailie Hensley MEDIA SALES REPRESENTATIVES: Parker

Korpak, Emelia Sandreuter

GABRIELA SZYMANOWSKA Editor-in-Chief Gabriela Szymanowska / Daily Beacon

ADVERTISING PRODUCTION ARTISTS: Anna

House, Elizabeth Ledoux, Carlos Padron, Hailey Morash, Victoria Wheelock

CONTACTS TO REPORT A NEWS ITEM, please email

editor.news@utdailybeacon.com or call (865) 974-2348 TO SUBMIT A PRESS RELEASE, please email pressreleases@utdailybeacon.com TO PLACE AN AD, please email beaconads@utdailybeacon.com or call (865) 974-5206 ADVERTISING: (865) 974-5206

beaconads@utk.edu EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: (865) 974-3226

editorinchief@utdailybeacon.com MAIN NEWSROOM: (865) 974-3226

editorinchief@utdailybeacon.com LETTERS POLICY: Letters to the Editor must be exclusive to The Daily Beacon and cannot have been submitted to or published by other media. Letters should not exceed 400 words and can be edited or shortened for space. Letters can also be edited for grammar and typographical errors, and Letters that contain excessive grammatical errors can be rejected for this reason. Anonymous Letters will not be published. Authors should include their full name, mailing address, city of residence, phone number and e-mail address for verification purposes. Letters submitted without this information will not be published. The preferred method to submit a Letter to the Editor is to email the Editor-in-Chief.

CORRECTIONS POLICY:It is the Daily Beacon’s policy to quickly correct any factual errors and clarify any potentially misleading information. Errors brought to our attention by readers or staff members will be corrected and printed on page two of our publication. To report an error please send as much information as possible about where and when the error occurred to managingeditor@utdailybeacon.com, or call our newsroom at (865) 974-5206.

The Daily Beacon is published by students at The University of Tennessee on Monday and Thursday during the fall and spring semesters. The offices are located at 1345 Circle Park Drive, 11 Communications Building, Knoxville, TN 379960314. The newspaper is free on campus and is available via mail subscription for $200/year or $100/semester. It is also available online at: www.utdailybeacon.com The Daily Beacon is printed using soy based ink on newsprint containing recycled content, utilizing renewable sources and produced in a sustainable, environmentally responsible manner.

Well this is it. This is goodbye. It’s been an amazing run, and I’m definitely going to miss my time at the Daily Beacon and at UT. Back in high school, in one of my English courses we read a poem entitled “To a Mouse,” by Robert Burns. Now, while I may not have understood the Scottish poem then, or still to this day, to be honest, I do remember one line: “The best laid schemes o’ Mice an’ Men / Gang aft agley” Essentially, it means that the best-laid plans never work out according to plan, and something is bound to go wrong.

And it’s 100% true. I knew coming into my freshman year that I had plans and goals and expectations lined up for myself and more than likely, things wouldn’t go according to plan. But no one could have predicted just how much change would happen.

While the coronavirus may have drastically altered my last few months at UT — taking away the opportunities of participating in graduation traditions, making a few last memories on campus, spending my last days within the orange walls of the Beacon’s office and so much more — it doesn’t change the fact that I truly had an amazing four years before that.

And out of everything that happened, the Beacon will always hold a special place in my heart. It has been an honor and a pleasure to be with the editorially independent news organization since my freshman year and to be able to lead a staff of dedicated students this last semester.

I mean, how many people can say they lead students through a pandemic and managed to somehow pull through? The Beacon is truly an important entity on campus for the very reason of what we’ve been trying to do all this time: keeping the UT

community informed, giving students field experience and being a place to learn.

And that’s why we carried on with the plan to focus on one last special issue throughout the entire month of April: Climate Change and Crisis. Focused on climate change and the growing crisis of global warming, as well as keeping the community informed about the coronavirus, this special issue was aimed at informing the community about other issues that are still going on, even if they are put on the back burner as the world works towards grappling with the coronavirus pandemic.

But I couldn’t have done it without the help of so many people; individuals who pushed me to be a better leader, were there when I was down and made my college experience truly unique. I wanted to take a moment to thank them.

I want to first thank everyone I have met through my time with the Office of Student Media; from my staff who stuck through the tough times and came together to continue the legacy of bringing news to light, to the friends I’ve made with many at the Beacon, to people I met through interviews and connecting with sources, to those who were with the Beacon for only a short period and those I’ve known the whole time I’ve worked there. Each and every one of them has made my time at the Beacon memorable.

Next, I want to extend a huge thank you to Jerry Bush, John Kennedy and Summer Johnston. Without these three wonderful individuals, the Office of Student Media wouldn’t exist in the capacity it has. John’s mentorship and enthusiasm to help students learn about videography and explore different branches of media has helped start so much great content. Jerry’s advice and guidance in this position has been in-

valuable in helping to figure out how to navigate difficult times and so much more.

And Summer has been a guardian sitting up front and always taking a moment to speak with each person coming in, putting us all in a better mood.

Lastly, I want to thank my family who have stuck with me since the beginning.

I want you all to know that all of my accomplishments and my college journey wouldn’t have been the same without you.

Mom, Dad, Konrad — you all have been my rock during the toughest times, kept me sane when the anxiety got real and cheered me on with every small milestone. Thank you for everything.

Thank you to the students, thank you UT and thank you to the Volunteer community for making Rocky Top my home.

The Beacon is in great hands as I have no doubt that Alexandra DeMarco and Calista Boyd will do an amazing job as Editor-inChief and Managing Editor, respectfully.

Good luck with everything Vol nation!

And with that I’d like to introduce the new Editor-in-Chief: Alexandra DeMarco!

Hey all, I’m Alexandra, and I’m so looking forward to serving as the Beacon’s Editor-in-Chief. I’m currently a sophomore studying journalism and electronic media and French, and I have a passion for student media and empowering students’ voices. I am so excited for the future and enthusiastic about working with the UT community in the midst of the craziness that our world is currently experiencing. Here’s to a great upcoming year!

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

3

Letter from the Managing Editor: It takes a village, and I’m glad I had this one

CAROLINE JORDAN Managing Editor

For the past three years I have held a myriad of roles at the Daily Beacon: copy editor, sports writer, Managing Editor. Yet surprisingly, no phase of my time has been as impactful as the past month being out of the newsroom. Going into the quarantine and facing the reality of my senior year being cut short, I was uncertain about how this special issue — the one Gabi and I have been planning for months — would turn out considering none of the staff can be in the same room.

It has truly taken a village to persevere and create this special issue.

Over the past month I have been overwhelmingly impressed with my editors, writers, contributors, photographers, videographers and graphic designers. Since news hit that we would not see each other for the remainder of spring semester, the Daily Beacon has not stopped producing meaningful content in a time when news is being consumed at an unprecedented rate (because we’re all at

home).

This edition of the Daily Beacon will publish solely online for the time being, and I think that’s quite fitting considering the issue we’re raising awareness of is environmental problems facing the globe. The COVID-19 crisis has caused logistical challenges, yes — but it has also given our staff the freedom to explore website redesign to match the paper, not to mention avoiding printing thousands of physical papers, eliminating excess waste.

This being the last news “paper” I oversee, I could not be happier for my goodbye to be included in such a meaningful edition of the Daily Beacon. After being in the news business for the past few years I’ve noticed that climate change discussion really only happens in April with Earth Day being on April 22.

My hope for this edition and for our campus is that it promotes discussion throughout the year, and that it no longer is a taboo or divisive topic. The writers of these articles tell

stories that affect our lives in the most literal sense.

As I say goodbye, I’d be remiss if I didn’t thank the following people who have impacted my time at the Daily Beacon: Kylie Hubbard for nagging me until I applied to work at the Beacon — it was a blessing to see her everyday and receive her guidance and friendship. John Kennedy for understanding that, although I don’t want to work in print journalism after graduation, the leadership skills I learned are still valuable because they can take me anywhere. Gabriela Szymanowska for stepping up and sticking by me through this season of uncertainty. Alexandra DeMarco for always being my hype-woman and a trusted friend. Evan Newell for always laughing at my jokes, no matter how bad they were. Ryan Schumpert for enlightening me in all things “The Bachelor” and being a fellow sports fan. Thank you all for supporting me — it truly took a village.

New stadiums making positive environmental impacts RYAN SCHUMPERT Sports Editor

Sports play a major role in millions of people’s lives all over America and the world, something that’s shown even greater during the coronavirus. Massive stadiums and arenas across the world have the capability for a massive carbon footprint.

However, these arenas and stadiums can also lead the way for implementing environmentally friendly features and practices helping reduce its carbon footprint while also encouraging fans to follow similar practices.

Stadiums across the United States and Europe have been moving to more environmentally conscious practices in recent years.

Some of these include solar panels, LED lights

and scoreboards, composters and water saving practices.

All of these make a difference but there are only so many ways for stadiums and arenas to adapt after being built. To see major changes, you often have to look at new stadiums.

You’d be hard pressed to find a stadium that represents this more than Atlanta’s Mercedes Benz Stadium. Home to the Atlanta United Soccer Club and Atlanta Falcons, Mercedes-Benz Stadium opened in 2017, with Tennessee ironically playing the second ever game in the stadium — the Vols’ 42-41 win over Georgia Tech in the 2017 season opener.

From the get-go plans of environmental innovation were paramount for building the 71,000-seat stadium.

“We were trying to send a message to the construction industry to be efficient but also build great buildings,” Atlanta United and

Falcons owner Arthur Blank said. “I told them it was important to me and for the environment and the community. They knew from Day 1 that it was a priority.”

The stadium has succeeded in its goal even earning a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) award. The stadium includes a rainwater collection from its roof that holds 680,000 gallons and helps water surrounding plants.

Thanks to the water storage, MercedesBenz Stadium uses less then 47% of water that other stadiums. It also uses 30% less energy consumption than other stadiums.

Another stadium earning praise from the LEED and even the White House is Santa Clara’s Levi Stadium, opened in 2014 and home to the San Francisco 49ers. The stadium includes a 27,000 square foot solarpaneled roof and local food sources.

While environmentally conscious stadiums make an impact on their own, many are hoping its enhancements can help show fans ways to make changes in their own homes and places of business.

“Any single sporting event doesn’t really have a giant ecological footprint, whether it’s a football game or even a season for a team,” Sport and Sustainability International founder Allen Hershkowitz told the New York Times. “But the cultural and social platform of sports is almost unparalleled in terms of its ability to reach people.”

New stadiums and how they can improve sustainability will continue to grow in coming years as more and more open, especially with the Las Vegas Raiders and Los Angeles Chargers moving into new stadiums in the coming years and Tennessee forming plans to renovate Neyland Stadium.

4

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Predictable Surprises, Failures of Leadership

MARK E. KEIM M.D., M.B.A Affiliations: DisasterDoc LLC, Lawrenceville, GA USA Emory University, Rollins School of Public Health Atlanta, GA USA Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard School of Medicine, Boston, MA THE PROBLEM: PREDICTABLE SURPRISES According to of the Harvard Business School’s professors Bazerman and Watkins, “predictable surprises” are “disasters that catch leaders off guard even though they had all the information necessary to anticipate them.” These occurrences represent a “pervasive failure of leadership that holds grave consequences for individuals, organizations and society”.

There are six characteristic traits of a predictable surprise disaster: 1. Leaders knew that a problem existed and that the problem would not solve itself.

2. Organizational members recognize that the problem is getting worse over time.

3. Fixing the problem would incur significant costs in the presence while the benefits of actions would be delayed.

4. Addressing the problem typically requires incurring a certain cost while the reward is avoiding a cost that is uncertain, but likely to be much larger.

5. Decision-makers fail to prepare for the predictable surprises because of the natural human tendency to maintain the status quo.

6. A small vocal minority benefits from inaction and is motivated to subvert the actions of leaders for their own private benefit.

This manuscript compares the leadership challenges of the coronavirus pandemic to that of climate change. This comparison is offered as a case study for the need for risk management as a national policy that will address predictable public health emergencies in the US.

Knowing that the problem exists and that it won’t solve itself The world has long recognized pandemic-related illness as a serious global threat.

There were three global pandemics of influenza during the 20th century: in 1918, 1957, and 1968. Most recently, pandemicrelated research has grown substantially since introduction of the first trivalent influenza vaccine and the emergence of H1N1 in the 1980s.

In 2006, Congress recognized this grave threat and passed the nation’s first Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness Act. PAHPA I established a new Department of Health and Human Services Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response provided new authorities for a number of programs at the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Pandemic preparedness has, in fact, become a cornerstone of US disaster policy.

The world has also long recognized climate change as a serious global threat. In 1988, the United Nations established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to review the science of climate change, its social and economic impacts, and potential response strategies. By 2007, there was a global consensus regarding the extreme weather events that were predicted to occur with an increasing frequency and/or severity as a result of global warming.

Also by 2007, the Bush administration was already seeking to ratify a maritime boundary treaty between eight nations surrounding the arctic region that would allow for extraction of the oil, nickel and diamond resources that were known to be buried under the melting sea ice (which was then known to have already decreased by 20%) .

Recognizing that the problem is getting worse over time.

In 2007, H5N1 influenza (“bird flu”) outbreaks in southeast Asia again threatened to become a global pandemic. By 2009, the US had also made its first declaration of national emergency related to a pandemic

(H1N1 “swine flu”). Over a decade later, Congress continued to recognize pandemics as an imminent threat to the health and national security of Americans with passage of the 2019 Pandemic and All-Hazards Preparedness and Advancing Innovation Act (PAHPA II).

And yet, at the time of the 2020 pandemic, most Americans can easily recognize that the problem has worsened over time, particularly with respect to: stockpiling of critical medical equipment and supplies; hospital preparedness for surge capacity; bio-surveillance for active cases; accelerating medical countermeasures for outbreaks.

As early as 2013, the US Navy leadership voiced public concern regarding the impact of climate change. US Pacific Command Rear Admiral Samuel J. Locklear III then stated that, “Climate change is probably the most likely thing that is going to happen ... that will cripple the security environment, probably more likely than the other scenarios we all often talk about.’’ In the 2015 Paris Agreement, world leaders pledged to restrict the expected increase in global temperature to below 1.5° Celsius.

However, by 2017, global warming had already reached approximately 1°C preindustrial levels. And the IPCC has also recently reported that 1.5°C could be reached in as little as 11 years — and almost certainly within 20 years without major cuts in carbon dioxide emissions.

Fixes incur significant costs with delayed benefits Pandemic preparedness is not an inexpensive endeavor. The long-term management of a stockpile inventory requires an ongoing and steadfast commitment sustained over multiple political administrations. Like most risk management activities, the expected benefits are often delayed.

It takes time to implement effective public health interventions and to then measure their effectiveness. This time lag does not align with the short attention span of policymakers and the public.

For example, the 2006 PAHPA I legisla-

tion established nine national Preparedness Emergency Response Research Centers to conduct research for public health preparedness and emergency response.

This program was then entirely defunded in 2013 (in effect, after graduating only three cohorts). This is an obvious example of the lacking public and/or political will to delay gratification long enough to even measure any return on the public investment.

The transition from fossil fuel energy is also not an inexpensive endeavor. The transition to alternate energy sources will require significant investments across multiple sectors with delayed benefits. According to the IPCC, even if significant cuts were to begin immediately, we could delay, not prevent, 1.5°C of global warming.

The costs of preparing are certain. The benefits are likely (but not as certain).

While the public and policymakers are often well aware of the potential benefits of pandemic preparedness, the “rule of rescue” instead often serves to direct most allocations of the day. As a result, costs tend to become prioritized according to acuity or immediate likelihood, as compared to the potentially high societal impact.

White House advisor John Bolton recently justified his 2018 decision to disband the National Security Council pandemic response team as “streamlining” while responsibility for monitoring threats from infectious diseases was shifted to another group. The move has since been characterized as highly impactful upon the current state of pandemic preparedness.

And, just like the COVID pandemic, it’s difficult for us to fully appreciate the benefit of preparing for climate change until we are immersed in a global crisis with few options left. The benefits of a “normal” climate are more subtle, difficult to appreciate. Uncertainty regarding the future climate is also a difficult to communicate to the public. People tend to want a “black or white” answer, many times where one does not exist.

STORY CONTINUED ON PG. 5

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

The science and practice of risk communication has developed to address this common public health challenge.

Once again, the certainty of cost appears to carry more psychological weight than uncertain benefit, regardless of the scale of the potential losses or downside that may occur.

Decision-makers tend to maintain the status quo, rather than prepare For decades, the status quo for US public health emergency management was an ad hoc response delivered during times of national crisis. Then, during the late 1990s, US policy came to recognize public health emergencies as a significant threat to national security. In 2002, Congress established the CDC Public Health Emergency Preparedness cooperative agreement as the main source of federal support for state and local public health preparedness and response). However, during 2003 to 2019 the CDC’s funding for PHEP was cut by a third (along with other key HHS programs including hospital preparedness and global health security).

With respect to climate, there are many kinds of costs associated with fossil fuel use in the form of greenhouse gas emissions and other pollution resulting from the extraction and burning of fossil fuels.

These negative externalities have adverse environmental, climate and public health impacts.

According to the International Monetary Fund, “fossil fuels account for 85% of all global subsidies,” and reducing these subsidies “would have lowered global carbon emissions by 28% and fossil fuel air pollution deaths by 46% and increased government revenue by 3.8% of GDP.” But rather than being phased out, fossil fuel subsidies are increasing. The latest IMF report estimates 6.5% of global GDP ($5.2 trillion) was spent on fossil fuel subsidies in 2017, a half trillion dollar increase since 2015. The largest subsidizers are China, the United States and Russia.

A small vocal minority benefits from in-

action and is motivated to subvert the actions of leaders for their own private benefit.

The most vocal minority to benefit from inaction related to pandemic preparedness is the voice of (albeit well-intended) fiscal conservatism that is often given strict interpretation when applied to public health programming in general, but even more so for low probability events, such as pandemic. However, actions that may be seen in the short term as saving money tend to become lost opportunities for a return on investment that could have been monumental and perhaps even existential.

There are a number of powerful and profitable industries and nations that are affected by US climate change policy, most obvious being the energy sector. In one of the most publicized examples, of such benefit, the Heartland Institute, a $5M/year conservative public policy think tank has been at the vanguard of climate change denial in the US over the past generation. This group receives direct support from the US fossil fuel industry.

THE SOLUTION: RISK MANAGEMENT The common thread among all predictable surprises is the nature of the disaster risk – commonly characterized as “high impact/low probability events” (HILPE).

HILPE share many of the same challenges. Their definitive characteristic is that though they are unlikely to occur, the impact is devastatingly high when they do.

This relative infrequency often results in a lower perception of risk among the public and policymakers. However, countering the relative low probability is the high degree of societal impact that many of these events also entail. It then becomes necessary to include these hazards in our spending and policy priorities even though the timing and degree of their impact may be less certain. Again, it is this uncertainty regarding future costs versus benefits that complicate the risk communication efforts for all of these HILPEs. If the event does not appear certain to occur during this fis-

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

cal year (or earnings quarter), it is more likely to be prioritized much lower.

Of course, the common lesson among all of these disasters is that predictable surprises are best prevented altogether, (rather than reacted to). The losses are either too great to bear for our collective health and national security or our capabilities are not developed well enough to respond to the event in such a way that would be reasonably effective (e.g. no therapeutics or vaccine for a coronavirus).

Prevention is the action of stopping “something” from occurring, in this case disaster-related disease (including injury). This “something,” also known as “risk,” occurs when there is an exposure that could result in damage or losses. Prevention seeks to lower “health risk” before it actually occurs to become a “health consequence.”

ISO 31000, the international standard for risk management, applies the process of prevention in three successive steps: 1) risk assessment; 2) risk communication and 3) risk treatment. The first step in risk assessment is hazard identification – the process of recognizing and characterizing terms of potential impacts and losses. The second step in risk assessment is to prioritize potential hazards and threats according to impact and probability (the measures of disaster risk). The risk assessment also includes a well-informed cost-benefit analysis that will guide future decisionmaking. Risk communication is the action of sharing information regarding the impact and probability of the event (i.e. the risk) with the public and decision-makers for subsequent treatment of the risk. ` Bazerman and Watkins described this same risk management process, in terms of three “key actions” that may be taken to prevent predictable surprises in the future: •Recognition – identifying emerging threats earlier •Prioritization – focusing on the right problems

5

•Mobilization – building support for preventative actions These key actions serve to assess and communicate the health risks associated with both pandemics and climate change.

But of course, mobilization is a much larger effort than merely risk communication -implying treatment and lowering of the risk. It is the next step – action. As Leonardo da Vinci implored, “Knowing is not enough; we must apply. Being willing is not enough; we must do.”

It is within that final task of mobilization that leadership becomes so critical and that failure of leadership becomes so obvious. And it is that failure of leadership which also defines the final characteristic of a “predictable surprise”, when mobilization of national efforts is the primary raison d’etre among public health leaders.

But, are we, as the public, absolved from any responsibility for these predictable surprises? As Joseph de Maistre pointed out, “Every nation gets the government it deserves”, and as such, we can easily see that our own citizens and policymakers have a similar propensity when making the following choices grounded in human nature: •denial versus recognition of risk •short-term versus long-term gratification •certain costs versus uncertain benefits •status quo versus change •inaction versus action Indeed, we are each responsible to an extent (especially those of you reading this that may also live in a democracy where the people are directly responsible for their own government).

So, finally it comes down to you, and what you must do.

Columns and letters of The Daily Beacon are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Beacon or the Beacon’s editorial staff.

6

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

From Hill to Hill: An empathetic approach to a world of change

EVAN NEWELL Opinions Editor

I’m a senior now, which means I’m kind of old. Old enough to remember the strip before it was renovated, old enough to remember the brief (and miserable) coaching tenure of Donnie Tyndall and old enough to remember a world without two-factor authentication.

Before UT switched to two-factor, life was simpler. There weren’t all of these extra hoops to jump through just to log into Canvas. I wasn’t asked to make a password that’s sprawls for 12-16 characters. There was no app to keep me tethered to my phone all the time.

We just had a single password. That was it. Short and sweet. That was all we needed, and it was outrageous to think that anyone would want a more inconvenient, complicated system, right?

Well, I’m not so sure.

People love to hate on two-factor authentication, but I think it gets too much flack. When we attack 2FA, not only is it just about the most uninteresting small talk you can have with someone on campus, but it also feels like a misguided conversation about what our university should be doing.

Like I said before, I was around before two-factor, which means I’m also old enough to remember when our online accounts were less secure. For years, they were more susceptible to hackers and breaches, and our personal, financial and academic information was at risk. This was always a problem, and just because I didn’t know about it or understand it at the time doesn’t mean that it wasn’t important— and it doesn’t mean that it didn’t need to change.

But it’s understandable that this new process would receive pushback. The loathing of 2FA was not just because it required a change in behavior, but because it warranted a change in our expectations and understanding of digital security. It demanded us to come to terms with the complexity and risk of the digital world, and that’s no small

task.

We as a society and as a species are resistant to change of all kinds, but maybe two-factor authentication is just a small example. All around the globe, we particularly see resistance when we talk about environmental policy.

In our efforts to make a more environmentally friendly world, we have placed regulations on emissions, dangerous chemicals, natural resource usage and the like. And the people whose lives would be easier without these restrictions are often upset.

Like two-factor authentication, these policies create inconveniences, but unlike 2FA, these added barriers can be lifechanging. They affect not just governments and businesses that lose revenue and stability, but also individuals who lose their jobs and find themselves with a set of skills that is no longer in demand.

Environmental regulations acknowledge that we need to change our behaviors and our expectations about business and the environment to make a better world, and that doesn’t come without a price.

The people who speak out against cli-

mate policy are often villainized, labeled as ignorant and cast out by many of us, but are they fundamentally that different than those of us who complain about 2FA? Both groups are looking at a problem they may not fully understand and a set of solutions that make their lives more difficult, and they complain and condemn because of their understandable frustrations.

I want to be clear about what I’m not saying. I am not saying we should stop pursuing environmental policies because they’re harmful to people’s economic wellbeing. I am not saying that it’s entirely unreasonable to be upset about two-factor authentication. And I am not saying there aren’t legitimate problems within both environmentalism and 2FA. What I am saying is that we need to be empathetic with people affected by big changes like climate policy, and we also need to be better at handling small changes like two-factor authentication. Change is hard, and we’re all kind of bad at it.

The regular readers of my column (yes, all eight of you) might say that this piece is redundant—that I’ve harped on the difficulties of change and complexity in plenty

of columns before. They would be right, but I do this on purpose.

I dwell on these topics so much because while the details may change, they get at something so important. They bring to light a fundamentally important question that persists throughout history: change is inevitable, so how do we respond when it happens?

Different changes warrant different responses for sure, but some things always hold. We have to find ways to deal with changes that inconvenience us for the greater good, and we have to be better at handling the small changes—or we’ll never be ready for the big ones.

Evan Newell is a senior majoring in Chemical Engineering. He can be reached at enewell2@vols.utk.edu.

Columns and letters of The Daily Beacon are the views of the individual and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Beacon or the Beacon’s editorial staff.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

7

The truth about the recycling industry: Is it worth the effort?

BEN WINIGER Staff Writer

“Reduce, reuse, recycle” is a saying many American children grew up with, repeated verbatim to encourage more environmentally friendly mindsets. But what if that adage is wrong? What if recycling isn’t as beneficial as we once supposed?

Some studies report that only 9% of all plastic discarded since the 1950s has been recycled. China, one of the largest buyers of US reuse materials, recently stopped accepting U.S. recyclables. Knoxville’s own recycling center stopped accepting glass in curbside bins, instead having citizens take recyclable glass directly to the recycling center.

This paints a dark image of recycling initiatives gone wrong and of a world where reusable materials go to waste.

However, according to Knoxville and Tennessee recycling experts, the situation is not nearly so dire.

Patience Melnik, the Knoxville Waste and Resources Manager, and Jeffrey Barrie, CEO of the Tennessee Environmental Council, discussed the nature of American recycling initiatives with “The Daily Beacon.”

Recycling, like landfill management, is an industry. As an industry, recycling companies react to market forces of supply, demand and profit maximization. According to Melnik, that is the unfortunate reality of recycling initiatives.

“We all recycle because we want to help the earth and not fill up our landfills. But, at the end of the day, recycling is a business,” Melnik said. “If nobody can pay for folks sorting on the line — if no one can pay for recycling equipment and maintenance of that equipment — there is no recycling.”

Recyclable goods do not go straight from the bin to the shelf as a new product. Recyclables need to be cleaned, sorted and processed by recycling companies. The Knoxville government contracts Westrock to sort and process reusable industry materials.

Westrock then needs to find companies willing to buy those recycled materials.

As such, a lack of buyers can significantly halt use of recycled materials.

“At the end of the day, Westrock has to be able to find someone to buy that product; that someone will give that product new life,” Melnik said.

Melnik explained that this is what’s currently happening with China and coastal recycling companies. China recently revised policies on recycling contaminants — unrecyclable materials mixed in with recyclable ones. Companies that once relied on Chinese companies as a buyer could no longer do so and local recycling buyers were

Ian Harmon // Contributor

few and far between.

“We’ve been seeing news stories about how recycling is in trouble because China’s implemented more stringent guidelines on contamination. The national situation is that there are lots of places that are very progressive — such as California and Portland, Oregon — that were selling to China.

When the bottom dropped out on that, they could find no buyers,” Melnik said. “We [Knoxville] weren’t buying from China because we’re landlocked. We had a pretty low loss of regional buyers. The truth of the matter is, we’re fortunate that we have these regional markets.”

Knoxville’s recyclables, as well as many other eastern Tennessee recyclables, go to domestic producers who buy reusable materials.

Recycled steel goes to Gerdau Ameristeel in Knoxville; glass goes to Strategic Glass in Atlanta, GA; Plastics go to Bellhawk Carpet in North Georgia; among other examples According to Jeff Barrie, the recycling industry also employs many more people than landfill waste. This makes the recycling industry a profitable industry and a valuable employer.

“Trash is a profitable resource for big industries that just dump it, but there is a more profitable industry around those resources that can be cleaned, separated and

turned into new products.,” Barrie said.

Whether or not those employees are treated well is another story that requires further research.

Industry landscape changes may lead to greater regional efforts, with recycling agencies finding new ways to get regional companies to purchase.

But what of what gets recycled? Does most of it go to waste? According to the experts, this situation is also not nearly so dire as one might think.

Melnik confirmed the statistic that only 9% of disgraded plastics since the 1950s.

However, she explained that plastic is so ubiquitous in modern industry — with plastics of varying shapes, sizes and hardness used to craft goods from forks to printers and car interiors — that it’s impossible to recycle every single type of plastic.

While the 9% statistic does represent all plastics, the ratio of recycled plastics to recyclable plastics is much higher.

“People are horrified by that, but when you think about all the things that plastic’s been used to make, it’s not that terrible a number,” Melnik said. “Though we can certainly do better.”

Many recyclables are thrown out, with contamination being the leading reason.

The sorting, cleaning and processing of recyclables requires specified machinery

and labor. If non-recyclable goods get into the machinery, there’s a risk of personal injury and broken tools that render all efforts null.

“Contamination does cause things to not get recycled. One of the biggest issues globally is that people throw trash into the recycling and think it’s getting reused, Barrie said. “If we keep it clean, a much higher percentage of that will be recycled.”

Contaminants exist both on the personal and corporate ends of recycling, with people mistakenly putting non-recyclables into the wrong bins. This results in massive lost opportunities.

“I will say we need to do an audit on our materials, but the standard contamination rate in a curbside recycling bin is 25%,” Melnik said. “Yes, that means a lot of what’s in a bin will go to a landfill, but only because people are putting things in there that they shouldn’t.

Melnik and Barries cited three causes for recycling contamination: corporate misinformation, citizen ignorance and a decreased focus on reuse.

A company’s goal is to get people to buy products and services. As such, companies that use landfill pollutants like plastic want customers to feel good about their purchase.

STORY CONTINUED ON PG. 8

8

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

STORY CONTINUED FROM PG. 7 One way they accomplish this is by advertising the “recyclability” of their products.

However, many of these claims are acts of corporate misinformation. While something may be recyclable on paper, most US regions haven’t the resources to process the goods. Plastic bags are a premiere example of this.

“The plastic producers want to paint themselves as environmentally friendly, so they put a little symbol that says ‘recyclable’ [on their goods]. People will put that on plastic bags. Hypothetically, they are recyclable. But in most programs across the US, plastic bags are not recyclable,” Melnik said. “That’s producer confusion. They want people to buy and feel good about their purchase.”

Plastic forks, hard plastics like kitchen ladles, rubber and e-waste plastics are also un-recyclable. Anything that contacts food is un-recyclable, as residue can gum up machinery.

Locally, glass is a massively under-recycled material. One needs to personally take glass to the recycling center, or else risk the material shattering and breaking machinery.

“Glass is not recyclable in our current program in Tennessee. If the recycling brokers find glass in a load of recyclables, they have to take the whole thing off the line and put it into a landfill,” Barrie said.

“Glass is a contaminant because it can and does break in the machinery. If it gets to the point where plastic is separated from paper, the glass would shatter and break the machine.”

Many citizens simply don’t know the limits, leading to widespread misinformation and an unnecessary amount of goods going un-recycled.

Melnik suggested that education best on what one can’t recycle would work best, as it would avoid overwhelming amounts of information citizens are expected to personally remember.

Barrie encouraged citizens to treat recycling as a constructive act, as if one were building a garden.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS “If you’re trying to create a beautiful lawn, you wouldn’t throw a bunch of weed seeds into your grass mix. You would take the time to find the right kind of seed. You need to make the right consumer choice, and the same goes for recycling if you want it to work,” Barrie said. “Get the right materials in the recycle cart, or else you’re getting weeds in.”

However, the largest detraction is the nature of recycling itself. Recycling is not, and was never meant to be, the solution to excessive waste.

While turning old materials into new mitigates waste, it’s only by not wasting at all that the issue is fixed. As such, Melnik encourages a larger focus on purchasing reusable goods.

“There’s not a way to buy our way out of this problem. The best thing that people can always do is to buy reusable. Recycling is great for the environment, and we should do it as much as we can, but when compared to all the waste we’re constantly producing, it’s kind of a band aid,” Melnik said.

Melnik went further, saying that use of reusable goods is the responsibility of all

parties. Good producers need to reused materials just as much as private citizens, and governments need to encourage reuse programs.

Governments, corporations and private citizens are all responsible for our planet’s wellbeing. If lowered pollution is a goal worth caring about, then it’s worth holding companies and governments to task over.

We need producers using recycled content. The market forces for an aluminum can make it so can producers will always buy recycled steel. For plastic, the plastic producers really want to buy virgin plastic,” Melnik said. “People can be that market influence without purchasing habits. Everyone needs to get on board to fix the problem — governments, companies and consumers.”

In summary, the recycling industry is not dying. It’s experiencing rapid changes due to economic forces.

We can all do our part by learning what and what not to recycle. We can also hold companies and corporations accountable for their actions, demanding that they use less polluting measures to make profits.

Joe Biden’s and Donald Trump’s differing views on climate change JAKE YODER City News Editor

Going into the 2020 presidential election, one of the hottest issues is climate change.

With each passing year, Earth’s situation seems to worsen. Now more than ever, people are calling on their governments and their leaders to make changes to save the planet.

With that in mind, what do this year’s candidates for the United States presidency, Joe Biden and Donald Trump, have to say about climate change?

Donald Trump During the past four years of his presidency, Donald Trump has been incredibly critical of climate change. Over the years, he has denied its existence in speeches, interviews and on his personal twitter account.

In a tweet from 2012, he said, “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.”

Past presidents, such as Barack Obama, have pushed to fight climate change, setting up numerous plans and signing treaties with other countries to reduce the United States’ carbon footprint. President Trump’s main issue with these plans, such as the Clean Power Plan, is the cost it would put on the county and the American people. He has spent much of his presidency repealing past climate change plans and removing the United States from climate change treaties such as the Paris Agreement.

This is not to say that President Trump’s administration is doing nothing regarding climate change. After repealing the Clean Power Plan, President Trump announced the Affordable Clean Energy rule which, according to his official campaign website, will, “reduce greenhouse gasses, empower states, promote energy independence and facilitate economic growth and job creation.”

In addition to this, he has focused heavily on expanding American energy output, putting more oil and gas production in the US, creating billions of dollars of revenue.

Though he has saved the country billions of dollars with his reforms and policy changes, it is clear that climate change is not an issue Trump puts much weight in.

Joe Biden Former Vice President Joe Biden has almost exactly the opposite view on climate change that President Trump has. In a video on his official campaign website, Biden says, “Science tells us how we act or fail to act in the next 12 years will determine the very livability of our planet.”

In the lead up to the 2020 presidential election, Biden has emphasized the importance of addressing climate change in the coming years. On his campaign website, Biden has released a detailed outline of his plan to address climate change if elected president.

The “Biden Plan for a Clean Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice” is split into five parts. The first ensures that the United States will achieve a 100% clean energy economy and net-zero emissions by 2050.

He promises that on his first day in office, he will, “use the full authority of the executive branch to make progress and significantly reduce emissions.”

The second step in Biden’s plan is to make the United States a, “stronger, more resilient nation.” By creating more ways for local governments and companies to become environmentally friendly, Biden hopes that individual states and cities will take charge and lead by example.

The third step sees America becoming a leader in the fight against climate change, inspiring other nations to follow its example.

Biden promises to make treaties and deals with other nations that significantly contribute to climate change in an effort to bring down global emissions, not just the emis-

sions of the United States.

The final two steps of Biden’s plan outline how he plans to stand up for the working class that powered decades of economic growth, as well as low income communities and communities of color, two groups and are most heavily impacted by climate change.

Biden promises to, “make it a priority for all agencies to engage in community-driven approaches to develop solutions for environmental injustices affecting communities of color, low-income and indigenous communities.” In addition, he promises to protect the benefits of those working in coal and power plant industries.

Photos courtesy of Gage Skidmore

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

9

Exploring the way in which climate change impacts the spread of diseases ALEXANDRA DEMARCO Campus News Editor

Many have long since accepted the established effects of climate change — global warming, the melting of the polar ice caps and rising sea levels, to name a few. However, scientists also hypothesize that climate change may have new effects that they are not yet able to predict and now, under our present international circumstances surrounding the outbreak of a deadly pandemic, many are begging the question: are diseases related to climate change?

The suspicion likely stems from the fact that COVID-19, the strain of coronavirus that is currently infecting the human population, has never been seen in human beings before, marking it a novel development.

According to several UT scientists, diseases are not a direct product of climate change. However, climate change plays a large role in changing the way that diseases develop and spread.

According to Kristina Kintziger, associate professor in the Department of Health, no new pathogens have been created because of climate change; instead the phenomenon has allowed already existing pathogens to spread much more rapidly.

She explained that most diseases of significance in the health community are of zoonotic origins, meaning that they originate in animals and make their way to infect humans. The coronavirus is an example of one such disease.

Kintziger stated that as temperatures rise, arthropods are forced to change their breeding and and habitat patterns, allowing pathogens, which spawn disease and viruses, to spread to new areas. Furthermore, droughts brought on by climate change lead to an increased mixing of pathogens as well, as both humans and animals overcrowd the nearest water sources.

“Climate change has definitely been responsible for the spread and exacerbation of a variety of infectious and non-infectious diseases and health problems. This has occurred for many reasons,” Kintziger said.

Andrew Steen, associate professor in the Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, seconded Kintziger’s statement about the increased spread of pathogens. He added that as climate change leads to increased agricultural failures, more people are forced to consume wild animals, leading to the further spread of pathogens.

“Climate change can cause agricultural failures, which can cause people who don’t normally hunt ‘bushmeat’ to begin to do so, which again creates new opportunities for new viruses to jump to humans,” Steen said.

Climate change leads to the increased spread of diseases through many other situations,

Kendal Wimberley, a senior Environmental Science student, starts the rally before the “Global Climate Strike” march, on Friday, September 20, 2019.

Caitlyn Jordan / Daily Beacon

such as overflowing sewer systems as a result of flooding, increased precipitation spreading chemicals into food and water and the introduction of new animals as they replace those who have gone extinct, leading to human interaction with new species.

Furthermore, climate change itself is not the only generator of increased disease spread; its causes, such as overcrowding and pollution, are just as culpable as well.

“The causes of climate change definitely contribute to disease development in humans.

Overcrowding leads to greater mixing of people, and therefore, easier transmission of infectious diseases that are spread person-to-person. Pollution leads to a greater incidence of respiratory diseases, like asthma, particularly in vulnerable populations,” Kintziger said.

So, what does this information mean for the coronavirus in particular?

Scientists around the world have determined that the virus has natural origins and began in a bat, although they are unsure exactly how the disease spread to humans. Officials have yet to successfully determine whether the virus originated from a lab spill, where samples of a natural strain of the disease may have been held, or a wet market in Wuhan, China.

As Benjamin Auerbach, associate professor in the Department of Anthropology, explained, spillover events between animals and humans,

similar to what may have occurred in the creation of the coronavirus, have led to the spread of infections in the past, and these events will likely increase as humans continue to expand across the planet.

“There were likely many spillover events (when infectious agents pass from animals to humans, like the one we are currently experiencing with SARS-CoV-2) in the past, as humans interacted with their environment; because these groups were isolated, the agent infected the local human population but never passed elsewhere,” Auerbach said. “I can say that we can probably expect to see more spillover events with the ongoing expansion of humans into previously remote ecosystems, especially given the ease by which those remote locations are linked to metropolitan areas.”

However, Auerbach is unable to connect these events specifically with climate change.

“Yet the connections with climate change are not easy to link, as the reasons why human groups choose to exploit these wild environments are varied, and the ecological circumstances for spillovers to occur and for diseases to be transmissible among humans are complex,” Auerbach said. “Spillovers can occur because humans displace animals (like bats) when destroying wild habitats, increasing the contact with those species as they seek new ways to survive in a disrupted habitat. Spillovers can also occur be-

cause humans actively hunt wild species, which increases the chances for spillover events.”

Kintziger added that it is not possible to fully predict how climate change will affect the development of the coronavirus in the future. She explained that if the virus does behave similarly to the flu, however, the disease will be impacted and worsened by ongoing climate change and global warming.

“If COVID-19 proves to be similar to influenza in terms of seasonal patterns, then climate change will impact both the timing of infection and the severity of the season,” Kintziger said.

“With influenza, we see that severe flu seasons were typically preceded by mild winters, and that these severe flu seasons began earlier in the year.

Influenza is less transmittable in these mild winters, so not many people are infected. This yields a large susceptible population, with little immunity, the next winter.”

Because scientists have not currently determined exactly how the coronavirus made its leap from animals to humans, time will likely pass before we are able to postulate whether or not climate change played a role in the development of this modern pandemic.

Corrections have been made to this story to more accurately reflect scientific information.

10

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

What to know about e-waste, hazardous material in Knoxville Michael Bloodworth // Daily Beacon

CALISTA BOYD Copy Chief

E-waste, the shortened term for electronic waste, is a relatively new environmental worry that poses a threat, with long-standing, harmful health and environmental effects. While it is important to keep in mind, the overall goal is to reduce electronics consumption in order to reduce e-waste production.

Common examples of e-waste found in households and offices include: batteries, computers, TVs, calculators, printers, vacuum cleaners and more. The amount of electronic devices people use in their everyday routine is a lot more than you consciously realize ... from using your hairdryer out of the shower, preparing breakfast with your toaster, to setting your alarm before falling asleep — these appliances contribute to our daily routines and increase our comfort and perceived standard of living.

It is no lie to say that our electronic devices are not always perfectly made or invincible to human wear and tear, so we often times replace our devices or simply upgrade them. On campus and in Knoxville, what kind of procedures are there in place to deal with e-waste sustainably?

Patience Melnik, the solid waste manager for the city of Knoxville, explained that Knoxville has a specific procedure in place for safely disposing of e-waste and hazardous materials that these items out of normal landfills.

“The City of Knoxville contracts with a company called ‘Green Wave’ and pays them to pick up the e-waste, disassemble it, recycle the valuable materials and safely dispose of the toxic materials,“ Melnik said.

Green Wave is an EPA-certified company that dismantles e-waste and collects the profitable parts of the electronics, like precious metals or plastics, to process further and eventually be used to manufacture other items. By being a certified recycler, this means the United States Environmental Protection Agency deems its health and disposing standards to be fit, so there is minimal human and environmental exposure throughout the recycling process.

The cost of recycling e-waste is expensive, and there are many risks of environmental hazards when they are not disposed of correctly.

“Because computers and other electronics contain both precious metals and toxic materials, there is financial incentive for unethical and uncertified e-waste recyclers to collect e-waste, often for free, remove the materials of value and then illegally dump or hoard the rest, as proper disposal of the toxics can be expensive,” Melnik said. “This material can threaten human health and the environment when it gets into the soil and water, and can be very costly to cleanup.”

That is why many waste management resources turn to companies like Green Wave that specialize in recycling e-waste because they have

more resources to put towards ethical and safe practices.

Khann Chov, recycling supervisor at the University of Tennessee, explained that the university also participates in recycling e-waste and uses the vendor Powerhouse Recycling. The Office of Sustainability and its drive to “Make Orange Green” has several different types of resources available for students wanting to join in recycling e-waste.

“Many residence halls also have bins for these items, but locations vary from hall to hall. During move out at residence halls, the Office of Sustainability hosts e-waste drives for students to dispose of a variety of electronics such as small kitchen electronics, tablets, calculators or laptops,” Khann said.

Students can participate in e-waste recycling by sending small electronics via the mail by sending them to “Recycling” through UT mail services or by dropping off their waste off at the Public Recycling Drop-Off, located right behind Lindsey Nelson Stadium.

The Office of Sustainability also helps the university dispose of something called ‘universal waste.’

“The Office of Sustainability does dispose of universal waste from the university, but we do not accept items from the public. Universal waste refers to items such as lightbulbs, batteries and ballasts.” Khann said. “Universal waste comes primarily from consumer products containing mercury, lead, cadmium and other substances that are hazardous to human health and the environment. These items cannot be discarded in household trash nor disposed of in landfills”

Typically, students wanting to properly dispose of hazardous waste can take it to the city’s household hazardous waste facility located in the Solid Waste Facility at 1033 Elm Street.

However, since recent events concerning coronavirus and Governor Bill Lee’s stay-athome order, waste management in Knoxville is looking different than usual.

“The Household Hazardous Waste is currently closed, and the entire Solid Waste Facility is closed on Saturdays. Cash is not currently accepted at the Solid Waste Facility; residents and businesses must use cards,” Melnik said. “Additionally, extra recycling outside the provided City of Knoxville recycling cart is not currently accepted as Waste Connections works to minimize touch points with the materials.“ During this public health crisis, the safety of workers is extremely important to most organizations and businesses, and waste management and recycling is no different.

With the university currently having its campus closed, the recycling center faces different circumstances, as well.

“We have changed the way we have handled materials at the recycling public drop-off on Stephenson Drive. While we continue to accept cans (aluminum and steel), paper, cardboard and plastics: labeled no. 1-7, we are not taking plastic film, e-waste, batteries, scrap metal or donations for the free store,” Khann said. “Our goal is to minimize the contact our staff has with materials.”

The recycling drop-off also recommends that the public tries to practice social distancing and refrain from possibly putting others in danger.

“The recycle drop off typically sees high traffic on the weekends, and dumpsters get overloaded. We recommend that the public makes an attempt to visit the public drop off during the week when levels are lower,” Khann said. “We can not accept recyclables from any households with individuals testing positive for COVID-19 or any household with individuals showing signs of COVID-19.”

So, while the disposing and recycling of ewaste is currently on hold, it is recommended that you hold onto your electronic and hazardous waste to dispose of at a later date. It is still important to keep in mind the risks that improper disposal of these types of items can have on the environment.

“Studies have shown that Improper handling and disposal of e-waste can lead to adverse human health effects and environmental pollution. Heavy metals and toxic chemicals are non biodegradable and can leach into groundwater and soil,” Khann said. “If disposed in a landfill, incineration makes these hazardous materials airborne.”

Of course, the uncertainty of the future is on the minds of many through these times, helping take care of the Earth now can make for a healthier and safer future. Following correct disposal and recycling procedures locally is one way to clean up landfills and contribute towards ethical practices of sustainable e-waste production.

It is important to avoid excessive e-waste dumping that can lead to harmful health effects for humans and animals that will carry the burden of our electronic overconsumption and careless disposal methods.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

11

‘Climate change is already here and happening’: Taking a look at the bigger picture

GABRIELA SZYMANOWSKA Editor-in-Chief Many people have effectively put the climate change crisis on the back burner because its effects seem to be far in the future, but scientists say that climate change is already here and are going to have a big effect on our daily lives if we don’t start making changes now.

Associate professor in the College of Social Work Lisa Reyes Mason stressed just how important it is to bring this issue to the front of people’s minds.

“This is one of the most pressing issues of our time,” Mason said. “It’s already happening really. It’s something that years ago we used to talk about, ‘Oh, in the future,’ and we can see what we can do to prevent climate change — but climate change is already here and happening.”

Climate change isn’t something that’s happening far away in other places to other people Mason said, but is in fact right here at home in the U.S. as well. This can be seen especially well when looking the numerous individuals protesting going on climate strikes across the nation.

For instance, in September 2019, over four million people participated in the Global Climate Strike Day across the globe to speak out against the growing climate change crisis. As for on the University of Tennessee Knoxville’s campus, students came together Friday, Sept.

20 to join SPEAK, Students Promoting Environmental Action in Knoxville, as the organization participated in their own climate change protesting.

Also throughout the year, individuals young and old joined together to bring awareness to the growing issue of climate change, an issue which has been on the minds of many since the first Earth Day protests on April 22, 1970.

That day, 20 million Americans gathered in the streets and thus launched the modern environmental movement.

Before the first Earth Day, in the decades leading up to it, Americans were consuming vast amounts of fossil fuels and polluting the air without concern according to the Earth Day website. But in 1962, public awareness and concern for the links between pollution and public health rose after the publication of Rachel Carson’s “Silent Spring.” In an effort to bring people together, the first Earth Day was organized, achieving “a rare political alignment, enlisting support from Republicans and Democrats, rich and poor, urban dwellers and farmers, business and labor leaders.”

From then, each Earth Day has been about educating the public about the environment, forming policies to combat the effects of global warming and bringing people together in an environmental movement.

While there may be debates on just how much humans have impacted global warming, there is no doubt that some of the effects of global warming are taking place today.

Professor in the Department of Anthropology David Anderson co-authored a study on sea-level rise which was referred to in the Fourth National Climate Assessment, which assesses climate change and its impacts across the U.S. in the present and throughout the past century.

“I don’t know if it’s good or bad. It’s happening. And it always happens, but we’re going through a period of dramatic global change right now,” Anderson said. “And it’s important to be aware of that and pay attention to it.”

According to NASA, climate change occurs in cycles with both glacial and interglacial periods. In the last 650,000 years, there have been seven cycles with the last ice age ending abruptly approximately 11,700 years ago.

According to scientists, the world is ex-

periencing an interglacial period of warmer temperatures with glaciers retreating and sea levels rising. But, this period of warming has been impacted by human activity, such as the release of carbon dioxide and other emissions from deforestation, fossil fuels, volcanic eruptions and respiration which then trap heat being reflected off the Earth’s surface.

This has increased the average surface temperatures by 0.9 degrees Celsius, since the late 19th Century, with 19 of the 20 warmest years on record occurring since 2001.

If the earth continues to heat up and average surface temperature were to rise by 2 degrees Celsius, scientists have warned that the world will experience more extreme heat waves with an increase in heat-related illnesses and deaths, especially in cities which warm up faster than rural areas. There would be more droughts and risks to water availability, which could cause crop shortages and economic damages. Scientists have also warned that virtually all coral reefs would die out, the Arctic Ocean would be without ice twice per decade and more.

Other evidence of climate change can be found on NASA’s website and includes the fact that oceans have become more acidic, there has been an increase in the number of extreme weather events such as the wildfires in Australia this past year, and glacial retreat which could have downstream effects of reducing water supply during droughts impacting generations down the line.

The effects of increased temperatures has already begun to melt polar ice-caps, raising sea levels. Anderson, whose primary research area encompasses archeological and historical sites that are based near waterfronts in the Southeastern region of the U.S., explained that some sites are already under threat of being destroyed by natural disasters.

Using the Digital Index of North American

Archaeology, Anderson looked at 130,000 sites above five meters of current sea level and given projected rise in sea level, tried to see how many of the sites would be lost.

“And the numbers were sobering, just for the Southeast alone, was where our study was located. Tens of thousands of sites would be lost and many of these have been deemed significant enough for inclusion on the national register of historic places,” Anderson said.

“These are very famous, many of them are very famous sites, like Jamestown for example.”

Such sites, if lost, would take with them many artifacts of American history. And with those rising sea levels, coastal cities could become submerged, forcing the population to condense as they move further inland. Other consequences of rising sea levels would include more dangerous hurricanes and typhoons, as well as more flooding in certain areas.

Beyond just sea level rising, changes in weather extremes will also affect individuals everywhere, with increased rainfall, drought, heat waves and natural disasters. These weather conditions could change everything from food security, health, water supply, transportation, energy and ecosystems.

“To me, climate change, and again this is coming from me as a social worker, it’s not just about the environmental part of it, it’s also about the human part of it,” Mason said.

“In terms of also the human impact, the human cause of the problem, but then as a social worker seeing it very much as a social justice issue — who’s going to be most affected and most harmed really by these changes.”

Mason explained that those physically more vulnerable like the elderly, young children and those with underlying health conditions are the ones most susceptible to the extreme weather variants.

STORY CONTINUED ON PG. 12

12

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

STORY CONTINUED FROM PG. 11 “One thing that we see with climate change with changing temperatures is that part of what happens in the natural environment, temperatures at night don’t drop down as much and so people don’t have as much chance to kind of recover in the evening with cooler temperatures, so their body can’t recover,” Mason said. “So you think about certain groups of people who might be physically more vulnerable to dealing with heat.”

In addition, those living in poverty are also highly impacted by climate change, as economic recessions and natural disasters such as Hurricane Katrina have highlighted. Those who lose their jobs don’t have health insurance and can’t afford to make rent payments are exposed the most to the elements of climate change.

So while the impact of climate change is currently taking place and could get worse, action is needed now to prevent future catastrophe either

through mitigation or adaptation.

Adaptation efforts are focused on preparing and adjusting to the changing climate conditions while mitigation focuses on efforts to reduce the amount of climate change and how fast it occurs.

Efforts like reducing emissions, reforestation, using sustainable energy sources, reducing the amount of consumption, reducing the amount of wastes and pollutants, and more are just a few ways to begin the efforts to slow down climate change.

One example of mitigation efforts by countries globally was the 2015 Paris Agreement which aimed its efforts of “holding the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels and pursuing efforts to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels.”

When it comes to mitigation, one of the biggest challenge would be focused on continuing to move industries towards sustainable energy.

“The greatest challenge is that we’ve got a

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS global economy that’s based on fossil fuels and it’s very difficult to change that,” Anderson said. “I mean it’s one thing to say, ‘Yeah, we can go to sustainable resources overnight,’ but it’s impossible to do that. I mean it would take a really sustained effort to bring that about and that’s where it gets into policy and politics and that debate is playing out all around us. It will for the next months, years, decades and you’ll get to see how it plays out.”

On a more personal level, Mason said people can focus on their own behaviors to help reduce climate change by consuming less and eating less meat like beef, as cows are one of largest emitters of greenhouse gases.

Some way that scientists and activists have suggested helping slow climate change on a personal level include to use energy wisely or switch to renewable energy sources like solar power panels. People can also find different modes of transportation such as bicycling to school or work, or if the commute is longer find someone to carpool with. Individuals can also

plant their own gardens or a tree which will then remove some of the carbon dioxide in the air.

Some other sustainability acts are also listed on the Daily Beacon’s website.

Mason also said that something people can do to enact change with climate change is educating themselves about climate change and also talking with others.

“If you’re a young person, a college student at University of Tennessee reading this special issue and you have a concern about climate change and how it’s going to affect you in your lifetime, talk about it with people. ... especially with people who maybe don’t agree with you, but you’re part of their circle and so you can have that conversation with them,” Mason said.

“Plant that seed with them that this is indeed happening, that this is something to be concerned about, that we all have a stake in it,” Mason added. “That that has a potential to ripple out into greater change.”

Why average Americans might not be worried about climate change RYAN CREWS Sports Editor

While our current special issue explores the topic of climate change and the dangers it could possibly pose, it is important, as it would be for any controversial topic, to examine both sides of the issue.

Listed below are some of the few reasons that average Americans may not feel that climate change is that big of a deal.

One of the first things that hurts the climate change movement is what can be called the ‘boy who cried wolf’ effect. Leaders in the climate change movement such as Al Gore and recently Alexandra Ocasio Cortez have a long history of making bolding statements about climate repercussions, and many have been false.

As compiled by Fox News, here are a few of the more notable examples of those bold predictions for 2020 falling flat. In 1990, the Washington Post warned that “Carbon dioxide is the gas most responsible for predictions that Earth will warm on average by about 3 degrees Fahrenheit by the year 2020.” The paper added that “The United States, because it occupies a large continent in higher latitudes, could warm by as much as 6 degrees Fahrenheit.” However, now in 2020, the both the Earth and the United States have only warmed roughly one degree according to NASA. Additionally, in 2003, Christian Lambrechts, an officer at the U.N. Environment Program, told CNN that in “2020, there will be no glaciers of Mt. Kilimanjaro,” and glaciologist Lonnie Thompson told the Associated press the same in 2001. Again, their ‘doomsday’ prediction was wrong. Others talked about drying

oil reserves and millions of climates deaths, but again they were all wrong. What this does is discredit the climate activists if they do actually make correct predictions.

Something else hurting the climate movement is the messengers for the cause, many who take a ‘do as I say, not as I do” mentality.

Notable climate activists who could fit in this category include people like Leonardo DiCaprio and Prince Harry, who admonish people for various climate offenses and then utilize unsustainable practices like using private planes.

Also hurting the message is that the loudest

climate activists are disproportionately young, and uncomfortable as is may be for some, average Americans trying to provide for themselves and their families aren’t going to be as worried about what teenagers are telling them that they’re doing wrong.

The biggest and most important reason average Americans may be not worried about climate change is that they are more focused on making a living to provide for themselves and their families.

Right now, some members of the United State Congress are pushing for a set of policies

referred to as the Green New Deal. Based on a study by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, the GND would mean a cost of $70,000 for the average household in the first year of its implementation. After five year that number would reach a whopping $250,000. Additionally, it was calculated by the Heritage Foundation that just a portion of the emissions reductions goals in the deal would be a $15,000,000,000,000 ($15 Trillion) reduction in gross domestic product in this country.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

13

Alex Phillips // Daily Beacon

Small acts of sustainability everyone can accomplish ALEXANDRA DEMARCO Campus News Editor

Climate change is no secret, and it’s also no joke. As Earth grows more polluted and global warming grows more serious, it becomes increasingly important that each person takes the time to change their lifestyle and reduce their personal carbon footprint in order to slow climate change.

Here are some small but effective ways that each and every person can help.

Eliminate single-use items Many people go about their days using a plethora of single-use kitchen and

household items such as paper towels, plastic water bottles and plastic bags.

Although this particular time in life may be an exception, due to an extra need for cleanliness, typically, singleuse items are simply not needed, and can be swapped for sustainable alternatives.

For example, swap paper towels out with dish towels that you can wash. You may quickly see that there is really no need for paper towels; you just have to be willing to give up the convenience of throwing away something instead of washing it.

Replace single-use plastic bags with reusable plastic bags or Tupperware

containers. These items are becoming increasingly popular and can be found online and in many retail stores. If you

use plastic bags in your lunch everyday, imagine how much trash you can eliminate simply by replacing them with a sustainable alternative. It adds up!

Be sure to eliminate single-use, plastic water bottles. They are simply not necessary when you can purchase a reusable metal or plastic water bottle that you can wash and reuse. If you’re concerned about having to drink tap water, invest in a Brita water filter. This simple device makes tap water taste like it just came out of the fridge.

Consider replacing makeup wipes or cotton balls with reusable and washable cotton pads. These will dramatically reduce the amount of trash that piles up, especially if you wear makeup everyday.

Don’t use paper dishes. If you have a sink or dishwasher in your kitchen, they are simply not necessary. Take the time to wash reusable dishes instead of throwing away paper ones.

STORY CONTINUED ON PG. 14

14

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

STORY CONTINUED FROM PG. 13 And remember — all of these swaps save you money in the long run. It is cheaper to buy one thing that you can use over and over again instead of buying a disposable product multiple times.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

sustainable to ride in a vehicle of public transport with several other people than drive an individual, gasoline-powered car.

And remember, the trolley system and UT buses are free to ride, so you are also saving money on gas by choosing public transportation.

Additionally, biking and walking are

ply must learn to be cognizant of what items can be recycled and which can not. For example, many “paper” coffee cups cannot be recycled as paper products because they contain traces of plastic. And make sure to always clean out items that contained food or liquids before recycling them.

Additionally, if you are worried about having access to a recycling center, remember that UT has its own recycling drop-off at 2121 Stephenson Drive, and there are many other recycling bins located across campus as well. UT itself has a fantastic recycling program and makes significant efforts to recycle, so the practice is very easy as a Vol.

Use public transportation or bike Gasoline cars are some of the largest polluters and producers of greenhouse gases. Here at UT, great infrastructure is available for public transportation.

From the trolley system to the UT bus system to the KAT bus routes, public transportation is accessible all over UT’s campus and throughout Knoxville.

Take the time to get to know these buses’ routes and take advantage of them when you can. It is far more

also great forms of transportation that don’t pollute and simultaneously provide forms of exercise.

Recycle This may seem like a given, but it’s still really important to discuss. By recycling, you greatly reduce the amount of trash sent to landfills, and you therefore reduce the amount of greenhouse gases released by landfills.

The act of recycling takes just a few minutes out of your week; you sim-

Compost This is another great way to divert waste from landfills — particularly food waste. Composts harvest food waste to create fertile soil.

Unfortunately, this practice may not be feasible for students who live in dorms or apartments without access to a yard in which to build a compost.

However, if you do live in a house or have access to green space, consider building your own compost. It is also possible to purchase filtered compost bins that can remain in your house as

you fill them up with waste until you are ready to dump them externally.

Consider how your items are packaged Many people may not realize how much waste they are producing simply from the containers of the objects they purchase, whether that be groceries or items ordered online.

Certain grocery stores, such as Trader Joe’s, have worked to provide low-waste packaging solutions; for example, their produce bags are compostable.

When you are grocery shopping, take an extra few minutes to consider what your food is packaged in. Can you recycle it, or will it go straight in the garbage? In general, paper or cardboard packaging can be more easily recycled, so gear toward products wrapped in these materials.

Finally, you can try to eliminate the number of items that you purchase online. Once again, in the time that we are currently experiencing, this is difficult.

But, in general, purchasing items instore is more sustainable because of the amount of extra packaging that often accompanies items ordered online.

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS // PUZZLES & GAMES

Wednesday, April 22, 2020 • The Daily Beacon

LOS ANGELES TIMES CROSSWORD • Edited by Rich Norris and Joyce Lewis

15

16

The Daily Beacon • Wednesday, April 22, 2020

CLIMATE CHANGE AND CRISIS

‘Fight like hell’: The Sunrise Movement continues to be a strong voice for climate action on campus, in city of Knoxville DANIEL DASSOW Staff Writer

The Sunrise Movement has never been shy about what it wants. Think youth activists occupying the hall outside House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s office demanding action on climate change. Think elementary schoolers defiantly telling Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California that the planet is dying and that we must pass the Green New Deal to save it.

Think the Green New Deal itself, the expansive package of legislation aimed at restructuring the U.S. economy to halt what its supporters see as the imminent climate crisis à la Franklin Roosevelt and the Great Depression.

The legislation is the life force of the Sunrise Movement, formed in 2017 as a youth-led movement with the express purpose of rallying behind the passage of the Green New Deal.

Its supporters call it bold. Its detractors call it mathematically impossible. And what do members of the Sunrise Movement on UT’s campus call it? Necessary.

The local branch of the movement — or “hub,” as they are called by Sunrise organizers — was formed this past fall by students who were ready to take action to end climate change and create a more just American economic system.

Since that time, the group has been busy planning strikes, lobbying for national and local climate policies such as the so-called “Green New TVA,” and working towards getting the mayor to declare a climate emergency.

Even in the face of a nationwide lockdown and the challenges of organizing remotely, Sunrise students are not slowing down.

In fact, sophomore Isabella Killius, a lead organizer with the Sunrise Movement, believes that the coronavirus may provide the fuel the group needs to emerge from the quarantine stronger than before.

“I think we need to come back, once social distancing is over, with full force,” Killius said.

“And having developed the skills and toolsets while in quarantine, whether that be trainings or virtual events ... using those tools and skills when we come back in person to fight like hell for a Green New Deal and for a transition to a more clean, renewable and just system.”

According to Killius, one of the movement’s main objectives is to become “embedded in the fabric of Knoxville.” After executing two climate protests last semester, both of which were well-attended by students and members of the greater Knoxville community, the Sunrisers may have inched closer to that goal.

The latter of these events, a march held in November, was unsuccessful in its stated pur-

Students spoke at the rally that started at 12:30 pm in front of the Humanities and Social Sciences building on Friday November 22, 2019.

Kailee Harris / Daily Beacon

pose of securing the declaration of a climate emergency by Knoxville mayor Indya Kincannon. But Killius and her fellow organizers viewed it as a crucial step forward for the stillyoung movement.

“When you collectivize and organize and really put your feet on the ground, people will listen to you if you’re doing it in an equitable way,” Killius said. “We still kind of created a space where we can strike a lot more in the future and be taken very legitimately as a hub.”

As for its plans in the age of pandemic, the Sunrise Movement is still looking to partner with fellow youth-led climate groups to host “Earth Day Live,” a three-day livestream featuring musical performances, voter registration and educational webinars from April 22 to 24. The Knoxville hub is also looking into making endorsements of candidates for upcoming

local elections.

Despite the difficulties of isolation, the new hub of the Sunrise Movement, which is composed of a core group of 10 to 12 students, works undeterred towards its ambitious goals of securing federal action on climate, as well as championing local policies and candidates and expanding membership on campus.

Like many climate activists, the students of the Sunrise Movement do see some positives amid the chaos and grief of the current moment. With people stuck at home all across the world, carbon emissions have been greatly diminished and the rate of Earth’s warming appears to have slowed.

Logan Hysen, a senior who serves as hub coordinator, sees these environmental benefits as essentially superficial and, in doing so, reflects the integrated and intersectional goals of

the Sunrise Movement. Since its founding, the movement has taken as its central stance that the U.S. cannot work towards fixing the climate crisis without also fixing the unjust and corrupt national economy.

“You can’t have a clean environment at the expense of working class people,” Hysen said.

“Yes, the environment’s good, but we haven’t lifted people up so they can enjoy that environment.”

And besides, as the local Sunrise organizers strive to remind their community, we have known what must be done to save the environment since long before the coronavirus came around.

“It shouldn’t take a pandemic to realize we need environmental health and safety,” Killius said.